<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:series="http://unfoldingneurons.com/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What You&#8217;re Missing With Half Squats</title>
	<atom:link href="http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/</link>
	<description>The Art and Science of Building Lean Muscle Mass &#60;br&#62;and An Awesome Physique for Men Over 40</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 19:13:17 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Darrin</title>
		<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/comment-page-1/#comment-8194</link>
		<dc:creator>Darrin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 20:53:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/index.php/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/#comment-8194</guid>
		<description>@Jon M.  Thanks for that additional citation - that was an interesting one I missed.  I believe you are right in your hunch about more hormonal and CNS response with the heavier weight, but like most things it&#039;s not black and white.  A higher range of motion, combined with more total time under tension [I know that concept is abused by some writers], could produce more hormonal response than heavier weight under a slightly shorter time under tension and smaller range of motion.  There&#039;s probably a point where the two curves intersect.  My personal belief is that if you just barely break parallel (like the first picture shows), you are doing things optimally. 

However, I don&#039;t come up with sources showing any hormonal measurements for different depths (and there are almost never any measurements of CNS response in any studies).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jon M.  Thanks for that additional citation &#8211; that was an interesting one I missed.  I believe you are right in your hunch about more hormonal and CNS response with the heavier weight, but like most things it&#8217;s not black and white.  A higher range of motion, combined with more total time under tension [I know that concept is abused by some writers], could produce more hormonal response than heavier weight under a slightly shorter time under tension and smaller range of motion.  There&#8217;s probably a point where the two curves intersect.  My personal belief is that if you just barely break parallel (like the first picture shows), you are doing things optimally. </p>
<p>However, I don&#8217;t come up with sources showing any hormonal measurements for different depths (and there are almost never any measurements of CNS response in any studies).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon M.</title>
		<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/comment-page-1/#comment-8191</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon M.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:06:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/index.php/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/#comment-8191</guid>
		<description>Darrin:

I took a look at those sources and you&#039;re absolutely right.  The definitions of full, half, and parallel squats are unclear, especially in the study using the EMG.  The study didn&#039;t even list the %&#039;s for parallel squats without balance boards.

I found this study which compared differences muscle activation in the quads, hamstrings, and gluteus maximus at three squat depths (partial, parallel, and full).  They concluded that the glutes are the only muscle that becomes more active as squat depth increases.  So full depth squats do indeed activate more muscles.

http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/2002/08000/The_Effect_of_Back_Squat_Depth_on_the_EMG_Activity.14.aspx


I&#039;ve always been interested in squats more for the claimed positive effects on GH, testosterone, IGF-1, the CNS, and other muscle building hormones and the resulting potential for increasing upper body size.

As parallel squats can be performed using a much heavier weight than full squats, I&#039;m wondering if they would have a greater effect on hormone production than full squats even though they do not activate the glutes as much.  What are your thoughts?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Darrin:</p>
<p>I took a look at those sources and you&#8217;re absolutely right.  The definitions of full, half, and parallel squats are unclear, especially in the study using the EMG.  The study didn&#8217;t even list the %&#8217;s for parallel squats without balance boards.</p>
<p>I found this study which compared differences muscle activation in the quads, hamstrings, and gluteus maximus at three squat depths (partial, parallel, and full).  They concluded that the glutes are the only muscle that becomes more active as squat depth increases.  So full depth squats do indeed activate more muscles.</p>
<p><a href="http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Abstract/2002/08000/The_Effect_of_Back_Squat_Depth_on_the_EMG_Activity.14.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://journals.lww.com/nsca-j.....ty.14.aspx</a></p>
<p>I&#8217;ve always been interested in squats more for the claimed positive effects on GH, testosterone, IGF-1, the CNS, and other muscle building hormones and the resulting potential for increasing upper body size.</p>
<p>As parallel squats can be performed using a much heavier weight than full squats, I&#8217;m wondering if they would have a greater effect on hormone production than full squats even though they do not activate the glutes as much.  What are your thoughts?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Darrin</title>
		<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/comment-page-1/#comment-8189</link>
		<dc:creator>Darrin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:19:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/index.php/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/#comment-8189</guid>
		<description>@Jon M. - interesting reference you cite, but ironic to your post, that article doesn&#039;t cite any references either (those two he lists are not very relevant if you read the full studies)!

I can&#039;t find any good studies comparing them.  But I think there&#039;s a good reason for that.

Let&#039;s say you are right - there&#039;s no real difference.  I then ask, &quot;but how do you define a half squat?&quot;  Are you thinking &quot;half&quot; means you go 70% down?  50%?  What about if I only go 10% down - is that equal to a full squat?  

No way.

That makes it hard, in a scientific setting, to define &quot;half squat.&quot;

But even if a study defined a half squat and found out that there was no difference, you&#039;re still left as an individual person to figure out &quot;how much is far enough to count as a half?&quot;

From a practical sense, defining the target as &quot;breaking parallel&quot; ensures that people aren&#039;t cheating so much that they get no benefit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Jon M. &#8211; interesting reference you cite, but ironic to your post, that article doesn&#8217;t cite any references either (those two he lists are not very relevant if you read the full studies)!</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t find any good studies comparing them.  But I think there&#8217;s a good reason for that.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s say you are right &#8211; there&#8217;s no real difference.  I then ask, &#8220;but how do you define a half squat?&#8221;  Are you thinking &#8220;half&#8221; means you go 70% down?  50%?  What about if I only go 10% down &#8211; is that equal to a full squat?  </p>
<p>No way.</p>
<p>That makes it hard, in a scientific setting, to define &#8220;half squat.&#8221;</p>
<p>But even if a study defined a half squat and found out that there was no difference, you&#8217;re still left as an individual person to figure out &#8220;how much is far enough to count as a half?&#8221;</p>
<p>From a practical sense, defining the target as &#8220;breaking parallel&#8221; ensures that people aren&#8217;t cheating so much that they get no benefit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon M.</title>
		<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/comment-page-1/#comment-8184</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon M.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 19:02:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/index.php/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/#comment-8184</guid>
		<description>The conclusions made in this article are logical; however, there are no references or studies cited to back up the claims.

Check out this article:

http://weighttraining.about.com/b/2008/05/13/how-low-should-you-squat-full-or-parallel.htm

It cites scientific studies which have compared muscle activation in full-squats to half-squats and concludes that mixing up both full and half squats may be the best way to go.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The conclusions made in this article are logical; however, there are no references or studies cited to back up the claims.</p>
<p>Check out this article:</p>
<p><a href="http://weighttraining.about.com/b/2008/05/13/how-low-should-you-squat-full-or-parallel.htm" rel="nofollow">http://weighttraining.about.co.....rallel.htm</a></p>
<p>It cites scientific studies which have compared muscle activation in full-squats to half-squats and concludes that mixing up both full and half squats may be the best way to go.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guru</title>
		<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/comment-page-1/#comment-3358</link>
		<dc:creator>Guru</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Dec 2008 08:10:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/index.php/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/#comment-3358</guid>
		<description>Great article, short &amp; to the point. I do full squats (thanks to Mehdi of Stronglifts) &amp; know that my hamstrings play a role, but did not really know how. This article explains it well &amp; I am glad I do full squats. I am still in the process of increasing the weights, but my entire thighs are rock hard already.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great article, short &amp; to the point. I do full squats (thanks to Mehdi of Stronglifts) &amp; know that my hamstrings play a role, but did not really know how. This article explains it well &amp; I am glad I do full squats. I am still in the process of increasing the weights, but my entire thighs are rock hard already.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Weighted Dips For the Chest And Triceps &#124; World Fitness Network</title>
		<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/comment-page-1/#comment-885</link>
		<dc:creator>Weighted Dips For the Chest And Triceps &#124; World Fitness Network</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 07:10:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/index.php/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/#comment-885</guid>
		<description>[...] in this way, doing full dips is important for the same reason that doing full squats is important. They simply work more muscles mass. And as you know by now, working more muscle mass means [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] in this way, doing full dips is important for the same reason that doing full squats is important. They simply work more muscles mass. And as you know by now, working more muscle mass means [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jason</title>
		<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/comment-page-1/#comment-341</link>
		<dc:creator>Jason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:04:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/index.php/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/#comment-341</guid>
		<description>Sean- so true, it can happen to anybody that piles the weight on too quickly. I just went through that a month or two ago. I put on the weight too fast and wasn&#039;t going all the way down. Had to take off 20 pounds to get back down to the bottom and work back up from there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sean- so true, it can happen to anybody that piles the weight on too quickly. I just went through that a month or two ago. I put on the weight too fast and wasn&#8217;t going all the way down. Had to take off 20 pounds to get back down to the bottom and work back up from there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sean</title>
		<link>http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/2008/01/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/comment-page-1/#comment-340</link>
		<dc:creator>Sean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2008 12:12:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://worldfitnessnetwork.com/index.php/half-full-squat-range-of-motion/#comment-340</guid>
		<description>Good point about gains when squatting all the way down.  When using good form and a good range of motion you&#039;ll know you have truly gained that extra strength when adding weight.

Another reason to squat all the way down is if you are only half squatting your progress will eventually be marred and you&#039;ll inevitably end up deloading in the long run.

A while back ago I let my ego get in the way and piled on the weight and only half squatted.  Consequently I made no size gains and when I finally decided to use good form I realized I wasn&#039;t as strong as I thought I was

If you are a beginner start off right the first time.  If you are an intermediate and thnk maybe you need to brush up on your form a bit, drop the ego and squat correctly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good point about gains when squatting all the way down.  When using good form and a good range of motion you&#8217;ll know you have truly gained that extra strength when adding weight.</p>
<p>Another reason to squat all the way down is if you are only half squatting your progress will eventually be marred and you&#8217;ll inevitably end up deloading in the long run.</p>
<p>A while back ago I let my ego get in the way and piled on the weight and only half squatted.  Consequently I made no size gains and when I finally decided to use good form I realized I wasn&#8217;t as strong as I thought I was</p>
<p>If you are a beginner start off right the first time.  If you are an intermediate and thnk maybe you need to brush up on your form a bit, drop the ego and squat correctly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
