Gabriel Illmeier, Nachwuchsleistungssportzentrum Steiermark, Illmeier G. Sports, Injr Med
{"title":"Variations of The Bilateral Barbell Squat: A Brief Review","authors":"Gabriel Illmeier, Nachwuchsleistungssportzentrum Steiermark, Illmeier G. Sports, Injr Med","doi":"10.29011/2576-9596.100196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The three most fundamental variations of the barbell squat with the bar placed on the shoulders are the high-bar back squat (HBBS), the low-bar back squat (LBBS), and the front squat (FS). There are significant kinematic, kinetic, and biomechanical distinctions between these variations that should be considered in the exercise selection. In comparison to the high-bar variations, the LBBS results in a greater hip joint torque and greater activation of the hip extensor muscles. In contrast, during the FS, the m. quadriceps is utilized more compared to the other two variations due to an increased torque in the knee joint. Regarding the relation between hip and knee joint torques, the HBBS is an intermediate and more balanced exercise variation than the LBBS and the FS. The HBBS is a fundamental exercise in athletic conditioning and a suitable starting point for novices, whereas the LBBS is preferred when the primary objective is to maximize weightlifting performance. The FS is crucial for athletes performing the clean and its derivates since it trains the required body position for a successful catch and might be the biomechanically advantageous variation if the goal is to target the knee extensor muscles. However, the differences in terms of knee extensor demands, muscle activation and kinematics between the HBBS and FS seem to be minimal, as the literature indicates similar results when comparing the FS to the HBBS. As far as analysis methods are concerned, even though 3D movement analysis is regarded as the gold standard for motion capture and analyzing kinematics, 2D models seem to serve as a valid initial guide in order to understand the kinematics and biomechanics of different squat variations.","PeriodicalId":162912,"journal":{"name":"Sports Injuries & Medicine","volume":"47 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sports Injuries & Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29011/2576-9596.100196","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The three most fundamental variations of the barbell squat with the bar placed on the shoulders are the high-bar back squat (HBBS), the low-bar back squat (LBBS), and the front squat (FS). There are significant kinematic, kinetic, and biomechanical distinctions between these variations that should be considered in the exercise selection. In comparison to the high-bar variations, the LBBS results in a greater hip joint torque and greater activation of the hip extensor muscles. In contrast, during the FS, the m. quadriceps is utilized more compared to the other two variations due to an increased torque in the knee joint. Regarding the relation between hip and knee joint torques, the HBBS is an intermediate and more balanced exercise variation than the LBBS and the FS. The HBBS is a fundamental exercise in athletic conditioning and a suitable starting point for novices, whereas the LBBS is preferred when the primary objective is to maximize weightlifting performance. The FS is crucial for athletes performing the clean and its derivates since it trains the required body position for a successful catch and might be the biomechanically advantageous variation if the goal is to target the knee extensor muscles. However, the differences in terms of knee extensor demands, muscle activation and kinematics between the HBBS and FS seem to be minimal, as the literature indicates similar results when comparing the FS to the HBBS. As far as analysis methods are concerned, even though 3D movement analysis is regarded as the gold standard for motion capture and analyzing kinematics, 2D models seem to serve as a valid initial guide in order to understand the kinematics and biomechanics of different squat variations.