PLer Squats vs Oly style... quote

[curgeo]

Again, Tate was making the reference because of the basic criticism of powerlifters not going ass to the floor. It's not a critique of the Olympic squatter, it's an observation that even though PL don't go as far down as OL, they are still plenty strong. I don't think he was trying to belittle an olympic lifters accomplishments.

 

[Madcow2]

There is no need for an OL to be very strong in the squat although it happens a fair amount. I believe there is a section on Alexeyev in Dreschler's Weightlifting Encyclopedia. In this Alexeyev indicates that he is not nearly as strong in the squat as one of his teammates (by a very significant margin if I remember correctly) but he can still outlift him in the Olympic Lifts by an equally significant margin. Unless leg strength is a limiting factor for someone there's really no need to be a superhuman squatter in that sport.

In PL, this is a contested lift. It absolutely must be as good as possible. You train according to the rules of the Federation. If they allow equipment, best use it. If they allow for squats that are more advantageous for your build, best perform them. Either that or find a Federation that has rules that you like.

In essence the PL squat enables most people to lift more weight. Two totally equivalent athletes, one will lift more in the PL style vs. OL in the vast majority of cases. So in the case of a PL 500lbs squatter against an OL 500lbs squatter, give the OL some time to train the PL version and he'll likely win since he's performing a less mechanically advantageous squat with equal weight. Likewise the 500lbs PL squatter probably would end up below the 500 mark given some time to train OL. This isn't always the case but the vast majority of the time I think it's valid.

Taking this case to Tate's 1000lbs PL squatter (RAW for simplicity's sake), of course he can OL 500. Probably 700 without too much issue. Throw 900-950 on his back and make him go rock bottom, there's a good chance he isn't coming back up. It's just a less mechancially advantageous movement.

I think if weight is not the overriding concern (meaning you aren't a PL), OL style is a better all around exercise for development and athletics. If it's about how much you can squat in competition, you train according to how you are judged (I think I've expressed the same opinion on the sumo vs. conventional - sumo lets most people move more weight but I believe the better all around exercise is the conventional - for me it was even the best way to improve the sumo between training cycles). I believe there's a lot of benefit in altering squatting style periodically. Depending upon where one's weak points might be it makes sense to use a form that improves them. Obviously there are a lot of considerations for an individual but for the majority, I think this stuff is very valid.

 

[kiloamp]

There is no need for an OL to be very strong in the squat although it happens a fair amount.

Well in some cases that is true but most cases OL have very strong squats. Pisarenko was said to be able to clean more than he could front squat but he usually stood up from his cleans like they were nothing. Alexeev also was said to be the same way. So generally speaking, both Pisarenko and Alexeev would be considered as being highly efficient lifters (Eff(%) = (Best Clean)/(Best Back Squat) x 100%). On the other hand, some lifters have a lower efficiency rating and need a much higher squat to achieve the same clean as a more efficient lifter. Take Kakiachvili as an example of a lifter that has a higher relative squat strength to his clean. In the training hall tapes that CCJ posted not too long ago, we see Kaki back squating well over 700Lbs for a double with his butt very nearly touching the floor. Off hand I don't know what his best clean is or his best back squat but if it were something like 535Lbs and 750Lbs then his efficiency would be around Eff = 535/750 x 100% = 71% For an elite lifter anything less than 80% is considered less than optimal but it certainly didn't prevent Kaki from becoming a World and Olympic champion.

As for the discussion of which is stronger between PL vs. OL squaters. Shane Hamman had the world record in PL with just over 1000Lbs. A buddy of mine spotted for him at the OTC while he maxed out back squating Olympic style with no wraps, belt, suit etc. ... he did 800Lbs. Of the two lifts, I'm more impressed with the raw 800Lbs and I think even Shane would consider that his leg strength was stronger at the time he did the raw 800Lbs.

 

[Madcow2]

Well in some cases that is true but most cases OL have very strong squats.

I knew I was going to get burned when I wrote it but I figured I'd be okay at Elitefitness and not have to go into my usual statement followed by 10 caveates. I saw your name under the thread and I knew what was coming. All great points though.

On that topic of the efficiency ratio between the clean and the backsquat, I wonder if they every dug out any commonalities in athletes that drove those ratios one way or another. Was there something specific to their builds or a particular bodypart (i.e. torso length or torso/leg ratio). I know they kept all kinds of detailed documentation in order to drive well suited athletes towards sports that they were likely to excel in. I remember a case regarding foot size based on Tony Urutia but there were a number of extreme examples where the inverse was found. Do you know if anyone ever looked at this or found anything conclusive on the topic at all. I've never seen anything but this would be invaluable if anyone ever puzzled out even a bit of it.

 

[ghettostudmuffin]

I've got a question.

I plan on possibly competing in the future in powerlifting, but I want all around leg developement and athletic carry over too.

What about doing full squats for warmups until the last warmup set before your work sets, then switch to PL style?

As you get stronger you will be full squatting and PL squatting more and more and will be able to do both well.

The only negative I can see to this is that the full squat is training a different groove and range of motion so you don't get as much neural efficiency built for the PL style as you could if you did all warmups sets PL style.

 

[ghettostudmuffin]

I wouldn't mind doing a no-no-no full squat with 650-750 or more pounds. That's sick imo.

I have to admit I would be more impressed with an 800lbs raw full squat than a 1100lbs equipped PL squat.

Although obviously both lifters are UBER strong at that point.

 

[super_rice]

i think training both styles is the complete package to carry over to greater athletic ability, since ideally, you'd be learning a greater amount of motor patterns (therefore having greater athletic ability? or am i just going on about something crazy?)

anyway, about squat strength vs clean numbers, there seems to be a point where full front squat or backsquat strength no longer carries over to clean numbers. i believe sportivny on dynamic-eleiko had an article regarding this. it was a very interesting read to say the least.

my point initially was that, i felt the full oly backsquat style is invaluable to the athlete, ESPECIALLY the beginner such as myself, and don't really like all the bad rap it seems to be getting lately regarding its carryover to other sports relative to PLer style squats. don't you just hate it when PLers call them "bodybuilding" squats?

anyway, this is really good conversation, much akin to those on fortified iron. this is the sort of stuff we should be talking about, not "how do i get a biceps peak?!"


edit: madcow, good to have you back

 

[Dial_tone]

I wouldn't mind doing a no-no-no full squat with 650-750 or more pounds. That's sick imo.

I'm shootin for a 585 no-no-no.....probably won't get much past 500 this year though.

 

[Madcow2]

GhettoStudMuffin:
Don't mix the warmups with the work sets. You're trying to warm up specifically for that exercise and it's going to be too shocking on the system to radically change the squat style with heavy work weight.

In the end, a good squatter is a good squatter. The groove and neural efficiency are valid points. You get specifically good at PL squating by squating PL style. There's a bigger emphasis on certain areas and you'll squat the most in this style by specifically training. There's going to be a lack of carryover somewhere both ways OL or PL but if you intend to specialize and compete there is a reason to stick primarily with one.

Superrice:
The greater amount of patterns has an issue - it's hard to get good (adapt) to too many things at once. Like in life, sometimes the best progress is made by sticking to one thing and hammering at it over a long period. Obviously there will be plenty of exceptions but you get my point.

I haven't seen much 'bad carryover rap'. I take Westside's comments on anything OL with a grain of salt. Some of the comments I've read from Louie I really feel are flat out wrong and I'm not the only one (although he certainly is more qualified than I in nearly every area but I really pick up on some heavy illogical bias and I've been meaning to follow it up forever since the OL's fit well into a dynamic/ME structure, are concentric only and far less taxing than the DL - many of Mr. Simmons favorite things). The idea of a max clean being no faster than any max powerlift - how does one get under the bar then if there was no acceleration in speed, it doesn't seem to drop like a rock and there have been more than enough calculations to prove otherwise. The other one being the reference to the Bill Starr increase your DL without deadlifting where Simmons substitutes good mornings and all kinds of his standard stuff - of course Starr's own substitutions involved a ton of olympic lifts and assistance variants. Here's a link to an excerpt. There was a reprint in PLUSA a long time ago where I believe Bill flat out stated the bread and butter of the program was the highpulls. Here's a basic jist http://www.americanpowerliftevolution.net/New Folder 1969/dlapproach1.html

The issue with conversation like this is that they interest about 1% of the people. BBing is fairly cutting edge with nutrition and anabolics. Hell, if new research on an exotic anabolic was published in a Med journal it would be all around the boards. Nutrition and anabolics are the response side of the equation, they help you not limit (nutrition) or magnify (anabolics) your response to a stimulus. When it comes to training though - the stimulus of it all - the knowledge level is right in the shitter. It comes from Flex mag and other crap where some of the finest sources imaginable have been around for decades and the BBers have no idea. Most couldn't name even one good book on training. Now if Mr. Starr would have been kind enough to give us his magical superset recipe to build in the bicept peak we'd really have something to share with them.

 

[coolcolj]

I really hate it when people say frontsquats and olysquats are all quads, especially frontsquats

quads only flex the knee, although some of it does work on the hip joint, but mostly knee. If the knees only flex in a squat, you end up in a good morning... with your head into the floor....!
The hips and hams have to flex too to keep you upright. If you have a big frontsquat all the way down, with pretty vertical back, chances are you have very strong hamstrings as well, since you can't use your lower back and glutes as much. If you frontsquat is at least 80% of your fullbacksquat then you have strong hams. If not your hams are weak