Weighted SLS loading?

Hello,

I've been wondering if SLS, loaded in a front rack position with dumbbells or kettlebells will

work the core along with the legs in a balanced fashion - much like front and back squats do?

SLS is a great exercise, but one major criticism it receives is that it doesn't train stabilizing the core like

back squats or front squats do via loading up the barbell near the torso (which builds core stability while

expressing lower body power, which is crucial for many sports).

Because of this criticism, SLS is often treated as inferior by many people (particularly strength athletes 

and strength and conditioning coaches for field sports - who claim that the absence of core/spine stability strength involvement will not transfer over to sporting events)

Now squats with kettlebells and dumbbells in a rack position is acknowledged as a great core 

strength building exercise, but to the degree that may become a limiting factor in developing lower body strength.

So instead, what if we did them on one leg instead - in order to further overload the legs and hips?

Would loading the SLS that way a good way of promoting an overall balanced squatting pattern exercise, like the Front squat and the Back squat?

P.S.: I also can imagine a proper SLS with weighted vest, done upright as possible also could develop torso stability. Not as much as front rack loaded SLS would, but the weight wrapped around the torso could change the center of balance and make it harder for the athlete to stabilize himself. Any thoughts on this?

Surely SLS requires spinal/core/torso stability.  I am not sure your statement does this exercise any justice.  That criticism seems to come from people who have no desire to put their ego on the line.

You do get activation, though surely not as much. However, if you plan on getting your side lever, front lever and manna, I'm fairly certain you'll have the superior core!

As for your question, I wouldn't bother too much with 'barbell SLS'. If your SLS and iMs are mastered, you may just as well do regular front/back squats along with maintaining your SLS. How to program the two is another story, but Coach said many times to hold off barbell work until SLS and iMs are mastered, so if they are, I'd say you've earned your right to play. 

I'm surprised more people don't look at SLS like a balancing tool. you do need strength to do them on both legs as close to symmetrical as you can manage, the greater the divide, the bigger the compensation. but its not like we would do these forever. there are harder things in store thats why the Leg Strength portion in Foundation is broken into SLS AND Fundamental Leg Strength.

eventually, once you're at the point of doing SLS and iM's as warmup to FLS, some OL, back squats, front squats could be something to discuss and we actually have in the F3 forum.

 

17 hours ago, James Hall said:

Surely SLS requires spinal/core/torso stability.  I am not sure your statement does this exercise any justice.  That criticism seems to come from people who have no desire to put their ego on the line.

I actually firmly believe that SLS works the core. Most of the "SLS (or any other unilateral exercise) doesn't work the core!" comes from a portion of the barbell crowd, who believe that one needs to compress their spine with tremendous loads of weight to work their core. In my opinion, however, kettlebell front squats, barbell front squats, overhead squats, and zercher squats work the core in a much better way than back squats do.

12 hours ago, Briac Roquet said:

You do get activation, though surely not as much. However, if you plan on getting your side lever, front lever and manna, I'm fairly certain you'll have the superior core!

As for your question, I wouldn't bother too much with 'barbell SLS'. If your SLS and iMs are mastered, you may just as well do regular front/back squats along with maintaining your SLS. How to program the two is another story, but Coach said many times to hold off barbell work until SLS and iMs are mastered, so if they are, I'd say you've earned your right to play. 

I don't think it's a good idea to load the SLS with a barbell (FS or BS barbell position seems unsafe in SLS - bailing out of it would be pretty difficult), unless it is in an overhead fashion like crossfitters do. Loading them via the weighted vests and dumbbells/kettlebells in rack position seems to be a much safer option in my opinion.

And the reason why I came up with the loaded SLS idea is because it tends to prevent excessive hypertrophy while being able to develop a strong pair of legs (and core - if done correctly). I actually see quite a bit of people (some MMA fighters, the kettlebell crowd, etc) using this as their main squatting pattern exercise. I've also seen Ben Bruno's athletes go heavy on loaded SLS (on a box).

Although, low volume - heavy - high speed FS and BS w/ rep range of 1-3 could do a good job preventing excessive hypertrophy.  This method is an excellent way to develop lower body strength without excessive size until going beyond the 2 x BW squat region.

And I also agree on your statement regarding holding off weighted lower body work. People should focus on completing their iM's and SLS progressions until they can do all the iM's and SLS flawlessly.