Calf To Ham
Squatting through a full range of motion – A practical strategy for optimizing your leg training
Here at Level TEN we pride ourselves on taking a “backed by science”, evidence based approach to training and nutrition. We wouldn’t recommend anything that doesn’t have, at the very least, some data to suggest that it is beneficial. And if you follow Coach John you know his favorite training application to recommend is going “calf to ham”; i.e squatting through a full range of motion.
So, let’s take a look at the evidence to determine if this is just another catchy Instagram tagline or if there really is some merit to making sure your hamstrings touch your calves at the bottom of your squat patterns.
A recent systematic review (essentially a review of “all evidence that meets a certain criteria”) on training through a full range of motion concluded that all lower body studies show either a statistically significant benefit on muscle hypertrophy when squatting through larger degrees of knee flexion OR data that showed an advantageous result that wasn’t statistically significant.
A brief explanation as to WHY training through a longer ROM causes more muscle growth:
We (likely) need to apply mechanical tension, metabolic stress, and muscle damage to illicit growth. Tension is generally the highest when muscles are in the stretched position, if you fully flex a joint you may be “limiting” some oxygen supply to the muscle cells which would illicit metabolic stress, and muscle damage is greater the further you stretch a muscle fiber.
Now, as is typical in research, “the devil is in the details” – so I want to dive a little bit deeper to explain why it’s likely more “practical in application” to squat through as much knee flexion as you safely and comfortably can.
Let’s take a look at an “obvious” study result from the systematic review that would suggest “calf to ham” is the only way to live:
“Effect of range of motion in heavy load squatting on muscle and tendon adaptations” by Bloomquist had one group squat from 0 to 120 degrees of knee flexion and another squat from 0 to 60 degrees of knee flexion throughout a 12 week resistance training program.
Basically, one group went through a deep squat and the other went through a shallow squat. The “deep squat” group experienced significantly (statistically) more anterior thigh cross sectional area (quad growth). Score one for #TeamFullROM.
Contrastingly, there was a study included in the review that did not show a statistically significant difference in quad growth.
“Effects of squat training with different depths on lower limb muscle volumes” by Kubo had one group squat from 0 to 140 degrees of knee flexion and another squat from 0 to 90 degrees of knee flexion throughout a 10 week resistance training program.
So, one group went through a “full squat” and another a “half squat”. Both groups experienced quad growth but neither significantly greater than the other (although the results did favor the full squat group). Another notable result was that the “full squat” group achieved significantly greater adductor and gluteus maximus hypertrophy.
So, although this study didn’t show any statistically advantageous results for quad growth when squatting deep or cutting off the movement at parallel, it did for the glutes – score two for #TeamFullROM.
And here’s the caveat that brings our tally to #TeamFullROM: 3 and Team quarter or half squat: 0 – the half squat group in the Kubo study had to use heavier loads to achieve “the same” quad growth and less glute growth than the full squat group.
Summing up the above “calf to ham research”
Quad growth is better than in shallow (0-60 degrees knee flexion) squats.
Quad growth is just “just as good as” half (0 to 90 degrees knee flexion) squats EVEN WHEN LIFTING LIGHTER WEIGHTS.
Glute growth is better than half (0 to 90 degrees knee flexion) squats.
From these findings, one could reasonably conclude that you have to go AT LEAST further than 60 degrees of knee flexion to maximize your quad growth and you’d want to go deeper than parallel (90 degrees) if you also care about your glute development.
When we think about maximizing mechanical tension we need to consider when that is greatest throughout a range of motion.
Where is the most “difficult” position where the load FEELS the heaviest? In a squat this is likely at or slightly deeper than 90 degrees of knee flexion. This is likely why 0-90 degrees of knee flexion squats and 0-140 degree squats yielded similar results; they both included the most difficult portion of every rep (as far as quads are concerned). This is likely why load NEEDED to be greater when performing shallow squats to make up for the “lost tension” from cutting the movement short.
And as a final, reiterated, take home … for those who are currently limited to AT HOME training:
Many have been and still are limited in the amount of weight/resistance they have access to utilize for their training. Not everyone has the ability to do “heavy squats”. But what everyone CAN do is FULL RANGE OF MOTION squat patterns which we just concluded are just as good as or even more effective than decreased knee flexion variations even if lifting less weight.
NOTE: Resistance training programs used in laboratory settings are usually pretty rigorous, REQUIRING participants to train at or very close to muscular failure. So regardless of how deep you take your squat pattern exercises, how close you take them to failure is also going to matter. But the research is fairly clear that, as long as you do so, you’re likely to achieve more favorable outcomes when utilizing the most knee flexion that you can.
Until next time… calf to ham, fam! - Coach John