Introduction
If you’re reading
this you probably already know that my company, Heilman’s Performance, has
recently been contracted to provide strength and conditioning guidance and
services to Minot Public Schools and Minot State University. This includes the
off-season and in-season training regimens for all of Minot High School and
Minot State University’s athletic teams.
Now that I’m
designing training programs for more athletes in my community I have consistently
received some questions about the omission of a single exercise in my program,
the barbell loaded back squat. It’s gotten to the point that instead of trying
to explain myself one conversation at a time why I don’t include it in my
programming it would just be easier to put it in writing and distribute it so I
can take all the scrutiny at once. Before I get to my evidence-based defense
for my omission of the back-squat exercise I feel like I have something to get
off my chest regarding the current situation.
I am a Certified
Strength and Conditioning Specialist (CSCS) through the National Strength and
Conditioning Association (NSCA), I hold certifications through organizations
such as Functional Movement Systems (FMS), Dynamic Neuromuscular Stabilization
(DNS), United States Weight Lifting Association (USA-W), have obtained my
undergraduate degree in the field of Exercise Science, and am less than a year
away from obtaining a Master’s Degree in Kinesiology that is dual-tracked in Corrective
Exercise and Orthopedic Rehabilitation and Sport Psychology. On top of the
formal education I’ve worked so hard to obtain, I’ve poured my heart into
successfully running and growing a human performance company for the last 5
years that I started at the age of 25. I was recently named Director of Human
Performance at a Division II University and I think it’s worth noting that on
top of all these responsibilities, my wife and I recently celebrated the birth
of our first child.
My purpose is not
to patronize anyone who has questions regarding the exercises I prescribe or to
selfishly promote my professional accomplishments, but to:
1. Establish
an understanding that if you are going to challenge what I think is best for
the long-term athletic development (LTAD) of those I work with, you have to come
to me with something better than subjective experience and what you “think” or
“feel” is the right way to train.
2. Establish
an understanding that I have more important things to do than write a blog
explaining to those not educated in the field why I choose to omit ONE EXERCISE
from my programming.
I have no qualms
about defending the methods I choose to employ, but I find it frustrating that
our athletic community has reacted the way they have in regard to this
professional relationship. I’ve already had a meeting that took roughly 2 hours
of my time and am now dedicating time to this writing that could be better
spent running my company, progressively moving the athletic community in my
community forward, spending time with my wife and daughter, or doing any number
of the things I love to do.
Position Statement on the Back-Squat Exercise for LTAD
Let’s first
address the nuance of the situation. This is not a black and white topic. There
is gray area involved so it’s important to establish:
I AM NOT suggesting that you cannot derive improvements in performance from performing the back squat in your training. You can, and that’s why so many people defend it as if it’s a necessary component of all training programs.
I AM NOT suggesting that you cannot derive improvements in performance from performing the back squat in your training. You can, and that’s why so many people defend it as if it’s a necessary component of all training programs.
I AM suggesting that the COST of frequently back squatting with high intensities through a pre-determined range of motion outweighs the BENEFIT derived by most individuals performing said action.
I AM suggesting that there are better methods that we can employ to achieve a higher transfer of training while simultaneously limiting the long-term structural distress placed on most individuals who frequently perform the back-squat exercise at high intensities.
The History of Powerlifting and its Influence on Sports Performance Training
The back-squat is
one of three events in the sport of powerlifting (Powerlifting, 2018). The
other two events in powerlifting are the bench press and the deadlift. Strength
competitions have been around for centuries, and the roots of powerlifting can
be found in traditions stretching all the way back to ancient China, Persia,
and Greece. Throughout the history of strength events, people began calling for
standardization and regulation of the competitions. This eventually evolved into
what we recognize today as the sport of Powerlifting.
The International
Powerlifting Federation was established in 1973, but the sport of powerlifting originated in the United Kingdom and the
United States sometime in the 1950s. It was around this time that individuals started
to recognize the benefits of strength and power development to performance in
team sports and began seeking out the best methods available for the development
of these physical qualities. As football coaches and the like started to
navigate weight rooms in the mid 20th century what do you suppose
they found? I’ll tell you. They found that, in every weight room, the strongest
cats in the room were powerlifters. As professionals with little understanding
of strength and power enhancement, the assumption was then made that the
methods being employed by these individuals would be the best methods to
develop physical qualities necessary to enhance sport performance. This is why
the back squat, deadlift, and bench press have been a part of the sports
performance training paradigm for so many years. It was the best way to train
powerlifters, but nobody bothered to ask, “Is this the best way to train
athletes?” It just became “the way.”
Cross Training is NOT Sports Performance Training
I think it’s important to understand how
the history of strength competitions has influenced the pursuit of performance
enhancement in team sports but equally important is understanding that there is
a difference between cross-training and sports performance training. Cross-training
is defined as training in sports other than the athlete’s primary sport (Cross-training, 2018). When
we engage in Powerlifting as a means to enhance performance in football,
basketball, baseball, etc. we are engaging in cross-training, not sports
performance training. We are, quite literally, utilizing the methods of one
sport in the hopes that it produces benefit in another. Mike Boyle (2016)
eludes to this confusion of the masses in his book Functional Training for Sports if you care to read more.
The most unfortunate part about this
implementation is that it’s worked for a number of years. Participants in team
sports back squatted, deadlifted, and bench pressed their way to great results.
I would never argue that you can’t achieve positive results utilizing this
strategy, but I will, with this writing try and convince you, through the
presentation of scientific evidence, that it is not the most optimal way to
enhance performance for team sport. And further, the cost of engaging in
powerlifting for youth athletes outweighs the benefits they derive in the sport
of their choice.
Evidence of Powerlifting’s Long-Term Effects
A cross-sectional study conducted by
Strömbäck, Aasa, Gilenstam, and Berglund (2018) to investigate the prevalence,
localization, and characterization of injuries among Swedish subelite classic
powerlifters found that 70 percent (73/104) of participants were currently
injured. 87% of the participants in the study reported having been injured
through powerlifting at least once within the past 12 months. Injuries to the
lumbopelvic region, the shoulder, and the hip were most commonly reported.
Brown and Kimball (1983) reported that the
lower back region was shown to be the most commonly injured site in a
prospective analysis of adolescent powerlifters competing in the Michigan
Teenage Powerlifting Championships. Siewe et al. (2011) found in a review
of 245 competitive and elite powerlifters that 43% of powerlifters complained
of problems during training related to the shoulder, lower back, and the knee.
Are you starting to recognize the same
trend that I am? Two of the studies, consisting of 349 of the participants,
were conducted on competitive lifters. These are lifters that have committed to
technical mastery of the three exercises and they’re still getting injured
during their training. Do you really think that youth athletes who just want to
be better at football, basketball, swimming, and volleyball should employ these
same strategies now that you know the prevalence of injury associated?
In a recent study, McClellan et al. (2019) shined
shed some light on why these injuries may be so common. In the study they found
that the average slope of the sacrum from a standing position to a bilateral
squatting position changed from 41 degrees to 68 degrees. This slope change
combined with large external loads placed on the shoulders is almost assuredly
a contributor to the increased rate of lower back injuries in those forced to perform
traditional back squats and deadlifts across the country. The study by
McClellan et al. also showed that many individuals who partake in bilateral
squatting exercises early in life eventually develop degenerative disc
problems, pars fractures in the lumbar spine, and a consequent lifetime of low
back pain.
Knowing this evidence exists, I just can’t
reason with asking youth athletes to perform the back squat (or the deadlift
for that matter) at high intensities to/from a predetermined depth. It is my
opinion that living with stress fractures in their lumbar spine and
debilitating lower back pain into adulthood is not worth the potential benefits
derived from partaking in this style of training.
Evidence that Back Squatting through Full Range of Motion is not Optimal
As I previously mentioned, one of the
biggest problems with implementing cross-training in the weight room is that we
confuse the rules of powerlifting with the methods used to enhance performance.
In powerlifting you MUST squat to a standardized depth and you MUST deadlift a
barbell from the floor in order to qualify in competition. We should NOT let
this confuse us when we are training for other sports in the weight room. Not
only is it unnecessary to force an athlete to a specific depth in a bilateral
squat, but there is evidence to suggest that it’s also not OPTIMAL.
Dr. Matthew Rhea and colleagues (2016)
have shown recently that quarter squats and half squats are actually more
beneficial to sprint and jump performance. In their paper they suggest that, “Improvements
in muscular fitness will occur at the joint-angles that are sufficiently
overloaded. In the conventional approach to measuring 1RM values at either a
parallel or deep squat depth, and then performing squats at a certain
percentage of that 1RM through a parallel or deep squat range of motion, the
joint-angles involved in jumping and springing may not be sufficiently
overloaded for maximal gains.”
This suggests that if developing maximal
power output is our ultimate goal, which I hope every sport coach in the
country would agree that it should be, squatting to full depth is more than
likely hindering our ability to do so. I would encourage you all to read Dr.
Rhea’s paper in its entirety as it has been an absolute game changer in the sports
science world. He’s one of the most well-respected sport scientists in the
country so for him to release this data has undoubtedly changed the way
strength coaches around the country approach squatting with their athletes.
Are you a Powerlifter or an Athlete?
If you’ve read this far I’m hoping that
I’ve convinced you that powerlifting at high intensities through a full range
of motion over the course of their athletic careers can be detrimental to the
health of youth athletes and unless you compete in the sport of powerlifting,
there is no need to squat through the full range of motion, especially if your
goal is to improve power output for a team sport.
What we should really be discussing in regard
to sport performance training are the methods that achieve the highest levels
of transfer to the playing field. Lucky
for us, Dr. Matthew Rhea has our back on this front too. He has a correlation
chart that he has compiled over years of working with high school, college, and
professional football players that his colleague, David Ballou of Indiana
University, was kind enough to share on Twitter.
- The Squat 1RM doesn’t highly correlate to any measured performance variables quite like the speed squat does. This suggests to me that when we do squat, loads that lead to slow moving bar are considerably less optimal than loads that allow the athlete to move the bar at a higher velocity. Dr. Bryan Mann has been preaching this for years and is leading the charge on velocity-based training in the country. I would recommend reading his paper: Velocity Based Training in Football.
- For the big boys, Hang/Power Clean 1RM matters. Everyone else should concern themselves with bar velocity.
- The landmine press correlates higher than the bench press to talent levels at all positions.
- Split squat jump performance correlates the highest with talent in skill position players, while rear foot elevated split squats correlates highest to the 10- and 20-yard dashes of the big fellas. This suggests to me that if you want to play the game fast at all levels, you’d better be training on a single leg.
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but according to this chart, the 1RM back squat doesn’t seem to transfer nearly as well to the sport of football as other methods. Further evidence that we shouldn’t just hang our hat on how much weight we can squat.
Evidence that Single Leg Training is More Effective
I promised at the beginning of this paper
that I would not only explain to you why I think back squatting gets way too much
credit as a performance enhancing exercise, but also demonstrate to you
that there are better methods we can employ to achieve all the same positive
adaptations we seek from the back squat with the addition of many more positive
qualities.
In sports science, there is something
referred to as the bilateral deficit. It is defined by Eliassen et. al (2018) as the ability to generate more force in
sum performing two unilateral exercises (i.e. one-legged squat) than in a
bilateral exercise (i.e. two-legged squat).
Bilateral deficit can be explained like
this: If a person can squat 100 lbs. on their left leg and 100 lbs. on their
right leg it can be assumed that they can squat 200 lbs. on two legs, right? If
you made that assumption, you would be wrong, and it’s demonstrated over and
over in the literature. Individuals in this particular example almost always
end up squatting loads under 200 lbs. on two legs.
If you’re a critical thinker I hope you’ll
understand that what I’m telling you is that by performing HEAVY single leg
exercises we can not only load our lower extremities with heavier loads than we
could on two legs while simultaneously taking advantage of the proprioceptive
qualities developed through single leg training AND attenuate the loads that we
ask our spinal column to manage over the course of a training career. I don’t
know about you, but that all sounds pretty good to me. More benefit, less cost.
If you can’t conceptualize that single leg
training could possibly be more beneficial than two leg training then I would encourage
you to read the work from Eliassen
et. al (2018)
that showed “unilateral
squats with the same external load per leg produced greater peak vertical
ground reaction forces than bilateral squats, as well as higher barbell velocity,
which is associated with strength development and rate of force development,
respectively.” Dawes and Raether (2010) published similar findings in
the Australian Journal of Strength and Conditioning.
Subjective Reasoning for Eliminating Back Squats from Sports Performance Training
I know most who will defect will be
speaking from subjective experience so I think it’s important that I also state
some reasons, from my own experience, why I don’t love to utilize back
squatting through full ranges of motion and heavy deadlifting from the floor as
components of the LTAD model
The most common question I get from
individuals is “If you don’t back squat athletes, how do you get strong?” Now
that you’ve read through some of the scientific evidence I hope this sounds
silly to you, but if it still seems like a legitimate question, I’ll explain.
We perform other exercises that require strength and don’t put the athlete in a
compromised position. If you’re a “subjective experience” guy I can help you
with that. Here are a couple exercises we use frequently with athletes to build
transferrable strength:
The second most common question I get is
“If you don’t back squat athletes, doesn’t it hurt the culture?” My thoughts: “You
can’t be serious.” My answer: “No.”
I do program the front squat. My reason
for keeping a front-loaded bilateral squat in my programming is
multi-factorial.
1.
If
you read the paper from McClellan
et al. (2019)
you’ll know that the change in sacral slope in a front squat is less extreme
than it is in the back squat due to the counterbalance provided as the athlete
descends through their range of motion. This, combined with the loads being
attenuated by stability in the trunk makes me feel as if front squatting will
not only have a higher transfer to the playing field, but also be safer for athletes
long-term.
2.
I
believe that performing the front squat is one of the best ways to ensure an
athlete continues to make progress in their power/hang clean. Though evidence
exists that power can be developed without Olympic lifting (Oranchuk et. al, 2019),
I think the Olympic clean has to, in some capacity, be a part of the LTAD model.
3. Front
squatting is a considerably safer exercise, in my opinion, than the back squat
because once trunk stability becomes compromised, the individual is usually
forced to shed the bar. This is known in the strength and conditioning world as
a self-limiting factor. The exercise is over before the participant ever gets
the opportunity to put themselves into a compromising posture. The back squat,
comparatively, is not an exercise that gets terminated once posture is
compromised and looks nothing like any portion of the Olympic clean, so I just
don’t understand the argument for it.
Closing
My hope is that this writing will help
you to understand why the back squat has persisted in weight rooms throughout
the years, but also why I don’t see it as a great fit for the LTAD model. I’m
certain that no matter how much evidence exists there will be those who think their
subjective experience is more robust than any collection of objectivity. I think
this will help mediate the amount of time I spend explaining my omission of
back squatting from my program, but I also look forward to the discussion that
will ensue. I remain open minded on the subject and perhaps there is someone
out there that can convince me to add full ROM back squatting to my
programming, but for now it will remain omitted. If you have made it this far,
I appreciate you taking the time to learn and I hope my writing has positively
influenced you in some way. I plan to continue pushing the athletic community I
represent forward as best I possibly can, I hope you will join me.
As always, thank you for reading.
Caleb Heilman
References
Boyle, M. (2016) Functional Training for Sports. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
Brown, E.W., Kimball, R.G. (1983) Medical
history associated with adolescent powerlifting. Pediatrics, 72(5), 636-644. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6634267
Dawes, J., Raether, J. (2010) Single Leg
training exercises. Australian
journal of strength and conditioning, 18(1), 29-30.
Eliassen, W., Saeterbakken, A.H., Tilaar, R.
(2018) Comparison of bilateral and unilateral squat exercises on barbell
kinematics and muscle activation. International
Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 13(5), 871-881. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6159498/
McClellan, J. et al. (2019) The effects of
two different types of squat exercises on radiography of the lumbar spine. North American Spine Society. Retrieved
from: https://www.medpagetoday.com/orthopedics/sportsmedicine/29412
Mann, B.J., Ivey, P.A., Sayers, S.P.
(2015) Velocity-Based Training in Football. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning, 37(6), 52-57. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284281938_Velocity-Based_Training_in_Football
Oranchuk, D.J., Robinson, T.L., Switaj,
Z.J., Drinkwater, E.J. (2017) Comparison of the Hang High-Pull and
Loaded Jump Squat for the Development of Vertical Jump and
Isometric Force-Time Characteristics. Journal of Strength and Conditioning research.
Siewe,
J., Rudat, J., Röllinghoff, M., Schlegel, U.J., Eysel, P., Michael, J.W. (2011)
Injuries and overuse syndromes in powerlifting, 32(9) 703-711. Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21590644
Rhea,
M., Peterson, M., Kenn, J., Massey, D. (2016) Joint-angle specific strength
adaptations influence improvements in power in highly trained athletes. Human Movement, 17(1). Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304607794_Joint-Angle_Specific_Strength_Adaptations_Influence_Improvements_in_Power_in_Highly_Trained_Athletes
Strömbäck,
E., Aasa, U., Gilenstam, K., Berglund, L. (2018) Prevalence and consequences of
injuries in powerlifting: A cross-sectional study. Orthopedic Journal of Sports
Medicine, 6(5). Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5954586/
No comments:
Post a Comment