Low-bar squatting is only useful for PL comp. Squats aren't primarily used to develop the posterior chain, that's why deadlift variants, clean variants, and snatch variants exist. Front and high-bar back squatting allows development of quad extension and vertical posture strength through the midsection. If you want to improve vertical pressing for OLs, front and high-bar back squats are necessary and far more useful than low-bar. Rip unnecessarily wants everyone to use his preferred method.
durch ihn und seine videos hab ich viel im training dazu gelernt, Mark Rippetoe heißt der Herr, er hat auch viele Bücher über Kraftsport geschrieben........
You can move more weight (reason it's probably best for PL comps, given correct anthropometry), but to say it's best for hypertrophy isn't necessarily true. It's a matter of the type of hypertrophy you're trying to develop. High bar position still puts more strain on quads than low bar because the posterior chain takes over in the latter to a greater degree. So, great for glute, ham, etc., hypertrophy, but I'd rather hit that with deadlift variants and use high bar squats for quad development.
Low-bar squatting allows more weight to be used, therefore more potential overall hypertrophy as quickly and efficiently as possible. However anthropometry and personal preference can't be ignored; for example I prefer high bar and it simply feels better. The problem is that most people just squat badly and they need to be taught one form and learn it well.
I find it a lot easier to go rock bottom in the high bar squat because the hamstrings don't "get in the way", by which I mean that in the low bar squat the hamstrings pull tight (provided your lower back is not relaxing). This is at least my experience.
Mark has forgotten more knowledge than these clowns in the comments will ever know. I listen to logic not some roided fool telling me to train until I wanna puke
I think it kind of depends on your anthropometry. I've done a limited amount of high-bar squatting, and it feels a bit easier to do for me at least. It seems to require a bit less flexibility.
The Nautilus leg press is far more effective and safer than any version of barbell squat. The Nautilus cam makes an exercise harder, and that is good. To quote Arthur Jones, a Nautilus machine is simply a logical barbell.
MrJayrhine Machines cannot fully replace the value of free weights because no machine fully engages all the support muscles. Machines can be used for targeting specific muscles but that's all.
Direct quote from the book " the function of the hamstring muscles is primarily isometric, since they don't necessarily change length on the way down. This is why the hamstrings don't get very sore when you squat, even though they are working as hard as the rest of the muscles involved."
To me for overall leg development and strength, the low bar squat is the best. Yes being more vertical in a high bar and front squat does shift emphasis to the quads and shifts away from the posterior chain..since you basically have squat straight down more so than slightly pushing your hips back in a low bar to initiate the descent. BUT, isnt the goal TOTAL leg development?...well it should be. Vince Gironda back in the 60's..banned squats in his gym,since he said it makes your butt big. He only advocated hack squats, sissy squats and roman chair squats. As we know, everything back then in those days was about asthetics. But what is worse..big huge quads and a flat undeveloped butt or good sized quads to go along with well develop glutes? its about total leg development and building the glutes is very important for protecting the back and the hips. The squat is considered the king of total leg development, not just quad development. Whether you high bar or low bar, once you overload the quad..and when the thighs is breaking parallel...the quads are going to get stimulated no matter what. Ronnie Coleman, who started out as a powerlifter, squatted low bar for years and built some of the best legs in bodybuilding history. John Cena squats low bar and you see how big and developed his legs are. High bar is good fro olympic lifting to catch the weight at the bottom to drive up for jerks etc..but for overall stimulation and development of the quads, posterior chain..low bar squad is best. If you use a real wide stance you arent going to hit the quads as much anyway....but hit the glutes, inner thighs and hamstrings. But once your feet are shoulder width or just slightly wider..and you go below parallel..the quads are getting hit. Christian Thibadeau, who is a well known strength coach, talks about high bar and low bar etc..and he said in totality..you want to use a stance that you can use the most weight but also target all of the musculature of the lower body..not just "isolate" one area. But its about total lower body power and muscular development.
james jacob because he was showing a woman the spine of the scapula. None of that was sexual. People have gotten so goddamn soft its pathetic. People want to be treated equal but act like theyre so good that if you touch their shoulder youre a rapist.
Not to the degree that a low-bar back squat can. The torso is forward in the low-bar squat, much more so than it is in the high bar or the front squat. No, Sir, his argument is valid.
there's nothing natural about doing anything with a cylinder of iron. If you don' understand that your hip angle is more mute in a front squat while maintaining an upright torso and vertical shins compared to a low-bar squat where your torso is more forward, than I can't help you see something as basic as anatomy. No one is saying there's NO hip drive, the issue is it's not a major component of the front squat as it is to the low-bar back squat. Obviously hips are addressed in things like cleans(which is why you front squat anyway). Rippetoe has anatomy, physiology, exercise science, and just straight up performance numbers supporting his claims. You can theory craft from your arm chair all you want. The stuff he's saying works, and makes sense.
The_Scientist i highly doubt that stomping the ground on power cleans works... please upload a video where you front squat mantaining an upright torso and VERTICAL SHINS saying that low bar is doing the exercise correctly is bad because there is no correct way to do a squat please show me someone who has squatted 600+ high bar using rippetoe's methods you can't because low bar doesn't carry over to high bar as much as high bar carries over to low bar which is the correct way to squat in competition not in training.
Bob Tranquilli good, no reason. All these heavy compound lifts damage the body. They should have been left in the circuses of the 1800's and 1900's where they came from. Mechanically efficient isolation movements will be the future.
james jacob thats not how the body was designed to move. Were designed to move in PATTERNS. Which is why we train and strengthen those PATTERNS. Humans dont move one muscle at a time.
@@heithheithinson2495 I do move one muscle at a time. Just because you can involve more doesn't mean it's good. There is no evidence to suggest adding more muscles to an exercise makes it any better. The muscle doesn't know the difference. All it knows it to contract.
Old age + powerlifting not bodybuilding Look at any of the people doing world record main lifts, they all have a fatty look even while being much younger than Rip
Because a coach doesn't need to be big? Show me an olympic coach from a prestigious country like China or Russia with an in shape coach? Same can be said about football coaches, NFL coaches, boxing coaches etc.
He's getting older? Also strength trainers/power lifters are generally not in "shape". Go take a look at a power lifting video. You will see most of them have a gut but are powerful as fuck.
"This massacre of art" - that's some poetry right there.
This is great! I like that Rip explains the why and how.
Low-bar squatting is only useful for PL comp. Squats aren't primarily used to develop the posterior chain, that's why deadlift variants, clean variants, and snatch variants exist. Front and high-bar back squatting allows development of quad extension and vertical posture strength through the midsection. If you want to improve vertical pressing for OLs, front and high-bar back squats are necessary and far more useful than low-bar. Rip unnecessarily wants everyone to use his preferred method.
I find rips version of most exercise’s the best way of doing things
HIP DRAIHVE
Rippetoe's squat technique works for me and add a few pounds on my squat
durch ihn und seine videos hab ich viel im training dazu gelernt, Mark Rippetoe heißt der Herr, er hat auch viele Bücher über Kraftsport geschrieben........
You can move more weight (reason it's probably best for PL comps, given correct anthropometry), but to say it's best for hypertrophy isn't necessarily true. It's a matter of the type of hypertrophy you're trying to develop. High bar position still puts more strain on quads than low bar because the posterior chain takes over in the latter to a greater degree. So, great for glute, ham, etc., hypertrophy, but I'd rather hit that with deadlift variants and use high bar squats for quad development.
Low-bar squatting allows more weight to be used, therefore more potential overall hypertrophy as quickly and efficiently as possible. However anthropometry and personal preference can't be ignored; for example I prefer high bar and it simply feels better. The problem is that most people just squat badly and they need to be taught one form and learn it well.
I find it a lot easier to go rock bottom in the high bar squat because the hamstrings don't "get in the way", by which I mean that in the low bar squat the hamstrings pull tight (provided your lower back is not relaxing). This is at least my experience.
Mark has forgotten more knowledge than these clowns in the comments will ever know. I listen to logic not some roided fool telling me to train until I wanna puke
A Person what
I think it kind of depends on your anthropometry. I've done a limited amount of high-bar squatting, and it feels a bit easier to do for me at least. It seems to require a bit less flexibility.
I only zercher squat now and I feel my hip drive plenty
He's holding a toddler's skeleton. hahaha
Prog47 you sayin toddlers dont squat haha
More "potential" overall hypertrophy, is what I said. I actually agree completely with everything you said.
The SPAIHNE of the scapula!
haha this cracked me up
The Nautilus leg press is far more effective and safer than any version of barbell squat. The Nautilus cam makes an exercise harder, and that is good. To quote Arthur Jones, a Nautilus machine is simply a logical barbell.
.
MrJayrhine Troll harder.
MrJayrhine Machines cannot fully replace the value of free weights because no machine fully engages all the support muscles. Machines can be used for targeting specific muscles but that's all.
Actually it requires more flexibility if you do it to full depth, low bar tends to be done to a shallower depth
W
HWHY
9:46 dam thats the kid from that crossfit coach that was triying to teach the highbar squats on one of his seminars
Rip once said that your hamstrings should never be sore from squatting. Why is that?
Direct quote from the book " the function of the hamstring muscles is primarily isometric, since they don't necessarily change length on the way down. This is why the hamstrings don't get very sore when you squat, even though they are working as hard as the rest of the muscles involved."
To me for overall leg development and strength, the low bar squat is the best. Yes being more vertical in a high bar and front squat does shift emphasis to the quads and shifts away from the posterior chain..since you basically have squat straight down more so than slightly pushing your hips back in a low bar to initiate the descent. BUT, isnt the goal TOTAL leg development?...well it should be. Vince Gironda back in the 60's..banned squats in his gym,since he said it makes your butt big. He only advocated hack squats, sissy squats and roman chair squats. As we know, everything back then in those days was about asthetics. But what is worse..big huge quads and a flat undeveloped butt or good sized quads to go along with well develop glutes? its about total leg development and building the glutes is very important for protecting the back and the hips. The squat is considered the king of total leg development, not just quad development. Whether you high bar or low bar, once you overload the quad..and when the thighs is breaking parallel...the quads are going to get stimulated no matter what. Ronnie Coleman, who started out as a powerlifter, squatted low bar for years and built some of the best legs in bodybuilding history. John Cena squats low bar and you see how big and developed his legs are. High bar is good fro olympic lifting to catch the weight at the bottom to drive up for jerks etc..but for overall stimulation and development of the quads, posterior chain..low bar squad is best. If you use a real wide stance you arent going to hit the quads as much anyway....but hit the glutes, inner thighs and hamstrings. But once your feet are shoulder width or just slightly wider..and you go below parallel..the quads are getting hit. Christian Thibadeau, who is a well known strength coach, talks about high bar and low bar etc..and he said in totality..you want to use a stance that you can use the most weight but also target all of the musculature of the lower body..not just "isolate" one area. But its about total lower body power and muscular development.
He ate that child for its protein rich flesh.
the high bar is easier to learn yes.
basically it's just a 'common sense' squat.
ive read that high bar is easier to learn?????..
lmao
Whowat
He is on Scoobys Hall Of Shame!!
And who ever the fuck is he?
I like scooby...but Mark's info is 10000000000000000000 times better.
Scooby is a very shameful human being so that means nothing.
i like scooby but he is kind of a moron
And for good reason
2:12 any excuse rippletits. any excuse
Yeah it's pretty disgusting behavior.
james jacob because he was showing a woman the spine of the scapula. None of that was sexual. People have gotten so goddamn soft its pathetic. People want to be treated equal but act like theyre so good that if you touch their shoulder youre a rapist.
I don't like Marks tone
+Nicholas Rachuna I don't like your lack of apostrophe.
I'm here in 2024 because no one knows this and they're all fools muahahaha
you can hip drive in the front squat your argument is invalid rip
Not to the degree that a low-bar back squat can. The torso is forward in the low-bar squat, much more so than it is in the high bar or the front squat. No, Sir, his argument is valid.
The_Scientist bogus, better hip drive with the front-squat just cause it's more natural.
there's nothing natural about doing anything with a cylinder of iron. If you don' understand that your hip angle is more mute in a front squat while maintaining an upright torso and vertical shins compared to a low-bar squat where your torso is more forward, than I can't help you see something as basic as anatomy. No one is saying there's NO hip drive, the issue is it's not a major component of the front squat as it is to the low-bar back squat. Obviously hips are addressed in things like cleans(which is why you front squat anyway).
Rippetoe has anatomy, physiology, exercise science, and just straight up performance numbers supporting his claims. You can theory craft from your arm chair all you want. The stuff he's saying works, and makes sense.
The_Scientist i highly doubt that stomping the ground on power cleans works...
please upload a video where you front squat mantaining an upright torso and VERTICAL SHINS
saying that low bar is doing the exercise correctly is bad because there is no correct way to do a squat
please show me someone who has squatted 600+ high bar using rippetoe's methods you can't because low bar doesn't carry over to high bar as much as high bar carries over to low bar which is the correct way to squat in competition not in training.
You say you lift weights. But judging by your videos, that's debatable. Go troll elsewhere.
Speaking personally, I'll never do another barbell squat in my life. I'm making pretty good gains (at 60+) without them.
Bob Tranquilli good, no reason. All these heavy compound lifts damage the body. They should have been left in the circuses of the 1800's and 1900's where they came from.
Mechanically efficient isolation movements will be the future.
james jacob thats not how the body was designed to move. Were designed to move in PATTERNS. Which is why we train and strengthen those PATTERNS. Humans dont move one muscle at a time.
@@jamesjacob9632 good, and you'll stay 150lbs in the future
@@heithheithinson2495 I do move one muscle at a time. Just because you can involve more doesn't mean it's good. There is no evidence to suggest adding more muscles to an exercise makes it any better. The muscle doesn't know the difference. All it knows it to contract.
@@strahinjaristic6544 You do know that most bodybuilders valued their isolation movements over compounds.
Why does Mark Rippetoe look like he's never worked out a day in his life?
Old age + powerlifting not bodybuilding
Look at any of the people doing world record main lifts, they all have a fatty look even while being much younger than Rip
Because he’s 65 and got bored of training before you were born
He eats too much
because youre an idiot. you think having abs is the only benefit of working out
Because a coach doesn't need to be big? Show me an olympic coach from a prestigious country like China or Russia with an in shape coach? Same can be said about football coaches, NFL coaches, boxing coaches etc.
Why does a guy with a middle age buldge bark about how to get into shape?
because he can squat more than you
Alexander Stangl I'd rather squat less and not have a beer gut.
The one thing has nothing to do with the other. Dont justify your lazyness.
You could say that about almost all of the coaches who have won the Super Bowl, too, so what's your point?
He's getting older? Also strength trainers/power lifters are generally not in "shape". Go take a look at a power lifting video. You will see most of them have a gut but are powerful as fuck.