Squat depth

Reyman

After getting some advice here I've managed to get my squat a lot deeper.
I started off going down to 16" and I have it now at 10". Two questions:

1. The weight I'm able to handle has gone to nothing - less than half of what I used to squat with. Is this normal ? Should I stick with it or squat higher with more weight?

2. Is 10" a decent depth (I'm normal ht. 5'11")? What do you expert guys go down to?

Colm_OReilly

The depth (10" or 16") means nothing without knowing your anthropometry and seeing you squat.

If you are doing a low bar hamstring dominant squat (like Rip's Starting Strenght and powerlifters do), your squat will do just beyond parallel, because to a very large extent, that's the maximum your hamstrings can stretch while keeping your lumbar curve intact. This is generally what's recommended for most people looking to get stronger.

Edwardius

Reyman wrote: »

After getting some advice here I've managed to get my squat a lot deeper.
I started off going down to 16" and I have it now at 10". Two questions:

1. The weight I'm able to handle has gone to nothing - less than half of what I used to squat with. Is this normal ? Should I stick with it or squat higher with more weight?

Uh oh!

Reyman wrote: »

2. Is 10" a decent depth (I'm normal ht. 5'11")? What do you expert guys go down to?

I ain't exactly an expert, but 10" doesn't mean anything. The depth is gonna be a consequence of your limb lengths, flexibility etc. squat as low as you can while maintaining your lumbar arch and low enough to involve the hamstrings at the bottom. This'll usually be at or below parallel.

Edit: Beaten to it!

kevpants

Stick with deeper squats.

This is the consequence of half squating. No matter how much you can half squat the day you try a full one is always gonna be a facepalm moment.

It's not the full squats fault, you're just weak at the bottom. You'll get there though.

I have no idea how you measured your squat depth in inches but it sure does form a funny mental image.

Reyman

Thanks lads! The reason I put in the depth is so that I have something definite that I can measure my progress with. I squat to a bench or box or something whose height I know to get a clear idea of how I'm doing. Otherwise I slacken off as the reps mount and don't go so deep.

I reckon that at 13" the top of my quads are parallel to the ground - is this the strict definition of parallel?

the drifter

For a squat to be parallel your hips need to be below or level with your knees...

spiral

a pair of weightlifting shoes might not be a bad investment. They really help with the squat and a pair should last you years. If you are squatting with a very wide stance it will be hard to go much lower than parallel or just below.


A very deep squat means a narrower stance and good flexibility

Reyman

That girl on the front squat looks like she's doing 6". Incredible with that weight. I'd break in two!

carlowboy

I just wanna let everybody know that DCU is setting up a weightlifting society for people who enjoy lifting heavy things...Like yourselves. If anybody was interested we'll be meeting in the Old bar of Dcu. Ask for Colm if you arrive. there will also be a gentlemen selling Sheffield Wednesday calandars in tribute to the late great Ronnie Drew.

podge57

carlowboy wrote: »

I just wanna let everybody know that DCU is setting up a weightlifting society for people who enjoy lifting heavy things...Like yourselves. If anybody was interested we'll be meeting in the Old bar of Dcu. Ask for Colm if you arrive. there will also be a gentlemen selling Sheffield Wednesday calandars in tribute to the late great Ronnie Drew.

you never said when this meeting is on??

is it oly lifting only, or is powerlifting included?

i dont spend much time at dcu - i commute, so im not there in the evenings, but ill be there more often next semester, sounds interesting

Hanley

Reyman wrote: »

That girl on the front squat looks like she's doing 6". Incredible with that weight. I'd break in two!

It's alot easier to front squat deep than it is to back squat (and the back squat's with almost 3x the weight too :P). It's worth nothing that people with longer femurs and thinner legs will be able to get much deeper than a thick set short leg guy!!

Jimmy Bottlehead

Hanley wrote: »

It's alot easier to front squat deep than it is to back squat (and the back squat's with almost 3x the weight too :P). It's worth nothing that people with longer femurs and thinner legs will be able to get much deeper than a thick set short leg guy!!

So for lanky guys (like myself) front full squats are easier to do?

spiral

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEy7bFtghcw

Hanley

Still doesn't look all that deep :P

This is what I was talking about when I mentioned long legs btw;

spiral

Hanley your right but femur/tibfib ratio is only one aspect , leg thickness affecting the knee angle another , hip and ankle flexibility another.
Even big guys if they have very flexible ankles and knee flexion can go quite deep .

brianthebard

Jimmy Bottlehead wrote: »

So for lanky guys (like myself) front full squats are easier to do?

Front squats are easier to go deep with because your back is in a more upright position afaik. You are only six foot though afaik so you shouldn't be having great difficulties with back squats either. If you had another five or six inches then it would be a different story.

Reyman

I suppose my bottom line is - do a few inches depth make much difference? I'd like to get overall leg development and not just strong quads.

I'm finding this deep stuff isn't great on the knees, but that's maybe cos I'm doing something amiss

Colm_OReilly

Again it goes back to high bar vs low bar squats.

With low bar, proper posterior chain reliant squats, it's hard to go much deeper than just below parallel (defined here as the crease of your thigh, the apex of your knee, and the line made between them) because of limitations with flexibility.

With a high bar squat, you'll be going much deeper, however you're forcing your knees forward in order to keep your hips over your heels and your torso upright. Unless you're doing Olympic lifting the low bar is preferable for overall development. The high bar is extremely quad/glute dominant, as the hamstrings are fully contracted at the bottom so can't pull you out of the hole.

Also, if your knees are travelling forward at the bottom of the low bar squat, you're doing something wrong and heading for trouble, in addition to limiting your effective hamstring involvement.

spiral

do both ? or low bar backsquat and front squat for variety.
throw in deads and/or RDLS. Why limit yourself.

Jonny303

kind of related here, but the lower i go, what i feel is stopping me is a pull at the front of my shins, kind of pulling my toes towards me. any ideas?

Pro-Nutrition

Reyman wrote: »

I suppose my bottom line is - do a few inches depth make much difference? I'd like to get overall leg development and not just strong quads.

I'm finding this deep stuff isn't great on the knees, but that's maybe cos I'm doing something amiss

Reyman, how ya doing man? If you are looking to develop your legs I would recomend that you focus on the movement/depth rather than the weight your lifting. There is nothing worse than a guy packing the bar with 200kg and only managing to get 2-3 half reps out and busting his balls at the same time. I found that my legs have grown bigger and better since I cut back the weight and focused on the depth. On all my exercises I would focus on the movement to ensure that I am working the muscle getting a good 8-12 reps hitting the muscle with all that I've got.

Reyman

Thanks PN and all you other guys. I understand the whole thing better now.

I use the gym when it's quiet now to spare anyone seeing me going deep with beginner weight poundages

BossArky

Jonny303 wrote: »

kind of related here, but the lower i go, what i feel is stopping me is a pull at the front of my shins, kind of pulling my toes towards me. any ideas?

Do you mean the weight is being transferred to your heels?

This may give you the sensation you mentioned of your shins pulling your toes up, as your centre of balance is moving backwards.

Pro-Nutrition

Reyman wrote: »

Thanks PN and all you other guys. I understand the whole thing better now.

I use the gym when it's quiet now to spare anyone seeing me going deep with beginner weight poundages

Dude to be honest with you, I am a big lad and can lift heavy weights. I could not give a monkeys if the smallest guy in the gym is benching heavier than me. If I feel that I should drop back a little so that I dont sacrifice form well thats what I do.

Dont be like so many others in the gym, train your muscle/body and not your ego. Leave that at the door.

Roper

Jonny303 wrote: »

kind of related here, but the lower i go, what i feel is stopping me is a pull at the front of my shins, kind of pulling my toes towards me. any ideas?

Explain a bit more. Pulling your toes towards each other or pulling your toes upwards so that you're rocking backwards?

Jonny303

Roper wrote: »

Explain a bit more. Pulling your toes towards each other or pulling your toes upwards so that you're rocking backwards?

Pulling towards myself, something in mind?

Roper

Jonny303 wrote: »

Pulling towards myself, something in mind?

Yeah, flexibility in the ankles possibly. Without seeing you do it it's hard to tell but it's a common problem.