Holy shit

You aren't supposed to go ATG, you're supposed to break parallel.
>one guys opinion on his wordpress blog
oh shit I sure am blown the fuck out

>>one guys opinion on his wordpress blog

>Thinking John Coffee is just "one guy"
Dude's a legend.

Okay so he's one guy who's popular. Doesn't make him any less incorrect.

how is it not apparent to you anecdotally that low bars incorporate far less quads than a high bar

Because my knees bend just as much. Tell me how, SPECIFICALLY, my quads aren't getting engaged when my knees are bending just as much.

You've obviously never done a high bar squat lol

because you are leaning over instead of maintaining an upright position, which inevitably forces the posterior chain to take over some of the tension

...wait, you guys do know you increase the weight on low bar, right? Which means your core and hips are getting engaged, but your quads are getting just as much work as if you were doing lighter high bar squats?

You did know that, right?

If putting more weight on a squat just from doing low bar resulted in the same quad and leg development, sports athletes and olympic weightlifters would train using low bar squats.

Do you hang out with a lot of them? Do you discuss your squat routines?

For the sake of argument, lets say low bar squats utilize your quads 20% less than high bar. You would just increase the weight enough that the 20% subtraction in quad engagement still ends up equaling the tension used during a lighter high bar squat, plus strengthening your core more from increased intensity. It's math, bro. Arguments like "yeah well why does this one guy say they're bad?" and "okay then why don't these people do them?" don't get you very far.

you dont inherently use more weight just because you do low bar

also, if you can lift mroe weight with low bar, it is because you rely more on your posterior chain

But some sports athletes do. Weightlifters train high bar because it more closely mimics the bottom position of a clean or snatch, nothing about developing leg or core strength.

low bar is stupid and will have more people failing by falling forward which is way more dangerous than high and just throwing the bar backwards. even with safety bars. people here defending it are just rippletits SS drones.

>you dont inherently use more weight just because you do low bar
Yes, yes you do, that's the point.
>also, if you can lift mroe weight with low bar, it is because you rely more on your posterior chain
You did read what I typed, didn't you?

>t. fell forward doing a squat his first week of SS

I find highbar squats to be a lot more comfortable, and the form a lot easier.

>more effort is placed on the hamstrings, low back and glutes
Why the fuck is that bad??? Sounds great to me.

naturally I've always tended toward low bar, it just seems easier

only egolifting fatties lift low bar anyway. high bar and front squats
There is no reason whatsoever to low bar squat if you are not competing. Not a single one. Except for boasting about lifting more, that is

Because the squat isnt a hamstring exercise in the first place you retard. Are you just close grip benching from now on because it works the triceps more? God you people make me sick
Have you done any research on this whatsoever or are you just parroting the inane ramblings of some glorified high school coach with nothing to his name

youtube.com/watch?v=KVMOqfnG65U
Just lol

But it is now. It's changed. Get over it grandpa. Front squat as well and you're fine. Calm your autism.

you are an idiot oly lifters squat high bar because its more specific to the competition lifts than a low bar squat same goes for front squat

High bar squats are a thing of beauty
youtube.com/watch?v=VcEsmhVag1c

If you are just lifting for aesthetics and dont give a fuck about competing in PL, you should high bar squat.
youtube.com/watch?v=s6H-xs0fPyM
>In powerlifting squatting the bar is real low on your back, and you use your butt and your lower back almost exclusively. Your legs are just a leverage piece of equipment basically (laughs). The stress isn’t on your legs – well, it is to some degree, but you’re using your butt and your lower back to push yourself up. And the angle at which you squat is sort of a forward lean rather than an up-and-down angle. The upper body is leaning forward, your knees stay in front of your toes.
>In Olympic squatting your knees are in front of your toes, the bar is very high on your back, and you go down to the point where your butt is touching the ground or your heels.
>Olympic-squatting technique is more of a straight up-and-down movement in which the stress is directly on the quadriceps. If you think about it, in bodybuilding you try to make the exercise as hard as you can make it. It’s: How hard can you make the exercise and how productive can you make the muscle response in reference to that?
>In powerlifting the objective is: How easy can you make the exercise so that you can lift the most weight? Powerlifting is not an easy sport, not by any means, but the point of it is: How do you get the most weight up and establish the best possible leverage, whereas in bodybuilding the objective is to make the exercise hard. I liked Olympic lifting for that strict protocol involved. And every Olympic lifter knew that I had great leg development.
In fact, bodybuilders back then never squatted. I first came out to L.A. in ’77, and the squat rack at Gold’s Gym was way in the back behind all the old equipment. Nobody ever used it. The bodybuilders were all doing leg extensions, hack squats and lunges.

My shoulders can't handle it

I think ROM is much more important than "work" you do. Just because you can expend the same amount of energy doesn't guarantee that it's being expended at the same rate at the same place. IMO, high bar back squats should be your default go-to for people with normal/manlet proportions, lanklets should try low-bar. Obviously, certain squats offer certain advantages to those in some sports, squat low-bar for powerlifting, high bar/front squat for Olympic WL.

In OWL the squats teach two important concepts, one being tense and straight torsos which should be your position for catching the bar, and also increased ROM near the bottom requires more power to drive out of than a low bar squat, and also, ofc, being able to catch lower. Really Low bar and High bar aren't so significantly different that it merits bickering over - overall the periodization and training style you target is more important.

lowbar lets you squat 5-10% more because of the better leverage since the bar is close to the center of mass

you can still squat lowbar pretty upright. It wouldnt make much of a difference in terms of quad gains if you squat lowbar upright, which the best squatters do(look at Ray williams for example, has the squat record at 470kg something). You might see a dude doing a semi goodmorning and calling it a lowbar squat, truth it ''squatting'' that way takes a lot of emphasis off the quads and puts a lot of strain on your back. With the right build you can ''squat'' more that way but its not optimal health wise(look at layne norton, several herniated discs because of this style) and its not really a squat

If low bar isn't taxing your quads then you aren't squatting correctly.
Shifting the weight down your back an inch or two shortens the lever arm and slightly changes your back angle, letting you recruit more muscles. They're still 90-95% the same movement.

My ankle mobilty is non existent and I can't afford weightlifting shoes so I squat lowbar