Thread: BGB - Intensity for Squats, Deadlifts, Bench Press?

Originally Posted by CowPimp

That's not entirely true. If you put the bar lower on your back, your have to lean forward more in order to keep your center of mass within your base of support. It causes you to use the posterior chain more, hence why powerlifters squat "low bar." It is true, however, that front squats allow for a more upright posture; the Zercher squat should be the same deal as well.

That's weird.

I'm able to stay more upright when I keep the bar a little lower. And I've really struggled with this. Now that I'm doing it, I can rep out 8-rep sets of below parallel squats with 165 and feel it in my QUADS for once.

Am I an alien?

no Built ,you ar not alien. I am the same way, the lower the bar is on my traps the more upright I can stay, especially below parallel.

Originally Posted by C6zo6

Sakbar, you should have ended things when he apologized. He really didn't say anything mean to you...You went on with it and brought up his work ethic. Very rude and uncalled for. For the record, i would really be p*ssed about this. That was uncalled for.

Just end this, because it's not relevant and is going no where.

Thanks, C6zo6. Point taken.

Regards,
Sak

Originally Posted by Built

That's weird.

I'm able to stay more upright when I keep the bar a little lower. And I've really struggled with this. Now that I'm doing it, I can rep out 8-rep sets of below parallel squats with 165 and feel it in my QUADS for once.

Am I an alien?

I think CowPimp's theory might be slightly flawed. Even though when you bend over having the bar higher up might have a benefit to keeping the weight in a central position due to it being more forward when you bend over, having the bar lower has it closer to the centre of the movement and so doesn't have as much effect on pulling the weight either way because of it's more central position. This is just a thought.

I have read what I've said and it's one of those statements that makes sense to me but I'm sceptical about whether anyone else will understand it

Originally Posted by sakbar

Thanks, C6zo6. Point taken.

Regards,
Sak

No problem.

Good to see your dropping it and being the better guy.

Originally Posted by T_man

I think CowPimp's theory might be slightly flawed. Even though when you bend over having the bar higher up might have a benefit to keeping the weight in a central position due to it being more forward when you bend over, having the bar lower has it closer to the centre of the movement and so doesn't have as much effect on pulling the weight either way because of it's more central position. This is just a thought.

I have read what I've said and it's one of those statements that makes sense to me but I'm sceptical about whether anyone else will understand it

This is not a theory, it is biomechanics. The position of the bar is only one important factor. However, THE important factor is the overall center of mass of the system in question. So, body positioning, and mass of everything above the knee for that matter, are both very important in this equation.

Plain and simple, what defines an Olympic style squat, also known as squatting "high bar," is a more upright stance and more narrow foot position. What defines a powerlifting style squat, also known as squatting "low bar," is more forward lean and a wider foot position. If you are "feeling" otherwise, I urge you to video tape yourself doing both and making sure this is the case.

Think about it like this, the variation that will allow THE must upright stance is for you to hold a weight out in front of you while you squat. This is because the center of mass is shifted anteriorly, so you have to position your torso more upright to bring the COM back in the posterior direction and, once again, within your base of support. The next step would be the front squat. Again, because the weight is in front of you, you have to shift your trunk into a more upright position the bring your center of mass within your base of support. The next step is a high bar back squat, and the next step after that is the low bar back squat. Notice how with each progression further back, you have to lean forward more.

When squatting low bar, unless you are putting the bar UNDER your shoulder blades, and you have a really fucked up spine shape and zero erector spinae, I don't see how you can get the bar further forward than in a high bar squat.

Originally Posted by CowPimp

This is not a theory, it is biomechanics. The position of the bar is only one important factor. However, THE important factor is the overall center of mass of the system in question. So, body positioning, and mass of everything above the knee for that matter, are both very important in this equation.

Plain and simple, what defines an Olympic style squat, also known as squatting "high bar," is a more upright stance and more narrow foot position. What defines a powerlifting style squat, also known as squatting "low bar," is more forward lean and a wider foot position. If you are "feeling" otherwise, I urge you to video tape yourself doing both and making sure this is the case.

Think about it like this, the variation that will allow THE must upright stance is for you to hold a weight out in front of you while you squat. This is because the center of mass is shifted anteriorly, so you have to position your torso more upright to bring the COM back in the posterior direction and, once again, within your base of support. The next step would be the front squat. Again, because the weight is in front of you, you have to shift your trunk into a more upright position the bring your center of mass within your base of support. The next step is a high bar back squat, and the next step after that is the low bar back squat. Notice how with each progression further back, you have to lean forward more.

When squatting low bar, unless you are putting the bar UNDER your shoulder blades, and you have a really fucked up spine shape and zero erector spinae, I don't see how you can get the bar further forward than in a high bar squat.

This would be correct if you were using a smith machine where the bar didn't move. However, because this is a free weight, physics comes into play. If you have a skyscraper, it is more likely to topple over when you have a weight right at the top as compared to a more central position. If you get me.
This not an argument cowpimp just have it in ur mind tht this is jus a discussion and i'm just putting across ideas because i'm not as experienced as you guys. Infact I dont disagree with you, i'm just offering a different opinion to try to explain why these biomechanic theories don't quite work how they're supposed to in theory.

any help with avanar i just got it and i dont know anything about how to cycle it what to take with it my friend told me to take it everyday for 6 weeks and take testosterone boost with it then get something for my liver also some superpump 250 then i will be good to go i just want to know if this is true any help help with be well appreciated i just want to do it right thanks again for taking the time and read this