Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below I squat pretty wide and go as far down (a tad bit under parallel), and have never done an atg squat (with weight, have done the bar), because i fear of falling back. when squatting atg with the bar, the only way i don't fall back is if my feet are turned out about 45 degrees. Is that all right?
ATG squats
- Thread starter oso0690
- Start date
BiggT
New member
No, your feet don't have to be turned out......I think the problem is the stance, and with a wide squat (a PL squat to paralell or a little below) you sit back and the knees don't come forward.....and in olympic squats the knees will pass the toes, and while you may break at the hips first to begin the descent, you're not "sitting back" through the movement.....they are really two totally different things. If you try to sink the PL- type squat to the floor you'll end up hurting the hips. If you're interested in ATG squatting, you'll have to scrap the wide stance PL sitting back squat and treat ATG squats as a new lift....All a Pl squat and an ATG olympic squat have in common is they are both called 'squats'.
Protobuilder
New member
More info. would help. How tall are you? Are you currently trying to do a real PL style squat? Or are you just having balancing problems if you don't go "pretty wide" as you describe it? And how wide is "pretty wide"?
I ask b/c I had serious trouble getting my squat form down, and finally found a groove . . . my "ass to grass" squat is a bit wider than some (most?) and I can't really sit on my ankles due to the wider stance, but I can get well below parallel. Don't know if its right, but after trying lots of diff't things, that's what worked. I just think some people are dimensionally better able to do a narrow stance, upright torso, ass to ankles squat. Others can't. Or maybe I am just t3h suck.
Oh yeah, dropping shoes helped a lot too.
I ask b/c I had serious trouble getting my squat form down, and finally found a groove . . . my "ass to grass" squat is a bit wider than some (most?) and I can't really sit on my ankles due to the wider stance, but I can get well below parallel. Don't know if its right, but after trying lots of diff't things, that's what worked. I just think some people are dimensionally better able to do a narrow stance, upright torso, ass to ankles squat. Others can't. Or maybe I am just t3h suck.
Oh yeah, dropping shoes helped a lot too.
Protobuilder said:
I'm 6'1 and yes, i have been trying to do PL style squats. Pretty wide = twice shoulder width about. I've never taken my shoes off in the gym, but I do squat with converse all star chuck taylors, if that helps any.
@BiggT, that helps, I always sat back when i did any style squat.
Protobuilder
New member
OK, then ignore my earlier post. LoL
One of the best ways I heard Oly squatting described was by Dan John: sit between your legs. Torso upright. That's it. The knees will come forward, and as you get down into the hole, the hips & glutes come more into play.
One of the best ways I heard Oly squatting described was by Dan John: sit between your legs. Torso upright. That's it. The knees will come forward, and as you get down into the hole, the hips & glutes come more into play.
Totally different, as BiggT says. With PL squat you're looking to distribute the weight with your posterior chain for the entire lift- it's designed to break the parallel plane for that white light. Unless your training for competition, there's no real advantage unless it's just more "natural' for you that way or you're a numbers geek.
Even if you prefer PL squat, there's an advantage to changing your stance width occaisionally, even using a narrow width down to 6". You're stressing your muscle, stabilizers, and CNS differently in an effort to build better overall strength.
Even if you prefer PL squat, there's an advantage to changing your stance width occaisionally, even using a narrow width down to 6". You're stressing your muscle, stabilizers, and CNS differently in an effort to build better overall strength.
