Box squat vs squatting to a box

[saffo]

Guys i said start without weigth and go from there until you are comfortable and also doing it correctly. Its hard to accept to restart squat but you should think further than only a week. You can here come with all sort of things but in the end of the day everybody can squat properly not all “atg” squats are the same depth, i mean with it the lowest you can go where you can show flexility aswell as power instead of half squating and then do it for years and come here with some sort of evidence that you cannot go lower...

 

[Prokofievian]

I've heard buttwink being explained by tight hamstrings (which obviously doesn't make sense), but did people really think that hamstrings were prime movers? I don't understand how something like that can perpetuated in circles with people who make physical activity part of their identity.

Sure, proportions matters too.

Greg Knuckols wrote a takedown article on hamstrings and the squat featuring some cool biomechanical papers.

https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hamstrings-the-most-overrated-muscle-for-squat-2-0/

But for real you never heard the ''sit back, shins vertical!'' cue before?

 

[deadshot138]

I've heard buttwink being explained by tight hamstrings (which obviously doesn't make sense), but did people really think that hamstrings were prime movers? I don't understand how something like that can perpetuated in circles with people who make physical activity part of their identity.

Sure, proportions matters too.

The popular powerlifting style of squatting with vertical shins puts the emphasis on hams and glutes over quads and also makes it challenging to hit depth if those muscles are weak/tight. It essentially makes the squat a sumo diddly with the bar on your back.

 

[Sano]

Greg Knuckols wrote a takedown article on hamstrings and the squat featuring some cool biomechanical papers.

https://www.strongerbyscience.com/hamstrings-the-most-overrated-muscle-for-squat-2-0/

But for real you never heard the ''sit back, shins vertical!'' cue before?

Yeah that transfers the load posteriorly, as well as increases hip flexion ROM, which both makes the posterior chain more engaged, but I never heard anyone say that it made the hamstring prime movers.

The popular powerlifting style of squatting with vertical shins puts the emphasis on hams and glutes over quads and also makes it challenging to hit depth if those muscles are weak/tight. It essentially makes the squat a sumo diddly with the bar on your back.

Same as above. It might put help you engage both more, and there's definitely less emphasiz on the quads because there's less knee travel/shorter knee ROM, but that doesn't necessarily pertain to tight/weak muscles hindering depth. Glutes perhaps, but hamstrings are bilateral, meaning they travel across both your knee and your hip. Even with a greater hip flexion (stretches hamstrings) the knee flexion (shortens hamstrings) still makes up for it. Hamstrings hardly changes in lenght during the movement. I'd say tight adductors/groins like adductor magnus probably has more to do with it, especially with as wide and externally rotated as most powerlifting lowbar squats stances are. Ultimately technique, proportions, hip anatomy and inter-muscular coordication has the biggest say in how challenging a certain squat is for you. Granted "loosening" up helps release some tension both in muscle tissue and neurologically.

 

[Prokofievian]

Yeah that transfers the load posteriorly, as well as increases hip flexion ROM, which both makes the posterior chain more engaged, but I never heard anyone say that it made the hamstring prime movers.


Same as above. It might put help you engage both more, and there's definitely less emphasiz on the quads because there's less knee travel/shorter knee ROM, but that doesn't necessarily pertain to tight/weak muscles hindering depth. Glutes perhaps, but hamstrings are bilateral, meaning they travel across both your knee and your hip. Even with a greater hip flexion (stretches hamstrings) the knee flexion (shortens hamstrings) still makes up for it. Hamstrings hardly changes in lenght during the movement. I'd say tight adductors/groins like adductor magnus probably has more to do with it, especially with as wide and externally rotated as most powerlifting lowbar squats stances are. Ultimately technique, proportions, hip anatomy and inter-muscular coordication has the biggest say in how challenging a certain squat is for you. Granted "loosening" up helps release some tension both in muscle tissue and neurologically.

I took an evening to read and watch some Rippetoe lectures before I made this response, in the anticipation of some SS acolyte taking issue with it. But Ripp is at least partially responsible for this ''hamstrings are super important in the back squat'' idea. And the following passage is about as close as he ever came to outright saying that the hamstrings are a prime mover in the back squat.

The hamstrings, adductors, and glutes in a low-bar squat act directly to open the hip angle out of the bottom. In a front squat the hamstrings are shortened by the closed knee angle and open hip angle into a position of contraction, and cannot be used to make the hips extend since they are already contracted. The extremely vertical back angle is maintained by the glutes and the contracted hamstrings, and the glutes and adductors function as the primary extensors of the hip in the absence of hamstring involvement. This means that there is little hamstring in a front squat and lots of hamstring in a low-bar back squat. And a high-bar back squat is intermediate between the two. I specifically want there to be lots of hamstring involvement in the squat, especially for Olympic weightlifters, most of whom either will not or are not allowed to deadlift heavy and thereby get some hamstring work.

https://startingstrength.com/articles/squat_rippetoe.pdf

Most of his argument about why people should lowbar squat is all about the hamstrings. It's about ''recruiting the most amount of muscle possible.'' What muscle is ''not recruited'' in the front/high bar positions? Well, the hamstrings, according to Ripp. And what, according to Rippetoe, do the hamstrings do in the back squat? ''open the hip.'' Later, in the 3rd edition of starting strength, he seems to admit his error in stating that the hamstrings involvement in the back squat is isometric (he never admits that this is their function in the front squat as well, essentially nullifying the whole argument from the get go), and he even states in the lecture provided below that the hamstrings cross two joints (and thus resist knee extension). However, he continues to overemphasize the hamstrings involvement in the squat to this day. He keeps his front squat/low bar argument basically intact but he just doesn't follow it to its conclusion.



But, if you're an educator, as Rippetoe is, and you spend all this time talking about the hamstrings involvement in the back squat, it's going to happen that some of the people you educate come away with the impression that the hamstrings are prime movers in the back squat. It's not for nothing that Greg's first attempt at his article was met with extreme skepticism. If you look in the comment section of the related video, someone even calls the squat a ''leg curl.''

 

[Dana's Moonface]

If you are breaking parallel then that's a good enough squat. It will build power and size.

I like box squats, but rarely do them.

I would prefer to do pause (speed) squats. Put around 40-70 % on bar and hit 2-3 reps per set. Descend under a controlled manner, pause for about 3 seconds, then quickly explode.

This type of training after heavy sets and on a separate day of the week has seen my squat go up around 50 lb.

 

[deadshot138]

Guys i said start without weigth and go from there until you are comfortable and also doing it correctly. Its hard to accept to restart squat but you should think further than only a week. You can here come with all sort of things but in the end of the day everybody can squat properly not all “atg” squats are the same depth, i mean with it the lowest you can go where you can show flexility aswell as power instead of half squating and then do it for years and come here with some sort of evidence that you cannot go lower...

Ass to rads is not

I took an evening to read and watch some Rippetoe lectures before I made this response, in the anticipation of some SS acolyte taking issue with it. But Ripp is at least partially responsible for this ''hamstrings are super important in the back squat'' idea. And the following passage is about as close as he ever came to outright saying that the hamstrings are a prime mover in the back squat.



https://startingstrength.com/articles/squat_rippetoe.pdf

Most of his argument about why people should lowbar squat is all about the hamstrings. It's about ''recruiting the most amount of muscle possible.'' What muscle is ''not recruited'' in the front/high bar positions? Well, the hamstrings, according to Ripp. And what, according to Rippetoe, do the hamstrings do in the back squat? ''open the hip.'' Later, in the 3rd edition of starting strength, he seems to admit his error in stating that the hamstrings involvement in the back squat is isometric (he never admits that this is their function in the front squat as well, essentially nullifying the whole argument from the get go), and he even states in the lecture provided below that the hamstrings cross two joints (and thus resist knee extension). However, he continues to overemphasize the hamstrings involvement in the squat to this day. He keeps his front squat/low bar argument basically intact but he just doesn't follow it to its conclusion.



But, if you're an educator, as Rippetoe is, and you spend all this time talking about the hamstrings involvement in the back squat, it's going to happen that some of the people you educate come away with the impression that the hamstrings are prime movers in the back squat. It's not for nothing that Greg's first attempt at his article was met with extreme skepticism. If you look in the comment section of the related video, someone even calls the squat a ''leg curl.''

I would say Westside is more responsible for the hamstrings/squat correlation.

 

[Sano]

I took an evening to read and watch some Rippetoe lectures before I made this response, in the anticipation of some SS acolyte taking issue with it. But Ripp is at least partially responsible for this ''hamstrings are super important in the back squat'' idea. And the following passage is about as close as he ever came to outright saying that the hamstrings are a prime mover in the back squat.



https://startingstrength.com/articles/squat_rippetoe.pdf

Most of his argument about why people should lowbar squat is all about the hamstrings. It's about ''recruiting the most amount of muscle possible.'' What muscle is ''not recruited'' in the front/high bar positions? Well, the hamstrings, according to Ripp. And what, according to Rippetoe, do the hamstrings do in the back squat? ''open the hip.'' Later, in the 3rd edition of starting strength, he seems to admit his error in stating that the hamstrings involvement in the back squat is isometric (he never admits that this is their function in the front squat as well, essentially nullifying the whole argument from the get go), and he even states in the lecture provided below that the hamstrings cross two joints (and thus resist knee extension). However, he continues to overemphasize the hamstrings involvement in the squat to this day. He keeps his front squat/low bar argument basically intact but he just doesn't follow it to its conclusion.



But, if you're an educator, as Rippetoe is, and you spend all this time talking about the hamstrings involvement in the back squat, it's going to happen that some of the people you educate come away with the impression that the hamstrings are prime movers in the back squat. It's not for nothing that Greg's first attempt at his article was met with extreme skepticism. If you look in the comment section of the related video, someone even calls the squat a ''leg curl.''

Interesting video, up to a certain point. That's the thing about Rippetoe, he has a very basic understanding of biomechanics and anatomy which allows him to formulate his concepts, and then at a certain point he just starts talking out of his ass. The hamstrings works as both antagonists and synergist depending on the joint angles and if it's the eccentric or concentric part of the movement. Mostly it just stabilises during co-contraction which is why you could theorise that pause squats involves greater hamstring activity (isometrically). Rippetoes assertions here that the hamstrings are contracted over the hip joint during the front squat is not right. They start in a neutral position (not contracted) and are obviously stretching with hip flexion which happens to a great extent during the front squat (although granted not as much as when back squatting or lowbar squatting). Yes they are slightly shorter during the front squat compared to the low bar, but not enough to hinder hamstring activity.

His example of showing the hamstring in the shortest position at 12:56 is not quite right either. It's short definitely, but again, the hips are in neutral. If he added maximal extension over the hip joint with the maximal knee flexion he is showing, then that would be the shortest position, which would be what you call "active insufficiency" meaning the hamstrings would barely be able to contract yes.

There's no evidence to support what he is saying, although I will grant that low bar and sitting further back "may" activate the hamstrings and glutes more.

Btw, sports exercise studies you always have to take with a grain of salt. There's a lot of measurements (like EMG) that alone cannot tell you the entire picture, yet they are still used in isolation. With that in mind, if you want to look at a somewhat decent compilation of sources for muscle activity during the squat, check this out: https://www.strengthandconditioningresearch.com/exercises/squat/

 

[deadshot138]

 

[Sano]

Watched the whole series. Besides a few things we could contend on, that was one of the more decent and straightforward squatting tutorials I've seen. Thanks for the link!

 

[deadshot138]

Watched the whole series. Besides a few things we could contend on, that was one of the more decent and straightforward squatting tutorials I've seen. Thanks for the link!

The seated safety bar good mornings are amazing. I’ve started doing them because I’ve identified my back as being weaker than my legs.

 

[Miiiiiiighty]

So have the experts decided if the most beneficial version of box squats is to do them "touch and go" with a really short pause or to really sit then dead squat the weight ?
I'd say the latter is a lot more dangerous for trainees handling big weights...

 

[Sano]

So have the experts decided if the most beneficial version of box squats is to do them "touch and go" with a really short pause or to really sit then dead squat the weight ?
I'd say the latter is a lot more dangerous for trainees handling big weights...

Depends on the purpose of the squat and the box. If you want to practice sitting back specificly with someone that might have a very quad dominant squat and work on their mechanics, sitting down on the box might be preferred. Even if you have to adjust/lower the intensity (load). Same with coaching elderly and the like, as a cue to sit back it can be very efficient without overloading them with information (plus making it safer). On the other hand, if you want to use it more for ingraining a specific squat height touch and go might be better.

It's all just tools that work better or worse depending on the goal and individual.

 

[spiderguardman]

So have the experts decided if the most beneficial version of box squats is to do them "touch and go" with a really short pause or to really sit then dead squat the weight ?
I'd say the latter is a lot more dangerous for trainees handling big weights...

I use a box just to get proper depth for me.
I have a very messed up back so if i get even a slight tail tuck im getting major flair ups.
So i put a box just around parallell or even slightly higher.
I will never compete so i dont really care if its not a legit full squat.
Mcgill even talks about this and agrees with just going as deep as you safely can.
Esp if its someone who doesnt compete powerlifting.
Its still better then not squatting at all.

And who knows, maybe when ive built this squat up i could go deeper in the future.
I dont really care at this point.
Im just glad i can lift something heavy and not be in pain.

 

[deadshot138]

I use a box just to get proper depth for me.
I have a very messed up back so if i get even a slight tail tuck im getting major flair ups.
So i put a box just around parallell or even slightly higher.
I will never compete so i dont really care if its not a legit full squat.
Mcgill even talks about this and agrees with just going as deep as you safely can.
Esp if its someone who doesnt compete powerlifting.
Its still better then not squatting at all.

And who knows, maybe when ive built this squat up i could go deeper in the future.
I dont really care at this point.
Im just glad i can lift something heavy and not be in pain.

According to Louie Simmons, you strengthen a muscle 15 degrees in each direction of a range of motion. So if you go to exactly parallel, you are training the necessary muscles to break parallel as well.

 

[Sano]

According to Louie Simmons, you strengthen a muscle 15 degrees in each direction of a range of motion. So if you go to exactly parallel, you are training the necessary muscles to break parallel as well.

Louie Simmons often talks about things outside of his realm of expertise. To put it politely,

 

[deadshot138]

Louie Simmons often talks about things outside of his realm of expertise. To put it politely,

He does seem like a rambler and hasn’t the reverse hyper been largely debunked? Also if I go 15 degrees lower than normal in a squat I’m likely missing it. Just put what he said out there to see what the consensus was.

 

[Sano]

He does seem like a rambler and hasn’t the reverse hyper been largely debunked? Also if I go 15 degrees lower than normal in a squat I’m likely missing it. Just put what he said out there to see what the consensus was.

The reverse hyper is a good machine for glutes, hammies and lower back in a different way, but it's not a perfect cure for disc bulges/back pain as it was advertised (nothing is the cure for everyone). It also doesn't create any noticeable traction either, but it does however open the facet joints a bit and stretches the hamstrings. Either way it is a fine machine, and probably has helped more than a few people. It's just not something that cures all ails.

In regards to 15 degrees in every direction, that number seems made up. There is definitely a transfer, but if you want to get good at a specific squat height, best bet is to squat at that height. Strength and motor control has a way of adapting most to the angle you move to.