back squats or front squats for athletic performance

[Hendersonfan119]

My friend who played football, wrestled and now currently competes in strongman competitions swears that I should do front squats because it has more athletic carryover then back squats. Is that true? He said its because the weight is in front of you and in sports especially wrestling you always want your opponent infront of you.

 

[Klotz]

Do both.

There's no real substitute for the back squat.

 

[Hendersonfan119]

Can I do them two days a week since front squats focuses on your quads? Something like this.


monday- Back squats, good mornings, bulgarian split squats
thursday-front squats, deadlift, reverse lunges.

 

[Tosa]

By following that logic, I could make the following argument

In sports, especially wrestling, it's a person in front of you, aproximately the same weight as you, wearing a singlet, so you should front squat people in singlets with a similar bodyweight to your own.

You don't do a particular exercises because they superficially resemble some element of a sport, or athletic movement, you do them because they develop specific qualities that have a signifcant amount of carryover to your sport (or help you achieve your goals).

So when considering which type of squat is better, we'd first have to consider "better for what"...athletic perfomance is much too vague a term. A powerlifter, triathlete, table tennis player, wrestler are all competive athletes, and are all concerned with "athletic performance". But it'd be silly to expect how they train to be alike.

Next you'd have to consider, load moved, which muscles are emphasized and range of motion used for individual joints, and whether the particular athlete has any issues that need to be accomodated.

Finally, you'd have to explain why you can't just do both.

 

[Revok]

All this clamour and complexity is why I choose to squat with the bar precariously balanced on the point of my skull.

 

[Donut62]

Unless your a strength athlete with some form of weighted squatting in your contest, squats are a general strength exercise for sports. It doesn't really matter. Just fucking squat.

Anecdotally, people who are good at high bar back squats are pretty good at every type of squat.

 

[scoopj]

Finally, you'd have to explain why you can't just do both.

This right here. The rest was good too.

 

[scoopj]

Anecdotally, people who are good at high bar back squats are pretty good at every type of squat.

Does this hold true for low bar as well?

 

[Donut62]

Does this hold true for low bar as well?

Not always. Again, I don't think it particularly matters. You can find people all across the spectrum to support whatever your opinion is. If a guy does a lot of heavy squats you are going to see an athlete with big strong legs and not a front/back/low bar squatter.

 

[Morganation]

All this clamour and complexity is why I choose to squat with the bar precariously balanced on the point of my skull.

Thats awesome lol.

 

[ozbrawler]

id just do both and even through in zercher squats occasionally instead of front squats

 

[apizur**]

You don't do a particular exercises because they superficially resemble some element of a sport, or athletic movement, you do them because they develop specific qualities that have a signifcant amount of carryover to your sport (or help you achieve your goals).

don't sleep on all other squats, unilateral squats are the new rage in men's health and frankly... when i wrestled we never ended up in a perfect squatting position after shots and high-crotches. bulgarian split squats and lunges (for example) can and will bust your ass and work the supporting quad and hip awesomely, and additionally to me, look like good shot position.

but to answer your question. no.

 

[SuperAlly]

Perhaps OT:

By following that logic, I could make the following argument

In sports, especially wrestling, it's a person in front of you, aproximately the same weight as you, wearing a singlet, so you should front squat people in singlets with a similar bodyweight to your own.

You don't do a particular exercises because they superficially resemble some element of a sport, or athletic movement, you do them because they develop specific qualities that have a signifcant amount of carryover to your sport (or help you achieve your goals).

I need to remember this example when people talk about getting their training to mimic their sport.

So when considering which type of squat is better, we'd first have to consider "better for what"...athletic perfomance is much too vague a term. A powerlifter, triathlete, table tennis player, wrestler are all competive athletes, and are all concerned with "athletic performance". But it'd be silly to expect how they train to be alike.

Next you'd have to consider, load moved, which muscles are emphasized and range of motion used for individual joints, and whether the particular athlete has any issues that need to be accomodated.

Finally, you'd have to explain why you can't just do both.

In terms of that overall argument; training reflecting your sport, I started to question why coaches I have worked with take this to extremes in terms of practising weight lifting movements that specifically reflect the sport.

It now appears to me that your best bet is to follow a programme say SS or Bill Starr, Madcow, whatever it is to develop strength and then practising the skills of your sport will allow you to apply this greater strength into your sports movements.

Using a soccer example, I had a coach recommend that when you do lunges that you lunge forward, back, left, right, diagonally forward etc. By the time you've hit every direction of the compass or on a clock face you're not going to have time for much else in your lifting routine which must compliment all your other training commitments.

I would guess that doing lunges or reverse lunges would suffice and would allow you to focus on more important areas of your training?

Anyone care to enlighten me as to where my thinking is flawed?

 

[Oblivian]

I used to really like Front Squats and think they were ok to substitute for Back Squats when I had major form issues on Back Squats. Since then, I've fixed Back Squat issues and mainly focused on those. My thinking has completely reversed. I've made better gains on Front Squats without actually doing them. Back Squats IMO have the best carryover to all lifts. I feel that they should be incorporated in any routine where strength gains is a concern.

 

[Jaredsyn]

lemme ask you this, when are you going to squat your opponent?

 

[DrBdan]

lemme ask you this, when are you going to squat your opponent?

When are you ever doing to drop and do burpees during a fight? When are you ever going to jog around the ring/cage for 45 minutes?* When are you ever going to sprint up a hill during a fight?

My point is that all strength and conditioning work is just GPP unless you are competing in a specific strength or conditioning sport (powerlifting, marathons etc) so stop worry about how sport specific something is and worry more about how applicable it is to your needs.

To get back to the TS's question, back squats are widely considered one of the best exercises for developing overall strength and I think it would be silly to leave them out unless you had a really good reason.

*note this example doesn't apply if you are Kalib Starnes

 

[toonie]

...

*note this example doesn't apply if you are Kalib Starnes

 

[Oblivian]

lemme ask you this, when are you going to squat your opponent?

I always lol at the boxers hitting the heavy bag or speed bag. Don't they realize that the bags don't hit back? Don't get me started on boxers jumping rope. What idiots!

 

[DrBdan]

toonie, you can't forget this one too:

 

[apizur**]

I always lol at the boxers hitting the heavy bag or speed bag. Don't they realize that the bags don't hit back? Don't get me started on boxers jumping rope. What idiots!

please let me know if i'm missing your sarcasm. seriously. you're about to get called out.