Execution of Leg Sets

[bigla2004]

Scott- I've been reading and looking through a lot of Ben Pakluski's stuff and a lot of it mirrors your thoughts on continuous tension for muscle growth. For legs he's a proponent of keeping quads tensed on leg press, squats, and hacks, which results in a rom right around parallel or a little higher for most people.

I was wondering your thoughts on that as opposed to bottoming out exercises like squats and hacks where some of the tension may shift to muscles other than quads/glutes.

Matt

[Scott Stevenson]

Scott- I've been reading and looking through a lot of Ben Pakluski's stuff and a lot of it mirrors your thoughts on continuous tension for muscle growth. For legs he's a proponent of keeping quads tensed on leg press, squats, and hacks, which results in a rom right around parallel or a little higher for most people.

I was wondering your thoughts on that as opposed to bottoming out exercises like squats and hacks where some of the tension may shift to muscles other than quads/glutes.

Matt

Hey Matt,

Thanks for posting this up here.

Well, I would say that you're doing to lose tension on the quad and glutes at the bottom of the ROM on squats or hack squat. At the "top" of the ROM (knees and hips extended) this would be the case if you just stand / pause with the weight.

So, when you say, "which results in a rom right around parallel or a little higher for most people" but say, " as opposed to bottoming out exercises like squats and hacks where some of the tension may shift to muscles other than quads/glutes" I can't tell what you are saying Ben suggests for ROM (*range* of motion). Does say just to use the TOP part of the ROM?...

My thought is simply to maintain continuous tension and keep the weight moving throughout a "full" (safe) ROM, but I don't want to preclude the need to pause during a set instantaneously to make an adjustment in stance, grip, etc.

During PUMP sets, PARTIALS definitely make sense, but I'm not suggesting that an abbreviated ROM be used on all exercises, unless that is what feels natural to someone. For some, during chest presses, favoring the top of the ROM feels best and for some the bottom of the ROM. If that's the natural ROM that you've found you progress on, feels right, and can be consistent with, then I'm all for it.

The idea of an abbreviate ROM was put forward with a book called Power Factor training (if not before) as a way to (supposedly) create maximal muscle tension (although I believe the book looked only a strength and didn't account for biomechanical factor that could play a role maximal in external force output when there was sub maximal muscle activation).

Continuous tension will favor metabolic stress and also usher the progressive involvement of higher threshold motor units, calling upon those more difficult to recruit fibers earlier in a set. My experience tells me that doing sets this way is less stressful on the nervous system and means overall a better return on investment when it comes to muscle stress vs. CNS (and autonomic / endocrine) stress.

-S

[bigla2004]

Thanks for the great answer as always. It seems Ben and others are advocates of continuous tension throughout the maximum range of motion where the majority of tension is on the muscle. This is pretty clear cut for most muscle groups to me, with the trickiest being legs.

In an instance of squats/hacks, the deeper one goes the more likely they are to probably recruit muscles outside the quad once they approach/pass parallel. Likely more hip, glute and hamstring involvement and less direct focus on the quad as you bottom out a squat or hack.

Thoughts?

[Scott Stevenson]

Thanks for the great answer as always. It seems Ben and others are advocates of continuous tension throughout the maximum range of motion where the majority of tension is on the muscle. This is pretty clear cut for most muscle groups to me, with the trickiest being legs.

In an instance of squats/hacks, the deeper one goes the more likely they are to probably recruit muscles outside the quad once they approach/pass parallel. Likely more hip, glute and hamstring involvement and less direct focus on the quad as you bottom out a squat or hack.

Thoughts?

Couple thoughts:

What makes you think that quad activation decreases with deeper squats with a given weight?... (The trickiness here is that you can't do as deep with heavier weights, but you might get just as much - and increasing quad activation the deeper you go - if you use lighter weights: Joint moments of force and quadriceps muscle activity during squatting exercise - Wretenberg - 2007 - Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports - Wiley Online Library )

This is a nice article: http://www.treinamentoesportivo.com/wp-c...NTO-02.pdf

Ben's big push here is to perform exercises with intentional activation patterns that ensure you're activating the muscles you want to in performing the exercise. What does he say about keeping the quad maximally active (if that's your goal) during the squat?...

-S

[bigla2004]

The below is the essence of my question. Normally I'd advocate the stretch from a full squat for less weight and more rom but I have very long femurs so I have to lean forward More to squat recruiting more back and hips as well as having low back be a limiting factor (folding over)

Couple thoughts:

What makes you think that quad activation decreases with deeper squats with a given weight?... (The trickiness here is that you can't do as deep with heavier weights, but you might get just as much - and increasing quad activation the deeper you go - if you use lighter weights: Joint moments of force and quadriceps muscle activity during squatting exercise - Wretenberg - 2007 - Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports - Wiley Online Library )

This is a nice article: http://www.treinamentoesportivo.com/wp-c...NTO-02.pdf

Ben's big push here is to perform exercises with intentional activation patterns that ensure you're activating the muscles you want to in performing the exercise. What does he say about keeping the quad maximally active (if that's your goal) during the squat?...

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

The below is the essence of my question. Normally I'd advocate the stretch from a full squat for less weight and more rom but I have very long femurs so I have to lean forward More to squat recruiting more back and hips as well as having low back be a limiting factor (folding over)

Matt,

I don't see that you've asked a question, but only asked for my thoughts.

So, I don't know what you're asking (or what your question is).

-S

[bigla2004]

Apologies for not communicating clearly. I meant that your previous comment was basically the essence of my original question (weight vs rom for more muscle growth in the squat).

Matt,

I don't see that you've asked a question, but only asked for my thoughts.

So, I don't know what you're asking (or what your question is).

-S

[Scott Stevenson]

Apologies for not communicating clearly. I meant that your previous comment was basically the essence of my original question (weight vs rom for more muscle growth in the squat).

No worries. It sounds like I got you covered (even if I'm still not sure what your actual question was specifically... )

I think the issue is with the notion that you don't have maximal quad activation at the depths of a squat, which isn't necessarily true.

From talking to Ben and seeing him present, I'm surprised his thrust would not be that you can make the squat into a quad dominant exercise throughout a very full ROM simply by learning to activate the squat throughout the movement.

-S

[bigla2004]

No worries. It sounds like I got you covered (even if I'm still not sure what your actual question was specifically... )

I think the issue is with the notion that you don't have maximal quad activation at the depths of a squat, which isn't necessarily true.

From talking to Ben and seeing him present, I'm surprised his thrust would not be that you can make the squat into a quad dominant exercise throughout a very full ROM simply by learning to activate the squat throughout the movement.

-S

It could be, but I haven't seen his material addressing the squat specifically, rather the leg press where he mentions most people go too deep and shift tension onto low back etc via rounding at the bottom.

[Scott Stevenson]

It could be, but I haven't seen his material addressing the squat specifically, rather the leg press where he mentions most people go too deep and shift tension onto low back etc via rounding at the bottom.

That's an entirely different issue related to performing the exercise "improperly" meaning in a way that predisposes the low back to injury, not an issue with the normal recruitment patterns used to execute the lift.

Have you been lumping squat, leg press and hack squat (machine) together in terms of quad activation over the course of the movement (ROM)?...

-S