Question: How important is it to perform squats over the full range of motion? Do I have to squat from “ass-to-grass” to lockout, or will a partial rep be just as effective? I see a lot of people doing half squats in the gym and a few of them have impressive legs.
Answer: If your primary goal is to stimulate strength and size increases in the hip and thigh musculature it is not necessary to perform squats over the full range of motion (ROM). To increase the difficulty of the exercise and reduce the load required to achieve momentary muscular failure within the desired repetition range I teach clients to perform only the bottom half to two-thirds of the movement, squatting down until their thighs are parallel with the ground then only coming back up about forty five to sixty degrees. You could reduce this ROM even further and squat isometrically using either a static hold or timed static contraction in the mid-range position and it would still be effective. As long as the ROM or position used effectively loads all of the muscles being targeted the strength gains for those muscles will transfer to the full ROM.
As for people with impressive legs half-squatting, keep in mind what Arthur Jones used to often point out; the fact that some result has been achieved by some method is not proof that the same or better results could not have been achieved more quickly, more efficiently, and more safely by other means.
This subject recently came up during an online discussion with Markus Reinhardt. He posted a video of a client performing low partial squats and I meant to only type a short comment but ended up writing several paragraphs. Below are my comments, edited slightly for brevity and clarity, and a screenshot from the video showing her at the top of the ROM used:
“How well you perform an exercise is far more important than how much weight you lift. The goal of exercise isn’t to make weight go up and down, it is to impose a demand on the target muscles to work them with a high intensity of effort and stimulate an adaptive response while minimizing the risk of injury.
Using the lower portion of the ROM of a squat or deadlift and avoiding the top increases the average lever you work against, which makes a weight feel much heavier. This is why most people do the opposite of what they should, squatting only in the top half of the ROM and resting at lockout.
Consider that you can lockout and stand with a very heavy barbell on your back for a long time and even walk around with it, because your knees do not bend much. With the bones of your legs aligned and good posture the lever your muscles work against to stand with a barbell on your back is minimal.
If you squat down to parallel (but do not go lower and rest your hamstrings on your calves) and try to hold that position with the same weight you won’t be able to for even a small fraction of the time you can stand with it.
The weight is the same in both instances, but it feels much heavier as your thighs approach parallel because of the difference in leverage. Remember, your muscles work against resistance which is the product of weight, leverage, and other factors, not just the weight.
The difficulty of a full ROM squat is the average of the difficulty of holding the bar in either of these positions. Since standing in lockout is very easy it brings the average difficulty way down. This means you have to use a much heavier weight to place the same demand on the muscles than if you only performed the lower portion of your ROM. You can provide the same average resistance to the target muscles with a shorter average lever and heavier weight or with a longer average lever and lighter weight. It doesn’t make any difference to your muscles but it does to your spine.
If you reduce the ROM to the lower half (thighs from parallel to about 45 degrees relative to the ground) to two-thirds of the movement (to about 60 degrees) the difficulty becomes much greater because both of these positions are a lot harder to hold than lockout.
Then comes the issue of timing. You do not spend an equal amount of time at all positions over your ROM. You must slow down as you come to a stop and then start again at the start/bottom and end/top of the ROM, so you spend more time towards the ends than the middle. How much more slowly you perform these turnarounds, or if you pause at the start or end points how much time you spend holding, also affects the average.
This is why most people stop and rest at lockout when squatting, it makes squatting much easier. If you do the opposite, if you gradually slow to a stop then hold the weight motionless for a few seconds at the start with your thighs parallel then slowly squeeze out of the start (taking a second or two to just move the first few inches) the exercise becomes much harder.”
This applies to many other exercises as well. It is the exact opposite of the “strong-range” partials recommended by Pete Sisco which should not be performed by anyone who values their joints. I cover the application to other exercises in detail in Elements of Form.
What if your goal isn’t just effective exercise and you also want to squat with as heavy a weight as possible? If your primary goal is to perform the squat in powerlifting you should train dynamically going down to the depth required by whatever organization you compete in. For more on squatting for powerlifting read my interview with Doug Holland.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Training squats or lunges in the bottom ranges of motion is super effective. I have applied this also to training bodyweight lunges, but my method trains the full range in a step-wise fashion from most to least difficult. I do 3-5 slow repetitions in the below parallel range, then 3-5 around the parallel range, then 3-5 just above parallel range, and finally, if possible, 3-5 in the upper lockout range. If you can do this at all, most will find that by the time they get to training the lockout range, their thighs and hips are like rubber. Here’s my video demonstration. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoSSuSKZk3s
I see lots of people bouncing in and out of the most difficult bottom position of lunges and single-leg squats, yet trying to make the exercise more difficult by carrying a barbell, kettle bell, or dumbbell. This method makes external resistance unnecessary for the vast majority of people. I have a goal to do single-leg squats (aka pistols) with the above method and 90s-120s TUL. I presently doubt my hip and thigh development and strength will leave much to be desired when I reach that goal.
Hey Don,
I do something similar with bodyweight-only clients if they start to fail before completing the minimum target rep count in the lower portion of the ROM.
Having people gradually slow to a stop, then hold for at least a second or two, then barely moving as they start (I tell them to imagine they’re trying to sneak out of the starting position) is definitely more effective, as well as much safer.
With regards to one-legged squats Arthur Jones once wrote,
“Apart from a rather limited number of hardcore bodybuilders who are misguided enough to believe that they have a chance to compete against the outright genetic freaks that now dominate bodybuilding competition, just about anybody else in this country can produce nearly all of the potential benefits of proper exercise without spending much if anything in excess of about twenty dollars. You can build both a chinning bar and a pair of parallel dip bars for a total cost of only a few dollars, and those two exercises, chins and dips, if properly performed, will stimulate muscular growth in your upper body and arms that will eventually lead to muscular size and strength that is very close to your potential.
Adding full squats, eventually leading up to one-legged full squats, and one-legged calf raises, will do much the same thing for your legs and hips. Using this very simple routine, when you get strong enough to perform about ten repetitions of one-armed chins with each arm, your arms will leave very little to be desired.”
Love that quote. Keep up the good work Drew. BTW did you know, I just listened the other day to Mike Mahler’s interview of Steve Maxwell, and Steve mentioned you and timed static contractions a few times while discussing AJ, Ellington Darden, Ken Hutchins, and Mentzer also. Here’s the interview: http://mikemahler.com/blog/live-life-aggressively-podcast/ep-125.html
Haven’t listend to part 2 yet, it was just posted, but apparently Steve talks more in this episode about TSC: http://mikemahler.com/blog/live-life-aggressively-podcast/ep-128.html
Hey Don,
Thanks for the heads up. We talked a few months back via Skype and Steve said he had come “full circle” back to high intensity training and was interested in timed static contractions. I think TSC is a great protocol for a variety of applications.
I thought he had gone ballistic for a while (LOL). I am doing various longer duration static holds presently. I use static holds with a resistance band for leg flexion, using progressively difficult bands; hold to isometric failure. I am also working on developing a set of progressions for straddle planche, front lever, and back lever using only one 30+ second static hold per training session, as opposed to the common training systems which use 5-10 sets of 3-5 seconds. “They” say it can’t be done with “only” one set which is “not enough volume.” We’ll see.
Hey Don,
I’m confident you’ll prove them wrong. If they say it can’t be done with “only” one set, it’s because they’ve never done an exercise intensely enough to understand why that’s all it takes.
Drew,
Thanks for the great post. In the April 12 edition of T-Nations “A weekly dose” this was their FEATURE ARTICLE
Rep Ranges for Muscle Size
by Paul Carter
It’s refreshing to still read the logical reasons to training smart. Even it the goal is hypertrophy or strength gain, good form will take you a long way and perhaps even lengthen the years you can enjoy your sport. Thanks again! Keep up the good work.
Hey Jesse,
You’re welcome, and thanks or letting me know about the T-Nation article. It was full of nonsense that needs debunking, something I can always count on T-Nation to deliver.
Hello Drew!
This article is coming right on time. Just started progressing on single leg squats, but for now I can do only upper part of the motion, I descend to a chair with few books on it. Plan is of course to progress through deepening ROM over time. My concern was that different part of ROM will stimulate different heads of quadriceps muscle.
Also what is your thought on back exercises that work spinal muscles only in hyperextended part of ROM, like back bridges, or locust pose from yoga? I find that the last of two is providing extremely hard and direct stimulus to spine extensors, especially the variant when you suspend legs under something immovable, and arch up upper body in the air. Would this be good alternative for RDL?
Thanks!
Hey Mile,
Different portions of the ROM are not going to stimulate different heads of the quadriceps. You could even do nothing but a mid-range timed static contraction belt squat and still effectively work the entire quadriceps.
The portion of the ROM the spinal muscles are worked in is also not important for muscular strengthening (although it is a concern for safety in some exercises). You can also effectively work the erector spinae isometrically, either with timed static contraction protocol or as part of a dynamic movement like stiff-leg deadlifts. If done correctly trunk extensions on a roman chair can be an effective alternative to deadlifts for exercising the muscles of the lower back.
Great blog post.
Speaking of squats. What do you think of hack squat machines? I’m only doing leg press on a very basic leg press machine and would like to include squats in my workouts. But I don’t want to use a barbell on my back to prevent injuries and risks associated with going to failure even if there are ways around (using power rack etc)
We have a hack/power squat machine combo (front or back) at my gym. Is it safe to use them and do you recommend the hack or power squat exercise as a barbell squat replacement?
Thanks a lot for your time!
Hey Pascal,
Used correctly, a properly-designed hack squat machine will be safe and effective, but whether you have a bar on your back or pads on your shoulders the load is still being transferred to the hip and thigh muscles through your spine. If the exercise is performed correctly the amount of weight will be much less than what people can handle using typical squat form and much safer, but whether this is safe enough depends on your back. Used correctly, a properly-designed leg press will do the same thing while putting much less stress on the spine.
There are a few very good machines, a few horrendously bad machines, and a lot of machines that are in between, though. So I can not say whether the specific one you have is safe and effective without knowing which one it is.
hi drew. I have decided to train at home. I am planning to do split squats and pistols. in what way would you recommend balancing oneself while performing pistols?
Hey James,
If you’ve got a squat rack set a bar at about waist height and hang on to that if you’re having difficulty balancing, or you can use a suspension trainer. I cover unilateral squats in detail in Project Kratos.