That was a perfect squat. He literally exploded out of the parallel point which gives the illusion of not being deep enough but it was. For lack of better explanation: the top of the knee cap needs to be in line with the point where the legs join the hip. The Femur is then parallel with the floor. You can then go back up.
From where we are sitting that does not look that deep. Now put 600 lbs on your back and it is a whole different story.
That was fucking ridiculous, I would love to see someone do a 1000 pound raw squat in my lifetime.
Wow, that was incredible. When I first broke 500 lbs, I thought it was ridiculous. Seeing that kinda puts it in perspective.
Of course, I don’t want to be that large…
[quote]ShadowStrong wrote:
Wow, that was incredible. When I first broke 500 lbs, I thought it was ridiculous. Seeing that kinda puts it in perspective.
Of course, I don’t want to be that large…[/quote]
Yah, but how much can the bull in your avatar squat?
Yeah I wish there was another camera angle, I’d still say it was just above parallel…real close. Regardless like everyone else mentioned very impressive no doubt.
Anyone know the lifters name?
Just checked out his youtube account, the dudes bench videos are insane also, he just completely smokes 545+80 pounds of chains, raw.
That was nuts, but jesus christ that dude is fat. 
[quote]rasturai wrote:
Yeah I wish there was another camera angle, I’d still say it was just above parallel…real close. Regardless like everyone else mentioned very impressive no doubt.
Anyone know the lifters name?[/quote]
his name is robert wilkerson
big ups to this dude, but i would never want to squat that and also be his size
[quote]jb2001 wrote:
big ups to this dude, but i would never want to squat that and also be his size [/quote]
A legitimate concern.
In fact, we all have similar fears.
Every time I drink a protein shake, for example, I go to sleep dreading that I may wake up looking like Ronnie in the off-season the next morning… With several Sandows on the table next to the bed, multiple cool and expensive cars in the garage, a family that supports me fully, a million fans… That would be horrible, right?
“Big ups to Bill Gates, but I would never want to be that rich and successful.”
Yeah it’s definitely something to be concerned about, I would never want to be as big as you C_C…hence why I only go the gym 3 times a week and don’t take those nasty protein shakes 
[quote]jb2001 wrote:
big ups to this dude, but i would never want to squat that and also be his size [/quote]
Fuck that man. I would give one of my nuts just to be like that!!
[quote]four60 wrote:
Big guy yes. camera dark and angle not good for judging but. COME ON DAMN THAT WAS 950LBS ON A MAN’S BACK RAW. I’ll leave it to the judges to say if he broke parallel. That was power.[/quote]
Translated: since it’s a lot of weight we shouldn’t judge him so strictly.
Bullshit.
[quote]Wrah wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Big guy yes. camera dark and angle not good for judging but. COME ON DAMN THAT WAS 950LBS ON A MAN’S BACK RAW. I’ll leave it to the judges to say if he broke parallel. That was power.[/quote]
Translated: since it’s a lot of weight we shouldn’t judge him so strictly.
Bullshit.[/quote]
You might have an argument against not-so-strict judgment if the guy had just quarter-squatted, but he wasn’t, or if by ‘a lot of weight’ you mean just anything that is a lot and not necessarily something close to numbers known to be records.
But that’s not the case. It is so close to breaking parallel that a discussion is taking place. To me it looks he did (not counting the speed at which he went up and down which is impressive no matter how you cut it.)
Compounded to that is the fact that it’s on a video at a distance AND AT AN ANGLE instead of being either in person and close enough to judge or if the video had been taking from his side.
How can YOU judge strictly when your frame of reference and the data/view does not guarantee you the ability to actually measure THAT which you are so strictly trying to judge?
With the evidence (the video at an angle) presented thus far, you can’t. You take what you have, which is the following:
What can anyone conclude from that shit?
Get a good view of that lift that can allow a strict judgement of the squat and then we can talk about judging strictly. Anything else is e-dick wagging and faulty logic.
I think a lot of people would be surprised at their ROM in the squat if they had it filmed; a lot of people who thought they were going deep according to the mirror are probably not even close…not as close as this guy is…especially at that weight!
He deserves much credit even if it wasn’t EXACTLY parallel. He’s not exactly cheating is he?
Most here probably THINK they are going parallel, but videos don’t lie…
It’s close enough that the judges deserve the benefit of the doubt. I’ve seen some really drastic differences in perceived depth with different angles.
[quote]Wrah wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Big guy yes. camera dark and angle not good for judging but. COME ON DAMN THAT WAS 950LBS ON A MAN’S BACK RAW. I’ll leave it to the judges to say if he broke parallel. That was power.[/quote]
Translated: since it’s a lot of weight we shouldn’t judge him so strictly.
Bullshit.[/quote]
WOW, Did you really need to translate my statement? If I was there I and at an angle to Judge I would make a PERSONAL call on his depth, like everyone does at a meet. But since I’m arm chairing it from a dark video at a high angle I will stay with my original statement.
BIG GUY IS FREAKING STRONG, AND TO ADD WISH I COULD SQUAT A 1000 IN A SINGLE PLY INZER MUCH LESS A SINGLET.
[quote]elnyka wrote:
[quote]Wrah wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Big guy yes. camera dark and angle not good for judging but. COME ON DAMN THAT WAS 950LBS ON A MAN’S BACK RAW. I’ll leave it to the judges to say if he broke parallel. That was power.[/quote]
Translated: since it’s a lot of weight we shouldn’t judge him so strictly.
Bullshit.[/quote]
You might have an argument against not-so-strict judgment if the guy had just quarter-squatted, but he wasn’t, or if by ‘a lot of weight’ you mean just anything that is a lot and not necessarily something close to numbers known to be records.
But that’s not the case. It is so close to breaking parallel that a discussion is taking place. To me it looks he did (not counting the speed at which he went up and down which is impressive no matter how you cut it.)
Compounded to that is the fact that it’s on a video at a distance AND AT AN ANGLE instead of being either in person and close enough to judge or if the video had been taking from his side.
How can YOU judge strictly when your frame of reference and the data/view does not guarantee you the ability to actually measure THAT which you are so strictly trying to judge?
With the evidence (the video at an angle) presented thus far, you can’t. You take what you have, which is the following:
What can anyone conclude from that shit?
Get a good view of that lift that can allow a strict judgement of the squat and then we can talk about judging strictly. Anything else is e-dick wagging and faulty logic.[/quote]
Okay, I have to say it. This is not breaking parallel. This is not close to parallel. He’s at least 6" away… AT LEAST. The video angle can’t account for all of that.
That being said, I’ll repeat: it is a very impressive lift (950 lbs. would leave me crushed on the floor, or more likely I wouldn’t be able to even unrack it) and not the worst squat that has recieved white lights in the past. But, there is a reason no one in the IPF lifts close to that weight RAW.
Edit: I will say this: perhaps the rules in his federation are different and they have a different definition of “parallel”. To me parallel means the crease of the hip below the top of the knee. That is CLEARLY not the case here. If the rules of his federation are different, I’d love to be corrected on this.
Does the IPF even have a raw division? If it does it would be tough to compare a “raw” squat using knee wraps and a monolift to a walked out squat in just a belt.
Here we go…