One other thing I meant to mention regarding form. Shaky, difficult squats are not bad. I do them, and this is not what I was addressing. Shaky, knee-caving squats are absolutely dangerous, and I doubt you would disagree. There are a lot of technical points I can let slide on the squat, particularly heavy squats, but developing the habit of knee caving should absolutely be avoided for young trainees. I don’t believe there’s wiggle room on that.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hey, I know what worked for me…and it damn sure wasn’t trying to make each rep perfect.
Most of the guys I see like that limit their own progress because they stay in that comfort zone.
The entire reason I can curl what I do now with great form…is because of all of those years pushing for more than that with “not so great form”.
You have to build that strength up and doing perfect reps and hardly the way to go about that unless you are trying to go slow on purpose.
I see people discussing form a lot here and you can see the thickness of the guys who DON’T think like that.
Much of my training now would look great in form…but that took time…and I didn’t get there using that much weight by always using perfect form.[/quote]
Well that’s an interesting topic in and of itself.
There are certain exercises where I think using bad form is acutally superior to using crazy strict form. This is for like barbell curls and rows. Crank the weight up and use some body english.
Squats are not like that though. You can build up to like a 500lb half squat and not even be able to squat 315 to depth. You do not build what is necessary to squat out of the hole unless you go there. Same with bench. You can get up to like 350 with a big bounce off your chest and your butt a mile high, but you couldn’t bench even 300 with proper form.
Anyone who trains hard understands form breakdown and accepts it. You will have wobbly arms on bench and your knees will come in on the squat and your back will round on the deadlift. This happens when you push the limit. Those form breakdowns are very different though than not squatting to depth or simply performing the lift improperly. I think there is very, very little merit to the latter.
The strongest people in the world train using the most perfect form they can and would not advocate otherwise at any level. That doesn’t apply strictly to bodybuilding, but for strength purposes I think that stance is pretty established. Dan Green, Ed Coan, and Andrey Malanichev are all in step on that.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hey, I know what worked for me…and it damn sure wasn’t trying to make each rep perfect.
Most of the guys I see like that limit their own progress because they stay in that comfort zone.
The entire reason I can curl what I do now with great form…is because of all of those years pushing for more than that with “not so great form”.
You have to build that strength up and doing perfect reps and hardly the way to go about that unless you are trying to go slow on purpose.
I see people discussing form a lot here and you can see the thickness of the guys who DON’T think like that.
Much of my training now would look great in form…but that took time…and I didn’t get there using that much weight by always using perfect form.[/quote]
Well that’s an interesting topic in and of itself.
There are certain exercises where I think using bad form is acutally superior to using crazy strict form. This is for like barbell curls and rows. Crank the weight up and use some body english.
Squats are not like that though. You can build up to like a 500lb half squat and not even be able to squat 315 to depth. You do not build what is necessary to squat out of the hole unless you go there. Same with bench. You can get up to like 350 with a big bounce off your chest and your butt a mile high, but you couldn’t bench even 300 with proper form.
Anyone who trains hard understands form breakdown and accepts it. You will have wobbly arms on bench and your knees will come in on the squat and your back will round on the deadlift. This happens when you push the limit. Those form breakdowns are very different though than not squatting to depth or simply performing the lift improperly. I think there is very, very little merit to the latter.
The strongest people in the world train using the most perfect form they can and would not advocate otherwise at any level. That doesn’t apply strictly to bodybuilding, but for strength purposes I think that stance is pretty established. Dan Green, Ed Coan, and Andrey Malanichev are all in step on that.[/quote]
Agreed. X primarily uses exercises where “cheating” is acceptable and often beneficial, but on many lifts such as the squat, shaky form at the heavier weights is not a good situation. For me, when I go over 400 for a high rep set on squats, I definitely call it a bit earlier than I did when I was squatting lighter weights because I can tell the difference in terms of the effect shaky form can have.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
This isn’t Johnnie Jackson coming back from an injury, this is a kid who’s most likely going to hurt himself eventually, because he’s trying to use weights literally 2x heavier than he can actually handle.[/quote]
Dude, I get that…but if he was able to get a “shaky quarter rep” that is usually how you get to doing that weight for full reps. It just takes time. That is how weak skinny guys get really big quickly when they start…that and a lot of food on hand.
I can understand the “risk of injury” angle, but there is no doubt that this is how you get strong…not by sticking with the weight you can always do with great form.[/quote]
Well I guess you could go at it like that, Paul Anderson style lol. I think most people do up the weight by always working through full range of motion, but you can use ROM progression if you know how to do it right.[/quote]
Haha. What a civil response. You have to teach me Oh Mighty SquatGod.
[quote]mbdix wrote:
Go Cowboys[/quote]
Professor X:
What is your take on Larry Hoover’s bench??
[quote]csulli wrote:
The strongest people in the world train using the most perfect form they can and would not advocate otherwise at any level. That doesn’t apply strictly to bodybuilding, but for strength purposes I think that stance is pretty established. Dan Green, Ed Coan, and Andrey Malanichev are all in step on that.[/quote]
Do they really? Or at least, did they do that to get to that level? I just have problems believing Ed Coan got to where he did without ever cheating. I also have no doubt that by the time he was a professional, there was very little cheating going on. Big difference though.
Look, form is a HUGE issue for me now. Any serious injury at this stage is likely to end things for me in the gym. I go heavy with good form…but the only reason I am able to go as heavy as I can and still train with good form…is because of all of those years training to get stronger with “not so good form”.
I did lat pull downs last week and did the whole stack with a pause at the bottom for 8 reps (not 100% perfect but very decent in my opinion). Hurt like hell…but there is no way I could have done that without building a base with a long history of way more body language.
1 Like
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Professor X:
What is your take on Larry Hoover’s bench??[/quote]
That he’s a strong dude. I wouldn’t spend any time at all trying to call it fake or determine how much weight the other guys took off the bar. No one is even unracking that much weight at all without being damn strong.
It just isn’t in me to try to find things wrong with it.
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Professor X:
What is your take on Larry Hoover’s bench??[/quote]
Can’t tell if racist or just dumb…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
The strongest people in the world train using the most perfect form they can and would not advocate otherwise at any level. That doesn’t apply strictly to bodybuilding, but for strength purposes I think that stance is pretty established. Dan Green, Ed Coan, and Andrey Malanichev are all in step on that.[/quote]
Do they really? Or at least, did they do that to get to that level? I just have problems believing Ed Coan got to where he did without ever cheating. I also have no doubt that by the time he was a professional, there was very little cheating going on. Big difference though.
Look, form is a HUGE issue for me now. Any serious injury at this stage is likely to end things for me in the gym. I go heavy with good form…but the only reason I am able to go as heavy as I can and still train with good form…is because of all of those years training to get stronger with “not so good form”.
I did lat pull downs last week and did the whole stack with a pause at the bottom for 8 reps (not 100% perfect but very decent in my opinion). Hurt like hell…but there is no way I could have done that without building a base with a long history of way more body language.[/quote]
I’m not sure what cheating even means on the squat. Partial reps done for a purpose are one thing, and again have a place in training, but they’re not a SUBSTITUTE for a deep squat, particularly in the case of a powerlifter like Coan. If he was ‘cheating’ (not hitting depth) on all his training reps, that’s certainly understandable, and likely. I think that’s apples to oranges here though. A deep squat engages muscles that a shallow squat does not. Anybody who’s ever performed a deep squat is aware of this. Your hips, glutes, lower back, ‘tear drop’ quad muscle, all have to engage in a deep squat. This is not the case on a quarter squat. So it’s truly a different exercise. That’s why it’s not comparable to a cheating barbell curl, row, or pulldown, as Csulli mentioned. In fact, you’re actually engaging MORE muscles on a cheating curl, whereas you isolate the bicep on a strict curl. That’s why I don’t think ‘cheating is cheating’.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
The strongest people in the world train using the most perfect form they can and would not advocate otherwise at any level. That doesn’t apply strictly to bodybuilding, but for strength purposes I think that stance is pretty established. Dan Green, Ed Coan, and Andrey Malanichev are all in step on that.[/quote]
Do they really? Or at least, did they do that to get to that level? I just have problems believing Ed Coan got to where he did without ever cheating. I also have no doubt that by the time he was a professional, there was very little cheating going on. Big difference though.
[/quote]
On the squat, bench, and deadlift they certainly did. Everything else, probably not. For example I can guarantee Eric Lilliebridge has not sacrificed form on any of the big three since he started. I also know that he loves doing upright rows, and he doesn’t worry about perfectly mechanical form on them.
I just think squat is one of those lifts that is an exception. You can’t get dirty with those and expect good things like you can with skull crushers or shrugs or something.
[quote]csulli wrote:
It’s very sad, but unless the team has a strength coach who was literally an ex-powerlifter or something, the state of lifting amongst football players remains pretty much the exact same from high school through the pros.
I train at a gym that collaborates with the local high schools to provide extra training for the student athletes. It’s pretty cool actually, and the kids are very nice, but mother of god I cannot tell you how many kids have told me they can bench 350 and squat 500, often for a double. I mean pretty much fuckin all of them. Strangely they never seem to mention the deadlift; that’s a tough one to bullshit I guess 
Let me describe these lifts to you. 350 on the bar, there is a shoulder saver pad on it (2 inches thick), kid gets a lift off, 350 in his hands for less than a second, the weight plummets precipitously under no semblance of control, smashes into his chest, the shoulder saver pad is the only thing stopping his ribcage from shattering, it also acts as a sort of trampoline, the weight bounces massively, his butt immediately shoots a foot off the bench, the spotter deadlifts the bar off of him and racks it. GREAT BENCH DUDE THAT WAS ALL YOU
There is zero exaggeration there. And the kid is so delusional he actually believes he can bench 350.
The squat. 500 on the bar, kid unracks it, looks like he’s about to die, pushes his butt back somewhat so that his knees are slightly bent, guy standing behind him is in full bear hug mode squatting with him, guys on each side grab the bar, all 4 men move the weight back into the rack. NICE SQUAT DUDE EASY
My training partner and I actually caught one of these kids alone without his dumb and dumber lifting entourage once. He was benching and so were we, so we invited him to work in with us evilgrin.jpg. He said he has done 315 on multiple occasions. Okay cool, we’ll all three work up to that.
He goes for the shoulder saver, “No, you don’t need that.” we tell him. “Oh, uh, yeah okay.” We get to 225, and he struggles to bounce up 4 with his ass a mile high. He seems confused that my hands never touched the bar. “Man, I’m uh, just not feelin it today I guess.” He says as he walks away. Yeah you’re not feelin it any day dude. For fuck’s sake…
Now I’m sure it’s not THAT bad when they’re older, but this is how football players grow up, and unfortunately most of them never actually grow out of it. It takes a kind of brute strength I can’t even fathom to do what Allen did with 700 on that bench, but I hope no one ever makes the mistake of comparing football players apples to apples with strength athletes, because with the removal of the spotter, having to keep the butt down, and having to pause, all the sudden that number drops by over 200lbs. Still the strongest guy at the barbeque, but not someone you should be mentioning in the same sentence with the likes of Vincent Dizenzo.[/quote]
Awesome post bro!
Love your posts in general.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
This isn’t Johnnie Jackson coming back from an injury, this is a kid who’s most likely going to hurt himself eventually, because he’s trying to use weights literally 2x heavier than he can actually handle.[/quote]
Dude, I get that…but if he was able to get a “shaky quarter rep” that is usually how you get to doing that weight for full reps. It just takes time. That is how weak skinny guys get really big quickly when they start…that and a lot of food on hand.
I can understand the “risk of injury” angle, but there is no doubt that this is how you get strong…not by sticking with the weight you can always do with great form.[/quote]
Well I guess you could go at it like that, Paul Anderson style lol. I think most people do up the weight by always working through full range of motion, but you can use ROM progression if you know how to do it right.[/quote]
Hey, I know what worked for me…and it damn sure wasn’t trying to make each rep perfect.
Most of the guys I see like that limit their own progress because they stay in that comfort zone.
The entire reason I can curl what I do now with great form…is because of all of those years pushing for more than that with “not so great form”.
You have to build that strength up and doing perfect reps and hardly the way to go about that unless you are trying to go slow on purpose.
I see people discussing form a lot here and you can see the thickness of the guys who DON’T think like that.
Much of my training now would look great in form…but that took time…and I didn’t get there using that much weight by always using perfect form.[/quote]
Yeah, and there are those who progressed with at least DECENT (not perfect) form on nearly all our reps through the years by adding weights and reps over time. That’s another way of getting out of a comfort zone.
They aren’t talking about some experienced guy coming back from a layoff who looks shake; they are talking about a kid who has no idea what he is doing.
Wait a minute, X. Aren’t you the guy who said it’s bad to be something you’re not, like the kid who is a buck-80 wearing a skin tight shirt and pretending he has lats and is jacked. So with that line of thought, shouldn’t it irk you when people make unsubstantiated claims, such as stating a lift that wasn’t done?
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Wait a minute, X. Aren’t you the guy who said it’s bad to be something you’re not, like the kid who is a buck-80 wearing a skin tight shirt and pretending he has lats and is jacked. So with that line of thought, shouldn’t it irk you when people make unsubstantiated claims, such as stating a lift that wasn’t done? [/quote]
Uh, no, because I don’t waste much time worrying about what other people are doing unless it directly affects me.
You took one statement to a very specific question and are trying to use it across the board. It doesn’t work like that.
No, it doesn’t bother me at all when people claim how they used to be buff or how much they used to lift. Why the hell would it?
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
The strongest people in the world train using the most perfect form they can and would not advocate otherwise at any level. That doesn’t apply strictly to bodybuilding, but for strength purposes I think that stance is pretty established. Dan Green, Ed Coan, and Andrey Malanichev are all in step on that.[/quote]
Do they really? Or at least, did they do that to get to that level? I just have problems believing Ed Coan got to where he did without ever cheating. I also have no doubt that by the time he was a professional, there was very little cheating going on. Big difference though.
Look, form is a HUGE issue for me now. Any serious injury at this stage is likely to end things for me in the gym. I go heavy with good form…but the only reason I am able to go as heavy as I can and still train with good form…is because of all of those years training to get stronger with “not so good form”.
I did lat pull downs last week and did the whole stack with a pause at the bottom for 8 reps (not 100% perfect but very decent in my opinion). Hurt like hell…but there is no way I could have done that without building a base with a long history of way more body language.[/quote]
I’m not sure what cheating even means on the squat. Partial reps done for a purpose are one thing, and again have a place in training, but they’re not a SUBSTITUTE for a deep squat, particularly in the case of a powerlifter like Coan. If he was ‘cheating’ (not hitting depth) on all his training reps, that’s certainly understandable, and likely. I think that’s apples to oranges here though. A deep squat engages muscles that a shallow squat does not. Anybody who’s ever performed a deep squat is aware of this. Your hips, glutes, lower back, ‘tear drop’ quad muscle, all have to engage in a deep squat. This is not the case on a quarter squat. So it’s truly a different exercise. That’s why it’s not comparable to a cheating barbell curl, row, or pulldown, as Csulli mentioned. In fact, you’re actually engaging MORE muscles on a cheating curl, whereas you isolate the bicep on a strict curl. That’s why I don’t think ‘cheating is cheating’.[/quote]
I don’t really disagree with this…but in the context of a “quarter squat”…yes, there may be some merit to doing that at the end of a workout just trying to get a weight up. You don’t build strength above average by not getting out of that comfort zone ever.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]flipcollar wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
The strongest people in the world train using the most perfect form they can and would not advocate otherwise at any level. That doesn’t apply strictly to bodybuilding, but for strength purposes I think that stance is pretty established. Dan Green, Ed Coan, and Andrey Malanichev are all in step on that.[/quote]
Do they really? Or at least, did they do that to get to that level? I just have problems believing Ed Coan got to where he did without ever cheating. I also have no doubt that by the time he was a professional, there was very little cheating going on. Big difference though.
Look, form is a HUGE issue for me now. Any serious injury at this stage is likely to end things for me in the gym. I go heavy with good form…but the only reason I am able to go as heavy as I can and still train with good form…is because of all of those years training to get stronger with “not so good form”.
I did lat pull downs last week and did the whole stack with a pause at the bottom for 8 reps (not 100% perfect but very decent in my opinion). Hurt like hell…but there is no way I could have done that without building a base with a long history of way more body language.[/quote]
I’m not sure what cheating even means on the squat. Partial reps done for a purpose are one thing, and again have a place in training, but they’re not a SUBSTITUTE for a deep squat, particularly in the case of a powerlifter like Coan. If he was ‘cheating’ (not hitting depth) on all his training reps, that’s certainly understandable, and likely. I think that’s apples to oranges here though. A deep squat engages muscles that a shallow squat does not. Anybody who’s ever performed a deep squat is aware of this. Your hips, glutes, lower back, ‘tear drop’ quad muscle, all have to engage in a deep squat. This is not the case on a quarter squat. So it’s truly a different exercise. That’s why it’s not comparable to a cheating barbell curl, row, or pulldown, as Csulli mentioned. In fact, you’re actually engaging MORE muscles on a cheating curl, whereas you isolate the bicep on a strict curl. That’s why I don’t think ‘cheating is cheating’.[/quote]
I don’t really disagree with this…but in the context of a “quarter squat”…yes, there may be some merit to doing that at the end of a workout just trying to get a weight up. You don’t build strength above average by not getting out of that comfort zone ever.[/quote]
I think we’re mostly on the same page on that. CT incorporated quarter, or half squats from pins in… I Bodybuilder, maybe? I think that’s right, I remember using them in a program a few years ago. In fact he had a lot of partial movements in that program.
Here again though, context is key. The kid in my example is not a bodybuilder. He’s a high school athlete who wants to be better at sports. Every study I’ve read has indicated that full squats have the most carry-over to sports, including vertical leap, and that’s why they should be emphasized. This kid did exactly 1 set to a good depth before he started coming up short. That’s not ideal for becoming a better athlete. Neither is hitting 1 rep maxes in general, for that matter, although again 1 rep maxes have a place. If he can gain the discipline to practice great squatting technique, and learn to control his body and put it through extended ROM, he’s likely to become a better athlete.
I think the biggest key here that we agree on is pushing outside of the comfort zone. This mentality is your strongest suit. It’s why I was so interested in what you had to say in my early lifting years. Building the inner strength and the belief that the body you’re accustomed to doesn’t have to be the body you live with is essential to making radical changes.
For me, my comfort zone squatting is actually the heavy/low rep squats. Nothing beats me up more than sets of 15+, regardless of how much weight is on the bar. That’s why I’ve come to value excessive volume so much for legs in the last year. It pushes me beyond my presupposed abilities, and makes me reach deep to keep my legs moving when they start to go numb and I feel like my lungs are on fire. This is outside of my comfort zone.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
Professor X:
What is your take on Larry Hoover’s bench??[/quote]
That he’s a strong dude. I wouldn’t spend any time at all trying to call it fake or determine how much weight the other guys took off the bar. No one is even unracking that much weight at all without being damn strong.
It just isn’t in me to try to find things wrong with it.
[/quote]
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
Go Cowboys[/quote]
Professor X:
What is your take on Larry Hoover’s bench??[/quote]
It’s Larry ALLEN. Who is Hoover? Never heard of him. Who does he play for? You must not follow football too closely…
Nah, NorCal was baiting X, thats all. Has nothing to do with not following football.
[quote]Brett620 wrote:
[quote]NorCal916 wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
Go Cowboys[/quote]
Professor X:
What is your take on Larry Hoover’s bench??[/quote]
It’s Larry ALLEN. Who is Hoover? Never heard of him. Who does he play for? You must not follow football too closely…[/quote]
This is one of my fave BP bombs.