Is Barbell Squatting Really Worth It?

Kenneth Copeland, Verified Millionaire wrote:

fisky wrote:

In my non-coaching, but lots of running, experience, exercises should be running-specific. As a runner, the only time you would ever put force into the legs while the knee is bent 90 degrees is when sprinters come out of the blocks.

Let me be clear. I'm not saying "never do squats." What I'm saying is that there are better exercises for the legs for runners than squats. In my opinion, these are mostly one leg exercises, like Bulgarian squats, skater squats (aka curtsy squats), lunges, and 1 leg press on the leg press machine. Note: the Bulgarian squat can be done with the back mostly vertical to work the quads or with the back at an angle so your upper body moves diagonally forward and back as you go up and down. That works the glutes.

There are lots of other leg exercises so these aren't the only ones to consider. I'm listing these because I know what they are called and they are part of my regular leg routine.

In short, the risk (of injury) vs the reward of the squat FOR RUNNERS isn't as good as the risk/benefit of other leg exercises.

NOTE: If you're a sprinter, then, yes, you should squat, but if you've been doing them long enough to see a change in your physique, as you say you have, then you shouldn't be doing them so hard you're wiped out for 5-6 days. Reduce the weight.

My goodness so much wrong with this post.

1.) "As a runner, the only time you would ever put force into the legs while the knee is bent 90 degrees is when sprinters come out of the blocks."

You fundamentally misunderstand the point of squatting to parallel. You squat to 90 degrees because that is where all the muscle mass of the knee extensors, the hip extensors, and the spinal stabilizers are working at their optimum capacity. The term in lifting is called "effective range of motion." General strength translates to running strength (think - speed/power development, "core" work, and injury prevention). Why would you CHOOSE to neglect training certain muscles in your legs? With that said, there is a time and place for half/quarter squats, which is demonstrated with the videos of the sprinters doing them posted earlier in this thread. There are also so good reasons why some people prefer to do ATG, but nevertheless, the statement quoted above is incredibly short sighted, ignorant of basic lifting principles, or both. It's like saying "why should I do any rep longer than a mile when I'm only training for the mile."

2.) "What I'm saying is that there are better exercises for the legs for runners than squats."
This is highly, highly questionable, and other than because they are easier/more accessible. I don't think it's true. My guess people are so resistant to squatting is because it's SCARY. Nothing wrong with the lifts mentioned, but squatting is better.

3.) "There are lots of other leg exercises, so these aren't the only ones to consider."

True, but squatting is a full-body lift, not just the legs. There is a reason why there is a debate between the back squat and deadlift as to which is considered "The King of Lifts." It activates everything in your lower body - all the leg muscles, glutes, abs, and lower/middle back. In of itself, it is a far superior lift than the other exercises you lifted above.

4.) "In short, the risk (of injury) vs the reward of the squat FOR RUNNERS isn't as good as the risk/benefit of other leg exercises."

If done properly (like all things), there is very little risk in squatting - it is a fundamental movement pattern. Studies continuously show this. The dark truth is you are far more likely to get injured from RUNNING than you are from lifting weights.

joalturn wrote:

I suck at barbell squats, and I’ve done a lot of (armchair) research into why that is. And I think it’s because it’s so easy to do this lift wrong. If you are restricted in any mobility in your lower body, or if you have a muscle imbalance anywhere, the squat will quickly expose it. And if you don’t address that restriction/weakness, you’ll get hurt sooner rather than later.

IMO, single leg lifts are much better for sport performance. The downside is that they take twice as long (for example, 3x10 single leg squats takes twice as long as 3x10 back squat). If your goal is general strength and/or aesthetics, then you can get a great pump on leg press, hack squat, and other leg-specific machines.

If you want to attack the squat and hit some big numbers, you have to a. Do it consistently, b. Know your unique physical limitations, and c. Thoroughly mobilize/stabilize before each squat session.

You dont know squat wrote:

Kenneth Copeland, Verified Millionaire wrote:

My goodness so much wrong with this post.

1.) "As a runner, the only time you would ever put force into the legs while the knee is bent 90 degrees is when sprinters come out of the blocks."

You fundamentally misunderstand the point of squatting to parallel. You squat to 90 degrees because that is where all the muscle mass of the knee extensors, the hip extensors, and the spinal stabilizers are working at their optimum capacity. The term in lifting is called "effective range of motion." General strength translates to running strength (think - speed/power development, "core" work, and injury prevention). Why would you CHOOSE to neglect training certain muscles in your legs? With that said, there is a time and place for half/quarter squats, which is demonstrated with the videos of the sprinters doing them posted earlier in this thread. There are also so good reasons why some people prefer to do ATG, but nevertheless, the statement quoted above is incredibly short sighted, ignorant of basic lifting principles, or both. It's like saying "why should I do any rep longer than a mile when I'm only training for the mile."

2.) "What I'm saying is that there are better exercises for the legs for runners than squats."
This is highly, highly questionable, and other than because they are easier/more accessible. I don't think it's true. My guess people are so resistant to squatting is because it's SCARY. Nothing wrong with the lifts mentioned, but squatting is better.

3.) "There are lots of other leg exercises, so these aren't the only ones to consider."

True, but squatting is a full-body lift, not just the legs. There is a reason why there is a debate between the back squat and deadlift as to which is considered "The King of Lifts." It activates everything in your lower body - all the leg muscles, glutes, abs, and lower/middle back. In of itself, it is a far superior lift than the other exercises you lifted above.

4.) "In short, the risk (of injury) vs the reward of the squat FOR RUNNERS isn't as good as the risk/benefit of other leg exercises."

If done properly (like all things), there is very little risk in squatting - it is a fundamental movement pattern. Studies continuously show this. The dark truth is you are far more likely to get injured from RUNNING than you are from lifting weights.

What are your credentials to speak on this topic? Fisky wrote a book on running, and he’s one of the fastest masters runners in the world. He’s jacked even though he’s in his 70s, and he was featured in the WSJ. He is a role model for healthy aging and septuagenarian track performance. I’ll take his word over yours.

joalturn wrote:

I suck at barbell squats, and I’ve done a lot of (armchair) research into why that is. And I think it’s because it’s so easy to do this lift wrong. If you are restricted in any mobility in your lower body, or if you have a muscle imbalance anywhere, the squat will quickly expose it. And if you don’t address that restriction/weakness, you’ll get hurt sooner rather than later.

IMO, single leg lifts are much better for sport performance. The downside is that they take twice as long (for example, 3x10 single leg squats takes twice as long as 3x10 back squat). If your goal is general strength and/or aesthetics, then you can get a great pump on leg press, hack squat, and other leg-specific machines.

If you want to attack the squat and hit some big numbers, you have to a. Do it consistently, b. Know your unique physical limitations, and c. Thoroughly mobilize/stabilize before each squat session.

big lifter wrote:

Squatters Rights wrote:

Why not? I note that some of the fastest people in the world can squat, huge amounts of weight, double or triple their body weight. Are the two not connected?

All of my advice/thoughts here are based on improving max velocity, not necessarily running economy.

Squatting in and of itself likely won't make you sprint faster except for the initial drive phase. Speed is a function of power and technique. Power is force over time. Squatting works on the force part of the equation, but without the time part, it's not incredibly helpful for sprinting. Think about this. The strongest power lifters, with "power" lifting being a misnomer, can squat close to 1,000lbs. None of those guys are remotely fast because they only move big weight slowly. The best weightlifters, as in Olympic lifters, are all extremely fast athletes. They may not be great runners, but their speed and coordination is certainly something that has transfer to running.

Squatting has its place in a well-rounded training program for runners. Typically you should do your primary explosive exercise first though. A basic plan for a day in the gym is something like this

* Power movement (e.g. power cleans/snatches/split jerks). 4–10 sets of 1–3 reps.

* Strength movement (e.g. back squats, single leg squats, front squats). 2-5 sets of 3-5 reps

* Any accessories you like to do (pullups, planks, back extension, etc.). Usually higher rep ranges like 3x12

Kenneth Copeland, Verified Millionaire wrote:

fisky wrote:

In my non-coaching, but lots of running, experience, exercises should be running-specific. As a runner, the only time you would ever put force into the legs while the knee is bent 90 degrees is when sprinters come out of the blocks.

Let me be clear. I'm not saying "never do squats." What I'm saying is that there are better exercises for the legs for runners than squats. In my opinion, these are mostly one leg exercises, like Bulgarian squats, skater squats (aka curtsy squats), lunges, and 1 leg press on the leg press machine. Note: the Bulgarian squat can be done with the back mostly vertical to work the quads or with the back at an angle so your upper body moves diagonally forward and back as you go up and down. That works the glutes.

There are lots of other leg exercises so these aren't the only ones to consider. I'm listing these because I know what they are called and they are part of my regular leg routine.

In short, the risk (of injury) vs the reward of the squat FOR RUNNERS isn't as good as the risk/benefit of other leg exercises.

NOTE: If you're a sprinter, then, yes, you should squat, but if you've been doing them long enough to see a change in your physique, as you say you have, then you shouldn't be doing them so hard you're wiped out for 5-6 days. Reduce the weight.

My goodness so much wrong with this post.

1.) "As a runner, the only time you would ever put force into the legs while the knee is bent 90 degrees is when sprinters come out of the blocks."

You fundamentally misunderstand the point of squatting to parallel. You squat to 90 degrees because that is where all the muscle mass of the knee extensors, the hip extensors, and the spinal stabilizers are working at their optimum capacity. The term in lifting is called "effective range of motion." General strength translates to running strength (think - speed/power development, "core" work, and injury prevention). Why would you CHOOSE to neglect training certain muscles in your legs? With that said, there is a time and place for half/quarter squats, which is demonstrated with the videos of the sprinters doing them posted earlier in this thread. There are also so good reasons why some people prefer to do ATG, but nevertheless, the statement quoted above is incredibly short sighted, ignorant of basic lifting principles, or both. It's like saying "why should I do any rep longer than a mile when I'm only training for the mile."

2.) "What I'm saying is that there are better exercises for the legs for runners than squats."
This is highly, highly questionable, and other than because they are easier/more accessible. I don't think it's true. My guess people are so resistant to squatting is because it's SCARY. Nothing wrong with the lifts mentioned, but squatting is better.

3.) "There are lots of other leg exercises, so these aren't the only ones to consider."

True, but squatting is a full-body lift, not just the legs. There is a reason why there is a debate between the back squat and deadlift as to which is considered "The King of Lifts." It activates everything in your lower body - all the leg muscles, glutes, abs, and lower/middle back. In of itself, it is a far superior lift than the other exercises you lifted above.

4.) "In short, the risk (of injury) vs the reward of the squat FOR RUNNERS isn't as good as the risk/benefit of other leg exercises."

If done properly (like all things), there is very little risk in squatting - it is a fundamental movement pattern. Studies continuously show this. The dark truth is you are far more likely to get injured from RUNNING than you are from lifting weights.

Squatters Rights wrote:

Kenneth Copeland, Verified Millionaire wrote:

My goodness so much wrong with this post.

1.) "As a runner, the only time you would ever put force into the legs while the knee is bent 90 degrees is when sprinters come out of the blocks."

You fundamentally misunderstand the point of squatting to parallel. You squat to 90 degrees because that is where all the muscle mass of the knee extensors, the hip extensors, and the spinal stabilizers are working at their optimum capacity. The term in lifting is called "effective range of motion." General strength translates to running strength (think - speed/power development, "core" work, and injury prevention). Why would you CHOOSE to neglect training certain muscles in your legs? With that said, there is a time and place for half/quarter squats, which is demonstrated with the videos of the sprinters doing them posted earlier in this thread. There are also so good reasons why some people prefer to do ATG, but nevertheless, the statement quoted above is incredibly short sighted, ignorant of basic lifting principles, or both. It's like saying "why should I do any rep longer than a mile when I'm only training for the mile."

2.) "What I'm saying is that there are better exercises for the legs for runners than squats."
This is highly, highly questionable, and other than because they are easier/more accessible. I don't think it's true. My guess people are so resistant to squatting is because it's SCARY. Nothing wrong with the lifts mentioned, but squatting is better.

3.) "There are lots of other leg exercises, so these aren't the only ones to consider."

True, but squatting is a full-body lift, not just the legs. There is a reason why there is a debate between the back squat and deadlift as to which is considered "The King of Lifts." It activates everything in your lower body - all the leg muscles, glutes, abs, and lower/middle back. In of itself, it is a far superior lift than the other exercises you lifted above.

4.) "In short, the risk (of injury) vs the reward of the squat FOR RUNNERS isn't as good as the risk/benefit of other leg exercises."

If done properly (like all things), there is very little risk in squatting - it is a fundamental movement pattern. Studies continuously show this. The dark truth is you are far more likely to get injured from RUNNING than you are from lifting weights.

Excellent post, thank you. I’m afraid I have been squatting pretty consistently for over a year, once every 7-12 days. It would seem odd that the exercise is still so difficult to recover from.

In reading this thread, I have been reflecting on my squat form. I have a terrible time with pitching forward at the hip as I get tired. I am relatively tall, (6 feet) and struggle with my form breaking down in this way. That probably makes it more difficult to recover.

Squat anyway wrote:

IMO you're unlikely to get massive performance benefits from squatting, assuming you're a distance runner racing >800m. Doing strides or hill sprints a few times a week will probably give you more benefits to your speed.

But in terms of injury prevention and just being a human existing through the 23 hours of the day you're not running, squatting is a really useful movement to gain strength and prevent injury. Use a full range of motion (not this 90 degree knee angle stuff) because you want your body to be able to confidently move in any position you put it in. That means deep knee, ankle, and hip flexion at the bottom after a controlled descent. You're probably lifting too much weight for what you can handle if you're sore for 5 days, so scale it back and get your form right and get the consistency of doing it regularly before ramping up the weight.

Anyone saying squats destroy your knees (like those saying running destroys your knees) has not kept up on exercise science for the last 20+ years.