The great squat form debate

but the full squat shown here is powerlifting squat, parell squat dont count as squat, and true atg is much lower?

>ass to grass
>barely below parallel
nigga gtfo

>ass over 1ft off the grass
>ATG

If you're squatting high bar then I'd just go as low as I can while maintaining good form/going below parallel. A lot of people's bottom "atg" position looks like dogshit cause they completely lose tightness.

>>41862600
see Klokov squat, this is ATG squat

>>41862636
It all depends on proportions. For me to get below parallel with a neutral lower back and pelvis, I have to have a lot of knee travel. My "ATG" is basically the second picture

>>41862600
ATG for when I want to hit my glutes
Parallel when I mainly want to hit quads

File: overhead-squat.jpg (31KB, 350x444px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 350x444px

high bar ATG
but I can do it because my mobility is good and my proportions are as well. Some people arent meant to squat atg.
With that being said, unless you are competing there's no reason to low bar squat


Do yourself a favor and watch these videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av3LO2GwpAk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGEKRjlZKf8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPo5gpVrA9E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zT3pwocyU68

>>41862757
I squat low because Rip says so and until I become more knowledgeable I'm just gonna follow his advice.

>>41862801
Yeah people like you roam this board and its one reason its so shitty. Rip is a glorified high school football coach with an authoritative voice (I'll give him that) and no accomplishments to his name.
I take it you are new to lifting, and that is ok. Once you get a better understanding of things, you'll realize what a hack he is.
But dont take my word for it, just listen to what he has to say here. All I can say is, do research on your own and dont fall victim to the egolifting circlejerk that is "strength training". The rules of a sport you are not competing in do not apply to you, remember that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mC5-g1Ugmgc

>>41863057
>I take it you are new to lifting, and that is ok.
Correct
>Once you get a better understanding of things, you'll realize what a hack he is.
That may very well be but atm this stuff is complicated to me and I'm gonna take my time to figure it out. The consensus seems to be that his book is full of good info and his program is good for beginners. It gives me something to do while I understand the mechanics and complications of lifting and it's no doubt better than nothing. I didn't learn to play the piano by playing Beethoven sonatas on my first day and I'm not gonna learn lifting by starting with Mr. Olympia's pre-contest workout.
I respect and appreciate your advice though. Thanks.

>>41863057
>>41862757

There is no difference in muscle activation between highbar and lowbar. Do whatever is fucking comfy for you.

>>41863233
Uhhhhhhh

Woah woah hold on

Uhhhhh

This isn't true at you nigger fuck. Low bar activates the glutes and hams more. The more upright you get (high bar->front squat) the more the load transfers to your quads.

>>41863326

No it doesn't you fucking retard. The only difference is a mechanical advantage. No matter the bar position your quads are always going to be maximally challenged at the bottom of a squat. Why don't you read an actual study on the subject and get back to me?

>>41863615
>implying engagement doesn't mean the weight load isn't focused differently
Wew lad what's your first year of lifting look like

>>41863326
no muscle activation is the same. It stresses your back more (thats bad). And you dont want to train your hamstrings on a fucking squat. Its like only close grip benching to train your triceps more. As if there arent triceps exercises that target that muscle group better. You need to do some research into this instead of repeating silly soundbites you picked up from rippletards

https://www.strongerbyscience.com/its-time-to-end-this-nonsense-high-bar-vs-low-bar-squatting/

>With the low bar squat, the bar is closer to the fulcrum, which means similar hip extension torque has to be produced even though there may be a little more forward lean than with a high bar squat. Similar hip extension torque means similar challenge to the hip extensors (including the hamstrings).

>Second: The squat isn’t a very potent exercise for the hamstrings anyways. I’ve written about this before, but just to cover the high point: When comparing the squat to exercises where hamstring strength is apt to be a limiting factor (RDLs and leg curls), squats produce much lower hamstrings activation with the same percentage of a 1rm. This leads you to believe that 1) Your hamstrings are probably not a limiting factor for your squat; 2) Squats aren’t a particularly good exercise to train your hamstrings.

>Lastly, there’s not even a significant difference in hamstrings activation when comparing back squats and front squats. Surely if altering squat form would change the training effect for the hamstrings in any meaningful way, you’d see it when comparing front squats and back squats, which are much more different than are low bar and high bar back squats.

>Squat to build the squat, do exercises that target the hamstrings (which do not include squats) to train the hamstrings.
>>41863615
this anon knows

>>41862618
Correct. Left is what I call the PT squat, the kind of squat gym workers decide to teach everyone is safe because of some schizophrenic advice in Men's Health.

>actually enjoyed squatting
>physio tells me that I have fucked up tendons and I can't go below parallel
>have to do box squats