You can say whatever you want to say but "efficient" is not the same as "good for safety and muscle building purposes". Maybe if you want to lift the most possible weight and win in your category as a WEIGHTLIFTER (not as an athlete that uses weightlifting to build muscle for his athletic endeavors) then yeah, you can go overboard with "efficient" and "unsafe" technique.
Looking at it the wrong way. If this technique is fundamentally sound enough for other men to lift extremely heavy weights safely then maybe it's good enough for the rest of us with our more modest loads. But you're completely off the mark this time. This method of lifting recruits more LEG musculature - these guys have very strong quads and highly defined VMOs. This is what we look for when training for athleticism!
Would a guy trying to win his powerlifting event risk pulling with a bent back on a deadlift his final attempt? You bet he would. Would he be smart to try to do that continuously every day he trains? I don't think so.
Why are you muddling the issue by introducing deadlifts? Round back deadlifts have a place in training, as do straight back ones. They're a tool whose use depends on the needs of the lifter. Off topic, let us stick to squats.
Same here. Yes they will go to their max and allow the knees to cave in if that means winning the competition etc.
pls go. you're being an idiot. Go and try it out and see how you feel about it, even if it's with the empty bar. Get a tendo unit, see if it gives you more bar speed. Explore it, dont apriori reject it out of dogma because some asshole who came out of crossfit wrote a book saying you must saying you must keep knees out.
And no, just because 200 kg is their 60% 1RM is NOT easy for them. It's still very hard, even as a low % of their 1RM. It still might bring up some issues they have in maintaining proper form, even as elite as they are.
nah, they're pro weightlifters they have the best form going around, they live and breathe this shit. revise your theory that they don't care about technique when doign these heavy lifts and reconsider that maybe they have to lift that way to move such heavy weights out of necessity and efficiency considerations.
edit. I'll just add one last thing on this post. If you lift 60% of 1RM, you have less muscle recruitment than if you were lifting 90% of 1RM. Maximum muscle recruitment happens at 100% of 1RM. Or when you are lifting near a RM for a given percentage of 1RM. So an 8RM has near enough 100% muscular recruitment as you get closer to rep 8.
Now what does this mean for our knee-in vs knee-out discussion? It is when the lifter requires 100% of muscular recruitment, especially of the legs and VMOs that's what knee-in gives you out of the bottom of a squat, that extra kick to initiate the ascent of the squat. And this is why you see an exaggerated knee-in action on those limit weights (for reps or max), because you must recruit more muscle than at 60% when you can relax the need to recruit as much muscle.
Show Posts
that's insane. Personally I feel a million times better playing at ~180-5lbs ~10-12% bf as opposed to 210-215lbs ~18% bf, man that was a bad time.
but I had to save myself for the challenging RSR worksets. The remarkable thing is that 132.5kg was done after a 125kg warmup which was nice and easy up from a double of 110kg. Which is to say, i was primed for a front squat PR today but alas I could not attempt one for fear of ruining my backsquats! 