In part I of this series I discussed how many coaches and athletes often object to full depth squatting for sprinters and jumpers out of a fear of getting hurt, claiming that it is inherently dangerous for athletes with the long-limbed body-type to perform deep squats. I explained the how of squatting - how to mitigate the risk of injury by developing the mobility, stability, and control necessary to squat safely for athletes with this body type.
In part II, I’m going to concentrate on why we should learn to deep squat by addressing another common objection for sprinters and jumpers: the movement isn’t specific to the sport. I intend to demonstrate that while some athletes don’t have to deep squat to be successful, deeper squatting under load can provide numerous performance-enhancing benefits, and that those benefits are unique to deep squatting that are unlikely to be met with shortened range of motion squats.
What is Specificity?
To understand how specificity impacts performance, we need to understand what is meant when the term is used.
Specificity is the degree to which movements used in training mimic the demands of the sport. Using specificity in training means tailoring training exercises to duplicate the energy system requirements, joint angles, velocities, and forces required in competition. Specificity is a critical component of improving sport performance. This idea is summed up in the SAID principle (Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demand) which suggests the body’s adaptations are dependent upon and specific to the stress applied to it. Throwing a baseball helps develop an important skill in baseball, but it is unlikely to help you run a faster 5K.
This means that some component of training should resemble the sport that the athlete competes in – a point that likely seems obvious even if you’ve had no education in exercise science. It is why we go to practice in the first place – to rehearse and prepare for what we do in competition, and practice is most effective when it closely resembles the demands of the sport. For sprinters and jumpers, this means sprinting and jumping as well as drills or other exercises that break down these skills into smaller components.
Training gets confusing when we introduce the weight room into the training paradigm, and this is where rifts typically develop between strength coaches and sport coaches / athletes. Though athletes likely will not get much faster or jump farther or higher without actually practicing sprinting and jumping, the idea of specificity is frequently applied to the weight room under the assumption that strength training must also look like the sport in order for it to improve sport performance. We are usually left with an argument that goes something like this when considering deep squatting: “why do I need to be in that position in the weight room when I’m never in that position in my sport?” The assumption is that ¼ squats are more beneficial to performance on the track than deep squats because they overload the range of motion used in vertical jumping, which translates to increased force production when the foot is in contact with the ground in sprint and jump events.
In response, here are a few questions we either never ask or fail to answer in pursuit of specificity:
Are there negative consequences of pursuing the same or similar stressors in the weight room when they are already addressed in practice?
Does chasing specificity in the weight room actually elicit the adaptation we are after?
Can using the weight room to address qualities that are not trained in sport - strength, longer ROM - play a role in supporting and amplifying the ones that are?
To find out, let’s start with a look at our foundational assumptions and address why we are in the weight room in the first place.
Why Lift?
Let’s take a step back and answer the most fundamental question when it comes to strength training to improve sprint and jump performance: Why lift in the first place? After all, lifting isn’t the sport unless we are competitive powerlifters or weightlifters. So if lifting isn’t the sport, and we operate on the assumption that training needs to be as specific as possible, what’s the point of lifting to begin with? We can never truly match the demands of sprinting and jumping on a track unless we are actually sprinting and jumping.
There are a multitude of benefits to lifting weights, the primary one being to get stronger. The main reason track athletes perform the squat is to improve strength in the prime movers of the lower body by exposing them to an external load that simply can’t be achieved on the track. Strength can be developed using both the ¼ squat and the full squat, but the expression of that strength is different between the two movements. Strength improvements through deep squatting improve strength throughout the entire range of motion, meaning that the shorter range of motion used for ¼ squatting also improves. The reverse isn’t generally true. Unless training an absolute beginner, increases in ¼ squat strength generally are only applicable through the short range of motion within which they are performed. They don’t improve strength through the lower portion of the movement used in deep squatting.
While we may not be mimicking the short range of motion during ground contact in sprinting and jumping, we are still addressing the demands by getting stronger through a long range of motion. Improving the force-producing ability of these muscle groups raises the ceiling for force production that can then be applied through the specific demands of sprinting and jumping, which are improved through sport practice.
If we shift the purpose of lifting away from “sport rehearsal” and towards “strength development”, we open up a new lens through which strength training can be viewed. The question now becomes a matter of choosing the most effective movements for developing strength rather than trying to imitate sport practice.
But maybe you just don’t want to deal with the perceived risk of going lower in the squat if relevant strength can still be developed with ¼ squats. As it turns out, there are many other systemic changes that occur throughout the body with deep squatting other than directly improving force production that can impact performance that you will likely miss out on if you always avoid the longer range of motion:
1. More Muscle Activation:
Squatting to depth is a full-body movement. It engages a wider range of muscles and through a longer range of motion than ¼ squats, including the quadriceps, hamstrings, and glutes that create movement, but also the arms, back, and entirety of the core in order to transfer force to the bar. This concept can be manipulated to increase hypertrophy when necessary when combined with intensity and volume.
2. Injury Prevention/Joint Health:
Squatting to depth involves a greater degree of joint flexion at the ankles, knees, and hips. This increased range of motion helps to lubricate the joints and maintain and even improve mobility. The full range of motion in squatting to depth promotes mobility, flexibility, and muscle elasticity, potentially reducing the risk of injury.
This idea can be seen in the rehab exercises many athletes are assigned when they have tendon and other soft tissue injuries. Different deep squat variations are often used as tools to induce changes in the tissue through a longer range of motion. This means when you perform deep squats correctly, you may not need as many other rehab movements – strength training itself acts as an injury prevention tool. Check out this article by my friend Meaghan Dayton to learn more about how strength training is a critical injury prevention tool.
While joint stiffness is an important quality for sprint and jump athletes to be able to transfer force efficiently, chronically stiff joints as a result of avoiding end range of motion can contribute to other issues like stress injuries in the foot and tibia as well as tendinopathy of the patellar and achilles tendons.
3. Core Engagement and Stability:
Squatting to depth requires greater core activation for stability during both the descent and ascent. This enhances core strength and stability in a way that typical flexion and rotation core exercises do not. This is essential for maintaining proper posture, balance, and force transfer during dynamic athletic movements. Quarter squats offer limited core engagement compared to full-depth squats.
4. Hormonal and Neuromuscular Benefits:
Squatting to depth triggers a more robust hormonal response, including the release of growth hormone, which aids in muscle growth and repair. Additionally, the neuromuscular adaptations required for full-depth squats contribute to improved motor control and coordination.
5. Movement Variability:
Chronic partial range of motion can handicap athletes. It can make them less resilient by limiting their movement variability – movement outside the parameters of their sport. Pursuit of strength in a narrow range of motion can leave athletes vulnerable for injury when they are exposed to a stressor outside of those parameters. Deep squatting helps to fill in crucial gaps in training stimuli that aren’t addressed in sport-specific training.
It is evident from these systemic changes that occur with deeper squatting that there are benefits to performing a movement that isn’t necessarily specific to the demands of the sport. But the lack of specificity doesn’t mean the changes occurring don’t contribute to sport performance improvements - it just may be a few degrees removed. For example, a more resilient body may have fewer missed training days, leading to more quality training sessions throughout the season.
One reason many programs continue to operate on the idea that ¼ squats are always better than full squats is because they mistakenly lump two additional distinct qualities together under the specificity label: transfer and value. In other words, the value of a movement is defined by how well it transfers, which depends on its specificity. While this take isn’t necessarily wrong, it is short-sighted and can prevent us from performing training that is still beneficial.
Transfer and Value
Transfer:
Transfer is the degree to which improvements gained from one exercise or training task carry over to improvements in another task or activity. Transfer of training occurs when the adaptations developed through an exercise positively impact the athlete's performance in their sport. An exercise with high transfer effectively improves the athlete's ability to execute similar movements in the sport. For instance, a swimmer might perform dryland exercises that mimic the arm and leg motions used in swimming to enhance their stroke technique. The training is specific, but the result of the training is transfer.
Value:
The value of an exercise encompasses its overall benefit and contribution to an athlete's performance. It considers factors such as transferability, muscle activation, joint mobility, injury prevention, and energy system development, among others. An exercise with high value can offer a well-rounded improvement to an athlete's physical attributes. For instance, Olympic weightlifting exercises like the clean and jerk might not directly replicate all movements in a specific sport, but they provide immense value by enhancing power and coordination – both important qualities that when applied within the confines of sport-specific training serve to improve performance.
When we separate these ideas out, we can see that it is possible for a movement to have value without being specific and vice versa. This is because value can be expressed in a variety of ways. The value of a full squat can be direct by improving force production, or indirect in the form of creating a more resilient body, improving joint function, core stability, motor control, and coordination in a way that more specific exercises may not. And though non-specific movements may not directly transfer to sport performance as much as highly specific sport practice does, these general qualities can enhance performance by laying a critical foundation that can amplify the effects of specific sport training. To describe it another way, specific training gets you closer to your performance ceiling, but the value of full squatting is that it helps to raise the ceiling. These ideas should make us re-evaluate the underlying assumption that strength training must look like the sport for it to be valuable.
Problems With Quarter Squats
Although ¼ squats are usually implemented under the guise of being safer and more specific, ¼ squatting sometimes doesn’t even satisfy either of these expectations. Exchanging full squats completely for shortened version comes with its own bag of issues:
1. Overtraining/Overuse Injuries:
Repeating the same sport-specific movements in both training and competition can lead to overuse injuries. Intense and repetitive training of specific muscles and joints without adequate variety and recovery can cause microtrauma to accumulate to the point of patella tendinopathy, stress injuries, and muscle strains.
2. Imbalanced Development:
Imbalance is a relative term – nearly all sports bias certain muscle groups over others depending on the demand of the sport. But sprinting and jumping are incredibly hamstring-intensive movements as the hamstrings help to both extend the hips and control knee extension. This is one of the problems with assuming that if an exercise superficially resembles a sport movement, it must train it in the same way.
While neither full squats or ¼ squats really replicate the function of the hamstrings while sprinting and jumping, ¼ squats primarily target the quadriceps and neglect the hamstrings. In full squats, the hamstrings must work harder to stabilize the knee joint as deeper ranges of motion are accessed.
3. Limited Transfer:
It seems counter-intuitive that supposedly more specific movements can have limited transfer, but this is a consequence of imbalanced development over a shallow range of motion. While the quads tend to be targeted on ¼ squats, training them through a short range of motion and neglecting the hamstrings can leave much on the table in terms of functional strength for both muscle groups that must be applied through a longer range of motion while sprinting and jumping. As the ceiling is approached for the usefulness of ¼ squats, deeper squats can help to re-ignite transferrable adaptations.
While sport-specific practice is crucial for skill development, not all aspects of sport performance can be effectively trained in the weight room. Continuous repetition of the same movements can lead to overuse injuries, imbalanced development, and diminishing returns - both in terms of strength gains and skill development. It is apparent from this list that the concept of value is extremely important when determining which movements athletes should perform in the weight room. Chasing specificity may seem a worthy and logical endeavor, but one which may unnecessarily dissuade us from including beneficial training. So why do so many in the sport performance realm still insist that strength training should mimic sport training?
The Specificity Paradox
The following two statements can be true at the same time:
1.) Specific training is the most important type of training there is towards improving performance of your sport.
2.) Specific is a buzzword used as a justification to avoid training difficult positions or movements.
Deep squatting is avoided in strength training programs for many sports, but this is especially true for track and field. Specificity and danger are often cited as the rationale, but in my experience it really comes down to the movement being difficult. It is difficult to perform for long-limbed athletes, and it is difficult to coach for coaches who don’t take the time to teach and progress it appropriately. (See Part I for a comprehensive look at teaching the squat for long-limbed athletes, and read Enhancing Athletic Potential for more ideas on how to implement corrective strategies.) When it comes to long-limbed athletes, that difficulty is amplified and often leaves them sore in ways that can degrade sprint and jump practice quality if the requisite mobility, stability, and positional strength hasn’t been developed yet. Moreover, trying to develop this skill while intense track work is also occurring can create hesitation as soreness or pain from spending time in uncomfortable or unfamiliar positions temporarily makes it harder to practice.
As a result, the term “specific” has turned into a buzzword – a trendy word that signals a coach’s allegiance to only the most (supposedly) relevant training in the weight room. In doing so, we ignore the SAID principal which indicates that we can adapt to the discomfort by getting stronger and more efficient in the deep position, and instead trade it for a “specificity only” approach to justify avoiding challenging positions and accommodating weakness and inability without ever really spending the time it takes to develop the skill of squatting.
When we do this, we ensure that difficult things stay difficult because we don’t allow athletes to adapt, making them potentially less resilient in the long term. It conditions both parties to devalue certain movements because of how they look regardless of how they work, and to avoid having to expand upon their current abilities – squatting for the athletes and teaching the squat for the coaches. Often athletes will endear themselves to coaches who are practitioners of exclusive ¼ squatting because they are assured they’ll never be forced to get uncomfortable under a barbell. Endearing or not, discomfort isn’t something that should always be avoided.
Raise the Ceiling
Let’s return to the three questions I posed earlier:
1.) Are there negative consequences of pursuing the same or similar stressors in the weight room when they are already addressed in practice?
There can be. Overuse injuries, imbalanced development, and a lack of transfer from replacing deep squatting with ¼ squats can all negatively impact athletes.
2.) Does chasing specificity in the weight room actually elicit the adaptation we are after?
Often no. Thinking something looks more like sprinting and jumping doesn’t mean it is.
3.) Can using the weight room to address qualities that are not trained in sport, like strength over a longer ROM, play a role in supporting and amplifying the ones that are?
Yes. Much of our time in the weight room should be spent pursuing other qualities in the weight room that raise the effectiveness of specific training, rather than attempting to create another round of specific training itself.
Does all of this mean that sprint and jump athletes can’t be successful if they don’t deep squat? Of course not. Athletes will improve in their sport to a certain level simply by practicing the sport. Some athletes who have the right genetic features can rise to world class status who have never touched a weight in their life. Others must dedicate themselves to the craft of strength training to achieve their stated goals, and there is a spectrum of success that occurs between the two extremes. But absolute success shouldn’t be the only barometer for the usefulness of a training tool. Rather, we should be focused on identifying anything that helps athletes improve. The critical debate here isn’t what has to be done to be successful, but what tools can be used to most effectively develop athletic performance, and how those tools can best be used. When it comes to squatting, learning how to safely perform deep squats helps to raise the performance ceiling, providing numerous performance-enhancing benefits that are unavailable with the exclusive use of their short range of motion cousins.
Part III
I’ve discussed here the main issues with replacing deep squats with ¼ squats - a discussion that is necessary because of the ongoing debate regarding seeking specificity in the weight room. While I believe deep squatting is valuable and shouldn’t be replaced entirely by ¼ squats, I don’t think the issue is an either/or proposition - the two can peacefully coexist in a training program. In part III, we will turn the tables to explore the value of ¼ squats, and discover when it can be beneficial to use partial range of motion in order to boost sprint and jump performance.