training high bar, competing low bar

[kaleida]

Does anyone else here do it? Training mostly high bar squats but competing with low bar? I'm just curious what the transition to low bar looks like before a meet.

[JamesMontana]

I think a lot of people will low bar once a week and high bar/front squat the other squat days throughout the week.

[308smk]

A lot of the squatting done in my club is highbar, on the order of 2-4 days per week, with 1-2 lowbar sessions per week. Typically lowbar once for every 2-3 highbar/front squatting sessions. I personally increase the lowbar frequency to 3 days per week at 3 weeks out and drop the highbar and front squatting as the competition lifts are the only ones I am performing at that time frame.

Since you use significantly less weight with a high bar and front squat, they can usually be trained at a higher frequency than the lowbar squat, along with a longer range of motion, it is a good way to build strength out of the hole and pack on muscle.

[naich]

A lot of the squatting done in my club is highbar, on the order of 2-4 days per week, with 1-2 lowbar sessions per week. Typically lowbar once for every 2-3 highbar/front squatting sessions. I personally increase the lowbar frequency to 3 days per week at 3 weeks out and drop the highbar and front squatting as the competition lifts are the only ones I am performing at that time frame.

Since you use significantly less weight with a high bar and front squat, they can usually be trained at a higher frequency than the lowbar squat, along with a longer range of motion, it is a good way to build strength out of the hole and pack on muscle.

nicely done.

[shadowroth]

I high bar below parallel but want to give low bar a try.no one around me low bars and dont know exactly where to put the bar. When ever i try it wont stay on my rear delts it just rolls off and i have to hold it completely with my arms. Instead of the bar just siting there. I know it isnt science but the bar wont stay in place if its not resting on my traps

[trancebreak]

Similar to 308smk, I train both but plan on dropping the weaker closer to competition (weaker being high bar)

[HamburgerTrain]

Serious question:

What is the difference between a low and high bar squat? I have just never really concerned myself with figuring out what the difference was. I am not even sure which one I do.

[ziyedb]

Serious question:

What is the difference between a low and high bar squat? I have just never really concerned myself with figuring out what the difference was. I am not even sure which one I do.

I think your bar placement is pretty high, but not high-bar like weightlifters do on their upper traps I guess?

[Huskarl]

I do low bar once a week, high bar twice a week and front squat once. Competes highbar

[Xuaxace]

Serious question:

What is the difference between a low and high bar squat? I have just never really concerned myself with figuring out what the difference was. I am not even sure which one I do.

oly high bar is usually the highest the bar can be in the back, which theoretically allows for the most upright posture (and more carry over to oly lifts I assume)




And the low bar position, bar resting on the groove between the middle and rear delt (rear delt making a shelve)





A lot of people squat in between this points though, in which case how the movement is performed influences the dynamics more than the bar placement itself.

[spotmebrah]

Serious question. Why would you switch your squat stance for competition if what you have been using works for you all this while? If you have been squatting high bar all the way, transiting to low bar for comp day does not really make much sense to me because the mechanics of the squat is different.

[kaleida]

Thanks for the info everybody!

This high bar thing is an experiment for me, I am trying to force my legs to get stronger by doing a type of squat where my back can't bail me out when it gets hard for my legs. Shorter torso / longer legs makes high bar really awkward and difficult with less weight. Low bar + front squat is the combination I would go back to if this doesn't work out long term because that was mostly working to solve the same problem I just didn't know how to program it without feeling overtrained.

Another unexpected side effect of switching to high bar: my squat recovery time decreased so much, so much that I was able to go back to starting strength linear progress instead of texas method. I'm not sure but I think this might be because my hip flexors aren't getting crushed between hip and thigh bones in the hole. My proportions require a lot of forward lean to keep the bar over my feet, even more when the bar is lower, needed heating pad on my hip flexors almost every night when I was low bar squatting, needed lots of recovery time. Low bar feels easier with more weight when I'm in the gym, but harder to recover from after, so I still want to compete with it.

Unexpected side effect #2: my deadlift really seems to love the high bar squats.

[trancebreak]

Serious question. Why would you switch your squat stance for competition if what you have been using works for you all this while? If you have been squatting high bar all the way, transiting to low bar for comp day does not really make much sense to me because the mechanics of the squat is different.

Who said they only train high bar? All replies ive read all state they include both variations

[kaleida]

Who said they only train high bar? All replies ive read all state they include both variations

I am currently training only high bar.

[trancebreak]

I am currently training only high bar.

I thought you still included low bar considering you said "mostly". But yeah, if you aren't doing some low bar somewhat frequently, start now

[kaleida]

I thoughtt you still included low bar considering you said "mostly". But yeah, if you aren't doing some low bar somewhat frequently, start now

I meant "mostly" on a larger scale...I expect the amount of low bar squatting to slowly increase as I get closer to a meet. My next meet is in July so it isn't time to do that yet; my high bar experiment is about using high bar to build strength and low bar to test strength. I don't have any need to test strength this far out from a meet. I admit I am occasionally TEMPTED to revert to it because high bar is challenging with really light weight and that's embarrassing but instead I'm going to stick to the experiment.

[KeepOnShruggin]

Serious question:

What is the difference between a low and high bar squat? I have just never really concerned myself with figuring out what the difference was. I am not even sure which one I do.

Came in to say this. It's like saying wide or narrow squat stance. It's not as black and white as a lot of people make it out to be.

[kaleida]

I gotta agree they are more similar than most people realize especially when comparing similar stance width and foot angle and knee travel just a different bar position. Still I notice a difference in whether or not I can get away with hips rising faster than shoulders (which is a subtle issue for me but my 1RM's are 20-30 pounds better if I avoid it) in a high bar squat if my hips rise faster than shoulders it's a nearly impossible and semi-painful grinder ... but in a low bar squat if the same thing happens I just good morning it up painlessly no problem...unless it's a max attempt in which case I fail because that's not my strongest form. High Bar it's like being punished for that minor issue so much that I no longer do it

[Mitch666]

I always squatted high bar and made the switch to low bar a few months ago and it's increasing 10x faster than it ever did highbar. I think all the high bar training helped me now that I'm in a more mechanically advantaged position.

I don't think taking low bar our for extended periods of time would be smart if that's what you'll compete with, it's not just like throwing a belt on or something, at least for me it took awhile to get used to it.

[IzzyT]

Low bar is nearly universally superior for powerlifting purposes. The low bar squat both uses more muscles mass (typically) and has a shorter range of motion with regards to reaching the natural rebound point (universally). It also preferentially shifts the leverage from the anterior chain to the posterior chain, which is both bigger and has a higher strength potential than the anterior chain.

If the high bar squat is an effective assistance exercise for you by all means continue to do it. Dropping low bar completely is foolish in my opinion. Specificity is one of the single most important factors in performance. You get good at what you train. Neural efficiency can account for up to 25-30% of your performance (depending on the study you want to discuss). You're going to sacrifice that because?

It is very possible to become quite efficient with an inefficient technique. People in the powerlifting world then point to people who have done this and say, "See! You can use any bar position. It doesn't matter whatsoever! Everything is optimal. Just gotta find what works for you, brah"!

"Find what works for you" is either blatant common sense or horrible advice. Can you think of a single sport where athletes stick to whatever they're "naturally comfortable" doing? How about shooting a basketball? Golf stroke? Athletes do not naturally select optimal techniques. This is why skill coaches even exist. Why anyone thinks this is different in powerlifting is very frustrating to me.

Does it ultimately matter that much? You could argue it doesn't because there are world records held by both high bar and low bar squatters. I've seen some people with no discernible mechanical difference whatsoever between their high bar and low bar squats because of favorable squat anthropometry. I've seen others who get more than 20% from the low bar position over the high bar position. The average person probably gets closer to 5-10%.

Can you afford to leave a potential 5-10% on the table? How about 5-10lbs? Only you can make that choice I guess.

If anyone is interested, I've written a pretty extensive biomechanical argument in favor of the low bar, wide(r) stance squat here



edit:
To actually answer OP's question, look up Fred Hatfield's old squat cycles and routines. He used EXACTLY this method. He strictly high-barred in the off-season and transitioned to low-bar for meet prep.

[Fletch1986]

edit:
To actually answer OP's question, look up Fred Hatfield's old squat cycles and routines. He used EXACTLY this method. He strictly high-barred in the off-season and transitioned to low-bar for meet prep.

The great Coan did this as well.

[308smk]

The great Coan did this as well.

Because it works ****ing great.

Source: My recent squat pr's.

[arn710]

The great Coan did this as well.

I would argue that's far from optimal for most people though. You're using 2 of the world's best, most experienced lifters as examples. These guys had countless hours perfecting their technique with high and low bar squat

Most people need to pick one and practice it to really dial it in. Unless you're a highly experienced lifter, you need to practice the competition lifts.

[HamburgerTrain]

Low bar is nearly universally superior for powerlifting purposes. The low bar squat both uses more muscles mass (typically) and has a shorter range of motion with regards to reaching the natural rebound point (universally). It also preferentially shifts the leverage from the anterior chain to the posterior chain, which is both bigger and has a higher strength potential than the anterior chain.

If the high bar squat is an effective assistance exercise for you by all means continue to do it. Dropping low bar completely is foolish in my opinion. Specificity is one of the single most important factors in performance. You get good at what you train. Neural efficiency can account for up to 25-30% of your performance (depending on the study you want to discuss). You're going to sacrifice that because?

It is very possible to become quite efficient with an inefficient technique. People in the powerlifting world then point to people who have done this and say, "See! You can use any bar position. It doesn't matter whatsoever! Everything is optimal. Just gotta find what works for you, brah"!

"Find what works for you" is either blatant common sense or horrible advice. Can you think of a single sport where athletes stick to whatever they're "naturally comfortable" doing? How about shooting a basketball? Golf stroke? Athletes do not naturally select optimal techniques. This is why skill coaches even exist. Why anyone thinks this is different in powerlifting is very frustrating to me.

Does it ultimately matter that much? You could argue it doesn't because there are world records held by both high bar and low bar squatters. I've seen some people with no discernible mechanical difference whatsoever between their high bar and low bar squats because of favorable squat anthropometry. I've seen others who get more than 20% from the low bar position over the high bar position. The average person probably gets closer to 5-10%.

Can you afford to leave a potential 5-10% on the table? How about 5-10lbs? Only you can make that choice I guess.

If anyone is interested, I've written a pretty extensive biomechanical argument in favor of the low bar, wide(r) stance squat here



edit:
To actually answer OP's question, look up Fred Hatfield's old squat cycles and routines. He used EXACTLY this method. He strictly high-barred in the off-season and transitioned to low-bar for meet prep.

Even Louie Simmons advocated a higher bar position for raw squats when I was at westside. I think you are missing the point here. That "optimal" is whatever someone does consistently, for the longest period of time, with the most improvements. The best training with the perfect technique only works if someone does it for 10 straight years. Also, it is pretty insane to think that, over the course of a training career, that "perfect technique" doesn't change ever for an individual.

[runtocatch]

Even Louie Simmons advocated a higher bar position for raw squats when I was at westside. I think you are missing the point here. That "optimal" is whatever someone does consistently, for the longest period of time, with the most improvements. The best training with the perfect technique only works if someone does it for 10 straight years. Also, it is pretty insane to think that, over the course of a training career, that "perfect technique" doesn't change ever for an individual.

Train if folks knew their powerlifting history a bit better they would understand how all these things developed and the reason folks were low bar squatting for so long. Its rather simple to figure out if you actually know wtf was going on back then.

Edit to say even today "raw" squatters are low bar squatting cuz of the knee wraps and how much they do for the squat. When equipment helps the legs so much of course having the bar lower will allow you to til the weight back and up rather than up on your neck/traps.

[IzzyT]

The great Coan did this as well.

I am pretty sure Coan used paused high bar squats as a secondary exercise rather than replacing his low bar squats entirely, but his routine evolved over the years. One thing is for certain. He DID do strictly conventional deadlifts until a few weeks out when he switched to sumo.

Even Louie Simmons advocated a higher bar position for raw squats when I was at westside. I think you are missing the point here. That "optimal" is whatever someone does consistently, for the longest period of time, with the most improvements. The best training with the perfect technique only works if someone does it for 10 straight years. Also, it is pretty insane to think that, over the course of a training career, that "perfect technique" doesn't change ever for an individual.

I don't think I'm missing the point, man. This is why I brought up specificity. You get good at what you train.

With regards to your bold, that is not the optimal. That is very, very close though because of real world constraints. Because most people can't stick to anything whatsoever, if you can find something that they WILL stick to, and CAN stick to, that can very often be optimal given their circumstances. But optimal is optimal. Truly optimal would be the technique that is both the most mechanically efficient, diligently trained to technical perfection over 10+ years, and that results in the highest squat on meet day. Otherwise, you run the risk of technically mastering an inefficient technique which would limit your overall potential. You can't really go back 10 years and do it over.

I agree that a lifters' technique is going to change over the years, but I'd argue that those should be minor adjustments. Such as where they put their hands to grip the bar when they squat (as they get bigger). The exact width of their stance might widen a few inches. They might point their toes slightly more forward or out. They might use slightly more or less knee travel.

But they aren't often going to make wholesale changes like going from a narrow stance to a stance that is greater than 150%+ of shoulder width like Louie recommends. If they do, this where the biggest risk for performance degradation comes in because whole sale changes usually result in wholesale differences in mechanics. That means you're, essentially, relearning the movement pattern. That takes a long time and can cost you quite a few pounds on the platform.

I think it is important that people actually discuss biomechanics when addressing powerlifting technique issues. Logic is good, but ultimately not as effective as a combination of both logic and the scientific method. When you start looking into the actual biomechanics of the squat, the "Well, lots of elite guys use high bar" argument starts looking weaker and weaker.

[HamburgerTrain]

I am pretty sure Coan used paused high bar squats as a secondary exercise rather than replacing his low bar squats entirely, but his routine evolved over the years. One thing is for certain. He DID do strictly conventional deadlifts until a few weeks out when he switched to sumo.



I don't think I'm missing the point, man. This is why I brought up specificity. You get good at what you train.

With regards to your bold, that is not the optimal. That is very, very close though because of real world constraints. Because most people can't stick to anything whatsoever, if you can find something that they WILL stick to, and CAN stick to, that can very often be optimal given their circumstances. But optimal is optimal. Truly optimal would be the technique that is both the most mechanically efficient, diligently trained to technical perfection over 10+ years, and that results in the highest squat on meet day. Otherwise, you run the risk of technically mastering an inefficient technique which would limit your overall potential. You can't really go back 10 years and do it over.

I agree that a lifters' technique is going to change over the years, but I'd argue that those should be minor adjustments. Such as where they put their hands to grip the bar when they squat (as they get bigger). The exact width of their stance might widen a few inches. They might point their toes slightly more forward or out. They might use slightly more or less knee travel.

But they aren't often going to make wholesale changes like going from a narrow stance to a stance that is greater than 150%+ of shoulder width like Louie recommends. If they do, this where the biggest risk for performance degradation comes in because whole sale changes usually result in wholesale differences in mechanics. That means you're, essentially, relearning the movement pattern. That takes a long time and can cost you quite a few pounds on the platform.

I think it is important that people actually discuss biomechanics when addressing powerlifting technique issues. Logic is good, but ultimately not as effective as a combination of both logic and the scientific method. When you start looking into the actual biomechanics of the squat, the "Well, lots of elite guys use high bar" argument starts looking weaker and weaker.

From a biomechanics standpoint, there are probably not two people on earth with the exact same hip dimensions, femur angulation, socket dimensions, acetablum depth, etc. There is literally an infinite number of bio mechanical factors just in the hip joint alone and this is not even getting into height, weight, anything in the torso, ankle structure, and then mobility. Just saying "low bar is best for everyone because of biomechanics" sounds too much like a p90X commercial. If you consider the actual structure of the human body and understand that, basically, no two people are going to be shaped the same.

If it were as cut and dry as one optimal way to do something, everyone would be doing it.

[IzzyT]

From a biomechanics standpoint, there are probably not two people on earth with the exact same hip dimensions, femur angulation, socket dimensions, acetablum depth, etc. There is literally an infinite number of bio mechanical factors just in the hip joint alone and this is not even getting into height, weight, anything in the torso, ankle structure, and then mobility.

Of course. This is where stance width, foot angle, knee travel, degree of hip abduction, etc. can all come into play. Notice that I said NEAR universally with regards to low bar. That is where I was leaving open the possibility of some bizarre biomechanical construction where someone's hips explode doing low bar or something weird like that.

Just saying "low bar is best for everyone because of biomechanics" sounds too much like a p90X commercial. If you consider the actual structure of the human body and understand that, basically, no two people are going to be shaped the same.

And of course this isn't my argument. I posted a link to my argument.

If it were as cut and dry as one optimal way to do something, everyone would be doing it.

This isn't quite true for a variety of reasons. There is a generally agreed upon "optimal" technique for a baseball swing, NBA jump shot, and NFL QB throwing mechanics. However, actual examination of these athletes reveals that some are way, way more proficient than others for a variety of different reasons. And this isn't small scale variation within the generally accepted models either. There are some guys who use bizarre, funky technique and succeed in spite of what they do. Look up Shawn Marion's jumpshot in the NBA, for example.

A lot of people in powerlifting don't have coaching when they first come up. They just do what they're comfortable doing. They copy other lifters. If no one is there to correct them, they might spend enough years doing an inefficient method that it just doesn't make sense to switch to a new technique at their current level of advancement.

[kaleida]

This whole 100% high bar thing transitioning to 100% low bar before a meet is an experiment for me ...I think at some point I might also want to do a 2nd experiment where I train both year-round ...that sounds like an option too

100% high bar has its perks so far for me... my deadlift really really loves it when I keep my leg and glute strength up with more upright-torso squatting as often as possible ... my hip flexors also love it when my torso angle is more upright for high volume squat work because hip flexors aren't getting crushed between thigh bones and hip bones, so I need less recovery time because I'm not "smashing" those hip flexor muscles every time I do high volume... plus the high bar and low bar feel look and feel similar as far as which muscles I need to use, except high bar becomes exponentially more difficult if my hips rise faster than shoulders so it pays off to avoid that, which is good because that issue always caused me to miss 1RM attempts with low bar and now I'm strengthening the habit of avoiding it ...

Plus I'm not flopping down with loose hamstrings and maximum forward knee travel like an Olympic high bar squat, I'm doing high bar with lots of hamstring and glute activation and putting a limit on the amount of forward knee travel... I suspect there will be very good carryover when it's time to transition back because my form is so similar for both of them...

[HamburgerTrain]

Of course. This is where stance width, foot angle, knee travel, degree of hip abduction, etc. can all come into play. Notice that I said NEAR universally with regards to low bar. That is where I was leaving open the possibility of some bizarre biomechanical construction where someone's hips explode doing low bar or something weird like that.


And of course this isn't my argument. I posted a link to my argument.


This isn't quite true for a variety of reasons. There is a generally agreed upon "optimal" technique for a baseball swing, NBA jump shot, and NFL QB throwing mechanics. However, actual examination of these athletes reveals that some are way, way more proficient than others for a variety of different reasons. And this isn't small scale variation within the generally accepted models either. There are some guys who use bizarre, funky technique and succeed in spite of what they do. Look up Shawn Marion's jumpshot in the NBA, for example.

A lot of people in powerlifting don't have coaching when they first come up. They just do what they're comfortable doing. They copy other lifters. If no one is there to correct them, they might spend enough years doing an inefficient method that it just doesn't make sense to switch to a new technique at their current level of advancement.

I understand what you are getting at and this is one of those things that sounds great on paper, but the actual practical application of it is much different. There is a different between accepted universal technique (whihc makes no sense in a strength sport where no one is shaped the same) and the form each individual employes. Technique cues are the same for everyone but the implementation of the form is different.

It really is splitting hairs here because it really doesn't matter. Becoming efficient with an inefficient form is still progress. Especially when considering that the example you give about lifters without a coach on hand applies to about 99% of the people that do this sport. Even if a coach is available, the chances of them actually knowing what they are talking about it pretty slim.