It's not important, because you should only be doing high-bar Olympic-style squats where it doesn't come into play. Low bar squats are just deadlifts with the bar on your back. Squats should be a leg movement.
It doesn't make you objectively stronger. It's still a partial that doesn't work any of those muscles through their full range of motion AND your quads aren't working as hard. I can do any deadlift variation to strengthen my posterior chain.
>All styles of squatting tend to make the quads sore, more so than any of the other muscles in the movement.
This soreness occurs because the quads are the only knee extensor group, while the hip extensors consist of three muscle groups (hamstrings, glutes, adductors). They comprise more potential muscle mass to spread the work across – if they are trained correctly . Given this anatomical situation, we want to squat in a way that maximizes the use of all the muscle that can potentially be brought into the exercise and thus be strengthened by it. So we need a way to squat that involves the posterior muscle mass, making it operate up to its potential for contributing to strength and power. The low-bar back squat is that way.
>Done correctly , the squat is the only exercise in the weight room that trains the recruitment of the entire posterior chain in a way that is progressively improvable. These are the things that make the squat the best exercise you can do with barbells and, by extension, the best strength exercise there is. The squat trains the posterior chain muscles more effectively than any other movement that uses them because none of the other movements involve enough range of motion to use them all at the same time, and none of the other movements train this long range of motion by preceding their concentric, or shortening, contraction with an eccentric, or lengthening, contraction, which produces a stretch-shortening cycle, or stretch reflex.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I'm glad you can copypaste the book. Low bar squatting is a technique to put more weight on the bar for competition. It's the same as sumo deadlifting.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>I'm asshurt I was wrong and have no rebuttal
Lol
8 months ago
Anonymous
You never rebuted my original points. I know what rip is claiming, but he's wrong in practice. There's a reason why a sizeable amount of powerlifters don't look like they lift.
Second, you're making a very poor appeal to authority since your "argument" is just a direct copypasta from rippletoad who is first and foremost a salesman.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Your point about ROM is factually wrong. As Rip described, you have MORE ROM in the posterior chain. And more muscles being strengthened inherently means you are objectively stronger. Starting strength is not a competitive lifting program and that is not a consideration. >appeal to authority
That's not what appeal to authority is, moron. I could just reiterate why low bar is used in my own words but it's easier to just use the book which more eloquently states the points.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>MORE ROM in the posterior chain >greater hip angle >greater knee angle >less range of motion in your posterior chain than a deadlift
>Starting strength is not a competitive lifting program and that is not a consideration.
I never said it was. Rip teaches low bar in SS because there are less mobility requirements and it's easier for any couch potato to perform.
>That's not what appeal to authority is
Your very first reply was "but rip said...!"
8 months ago
Anonymous
What determines the amount of hip vs knee engagement in the squat is the moment arm at the joints. When you do a low-bar squat, your knees are basically in line with the center of mass and there is no stress at the joint. Most of the stress is at the hip. When you do a high-bar squat, the knees are forward and there is more stress at the knee joint, forcing you to use more quad to move the weight.
It's all physics. Low-bar squats are a hip exercise like the deadlift, and they don't build legs.
8 months ago
Anonymous
if thats so true, then why did my legs get huge on SS?
check mate, moron
8 months ago
Anonymous
Post legs
Don't make claims
8 months ago
Anonymous
8 months ago
Anonymous
>do you really think your skeleton is that strong
Apparently it is.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Squats have to have one of the lowest injury rates out of the heavy compound exercises. The only time I have ever felt pain from it is if I attempted the exercise with preexisting issues. You can brute force the exercise with horrendous form so long as you do the bare minimum of decent bracing and keeping your chest up.
8 months ago
Anonymous
They have the highest injury rate
8 months ago
Anonymous
why would you want your squat to have full rom for the p. chain? it's a leg exercise.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Your point about ROM is factually wrong. As Rip described, you have MORE ROM in the posterior chain. And more muscles being strengthened inherently means you are objectively stronger. Starting strength is not a competitive lifting program and that is not a consideration. >appeal to authority
That's not what appeal to authority is, moron. I could just reiterate why low bar is used in my own words but it's easier to just use the book which more eloquently states the points.
You two are so dense, it bothers me to read your posts. Go hit the gym and start lifting.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Hold the L moron you look like what happens when some liberal homosexual gets btfo with facts lol k
8 months ago
Anonymous
It makes you objectively stronger your thoughts on it are subjective and cope. You are weak. Learn to lowbar dyel
This level of samegayging is pathetic and desperate. Just gargle rips balls already.
Ironically you have very little idea what you are talking about, the main action of the glutes after extension of the hip is external rotation. There is more transition from internal to internal rotation of the femur at the hip in low bar squatting than in highbar squatting.
>the main action of the glutes after extension of the hip is external rotation
Correct
>There is more transition from internal to internal rotation of the femur at the hip in low bar squatting than in highbar squatting.
Only true if you suffer from knee valgus
8 months ago
Anonymous
I agree with you, but I will also note that if you are truly low barring you have your feet facing forward, not angled into external rotation, which determines an artificial valgus in anyone when going into the hole.
Also, and please understand that I am no longer trying to be argumentative, just trying to converse, I am a supporter of the theory that emg studies are not a good indicator of which positions provide more hypertrophy.
But to be fair because his programs are targeted to powerlifters, their mass wouldn't let them squat properly so low bar squat is more useful for this specific demographic.
Rip is a fat guy who doesn't look like he has ever lifted a weight in his life. He's also a powershitter who only cares about raw numbers and not all around physical development.
Low bar squats and deadlifts are the same exercise, and neither hit the quads very well. If you want to squat without heavily overlapping with deadlifts, do upright high-bar squats.
>He's also a powershitter who only cares about raw numbers and not all around physical development.
No, the opposite. Rip is only concerned with making trainees as big and powerful as possible. It is not a powerlifting program. The criticism above that it's a program for "people trying to be varsity linemen" is not completely, but more accurate to the truth. A football lineman has to be maximally powerful and explosive, weight on the bar is a means to an end, they are not powerlifters.
Well no, it's not. For being strong and powerful, low bar is better. You get much more of your power from your posterior chain than you do your quads therefore focusing on them is a better course of action.
>Rip is only concerned with making trainees as big and powerful as possible.
Rip SAYS this but it's bullshit. His primary concern is getting people into his cult to consume his products. Listen to his takes on 20 rep squats, conjugate, or any training method that isn't his own. He is absolutist and dishonest.
>he didn't buy the specifically designed hand crafted Starting Strength Bench for $315.00
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Fabricated to Rippetoe's Starting Strength Specs >17" Tall >48"x10"x2" Solid Oak Top >Laser engraved "Starting Strength" logo >2x2 11g Steel Frame Construction >Raw Steel
8 months ago
Anonymous
Are you trying to justify this horrendous piece of shit attempt at a bench?
>Rip is only concerned with making trainees as big and powerful as possible
And his program isn't even good at that. You'll grow way more on a program that includes more volume, higher exercise selection, varied rep ranges and more isolation work than you will on SS
>And his program isn't even good at that
Yes it is. There is nothing better for getting big and strong than doing the main compounds at low reps. >more volume, higher exercise selection, varied rep ranges and more isolation work
Lol. Volume means frick all.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>There is nothing better for getting big and strong than doing the main compounds at low reps.
Yes there is, it's doing a mix of heavy sets for low to medium reps, some higher rep work, and a combination of compounds, accessory and isolation movements. You disagree with me because you're still a novice and SS/TM type training still works for you.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>SS is the best possible program in existence, unless you are an dvanced lifter squatting over 350lbs 3x5 and deadlifting over 405lbs 1x5 >at which point a program with more advanced recovery cycles is a good idea
Well I agree, I guess we're done here.
8 months ago
Anonymous
> SS is the best possible program in existence
Nope, never said this. I said it works for you because you're a novice and therefore aren't aware of its limitations. Even a novice would do better on a more varied program like I'm suggesting.
8 months ago
Anonymous
No you don't need to back down now, sweaty. We already agreed SS is the king of programs and nothing could be better, unless you're advanced.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Then why does everyone that does SS look like shit and have mediocre lifts (especially bench)?
8 months ago
Anonymous
>why do people who've only been lifting for 4 months and haven't cut yet don't look like Zyzz
A mystery for the ages.
8 months ago
Anonymous
So SS is only suitable for people lifting for less than 4 months and you can't obtain a decent physique with it? How can you then claim it's a good program with a straight face?
8 months ago
Anonymous
>only suitable for people lifting for less than 4 months
It's not. >you can't obtain a decent physique with it
You can.
Any other things you want to gargle out between sucks on my wiener?
8 months ago
Anonymous
So why did you say this: >why do people who've only been lifting for 4 months and haven't cut yet don't look like Zyzz
Inb4 "that wasn't me" - so why are you responding to the question aimed at that guy? Also post someone with a good physique purely from SS
8 months ago
Anonymous
>So why did you say this
How braindead are you? You need to go back to school for reading comprehension.
8 months ago
Anonymous
I asked: >Then why does everyone that does SS look like shit and have mediocre lifts (especially bench)?
The defense given was: >>why do people who've only been lifting for 4 months and haven't cut yet don't look like Zyzz
If SS was a good program then it should be possible to demonstrate that with examples of successes, yet no-one has posted a single one, as usual. Even Rippetoe himself has never looked physically impressive his entire life and only had very middling success in powerlifting.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>I asked: >The defense given was:
Yep. Completely logical. Your confusion is your own moronation. >successes
You'd never be satisfied with reality. Going from 145lbs x5 squat to 345lbs x5 squat in 6 months wouldn't be "good enough" to you, even though that's a bigger squat than almost anyone you'd see in a gym.
8 months ago
Anonymous
You're just coping with the fact that no-one on SS looks good or has impressive lifts. Who gives a shit about going from lifting next to nothing to somewhat intermediate, that you could do on almost any program. You can judge a program by the condition of its adherents, and by that metric SS is shit
8 months ago
Anonymous
"Looking good", especially in pictures, is primarily about being lean and having good bone structure and muscle insertions. I "looked good", in pictures, at 126lbs because I was very lean and I have aesthetic genetics. But clearly I was tiny. Looking good frankly isn't proof of anything. >impressive lifts
Having a better squat than nearly every man in your gym in 6 months is impressive. End of story.
8 months ago
Anonymous
What a long-winded way of admitting that SS isn't going to give you an impressive physique (and therefore by most people's standards a shit program).
8 months ago
Anonymous
>this complete lack of reading comprehension
You're a total wienersucking moron.
8 months ago
Anonymous
It's not even top 5 beginner routines
8 months ago
Anonymous
Shh, shh. No tears, only dreams now.
8 months ago
Anonymous
NTA, what is a good beginner routine? I wanna start lifting again and I started during the days where SS was shilled and I was young and impressionable, I got no clue what’s good for an overall balanced linear progression between upper and lower.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Andy Baker powerbuilding routine is good.
8 months ago
Anonymous
> SS is the best possible program in existence
Nope, never said this. I said it works for you because you're a novice and therefore aren't aware of its limitations. Even a novice would do better on a more varied program like I'm suggesting.
Also I wouldn't call either of those lifts "advanced". 405lbs for a single? Embarrassing.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Nta but you're embarrassing yourself trying to look cool and elitist. 350lb 3x5 squat is "advanced" even by this board's standards, and your deadlift assessment just makes you look illiterate.
8 months ago
Anonymous
3.5pl8 squat is not advanced. It's intermediate. Misread the deadlift but point still stands. A 4pl8 deadlift isnt remotely advanced.
Woohoo, it's just below advanced. What do you think remotely means?
8 months ago
Anonymous
I don't care what some gay website says and neither would you if you weren't some first year lifter SS noob.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>gets corrected >lashes out
Then who defines strength standards?
A committee of you?
8 months ago
Anonymous
By looking around at what serious long term lifters can actually pull.
8 months ago
Anonymous
And who defines serious?
Who defines long term?
What is your sample size?
How do you know your sample size is sufficient?
Do you know what the word 'advanced' means?
What percentage of lifters should be considered 'advanced'?
What is the difference between 'advanced' and 'elite'?
why is rippetoe so fricking fat. hes been fat for years. why would anyone take his advice seriously >inb4 pics from 40 years ago
yeah clearly his programs works well enough to turn you into a fat frick past the age of 40
He's 67 years old now, this isn't 2010 anymore. Starting strength has low bar squats because it's a beginner powerlifting program, and low bar is easier to teach to noobs. The bar position is less intuitive, but the movement is definitely easier for dyel mobilitylets and out of shape highschoolers that the program targets.
It's straightforwardly more prone to technique error than high bar squat. Why does Rip have to yell about hip drahve? Because many, many trainees have a very difficult time keeping their hips and back in good positions coming out of the hole.
I like low bar fine, but the biggest reason these guys recommend it is that you can load it heavier than other squat variants. Given that SS programs many other posterior chain exercises, I'm feel very safe calling it ego lifting.
Are you pretending that SS is actually a balanced strength training program?
Extremely important. Also, I'm suprised rippe is even letting that guy squat given his proportions. He really should be doing something with a less extreme hinge instead like the hack squat machine or lunges.
Machines are homosexual. But more specifically, you asked why Rip in particular has that guy squat. Then suggested homosexual machines. Rip hates machines.
>Barbells, and the primary exercises we use them to do, are far superior to any other training tools that have
ever been devised. Properly performed, full-range-of-motion barbell exercises are essentially the
functional expression of human skeletal and muscular anatomy under a load. The exercise is controlled by
and the result of each trainee’s particular movement patterns, minutely fine-tuned by each individual limb length, muscular attachment position, strength level, flexibility, and neuromuscular efficiency. Balance between all the muscles involved in a movement is inherent in the exercise, since all the muscles involved contribute their anatomically determined share of the work. Muscles move the joints between the bones which transfer force to the load, and the way this is done is a function of the design of the system – when that system is used in the manner of its design, it functions optimally, and training should follow this design. Barbells allow weight to be moved in exactly the way the body is designed to move it, since every aspect of the movement is determined by the body.
8 months ago
Anonymous
[...] >Machines, on the other hand, force the body to move the weight according to the design of the machine. This places some rather serious limitations on the ability of the exercise to meet the specific needs of the athlete. For instance, there is no way for a human being to utilize the quadriceps muscles in isolation from the hamstrings in any movement pattern that exists independently of a machine designed for this purpose. No natural movement can be performed that does this. Quadriceps and hamstrings always function together, at the same time, to
balance the forces on either side of the knee. Since they always work together, why should they be exercised
separately? Because somebody invented a machine that lets us? Even machines that allow multiple joints to be worked at the same time are less than optimal, since the pattern of the movement through space is determined by the machine, not the individual biomechanics of the
human using it. Barbells permit the minute adjustments during the movement that allow individual anthropometry
to be expressed.
I trust tom platz over ripplebreasts. Platz loved the hack squat
Machines are homosexual. But more specifically, you asked why Rip in particular has that guy squat. Then suggested homosexual machines. Rip hates machines.
>Barbells, and the primary exercises we use them to do, are far superior to any other training tools that have
ever been devised. Properly performed, full-range-of-motion barbell exercises are essentially the
functional expression of human skeletal and muscular anatomy under a load. The exercise is controlled by
and the result of each trainee’s particular movement patterns, minutely fine-tuned by each individual limb length, muscular attachment position, strength level, flexibility, and neuromuscular efficiency. Balance between all the muscles involved in a movement is inherent in the exercise, since all the muscles involved contribute their anatomically determined share of the work. Muscles move the joints between the bones which transfer force to the load, and the way this is done is a function of the design of the system – when that system is used in the manner of its design, it functions optimally, and training should follow this design. Barbells allow weight to be moved in exactly the way the body is designed to move it, since every aspect of the movement is determined by the body.
>Machines, on the other hand, force the body to move the weight according to the design of the machine. This places some rather serious limitations on the ability of the exercise to meet the specific needs of the athlete. For instance, there is no way for a human being to utilize the quadriceps muscles in isolation from the hamstrings in any movement pattern that exists independently of a machine designed for this purpose. No natural movement can be performed that does this. Quadriceps and hamstrings always function together, at the same time, to
balance the forces on either side of the knee. Since they always work together, why should they be exercised
separately? Because somebody invented a machine that lets us? Even machines that allow multiple joints to be worked at the same time are less than optimal, since the pattern of the movement through space is determined by the machine, not the individual biomechanics of the
human using it. Barbells permit the minute adjustments during the movement that allow individual anthropometry
to be expressed.
You would struggle to name even a handful of top tier current day physiques built solely on freeweights, and even the ingress you could come up with works be inferior to guys that incorporate machines into their training.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>top tier current day physiques
What do you mean by this? Olympia bodybuilders? They absolutely need machines to manage their SFR and to round out their proportions for judging. Your average hobbyist has no such worries.
8 months ago
Anonymous
your average hobbyist should not be bloatmaxxing and T-rexxing so they can make varsity lineman. That's who Rip designed SS for and everyone else is an afterthought for him.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>What do you mean by this?
Bodybuilders, fitness models, fitness ecelebs even. They all use machines.
8 months ago
Anonymous
Power lifters and strongmen use them too. Machine hate is just tough guy posturing.
Very important. Imagine you're frickin your girl and a 315 lb beast jumps and lands directly on your traps and shoulders, you'll need to push up while still fricking her at the same time.
You know, a lot of great lab-coat takes on squat bar placement. But here's another consideration, who gives a shit? Squats are leg exercise. High bar forces more on to the legs. Low bar allows you to use more weight with the sacrifice of ROM by using leverage and the back to do more of the lifting. If you're competing for low bar style squats, do them. If you're trying to get bigger and stronger legs, do high bar since it's harder.
A lot of professional powerlifters do both or use front squats as an assistance exercise.
If you don't compete there is no reason to do low bar unless you have exceptionally long femurs.
It's not important, because you should only be doing high-bar Olympic-style squats where it doesn't come into play. Low bar squats are just deadlifts with the bar on your back. Squats should be a leg movement.
Rip prefers low bar because it makes you stronger.
Rip was wrong. Low bar let's you put more weight on the bar but it's artificial strength from frauding leverages and cutting ROM.
It makes you objectively stronger. Because of the change in focus to the posterior chain. Hamstring, glutes, lower back and adductors.
Read the book.
It doesn't make you objectively stronger. It's still a partial that doesn't work any of those muscles through their full range of motion AND your quads aren't working as hard. I can do any deadlift variation to strengthen my posterior chain.
>All styles of squatting tend to make the quads sore, more so than any of the other muscles in the movement.
This soreness occurs because the quads are the only knee extensor group, while the hip extensors consist of three muscle groups (hamstrings, glutes, adductors). They comprise more potential muscle mass to spread the work across – if they are trained correctly . Given this anatomical situation, we want to squat in a way that maximizes the use of all the muscle that can potentially be brought into the exercise and thus be strengthened by it. So we need a way to squat that involves the posterior muscle mass, making it operate up to its potential for contributing to strength and power. The low-bar back squat is that way.
>Done correctly , the squat is the only exercise in the weight room that trains the recruitment of the entire posterior chain in a way that is progressively improvable. These are the things that make the squat the best exercise you can do with barbells and, by extension, the best strength exercise there is. The squat trains the posterior chain muscles more effectively than any other movement that uses them because none of the other movements involve enough range of motion to use them all at the same time, and none of the other movements train this long range of motion by preceding their concentric, or shortening, contraction with an eccentric, or lengthening, contraction, which produces a stretch-shortening cycle, or stretch reflex.
I'm glad you can copypaste the book. Low bar squatting is a technique to put more weight on the bar for competition. It's the same as sumo deadlifting.
>I'm asshurt I was wrong and have no rebuttal
Lol
You never rebuted my original points. I know what rip is claiming, but he's wrong in practice. There's a reason why a sizeable amount of powerlifters don't look like they lift.
Second, you're making a very poor appeal to authority since your "argument" is just a direct copypasta from rippletoad who is first and foremost a salesman.
Your point about ROM is factually wrong. As Rip described, you have MORE ROM in the posterior chain. And more muscles being strengthened inherently means you are objectively stronger. Starting strength is not a competitive lifting program and that is not a consideration.
>appeal to authority
That's not what appeal to authority is, moron. I could just reiterate why low bar is used in my own words but it's easier to just use the book which more eloquently states the points.
>MORE ROM in the posterior chain
>greater hip angle
>greater knee angle
>less range of motion in your posterior chain than a deadlift
>Starting strength is not a competitive lifting program and that is not a consideration.
I never said it was. Rip teaches low bar in SS because there are less mobility requirements and it's easier for any couch potato to perform.
>That's not what appeal to authority is
Your very first reply was "but rip said...!"
What determines the amount of hip vs knee engagement in the squat is the moment arm at the joints. When you do a low-bar squat, your knees are basically in line with the center of mass and there is no stress at the joint. Most of the stress is at the hip. When you do a high-bar squat, the knees are forward and there is more stress at the knee joint, forcing you to use more quad to move the weight.
It's all physics. Low-bar squats are a hip exercise like the deadlift, and they don't build legs.
if thats so true, then why did my legs get huge on SS?
check mate, moron
Post legs
Don't make claims
>do you really think your skeleton is that strong
Apparently it is.
Squats have to have one of the lowest injury rates out of the heavy compound exercises. The only time I have ever felt pain from it is if I attempted the exercise with preexisting issues. You can brute force the exercise with horrendous form so long as you do the bare minimum of decent bracing and keeping your chest up.
They have the highest injury rate
why would you want your squat to have full rom for the p. chain? it's a leg exercise.
You two are so dense, it bothers me to read your posts. Go hit the gym and start lifting.
Hold the L moron you look like what happens when some liberal homosexual gets btfo with facts lol k
This level of samegayging is pathetic and desperate. Just gargle rips balls already.
It makes you objectively stronger your thoughts on it are subjective and cope. You are weak. Learn to lowbar dyel
>Read the book.
Lmao SS cultists still exist in 2023? Holy shit
Her?
Yes!
Stronger for what? Low bar squatting? Get plowed in the ass? You squat for legs, between that and GHR your ass will get all the work it needs.
Ironically, high bar squatting is better for glutes because they get taken through a deeper stretch.
Ironically you have very little idea what you are talking about, the main action of the glutes after extension of the hip is external rotation. There is more transition from internal to internal rotation of the femur at the hip in low bar squatting than in highbar squatting.
Internal to external*
>the main action of the glutes after extension of the hip is external rotation
Correct
>There is more transition from internal to internal rotation of the femur at the hip in low bar squatting than in highbar squatting.
Only true if you suffer from knee valgus
I agree with you, but I will also note that if you are truly low barring you have your feet facing forward, not angled into external rotation, which determines an artificial valgus in anyone when going into the hole.
Also, and please understand that I am no longer trying to be argumentative, just trying to converse, I am a supporter of the theory that emg studies are not a good indicator of which positions provide more hypertrophy.
He prefers it for his lack of mobility and being a depthlet.
But to be fair because his programs are targeted to powerlifters, their mass wouldn't let them squat properly so low bar squat is more useful for this specific demographic.
>their mass wouldn't let them squat properly
fatty dyel mobility cope
would really help if I remembered the image
Front squats make you look like that? I'm never gonna front squat again.
You don't even lift in the first place.
Im literally shitting on them moron.
Rip is a fat guy who doesn't look like he has ever lifted a weight in his life. He's also a powershitter who only cares about raw numbers and not all around physical development.
Low bar squats and deadlifts are the same exercise, and neither hit the quads very well. If you want to squat without heavily overlapping with deadlifts, do upright high-bar squats.
>He's also a powershitter who only cares about raw numbers and not all around physical development.
No, the opposite. Rip is only concerned with making trainees as big and powerful as possible. It is not a powerlifting program. The criticism above that it's a program for "people trying to be varsity linemen" is not completely, but more accurate to the truth. A football lineman has to be maximally powerful and explosive, weight on the bar is a means to an end, they are not powerlifters.
Well his understanding of the low-bar squat is flawed.
Well no, it's not. For being strong and powerful, low bar is better. You get much more of your power from your posterior chain than you do your quads therefore focusing on them is a better course of action.
>Rip is only concerned with making trainees as big and powerful as possible.
Rip SAYS this but it's bullshit. His primary concern is getting people into his cult to consume his products. Listen to his takes on 20 rep squats, conjugate, or any training method that isn't his own. He is absolutist and dishonest.
>uhm 20 squat programs are heckin' awesome!!
Frick off moron.
t. cultist
>you have to be a cultist to think 20 rep squats are stupid
That's just a normal observation. Not even a hot take.
You are uneducated, uncultured and inexperienced.
You're fat, gay and moronic.
Dilate
Cope and sneed, wienersucker.
Have you ever actually done one?
>he didn't buy the specifically designed hand crafted Starting Strength Bench for $315.00
>Fabricated to Rippetoe's Starting Strength Specs
>17" Tall
>48"x10"x2" Solid Oak Top
>Laser engraved "Starting Strength" logo
>2x2 11g Steel Frame Construction
>Raw Steel
Are you trying to justify this horrendous piece of shit attempt at a bench?
>he didn't buy the elite SS squatting shoes
TheArtofManliness-core
>Rip is only concerned with making trainees as big and powerful as possible
And his program isn't even good at that. You'll grow way more on a program that includes more volume, higher exercise selection, varied rep ranges and more isolation work than you will on SS
>And his program isn't even good at that
Yes it is. There is nothing better for getting big and strong than doing the main compounds at low reps.
>more volume, higher exercise selection, varied rep ranges and more isolation work
Lol. Volume means frick all.
>There is nothing better for getting big and strong than doing the main compounds at low reps.
Yes there is, it's doing a mix of heavy sets for low to medium reps, some higher rep work, and a combination of compounds, accessory and isolation movements. You disagree with me because you're still a novice and SS/TM type training still works for you.
>SS is the best possible program in existence, unless you are an dvanced lifter squatting over 350lbs 3x5 and deadlifting over 405lbs 1x5
>at which point a program with more advanced recovery cycles is a good idea
Well I agree, I guess we're done here.
> SS is the best possible program in existence
Nope, never said this. I said it works for you because you're a novice and therefore aren't aware of its limitations. Even a novice would do better on a more varied program like I'm suggesting.
No you don't need to back down now, sweaty. We already agreed SS is the king of programs and nothing could be better, unless you're advanced.
Then why does everyone that does SS look like shit and have mediocre lifts (especially bench)?
>why do people who've only been lifting for 4 months and haven't cut yet don't look like Zyzz
A mystery for the ages.
So SS is only suitable for people lifting for less than 4 months and you can't obtain a decent physique with it? How can you then claim it's a good program with a straight face?
>only suitable for people lifting for less than 4 months
It's not.
>you can't obtain a decent physique with it
You can.
Any other things you want to gargle out between sucks on my wiener?
So why did you say this:
>why do people who've only been lifting for 4 months and haven't cut yet don't look like Zyzz
Inb4 "that wasn't me" - so why are you responding to the question aimed at that guy? Also post someone with a good physique purely from SS
>So why did you say this
How braindead are you? You need to go back to school for reading comprehension.
I asked:
>Then why does everyone that does SS look like shit and have mediocre lifts (especially bench)?
The defense given was:
>>why do people who've only been lifting for 4 months and haven't cut yet don't look like Zyzz
If SS was a good program then it should be possible to demonstrate that with examples of successes, yet no-one has posted a single one, as usual. Even Rippetoe himself has never looked physically impressive his entire life and only had very middling success in powerlifting.
>I asked:
>The defense given was:
Yep. Completely logical. Your confusion is your own moronation.
>successes
You'd never be satisfied with reality. Going from 145lbs x5 squat to 345lbs x5 squat in 6 months wouldn't be "good enough" to you, even though that's a bigger squat than almost anyone you'd see in a gym.
You're just coping with the fact that no-one on SS looks good or has impressive lifts. Who gives a shit about going from lifting next to nothing to somewhat intermediate, that you could do on almost any program. You can judge a program by the condition of its adherents, and by that metric SS is shit
"Looking good", especially in pictures, is primarily about being lean and having good bone structure and muscle insertions. I "looked good", in pictures, at 126lbs because I was very lean and I have aesthetic genetics. But clearly I was tiny. Looking good frankly isn't proof of anything.
>impressive lifts
Having a better squat than nearly every man in your gym in 6 months is impressive. End of story.
What a long-winded way of admitting that SS isn't going to give you an impressive physique (and therefore by most people's standards a shit program).
>this complete lack of reading comprehension
You're a total wienersucking moron.
It's not even top 5 beginner routines
Shh, shh. No tears, only dreams now.
NTA, what is a good beginner routine? I wanna start lifting again and I started during the days where SS was shilled and I was young and impressionable, I got no clue what’s good for an overall balanced linear progression between upper and lower.
Andy Baker powerbuilding routine is good.
Also I wouldn't call either of those lifts "advanced". 405lbs for a single? Embarrassing.
Nta but you're embarrassing yourself trying to look cool and elitist. 350lb 3x5 squat is "advanced" even by this board's standards, and your deadlift assessment just makes you look illiterate.
3.5pl8 squat is not advanced. It's intermediate. Misread the deadlift but point still stands. A 4pl8 deadlift isnt remotely advanced.
https://strengthlevel.com/strength-standards/deadlift/lb
Woohoo, it's just below advanced. What do you think remotely means?
I don't care what some gay website says and neither would you if you weren't some first year lifter SS noob.
>gets corrected
>lashes out
Then who defines strength standards?
A committee of you?
By looking around at what serious long term lifters can actually pull.
And who defines serious?
Who defines long term?
What is your sample size?
How do you know your sample size is sufficient?
Do you know what the word 'advanced' means?
What percentage of lifters should be considered 'advanced'?
What is the difference between 'advanced' and 'elite'?
Pure reddit
Cope and seethe brainlet
1x5 is 1 set of 5 reps, moron.
Literally this but the opposite.
I hate this phrase so much, there is no such thing as "hip drahve" because hips are a joint, not a muscle. it should be called "glutes drive".
why is rippetoe so fricking fat. hes been fat for years. why would anyone take his advice seriously
>inb4 pics from 40 years ago
yeah clearly his programs works well enough to turn you into a fat frick past the age of 40
>inb4 pics from 40 years ago
Sorry all gonna post it. Do your fahves.
That’s not him though
The anti SS-gay crumbles at prime rip. Stop coping.
https://zacheven-esh.com/tag/roger-estep/
what went wrong? he looks incredible here
That's not him lol
yea, you should probably use your hips in the squat
low bar squat is great if you want to practice positions for getting rammed in the ass
Low bar is gay. High bar and front squats are king. I do them with RDLs and weighted back extensions.
No one in this thread can squat more that Ripplebreasts, yet will endlessly shit on him for things they don't understand
He's 67 years old now, this isn't 2010 anymore. Starting strength has low bar squats because it's a beginner powerlifting program, and low bar is easier to teach to noobs. The bar position is less intuitive, but the movement is definitely easier for dyel mobilitylets and out of shape highschoolers that the program targets.
>powerlifting program
No.
>powerlifting program
You do not understand, you are idiot like baby except you could know better
Stay mad no one wants to buy your programming
It's straightforwardly more prone to technique error than high bar squat. Why does Rip have to yell about hip drahve? Because many, many trainees have a very difficult time keeping their hips and back in good positions coming out of the hole.
I like low bar fine, but the biggest reason these guys recommend it is that you can load it heavier than other squat variants. Given that SS programs many other posterior chain exercises, I'm feel very safe calling it ego lifting.
Are you pretending that SS is actually a balanced strength training program?
at the bottom I pretend i'm a rocket taking off and explode upwards
> low bar is good for le posterior chain
Maybe the ass but literally nobody grew meaty hamstrings from squatting, in any way.
Tell me you don't squat, without saying 'I don't squat'
Weak baby b***h
This but directed at yourself.
t. Grew zero hamstrings from lowbar squatting and skipping hinges.
Direct yourself to reach proper squat depth
Actually use your hamstrings when you squat and you'll be able to do more than 180lb for 2
I did. Squats do not build hamstrings.
Extremely important. Also, I'm suprised rippe is even letting that guy squat given his proportions. He really should be doing something with a less extreme hinge instead like the hack squat machine or lunges.
Everyone must squat. No exceptions.
Which is why there are hacksquat machines so that you can do squats without having to deal with an excessive hinge thanks to a long femur.
>machine
LOL
Yes. Machines are great. They're just as good as free weights and in some cases are better than free weights.
Machines are homosexual. But more specifically, you asked why Rip in particular has that guy squat. Then suggested homosexual machines. Rip hates machines.
>Barbells, and the primary exercises we use them to do, are far superior to any other training tools that have
ever been devised. Properly performed, full-range-of-motion barbell exercises are essentially the
functional expression of human skeletal and muscular anatomy under a load. The exercise is controlled by
and the result of each trainee’s particular movement patterns, minutely fine-tuned by each individual limb length, muscular attachment position, strength level, flexibility, and neuromuscular efficiency. Balance between all the muscles involved in a movement is inherent in the exercise, since all the muscles involved contribute their anatomically determined share of the work. Muscles move the joints between the bones which transfer force to the load, and the way this is done is a function of the design of the system – when that system is used in the manner of its design, it functions optimally, and training should follow this design. Barbells allow weight to be moved in exactly the way the body is designed to move it, since every aspect of the movement is determined by the body.
I trust tom platz over ripplebreasts. Platz loved the hack squat
>Machines, on the other hand, force the body to move the weight according to the design of the machine. This places some rather serious limitations on the ability of the exercise to meet the specific needs of the athlete. For instance, there is no way for a human being to utilize the quadriceps muscles in isolation from the hamstrings in any movement pattern that exists independently of a machine designed for this purpose. No natural movement can be performed that does this. Quadriceps and hamstrings always function together, at the same time, to
balance the forces on either side of the knee. Since they always work together, why should they be exercised
separately? Because somebody invented a machine that lets us? Even machines that allow multiple joints to be worked at the same time are less than optimal, since the pattern of the movement through space is determined by the machine, not the individual biomechanics of the
human using it. Barbells permit the minute adjustments during the movement that allow individual anthropometry
to be expressed.
Every legit well muscled and well proportioned guy uses machines.
Nope.
You would struggle to name even a handful of top tier current day physiques built solely on freeweights, and even the ingress you could come up with works be inferior to guys that incorporate machines into their training.
>top tier current day physiques
What do you mean by this? Olympia bodybuilders? They absolutely need machines to manage their SFR and to round out their proportions for judging. Your average hobbyist has no such worries.
your average hobbyist should not be bloatmaxxing and T-rexxing so they can make varsity lineman. That's who Rip designed SS for and everyone else is an afterthought for him.
>What do you mean by this?
Bodybuilders, fitness models, fitness ecelebs even. They all use machines.
Power lifters and strongmen use them too. Machine hate is just tough guy posturing.
Very important. Imagine you're frickin your girl and a 315 lb beast jumps and lands directly on your traps and shoulders, you'll need to push up while still fricking her at the same time.
You know, a lot of great lab-coat takes on squat bar placement. But here's another consideration, who gives a shit? Squats are leg exercise. High bar forces more on to the legs. Low bar allows you to use more weight with the sacrifice of ROM by using leverage and the back to do more of the lifting. If you're competing for low bar style squats, do them. If you're trying to get bigger and stronger legs, do high bar since it's harder.
A lot of professional powerlifters do both or use front squats as an assistance exercise.
If you don't compete there is no reason to do low bar unless you have exceptionally long femurs.
frick you jannie i just spent 5 minutes making this and u deleted the thread
very. i hurt my left hip doing hip thrusts, and i couldnt do my normal squat routine tonight.