High Bar or Low Bar?
Are alternating high bar and front squats 3x5 every workout enough?
Fitness goals: Gain strength (Don't really want to be a fat powerlifter.)
Do you want a strong squat which uses lots of muscles, or a squat which has a better transition to oly lifts and sports performance? If those things don't matter to you, then do the one that you like the most.
And are HBS and FS enough? For what? For lower body? No. You need some pulling work, especially because you do HBS and FS. Your posterior chain will get left behind. Add deadlifts / RDL / GHR and shit like that.
hb is the best of both worlds. it has the best balance between overall weight lifted and muscle involvement. fs is more quad dominant but limited by stablizing capacity of the trunk, lb puts more emphasis on the posterior chain but thats what deadlifts are for. for overall athleticism and development of lower body hb squat is the best option.
Lowbar = works entire leg in a balanced manner, makes you stronger, you lift more weight
Highbar = no hamstrings, meme, lift less weight
Oh fuck, is that what lowbar squatters actually believe?
Somewhere out there is a kid who is struggling and not having the slightest fun with his squat because he can't "activate his hamstrings" during squat, just believing the bullshit some so called "experts" tell. Get the fuck out of here and take that bullshit with you. It doesn't even make the slightest fucking sense, what the fuck.
thread has too much bait in it.
I do squats 2 times a week, so I ask the same question as OP. I want to make my squatting more diverse. Should I do front squats or low bar (in addition to high bar)?
I'm a DYEL fag who will never lift any decent weight but I want to know anyway.
then refer to fred hathfield, the first man to ever squat 1000 lbs, who believed lb squat to be only for testing/displaying strength rather than building it and advised all athletes, including powerlifters, to do high bar squats
Almost everyone is gonna tell you what's better for THEM and only what they have been LED to believe. Just do whatever feels more natural to you, and gives you the more fun.
But if you want some "science", Greg Nuckols has a great series on it:
Lowbar builds more strength and develops more muscle mass.
Highbar has the hamstrings under active insufficiency through most of the range of motion.
>reading greg cuckols pseudoscience
>Lowbar builds more strength and develops more muscle mass.
Sentences like these make me want to throw Rippetoe in a hole and make him never to be heard again. I'm glad most professionals trainers and PTs don't take him seriously.
Which is why "lift high-bar if you want to lift more weight" said no one ever. But "low-bar allows you to lift more weight making you stronger" is pure bullshit, pure nonsense. Read the Nuckols' articles above.
It's supposed that with the low bar you won't be able to get soo deep, whereas as with the high bar you can go atg.
I put the bar just beneath my trap and over my delts. Kind of a middle ground. I go ATG but if I feel that I may struggle more with the HB then I put it a bit lower.
>read cuckol's articles
The guy who says hamstrings are bad for squats?
>"Oh you're doing low bar squats with 405lbs or as us weightlifters call it, Good Mornings with 180kg?" My high bar squat with 60kg is much more impressive as I actually go through the full ROM as was intended. And in no way am I dyel."