You said that powerlifters compete later into their lives at a high level to justify your position that the sport is safe, so it is necessary to understand the nature of the sport.
False. I mentioned that many powerlifters compete well into their 40’s to counter your baseless contention that a wide squat stance “…tear(s) up their pelvis and surrounding connective tissue…”. If your statement regarding such injuries were true, that squatting wide did this kind of damage, lifters couldn’t compete at that age or for that number of years. Ironically, the research you posted, while being completely off topic, contradicts your own contentions about the safety of powerlifting style squats. The research finds all weightlifting to be safe if properly supervised. And this still has nothing to do with whether or not ATG squats can be shown, statistically, to be better than parallel squats.
It is quite obvious you didn’t even read the paper–you don’t even know the methods used.
I’ve read the paper several times and reread it today. The conclusions you suggested aren’t stated in the paper. Also keep in mind that just because data is presented in a paper, all the contentions and opinions stated by the author may not be addressed by the data. You have to seperate opinions of the authors, even if they seem reasonable, from the actual conclusions everyone can draw by examining the data presented.
You said stuff cannot be proven and imply it is otherwise and offer no data of any kind.
When did I say that? I have said several times, very clearly, there is no empirical data that I am aware of that compares the advantages of deep squatting to parallel squatting. If a well designed study did that, then yes, while not proving conclusively, it would go a long way in making me believe one is better than the other. Can you point me to such a study? I want to believe, one way or the other.
This was conducted by a POWERLIFTING ORGANIZATION looking at THEIR OWN ATHLETES AND DATA. Again, a paper you didn’t read.
I did read it, just before I posted. Was I incorrect in my interpretation of what I read? Or did you mistate the conclusions drawn by the authors?
I may have phrased it awkwardly (they don’t sit out an entire year, but during the year, missing a significant amount of training time). Again, this is analysis by a powerlifting organization on their own athletes.
That changes things a little, doesn’t it? Don’t Oly lifters ever become injured and have to sit out a spell? And importantly, and more to the point of our discussion, do the authors in any way suggest that if only they could get powerlifters to go ATG then these injuries wouldn’t have taken place and their results would have been dramatically improved? If not, how is this germaine to our discussion?
You don’t understand statistics at all. Furthermore, the topic is on because we are in general talking about improving performance and power output–you said just pure strength. This indicates there are certainly other things to consider.
First, you have given no reference to any data or study that clearly suggests ATG squats, even in a general sense, are better than PL squats in improving performance and power output. Not one data point. Second, did I not correctly quote the study (which I must have read in order to quote it) that said there were no significant differences in improvement except in vertical jump? As far as understanding statistics, I have around 30 hours of Calculus and around 24 hours of statistics, including Calculus based statistics, while working toward a Ph.D. in Petrology and Geochemistry. I’ve also spent years, on a daily basis, using multivariate statistics including log-linear analysis, factor analysis etc. in my position as a research scientist at a major oil company. As a scientist, I also understand the difference between a causal correlation and a casual correlation. I can also recognize statements which are actually supported by the empirical data presented from a hypothesis the author believes, but cannot prove, that the data suggests. Do you have a background in statistics?
Look at the rates of injuries in the report. Powerlifting is almost double olympic lifting per 100 hours in this data.
First, your report cites numbers taken from several different studies. Data taken from different data sets collected from different study groups can’t be compared directly without careful consideration of the populations studied as well as the design of the studies. Second, even if I grant you that the numbers can be compared directly, the papers do conclude that all types of weightlifting are safe, don’t they? And all of that stillhas no bearing on the discussion of whether ATG squats are more beneficial than parallel squats. If you want to continue this discussion, let’s take one thing and focus on that. Please cite a study, in a refereed journal using empirical data that the authors themselves collected, that directly compares performance benefits of ATG squats to parallel squats. Let’s focus on that, since that was the primary point of contention in this thread.