I was talking with my son’s football coach Wednesday evening. We got on the topic of bench press and muscle size. Coach and I have opposite challenges. He set a bench press record for his football team in college and is a guy who just explodes with size when he lifts weights (I hate him!). I, on the other hand, have always struggled to add muscle mass and lift weights that are rather unimpressive to all but the non-exerciser. I have to work hard to look like a “former athlete”. I have come to terms with this.
Looking back, I can recall so many cycles of letting weight supersede technique—all for the perception of “getting stronger”. Over time I learned (and relearned) form matters most. As a teenager, starting out with Nautilus equipment (yes, I am that old), I faced repeated correction on the Hip-and-Back from Biz Stark, the owner of Steel City Nautilus in Pittsburgh back in the late ‘70s. One day, he finally said, “Jeff, my business depends on results. If you are not going to do the machine correctly, I am happy to refund your money and send you on your way.” (Or something to that effect.) He clearly understood me, because that was all I needed. I got to where, later as an exercise trainer, with my back to someone on the machine, I could recognize that someone was doing the machine incorrectly only from the sound of the machine. (I was better off than my friend, Danny. Biz corrected his form on the Hip-and-Back by marking his leg with a black Sharpie pen every time his did a rep incorrectly!)
As a long, tall lifter, I lack the leverage and proportions for lifting the big heavy stuff. One rep for me is two for some powerlifters. This is important to remember.
Work is force times distance. So, the lazy thing to do is to shorten the range of motion. I was always big on range of motion, which is easier on a machine where leverage is often equalized by the fixed moment arm—i.e., height is less of a factor. It wasn’t until I made the shift to free-weights (now entirely free-weights) that the laziness set in.
Bench is bench—there is not much one can do to shorten the range of motion to make it easier (other than lifting the butt so high off the bench or not bringing the bar all the way down). Squats, on the other hand, are a bit easier to slip into a lazy technique. Indeed, many exercise professionals did—and still—encourage partial squats. I even bought into it (a little) for a while. I was never one to believe that it was bad for the knees to squat full range-of-motion. Nevertheless, I convinced myself that going to “90-degrees” (quotations marks because 90-degrees was probably more like 85- or 80-degrees or worse) was okay because I am tall. Thus, I would get “stronger” until my back would start hurting. Then, I convinced myself that my leverage was my limiting factor.
A few years ago, a student hit me with a brick. (Figuratively, of course. Throwing physical bricks at anyone is frowned upon.) I mentioned “deep squats”. He asked for clarification. I described what I meant, and he responded, “Oh. We just call those ‘squats’.” When I was in high school, we would have called that a “burn”. He was absolutely correct, and he changed my attitude. I became determined to do only full squats.
To correct my technique, I had to lower my weights significantly and improve the mobility in my hips and ankles. I went embarrassingly low in the bar weight and began to work my way back up. I am actually finding that my technique has improved over time, as well. Back pain? I am also finding that when I do have back pain (from sitting too much at a computer all day or extensive yard work), squatting actually helps. I lift at home, so I don’t really have to be embarrassed by how “little” I lift (which really isn’t that little for the average 54-year-old—but, I don’t want to be “average”). The key is: technique first; weight progression second.
Defining full range-of-motion is tricky. One thing I figured out is that the so-called “ass-to-grass” is not possible for everyone. Even in an unweighted squat, my butt doesn’t come near the floor. My limb proportions just don’t permit it. One can improve joint mobility (to a point), but one cannot change bone lengths. So, what is “full range-of-motion”?
Full range-of-motion is individualized. The form will not be the same for everyone. One finds his or her full squat depth by squatting to full depth. Simply drop down into a “comfortable” squatting position. Foot position, etc. will line up naturally. Restrictions in ankle and hip mobility can be improved with stretching.
The same goes for all weight-training exercises (well, all exercise, for that matter). Technique over show. You can load all the weight you want, but, if you don’t move it, no one is impressed. Focus on form and progress as required. Improvement will come—and continue—when you do it right.
I have been squatting “properly” for several years. My legs are by no means impressive (still quite chicken-like), but improving slowly. I am one of those “low responders”. Unlike my son’s coach, my muscle gets stronger but to a lesser degree—and less (much less) hypertrophy. High responders, perhaps, are more rare than low responders. Most will respond “normally”. So, if you are worried about getting “bulky muscles”, don’t. Most of us aren’t willing to work that hard. Even those “high responders” work hard for their gains. They just don’t need to work as hard for “modest” gains. Me? I’ll take the gains I am getting.
Be your best today; be better tomorrow!
Carpe momento!