ur missing the point. i can tell cause ur asking the wrong question. i never said they recruit more fibers. i never came anywhere near saying that. what i did say is that inter-muscular coordination when optimal allows an athlete to efficiently and fully use his/her available motor pool.
let me also make clear perfect movement or perfect inter-muscular coordination is an impossibility. perfection can never be attained but you can always get closer to it. ie development is asymptotal.
Specific adaptations, not intermuscular coordination, show me, show me something anything thats shows squat watever way you wanna do it on your head if u must, 1/4 squat, 1/8 squat, low bar, high bar, no bar, belted, non belted, isometric, single legged anything, you show me a study or any other information that shows that it improves intermuscular coordination or efficiency any where near sprinting or even a sprinting related activity or heck even more than bounding or any type of jump.
im trying to apply this to the theme of this thread on high bar squats or low bar squats, you say do hihg bar squats but im not convinced wouldnt both be great to do?
How would you even measure it? And even if one squat worked better for improving IC during squatting, how could you tell if it “transferred” to sprinting?
haha along the same lines as what i am thinking, thats y i just want to see something that shows that this is the case, because such a study is beyond anything i know of, but perhaps i am naive
ur not naive and ur not wrong a study showing us the way would be nice. but there are two problems with that. first studies are usually wrong or limited because they only address a few factors when truely the interaction of many many factors determines the outcome.
2. tell me when a study was done b4 a coach or athelte had already applied the given knowledge. studies usually come in to reinforce what atheltes and coaches already knew.
i get the impression that you think im trying to convert you. im not. in the kindess way i can say it, i could give a flying F*^& what you do in your life or in the gym, and that was said with the utmost resepect 
im only presenting what i know to be true.
now for you, because it doesnt have the “proof” you so desire you must decide. you must look at what ive written and decide for yourself if the logic is there or not. dont simply think , well no one else in th epat has done it so it must not be worth shit. this is the thining of aloser because only a winner is willing to do what others do not b4 they have the confirmation that what they are doing is right. research the topic for yourself. i reccomend some bondarchuck, verk, and zat. because they all present alot info that supports this. Bondarcuk has a book commin out called tranfer to training. may be a good read.
Just playing the devil’s advocate here: What if the general consensus about whether a low or high bar squat doesn’t make a damn difference at all… and a future study eventually reinforces what the athletes/coaches already know. What then? Either way, before that, we’re talking faith here. So perhaps best to do what seems correct… follow your faith! So far, to the best of my knowledge, there’s many ways of performing the squat; way more than actually predicting the outcome of the performance on the track or the field as a result – by any particular way. Hell, some champions don’t squat at all! Go figure! Personally, I like the Oly-type squat; it seems to be more standardized from a session-to-session perspective.
not just faith (u do have to believe in what you do) but knowledge. its all there layed out by siff, verk, bondarchuk, zat, and even charlie.
The differences are probably hardly measurable. I think the biggest factor is what you feel comfortable with so that you can attack the bar and make gains. I also think it would be best to use at least two, maybe three varieties, switching between them every few weeks.
That article has been circulating for a long time, and I have seen several articles disputing many of the claims made in the article, in terms of who did what and how effective it was. Having said that, I like step ups, but using steps ups with significant weight is extremely dangerous.
i’ve yet to do front squats heavy so far for me its 155lb front squat (felt easy but didnt wanna go heavy) 300lb high bar squat, and 350lb low bar squat. Heh
Could you expand more upon the increases in efficiency and maybe how to produce this effect? Obviously the Abadjiev model of training(max all the time, except when there is absolutely nothing left and the athlete takes a light day, all done at a high frequency) may be one way of accomplishing this, but in your opinion is this the most optimal way of increasing mechanical efficiency? And if not what do you do differently and why? Also, although you sort of alluded to it in previous posts, how much of a transferrance between different movements(not necessarily only their movement patterns but also their velocity) is there between movements? Sorry for all the questions but this is an interesting concept and one worth looking into.
simple, be an absolute prick about biomechancial form. but as you mentioned frequency is needed for development. one method of teaching proper activation patterns are extreme isos. seems a little couterintutive but ive personally seen the tranference from an iso lunge to a sprint or an iso push up to a bench press (when it comes to getting in the proper postion). this is work that most people arent willing to do to be honest. ive told a few people on this board how to perform them, they say they will and i never hear back from them lol it is extremely painful work… extremely.
the transference is universal, specific to muscle or muscle group not necessarily movement. for example there is an angle that a given muscle can optimally express its motor ability. we train so that in all movements the muscle is recruited at the most optimal postion. this is a natural occurance and development in training. your CNS will automatically seek a level of biomechancial effeciency but by intentionally training a certain way we accelerate this process.
for example the greatest difference between a guy that been training for a year and a guy the same size and weight that can squat doulbe the weight is efeciency of movement (among other things). over the years of training the CNS being the problem solver it is it learns the most effecient means to lift the weight (to a certain degree). its all about motor learning in athletics.
velocity must be trained but it is also affected by motor patterns. a muscle can generate a given force which results in a given acceleration. this acceleration just like the force can be optimized, as they are related, by increasing the effeciecntcy of the movement.
basically i beleive that you should get the most out of your bodies available motor ability then build off of that. you will be suprised how much more you can lift, how much faster you will run with out becoming “stronger” but simply becoming more effecient.
What in particular leads to the increase of efficiency with the usage of extreme iso’s(not saying I doubt you, just curious about the specific reasons)? Also, off topic, but have you read Bondarchuk’s new book? What all did it go over?
motor learning and body postion. get into the proper postion, hold it and contract in that postion. if you consider that its 5 mins of continuous contraction its no wonder the motor learning is so fast. motor learning is a complex issue that has many schools of thought. so the exact reason it works… i cant give that to you. regardless though, it does. i also hypothesize that the fact that its in an extreme joint angle has somethign to do with motor learning (sensory feedback from afferent nerve fibers being increased do to the postion). but honestly i dont know.
i have not read his new book, its not out yet, the topic is transfer in training.
went back to high bar, noticed how weak i am again hahahaha. Felt my lower back take in more pressure, and alittle on my knees but nothing troublesome. However next day i was sore on my back and glutes and hammies, not the quads like i usually am when i do high bar squats. My back is under even more pressure feels like the erector spinae muscles are gonna tear in the fifth rep of a set hehehe. Strength is the same on the squat but i ony did it twice so i will see in a few weeks how i adapt, but 255lbs feels troublesome for 5 reps, doable yet troublesome.
For those still willing to hear,and possibly learn what they do not understand yet,I do not think there’s ever been a clearer definition and more appropriate explanation of the basics of CFTS itself on this site!
Great effort,James.
yes i think many people took offense to what i am proposing. many assummed it flys in the face of what charlie preaches but in reality if you truely understand what i am saying, its effects, and its theory you will realize that it has much in common with charlies system of training.
