Exercise

[Vandy321]

You're ignoring the benefits that training at or near heavy (lets call it 1-5RM) has for the central nervous system, EVEN in half depth squats). ROM can be trained in other ways (FS, goblet squats, lunges, etc) but there is no substitute for squating/DL heavy from a CNS perspective.

 

[OOSWLC]

You're ignoring the benefits that training at or near heavy (lets call it 1-5RM) has for the central nervous system, EVEN in half depth squats). ROM can be trained in other ways (FS, goblet squats, lunges, etc) but there is no substitute for squating/DL heavy from a CNS perspective.

you say i'm ignoring, but from my perspective you're failing to define what "near heavy" even means.

again, heavy is relative. heavy training is about progressive increasing of stimulus - regardless of starting point, and regardless of ROM. getting back to backcountry hunting - no one says less ROM is going to be beneficial.

also- the science of strength training isn't as simple as "lift heavy as much as you can" in fact it shows, time and time again, that is a haphazard and short term approach to strength training. look up the bulgarian olympic weightlifting team and their injury rates.

there is also an unbelievable amount of documented soviet sports science that shows reps in the 70-80% range of max get you the strongest the fastest.

"going heavy all the time" works when you're a beginner - but also, the science there shows that reps in the 50% range are literally equally as effective as reps in the 85% range for a brand new athlete.

and we aren't even getting into the myraid of muscles you aren't training (hence, not adapting) by intentionally sacrificing form.

you can get the final word if you want, i'm done after this last point... and i will say, i think this is my weakest point of all because -"just cause everyone jumped off a bridge does that mean you would too?"...BUT...
you will literally not find a single respected strength coach who argues for an above parallel squat for literally any reason.

 

[Vandy321]

you say i'm ignoring, but from my perspective you're failing to define what "near heavy" even means.

again, heavy is relative. heavy training is about progressive increasing of stimulus - regardless of starting point, and regardless of ROM. getting back to backcountry hunting - no one says less ROM is going to be beneficial.

also- the science of strength training isn't as simple as "lift heavy as much as you can" in fact it shows, time and time again, that is a haphazard and short term approach to strength training. look up the bulgarian olympic weightlifting team and their injury rates.

there is also an unbelievable amount of documented soviet sports science that shows reps in the 70-80% range of max get you the strongest the fastest.

"going heavy all the time" works when you're a beginner - but also, the science there shows that reps in the 50% range are literally equally as effective as reps in the 85% range for a brand new athlete.

and we aren't even getting into the myraid of muscles you aren't training (hence, not adapting) by intentionally sacrificing form.

you can get the final word if you want, i'm done after this last point... and i will say, i think this is my weakest point of all because -"just cause everyone jumped off a bridge does that mean you would too?"...BUT...
you will literally not find a single respected strength coach who argues for an above parallel squat for literally any reason.

I would appreciate it if you stopped putting words in my mouth. Again, show me where I advocated for half reps? It's all here on this page, you won't find it.

What I did say was the guy who can only squat 150#'s full ROM, all else being equal, is doing less for himself from a CNS/neurological standpoint than the guy doing half reps with 500#. Nobody would advocate training half reps primarily, but it is acknowledged/respected as a way to overload and thus cause adaptation.

Again, ROM can be trained hundreds of ways, so can individual muscle recruitment. But taxing the CNS is best done with heavy weight, that is an undeniable scientific fact.

I'm out, before you start quoting me stuff from the Planet Fitness personal training handbook.

 

[OOSWLC]

What I did say was the guy who can only squat 150#'s full ROM, all else being equal, is doing less for himself from a CNS/neurological standpoint than the guy doing half reps with 500#. Nobody would advocate training half reps primarily, but it is acknowledged/respected as a way to overload and thus cause adaptation.

it's pretty well accepted that reps under 60% of max don't even count as training volume... so what are you even saying here? and also- how are you even quantifying these benefits? if the dude squatting 150 is at 80% of his max but the dude squatting 500 is at 65%... does your neuro adaptation argument still hold up? who is getting more from a CNS standpoint?

i said i was done but jesus this has my blood boiling that you are pulling this "putting words in your mouth" card. i'm literally responding to your stupid bro science and you can't handle it.

 

[Vandy321]

it's pretty well accepted that reps under 60% of max don't even count as training volume... so what are you even saying here? and also- how are you even quantifying these benefits? if the dude squatting 150 is at 80% of his max but the dude squatting 500 is at 65%... does your neuro adaptation argument still hold up? who is getting more from a CNS standpoint?

i said i was done but jesus this has my blood boiling that you are pulling this "putting words in your mouth" card. i'm literally responding to your stupid bro science and you can't handle it.

Dude literally said he can't squat 300# and has no desire to. So I hardly doubt he's training in the 80-100% of his max range.

The point is, the adult male who only squats 150# is hardly in a place to critique anyone in the gym for "baby reps" and laugh at them for trying.

 

[*zap*]

I could baby rep 300# all day....

 

[Vandy321]

I could baby rep 300# all day....

And if you did so (once in a while), you may actually see some benefit in your training from overloading the CNS.

 

[OOSWLC]

And if you did so (once in a while), you may actually see some benefit in your training from overloading the CNS.

....but it *probably* won't benefit your squat very much, since you are a person who squats to a lower range of motion - unless you have a specific problem sticking in that spot on the way up. (that is actually another totally legit reason for doing partial-ROM squatting)

there are more reasons to squat than sheer muscular strength, so there are more factors at play than simple muscle recruitment and the potential benefits of maxing that factor out.

if your only goal is to increase muscle fiber recruitment and you think that will make you the strongest- why even squat? you'd be better off leaving the barbell in the rack and doing leg press/smith machine movements where you don't have to do anything other than use those muscles specifically.

 

[JohnnyB]

You literally used the term “functional fitness” and accuse another of invoking “broscience”... lol

 

[*zap*]

I apologize if I hurt any baby rep folks feelings.... .

 

[Jmort1754]

Are you working with a physical therapist?

Yes, they recommended rower or non impact machine to start.

 

[OOSWLC]

please, anyone, provide any source at all that shows "training half reps is acknowledged/respected as a way to overload and thus cause adaptation"

....ok. i can feel myself becoming "that guy". the reality is i don't hate on anyone who is trying to improve themselves through training...

also, if anyone wants to learn to squat over 300# - i have coached over 20 women to that point, so let's get this ball rolling.

 

[Vandy321]

please, anyone, provide any source at all that shows "training half reps is acknowledged/respected as a way to overload and thus cause adadaptation"

Wendler said it, and programs it. So does Johnny Welborn from power athlete

Is it not in the planet fitness training manual?

 

[Gvanwage]

Rower. Or cheaper option… pull-up bar and a jump rope

 

[BadDogPSD]

Yes, they recommended rower or non impact machine to start.

I'd opt for a rower, but make sure you use proper form. A rower will give you a pretty good, almost full-body workout.
I like air rowers, but they are noisy. A magnetic rower is much more quiet if worried about disturbing others.

 

[OOSWLC]

Wendler said it, and programs it. So does Johnny Welborn from power athlete

Is it not in the planet fitness training manual?

*buys barbell from rogue*
*buys 5/3/1 book*
*becomes authority on strength training*

 

[BadDogPSD]

Guys, the OP is rehabbing a broken back & subsequent surgeries...

 

[Vandy321]

*buys barbell from rogue*
*buys 5/3/1 book*
*becomes authority on strength training*

I'm 40 dude, been doing this since HS...

I'm not the one on here trying to gain clients by regurgitating something he read online.

 

[OOSWLC]

Guys, the OP is rehabbing a broken back & subsequent surgeries...

lol... fair point

 

[OOSWLC]

I'm 40 dude, been doing this since HS...

I'm not the one on here trying to gain clients by regurgitating something he read online.

i hope you keep getting super strong!