Squat strength standards

Ask or answer questions, discuss and express your views

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, parth, stuward, jethrof

Post Reply
toby123
Novice
Novice
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:12 pm
Location: UK

Squat strength standards

Post by toby123 » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:05 pm

Hi,

does anyone know whether the squat standards on this website are for a parallel or a full squat?


brook011
Associate Member
Associate Member
Posts: 537
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 2:08 am

Post by brook011 » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:10 pm


User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Re: Squat strength standards

Post by Jungledoc » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:36 pm

toby123 wrote:Hi,

does anyone know whether the squat standards on this website are for a parallel or a full squat?
I'd guess a parallel, but the page doesn't really say.

User avatar
TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Va Beach, Va

Post by TimD » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:40 pm

The page states all exercises were used perorming "full ROM". I take that to mean as far down as you can comfortably get maintaining good form (no back rounding, etc), be that level parallel, above of below. Some long legged lifters have trouble with good form and depth due to bone lengths,. Quite frankly, it's all relative anyway.
Tim

pdellorto
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 5252
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 8:43 am
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by pdellorto » Mon Jan 12, 2009 5:13 pm

The standards are excerpted from "Practical Programming for Strength Training" by Rippetoe/Kilgore. Since they advocate squatting to parallel or slightly below, I'd be surprised if the standards meant deeper.

I'm 100% certain they don't mean "above parallel." :D


User avatar
TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Va Beach, Va

Post by TimD » Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:19 pm

P'Dell wrote
I'm 100% certain they don't mean "above parallel." :D

Well, that may hold true with around 80 percent of the population, but I know quite a few basketball types that cannot get to parralel without back rounding, because of their leg lengths. The page stated full ROM, and if full ROM is above parallel, are you going to negate it? C'mmon, use your head.
Tim

wilburburns
Member
Member
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Location: Kentucky, USA
Contact:

Post by wilburburns » Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:26 pm

From TimD
but I know quite a few basketball types that cannot get to parralel without back rounding, because of their leg lengths.
I have read this quite a few times in the past couple of days. Can someone explain why this is. I am under the impression that Full ROM is directly related to Flexibility, and Flexibility can increase or decrease over time. Increase with proper stretches, and decrease as motion range is not used.

For example, When younger, I could stand flat footed and bind over and touch my palms to the ground while keeping my legs straight. However, now, I am lucky if I can touch my finger tips to the ground while keeping legs straight. But, with a proper routine, I could regain the prior flexibility.

So, What is so special about Tall People that make it much more difficult to squat to or below parrallel?

Cliff

User avatar
TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Va Beach, Va

Post by TimD » Mon Jan 12, 2009 10:38 pm

I.m one of the first people that will talj about how to gain flexibility in the hips, shoulder girdle and ankles, because I am an O lifter, and you have to be able to get deep, but it;s been my observations over the years that people with long bones from the knee to hip in relation to bone lengths from the ankle to knee, just have many problems getting parallel, regardless to their flexibility. The first thing I do when a kid comes up to me and wants to learn O lifting, is to teach them overhead and front squats, , rock bottom with an empty bar. My observations have been that the above characteristics just can't get deep no matter how much practice or stretching they put into it. I haven't looked into the biomechanicas of it, but I'm sure leverages play a major role. Even coach Javorek states that you only have to go as deep as maintaining perfect form will allow you. Yes, try to incease that depth, but if you are over parallel, no problem.
Tim

KPj
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 3482
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:49 am

Post by KPj » Tue Jan 13, 2009 5:28 am

Tall people, or, people with long legs (I say this because i'm short, but my legs are long compared to my torso, which makes squating more difficult than DL's), technically have more ROM than others i.e. more distance to travel. So technically, it requires even more flexiblity and strength for someone like this to squat the same distance as someone 'built to squat' (short legs/long torso).

I can't really comment on Olifting. But, when just talking about squatting, what a tall lifter should be doing to try and work around this is striving for a wide stance.
wilburburns wrote:For example, When younger, I could stand flat footed and bind over and touch my palms to the ground while keeping my legs straight. However, now, I am lucky if I can touch my finger tips to the ground while keeping legs straight. But, with a proper routine, I could regain the prior flexibility
When you were about 1-2 years old, you could more than likely perform a perfect, full depth 'a$$ to grass' squat, too. Maybe i'm the only person that looks at babies/toddlers from a biomechanical perspective (i'm not actually, since I stole the analogy), but their movement is pretty impressive.

What people often overlook is that you don't GAIN the ability to squat, you REGAIN the ability. It's a movement pattern you've lost over the years of your life.

I also strongly agree that you should go as far as comfortable with good form

You know, increasing squat depth is a very interesting problem. I would be interested to hear if Olifters had any 'tips and tricks' for increasing squat depth.

An interesting way to approach it is the way Gray Cook recommends - (re)learning the squat from 'the bottom up'. So, you actually learn to squat from 'the hole'. In his view, this is how you learn the movement naturally, as a child/baby, and that's how it should be re-learned. I actually lost squat depth when I injured my knee about 6 months ago, and i've been struggling to get it back since then. I can get my hips below my knees quite easily, but can't get right down like I used to. I've 'regained' my squat before, but i'm going to try Cooks approach and see how it goes.

KPj

daniel4738
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 242
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 5:53 am

Post by daniel4738 » Tue Jan 13, 2009 7:30 am

The third world squat. I try doing this on my chair at work while working. Great article at T-nation.

http://www.t-nation.com/readArticle.do?id=1856085&cr

KPj
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 3482
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:49 am

Post by KPj » Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:04 am

Good Link. I love that article. Interestingly, it's a very similar theory to Gray Cooks approach.

KPj

wilburburns
Member
Member
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Location: Kentucky, USA
Contact:

Post by wilburburns » Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:32 am

Daniel,

Good article.

Cliff

wilburburns
Member
Member
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Location: Kentucky, USA
Contact:

Post by wilburburns » Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:42 am

Tim,

Real World experience is great. Being 5'9", I'm not Tall, but not short either. I do have flexibility issues though, which are getting better. :wink:

KPJ,

I look at my two daughters (ages 1 and 3.5) And can only dream of being as flexible as they are.

Cliff

toby123
Novice
Novice
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:12 pm
Location: UK

Post by toby123 » Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:41 pm

Since it does say full range of motion, I think I will assume that to count for the squats as well.

What do people think the relationship should be between the parallel squat and the full squat in terms of weight lifted? Presumably, more weight can be lifted in a parallel squat than in a full squat, but how much more?

pdellorto
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 5252
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 8:43 am
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by pdellorto » Tue Jan 13, 2009 2:24 pm

TimD wrote:The page stated full ROM, and if full ROM is above parallel, are you going to negate it? C'mmon, use your head.
Tim
I'm just saying, the numbers are from Mark Rippetoe. I've yet to see him call any squat above parallel anything except a "partial squat."

I agree on the limited ROM for some people, but then, those charts might not be valid for them.


Post Reply