074 - Back Squat Evolution: What History Teaches Us About Movement
Everyone squats, but no one squats the same. From 19th-century tippy-toe crouches to 21st-century barbell-loaded power racks, the back squat has undergone a radical transformation. This historical review tracks the squat’s evolution across culture, competition, and commerce.
For coaches and tactical professionals, it delivers an important lesson: squat technique is not sacred. Movement adapts with context, and history reveals why.
Understanding the roots of the movement clarifies how social, scientific, and technological changes shaped what we now see as essential.
What They Found:
The article maps the back squat’s progression from early gymnastic bodyweight movements to today’s loaded, flat-footed staple of strength and conditioning. It identifies three major forces driving change:
(1) equipment advancements like barbells, racks, heeled shoes, and wraps,
(2) the rise of strength sports like bodybuilding, Olympic lifting, and powerlifting, and
(3) evolving scientific attitudes about safety, effectiveness, and populations who benefit.
From Eugen Sandow’s spring-grip dumbbells to Henry Steinborn’s flat-foot squat, every generation redefined “good” squatting based on need, culture, and innovation.
The integration of squat racks in the 1930s, the mass production of lifting gear in the 1970s, and the emergence of position statements from institutions like the NSCA dramatically shifted access and perceptions of the squat.
What This Means:
There’s never been a single correct way to squat. What we now call “proper” technique was once considered dangerous, radical, or ineffective.
The lesson: technique should serve the goal, not tradition.
For coaches and clinicians, this means prioritizing function over dogma. It also underscores the importance of historical awareness—how commercial forces, misinterpreted science, and shifting sport demands shaped what we teach and believe about the back squat today.
Context matters: powerlifters may optimize depth and leverage, while tactical populations may benefit more from mobility and adaptability.
Tactical Implications:
Respect movement history, not myths: What’s "normal" today was once revolutionary. Challenge inherited cues and outdated assumptions.
Contextualize squatting techniques: Adjust form based on purpose—powerlifting, rehab, general readiness, or hypertrophy. Movement intent drives technical precision.
Avoid one-size-fits-all programming: Different populations (youth, tactical, aging adults) require tailored squat regressions or alternatives based on mobility, goals, and history.
Educate athletes on evolution: Use squat history to teach critical thinking, reduce fear, and boost buy-in. Help trainees understand why form varies across environments.
Monitor science and media influence: Be aware of how trends, influencers, and outdated research still shape public beliefs. Promote evidence-based movement literacy.
Reassess the "back squat or bust" mentality: Coaches should recognize the full squat family: front, goblet, box, Zercher, safety bar, as valuable tools to serve needs beyond ego lifting.
Questions To Consider:
Do your squat progressions reflect history, biomechanics, or just tradition?
How can you adapt squat technique to better serve individual performance goals?
Are your training environments shaped more by science or social media?
How does your coaching language reinforce or challenge outdated squat norms?
What role should history play in guiding your movement philosophy?
Heffernan, Conor. The History and Evolution of the Back Squat in the United States. Strength and Conditioning Journal 47(3):p 269-278, June 2025. | DOI: 10.1519/SSC.0000000000000880