Discussion
Yep, another one of those threads.
Last night, I was browsing a book on gymnastics training. For leg conditioning, it advises the use of leg machines in gyms with a note "avoid deep knee bends". But that's all it says. Any thoughts? Is this perhaps specific to just leg press and not squats?
As an aside, I love the fact that it recommends for training the abs to do V sits.
Last night, I was browsing a book on gymnastics training. For leg conditioning, it advises the use of leg machines in gyms with a note "avoid deep knee bends". But that's all it says. Any thoughts? Is this perhaps specific to just leg press and not squats?
As an aside, I love the fact that it recommends for training the abs to do V sits.
Edited by Hoofy on Saturday 18th August 10:03
I've heard that parallel thing as well. And it's still taught by some as the way to squat.
...But then we've just had the best squatters in the world on the telly for the past two/three weeks, amongst the strongest men on the planet with sinews like steel cable...and did they only squat to parallel?
Do what helps your goals.
...But then we've just had the best squatters in the world on the telly for the past two/three weeks, amongst the strongest men on the planet with sinews like steel cable...and did they only squat to parallel?
Do what helps your goals.
If I go anything beyond parallel my knees instantly complain and that's without stupidly heavy weights.
Just think of the stress when bending the legs much more than that and creating a sharp point at the knee over which the weight must be forced. Surely can't be good for the long term when we're all being told to avoid sports which are high impact on the knees.
Just think of the stress when bending the legs much more than that and creating a sharp point at the knee over which the weight must be forced. Surely can't be good for the long term when we're all being told to avoid sports which are high impact on the knees.
The pain perhaps comes from poor technique, or an underlying issue. Deep squats if done correctly do not give knee pain, quite the opposite.
http://www.lookgreatnaked.com/articles/archive/are...
It can be argued that ligamentous injury risk during squatting is actually greatest in the parallel squat-the position where PCL forces are at their apex.
In conclusion, there is scant evidence to show that deep squats are contraindicated in those with healthy knee function.
http://www.lookgreatnaked.com/articles/archive/are...
It can be argued that ligamentous injury risk during squatting is actually greatest in the parallel squat-the position where PCL forces are at their apex.
In conclusion, there is scant evidence to show that deep squats are contraindicated in those with healthy knee function.
That's an excellent and very interesting article, thanks Halb. I've always thought the worry was for the articulations. This paragraph in that article hints at this:
The greatest risk for injury during deep squatting would theoretically be to the menisci and articular cartilage (Escamilla, 2001; Li, Zayontz, Most, et al., 2004). Tibiofemoral compressive forces have been shown to peak at 130 degrees of knee flexion (Nisell and Ekholm, 1986) where the menisci and articular cartilage bear significant amounts of stress. Deep squats also may increase susceptibility to patellofemoral degeneration given the high amount of patellofemoral stress that arises from contact of underside of the patella with articulating aspect of femur during high flexion (Escamilla, et al., 2001). However, there is little evidence to show a cause-effect relationship implicating an increased squat depth with injury to these structures in healthy subjects.
Without trying to sound argumentative (I know when I'm out of my league Mr H!) logic would suggest therefore that by avoiding this 130 degree zone you could protect the articulatory surfaces of your knees.
The article states there is little evidence to show a cause-effect relationship but is this due to a lack of study? Can we find any studies on this?
The greatest risk for injury during deep squatting would theoretically be to the menisci and articular cartilage (Escamilla, 2001; Li, Zayontz, Most, et al., 2004). Tibiofemoral compressive forces have been shown to peak at 130 degrees of knee flexion (Nisell and Ekholm, 1986) where the menisci and articular cartilage bear significant amounts of stress. Deep squats also may increase susceptibility to patellofemoral degeneration given the high amount of patellofemoral stress that arises from contact of underside of the patella with articulating aspect of femur during high flexion (Escamilla, et al., 2001). However, there is little evidence to show a cause-effect relationship implicating an increased squat depth with injury to these structures in healthy subjects.
Without trying to sound argumentative (I know when I'm out of my league Mr H!) logic would suggest therefore that by avoiding this 130 degree zone you could protect the articulatory surfaces of your knees.
The article states there is little evidence to show a cause-effect relationship but is this due to a lack of study? Can we find any studies on this?
Here's an abstract on Pubmed from 2007 with a reference to joint health and squats (front vs back):
The strength and stability of the knee plays an integral role in athletics and activities of daily living. A better understanding of knee joint biomechanics while performing variations of the squat would be useful in rehabilitation and exercise prescription. We quantified and compared tibiofemoral joint kinetics as well as muscle activity while executing front and back squats. Because of the inherent change in the position of the center of mass of the bar between the front and back squat lifts, we hypothesized that the back squat would result in increased loads on the knee joint and that the front squat would result in increased knee extensor and decreased back extensor muscle activity. A crossover study design was used. To assess the net force and torque placed on the knee and muscle activation levels, a combination of video and force data, as well as surface electromyographic data, were collected from 15 healthy trained individuals. The back squat resulted in significantly higher compressive forces and knee extensor moments than the front squat. Shear forces at the knee were small in magnitude, posteriorly directed, and did not vary between the squat variations. Although bar position did not influence muscle activity, muscle activation during the ascending phase was significantly greater than during the descending phase. The front squat was as effective as the back squat in terms of overall muscle recruitment, with significantly less compressive forces and extensor moments. The results suggest that front squats may be advantageous compared with back squats for individuals with knee problems such as meniscus tears, and for long-term joint health.
The strength and stability of the knee plays an integral role in athletics and activities of daily living. A better understanding of knee joint biomechanics while performing variations of the squat would be useful in rehabilitation and exercise prescription. We quantified and compared tibiofemoral joint kinetics as well as muscle activity while executing front and back squats. Because of the inherent change in the position of the center of mass of the bar between the front and back squat lifts, we hypothesized that the back squat would result in increased loads on the knee joint and that the front squat would result in increased knee extensor and decreased back extensor muscle activity. A crossover study design was used. To assess the net force and torque placed on the knee and muscle activation levels, a combination of video and force data, as well as surface electromyographic data, were collected from 15 healthy trained individuals. The back squat resulted in significantly higher compressive forces and knee extensor moments than the front squat. Shear forces at the knee were small in magnitude, posteriorly directed, and did not vary between the squat variations. Although bar position did not influence muscle activity, muscle activation during the ascending phase was significantly greater than during the descending phase. The front squat was as effective as the back squat in terms of overall muscle recruitment, with significantly less compressive forces and extensor moments. The results suggest that front squats may be advantageous compared with back squats for individuals with knee problems such as meniscus tears, and for long-term joint health.
Going all the way down, even bouncing out of the hole, is fine- provided you have the flexibility to do it. I've read that stopping above parallel can have a shearing effect on the knees, but can't remember where.
A squat isn't a squat if you don't go parallel or below though- if this is an issue then it's something worth looking into, an ATG squat can & should be pain free and achievable for anyone.
A squat isn't a squat if you don't go parallel or below though- if this is an issue then it's something worth looking into, an ATG squat can & should be pain free and achievable for anyone.
I've been taught no lower than thighs parallel to the floor/90 degree bend and have only instructed to no lower than 90 degree bend. This is the official line (read: likely out-dated but certain safe).
There always the naturalistic philosophies to consider - given humans are hunter-gatherers and have knees with protection, strength and padding designed to walk and run, one could argue that extreme knee flexion under extreme load would not be entirely sound...
The only need for a 130 degree or more flexion I can think of in a naturalistic sense, is taking a dump in the middle of the savannah.
There always the naturalistic philosophies to consider - given humans are hunter-gatherers and have knees with protection, strength and padding designed to walk and run, one could argue that extreme knee flexion under extreme load would not be entirely sound...
The only need for a 130 degree or more flexion I can think of in a naturalistic sense, is taking a dump in the middle of the savannah.
I personally go all the way down but the knowledgeable coaches I've sought help from judge people on a case by case basis. Some can't get all of the way down either due to bio-mechanics or lack of flexibility.
My coach who has taught me a great deal thinks in most cases you can overcome problems and get down below parallel if you want however he doesn't really feel its necessary so for the average weight lifter his rule is, if it hurts or becomes uncomfortable below parallel then don't do it.
He also thinks below parallel hugely increases the risk of injury but is beneficial to training the muscle. This isn't scientific but from years of training people.
My coach who has taught me a great deal thinks in most cases you can overcome problems and get down below parallel if you want however he doesn't really feel its necessary so for the average weight lifter his rule is, if it hurts or becomes uncomfortable below parallel then don't do it.
He also thinks below parallel hugely increases the risk of injury but is beneficial to training the muscle. This isn't scientific but from years of training people.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff