No More Squats?
Some people are mad at me. You might even be one of them. Join the list. It’s long.
Ever since I said not to do traditional squats anymore, traditionalists have been up in arms. I suppose I can’t blame them. Change can be difficult. Especially when it means you have to scrap one of the core lifts found in almost all your strength training programs.
Of course, I’m not telling you to blindly do what I say. I have concrete reasons (and results) for making this change to my programs. In fact most of you have already read about it on StrengthCoach.com.
Before you dismiss the idea at least take a look at this video clip where I explain exactly why I think you should cut squats from your strength training programs:
Michael Boyle's Strengthcoach.com Blog 
October 23, 2009 at 1:42 pm
On an aside, Thomas Huxley’s original quote has been often MIS-quoted over the years by various people. He actually said:
“It is the customary fate of new truths, to begin as heresies, and to end as superstitions.”
Neither here nor there, just my fastidiousness at work I guess.
October 23, 2009 at 12:06 pm
rear foot elevated is the same as bulgarian split squats, right? If so then that is what I meant by split squats, sorry for the miscommunication.
How would you progress onto the rfess?
October 23, 2009 at 11:59 am
Brandon- rear foot elevated split squats work better than split squats some times as the hip stress is less. I would say the cuases would be a combination of all the ones you listed.
October 23, 2009 at 11:55 am
What about people who suffer hip flexor injuries from the split squat?
I’m a fan of split squats, and I’ve actually seen it work better than squats for people, and I too have gotten great results from it. But It has also irritated my hips, and I stopped doing them before it caused any serious damage.
What would you say is the cause of something like that: bad form, too much weight, improper progression?
October 23, 2009 at 11:25 am
Troy- I read a quote the other day. “All great ideas began as heresy”. I am not trying to be sensational at all. I have pondered this for years. I know many will disagree. I’ll try to post some more supportive info tomorrow.
October 23, 2009 at 11:23 am
I’ll post a video and some links tomorrow.
October 23, 2009 at 6:37 am
Mike,
While I very much respect your work and opinion in the Strength and Conditioning field, I have to say that I am questioning your motivation for making a statement like this about the conventional squat. Please allow me to explain. I don’t know if your intent here was to be sensational or if you genuinely have missed the pink elephant in the room. The pink elephant being, use of the conventional squat for developing max strength and power output in the lower body, which is clearly a legitimate and universally accepted truth. The context of your argument hinges around VOLUME OF WORK, as you say in the video, “… in no way does it (squat) allow you to get maximum WORK (emphasis mine) capability out of your lower body…” – everything revolving around rep ranges above 10RM which is obviously not the only scenario for using a back squat, right? While I do agree that low back FATIGUE is the limiting factor for back squats above about 5RM, I must depart from your reasoning as it regards developing absolute lower body strength specifally with rep protocols in the 1-3RM range. Basically, you have completely bypassed/ignored(?) any other use for the back squat, as if there are none, which is obviously my point of contention.
Hopefully we can further discuss this topic further in a spirit of mutual benefit and understanding. Look forward to your response.
Troy
October 23, 2009 at 5:51 am
So what is the claim, that squats are bad altogether or they are just inferior exercise compared to single leg movements?
Squats have been used as long standard for many years, what would one replace them with?