Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - steven-miller

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 33
361
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 20, 2010, 02:30:24 am »
Quote from: JCsBck on November 19, 2010, 11:03:24 pm
You're right, lets just add more ROM to every exercise and disregard the weight used because more ROM is always better.

The only reason you think the full squat is better is because of the added ROM. You have no experience with " full squatz increazed vertz by 8 inches while half squat only did 6 inchez'

Let's start deadlifting standing on 12 inch boxes.

If it is useful ROM (unlike in your example), it is indeed always better to go over full ROM as long as other technical demands are also taken in to consideration. Sure, there will be points to argue about. I can hardly see such things related to depth of the squat. You obviously can, but you also don't squat, so...

362
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 19, 2010, 06:20:41 pm »
Quote from: JCsBck on November 19, 2010, 01:45:11 pm
Of course the full squat is better assuming you could do the same amount of weight on a full squat as you can on a half squat, but you can't, so half squat wins.

No, they don't, but I do not expect you to comprehend that.

Quote from: AlexV on November 19, 2010, 03:36:55 pm
...


That was actually a very good and insightful post!
What we have to deduce from that is, that the work-out of a college athlete will usually be somewhat different than what I or many other hobbyists will be doing, mainly for recovery reasons. So "effective" training will look different for those two populations and we should not necessarily look at what coaches of the other group are doing to determine what will be the best course of action for oneself.

Quote from: LBSS on November 19, 2010, 03:45:58 pm
Yeah cause god knows you can't become stronger without ATG squatting. Elite athletes do strength exercises, they ARE STRONG, but many of them don't do full squats. In fact, I wonder how many Olympic athletes do real, honest-to-god full squats in their training, lifters aside. Or how many players within a given pro sport.

Do you think Rajon Rondo full squats when he trains? How about Vince Young? How about Chris Johnson? How about Cristiano Ronaldo? Dwight Howard? Jason Kidd? Andre Agassi, back in the day? How about Lindsay Vonn? I don't know, but I highly doubt it. Why should they invest time, energy and mental focus in steven-miller-approved full squatting? They spend all their time and energy doing important things, like getting better at their sport.

Elite athletes are often very strong/fast/amazing because of other reasons than training - at least to a substantial degree. That is also the reason why mentioned people might not even be familiar with a weight room. That however does not mean that the same source of action (becoming stronger being secondary to 6 days a week skill training for ones sport) is indicated for you and me to optimize results.

363
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 19, 2010, 01:20:32 pm »
Quote from: LBSS on November 19, 2010, 09:41:14 am
Yeah, I guess John Smith is a complete retard coaching-wise. I mean, he can't even teach a full squat! What a worthless coach.

Or maybe the guy who coached Maurice Greene, Ato Boldon, Carmelita Jeter and a bunch of sub-10 guys and a couple of 400m Olympic champs has realized throughout his decades of coaching that YOU DON'T HAVE TO SQUAT TO BE A GREAT ATHLETE. If it's going to distract from the main focus of training, why bother?

No, you don't need to squat, you can be a great athlete if you have good enough parents, too. So why don't we all choose ours instead of becoming stronger, seems like the best idea.

Quote from: JCsBck on November 19, 2010, 10:25:03 am
That's his opinion, but science (if you count using an EMG as science) and personal experience shows half squats (not 1/4 but same idea) hit the pchain quite well.

http://www.t-nation.com/testosterone-magazine-623#inside-the-muscles

Of course half squats will hit the p-chain as well, I don't need EMG "research", that has a ton of problems, to tell me that. There is hip extension involved, so you will activate the according muscles. You will still have a better strength exercise with a full squat.



364
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 19, 2010, 08:46:06 am »
Quote from: bball2020 on November 19, 2010, 07:37:18 am
Ive actually seen damn good athletes who struggle with proper squat technique and clean as well..

Anyways, gonna leave it as it is.  Squat how you do and ill squat how ill do.  I nor any athlete need to squat below parallel and vice versa.  Again, im not talking about squatting quarter squats, i mean i favor thigh parallel squats for the majority of my training IE powerlifting depth(lower than half squat). And you obviously prefer deeper, so be it to each his own.

also, are you a big RIPPTOE guy?  JW, like some of his vids, just cant get him over saying that VJ cant be improved.

If damn good athletes struggle with proper squat technique than their instruction is probably not up to par.

Regarding Rippetoe, I like that he makes clear predictions of what can be achieved with his program thus making it evaluable by everyone, I like that he wants things to be done right and does not just come up with some wishy-washy way of saying "do what works best for you", I like that he has good arguments why he thinks his method of training a beginner is the best, I like that he takes into account various stages of training advancement, which he also defined objectively with Lon Kilgore, and organizes training accordingly.
I think defining these stages the way he did along with his extremely detailed description and instruction of how to execute the basic barbell exercises and how to coach them are his most important contributions to the field. It's not so much his Starting Strength method that is so important, although I find it to be extremely good and I am sure that the modifications in the upcoming 3rd edition are going to make it even better, but it is those universal principals that he described and made practically applicable.
Regarding him and VJ: He never said that VJ cannot be improved. He said that it cannot be improved above a certain level, which is a rather obvious point to make. His suggestion or observation was, that it won't usually go up higher than 30% of the initial height. He therefore takes into account the genetic disposition of an athlete for this kind of task, in which he is doing right I think. The 30% are of course a somewhat arbitrary number and can certainly be disputed. But I think this might actually be a somewhat accurate approximation of what will be achieved on average. We all know some examples of people who increased their ability by more than 30% (mind you, we are talking SVJ here), but those are a minority.

I would not necessarily listen to Rip for advice on people who want to increase either sprinting speed or VJ, but he will tell you that himself. One should however listen to what he has to say about training for novices in general, which is his forte, and also about what he has to say on barbell exercises.
That does not mean that he is right and everyone else is wrong, but if you want to make up your mind about certain things you would be wise to read what he has to say.

365
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 19, 2010, 06:45:28 am »
Quote from: bball2020 on November 18, 2010, 07:16:09 pm
Well, I know many people, mostly due to how he writes not what he says, do not particularly like JS, so i guess ill try to speculate on this. As far as the flexiblity thing, maybe he speaks that way because he coaches a whole team.  There are much more important things to be accomplished with the little time he has than teach form and work on specific flexibility for a lift that has no barring on the football field.

I acknowledge the difficulties inherent in teaching a large group of athletes at the same time. Certainly not an easy task. If choosing less effective, but easier exercises is the answer can be debated though. But that is not for this discussion, right?

Quote from: bball2020 on November 18, 2010, 07:16:09 pm
Football is a year round sport. Im assuming the demands he talks about are mainly the sport specific stuff that they do year round(drills passing leagues) along with more specific stimulus such as sprints and jumps.  Like adarq said earlier, he tends to have problems with his hips easily if he squats below parallel.  Obviously problems still can happen at or slightly above parallel, but I guess the room for error is so much less at such a low depth.

I don't know adarqui's specific situation with his hips and how he used to squat when the injury happened. That being said, you cannot possibly compare an athlete that already had an injury before, that is still bugging him, with perfectly healthy athletes like you and me. Just because adarq has hip pain when he squats deep, does not mean that you or me have to squat high.
Regarding room for error - which error is that you are talking about? Are we actually discussing whether such a simple movement as the squat is too technically demanding for an ATHLETE to execute correctly? Please pardon me, but if an athlete is unable to execute a correct squat with adequate instruction, I argue that this has to be a horrible athlete and far from the norm. I say that the same applies to for example the powerclean and powersnatch.

Quote from: bball2020 on November 18, 2010, 07:16:09 pm
Also, plenty of people lift submaximal loads exclusively. I would say the criteria is

Max effort= above 90%
Sub max= below 80%  (80-90% is gray area i think)

A lot of people, especially who's sport isnt weightlifting, can make huge gains stick from 75%-80% range with the correct volume and with the use of other high intensity stumulus(sprints,jumps), especially those non advanced lifters.

If I do 20 reps with 75% of my 1rm then yes, this will certainly lead to adaptation. But that is not submaximal by my definition of the word and it is certainly not linked to a lower chance of injury.

And by the way, what is an advanced vs. non advanced lifter to you?

Quote from: djoe on November 19, 2010, 05:23:48 am
I think ure looking at the problem from two different angles.
as steven-miller was saying in another post about motivation, choosing what to do, investing time in your trianing and so on, its one thing to coach yourself when u have all the time in the world, u can ask urself to be motivated and u actually care about improving, esp for VJ or non-competitive athletes (we can assume that, if nobody's gonna pay u for training, u have some sort of passion and dedication about it), and TOTALLY different to train others, when u go on with different problems such as: time, lack of motivation to do every single drill perfectly, boredom, non-adherence, lack of confidence, non-trust, plus u simply dont have the ability to control every single second from your athlete's life.
I used to think the same, if you dont go 110%, whats the point of training? but then when u coach athletes and they dont turn up because they decided to go out, or they simply dont wanna do a drill because 'it's hard', what do you do?

Good post and I agree that those are different scenarios. I don't have experience with the "being a coach and training groups" scenario. But I guess you have to make sure that your athletes understand why the stuff they should do is important for them and that accomplishing it will lead to them performing substantially better. If they don't care about that, you can't do much about it. Making the training easy but extremely ineffective is however not a good solution because it will amplify the conviction of the athlete that training in the weight room is a waste of time and that he should better go partying.

366
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 18, 2010, 04:49:44 pm »
Quote
Weightlifting full squats demand a degree of mobility far beyond that which is required during the execution of most sport acts and certainly far beyond the working range of many athletes who might otherwise enjoy a full sporting career never having been cut short because they do not possess the requisite flexibility to squat like a weightlifter with limit loads.

The majority of non-weightlifters, in fact, would be foolish to risk the possible structural trauma that is presented as part of a cumulative result of squatting maximal loads through the entire amplitude concurrently with varied gradations of sport practice.

Anyone who states the contrary cannot possibly understand the training problems inherent to working with athletes year round whose practice of SPP yields a high structural demand to the legs and knees specifically.

This quote tells me, that Mr. Smith is unable to teach an athlete a full squat. It does not even have to tell me, he basically even said so himself since he believes that most athletes that seek his advice are not flexible enough to do more than a half squat. Can someone please tell me why we should even read beyond that? Or am I misinterpreting things? If so I apologize, since I find that post to be adding very little of substance to the discussion.

Other than this, since I openly admit not to have the experience of coaching anyone let alone athletes whose practice of SPP yields high structural demand to legs and knees, I will ask YOU, bb2020, since you posted this quote, to elaborate on the topic of the risk of structural trauma that presents itself from full squatting + sports, but not with half squatting + sports.

And if the argument runs that the difference is in lifting submaximal loads instead of maximal loads: Who here is planning to do that exclusively? I am sincerely interested since I will follow that training log very mindfully.

367
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 18, 2010, 12:47:23 pm »
Thanks for posting this!

368
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 18, 2010, 10:12:04 am »
I do not doubt, that the half squat is the most similar variant to a VJ and I would agree for the most part with the ranking adarqui gave - yet the squat, regardless which type, is still very, very different, especially in one of the most important aspects, namely time for force production. Thinking about the squat as a VJ-specific exercise will not lead to the best results for anyone but a novice-level-strength athlete.
IMO this point led to a lot of misunderstandings between people on internet forums. What everyone observes is that an athlete makes gains in VJ once he starts to train his squat and gets better relative strength. What people deduce from this observation is that they have to squat more weight and also jump to make further gains. Legitimate regarding the observation. Then there comes a coach like Shawn Myszka and says that the squat is overrated for VJ and that squat strength does not correlate with VJ. I am sure his observation is valid as well. The problem is that both sides talk about different athletic populations, one that needs less specificity and gains ridiculously well from the squat alone and one that needs more specificity and will have a hard time to make gains from squatting and jumping without the assistance of exercises, that are indeed closer to the VJ on the similarity spectrum than ANY type of squat, for example powercleans, powersnatches, hang snatches, jump squats, depth jumps etc.
I agree with adarqui in so far, that people will make considerable gains with a half squat in the beginning. bball2020's argument falls in the same category and might be correct if every trainee stays as unadapted as they are in the beginning. But that is not the case. Sometimes even with less than optimal programming people actually get somewhat strong by accident and from this point onwards they will have little benefit from doing half squats alone. What they need is the type of squat that produces the strongest person the fastest regardless of how similar that squatting movement is to the sport demands. Because other exercises will have to be used anyway to transfer higher strength to higher VJ. At this point it is irrelevant how closely your squat "mimics" a jump, a concept that is totally backwards in the first place, and it becomes a lot more important how well your squat prepares you for things you better do to become a better athlete, like doing snatches. Then you are at the point were Shawn Myszka was when he said that squats are an overrated exercise for VJ - an argument that I don't share, but that is understandable regarding his perspective working with a lot of preselected athletes, that have a certain level of strength already and that validates my thoughts that a half squat is not the final answer to VJ training and that training this way is short sighted because it won't make you as strong as fast and not optimally prepare you for other things that will need to be done once you gained some strength - for example unilaterals.

369
Article & Video Discussion / Re: Unilaterals Make You Weaker
« on: November 17, 2010, 09:31:07 am »
Quote from: adarqui on November 16, 2010, 05:51:22 pm
steven-miller, do you have any idea how high you jump off your right leg vs left leg?

Nearly missed that one.... I actually have no idea but I don't think that I would do very well, partially because I haven't needed the movement so far and probably never will in my sport - unless I decide to switch to track and field ^^.

370
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 17, 2010, 09:01:10 am »
Removed due to an unlogical thought :).

371
Article & Video Discussion / Re: Unilaterals Make You Weaker
« on: November 17, 2010, 08:56:16 am »
Quote from: adarqui on November 16, 2010, 06:05:38 pm
what is your 5RM lunge/5RM squat, for example, when you trained that way?

for example, when I was doing 225 lb barbell walking lunges for singles, the max was probably around 235, and my half squat was 315 x 1, at 165.. the walking lunge singles were extremely intense.

I did a variation of the forward lunge, where I make a step forward and drop into the lunge position and then do an explosive concentric with the forward leg to get into the starting position directly. I did those recently with 225 lbs for 3 sets of 10 reps (alternating legs) after my squats, 3 rm must have been between 402 and 408 lbs for the squat on this day (unusual training time). That was my third lunge session, so it might not have been a true 5 rm in the sense that coordination can still improve and I started out rather conservatively (198 lbs for mentioned reps/sets two training days before). But they were hard enough to get a sense of the trunk activation and IMO it does not compare to a heavy set of 5 in the squat.

Quote from: adarqui on November 16, 2010, 06:05:38 pm
why wouldn't you use unilaterals for beginners? or did i misunderstand.

and is this for performance, or just strength athletes?
Quote from: djoe on November 17, 2010, 05:51:32 am
Quote from: mattyg35 on November 16, 2010, 08:55:10 pm

During a squat for example, the outer quad(vastus lateralis) is recruited more than the inner quad(VMO). This will eventually lead to an imbalance, which if ignored can result in the knee 'caving in' b/c of the lack of strength of the VMO which may lead to injury. This is also why the VMO is heavily rehabbed in ACL injuries, to prevent further injury and 'caving in' of the knee. This is coming from experience.


wow i always thought the knee caving in = internal rotation of the femur which happen be because of tilted pelvis (which could suggests weak glutes and abs), or weak just glutes/hams....corrected by hip extension exercises focusing on keepping the knees in line with the hips/ankles, coupled with glute activation

My knees came in during the squat a lot at the beginning. I fixed this by taking weight off the bar, correcting the mistake and work up from there. I got a lot stronger and did not have this problem anymore. No unilaterals needed. Whatever is the cause for this problem (Mark Rippetoe argues that it is actually week adductors), it went away by performing bilateral work correctly.

Everything else really has already been addressed.

372
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 16, 2010, 05:30:03 pm »
@bball2020: Sure man, I don't want to fight with you either, just giving my thoughts.

I agree that strength is strength. But I guess we differ in opinion regarding the potential of certain exercises to create this strength long term. I have the strong opinion that low-bar squats have the most potential for growth based on the fact that people handle more weight with it (compared to high-bar, front squats, lunges, box squats over comparable ROM). It can be universally observed when comparing two different exercises, that the one which involves more muscle mass and lets you lift more weight is also the one that more readily responds to training, just think about the press and the bench press. Since these differences exist, we should not pretend that they are not.

Regarding powersnatches and jump squats I stated my thoughts here: http://www.adarq.org/forum/strength-power-reactivity-speed-discussion/3x8-or-3x5/msg20158/#msg20158
KellyB agreed with those observations as well.

Not trying to convince anybody really. If you get the results you want, everything is good. Just wanted to give reason for what I wrote.

373
Article & Video Discussion / Re: Unilaterals Make You Weaker
« on: November 16, 2010, 03:26:51 pm »
Quote from: Raptor on November 16, 2010, 11:30:27 am
One of the reason I like unilaterals is because you can work depending on your weak limb. If you can lunge 90 kg for 5 reps with your right leg and 90 kg for 10 reps with your left leg, then you can limit your left leg training to the right leg RM. So they both get the same amount of training.

In a squat, you'd probably load more the left leg in this situation and continue with the imbalance (sure, doing the same amount of reps and doing a bilateral exercise will also help balance things out in the end). But I just feel like more focus can be applied with an unilateral exercise, there's also a bit less stability so the core works harder etc.

If you have severe strength imbalances that show in your squat, you need to use less weight. Some people have the problem of using one side differently in the squat than another and this can usually be dealt with if you are aware of it. Take weight of the bar and concentrate on perfect, symmetrical form. A unilateral exercise might help with the awareness, but the possibility of compensation is not ruled out by that - you still need to be very aware of your form.

I disagree about the core working harder. My core works harder in a 5 rm squat and works less in a 5 rm lunge due to the differences in weight being used.

Quote from: Raptor on November 16, 2010, 11:30:27 am
It really just depends on what you're trying to improve on, I guess. So for athletics, unilateral work "must" be done because I feel it really helps and is more specific to human movement. For powerlifting etc, I don't really feel it "must" be done because it doesn't have any specificity to that.

I agree with that. Although I wouldn't use them for beginners.

374
Strength, Power, Reactivity, & Speed Discussion / Re: low bar squat vs high bar squat
« on: November 16, 2010, 02:18:53 pm »
Quote from: bball2020 on November 16, 2010, 11:57:00 am
sufficient depth is debatable IMO as it is atleast a half squat/close to parallel

It's not debatable since a half squat, which yours is, is not a squat. It is a different exercise and one might say more limited in its application.

Quote from: bball2020 on November 16, 2010, 11:57:00 am
i feel great glute activation and drive though so is that not a sign that I am using hips more?

More than what? More than you would use them with good technique? I don't think so.

Quote from: bball2020 on November 16, 2010, 11:57:00 am
Agree on the knee travel foreward a lot, I mean I do think it has to travel foreward and not just be a power lifter knees dont really move squat..

I agree that there has to be forward travel in a raw squat to get more quad contribution and hence create a balanced strength movement. But yours is clearly excessive in face of how little you use your hips. I can see the same by the way in your depth drops.

Quote from: bball2020 on November 16, 2010, 11:57:00 am
"A good squat will recruit more muscle mass than yours by having you go over the full range of motion and will therefore be more beneficial for athletic performance."

Again, not as clear cut as you make it out to be, especially if your focusing on vert mainly IMO..but yea I want to break parallel without rounding back at all just for main sake of consistency/fun  not "full" or ATG though    just my preferance

What do you want to imply with that? That it does not matter if you full squat or half squat?

I have been addressing this point a lot recently and I will do it again. Some people keep thinking that different training methods will still produce the same results and that they therefore have a reason to pick the method that is the most comfortable for them. My stance is that not every method can be the best, most effective, most time efficient method. And not every type of squat can be the best squat. If we take training seriously our concern has to be to find that best method or get as close as possible to it with what we do. As one of the best strength movements the squat is a key exercise for many athletes that they spend a lot of time on in the gym. And yet most people are of the opinion that it is okay to half squat instead of squat, to not use their hips in the squat, to not be consistent with their technique, essentially to do it however it feels comfortable for them at a given time. And those people are often wondering why they don't get stronger. These are the same people who are afraid to take 30 minutes of their time to learn a powersnatch and prefer to jump squat instead. They don't make this decision because they think the jump squat is the better exercise - which would be legitimate. But they don't care if it is or not. They only care about their comfort and what is easier to do. You don't want to be one of those people if want your training to be successful. Low-bar vs. high-bar might be a rather minuscule decision, choosing to half squat with bad technique instead of full squat with good technique is not.

Having said that, if you think your squat is the best squat for developing a high VJ than by all means go ahead and keep doing it. But please enlighten my why your squat is better than a full squat, which activates more muscle, puts less stress on the knees, uses the hamstrings and adductors better and utilizes a greater range of motion?

Quote from: bball2020 on November 16, 2010, 11:57:00 am
do you see the same things in this squat?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFGbr_GoAcY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7X5MeyG_94

Yes, I feel very similar about these squats.

375
Article & Video Discussion / Re: Unilaterals Make You Weaker
« on: November 16, 2010, 10:17:11 am »
Quote from: mattyg35 on November 16, 2010, 08:52:21 am
You can always do both, for those athletes you mentioned, single leg work wouldn't be the emphasis of their training.
Single leg work balances your legs out better than bilateral work.

With that said, I will step out of this mental masturbation circle jerk.

Please post evidence or provide logic reasoning for why unilaterals should balance out the legs more than correctly performed - which means balanced - bilateral exercises. And please explain why a powerlifter should do unilateral work when everything he does in his sport is bilateral in nature and will usually require a coordinated, well-balanced effort of both his left and right body side.
And don't just say "you can always do both", because only an idiot would bring forward such an argument, since it means that he does not understand that everything that is useless is in fact also detrimental because it means that valuable training time as well as physical resources are wasted which could otherwise be used for productive things that actually do something to help ones progress. And I don't think that you are an idiot, so please let us discuss this in an intelligent manner.

Pages: 1 ... 23 24 [25] 26 27 ... 33