I have used the box only for a brush and go type of box squat, as this is what I have had my HS athletes do. Today I decided I would try the “real” box squat. I have a history of quad and hamstring trouble, and haven’t really consistently gone heavy on the squat since college (6 years ago). I do have some questions regarding the box squat.
Today, I had some trouble getting my shin angle to be perpendicular (not to mention past that) when I got to the heavy weights. My shin angle was still slanting away from the box. I sat on the box for at least one second to release the hip flexors as best I could, but I still felt it working the quads quite a bit. Also, I was able to go pretty heavy, which I know should not be the case (at least compared to my regular squat max).
I also seemed to have to lean forward a the begininng of the squat to get it going. To me, it seems like this has to happen, but that is not what I read. Any tips or input is appreciated.
what was the box height
10 inch box plus a 25 lb plate. Maybe 11.5-12 inches.
In my opinion anything that involves direct compression of the spine from two directions with heavy loads unsafe… and certainly for sprinters.
If its used just to teach the proper lowest position that’s ok - I would use a rubber band or something else anyway - but that aside its fine.
i agree theres not much need for box squat, just do normal squats.
Hell of a lot safer!
using box squat a la westside is quite safe, not so much loading on the spine.
also works hams and glutes in a great way, done in the proper form
Regular squats do as well without the problems? Box squat people preach the technique, but if you look at the top guys they are landing on those boxes pretty freakin hard. Then again, almost all of them have back injuries from good mornings or the like.
We should be mindful of comments from the late Dr. Siff regarding compression/decompression of the spine:
"Yes, the spinal complex certainly compresses temporarily during all vertical loading, even during standing and walking. However, since the healthy spine displays hysteresis, all of the soft tissue components after the load is removed rapidly return to their preloaded state (the concept of hysteresis is explained on p44 of Siff, M C, “Supertraining”, 2000). Only if the spine has been loaded continuosly for very prolonged periods or if it is suffering from certain soft tissue pathology, does the spinal complex undergo more plastic, prolonged or permanent deformation.
…One has to remember that both excessive or prolonged loading OR stretching can exacerbate pain, muscle tension, tissue deformation and dysfunction. This is often a reason given why frequent spinal manipulation, "twisting or “popping” is discouraged, whether applied personally or by therapists, especially since torque about the rather narrow spinal column is produced by movement of relatively long levers (i.e. the distance from the spine to the sides of the body or head).
Rather than stating that “if there’s too much of a load on these joints”, it would be more accurate to state that if the body perceives that the load seems excessive at any given time (through proprioceptive responses relayed to the brain), the individual will stop the lift and progress no further - either that or he/she will drop the load, as is often the case when one is trying a personal best. When any exercise is perceived to be too demanding in terms of magnitude, duration and cognition (active mental thinking) rapidly intervenes, in some effort to make you ‘rethink’ what you are doing at a given instant.
All too often, analysis of muscle action is based upon entirely involuntary processes involving interaction between various relfexes and the Golgi tendon organ activity. This ignores the fact that all movement involves the ongoing interaction between involuntary and voluntary processes, with the latter playing a very significant role when one is learning a new movement or when coping with the demands of a movement under conditions that test one’s physical limits.
The joint receptors would not “shut down the muscular system” because that will immediately produce extensive instability and expose the spine to much greater risk of injury - that idea is utter nonsense in the case of involuntary spinal stabilization. If anything, inappropriate loading might provoke very painful muscle spasm which will immediately hint to you that you should cease the activity and jettison the load forthwith.
…Some degree of “locking” or “jamming” of the joints is meant to take place under loading or torqueing of the spine because it serves to minimise or halt further rotation, which can be very harmful to the loaded or stretched spine (Kapandji, "Physiology of the Joints discusses this). The “pop” that you may hear during spinal rotation has nothing to do with decompression. Various texts suggest that this is produced because the twisting may cause cavitation or release of tiny gaseous bubbles in the spinal fluid, but no research has ever shown that this sound is associated with “decompression” of the spine.
Anyway, the length of the spine is determined by some tissues which do not respond effectively or rapidly to short-term or sudden manipulation. The ligamentous, collagenous and capsular soft tissues associated with the spine are viscoelastic (i.e., they ‘flow’ viscously in response to slow loading, but elastically to rapid loading), whereas the disc material tends to be more poroelastic, which means that they rely on fluids slowly flowing in and out of the discs to alter their height, volume and stiffness. This explains why we can be a few centimeters taller, in the morning (compared with our evening height) after a good night’s rest which has removed most longitudinal loading from the spine - the fluid forced out of the spinal discs during loading gradually migrated through the porous exterior of the discs. Similarly, when one lies down, the viscoelastic tissues also follow their normal hysteresis and return to their unloaded length in a very short time.
Herein lies a useful tale - if you really wish to safely “decompress” the spine, simply lie down or go to sleep for a few hours. If you insist on some sort of traction or reduced weight, just float gently in a swimming pool or suspend yourself from the top of a power rack with Louie Simmons style rubber bands (of suitable stiffness) attached via a parachute type harness."
Is it compression/decompression we’re worried about or the unloading at the bottom changing the position of the spine from the correct posture?
Hi Charlie,
Good point, but for clarification could you explain what you mean by “unloading at the bottom changing the position of the spine from the correct posture?”
-
From the Westside/Louie Simmons explanation, the hip flexor musculature tends to slacken automatically when one sits on the box while the rest of the muscles should be under voluntary control and contracted. He would say that the box breaks the eccentric and concentric actions, increases starting strength, explosive strength, etc.
-
When you say “correct posture” is there a universally correct posture for everyone?
When I think about it further, I suppose the point must be mentioned that we are dealing with a cost/benefit issue. Depending on the skill of the athlete and or how well coached they are will determine to a large degree the “safety” of any movement. Are there inherently dangerous “exercises” or simply dangerous “exercisers”? Over to you!
I think dynamic box squat w/ 60% or under are pretty safe. The spinal position does get changed on the box at max weights however.
i agree the light box squats at 30-50% may be ok but not max effort.
Hi mortac8,
I tend to agree, however wouldn’t the position details of any movement performed with “max weights” change to some degree?
I believe Dave Tate said in an article that although he didn’t think it absolutely necessary for an elite coach to be an elite lifter, it would be very difficult for any coach to teach him how to squat with over 900 lbs on his back unless they themselves had done it. He said the difference between squatting 400-500 is considerably different than squatting 700, 800 or 900. He was not just referring to competition with the squat suits, etc. He was referring to the nuances of technique I believe. Your thoughts?
Well I say the difference between squatting 500 raw and 700 is a good canvas suit, belt, and wraps. In fact at the Olympia for example they had a raw bench meet. Joe Mazza won the 165s with like 420 and he has gone 600+ in a shirt.
I don’t think the technique of squatting 500 and 700+ are that different. Of course I can’t squat 7 so I guess I wouldn’t know.
Edit: As far as I know the raw 308 squat record is like 825 (w/ a belt). So I don’t wanna hear about people squatting 1000+ (1220) without a leviathan. The difference is mostly in using the equipment.
Also helps if you use a monolift and don’t have to walk out of the rack and even use it to increase leverage.