Squats: Are they REALLY necessary?

If you cut out squats and keep all the other junk, you're a fucking idiot.

If time is a problem go to a two or one a week full body program. Squat and press. 3x5 or 1x5. Volume is too low to gain weight. You'll still be stronger than if you're doing pistols and whatever gay shit you were going to do.

This thread is filled with broke dick weak athletes.
 
Why would you not want to squat? Squatting is awesome.
 
vrain said:
It would be interesting to know how many of the 'Squat no matter what' crowd trained in boxing, mma or other combat sports, vs the 'Not necessary' crowd.
Click to expand...

In spite of the fact that I lift way more often than I train judo (mostly because of price- gym is a helluva lot cheaper than the judo school), I would very much like to get more into judo than powerlifting or any weightlifting competition-type.

Getting my legs stronger helped a lot in power production. I don't think non-strength athletes need to be squatting 405lb or anything close to it, really. But doing some sort of squat and improving in some fashion (poundage isn't the only thing that can improve...) weekly or monthly would be very beneficial.

Everyone likes to think too much in the extremes. Why not just get your squat into the high 200-mid 300 range? It doesn't take all that much effort and the difference is obvious.
 
Lol. Was this post really deleted?

Dan O said:
You're high as giraffe pussy if you think pistols = squatting strength.

If you even entertain the idea I can't take you seriously.

This is coming from a guy that loves pistols and trains
people to do them in competition.

I could care less about how you "feel". People always spout some bullshit about the effectiveness of a program based on how they "feel". Don't care.

Oh suddenly you "feel" better? No shit you switched to something lower in intensity of course you feel better. Its easier.
Get out with that shit.
Click to expand...

Really?
 
Barbell squats are the best exercise for concurrent knee/hip extension strength development.

The best, by far. Not even a question.

Now, great max leg strength is not that important in every sport out there. A basketball player could be a great player without ever having done a single barbell squat. And if you can't squat due to health issues, you can find alternatives.

If you are healthy, want serious leg strength but don't want to squat because it's hard, then you're a pussy.
 
Also, using pistols for leg strength development is laughable.
 
miaou said:
Lol. Was this post really deleted?



Really?
Click to expand...

That was one of the few posts on the first page that made a good point re: feeling "better" initially after lowering intensity. Perhaps it was the giraffe vagina part?

Sherdog mods have long had a thing against posting shit about giraffe vaginas.
 
"High as giraffe pussy" is a Joe Rogan expression.

Joe has been the main UFC commentator for a decade now.

This is an MMA forum.

You see how ridiculous this is?
 
When you strength train you stimulate/stress your body. Your body then responds to that stress and given adequate recovery you get stronger. Squats are hard and make you stronger because they stress your body a lot. If you switch to an easier variation you aren't stressing your body as much so you won't get the same benefits.

If people could get just as strong from doing pistol squats as barbell squats but pistol squats are easier to recover from then strength athletes would do a lot more pistol squats, but they don't. Pistol squats might fit your overall training routine better precisely because they provide some lower body work while being lower stress but it's pretty bloody obvious that they aren't the same as heavy barbell squats.

By that same line of thinking, if heavy barbell squats are too much to recover from you could just as easily do lighter barbell squats and/or use a less aggressive progression in your program and get the same deload/lower intensity benefits that you get from pistols.
 
I will probably get flamed for this but who cares.
In Michael Boyles book advances in functional training he talks about not using back squats at all anymore.

He claims he gets his athletes just as strong using single leg squats combined with trap bar deadlifts, hang cleans and front squats.
The reason he does this is cause the rate of lower back injuries went down alot from skipping back squats.

Mind you that Boyle works with proffesional athletes who are training full time already and may be very banged up from doing this for decades.

My point is that if you can handle them then go for it, if you cant then dont.
 
spiderguardman said:
He claims he gets his athletes just as strong using single leg squats combined with trap bar deadlifts, hang cleans and front squats.
The reason he does this is cause the rate of lower back injuries went down alot from skipping back squats.
Click to expand...

It's not that implausible. Maybe his guys wouldn't be quite as strong at the bottom of the squatting movement because they can't load it quite as heavy, but otherwise all the elements are there. And very likely strength over that part of the ROM isn't that sports-specific for many or most athletes, so not developing it quite as much won't be a big deal at all.
 
spiderguardman said:
I will probably get flamed for this but who cares.
In Michael Boyles book advances in functional training he talks about not using back squats at all anymore.

He claims he gets his athletes just as strong using single leg squats combined with trap bar deadlifts, hang cleans and front squats.
The reason he does this is cause the rate of lower back injuries went down alot from skipping back squats.

Mind you that Boyle works with proffesional athletes who are training full time already and may be very banged up from doing this for decades.

My point is that if you can handle them then go for it, if you cant then dont.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that if a coach reduces the rate of injury by removing the back squat from his athletes training, that it wasn't an issue with the exercise, but with how technique is taught (or not), and how programming is done.

Additionally, how would you measure that the athletes are just as strong with or without the back squat? What is the measuring stick?
 
Squats: Are they REALLY necessary?

Yes. Unless you're happy being a lil' bitch.
 
Tosa said:
I'd argue that if a coach reduces the rate of injury by removing the back squat from his athletes training, that it wasn't an issue with the exercise, but with how technique is taught (or not), and how programming is done.

Additionally, how would you measure that the athletes are just as strong with or without the back squat? What is the measuring stick?
Click to expand...


I guess in his case he usually has groups of 20+ athletes to coach at the same time, maybe he has found that its easier to mess up a back squat and cheat the weight up than with the other lifts.
Also back squats do put alot more shear stress on the spine compared to front squats and esp compared to any single leg version.

And i think he means that they didnt suffer any decrease in performance on the field while reducing injury rates.

Ive noticed while training some mma guys that doing whats optimal is not always realistic, some people are just too banged up to be able to do the big 3 without breaking down.
So as a coach i sometimes need to find less demanding ways to train a movement.
If i can find a way to get similar amount of muscular tension with less joint load it might be a better way to train some people.
Thats why single limb loading can be better in some cases.
Now im no real expert in anything yet, im just a dude who has lifted for some years and read alot.
However i hope to be someone who really knows this stuff someday.
 
Last edited:
Front squats are still barbell squats. The difference between doing back squats vs doing front squats and trap-bar DLs is practically nonexistent for anyone not doing a barbell sport.
 
Regarding Boyle's functional training books/views:

We've got an intern at the S&C center, who holds Boyle as a god. He's read all his books, follows his advice to a "t", etc. He does all these endless "stretching/mobility/stability" warmups, does barbell lunges, bulgarian split squats, front squats (he doesn't back squat, obviously), turkish getups, one-arm DB snatches, single-leg DB RDLs, the works.

He is heavier than me, shorter than me, more muscular than me, has a better frame for strength training (shorter arms/legs, wider joints, etc.), has no significant injuries, has been training for a number of years, and his strength is laughable. He strains with 80-90 kg for the front squats and is impressed that I could do a 20 kg turkish getup the first time I ever tried them (which is also the only time I've ever done them, that exercise is shit). And he 100% believes I'm on steroids.


TL;DR: healthy athletes doing "functional training" is a joke.
 
Lol at being impressed with 20 kg Turkish get ups haha!!!
 
I guess that guy should focus more on his front squats then.
Its easy getting stuck in the fluff and forget about whats important.
I dont see why you cant get the benefits from both though.

I would kill to be able to do any kind of normal squat again, but my discs are so mashed it aint happening in any near future.
Thank god for hip belt squats though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,741
Messages
58,315,255
Members
175,999
Latest member
Rosabelot

Share this page

Back
Top