# Front Squat: Difference?



## Wells (Oct 25, 2010)

HELLO HI. :laugh:

Yeah well anyway I was reading this months *FLEX Mag* which is an *Arni special* and is worth buying. All of his old routines throughout the years for each bodypart, really good read. :thumb:

*ANYWAY* I was reading his leg routine and saw that he did normal squats (Bar behind neck) and front squats... I never do front squats as I didn't know there was any real difference that could make a drastic change to my legs.

So... What is the real difference? Is it that the front squat puts more stress on the quads?

Cheers.


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

I'm reading same mag! Quite interesting!

Front squats take the stress off the lower back and prioritises the quads, brilliant exercise IMO


----------



## RickMiller (Aug 21, 2009)

^^^ Depends how you perform a squat in the first place. If you utilise the 'high bar' (olympic style) position, the aim should be to achieve as upright a posture as possible, therefore the load (bar) is primarily between the knees and hips and there is more quadriceps involvement as they are fully stretched in the bottom of the squat. This makes this position excellent for bearing loads overhead (e.g. snatch, full clean) but ultimately the amount you can lift is lower.

Whereas the 'low bar' position (powerlifting squat) the load is borne by the hips and lower back, the load that can be lifted is far greater but emphasis is lost from the quadriceps. Most of the time, through a lack of clear form or poor technique, lifters often do a 'mix' of these two lifts, most would benefit (in my opinion) from learning the full olympic position as it has more benefits with regard to hip and knee flexibility and encourages good posture.

Concentration on this depth of squat would likely lead to greater quadricep hypertrophy (hence why Arnie possibly used it) but for the love of god stretch your wrists and learn a decent clean grip if you decide to do the front squat


----------



## Barker (Oct 1, 2009)

where exactly do you rest the bar? when ive tried with just the bar to see what itd be like it kinda gets on my collar bones... dont wanna be holding 100kg on my collar bones...


----------



## Bish83 (Nov 18, 2009)

i cant remember the correct names for it but the back squat put approximatly 40/60 on the front and back muscles but the front squat equalises it making it 50/50 so the legs get better hit. Arnold mentioned because of his height he had to lift out of the hole using his lower back so possibly why he used the front squat to accomodate poor form.


----------



## RickMiller (Aug 21, 2009)

Barker said:


> where exactly do you rest the bar? when ive tried with just the bar to see what itd be like it kinda gets on my collar bones... dont wanna be holding 100kg on my collar bones...


Well if a little girl can do it... 










No seriously, if your upper arms are parallel with the floor then the bar should rest quite nicely on your front delts. It will press against your throat, which can be a little uncomfortable at first but you'll get over it.


----------



## RickMiller (Aug 21, 2009)

Bish83 said:


> i cant remember the correct names for it but the back squat put approximatly 40/60 on the front and back muscles but the front squat equalises it making it 50/50 so the legs get better hit. Arnold mentioned because of his height he had to lift out of the hole using his lower back so possibly why he used the front squat to accomodate poor form.


Which probably with a little stretching and checking of form he may have resolved but then again I don't think Arnie was too worried  it certainly didn't bother the Olympia judges.


----------



## Wells (Oct 25, 2010)

Awesome, thanks everyone. I'll definatly be putting them in my new leg routine next month. Only problem (If it is a problem) is that my legs grow at a rapid rate so I don't wanna go crazy on my legs.

Reps given to all


----------



## MRSTRONG (Apr 18, 2009)

front squats hits more core stabilizers . imo both front/back should be done


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

shall be including this into me routine, my legs are the slowest growers and if i get one girl who comments that my legs dont fit my body ill go crazy


----------



## MRSTRONG (Apr 18, 2009)

barsnack said:


> shall be including this into me routine, my legs are the slowest growers and if i get one girl who comments that my legs dont fit my body ill go crazy


you started a journal with pics yet m8 ?


----------



## barsnack (Mar 12, 2011)

uhan said:


> you started a journal with pics yet m8 ?


naw im only maintaing my weight at the minute cause i went through PCT and goinna start a Journal next month when im starting a new cycle, let you know as soon as, will be regular pic's etc, might even include a few for you to enjoy in the Adult Section if your a good boy


----------



## Guest (Apr 29, 2011)

x


----------



## tombsc (May 29, 2008)

My dodgy back prevents me from doing back squats. Fronts are OK up to a certain weight - around 50-55Kg is my limit before my back gives out, so I guess there is less stress on the lower back from front squats.


----------



## Dirk McQuickly (Dec 29, 2010)

UKStrength said:


> ^^^ Depends how you perform a squat in the first place. If you utilise the 'high bar' (olympic style) position, the aim should be to achieve as upright a posture as possible, therefore the load (bar) is primarily between the knees and hips and there is more quadriceps involvement as they are fully stretched in the bottom of the squat. This makes this position excellent for bearing loads overhead (e.g. snatch, full clean) but ultimately the amount you can lift is lower.
> 
> Whereas the 'low bar' position (powerlifting squat) the load is borne by the hips and lower back, the load that can be lifted is far greater but emphasis is lost from the quadriceps. Most of the time, through a lack of clear form or poor technique, lifters often do a 'mix' of these two lifts, most would benefit (in my opinion) from learning the full olympic position as it has more benefits with regard to hip and knee flexibility and encourages good posture.
> 
> Concentration on this depth of squat would likely lead to greater quadricep hypertrophy (hence why Arnie possibly used it) but for the love of god stretch your wrists and learn a decent clean grip if you decide to do the front squat


That's interesting. I always thought the opposite to be true, as placing the bar further up the back causes a longer lever arm, hence greater torque on the lower back. Is this not the case?


----------



## RickMiller (Aug 21, 2009)

chilli said:


> That's interesting. I always thought the opposite to be true, as placing the bar further up the back causes a longer lever arm, hence greater torque on the lower back. Is this not the case?


If you're in an upright position, then the bar is virtually 'in line' with the hips, so the load is distributed evenly between the legs.

I think this classic diagram by Mark Rippitoe illustrates it well, have a look at the degree of protrusion by the lower back and hamstrings in the powerlifting stance vs. the olympic squat. Strictly speaking, an even more upright posture would be needed in the diagram below if a full clean was to be successful:


----------



## Dirk McQuickly (Dec 29, 2010)

UKStrength said:


> If you're in an upright position, then the bar is virtually 'in line' with the hips, so the load is distributed evenly between the legs.
> 
> I think this classic diagram by Mark Rippitoe illustrates it well, have a look at the degree of protrusion by the lower back and hamstrings in the powerlifting stance vs. the olympic squat. Strictly speaking, an even more upright posture would be needed in the diagram below if a full clean was to be successful:


yeah, I see what you mean. However, it was actually in Starting Strength that I read about the higher position causing back problems. Rippetoe advocates the lower position.


----------



## Barker (Oct 1, 2009)

What about the plank under the heels technique?

Does that hit the quads just as much? ive started doing a few sets of them but cant see it making that much difference


----------



## MRSTRONG (Apr 18, 2009)

Barker said:


> What about the plank under the heels technique?
> 
> Does that hit the quads just as much? ive started doing a few sets of them but cant see it making that much difference


pretty sure the wood under heels is for tight calves .


----------



## Dirk McQuickly (Dec 29, 2010)

Barker said:


> What about the plank under the heels technique?
> 
> Does that hit the quads just as much? ive started doing a few sets of them but cant see it making that much difference


I think that long term it's bad for your knees


----------

