But won't the monoarticular muscle group be the first to be used? How can one increase glute activation during a hip extension, in which the glutes aren't doing their fair share? Especially when this hip extension is accompanied by knee extension, thereby working against the hamstrings (which I would assume encourages the glutes to do as much as they can since the hamstrings will have a difficult time contributing if we also want strong knee extension)?Marenghi wrote: ↑Wed May 30, 2018 1:49 am Well, in this case it gets interesting because the prime movers for hip extension can be: hamstrings, adductors, glutes. So there is some wiggle room how to distribute the force between muscles that have similar tasks. And it makes sense to get the glutes on board as much as possible, because they are monoarticular muscles that also are quite powerful potentially. So if someone for whatever reason doesnt use them as much as he can, it may be a good idea to push their share.
The strength is [joint] angle specific confuses me with regards to high bar vs low bar. If the first pull is what we're trying to strengthen with squatting (I'm not sure it is, but I'm happy to be corrected), then low bar has more similar joint angles than high bar does. If it's the second pull (I'm pretty sure it is, this is where the majority of the power is applied), the time you're in that position, high bar and low bar seem very similar.Low bar vs high bar:
High bar has a greater ROM for knee extension with a more acute knee angle. Strength is angle specific. If you need that angle in your comp lifts, it helps training it in your acc. lifts.
Low back stress is another point but could be remedied by pulling a little less.
Back squats can be loaded quite a bit heavier than front squats, and I would argue that this points somewhat to general strength being a thing...Well, there is no "non-specific strength". Strength is specific. So claiming high bar or low bar as "better for general strength" is pointless. The two variants present a small tradeoff between a little more quad ROM on the one hand, and a little more hip extension ROM on the other. As a non-oly lifter, it isnt much difference in the first place with no variant being superior generally and in isolation (we never do only one exercise). Meaning it above all depends on your goals, rest of the program, preferences, individual suitability which you choose. (FWIW - that was arguing with your claim)
Re why not only front squat, but also high bar back squat for specificity: Yeah, FS would be even more specific - but unfortunately, in a practical sense, the limiting factor isnt quad strength. High bar can maximally train the quads in a similar ROM, whereas its hard to front squat heavy, often, with high volume with thoracic strength and endurance, bracing, stress on shoulders limiting the quad stress both short term in a session and long term throughout a program.
The point of low back stress I think makes the most sense for training high bar, in order to get more pulling volume in. I'm curious if the low back volume capacity (for handling lots of pulling plus lots of low bar squatting) can also be trained, as the Drs. have shown work capacity is trainable, similar to how @Austin mentioned he does about 70-80 deadlifts per week, much higher than the previously proposed by some 5-15.The "could be remedied by pulling a little less" comment was directed at IF you chose to train with low bar AND would experience too much low back stress. Sure, I think its a small advantage to be able to do more weightlifting specific pulling when doing high bar.
I wonder if the bar-hip contact is a way to, not exactly think about using your glutes, but to do a movement that actively maximally recruits them...
.
