Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'm with Rev on this one, I'm not sure I see squats as a great candidate for volume training,

Look at Markos beginner program, 2x 20 rep sets I think it is, then as soon as you can do that, you move into more focused training and the reps drop dramatically, regardless of if you want looks/size/strength, really high reps of squats isn't a good idea, but that's just my 2 cents and I know Birds you on a program which you're great at sticking to.

If you can do SIXTY reps before the knee bends in, I think you're doing fine.

my knees buckle inwards when I start getting tired. Its the first sign that my form is dropping.

If it isnt happening every set and every rep, probably isnt a real big issue. Just means its time to stop and go onto the next exercise.

If its happening from the first rep and pain builds up until you have to stop, then I say stop squatting

It happens past 50kg and obviously after many reps of 40kg. Birds told me to do as many reps as the 40kg as I can but I can see I'm not going to get much more than what I got out last night as I want to stop when my knee starts bending in.

Only thing is legs aren't sore at all today from squats, (they usually are sore the next day) so I'm a little worried I'm not really doing much to the muscles by keeping the weight at 40kg, but at 50kg my knee will bend in almost straight away.

have you tried 50 as your first working set?

that may answer if its fatigue causing the bending or not, otherwise may just be a strength thing that you need to work on

No I havent tried 50 as my first working set, I think it's a strength issue as I was doing it the other day when training with Birds and doing less sets.

However I can try 50kg first up next time just to double check

The reason she did fine for 60 reps is because I dropped the weight back to where it wouldn't happen.

Knee comes in at 45, 50, and badly at 60.

So for now my recommendation was to bring the weight back to a weight that didn't produce the fault, until squat mobility improves and strength will be built with volume at low weight rather than increasing the weight and having the knee come in. We will progressively be increasing the weight with small increments, as her knee allows, but for now I want her to be getting out volume so her muscles and joints know how to do the exercise even when tired.

Thinking about this one, I doubt it's anything to do with mobility at all. I'd say hip drive on this one.

Leesh , give this a shot and see if anything feels different. Without a bar or anything , get into a deep squat position.

if you can imagine at the top of your butt (where the tail bone is) You want to focus on driving upwards from that point as you move up. When the hip hinge is moving you will feel the movement has more strength the force will be moving through that point as a focus. Try this a few times without thinking about 'chest up' etc, till you recongise the hip motion.

If you have no hip drive , it will be becasue you have been taught to look all chest up and pretty in the squat first. Without hip drive the legs and quads cop the load alot more. I reckon this is pretty common. I recall this was one of my issues from way back when I learnt to squat right.

If I am right , then that weight you are doing will get blown into the weeds pretty quick.

Edited by rev210

So I did this, I'm thinking about moving up with the butt first yes? It's obviously easy to do with no weights, I'm not really sure what I'm meant to be feeling though, it seems a quicker motion however.

So I did this, I'm thinking about moving up with the butt first yes? It's obviously easy to do with no weights, I'm not really sure what I'm meant to be feeling though, it seems a quicker motion however.

Pretty much.

The fact you are noticing a 'quicker' motion means it's on like donkey kong. That there is the issue. Using the hips will produce way more power. The results will include 'speed' and power. Once the load is on, the hips will generate inertia and power in the lift. Hips are super important in squats .

do some focus on getting the most out of that section of the movement , enjoy exploiting it for a while and getting used to it.

Pretty much.

The fact you are noticing a 'quicker' motion means it's on like donkey kong. That there is the issue. Using the hips will produce way more power. The results will include 'speed' and power. Once the load is on, the hips will generate inertia and power in the lift. Hips are super important in squats .

do some focus on getting the most out of that section of the movement , enjoy exploiting it for a while and getting used to it.

Alrighty! hmmm, why do people say chest first instead of butt first then?

So I'm just going to think butt up first from now on?

I would like to try with some weights tomorrow and see how I go knee wise

Thanks for your help :)

To stop people's bad habit of looking at the ground and allowing the upper back to round. Chin up chest up. That was covered in those so you think you can squat videos, which I though you showed me.

To stop people's bad habit of looking at the ground and allowing the upper back to round. Chin up chest up. That was covered in those so you think you can squat videos, which I though you showed me.

yeah fair enough, after watching those videos I look higher up towards the ceiling now rather than into the mirror....much better!

Chin up / chest up causes as much issue (no hip drive) as head down. People seem to go overboard on tweaks vs core learnings.

I was taught at the very begining to work on hip hinge, then tweak other stuff like elbows back and chest up. Hip activation was the most critical part moving through the right alignment and position. I am not saying to the neglect of the other things but, if it isn't executed the squat isn't going to go right.

Looking down a little, a spot a few meters away on the ground , (as opposed to staring into the ceiling) helps to get the hip activation. When you are learning. High bar vs low bar also comes into play on how vertical the torso appears with the right spine and plane of movement vs depth.

Dan , reading back on your stuff, I am now pretty sure hip drive is your issue also.

Dan green in this training vid isn't checking light bulbs

16/10/13

Deadlift

50kg x 10

60kg x 10

70kg x 10

85kg x 1

95kg x 1

Bench Press

30kg x 10

35kg x 10

40kg x 7

40kg x 6

45kg x 1

45 Leg Press

80kg x 10

100kg x 10

120kg x 10

140kg x 10

160kg x 7

180kg x 1 (I had 2 spotters for this weight, as our machine doesnt have a safety catch, I felt like a powerlifter haha)

Captains Chair

25

20

25

20

25

Knee Raises

20

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
    • Yes they do. For some maybe. But for those used the most by abusers, ie Skylines, the numbers are known. The stock eyebrow height for R32/3 Skylines is about 365/375mm or thereabouts. The minimum such heights are recorded in adjacent columns in the database.
×
×
  • Create New...