|
Thread: How important is the back squat?
-
11-30-2010, 08:25 PM #31
-
11-30-2010, 08:32 PM #32
- Join Date: Jun 2006
- Location: Miami, Florida, United States
- Age: 35
- Posts: 5,957
- Rep Power: 6304
Even the case with MSIC qualified SHW lifters the mean back squat was 135.5% [+/- 5.5%]. So let's go crazy with a 270kg clean and jerk, even though the data for world record holders was not published but it states their results were higher than MSIC lifters. Assume the high range of the MSIC number of 135% + 5.5% = 141% to get us close to WR results. That would give us a back squat of 380kg and if we take low range of MSIC that is still 350kg.
Olympic Weightlifting: Cuban Method
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?p=703396581
Snatch: 97kg
Clean and jerk: 120kg
Front squat 160kg
Back squat: 170kg
-
-
12-01-2010, 08:02 AM #33
-
12-01-2010, 09:14 AM #34
I wasnt talking about 'everybody' I was talking about the examples being discussed (i.e. the Russian superheavies). You need to reread my post again: "You can if you know their totals with earlier maxes. For example, if the lifters squatted 300kg and cleaned 260, but then raised their squat max to 400kg and still cleaned 260, then obviously that extra 100kg didnt have an impact." Im addressing another poster who said theres no way to tell if the extra squat strength was beneficial and provided an example of a way.
The rest of you are arguing about whether back squats are overhyped, which given the videos that are posted here and if what you say is true in terms of squat strength, everyone here would be wise to work on technique and strength.Olympic Lifting Coach
My Demo Vids and some training:
http://www.youtube.com/user/mhbuitrago
-
12-01-2010, 11:16 AM #35
-
12-01-2010, 11:27 AM #36
-
-
12-01-2010, 11:51 AM #37
-
12-01-2010, 01:44 PM #38
-
12-02-2010, 08:00 PM #39
whole point is that he is nowhere near as strong as him but because he is very technically proficient can lift much more weight. The guy responding to saying someone with no technique who just strong will out lift guy weaker with amazing technique which is absurd.
speaking of zhang he has like a 200kg clean and jerk yet video of him bs 220kg which looked fairly difficult for him.updated 2011
Hw-Alistair overeem, Brock lesnar, Sergei Kharitonov
Lhw-jon jones, Gegard Mousasi, Lyoto machida
Mw-Chael sonnen, Yushin Okami, Ronaldo souza
ww-Jake shields, Ben Askren, Josh Koscheck
lw-Bj penn, Tatsuya Kawajiri, Eddie Alvarez
fw-jose aldo, Hatsu Hioki, Kenny Florian
bw-Urijah Faber
-
12-02-2010, 09:07 PM #40
You think these looked difficult?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y8yKSJbpFI
Seems pretty damn easy to me.Olympic Lifting Coach
My Demo Vids and some training:
http://www.youtube.com/user/mhbuitrago
-
-
12-03-2010, 01:07 AM #41
Ivan Chakarov had kind of bad technique but he could back squat 330-350kg at 90, he did alright. Rezazadeh had just plain awful technique but he did quite well too. Pisarenko/Kolecki are outliers. A reasonable majority of the time, I'm guessing the people with the highest totals are also capable of out-backsquatting the competition. Superheavyweights are also a special consideration in that they will have a higher ratio of slow strength/speed strength than light lifters; the backsquat has a diminishing marginal impact on results in the clean and jerk, on average, as bodyweight increases.
Hammon trained the lifts for like 4 years, there's no way he would have made those totals if he'd only been able to squat 600lbs prior to entering the sport. Comparing him to guys like pisarenko is kind of ridiculous, try comparing him to pisarenko after only 4 years of doing the lifts.
As one gets further along toward their genetic potential in any athletic endeavor, specialization needs to be increased to mandate progress. None of us are world class Olympic lifters and will therefore likely experience a higher impact on results in the clean and jerk and snatch given an increase in the backsquat than individuals with decades of full-time training. The backsquat also helps the pulling mechanics of both lifts in addition to helping you stand up from the clean, which is why its going to have a more dramatic impact than the front squat unless there's a large discrepancy between one's pulling and squatting abilities. (If you can rack much more than you can stand up with, maybe front squatting is more beneficial than backsquatting, otherwise it's unlikely.)Last edited by disgorge89; 12-03-2010 at 01:20 AM.
-
12-03-2010, 08:15 AM #42
Once again the topic was normal local-level lifters and the discussion turned to freakish elite levels. What he said was that lifters who don't have much experience, therefore poor technique, will beat lifters with good technique when there is a big difference in general strength. So a lifter who squats 200 will beat lifters who squat 130, even if the strong guy can only power snatch/clean. Nobody with real experience would argue with that.
"However, the strength of the hamstring muscles is crucial to fully exploit the strength potential of the quads and ultimately the vertical force that the athlete is able to impart to the barbell." - Andrew Charniga, Jr.
-
12-03-2010, 09:49 AM #43
And still there are weightlifters who have pressed over 200 kg, squatted near 400 kg, rack pulled 500 kg. I mean, how much stronger could you possibly get!?
To say "Technique and also the explosive power is much different then pure brute strength." just doesn't make much sense.Last edited by Squinky; 12-03-2010 at 09:55 AM.
-
12-03-2010, 04:16 PM #44
-
-
12-03-2010, 08:19 PM #45
-
06-25-2013, 08:19 AM #46
-
06-25-2013, 09:18 AM #47
- Join Date: Jan 2013
- Location: Tampa, Florida, United States
- Age: 41
- Posts: 8
- Rep Power: 0
Cracky... there you go with math and statistics and being analytical instead of using "I feel like..." ;-)
Back squat is as important to lifting as breathing is. As is Front Squat. That said, back squat is directly proportional to your front squat, therefore an increase in back squat generally translates into a higher front squat which will in turn mean beter ability to stand up in the rack position.
Now this assumes that you are back squatting in the high bar... low bar will do nothing for your lifts. (enter disagreement about using low bar for hamstring recruitment here... you do RDLs and good mornings in my book for hamstring development)
So yeah... BS
-
06-25-2013, 09:32 AM #48
Back squats are good for general weightlifting strength because it strengthens the posture, the pulling muscles, and the clean recovery muscles. Front squats train position and clean recovery muscles, and less general strength. If your pull is lagging behind your recoveries, back squats should be emphasized. If your pull is stronger than your recovery, front squats should be emphasized. If you are balanced, I have been told back squats should be emphasized in non-competition cycles and front squats emphasized in competition cycles.
112.5 snatch
131 cj
Log: http://www.pendlayforum.com/showthread.php?t=15188
-
-
06-25-2013, 11:47 AM #49
-
10-12-2021, 07:10 AM #50
-
02-24-2023, 02:42 AM #51
Squats — be it a back squat, front squat, or Zercher squat also burn many calories, increase your quad mass and glute mass, and boost the production of muscle-building hormones. it brings you More Confidence, The Ability to Produce More Power, Improved Mobility, You’ll Burn More Fat, Help Prevent Injuries, Forge Stronger Joints , You’ll Sprint Faster.
Do checkout for websites:
https://www.durafit.in/DC-Motor/durafit-pantherLast edited by JhanDiana; 05-22-2023 at 05:12 AM.
Similar Threads
-
how important is the back muscle for baseball?
By bruceleeTHIS in forum Sports TrainingReplies: 7Last Post: 02-19-2010, 08:23 AM -
Just curious, how important is the brand name on your supps?
By skelooth in forum SupplementsReplies: 10Last Post: 10-31-2004, 11:53 AM -
How important is the Pump in Bodybuilding???
By Realtest in forum Workout ProgramsReplies: 8Last Post: 08-26-2004, 08:21 PM -
How important is the bench press?
By PRESS in forum Workout ProgramsReplies: 8Last Post: 11-23-2002, 11:33 AM -
When eating carbs and protein together how important is the glycemic index?
By sfetaz in forum SupplementsReplies: 2Last Post: 04-27-2002, 05:19 AM
Bookmarks