« Congrats, Alec! | Main | EARLY MORNING STUDS! »
December 13, 2007
The Numbers Don't Mean Squat
The standard laid out for proper back squat depth in Starting Strength by Rip and Kilgore
[I'll apologize upfront if I offend anyone here; unfortunately every once in a while I have to put on my Mean Mike hat and get down to business.]
Nicole and I were appalled at the large number of CFO athletes who failed to get proper depth during the back squat workout when the sets counted (i.e., when we started to get into heavy singles). By our estimation, nearly 50% of those who walked through the gym doors failed to get to full depth on all five of the singles.
Make no mistake, we're not just pointing fingers at those going short on the back squats; it's as much a failure in coaching as anything and we definitely take our share of the blame for not being emphatic enough about the importance of full depth. That will soon change.
Also, while we're being clear, this is not directed at those who are not capable (due to inflexibility or otherwise) of achieving full depth at present. This is aimed at those who can achieve full depth but for whatever reason do not.
Enough of my preamble...
To paraphrase Mark Rippetoe (someone who knows a lot more about these matters than I), the purpose of barbell training is to get stronger, not to see how much weight we can lift. This concept should direct your entire training outlook.
Squatting, while a wonderful exercise in and of itself, when done to proper depth (as in the picture above, the crease of the hip is below the patella), is so much more than simply sitting down and then standing up with weight on your back. A properly executed back squat teaches you how to use the stretch reflex to drive your hips out of the hole. This has tremendous carryover into just about any activity that has a power production requirement. And simply put, if you're not utilizing that stored elastic energy out of the bottom of the squat, you're not squatting (you might as well just do box squats and dispense with the elastic loading that occurs in a back squat to proper depth).
Furthermore, this requirement of proper depth doesn't end with the back squat. If you care about benchmark workouts like Fran, where the thrusters only count if you go down to full depth, or being able to perform the heaviest clean you can (and you need to catch the bar in a full squat to pull off that feat), then you damn sure better care about getting down and out of the hole in your back squats.
If you can perform an empty-bar set of five to proper depth, you have all the tools you need to become a good back squatter. So get to work, get depth, and do it right. And for crying out loud, quit worrying about the numbers.
And one other side note and some food for thought: the athletes who put up the biggest squat numbers were the ones who went to full depth. Do you think that's a coincidence?
Posted by Mike Minium at December 13, 2007 9:45 PM
Comments
Mike -
You need to name names. Just like Senator Mitchell did. Make a report of it - The Minium Report!
Just kidding.
An idea - how bout on the performance of the day, you highlight best technique of the day.
Obviously I learn from you and the rest of the trainers, but I also learn from watching others that are just nailing it. (From Tuesday's 6pm class, Daniel with the clean/jerk and Casey on the sit-up machine)
Just a thought.
Posted by: Brad Gilliatt at December 13, 2007 11:14 PM
Guilty, although I'll plead inexperience rather than desire to do more weight. I'll work on it!
Posted by: Brad Greenlee at December 14, 2007 6:07 AM
You brought up an important idea.
"...the purpose of barbell training is to get stronger, not to see how much weight we can lift."
I know personally I often get caught up in "putting up numbers" that I sell myself short on a good workout. It's much better to walk out of the gym feeling your workout in your legs instead of your ego. (My ego is big enough as it is)
Posted by: daniel at December 14, 2007 7:19 AM
I like Brad's idea of posting another category of best technique of the day. It might give some of us lightweights a chance for our 15 minutes of CFO fame!
Posted by: mojo rising at December 14, 2007 7:45 AM
Mike & Nicole - Thanks for being the pain-in-the-ass-depth-police! It definitely feels better to get it "right"...
Posted by: Robyn at December 14, 2007 8:52 AM
yeah... guilty.. too shallow and lopsided!
Posted by: casey at December 14, 2007 9:39 AM
I did these at home on Wednesday in between diaper changes.
I find that my speed of decent decreases with heavier loads, thus diminishing the "bounce" at the bottom. I end up slowing down and going shallower, which I guess makes it harder to come back up.
Mike, can you talk a bit about the role core stabilization plays in all this? I have the impression that's my weak link--not my legs or hips.
Posted by: Tim at December 14, 2007 10:12 AM
forget core stabilization... it's all about leverage. That's why Daniel has the upper advantage on all of us.
Posted by: steven at December 14, 2007 10:56 AM
Steven, you're talking about his amazingly short legs? Or absurdly long torso?
Posted by: Tim at December 14, 2007 11:44 AM
Steven,
What are you talking about? I'm very stable...
Being low to the ground has it's advantages.
Posted by: daniel at December 14, 2007 1:31 PM
Daniel only has to move down and up like 6 inches from top of squat to bottom of squat. You know, low to the ground and all.
Tim, I'll have a nice little follow-up response for you a bit later. But yes, trunk stability is key.
Posted by: Mike Minium at December 14, 2007 2:05 PM
Why all these discussions about squats and depth and such? Multi-joint movements are of no value. When you want functional strength, you need to step up to what the big boys are using:
Biceps curl and
Triceps Pulldown
With those two exercises alone, you could put on 40 to 50 lbs of muscle in less than 3 months, working out perhaps 2 days a week. After curling and pulling down for those three months, come back and try your irrelevant squats. I guarantee that you will double your previous personal best.
Posted by: TomC at December 14, 2007 3:26 PM
i would sub kickbacks for the triceps instead.
Posted by: steven at December 14, 2007 3:48 PM
Don't forget the calf isolations. Gotta have that for beach time!
Posted by: Tim at December 14, 2007 3:55 PM
Dumbell twists really get the burn in my forearms which has been paying some serious divedends in my cable push downs.
For my money though...you can't beat John Basedow. Check it out at http://www.fitnessmadesimple.com/
Posted by: daniel at December 14, 2007 4:15 PM
beautiful post, comments, questions and shit talking.
Posted by: Lau at December 14, 2007 4:19 PM
> you can't beat John Basedow. Check it out at http://www.fitnessmadesimple.com/
Wow! I always suspected that "anything was possible once you believe in yourself and have the knowledge and determination to accomplish your goals." I'm so psyched for my workout now I can hardly stand it! I think a group hug may be in order followed by a good long round of unwarranted self affirmations.
Posted by: TomC at December 14, 2007 5:14 PM
Tim: I've been doing breathing squats (20 rep back squats at 60-70% 1rm) 2x/week for a while now, and am finding that between those and the GHD/Abmat combo, my midline is FINALLY connecting the two halves of my body, I'm psyched to be one-piece again! Also, between those three exercises, my low back problems are less frequent ...
Posted by: Nicole Okumu at December 15, 2007 9:03 AM
Thanks, Nicole. Just one thing: what do you mean by "breathing"? I usually include breathing in all my workouts....
Since I don't have a GHD at home, I do 45# good mornings and abmats or v-ups. Anything better I can do there?
Posted by: Tim at December 15, 2007 11:27 AM
Tim,
Breathing squats has somehow been adopted as an alternative name for 20-rep squats.
There's no special breathing sequence involved for 20-rep squats vs. squats of any other rep count (although you definitely tax a different energy system than say, for example, a 1-rep squat); it's just a silly naming convention.
And what Nicole said about the trunk. Think of squats as falling apart if you don't have a solid trunk; at the same time, think of squats as one of the best trunk-developing exercises out there (midline stabilization, isometric tension, and all that stuff).
And regarding exercise selection--good mornings will do fine. I also know you have a sweet pull-up bar at your place; get to work on some KTEs, straight-leg raises, and the like in addition to Abmat sit-ups.
Posted by: Mike Minium at December 15, 2007 8:48 PM
Thanks, Mike.
Yes, my pull up bar is probably the most solid thing in our 75+ year old house.
An extremely polite, vertically challenged structural engineer I know put it up.
Posted by: Tim at December 16, 2007 2:50 PM