Rippetoe's Squat Form

DM-BM · 22-02-2009 01:15PM

kevpants wrote: »

That just sounds like its all in the mind then?

I mean he says concentrate on driving with the hips, but keep your chest up. But don't concentrate on keeping your chest up.

Well, thats not how i would put it, i'd say concentrate on driving the hips, keeping your back locked tight, and therefore your chest up, but don't concentrate on leading with your chest.

DM-BM · 22-02-2009 01:52PM

At this point, I just want to explain a few things about my posts in this thread.

I'm not trying to say that squating the way it's described in Starting Strength is the only way to do it, i'm just giving my understanding of it.

I made gains using it, but i completely accept that as a novice, if i ate properly i'd have made gains squating like Kev or Hanley advise, or doing high bar oly type squats.

The reason, i implemented Rips techniques is basically i train alone, there is no one to watch my form and comment on it, no friendly competition, no coaching other than a book. So if i want to progress i felt i'd better pick a method, try and understand it, and give it a proper go, as i don't believe there is any point in doing it in a half assed maner.

Now i'm open to trying other techniques, but i have not seen a more comprehensive description of the major lifts than those in SS (i'm not saying they don't exist though), and it can be hard to implement some of the squat descriptions described briefly on here, it obviously would be much easier to see what people mean in person.

brianthebard · 22-02-2009 02:05PM

Killme00 wrote: »

I shouldnt have read this thread, very confused now about squat technique.

Seconded. Could Kev or Hanley or anyone who feels confident they know the correct method to squat please explain it or post a tutorial video that counters what Rip says and shows the correct technique? I'll give my example again, assuming I'm in the hole, low bar position, wide stance, back in the correct position/shape, what happens when I want to rise out of the hole??

Roper · 22-02-2009 02:22PM

brianthebard wrote: »

Seconded. Could Kev or Hanley or anyone who feels confident they know the correct method to squat please explain it or post a tutorial video that counters what Rip says and shows the correct technique? I'll give my example again, assuming I'm in the hole, low bar position, wide stance, back in the correct position/shape, what happens when I want to rise out of the hole??

Just stand up. I mean that.

You can complicate the motion as much as you want but it's simple and the only time you need to hear all of the complications and corrections above are when you're screwing up. The reason you're getting confused is because right now you're hearing EVERYTHING about the squat, including corrections you may not need. Good coaches know you can only fix one thing at a time and anything else is just flexing your knowledge.

So, the squat as I coach it:
Head and chest high like you're proud of yourself throughout the movement, don't look at the ceiling but instead think about sticking your m(b)oobs out throughout the movement and a good tight lower back. Break at your hips and control your descent to the target (I always use a target for depth, usually a med ball). Make sure your knees travel over the line of your toes and not caving inwards. Once you hit depth in that good position, touch the ball and dig your heels into the ground to drive upwards, now try to bring your chest up first until you're back to the start.

All of the other stuff, knees coming in, back rounding out, heels coming up etc. etc. I only fix as I see them happening. If I wanted to learn how to swng a golf club, I wouldn't expect the guy to tell me all of the pitfalls first.

cardio,shoot me · 22-02-2009 05:16PM

hate to go offtopic here but does anyone have any tips on front squatting? it kills me and i cant go near parallell and when i try to the bar falls forward

Hanley · 22-02-2009 07:04PM

I go away for the weekend and all hell breaks loose.... This is going to be a long ass reply.

kevpants wrote: »

The thing about Rippetoe is he's not a great coach so the argument is invalid. Who's he ever coached? About a million average lifters. Who else?

Mikel wrote: »

But they're not expert COACHES
Transform declared himself an expert at COACHING

What would say is important when it comes to being an expert??

I would say it's the range of topics you've studied, how well you comprehend and apply them, and how well you transfer this knowledge to real world situations.

I'm sure you'd agree the only was this can be done is by spending time at it. How long's Transform been in the game?? 10 years maybe, spending 30-40 hours per week, 48 weeks out of the year coaching? A sum total of approx. 15,000 hours?? Is that not enough time to teaching, reading, observing and learning to be an "expert"?

I don't think that follows, there's a world of difference between me and elite level athletes like that guy Hanley posted videos of, a different animal to the rest of us.
I would rather a guy who was good at coaching 'average' lifters myself.

Anyway, what has any of this have to do with technique?

I don't understand your point? Are you saying people who coach elite athletes are unable to coach average ones??

If that's not your point, then what is?

PeakOutput wrote: »

is he doing anything seriously dangerous that could easily injure him?

Nope.

edit; if this was an average person from the board looking for a rating on his squat out of ten what would you give him? 1 being stop immedietely and start with no weights as you are going to seriously injure yourself

6 or 7. Good start, but lots of things that could be better. Of course we know Rip doesn't think this, and wouldn't be willing to change any of them on anyone elses advice, so that marks him down to 4-5 in my book. Average, at best.

PeakOutput wrote: »

i hope i can word this properly bear with me

is an elite coach better than rippetoe because he can take a monority who have reached their peak with 'regular' coaches and get them better or is someone who can take any average person from scratch, get them interested in lifting(or any sport) bring them on greatly in the fundamentals and in such a way that they stick with it unlike most people who start working out, a better coach. after all the second guy is going to affect way way more people than the first guy and without the first guy the elite coach isnt going to have very many people making their way threw to his level

i know what im trying to say in my head lol sorry if it isnt that clear

I think what you're asking is;

Is an elite coach better because he can coach the top 1% to a higher degree than an "average" coach?? if that's the case, then yes, absolutely.

People seem to be arguing that since Rip coaches average people, he can coach them better than an elite coach. How does an elite coach become an elite coach tho? He spends time working his way thru the ranks with a broad spectrum of abilities. Any good coach can take the challenges theyve seen with high level guys and use the solutions and fixes with people in lower ranks so that they either avoid the problem altogether, or reach a resolution faster.

DM-BM wrote: »

Are you seriously saying that you think coaching is the only difference between being elite or not ?

kevpants wrote: »

No I was countering the argument that average coaches are better for average athletes. Elite coaches are better for ALL atheletes. Why would you want to work with some guy with limited knowledge when someone who knows what it takes is available.

Gameball. I personally don't see how anyone can argue that point.

Kev: I'm baffled by this. He can do things I can only dream of? God now we really are in full blown genetics excuse territory. People should do themselves a favour and forget about genetics. Elite athletes don't care about genetics, just 2nd rate ones who never made the grade. You think he doesn't dream of lifting heavier than he does?

More people need that attitude. I spent a good portion of the weekend discussing with Malteaser the limitations people place on themselves nd how it negatively effects them. It's something she feels very strongly about, so hopefully she'll weigh in.

Let me make a case using myself tho; When I first joined Hercs in Dec '05 the biggest squats in the gym were 322.5kg and 310kg. I looked at the guys doing it, both 30+ and thought "man, if only I could get there in 10 years I'd be soooo happy". There's the limitation I put on myself. Now training's gone so well the past 6 months that all going to plan, I shuold surpass one of them in April, and the other in November, if not sooner.

Where would I be, or how would training have gone if I decided I couldn't possibly lift that much weight? If I didn't believe I was capable of handling it? Do you think the strongest guys in the world doubted their ability to handle weight? Or just sort of went to the gym and hoped it would happen??

No, they dedicated themselves to it, and believed in it.

If you don't do that, then of course you can never hope to get near them. But if you're prepared to work like they do and progress thru the ranks, then why the hell can't you be as strong, or nearly as strong as them? There's outliers in every sport, but to get to a good elite level should be manageable for anyone who's willing to put the hours in (and it will take A LOT of hours).

Mikel wrote: »

Right, cos we could all reach the elite level if we would just work hard enough right?

See above.

Genetics is not an excuse, it just a recognition that some are more gifted than others, bell shaped curve and all that.

Ah yeah... bell curves. Where the vast majority of people are the same. And a few elite physical specimens like at the tail. Or course those are the guys winning the medals. They're also the ones training to win.

If you take someone with above average genetics and below average work ethic, I'm pretty sure an average person who puts in the time (and I'm talking 8-10 years here) could be a better athlete than him.

Alternatively, maybe you're right and if I got the right coaching and worked hard enough I could out sprint Usain Bolt.

Maybe if you started as young as him, and had the same opportunities you could have been a better sprinter.

Success doesn't just happen. You don't just float around in the gym or on the field for a couple of years and become the best at anything.

Bolt's not human, but there's nothing to say you couldn;t have got to a national level with the right training and dedication.

Mikel wrote: »

Incidentally, 5 pages of a thread critiquing his squat form and not one of the supposed experts has given the reason why his spine shouldn't be neutral and why he shouldn't 'hip drive' the way he does.
Interesting.

This fcuking hip drive sh!te again.

Anyone with even the most basic comprehension of physics and kinesiology would understand why it's bad.

Hips move first, weight shifts forwards, load goes to back, chest drops, face gets smashed.

DM-BM wrote: »

Well, my understanding of it is, hip drive is basically when you concentrate on driving your hips up out of the bottom of the squat, as opposed to trying to lead with your chest, or drive your feet through the ground.

Why is it better that your hips move first? Surely when youre trying to come out of a squat, the first thing to move should be the BAR??

If you concenrtate on hip drive and neglect to keep your back tight and your chest up, regardless of head position, your either going to be shoved forward and loose it or have to good morning it.

The whole movement needs to be balanced, and done in a way that the angle of your back stays as constant as possible. Focusing only on driving your hips and neglecting your back, will result in a mess.

So you're saying hip drive should be used as a means of moving the bar provided you keep a constant back angle (ie your hips don't move up before the bar does?)

In Rips set of ten, it does look to me, that he is trying to drive his hips up. Now they are not perfectb ut hip drive is present.

I agree that he's trying to drive up with his hips first. And look what that's doing to him!!

God. What a reply!!!

slemons · 22-02-2009 07:47PM

His squat form goes against everything iive ever seen...
I wont be changing to copy it any time soon

Mikel · 22-02-2009 08:11PM

kevpants wrote: »

I said myself I lost all my heavy squats forward because my hips were coming up faster than the bar. Hip drive ends up with the lifter having to do a Good Morning at the top. Hardly the most efficient method. Hip drive would be grand if the bar was sitting on your hips but it's not, it's sitting at the tob of a big long bendy thing called your back.
As for the neutral spine, that's Rippetie's excuse for looking down. Neutral spine means nothing, it's one of his catch phrases like hip drive. Head up helps with chest up which helps jeep your core solid which is what is keeping your back andgle and making sure the bar moves up when you push up.
Those reasons ok?

Yes and no.
The original thing you said was you kept losing them forward.
That may be a flaw in the method, but it could also be a flaw in how you implemented it. This is why I was looking for the general principles behind the pros and cons of it.
And I don't agree with you about the neutral spine, I posted the link to Cressey where he mentions it in the deadlift and was wondering if the same applied to the squat.

The thing about average/elite coach comes from this comment:

kevpants wrote:

The thing about Rippetoe is he's not a great coach so the argument is invalid. Who's he ever coached? About a million average lifters. Who else?

I was making the point that coaching average joes off the street is a different skillset to coaching guys lifting in the Olympics.

I don't see how pointing out that Bolt or that Konstantinos guy are more genetically gifted than the rest of us is being a 'loser' or making excuses.
I asked could I outrun Bolt and you said

kevpants wrote:

Maybe not. But you'd be faster than you would be if you decided from the start that you were already bet.

Which shows that you missed my point.
I not talking about looking at him and deciding not to try, I'm saying someone coaching a 'freak' like him could possibly do things with him that he couldn't do with me.
Think Jonah Lomu or Michael Johnson.
Coaching someone with those gifts and physical intelligence is a world away from coaching me.
Apologies if to the powerlifters that sounds like defeatism that somehow offends you, but that's not the point I was making.

Hanley wrote:

What would say is important when it comes to being an expert??
I would say it's the range of topics you've studied, how well you comprehend and apply them, and how well you transfer this knowledge to real world situations.
I'm sure you'd agree the only was this can be done is by spending time at it. How long's Transform been in the game?? 10 years maybe, spending 30-40 hours per week, 48 weeks out of the year coaching? A sum total of approx. 15,000 hours?? Is that not enough time to teaching, reading, observing and learning to be an "expert"?

But couldn't you say all those things about Rippetoe and more besides?
Which is why I don't like to take a particular person's view as gospel, I like to understand the rationale behind it.
And I agree with Roper that labelling oneself an 'expert' is probably a bit strong, you could always learn something new that contradicts something you thought before.

Hanley wrote:

People seem to be arguing that since Rip coaches average people, he can coach them better than an elite coach. How does an elite coach become an elite coach tho? He spends time working his way thru the ranks with a broad spectrum of abilities. Any good coach can take the challenges theyve seen with high level guys and use the solutions and fixes with people in lower ranks so that they either avoid the problem altogether, or reach a resolution faster.

That might be true, so I might be wrong above.
I suppose it depends on what their experience has been to that point.

Hanley wrote:

If you don't do that, then of course you can never hope to get near them. But if you're prepared to work like they do and progress thru the ranks, then why the hell can't you be as strong, or nearly as strong as them? There's outliers in every sport, but to get to a good elite level should be manageable for anyone who's willing to put the hours in (and it will take A LOT of hours).

I'm all for people giving it everything and not limiting themselves, but can we all reach the elite level really? There's no number of hours put in that will make me a premiership footballer.
But sticking to lifting, can we all on this board get to that level if we put the hours in? Can we all break world records?
Could I outlift that Ed Coan guy you mentioned before if only I was willing to work hard enough?
Of course there's outliers, and when you turn on the Olympics in the main that's what you see, is coaching those outliers 'different'?

Hanley wrote:

If you take someone with above average genetics and below average work ethic, I'm pretty sure an average person who puts in the time (and I'm talking 8-10 years here) could be a better athlete than him.

Don't disagree with that.

Hanley wrote:

Maybe if you started as young as him, and had the same opportunities you could have been a better sprinter
Success doesn't just happen. You don't just float around in the gym or on the field for a couple of years and become the best at anything.

Nor that but it wasn't what i was saying.

Hanley wrote:

Bolt's not human

*Insert wisecrack about defeatism here*

This fcuking hip drive sh!te again.
Anyone with even the most basic comprehension of physics and kinesiology would understand why it's bad.
Hips move first, weight shifts forwards, load goes to back, chest drops, face gets smashed.

Maybe you're 100% right, but someone above said the idea was to keep the back angle constant so maybe the weight isn't supposed to move forward.
I don't know, hence the questions!

This curve thing came up before so i searched for the thread...

In case anyone's not getting what I mean, there's a guy the same bodyweight as Roper, but he's an IPF world champion. No matter what Roper or anyone else does, they're not going to get near him. He's just more gifted genetically so he's off to the right of the curve.....
Think of the curve as genetic potential. You can be perfectly good in the middle, and be stronger than a hell of a lot of people, but you just can't do anything to prevent the freaks from going off to the right.

Guess who posted that....... and it's not defeatist, it's realistic

brianthebard · 22-02-2009 08:31PM

mikel wrote:

I don't see how pointing out that Bolt or that Konstantinos guy are more genetically gifted than the rest of us is being a 'loser' or making excuses.
I asked could I outrun Bolt and you said

What exactly do you know about their genetics? Both of them have issues, Bolt is way taller than the average olympic sprinter, it makes him terrible out of the blocks. No running coach would teach a kid to run like he does. Konstanwhatsits back is too long, if he set up his deadlift properly he'd end up stiff legging it. Again you wouldn't teach it the way he does. Instead of being gifted with gold winning genes, both of them have made accommodations for what they've been given by their genetics. FFS the idea that a random sperm and egg out of all the millions of random sperm and egg cells out there could come together and create an individual who's just perfectly gifted for their sport is beyond credibility.

DM-BM · 22-02-2009 08:37PM

Hanley wrote: »

This fcuking hip drive sh!te again.

Anyone with even the most basic comprehension of physics and kinesiology would understand why it's bad.

Tell that to Dr. Lon Kilgore the professor of kinesiology, who co-wrote starting strength.

Hanley wrote: »

Why is it better that your hips move first? Surely when youre trying to come out of a squat, the first thing to move should be the BAR??

Well if your back is locked, its hard for your hips to move without the bar isn't it?

Hanley wrote: »

So you're saying hip drive should be used as a means of moving the bar provided you keep a constant back angle (ie your hips don't move up before the bar does?)

I'm saying that is basically my understanding of SS squats.

I'm not saying it's the only way to squat though.

Hanley wrote: »

I agree that he's trying to drive up with his hips first. And look what that's doing to him!!

God. What a reply!!!

You see thats what i don't see. The biggest flaw i see is not what happens on the way up, its the way his upper back seems to relax just before he is in the hole.

And yeah, it was some reply in fairness to ya.:D

Hanley · 22-02-2009 08:43PM

The thing about average/elite coach comes from this comment:

I was making the point that coaching average joes off the street is a different skillset to coaching guys lifting in the Olympics.

But why is the elite coach elite?? He didn't just go from not coaching, to being elite. All things being equal, he probably worked his way up thru the ranks to get there. encountering many levels of trainee's during it. Presumably he excelled at all because he has continued to rise thru the ranks to become "elite".

Fair assumptions, no?

But couldn't you say all those things about Rippetoe and more besides?
Which is why I don't like to take a particular person's view as gospel, I like to understand the rationale behind it.

Obviously. Where did I say anything to imply otherwise?

His ability to coach people to do what he wants is obviously there. But does one's capabilities as a coach matter if they're teaching the wrong thing???

And I agree with Roper that labelling oneself an 'expert' is probably a bit strong, you could always learn something new that contradicts something you thought before.

So is someone only an expert if they think they know everything about a topic and can't possibly learn any more?? That's pretty much the textbook definition of an arrogant ignoramus in my book.

I'm all for people giving it everything and not limiting themselves, but can we all reach the elite level really? There's no number of hours put in that will make me a premiership footballer.

How many hours have premiership footballers put in? AT LEAST 2 hours a day, 4-5x a week since they were 8 or 9 say? Probably more as they get older so it should average out. Now assume most players first break into the premiership at 20. That's approx 11 years of training 500 hours a year or arounf 5-6000 hours of training at the peak ages for motor development and fitness/strength adaptation.

Saying that you NOW couldn't do it is obviously true. Who has 6000 hours spare to train with a real life. But to say you couldn't do it THEN with the right coaching and right facilities isn't true in my opinion.

You MIGHT have. you might not too tho. But you have to admit with different circumstances, there is the chance you could have.

But sticking to lifting, can we all on this board get to that level if we put the hours in? Can we all break world records?
Could I outlift that Ed Coan guy you mentioned before if only I was willing to work hard enough?
Of course there's outliers, and when you turn on the Olympics in the main that's what you see, is coaching those outliers 'different'?

No, of course not. There's been no one in the last couple of decades who could either. Your argument is jumping from being the ABSOLUTE best
Don't disagree with that.

This curve thing came up before so i searched for the thread...

"In case anyone's not getting what I mean, there's a guy the same bodyweight as Roper, but he's an IPF world champion. No matter what Roper or anyone else does, they're not going to get near him. He's just more gifted genetically so he's off to the right of the curve.....
Think of the curve as genetic potential. You can be perfectly good in the middle, and be stronger than a hell of a lot of people, but you just can't do anything to prevent the freaks from going off to the right. "

Guess who posted that....... and it's not defeatist, it's realistic

I don't see how that goes against my previous post tho.

I mentioned the FAR right. The guys who are the absolute best. Using your argument of the bell curve, by definition there can only be a small number of these. They're what happens when you combine genetic potential and superhuman work ethic.

Since you can't have a competition where everyone is the absolute best, there has to be people who are less good, but still extemely good, to make up the places.

THEY'RE the guys that people should aspire to be (realistically).

Hanley · 22-02-2009 08:52PM

DM-BM wrote: »

Tell that to Dr. Lon Kilgore the professor of kinesiology, who co-wrote starting strength.

Tell him I think it's stupid to attempt to move the bar by first moving your hips and putting yourself in a disadvantage leverage position? Gladly.

Maybe you could stop me from making a fool of myself and telling me why it's good. Without using the phrase "because Rippetoe says so"?

Well if your back is locked, its hard for your hips to move without the bar isn't it?

Em... no. Go get a brush. Hold onto the top of it and put the bottom of it on the floor. Now kick it. The bottom moves more than the top. But the handle remains rigid.

You see thats what i don't see. The biggest flaw i see is not what happens on the way up, its the way his upper back seems to relax just before he is in the hole.

His upper back relaxes because it's soft at the top (breathing into his chest and not belly) and the fact his hips rise first compounds the problem

And yeah, it was some reply in fairness to ya.:D

I dunno what I was thinking tbh

Hanley · 22-02-2009 08:55PM

brianthebard wrote: »

What exactly do you know about their genetics? Both of them have issues, Bolt is way taller than the average olympic sprinter, it makes him terrible out of the blocks. No running coach would teach a kid to run like he does. Konstanwhatsits back is too long, if he set up his deadlift properly he'd end up stiff legging it. Again you wouldn't teach it the way he does. Instead of being gifted with gold winning genes, both of them have made accommodations for what they've been given by their genetics. FFS the idea that a random sperm and egg out of all the millions of random sperm and egg cells out there could come together and create an individual who's just perfectly gifted for their sport is beyond credibility.

Bang on.

DM-BM · 22-02-2009 10:16PM

Hanley wrote: »

Maybe you could stop me from making a fool of myself and telling me why it's good. Without using the phrase "because Rippetoe says so"?

I don't know what you mean about making a fool of yourself, you disagree with hip drive, i don't, surely there is room for more than one opinion on the subject.

Basically, when i squat with hip drive, i feel more solid, and that i'm working my legs more than if i don't use it, like the work is spread between the quads, hamstrings, glutes and adductors. If i don't drive my hips, i feel it way more in my quads. So i feel as though i'm gettoing more out of my squats this way.

As for the "because Rippetoe says so" comment, if thats the way my post have come across then hereare two reasons for this.

1. They are his theories not mine, although i do feel they worked for me.

2. Some people here haven't read the book but are commenting on aspects of it, and others seemed to come to a different conclusion than me after reading it, I was just giving my interpretation of it.

Hanley wrote: »

Em... no. Go get a brush. Hold onto the top of it and put the bottom of it on the floor. Now kick it. The bottom moves more than the top. But the handle remains rigid.

Yeah, but if you hold the top while you kick the bottom, you won't have a problem.

Hanley wrote: »

His upper back relaxes because it's soft at the top (breathing into his chest and not belly) and the fact his hips rise first compounds the problem

I see it differently, he relaxes his upper back, and thats why his hips rise first, if it was locked, they would move together.

kevpants · 22-02-2009 10:57PM

Critique this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlxIGfm545I

and this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM_PG_0yHck

If anything I reckon Coan leads with his chest more than his hips.

And please don't argue it doesn't apply to beginners. I can see that one coming.

Pub07 · 24-02-2009 06:22PM

Well this is a very interesting discussion in its own right, the most interesting Ive seen here in a while here. I think it could be a good idea to split it off into another thread if the mods dont want it continuing here.

Hanley · 24-02-2009 07:55PM

Reyman wrote: »

I think this was the OP's original question.

Mods where are you?

Did you not read the first few pages of the thread?

Rippetoe's Squat Form

Comments