Comparative Analysis of Performance in the High-Bar vs. Low-Bar Squat
Source abstract
Abstract
The objective of this study was to compare the 1 Repetition Maximum (RM) performance in the parallel squat exercise with a low-bar vs. a high-bar technique and to analyze the gender differences. A secondary objective was to analyze the differences in the force–velocity profile between the low- and high-bar squat technique. Nineteen recreational strength-trained participants, 9 men (22 ± 1.9 years, 79.4 ± 13.9 kg, 1.77 ± 0.11 m) and 10 women (27.6 ± 3.12 years, 60.4 ± 5.0 kg, 1.67 ± 0.5 m), participated in this study. All participants performed two evaluations of the 1RM and the force–velocity curve in parallel squat exercises, separated by a week, one with a high bar and the other with a low bar technique. The level of significance set for this study was p < 0.05. The technical × gender interaction was not significant in any of the three variables analyzed: lifted load, mean propulsive velocity, and force. A difference (p < 0.001) in the lifted load and the mean force is observed between the techniques at 1RM, being in both cases (men and women) better in the low-bar performance. A difference (p < 0.001) was observed in relation to the technique × participation interaction when comparing the mean velocity and force obtained with the same absolute submaximal loads in each of the techniques. These data may guide a better and more precise organization of training when performing the squat exercise and differentiating the techniques to be used, using the low bar when the main objective is strength or power training.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Sports Performance and Training · Sports injuries and prevention · Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Sports Training Laboratory, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Castilla La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain
Faculty of Sports Sciences, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain
Department of Physical Education, Universidad de Las Palmas, 35015 Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain
References (50)
Show source-provided references
1. Jiménez-Reyes, P., Samozino, P., Brughelli, M., and Morin, J.-B. (2017). Effectiveness of an individualized training based on force-velocity profiling during jumping. Front. Physiol., 7.10.3389/fphys.2016.00677 ↗
2. The importance of muscular strength: Training considerations10.1007/s40279-018-0862-z ↗
3. The role of resistance exercise intensity on muscle fibre adaptations10.2165/00007256-200434100-00004 ↗
4. Test–retest reliability of the one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength assessment: A systematic review10.1186/s40798-020-00260-z ↗
5. Velocity-and power-load relationships of the bench pull vs. bench press exercises
6. Nieto-Acevedo, R., Romero-Moraleda, B., Díaz-Lara, F.J., Rubia, A.d.l., González-García, J., and Mon-López, D. (2023). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the differences in mean propulsive velocity between men and women in different exercises. Sports, 11.10.3390/sports11060118 ↗
7. Knee biomechanics of the dynamic squat exercise10.1097/00005768-200101000-00020 ↗
8. Garrett, W.E., and Kirkendall, D.T. (2000). Biomechanics of powerlifting and weightlifting exercises. Exercise and Sport Science, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
9. Back squat
10. The sticking point in the bench press, the squat, and the deadlift: Similarities and differences, and their significance for research and practice10.1007/s40279-016-0615-9 ↗
11. Stoppani, J. (2023). Jim Stoppani’s Encyclopedia of Muscle & Strength, Human Kinetics.
12. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006 ↗
13. A review of the biomechanical differences between the high-bar and low-bar back-squat10.1519/JSC.0000000000002007 ↗
14. Muscle activation in the loaded free barbell squat: A brief review10.1519/JSC.0b013e31822d533d ↗
15. Kinematic and EMG activities during front and back squat variations in maximum loads10.1080/02640414.2014.984240 ↗
16. A comparison of gluteus maximus, biceps femoris, and vastus lateralis electromyography amplitude in the parallel, full, and front squat variations in resistance-trained females10.1123/jab.2015-0113 ↗
17. Differences in Rate of Increased Patellofemoral Joint Reaction Force in the Back Squat Exercise: 2593: Board# 201 June 4 9: 00 AM-10: 30 AM10.1249/01.MSS.0000385899.80975.70 ↗
18. Effect of different types of conditioning contraction on upper body postactivation potentiation10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181fef7f3 ↗
19. Estimation of relative load from bar velocity in the full back squat exercise10.1055/s-0043-102933 ↗
20. The effect of the direction of gaze on the kinematics of the squat exercise
21. Using the overhead squat for core development
22. High-and low-bar squatting techniques during weight-training10.1097/00005768-199602000-00010 ↗
23. Muscle activation varies between high-bar and low-bar back squat10.7717/peerj.9256 ↗
24. Postural control during the back squat at different load intensities in powerlifters and weightlifters10.1080/07853890.2024.2383965 ↗
25. Badillo, J.J.G. (2017). La Velocidad de Ejecución Como Referencia Para la Programación, Control y Evaluación del Entrenamiento de Fuerza, Ergotech.
26. Injuries among weightlifters and powerlifters: A systematic review10.1136/bjsports-2016-096037 ↗
27. Travis, S.K., Mujika, I., Gentles, J.A., Stone, M.H., and Bazyler, C.D. (2020). Tapering and peaking maximal strength for powerlifting performance: A review. Sports, 8.10.3390/sports8090125 ↗
28. Classic powerlifting performance: A systematic review10.1519/JSC.0000000000003099 ↗
29. Comparison of Olympic and Safety Squat Bar Barbells on Force, Velocity, and Rating of Perceived Exertion During Acute High-Intensity Back Squats in Recreationally Trained Men10.70252/QTXB6775 ↗
30. Sex-based differences in skeletal muscle kinetics and fiber-type composition10.1152/physiol.00024.2014 ↗
31. Electromyography comparison of sex differences during the back squat10.1519/JSC.0000000000003469 ↗
32. Sex differences in lower extremity kinematics during overhead and single leg squat tests10.1080/14763141.2020.1839124 ↗
33. Movement velocity as a measure of loading intensity in resistance training10.1055/s-0030-1248333 ↗
34. Effect of loading on unintentional lifting velocity declines during single sets of repetitions to failure during upper and lower extremity muscle actions10.1055/s-2005-872825 ↗
35. Effects of complex vs non complex training programs on lower body maximum strength and power10.3233/IES-2009-0359 ↗
36. Imposing a pause between the eccentric and concentric phases increases the reliability of isoinertial strength assessments10.1080/02640414.2014.889844 ↗
37. The effect of different rest intervals between sets on volume components and strength gains10.1519/JSC.0b013e31815f912d ↗
38. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc. Publishers.
39. Biomechanical analysis of successful and unsuccessful snatch lifts in elite female weightlifters10.2478/hukin-2019-0057 ↗
40. The importance of muscular strength in athletic performance10.1007/s40279-016-0486-0 ↗
41. Differences in the knee torque between high-and low-bar back squat techniques: A pilot study
42. Understanding bench press biomechanics—Training expertise and sex affect lifting technique and net joint moments10.1519/JSC.0000000000004191 ↗
43. Push-Ups vs. Bench Press Differences in Repetitions and Muscle Activation between Sexes
44. Muscle Strength Testing10.2165/00007256-200232100-00002 ↗
45. The Biological Basis of Sex Differences in Athletic Performance: Consensus Statement for the American College of Sports Medicine
46. Using the load-velocity relationship for 1RM prediction10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b62c5f ↗
47. Biomechanical, Anthropometric, and Psychological Determinants of Barbell Back Squat Strength10.1519/JSC.0000000000002535 ↗
48. Effect of Squat Depth and Barbell Load on Relative Muscular Effort in Squatting10.1519/JSC.0b013e31826791a7 ↗
49. The Relevance of Muscle Fiber Type to Physical Characteristics and Performance in Team-Sport Athletes10.1123/ijspp.2022-0235 ↗
50. Xu, D., Zhou, H., Quan, W., Ma, X., Chon, T.-E., Fernandez, J., Gusztav, F., Kovács, A., Baker, J.S., and Gu, Y. (2024). New insights optimize landing strategies to reduce lower limb injury risk. Cyborg Bionic Syst., 5.10.34133/cbsystems.0126 ↗