Is the rear foot elevated split squat as good as the back squat?

In my box, we often substitute the traditional back squat for the rear-elevated split squat (RFESS or Bulgarian split squat) for those that need to amend some movement pathways. We do this in particular for those that struggle to hit depth/good form in the back squat due to a number of reasons. These can be things such as acetabular impingement, hip osteoarthritis or simply poor ankle dorsiflexion preventing a shift of their centre of gravity and therefore poor movement pattern. We do this because we believe this has a similar carryover for its effectiveness.

However, if there is no problem with the back squat, is it necessary to choose between these two perfectly good exercises? Does it provide the same improvements in leg strength and transfer to sports performance when using the RFESS?

The study

Unilateral vs Bilateral Squat training for Strength, Sprints and Agility in Academy Rugby Players. by Speirs, Bennett, Finn, & Turner, Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research (2015)

What did the researchers do?

The researchers compared the effects of two resistance training programs (one using the back squat and one using the RFESS) on measures of strength, sprint running ability and agility (change of direction speed) in rugby athletes.

Here are the key details

• Population: 18 academy rugby players, aged 18 ± 1 years
• Intervention: All subjects trained for 5 weeks, using either the back squat or the RFESS
• Comparison: The two groups were compared with each other and with baseline measures
• Outcomes: 1RM back squat, 1RM RFESS, 10m sprint, 40m sprint, pro agility test

What did the researchers find?

Both the RFESS and back squat groups improved most measures similarly and there were no differences between them.

Effect of resistance training on 1RM back squat and 1RM RFESS

Surprisingly, the researchers found that the RFESS and back squat groups improved back squat 1RM almost identically, by 5.7 ± 3.8% and 5.0 ± 3.7% respectively.
There was no difference between the groups. Similarly, they found that the RFESS and back squat groups improved RFESS 1RM identically, by 9.2 ± 2.1% and 10.5 ± 3.2%, respectively.

Effect of resistance training on sprint running ability

The researchers found that neither group improved 10m sprint times, but both the RFESS and back squat groups improved 40m sprint times similarly. The RFESS group trended towards a slightly larger increase (1.7% vs. 1.1%) but this did not reach significance.

Effect of resistance training on agility

The researchers found that both the RFESS and back squat groups improved pro agility times by almost identical amounts (1.7% vs. 1.5%) and there was no difference between these changes.

What are the practical implications?

This study is a big step forward for strength and conditioning. It demonstrates that traditional, heavily-researched exercises such as the bilateral squat are not irreplaceable in athlete development programs. Other, more modern practices can be equally effective in some cases.

And yet, coaches should not discard the traditional bilateral squat, as an enormous amount of research has been carried out on this exercise. Such research can be used to alter technique to optimum effect, select appropriate squat variations to stress different muscle groups, and identify the best variations or techniques to develop power or rate of force development.

If you need help with your training, take a look at our Train With Pain Gym.