Advantages of box squatting?

corribdude

I was wondering what are the advantages of box squatting over normal squatting, I take it it's more than just the fact that it gives you an indication that your squat is to parallel?

And one other question, what muscles are rectruited more/less for a closer stance squat as opposed to a wider stance? Is a wider stance going to be more conducive to lifting higher weights or does it all depend on the individual?

Edit: And another question Are split squats a good way to increase your regular squat and is it better to do regular split squats or bulgarian split squats?

Remmy

one of the reasons people use box squats is they are safer in that you can't squat as much but you produce a better quality squat if that makes sense.

As far as the wide stance this involves the hips more so you can get away with lifting more{all things being equal}compared to a narrow stance which involves the legs more.But I'd say up until your squatting enough for these to make a difference just use roughly a shoulder width or whatever feels most comfortable.Starting strength ftw!:D

podge57

hitting parallel is one of the reasons, ive also found it helps sitting back into the squat, and also you can vary the height to try and work on your sticking point

it will develop a lot of hip and hamstring strength, as you break the eccentric/concentric chain, and will need to be explosive to power off the box
heres a vid from the expert
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue_GrU4mhqc (theres a link to part2 there aswell)

As for stance, ive recently switched to a wider stance, and it also requires a lot more hip strength, whereas narrow stance is more quad dominant - it has helped me lift more, but i have really long legs, so the reduced ROM is also a factor
If you are going to switch to wide stance, i would recommend doing a lot of flexibility and direct hip work.

brianthebard

Remmy wrote: »

one of the reasons people use box squats is they are safer in that you can't squat as much but you produce a better quality squat if that makes sense.

As far as the wide stance this involves the hips more so you can get away with lifting more{all things being equal}compared to a narrow stance which involves the legs more.But I'd say up until your squatting enough for these to make a difference just use roughly a shoulder width or whatever feels most comfortable.Starting strength ftw!:D

Um, I'm not sure that's the case. Hamstring and Glute activation as well as shortened rom would've been the main things I think of when I consider benefits of wide stance, not hips, which should be involved anyways. Can you give a link to where you were given this information or something?

Hanley

Remmy wrote: »

one of the reasons people use box squats is they are safer in that you can't squat as much but you produce a better quality squat if that makes sense.

As far as the wide stance this involves the hips more so you can get away with lifting more{all things being equal}compared to a narrow stance which involves the legs more.But I'd say up until your squatting enough for these to make a difference just use roughly a shoulder width or whatever feels most comfortable.Starting strength ftw!:D

There's just so many things wrong with that....

For someone who can't even do a normal squat properly, box squatting's probably a lot more dangerous cos people tend to plop onto the box, ptting their back at risk. And then on the way up rock back and forth only to end up doing a half GM/half squat on the way up. Again putting your back at risk.

What's your definition of a "wide stance"? Because if you look at all the best raw and single ply squatters (for arguments sake say the middle weights), their stance isn't much outside shoulder width. It's only when you started to move up into the heavys, and into multiply gear with all the support that it offers that a wide stace becomes better.

Hanley

podge57 wrote: »

heres a vid from the expert
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue_GrU4mhqc (theres a link to part2 there aswell)

I'm genuinely terrified newbs reading this will try to box squat like that. You wont even find anything in a commercial gym the right height to box squat to anyway!!




I'll go out on a limb here and say if you can't squat 140kg then you've no reason to start messing about with box squats etc. Just get under the bar and get stronger like.

podge57

Hanley wrote: »

I'm genuinely terrified newbs reading this will try to box squat like that. You wont even find anything in a commercial gym the right height to box squat to anyway!!

what exactly is wrong with that? - i follow that basic setup, except id ont go "down and back", i try to just do one motion, and not place all the weight onto my back - is there anything else i should change?

Hanley

podge57 wrote: »

what exactly is wrong with that?

Next time you're in the gym, look at all the things peopel do badly when they're squatting. Then think of how bad they can make it with a solid object under them which instead of easing back onto, they just pretty much free fall to. And then imagine how sore if would be having your spine shoot out your ar$e.

i follow that basic setup, except id ont go "down and back", i try to just do one motion, and not place all the weight onto my back - is there anything else i should change?

I don't understand... are you breaking at the knees and just going straight down?

podge57

Hanley wrote: »

Next time you're in the gym, look at all the things peopel do badly when they're squatting. Then think of how bad they can make it with a solid object under them which instead of easing back onto, they just pretty much free fall to. And then imagine how sore if would be having your spine shoot out your ar$e.

I don't understand... are you breaking at the knees and just going straight down?

im not sure exactly how to explain, i squat down and back at the same time, instead of doing it in 2 movements, and i will try and keep tension in my hams and glutes instead of just dumping myself on the box

my motion: \
motion in vid: L

(very poor diagram, lol)