[quote]Affliction wrote:
jtrinsey wrote:
Affliction wrote:
However, the dynamic correspondence of the half squat is greater than the full squat
(first of all I want to make it clear that I define “full squat” as being below parallel but not necessarily glutes-to-calves which, from my experience most athletes don’t get as much out of, and I define a half-squat as being “knees at 90 degrees”, just to avoid any mixups)
Perhaps, but you need to consider the question of whether it is meaningfully greater such that it has a better risk:reward than the full squat.
For instance, say that on a fictional “dynamic correspondence scale” of 1 to 100 that a half squat rates as a 30 and a full squat a 28. Well then the half squat does have a greater dynamic correspondence than the full squat but not such that it would make a difference.
Also consider the differences of the half squat in that it does not provide for full development of the lower body, particularly in the glutes and hamstrings and poses greater stress on the knees. Additionally, the half squat is a movement of greater intensity as most athletes can handle a significantly greater loading in a half squat than a full squat. Thus, there is greater stress on the body, which may or may not be desirable.
In general, I’m inclined to favor a full squat. I think it provides for more balanced lower-body development and that the dynamic correspondence of both squat variations are low enough that neither holds a significant edge. Additionally, I think that, in many cases, reducing the loading on an athlete is better.
If I gave the impression that I favor the half squat only, I’m sorry. I think the half squat has its applications, but they are very specific and also somewhat limited. The full squat (I define it the same as you) is a much better approach the vast majority of the time.
It’s a tool in your toolbox. The only thing I was crusading for in this thread is that it should be in your toolbox. Most people don’t do them at all. They have their uses, as does everything.
The lack of glute and hamstring involvement can be a good thing for an athlete who is sprinting a lot. Ben Johnson used half squats exclusively later in his career.
Finally, I think you guys are exaggerating a bit with the dangers of them. I think depth jumps are a far more dangerous exercise for an athlete of lower preparation (then again, I wouldn’t have an athlete of low preparation do either exercise).
[/quote]
I don’t disagree that the half squat is a tool and can possibly have a place in one’s training program. I do think it has a very limited place outside of the strength/power athlete i.e. powerlifting, shotput, discus, hammer throw and possibly OL weightlifting.
Regarding the exxaggeration of the dangers of half squat, there is no denying the fact that doing the half squat with a substantially heavier weight than can be used in the full squat increases the the compressive force on the spine. Are the benefits reaped worth the potential risks that are associated with the extra loading?
I agree that depth jumps can also be a dangerous exercise for the unprepared athlete. Lack of eccentric strength, too many foot contacts/volume and starting at too high of a box are all common mistakes people make when incorporating advanced plyometrics.
I just wanted to say that this is a great thread.