A biomechanical comparison of the traditional squat, powerlifting squat, and box squat
Open accessAbstract
The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanics of the traditional squat with 2 popular exercise variations commonly referred to as the powerlifting squat and box squat. Twelve male powerlifters performed the exercises with 30, 50, and 70% of their measured 1 repetition maximum (1RM), with instruction to lift the loads as fast as possible. Inverse dynamics and spatial tracking of the external resistance were used to quantify biomechanical variables. A range of significant kinematic and kinetic differences (p < 0.05) emerged between the exercises. The traditional squat was performed with a narrow stance, whereas the powerlifting squat and box squat were performed with similar wide stances (48.3 ± 3.8, 89.6 ± 4.9, 92.1 ± 5.1 cm, respectively). During the eccentric phase of the traditional squat, the knee traveled past the toes resulting in anterior displacement of the system center of mass (COM). In contrast, during the powerlifting squat and box squat, a more vertical shin position was maintained, resulting in posterior displacements of the system COM. These differences in linear displacements had a significant effect (p < 0.05) on a number of peak joint moments, with the greatest effects measured at the spine and ankle. For both joints, the largest peak moment was produced during the traditional squat, followed by the powerlifting squat, then box squat. Significant differences (p < 0.05) were also noted at the hip joint where the largest moment in all 3 planes were produced during the powerlifting squat. Coaches and athletes should be aware of the biomechanical differences between the squatting variations and select according to the kinematic and kinetic profile that best match the training goals.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Compared to trunk inclination, inclination of the tibia during squatting has an opposite influence on the knee flexion moment.
“Compared to trunk inclination, inclination of the tibia during squatting has an opposite influence on the knee flexion moment.9,10,16–18”
From A Biomechanical Review of the Squat Exercise: Implications for Clinical Practice. (2024) · cites this paper as [18]
Moving the tibia from a more upright position to a more forward position shifts the knee joint center further away from the resultant ground reaction force vector, thereby increasing the knee flexion moment during squatting.
“Moving the tibia from a more upright position (Figure 3A) to more forward position (Figure 3B) shifts the knee joint center further away from the resultant ground reaction force vector, thereby increasing the knee flexion moment.”
From A Biomechanical Review of the Squat Exercise: Implications for Clinical Practice. (2024) · cites this paper as [18]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 30 · Cited by 168
- Authors
- Swinton, P. A., Lloyd, R., Keogh, J. W. L., Agouris, I., & Stewart, A. D.
- Affiliations
- Robert Gordon University (GB)
- Abertay University (GB)
- Bond University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Swinton, Paul A.
- Venue
- Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
- Published
- 2012-07
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1805-1816
- ISSN
- 1064-8011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2017044395
- Cited by
- 168
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 6.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Open Access Institutional Repository at Robert Gordon University (Robert Gordon University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- e-publications@bond (Bond University) (submittedVersion)
- Bond University Research Portal (Bond University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Sports Performance and Training
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
- Keywords
- squatting, squat variations, squat biomechanics, joint moments, center of mass displacement, knee position, hip joint moments, ankle moment, powerlifters
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Ankle, Biomechanical Phenomena, Hip, Humans, Knee, Male, Movement, Posture, Spine, Weight Lifting, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review