Squats everyday or 5 days a week with low weight?

rubadub

I got in the habit of doing pushups every morning for a while, 50 in a row. I was thinking about doing the same with squats, but weighted. I have no rack so just use what I can press up and onto my back. I can get ~63kg up now and can do 20reps at that, after which I am exhausted. I have no idea how much my 1RM would be on squats. I can deadlift around 130kg.

Would there be any harm in doing 20 squats at say 48kg everyday? I would probably have a few days off, probably the weekend, or I could leave off a day or 2 if I did deadlifts the night before.

I like the idea of boosting my metabolism throughout the day, and since I have no rack I cannot do heavy weight squats. I have tried all the alternatives to squats and don't really enjoy them, while the 20 squats seems to wake me up well.

Leon11

At 40-50 kilos I can't really see a problem with doing them to be honest. Obviously muscle growth isn't your key objective so I presume that there would be nothing wrong it. You hardly fell apart doing 50pushups every morning. You also seem to have a fair idea of what you do so you'd be in a better position than most to spot any problems that it may cause.

Imo 2 days on 1 day off would prob work best if like you say your gonna deadlift also.

Leon11

Another thing could be to vary the squat technique, I did front squats this morning and found it a bit more challenging at a lower weight. I was feeling adventurous so I also tried the overhead squat, found it incredibly hard to be honest. Point being that you should just try different techniques which your probably well use to and it may stimulate you more.

siochain

Just look out for your form, ensure your feet and knee alignment are perfect, it’s a lot of wear an tear on the knees if your doing most days with bad form.

Listen to your body, its will soon tell you if its OK or not.

cowzerp

if you can do them every day then i would say there no use, its meant to be resistance and the important part of resistance training is recovery, make them so you need recovery-then you will get benefits from them.

rubadub

Leon11 wrote: »

Another thing could be to vary the squat technique

Yes, I will try that

Just look out for your form

Will do, at lower weights it is easier to keep form.

cowzerp wrote: »

if you can do them every day then i would say there no use, its meant to be resistance and the important part of resistance training is recovery, make them so you need recovery-then you will get benefits from them.

With the same reasoning daily pushups would be no use either. Someone was saying they heard anecdotally about some guy doing loads of pushups everyday and getting good chest development. I realise I might not get huge or strong, it is mainly for the metabolic boost I would do them. I wonder if there would be much of a boost in metabolism from them. I think Boru was saying he does 100 hindu squats everyday. That is at least a form of cardio.

I weigh only 75kg, if I only stuck on 25kg it would be similar enough to a 100kg man doing the same thing (though some of their weight would be in the legs and not acting on them the same).

cowzerp

The same reasoning applies for any resistance exercises, cardio is different! the metabolic results will be so minimum its pointless and the muscle devolepment would be equally as good if don every 2nd day(maybe better as your getting proper recovery, where the growth happens)

Reyman

rubadub wrote: »

I like the idea of boosting my metabolism throughout the day, and since I have no rack I cannot do heavy weight squats. I have tried all the alternatives to squats and don't really enjoy them, while the 20 squats seems to wake me up well.

I'm not clear why you want to boost your metabolism? You're at a fairly "cut weight " as it is so you're hardly trying to lose weight ?

My feeling is that doing squats every day will lead to psychological staleness, which is often more of a problem than physically overdoing it,

rubadub

Reyman wrote: »

I'm not clear why you want to boost your metabolism? You're at a fairly "cut weight " as it is so you're hardly trying to lose weight ?

I still have a bit of a belly, I am not that big, and have no real desire to be. I would like to remain 75kg and lose a bit of fat, but more muscle. I would like to increase my metabolism so I can pretty much eat whatever I want really.

There are many sites I found talking of 100 bodysquats per day. I could go lighter, maybe overhead squats with dumbells, I reckon that would cross over and help my other fully weighted exercises. I found my 50 pushups improved my bench pressing. Might just do them every second day and see how I get along.

Al_Fernz

rubadub wrote: »

I found my 50 pushups improved my bench pressing. Might just do them every second day and see how I get along.

Exact same here. I used to knock out 100 pushups every morning. Then I gave up thinking it wouldn't be such a big deal because I was bench was improving. In fact I thought the extra rest would allow me to recover better and improve my bench. The opposite happened.

Rubadub you remind me of myself about 6 months ago. I really wanted to squat more but trained at home too (argos weights?). Then I joined a gym with a proper squat rack and oly weights. It was so worth it.

Hanley

cowzerp wrote: »

The same reasoning applies for any resistance exercises, cardio is different! the metabolic results will be so minimum its pointless and the muscle devolepment would be equally as good if don every 2nd day(maybe better as your getting proper recovery, where the growth happens)

If applying light resistance to your muscles everyday isn't a good way to elict growth then how do you explain mechanics and other people who work with their hands having big forearms.. Or fat people with large calves...?

cowzerp

Hanley wrote: »

If applying light resistance to your muscles everyday isn't a good way to elict growth then how do you explain mechanics and other people who work with their hands having big forearms.. Or fat people with large calves...?

forearms and calves and abs-would be more adapted to been in constant use, they are very fast to recover (smaller muscles recover quicker than big muscles) forearms and calfs are small muscles and more built for endurance than strenght anyway-Hanley i think your just been argumentitive! or else just trying to get some open debate (fair enough) do you not agree with this reckoning?

Hanley

cowzerp wrote: »

forearms and calves and abs-would be more adapted to been in constant use, they are very fast to recover (smaller muscles recover quicker than big muscles) forearms and calfs are small muscles and more built for endurance than strenght anyway-Hanley i think your just been argumentitive! or else just trying to get some open debate (fair enough) do you not agree with this reckoning?

I can see why forearms and calves would have adapted to high work loads, but why abs? On that note, the legs as a whole are capable of great feats of endurance. Marathons, Triathlons and the Tour De France, all hyper long distance events completed by the legs. They're certainly capable of managing a great workload. Would you not agree?

I'm not in anyway trying to argue just for the sake of arguing. One of the greatest things about the body is that it will adapt to pretty much anything you throw at it.

In fact I could make a case that legs are more built for endurance than strength. Think about it, over the course of evoltuion, which was more important, running to catch prey/being able to walk or move for long periods of time, or max strength??

Hell, look at the Grease The Groove Method popularised by Pavel, he advocates many reps throughout the day, every day to become better at a movement. I've squatted 4x a week with 70-80%+ weights and still improved too.

Olympic gymnasts train many times per week with workloads that would cripple most. Yet they are as heavily muscled on their upper body as anyone out there with the exception of pro bodybuilders.

The Bulgarian weightlifting squad was famed for training 4-6x a day, 5-6 days per weeks at their training camps. They were certainly working above 50 reps per day yet they not only survived, prospered (and I know you can probably throw the "genetically predisposed/steroid" card here, but I still think my point holds).

I do think the body would eventually become adapted to it, but I'm sure Rubadub will have something else he wants to try at that stage to give his body a break from the squats.

sheldonparkgym

Interesting thread.

Rubadub - I think the best thing to do is simply do it and then post your results. While I agree your body will eventually adapt to the new stress, it'll surely respond to the new stimulus in a positive way.

You might gain some muscle as your body attempts to make everything easier for the next time you perform this type of exercise (so that its easier and less stressful).

Or you might experience an increase in muscular endurance, which would help you to sustain strength over the course of a workout or an athletic activity.

So give it a go and let us know what results (if any) you get by trying this approach.

cowzerp

Hanley wrote: »

I can see why forearms and calves would have adapted to high work loads, but why abs?

Abs are naturally endurance muscles and work almost 24/7!
anything you do uses the abdominals, thats why they are so good at lasting through all types of feats, boxing, wrestling, heavy squating. there also very large so are strong aswell so support the trunk through heavy stress. same reason as calves and forearms, natural regular use, cant be avoided.

our bodies are made up of a mix of fibre types but the upper legs are mainly explosive power muscles, also the workload they can take means they need more recovery as they take more stress, if there not stressed there not working any way decent! thats my whole point, if there been done every day its minimal training at best, better off taking up running!

squat for real, and then you'll see the results! i know you do but the op is not.

rubadub

Al_Fernz wrote: »

(argos weights?). Then I joined a gym with a proper squat rack and oly weights. It was so worth it.

Yeah, argos weights! and a rake more plates. I really have no interest in joining a gym, I like the convenience of being at home, and am not overly serious about lifting, just to it to keep the fat off really.

Hanley wrote: »

If applying light resistance to your muscles everyday isn't a good way to elict growth then how do you explain mechanics and other people who work with their hands having big forearms.. Or fat people with large calves...?

That is what I was figuring. I have a mate who does manual labour and has massive forearms, he also did a lot of cycling, and had freakish calves yet did no weight work. I saw a few sites with cyclists doing 100 squats a day. Look at some of these tribes on Nat, Geographic channel and many are lean and developed, not huge but daily manual work must be doing something.

Hanley wrote: »

Hell, look at the Grease The Groove Method popularised by Pavel, he advocates many reps throughout the day, every day to become better at a movement.

That did work for me well. Thats why I was thinking it could work now. Some put the GTG method down to CNS functioning better, which they reckon is the same as beginners gains too.

sheldonparkgym wrote: »

Rubadub - I think the best thing to do is simply do it and then post your results.

Will do, problem is it will all be anecdotal, I have no rack so do not know my squat capability, I will know myself if I have improved, but won't have figures to back it up, just my own instinct/word. I did enjoy the GTG methods as I am at home so I can do it, and prefer short burst workouts. I am thinking of doing the GTG thing again for chins and dips, weighted this time. I am currently doing 6 reps of chins and dips with 22.5-25kg might drop the weight and do 5 reps for a month.

sheldonparkgym

rubadub wrote: »

Will do, problem is it will all be anecdotal, I have no rack so do not know my squat capability, I will know myself if I have improved, but won't have figures to back it up, just my own instinct/word.

Your word is good enough for me! Anyway, people often give B.S. stats and figures to "prove" that their training was successful. Before and after pics would be useful and informative though.

sheldonparkgym

rubadub wrote: »

Will do, problem is it will all be anecdotal, I have no rack so do not know my squat capability, I will know myself if I have improved, but won't have figures to back it up, just my own instinct/word.

Your word is good enough for me! Anyway, people often give B.S. stats and figures to "prove" that their training was successful. Before and after pics would be useful and informative though.

Hanley

cowzerp wrote: »

Abs are naturally endurance muscles and work almost 24/7!
anything you do uses the abdominals, thats why they are so good at lasting through all types of feats, boxing, wrestling, heavy squating. there also very large so are strong aswell so support the trunk through heavy stress. same reason as calves and forearms, natural regular use, cant be avoided.

I don't know about you, but I could quite easily argue that EVERY muscle in my body is working throughout the day, and is thus an endurance muscle. I'm sure my upper and lower back plays a large part in stabilising my body throughout the day too. Using your boxing anaology, the arms play a large part in a box match too right? You're always holding them up or extending them.

our bodies are made up of a mix of fibre types but the upper legs are mainly explosive power muscles, also the workload they can take means they need more recovery as they take more stress, if there not stressed there not working any way decent! thats my whole point, if there been done every day its minimal training at best, better off taking up running!

I know all about type I and type IIa/b/x muscle fibres... I also know that depending on how you train, they type II's can become type I's although the reverse doesn't happen. And since the majority of people do very little or nothing to stimulate max strength or the need for explosive contractions in their legs, would it not be fair to say that they run a higher chance of having alot of type I fibres too?

Remember, rubadub doesn't have access to a rack, so he is limited in what he can use weight wise. Only what he can get over his head. If this necessitates more reps, more frequently then surely it's better than doing nothing?

cowzerp

Hanley wrote: »

Remember, rubadub doesn't have access to a rack, so he is limited in what he can use weight wise. Only what he can get over his head. If this necessitates more reps, more frequently then surely it's better than doing nothing?

There is other ways of making it more intense, slow eccentric work, jump squats, jump lunges, holding the low part of the squat for time! anything that makes your body need to recover! without the need to recover i feel the training is not effective.

rubadub

cowzerp wrote: »

There is other ways of making it more intense, slow eccentric work, jump squats, jump lunges, holding the low part of the squat for time! anything that makes your body need to recover! without the need to recover i feel the training is not effective.

I have tried many variations, and other leg exercises, I still enjoy normal lower weight squats best. TBH I will be lucky to get in 5 days a week, my training is a bit haphazard, which may be a good thing- body never knows what is coming next. I will be doing other leg exercises too, so improvment might not only be due to this. Some days I would do a morning and evening of 20 deep squats at 62kg, and my legs can be in bits for days after, so it still is hitting them. I also cycle 9miles on weekdays, and usually more on one weekend day.