Weightlifting squat: barefoot or shoes?

NewsBot · Sep 14, 2013

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
Comparison of Back Squat Kinematics Between Barefoot and Shoe Conditions
Kimitake Sato, Dave Fortenbaugh, David S. Hydock, Gary D. Heise
International Journal of Sports Science and Coaching September 03, 2013

The purpose of the study was to compare the kinematics of the barbell back squat between two footwear conditions and to evaluate the results with respect to recommendations put forth in the National Strength and Conditioning Association position statement for proper squat technique. Twenty-five subjects with 5 - 7 years of resistance training experience participated. Selected kinematics were measured during a 60% of 1RM barbell back squat in both barefoot and athletic shoe conditions. Paired-samples T tests were performed to compare the two footwear conditions. Significant differences were found in trunk (50.72±8.27 vs. 46.97±9.87), thigh (20.94±10.19 vs. 24.42±11.11), and shank segment angles (59.47±5.54 vs. 62.75±6.17), and knee joint angles (81.33±13.70 vs. 88.32±15.45) at the peak descent position. Based on the kinematic analysis of the barefoot squat, two kinematic advantages are countered by two disadvantages. Coaches and instructors should acknowledge these results with respect to a performer's capability, and be aware the advantages and disadvantages of barefoot squat from a kinematic perspective.
Click to expand...

Euan McGivern · Sep 14, 2013

Has anyone seen the full text of this article?

My experience is that there is a considerable difference in feel between a cushioned sports shoe, an olympic weightlifting style shoe (with a hard midsole) and barefoot when back squatting. I wonder which style of shoe they used?

Euan

David Wedemeyer · Sep 14, 2013

Euan good insight. I recently began training again and find squats and deadlifts feel unnatural in my everyday training shoes. I plan on experimenting with hard midsole and cushioned soles but don't dare go barefoot ;)

Best,

stevewells · Sep 16, 2013

David Wedemeyer said: ↑

Euan good insight. I recently began training again and find squats and deadlifts feel unnatural in my everyday training shoes. I plan on experimenting with hard midsole and cushioned soles but don't dare go barefoot ;)

Best,
Click to expand...

Have tried all ways and purpose made weightlifting shoe with hard sole and slight wedge are by far and away the best for back squats

NewsBot · Sep 13, 2014

inov-8: Introducing the Fastlift BOA

NewsBot · Oct 24, 2014

The influence of different footwear on 3-D kinematics and muscle activation during the barbell back squat in males
Jonathan Sinclair, Derek McCarthy, Ian Bentley, Howard Thomas Hurst & Stephen Atkins
European Journal of Sport Science Published online: 21 Oct 2014

The barbell back squat is commonly used by athletes participating in resistance training. The barbell squat is typically performed using standard athletic shoes, or specially designed weightlifting footwear, although there are now a large number of athletes who prefer to squat barefoot or in barefoot-inspired footwear. This study aimed to determine how these footwear influence 3-D kinematics and muscle activation potentials during the barbell back squat. Fourteen experienced male participants completed squats at 70% 1 rep max in each footwear condition. 3-D kinematics from the torso, hip, knee and ankle were measured using an eight-camera motion analysis system. In addition, electromyographical (EMG) measurements were obtained from the rectus femoris, tibialis anterior, gastrocnemius, erector spinae and biceps femoris muscles. EMG parameters and joint kinematics were compared between footwear using repeated-measures analyses of variance. Participants were also asked to subjectively rate which footwear they preferred when performing their squat lifts; this was examined a chi-squared test. The kinematic analysis indicated that, in comparison to barefoot the running shoe was associated with increased squat depth, knee flexion and rectus femoris activation. The chi-squared test was significant and showed that participants preferred to squat barefoot. This study supports anecdotal evidence of athletes who prefer to train barefoot or in barefoot-inspired footwear although no biomechanical evidence was found to support this notion.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jan 22, 2015

The kinematics of the lower leg in the sagittal plane during downward squatting in persons with pronated feet
Jong Dae Lee, Da Hyun Koh, Kyoung Kim
Journal of Physical Therapy Science; Vol. 27 (2015) No. 1 January p. 285-287

[Purpose] This study aimed to examine changes in lower extremity kinematics in the sagittal plane during downward squatting by subjects with pronated feet.
[Subjects and Methods] This study selected 10 subjects each with normal and pronated feet using a navicular drop test. The subjects performed downward squatting, in which the knee joints flex 90° in a standing position. We recorded the angles of the hip, knee, and ankle joint in the sagittal plane through motion analysis. For the analysis, the squatting phase was divided into phase 1 (initial squat), phase 2 (middle squat), and phase 3 (terminal squat) according to the timing of downward squatting.
[Results] In the pronated foot group comparison with the normal group, the hip joint flexion angle decreased significantly in phases 2 and 3. The dorsiflexion angle of the ankle joint increased significantly in phase 3. The flexion angle of the knee joint did not differ between groups in any of the phases.
[Conclusion] The pronated foot group utilized a different squat movement strategy from that of the normal foot group in the sagittal plane.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Sep 9, 2015

The Influence of Footwear Type on Barbell Back Squat Using 50, 70 and 90% of 1RM: A Biomechanical Analysis.
Whitting, John; Meir, Rudi; Crowley-McHattan, Zachary; Holding, Ryan
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research: September 01, 2015

The effect of footwear type was investigated during the barbell back squat using 3D motion analysis and ground reaction force data. Nine male participants (mean age = 26.4 +/- 5.4 years, height = 1.79 +/- .08 m, mass = 84.7 +/- 16.1 kg) completed 2 experimental testing sessions wearing 2 different forms of training footwear: i) standard sports trainers (RS); and ii) specialized weightlifting shoes (WS). On each test day participants completed a sequence of 5, 3 and 1 repetitions of a barbell back squat using 50, 70 and 90% respectively of their 1RM load in each of the shoe conditions. Shoe order, which was initially randomly assigned for test day 1, was reversed on test day 2. Significant main effects were found for peak dorsiflexion of both left (p <0.001) and right (p < 0.001) ankles. Pairwise post-hoc comparisons showed that the RS condition exhibited significantly more dorsiflexion compared to the WS condition in both the left and right ankles. There was also a significant main effect of load (%1RM) within the left ankle (p < 0.01) with post-hoc comparisons showing that there was a significant increase in peak dorsiflexion angle from 50% to 90% (p < 0.05) and 70% to 90% of 1RM (p < 0.05) but no difference between 50% and 70% of 1RM (p = 1.000). These findings indicate that further investigation is necessary in order to substantiate claims regarding the benefits of wearing weightlifting shoes during resistance training exercises targeting the squat movement.
Click to expand...

DJMalone · Sep 17, 2015

stevewells said: ↑

Have tried all ways and purpose made weightlifting shoe with hard sole and slight wedge are by far and away the best for back squats
Click to expand...

I agree, I normally stick a 2x1inch lat of wood on the floor to riase my heels and find that gives me an increased ROM at the ankle..

See some folk doing it bare foot at the gym too and there's alot of navicular drop and eversion involved and can't help but think it's not healthy..
I wonder if there's a certain percentage of maximum weight repitition that would be advised for bare foot squatting.

NewsBot · Oct 3, 2015

The Effects of Footwear on Force Production during
Barbell Back Squats.
Schermoly TP, Hough IG, Senchina DS.
Journal of Undergraduate Kinesiology Research 2015; 10(2):42-51.

Purpose:
Powerlifting shoes claim to help individuals keep their heels in contact with the ground during
squatting, ensuring proper force transmission through the rearfoot. The purpose of this study was to
determine if a 2.5-lb. weight plate placed under the heels would provide the same advantage
powerlifting shoes do during barbell back squats. Methods: Twenty healthy males performed five
sets of three squats at 75% 1RM in four footwear conditions: low-end powerlifting shoes, high-end
powerlifting shoes, cross-training shoes with weight plates under the heels, and cross-training shoes
alone (control condition, performed twice). During squats, force plates measured rear- and forefoot
force production and an electrogoniometer measured knee angles. Ankle goniometry was performed
to measure subject dorsiflexion and plantarflexion as well as talar eversion and inversion. Subjects
reported perceived comfort, stability, exertion, and fatigue after completing each set. Results:
Footwear condition may influence an individual’s pre-or post-squat stance (p<0.05), but not the depth
or nature of the actual squat. Significant differences in the perception of stability between footwear
conditions were found (p<0.05). However, no significant differences between footwear conditions
were observed for ankle goniometry, knee angles, or perceptions of comfort, fatigue, or exertion.
Conclusion: Neither powerlifting shoes nor weight plates positioned under the heels had any effect
on rearfoot force production in this study.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Oct 6, 2015

Plantar pressures in individuals with normal and pronated feet according to static squat depths
Da Hyun Koh, Jong Dae Lee, Kyoung Kim
Journal of Physical Therapy Science; Vol. 27 (2015) No. 9 September p. 2833-2835

[Purpose] The purpose of the present study was to investigate differences in plantar pressure between individuals with normal and pronated feet according to 3 static squat depths.
[Subjects and Methods] Study subjects were 10 young adults with normal and pronated feet. Plantar pressures were measured in the standing position and static squat positions at 45? (semi-squat) and 90? (half-squat) knee flexion using the F-Mat. Subjects’ plantar pressures were analyzed by dividing the foot into 4 areas: forefoot medial, forefoot lateral, midfoot, and heel.
[Results] In the half-squat position, the pronated foot group showed a higher foot pressure in the forefoot medial than was seen in the normal group, whereas the normal group exhibited a higher foot pressure in the heel than was seen in the pronated foot group.
[Conclusion] An increase in squat depth led to the transfer of plantar pressure to the heel in normal feet and to the forefoot medial in pronated feet.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jan 12, 2016

Incidence and prevalence of weight lifting injuries: An update.
Alabbad MA, Muaidi QI.
Saudi J Sports Med 2016;16:15-9

Weightlifting is considered as a dynamic strengthen exercise and power sport in which the athletes lifts a maximum weight with one repetition. The weightlifting as other sports has common musculoskeletal injuries in different body location corresponding to the sports beneficial. However, identifying the injuries incidence and the etiology is a first two-step in the model of the injury prevention in order to introduce preventive measures for sports. Therefore, this literature review is aimed to focus on the incidence and the etiology related to injuries of the weightlifting. However, the incidence injuries studies revealed that the children have more injuries related to accident than the adults. Whereas, the adults have more injuries related to strain and sprain. The most common injured locations are shoulder, lumbar spine, knee, elbow, hand, and wrist in the weightlifters. The percentage of the injuries according to location is the shoulder (36%), lumbar spine (24%), elbow (11%), and the knee (9%). In the other hand, the rule and regulation in the weightlifting had been changed since 1972 in which the clean and press lift eliminated from the competition due to the risk of this lift. Finally, weightlifting considered as safe sport if it is compared with other sports
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Mar 28, 2016

REVIEW: INOV-8 FASTLIFT 325

NewsBot · Sep 22, 2016

NewsBot · Mar 29, 2016

Effects of Footwear on Performance in a Barbell Backsquat
ANTHONY WILKINS, SCOTT P. MCLEAN, and JIMMY SMITH
abstract

Varying philosophies exist on the type of footwear that is most beneficial to wear when strength training.
Olympic/power lifters prefer to train in a stiff shoe with a raised heel (0.6-0.75 inches) to provide more
stability through the movement. Bodybuilders prefer lifting barefoot or with a minimalist shoe. The
purpose of this experiment was to determine the effects that a weightlifting shoe has on peak vertical
force, peak vertical power, total center of pressure migration (COP), anterior-posterior (AP) COP
migration, and mediolateral (ML) COP migration. Eleven participants, (178.7?7.2 cm and 84.6?15.3 kg)
performed barbell back squats while wearing a weightlifting shoe and a running shoe with a minimal
drop height. All trials were performed atop a force plate with force and moment data collected at 200 Hz.
Participants reported on three separate days for testing. Day one was used to determine 1-RM using a
multi-rep test (Brzycki, 1993). Participants then were given 48 hours rest before reporting for the next day.
Days two and three were used to collect data kinetic data from a submaximal (70% 1-RM) squat trial while
wearing either a weightlifting shoe or running shoe. The same 48 hours rest was given between the two
days. Peak vertical force while wearing weightlifting shoes (2096?449 N) was not different than when
wearing running shoes (2086?486 N) (t32 =.154, p=.87, d=.015). Similarly, peak vertical power while
wearing weightlifting shoes (30.7?19.6 W) was not different than when wearing running shoes (31.1?23.4
W) (t32 =-.12, p=.9, d=.01). Wearing running shoes decreased total migration of the COP (0.61?0.18 m) by
34% from the weightlifting shoe (0.93?0.67 m) (t32 = 2.82, p=.008, d=.45). Likewise, AP COP migration
wearing the running shoes (0.35?0.13 m) was reduced by 51% compared to using the weightlifting shoe
(0.71?0.73 m) (t32 = 2.96, p=.005, d=.47). As indicated by Cohen’s d, approximately 45% of the reduction in
COP migrations was accounted for by shoe type. These data suggest that use of a flatter, less stable shoe
resulted in more stable body position throughout the squat exercise. Less body sway during the
movement may produce a more effective lifting technique that minimizes the risk of injury.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Apr 21, 2016

The effect of weightlifting shoes on the kinetics and kinematics of the back squat
Hayley S. Legg, Mark Glaister, Daniel J. Cleather & Jon E. Goodwin
Journal of Sports Sciences; Published online: 20 Apr 2016

Weightlifting shoes (WS) are often used by athletes to facilitate their squat technique; however, the nature of these benefits is not well understood. In this study, the effects of footwear and load on the mechanics of squatting were assessed for 32 participants (age: 25.4 ? 4.4 years; mass 72.87 ? 11.35 kg) grouped by sex and experience. Participants completed loaded and unloaded back squats wearing both WS and athletic shoes (AS). Data were collected utilising a 3D motion capture system synchronised with a force platform and used to calculate kinematic and kinetic descriptors of squatting. For both load conditions, WS gave significantly (P < 0.05) reduced ankle flexion and increased knee flexion than AS, as well as a more upright trunk and greater knee moment for the unloaded condition. In addition, the experienced group experienced a significantly greater increase in knee and hip flexion with WS than the novices when unloaded. These results are consistent with the idea that WS permit a more knee flexed, upright posture during squatting, and provide preliminary evidence that experienced squatters are more able to exploit this effect. Decisions about footwear should recognise the effect of footwear on movement and reflect an athlete’s movement capabilities and training objectives.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jun 7, 2016

Investigation into Barbell Back Squat Comparing Weightlifting Shoes
to Barefoot Conditions
Alex Pilkinton
Honours Thesis; East Tennessee State University
April 2016

This present study was intended to investigate muscle activation patterns
throughout the barbell back squat and determine if there are any differences found in
EMG responses among individuals wearing weightlifting shoes and barefooted individuals.
The hypothesis was that weightlifting shoes would generate significantly greater muscle
activation patterns throughout the barbell back squat due to the rigid structure and raised
heal in the shoe design. EMG patterns from six superficial lower extremity muscles were
recorded from 12 subjects (means: 22.67 ? 2.39 age, 172,28 ? 14.04 cm height, 74.88 ? 16.11
kg mass), each meeting a specific inclusion criteria. Data collection occurred over three
subject visits to determine one repetition maximum [1RM] (Day 1), conduct maximal
contraction tests (Day 2), and finally to perform squat tests with the two footwear
conditions (Day 3). Data was collected at 80% of the participants’ 1RM utilizing both
weightlifting shoes and barefoot conditions, and EMG activity was recorded for data
analysis. Paired-sample T-tests were calculated to check for any significant differences
among footwear conditions, and 2X2 ANOVA testing was used to determine if any
significant changes occurred among footwear conditions in the eccentric and concentric
portions of the barbell back squat. The study found two main components. The first was
that several muscles showed differences between eccentric and concentric phases in regards
to average muscle activity. However, none of the observed muscles showed significant
differences between the two footwear conditions in regard to EMG activity.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jul 10, 2016

EFFECTS OF FOOTWEAR ON SAGITTAL PLANE KINEMATICS AND CENTRE OF PRESSURE EXCURSION DURING THE BARBELL BACK SQUAT
Gerwyn Hughes, Stephen Prescott
International Conference of Biomechanics in Sports (2015)

Footwear has been proposed to alter squat performance whereby flat soles may reduce footfloor proprioception and raised heels may decrease joint range of motion. This study aimed to investigate the effects of footwear on centre of pressure excursion (CPE) and sagittal plane kinematics during the back squat. Seven males performed squats during five different footwear conditions (barefoot, weightlifting shoe, running shoe, minimal shoe, flat-soled shoe) while sagittal plane kinematics and CPE were recorded. Results showed no significant difference in CPE between any footwear conditions. Peak knee flexion was significantly greater for running shoes and weightlifting shoes compared to barefoot. Peak shank angle was significantly greater when wearing weightlifting shoes compared to minimal footwear. This suggests footwear which increases heel height may increase peak joint angles to allow for a deeper squat.
Click to expand...

plevanszx1 · Jul 11, 2016

As someone who has done weightlifting years ago i nearly fell off my chair when i saw this post. i would never have attempted it barefoot for fear of slipping on the floor.

NewsBot · Sep 27, 2016

The effects of a heel wedge on hip, pelvis and trunk biomechanics during squatting in resistance trained individuals.
Charlton BPEC CSCS, Jesse M.; Hammond, Connor A. BSc; Cochrane, Christopher K. BSc; Hatfield, Gillian L. PT, PhD; Hunt, Michael A. PT, PhD
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research: September 20, 2016

Barbell back squats are a popular exercise for developing lower extremity strength and power. However, this exercise has potential injury risks, particularly to the lumbar spine, pelvis and hip joint. Previous literature suggests heel wedges as a means of favourably adjusting trunk and pelvis kinematics with the intention of reducing such injury risks. Yet no direct biomechanical research exists to support these recommendations. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of heel wedges compared to barefoot on minimally loaded barbell back squats. Fourteen trained male participants performed a barbell back squat in bare feet or with their feet raised bilaterally with a 2.5cm wooden block while 3D kinematics, kinetics and electromyograms were collected. The heel wedge condition elicited significantly less forward trunk flexion angles at peak knee flexion, and peak external hip joint moments (p<0.05) compared to barefoot conditions. However, no significant differences were observed between conditions for trunk and pelvis angle differences at peak knee flexion (p>0.05). Lastly, no peak or root mean square differences in muscle activity were elicited between conditions (p>0.05). Our results lend support for the suggestions provided in literature aimed at utilizing heel wedges as a means of reducing excessive forward trunk flexion. However, the maintenance of a neutral spine, another important safety factor, is not affected by the use of heel wedges. Therefore, heel wedges may be a viable modification for reduction of excessive forward trunk flexion, but not for reduction in relative trunk-pelvis flexion during barbell back squats.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Oct 18, 2016

The effects of squatting footwear on three-dimensional lower limb and spine kinetics
Daniel J. Southwell et al
Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology; 12 October 2016

Altering footwear worn during performance of the barbell back squat has been shown to change motion patterns, but it is not completely understood how this affects biomechanical loading demands. The primary objective was to compare lower back and extremity net joint moments in 24 experienced weightlifters (12M, 12F) who performed 80% one-repetition maximum back squats under three different footwear conditions (barefoot, running shoes, weightlifting shoes). Results showed that there was a significant main effect of footwear condition on the knee extension moment (p= 0.001), where the running and weightlifting shoes produced significantly larger moments than the barefoot condition. There was also a main effect of footwear condition on knee external rotation moments (p=0.002), where the weightlifting shoe produced significantly larger moments than both other conditions. At the hip, there was also a main effect of footwear condition on the extension moment (p= 0.004), where the barefoot condition produced significantly larger moments than either the running shoe or weightlifting shoe condition. Lastly, there was also a significant main effect of footwear condition on both hip external (p=0.005) and internal (p=0.003) rotation moments, where the barefoot condition produced greater internal rotation and less external rotation moments than either shod condition. This study indicates that altering footwear conditions while performing the barbell back squat may redistribute the internal biomechanical loading patterns amongst the lower extremity joints and perhaps alter the musculoskeletal adaptations elicited.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jan 10, 2017

The Effect of Sex and Footwear on Dynamic Changes during the Loaded Barbell Back Squat
Teal, Ameera
(2016). Masters Theses. 475.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of sex and footwear on 3D kinematics, power output, and plantar pressure distribution during the loaded barbell back squat.
METHODS: Eleven (four male, seven female) recreationally-active individuals completed six sets of three repetitions of the loaded barbell back squat at 60% of their measured 1RM. Using a randomized counterbalanced crossover design, one set was completed in each of the three footwear conditions – weightlifting shoes (WLS), running shoes (RS) and minimalist shoes (MS) – and 3D kinematics, ground reaction force (GRF), and plantar pressure distribution were collected. A two-way 2 (sex) x 3 (footwear) analysis of variances was used to evaluate differences.
RESULTS: Females displayed significantly higher ankle plantarflexion and knee abduction at maximum knee flexion compared to males. Males exhibited significantly greater absolute peak power at the ankle, knee, and hip. Males had a lower mean absolute peak power knee to hip ratio in WLS compared to RS and MS while females had similar absolute peak power knee to hip ratios in WLS and RS. Males and females had similar ratios of peak pressure in the hindfoot relative to the total foot in WLS (0.78, 0.79 respectively). There was no interaction between sex and footwear when observing 3D kinematics, absolute peak joint power, and plantar pressure distribution in this study.
CONCLUSIONS: Females may need to train in WLS before seeing changes in power distribution that favors hip power output. The influence of footwear could affect males more so than females in their ability to maintain peak pressure in the HF relative to the total foot in order to drive through the heels during the ascent of the loaded barbell back squat.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Feb 7, 2017

TRIED & TESTED: INOV8 FASTLIFT 325s WEIGHTLIFTING SHOES

NewsBot · Feb 10, 2017

NewsBot · May 26, 2017

The Effects of a Heel Wedge on Hip, Pelvis and Trunk Biomechanics During Squatting in Resistance Trained Individuals.
Charlton JM, Hammond CA, Cochrane CK, Hatfield GL, Hunt MA.
J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Jun;31(6):1678-1687. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001655.

Barbell back squats are a popular exercise for developing lower extremity strength and power. However, this exercise has potential injury risks, particularly to the lumbar spine, pelvis, and hip joint. Previous literature suggests heel wedges as a means of favorably adjusting trunk and pelvis kinematics with the intention of reducing such injury risks. Yet no direct biomechanical research exists to support these recommendations. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of heel wedges compared with barefoot on minimally loaded barbell back squats. Fourteen trained male participants performed a barbell back squat in bare feet or with their feet raised bilaterally with a 2.5-cm wooden block while 3-dimensional kinematics, kinetics, and electromyograms were collected. The heel wedge condition elicited significantly less forward trunk flexion angles at peak knee flexion, and peak external hip joint moments (p ≤ 0.05) compared with barefoot conditions. However, no significant differences were observed between conditions for trunk and pelvis angle differences at peak knee flexion (p > 0.05). Lastly, no peak or root mean square differences in muscle activity were elicited between conditions (p > 0.05). Our results lend support for the suggestions provided in literature aimed at using heel wedges as a means of reducing excessive forward trunk flexion. However, the maintenance of a neutral spine, another important safety factor, is not affected by the use of heel wedges. Therefore, heel wedges may be a viable modification for reduction of excessive forward trunk flexion but not for reduction in relative trunk-pelvis flexion during barbell back squats.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jun 1, 2017

Utility of the Overhead Squat and Forward Arm Squat in Screening for Limited Ankle Dorsiflexion.
Rabin A, Kozol Z.
J Strength Cond Res 31(5): 1251-1258, 2017-

Limited ankle dorsiflexion (DF) range of motion (ROM) has been implicated in several lower extremity disorders. Effective screening for DF ROM may, therefore, help to identify "at risk" individuals. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the utility of 2 screening tests in detecting limited ankle DF ROM. Fifty-three healthy participants underwent an overhead squat (OS) test and a forward arm squat (FAS) test, as well as bilateral testing of weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing ankle DF ROM. Participants whose DF ROM fell below 1 SD from the sample average were considered to have limited DF ROM. The sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative likelihood ratio (LR) of the OS and FAS in detecting individuals with limited DF ROM was calculated. The sensitivity of the OS was 1.00 regardless of the mode or the side of testing, whereas specificity ranged from 0.34 to 0.36. The positive LR of the OS ranged from 1.52 to 1.56, whereas negative LR was 0.00. The sensitivity of the FAS ranged from 0.56 to 0.70, whereas specificity ranged from 0.84 to 0.88. The positive and negative LR of the FAS ranged from 3.49 to 6.02, and 0.34 to 0.53, respectively. Our findings suggest that the OS and FAS may be used as complementing tests in screening for ankle DF limitation. Because of its excellent sensitivity, the OS should be performed first, and if negative, may confidently rule out limited DF ROM. However, given a positive OS, testing should proceed with the FAS, to more confidently rule in limited DF ROM.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jun 24, 2017

Heel-Raised Foot Posture Do Not Affect Trunk And Lower Extremity Biomechanics During A Barbell Back Squat In Recreational Weightlifters.
Lee, Szu-Ping PT, PhD; Gillis, Carrie PT, DPT; Ibarra, Javier J. PT, DPT, CSCS; Oldroyd, Derek PT, DPT; Zane, Ryan PT, DPT, CSCS
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research: Post Acceptance: June 19, 2017

It is claimed that weightlifting shoes with a raised heel may lead to a more upright trunk posture, and thus reduce the risk of back injuries during a barbell back squat. These proclaimed biomechanical effects have not been thoroughly investigated. The purpose of this study was to compare trunk and lower extremity biomechanics during barbell back squats in 3 foot postures.

14 recreational weightlifters (7 male and 7 female) between the ages of 18-50 performed barbell back squats in 3 conditions (barefoot on a flat surface, barefoot on a heel-raised platform, and wearing heel-raised weightlifting shoes) at 80% of their 1-RM. Surface electromyography (EMG) was used to assess the activation of the knee extensors and paraspinal muscles at L3 and T12 spinal levels. A 3D motion capture system and an electrogoniometer recorded the kinematics of the thoracic spine, lumbar spine, and knee during the back squat to a depth where the hip was at least at the same level to the knee.

Resultsindicated that none of the heel-raised foot postures significantly affected trunk and lower extremity muscle activation [thoracolumbar paraspinal (p=0.52), lumbar paraspinal (p=0.179), knee extensor (p=0.507)] or the trunk angles [thoracolumbar spine (p=0.348), lumbar spine (p=0.283)] during the squat.

Our results demonstrated that during barbell back squats, heel-raised foot postures do not significantly affect spinal and knee extensor muscle activations, and trunk and knee kinematics. Heel-raised weightlifting shoes are unlikely to provide significant protection against back injuries for recreational weightlifters during the barbell back squat.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Oct 11, 2017

Shod versus barefoot effects on force and power development during a conventional deadlift.
Hammer, Mark E.; Meir, Rudi A.; Whitting, John W.; Crowley-McHattan, Zachary J.
Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research: Post Acceptance: October 07, 2017

The kinetics of a conventional deadlift in shod (S) versus unshod (US) footwear conditions in 10 male participants (mean +/- SD, age = 27.0 +/- 5.8 years; weight = 78.7 +/- 11.5 kg; height = 175.8 +/- 8.2 cm; 1RM deadlift = 155.8 +/- 25.8 kg) was assessed in two testing sessions. A counterbalanced, crossover experimental design was used with different loads (60% and 80% 1RM). Four sets of four repetitions were prescribed per session with two sets per shoe and with each shoe condition involving one set per load. Peak vertical force (PF), rate of force development (RFD), time to peak force (TPF), anterior-posterior (COP-AP) and medio-lateral (COP-ML) center of pressure excursion, and barbell peak power (PP) data were recorded during all repetitions. Except for RFD (F = 6.389; p = 0.045; [eta]p2 = 0.516) and ML-COP (F = 6.696; p = 0.041; [eta]p2 = 0.527), there were no other significant main effects of shoe. There were significant main effects of load for PF (p < 0.05), COP-AP (p = 0.011), TPF (p = 0.018) and COP-AP (p = 0.011). There were no significant interactions found between session, shoe and load (p range from 0.944 to 0.086). While the unshod condition may have produced changes in RFD and ML-COP compared with the shod condition, there is only limited evidence in the current study to support this lifting technique for the conventional deadlift. Further investigation is required to clarify any possible implications of this result and its benefit to lifters.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Apr 2, 2018

From LER:
Do specialty shoes boost weightlifting performance?

NewsBot · Sep 26, 2018

Shod vs. Barefoot Effects on Force and Power Development During a Conventional Deadlift.
Hammer ME, Meir RA, Whitting JW, Crowley-McHattan ZJ.
J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Jun;32(6):1525-1530. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002246.

The kinetics of a conventional deadlift in shod (S) vs. unshod (US) footwear conditions in 10 male participants (mean ± SD, age = 27.0 ± 5.8 years; body mass = 78.7 ± 11.5 kg; height = 175.8 ± 8.2 cm; 1 repetition maximum [1RM] deadlift = 155.8 ± 25.8 kg) was assessed in 2 testing sessions. A counterbalanced, cross-over experimental design was used with different loads (60 and 80% 1RM). Four sets of 4 repetitions were prescribed per session with 2 sets per shoe and with each shoe condition involving 1 set per load. Peak vertical force (PF), rate of force development (RFD), time to peak force (TPF), anterior-posterior (COP-AP) and mediolateral (COP-ML) center of pressure excursion, and barbell peak power data were recorded during all repetitions. Except for RFD (F = 6.389; p = 0.045; ηp = 0.516) and ML-COP (F = 6.696; p = 0.041; ηp = 0.527), there were no other significant main effects of shoe. There were significant main effects of load for PF (p ≤ 0.05), COP-AP (p = 0.011), TPF (p = 0.018), and COP-AP (p = 0.011). There were no significant interactions found between session, shoe, and load (p range from 0.944 to 0.086). Although the US condition may have produced changes in RFD and ML-COP compared with the shod condition, there is only limited evidence in the current study to support this lifting technique for the conventional deadlift. Further investigation is required to clarify any possible implications of this result and its benefit to lifters.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Feb 21, 2019

Heel-raised foot posture does not affect trunk and lower extremity biomechanics during a barbell back squat in recreational weight lifters.
Lee, S-P, Gillis, CB, Ibarra, JJ, Oldroyd, DF, and Zane, RS.
J Strength Cond Res 33(3): 606–614, 2019

It is claimed that weightlifting shoes with a raised heel may lead to a more upright trunk posture, and thus reduce the risk of back injuries during a barbell back squat. These proclaimed biomechanical effects have not been thoroughly investigated. The purpose of this study was to compare trunk and lower extremity biomechanics during barbell back squats in three foot postures. Fourteen recreational weight lifters (7 men and 7 women) between the ages of 18 and 50 years performed barbell back squats in three conditions (barefoot on a flat surface, barefoot on a heel-raised platform, and wearing heel-raised weightlifting shoes) at 80% of their 1 repetition maximum. Surface electromyography was used to assess the activation of the knee extensors and paraspinal muscles at L3 and T12 spinal levels. A 3D motion capture system and an electrogoniometer recorded the kinematics of the thoracic spine, lumbar spine, and knee during the back squat to a depth where the hip was at least at the same level to the knee. Results indicated that none of the heel-raised foot postures significantly affected trunk and lower extremity muscle activation (thoracolumbar paraspinal [p = 0.52], lumbar paraspinal [p = 0.179], knee extensor [p = 0.507]) or the trunk angles (thoracolumbar spine [p = 0.348], lumbar spine [p = 0.283]) during the squat. Our results demonstrated that during barbell back squats, heel-raised foot postures do not significantly affect spinal and knee extensor muscle activations, and trunk and knee kinematics. Heel-raised weightlifting shoes are unlikely to provide significant protection against back injuries for recreational weight lifters during the barbell back squat.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jul 8, 2019

Biomechanical effects of shod vs. unshod deadlift in
males
Jacob La Marche
Thesis, Iowa State University

There are many forms of resistance training, with the barbell squat, bench press, and deadlift
being three of the most popular exercises. The squat and bench press have been examined
extensively, while the deadlift has not. The purpose of this study was to examine participants
performing the barbell deadlift while wearing their normal lifting shoes and while barefoot.
Thirty male participants aged 18-30 and with at least one year of deadlift experience were
recruited for this study. An eight-camera system and a force platform were used to measure
three-dimensional movements and ground reaction forces during 80% one repetition maximum
deadlifts. Ankle, knee, and hip joint angles and moments were analyzed at the instance of lift
off and knee pass, along with bar velocity at those same points. A pair-wise t-test was used with
an alpha of 0.05. Ankle dorsiflexion angle (p = 0.018), knee flexion angle (p < 0.001), and knee
flexion moment (p < 0.001) were significantly higher at the point of lift off in the shod
condition. The bar velocity (p = 0.028) was significantly higher at knee pass in the shod
condition. These results indicate that performing the deadlift while barefoot could benefit
lifters who struggle with more flexed postures and/or have limited ankle dorsiflexion range of
motion. These changes in posture likely led to the reduced knee flexion moments required to
initiate bar lift off. However, lifting barefoot may decrease deadlift performance in terms of
power generated as evidenced by lower bar velocity.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Mar 18, 2020

The effect of elevating the heels on spinal kinematics and kinetics during the back squat in trained and novice weight trainers
Mark G. L. Sayers et al
Journal of Sports Sciences : 17 Mar 2020

This research assessed the influence of various heel elevation conditions on spinal kinematic and kinetic data during loaded (25% and 50% of body weight) high-bar back squats. Ten novice (mass 67.6 ± 12.4 kg, height 1.73 ± 0.10 m) and ten regular weight trainers (mass 66.0 ± 10.7 kg, height 1.71 ± 0.09 m) completed eight repetitions at each load wearing conventional training shoes standing on the flat level floor (LF) and on an inclined board (EH). The regular weight training group performed an additional eight repetitions wearing weightlifting shoes (WS). Statistical parametric mapping (SPM1D) and repeated measures analysis of variance were used to assess differences in spinal curvature and kinetics across the shoe/floor conditions and loads. SPM1D analyses indicated that during the LF condition the novice weight trainers had greater moments around L4/L5 than the regular weight trainers during the last 20% of the lift (P < 0.05), with this difference becoming non-significant during the EH condition. This study indicates that from a perspective of spinal safety, it appears advantageous for novice weight trainers to perform back squats with their heels slightly elevated, while regular weight trainers appear to realize only limited benefits performing back squats with either EH or WS.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · May 13, 2020

Time to Reconsider Foot and Leg Position During the Bench Press
Nuzzo, James L. PhD, CSCS
Strength and Conditioning Journal: May 07, 2020

The “feet on the floor” guideline for the bench press is a historical byproduct of old bench designs. The “psoas-relaxed position,” where the hips and knees are flexed and the feet rest on adjustable plates at the end of the bench, should be considered to replace existing guidelines. The psoas-relaxed position accommodates lifters of all body heights, is more sport-specific than current bench press posture, and reduces lumbar lordosis and increases the cross-sectional area of the dural sac and spinal canal, making the exercise more viable for certain back pain patients. Steps to implementation include research on bench press postural preferences, development of adjustable foot plates, and formal revision to bench press guidelines.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · May 24, 2020

The Effect of Elevating the Heels on Spinal Kinematics and Kinetics During the Back Squat in Trained and Novice Weight Trainers
Mark G L Sayers et al
J Sports Sci. 2020 May;38(9):1000-1008

This research assessed the influence of various heel elevation conditions on spinal kinematic and kinetic data during loaded (25% and 50% of body weight) high-bar back squats. Ten novice (mass 67.6 ± 12.4 kg, height 1.73 ± 0.10 m) and ten regular weight trainers (mass 66.0 ± 10.7 kg, height 1.71 ± 0.09 m) completed eight repetitions at each load wearing conventional training shoes standing on the flat level floor (LF) and on an inclined board (EH). The regular weight training group performed an additional eight repetitions wearing weightlifting shoes (WS). Statistical parametric mapping (SPM1D) and repeated measures analysis of variance were used to assess differences in spinal curvature and kinetics across the shoe/floor conditions and loads. SPM1D analyses indicated that during the LF condition the novice weight trainers had greater moments around L4/L5 than the regular weight trainers during the last 20% of the lift (P < 0.05), with this difference becoming non-significant during the EH condition. This study indicates that from a perspective of spinal safety, it appears advantageous for novice weight trainers to perform back squats with their heels slightly elevated, while regular weight trainers appear to realize only limited benefits performing back squats with either EH or WS.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · May 26, 2020

Effects of different footwear on kinetics, kinematics and muscle forces during the barbell back squat; an exploration using Bayesian modelling
Jonathan Sinclair, Bobbie Butters, Paul John Taylor, Mark Stone, Ian Bentley & Christopher James Edmundson
Footwear Science: 24 May 2020

The current study aimed to explore the effects of different footwear on kinetics, kinematics and muscle forces during the barbell back squat in both male and female lifters using Bayesian modelling. Twelve male and twelve female lifters completed squats at 70% of their 1 repetition maximum, in four different footwear conditions (Adidas weightlifting shoe, Inov-8 weightlifting shoe, Cross-fit and minimal footwear). Three-dimensional kinematics were measured using an eight-camera motion analysis system, ground reaction forces using a force platform and muscle/joint forces using musculoskeletal modelling techniques. Differences between footwear were examined using Bayesian 4 (FOOTWEAR) * 2 (GENDER) mixed ANOVA’s. Peak quadriceps force was greater in the Adidas (male = 89.78/female = 70.56 N/kg), Cross-fit (male = 92.41/female = 70.82 N/kg) and Inov-8 (male = 91.57/female = 68.21 N/kg) conditions compared to minimal footwear (male = 82.61/female = 64.40 N/kg). In addition, peak patellofemoral stress and patellar tendon forces were greater in the Adidas (patellar tendon force: male = 64.67/female = 42.89 N/kg & patellofemoral stress: male = 143.21/female = 118.92 KPa/kg), Cross-fit (patellar tendon force: male = 67.89/female = 43.52 N/kg & patellofemoral stress: male = 146.02/female = 114.73 KPa/kg) and Inov-8 (patellar tendon force: male = 64.08/female = 41.04 N/kg & patellofemoral stress: male = 193.09/female = 169.09 KPa/kg) conditions compared to minimal footwear (patellar tendon force: male = 56.75/female = 39.92 N/kg & patellofemoral stress: male = 134.06/female = 108.91 KPa/kg). Finally, angular ROM was greater in the minimal footwear (male = 28.04/female = 33.75°) compared to the Adidas (male = 26.85/female = 30.73°) and Inov-8 (male = 26.92/female = 32.63°) conditions. The findings from the current investigation therefore indicate that weightlifting footwear may be able to enhance lower extremity muscle development and improve squat biomechanics owing to a reduced trunk angular ROM; however, this is likely to be at the expense of increased knee joint loading.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jul 26, 2020

The effect of increasing heel height on lower limb symmetry during the back squat in trained and novice lifters
Mark G. L. Sayers, S. H. Hosseini Nasab, Caroline Bachem, William R. Taylor, Renate List & Silvio Lorenzetti
BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation volume 12, Article number: 42 (2020)

Background
Symmetry during lifting is considered critical for allowing balanced power production and avoidance of injury. This investigation assessed the influence of elevating the heels on bilateral lower limb symmetry during loaded (50% of body weight) high-bar back squats.

Methods
Ten novice (mass 67.6 ± 12.4 kg, height 1.73 ± 0.10 m) and ten regular weight trainers (mass 66.0 ± 10.7 kg, height 1.71 ± 0.09 m) were assessed while standing on both the flat level floor and on an inclined board. Data collection used infra-red motion capture procedures and two force platforms to record bilateral vertical ground reaction force (GRFvert) and ankle, knee and hip joint kinematic and kinetic data. Paired t-tests and statistical parametric mapping (SPM1D) procedures were used to assess differences in discrete and continuous bilateral symmetry data across conditions.

Results
Although discrete joint kinematic and joint moment symmetry data were largely unaffected by raising the heels, the regular weight trainers presented greater bilateral asymmetry in these data than the novices. The one significant finding in these discrete data showed that raising the heels significantly reduced maximum knee extension moment asymmetry (P = 0.02), but in the novice group only. Time-series analyses indicated significant bilateral asymmetries in both GRFvert and knee extension moments mid-way though the eccentric phase for the novice group, with the latter unaffected by heel lift condition. There were no significant bilateral asymmetries in time series data within the regular weight training group.

Conclusions
This investigation highlights that although a degree of bilateral lower limb asymmetry is common in individuals performing back squats, the degree of this symmetry is largely unaffected by raising the heels. Differences in results for discrete and time-series symmetry analyses also highlight a key issue associated with relying solely on discrete data techniques to assess bilateral symmetry during tasks such as the back squat.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Aug 2, 2020

The effect of increasing heel height on lower limb symmetry during the back squat in trained and novice lifters
Mark G L Sayers et al
BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2020 Jul 25;12:42

Background: Symmetry during lifting is considered critical for allowing balanced power production and avoidance of injury. This investigation assessed the influence of elevating the heels on bilateral lower limb symmetry during loaded (50% of body weight) high-bar back squats.

Methods: Ten novice (mass 67.6 ± 12.4 kg, height 1.73 ± 0.10 m) and ten regular weight trainers (mass 66.0 ± 10.7 kg, height 1.71 ± 0.09 m) were assessed while standing on both the flat level floor and on an inclined board. Data collection used infra-red motion capture procedures and two force platforms to record bilateral vertical ground reaction force (GRFvert) and ankle, knee and hip joint kinematic and kinetic data. Paired t-tests and statistical parametric mapping (SPM1D) procedures were used to assess differences in discrete and continuous bilateral symmetry data across conditions.

Results: Although discrete joint kinematic and joint moment symmetry data were largely unaffected by raising the heels, the regular weight trainers presented greater bilateral asymmetry in these data than the novices. The one significant finding in these discrete data showed that raising the heels significantly reduced maximum knee extension moment asymmetry (P = 0.02), but in the novice group only. Time-series analyses indicated significant bilateral asymmetries in both GRFvert and knee extension moments mid-way though the eccentric phase for the novice group, with the latter unaffected by heel lift condition. There were no significant bilateral asymmetries in time series data within the regular weight training group.

Conclusions: This investigation highlights that although a degree of bilateral lower limb asymmetry is common in individuals performing back squats, the degree of this symmetry is largely unaffected by raising the heels. Differences in results for discrete and time-series symmetry analyses also highlight a key issue associated with relying solely on discrete data techniques to assess bilateral symmetry during tasks such as the back squat.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Nov 10, 2020

HEEL-RAISED SQUATS: GOOD OR BAD?

This Technique Gets Too Much Hate

NewsBot · Apr 16, 2021

Footwear and Elevated Heel Influence On Barbell Back Squat: a Review
Aaron Michael Pangan, Matthew J Leineweber
J Biomech Eng. 2021 Apr 12

The back squat is one of the most effective exercises in strengthening the muscles of the lower extremity. Understanding the impact of footwear has on the biomechanics is imperative for maximizing the exercise training potential, preventing injury, and rehabilitating from injury. This review focuses on how different types of footwear affect the full-body kinematics, joint loads, muscle activity, and ground reaction forces in athletes of varying experience performing the weighted back squat. The literature search was conducted using three databases, and fourteen full-text articles were ultimately included in the review. The majority of these studies demonstrated that the choice of footwear directly impacts kinematics and kinetics. Weightlifting shoes were shown to decrease trunk lean and generate more plantarflexion relative to running shoes and barefoot lifting. Elevating the heel through the use of external squat wedges is popular clinical exercise during rehabilitation and was shown to provide similar effects to WLS. Additional research with a broader array of populations, particularly novice and female weightlifters, should be conducted to generalize the research results to non-athlete populations. Further work is also needed to characterize the specific effects of sole stiffness and heel elevation height on squatting mechanics.
Click to expand...

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Euan McGivern Active Member

David Wedemeyer Well-Known Member

stevewells Active Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

DJMalone Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

plevanszx1 Active Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Medial pain, still can't squat 14 months after sprain?

The Effects of Rearfoot Position on Lower Limb Kinematics during Bilateral Squatting in Asymptomatic

Medial pain, still can't squat 14 months after sprain?

Share This Page