Content uploaded by Robert George Lockie
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Robert George Lockie on Sep 25, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Exercise Technique:
Applying the Hexagonal
Bar to Strength and
Power Training
Robert G. Lockie, PhD
1
and Adrina Lazar, BSc
2
1
Department of Kinesiology, California State University, Fullerton, California; and
2
Department of Kinesiology, California
State University, Northridge, California
ABSTRACT
THE HEXAGONAL (HEX) BAR CAN
OFTEN BE FOUND IN TRAINING
FACILITIES; THIS ARTICLE WILL
DESCRIBE HOW THIS EQUIPMENT
COULD BE INCORPORATED IN THE
STRENGTH AND POWER TRAINING
OF ATHLETES. THE UNIQUE BAR
DESIGN MEANS THAT THE HEX
BAR COULD BE USED FOR DIF-
FERENT EXERCISES, INCLUDING
THE DEADLIFT, FARMER’S WALK,
AND JUMP SQUAT. THE LITERA-
TURE REGARDING THESE EXER-
CISES WILL BE DISCUSSED, AND
THIS INFORMATION WILL BE USED
TO DEMONSTRATE PRACTICAL
APPLICATION FOR THE STRENGTH
AND CONDITIONING PROFES-
SIONAL. IN ADDITION, THE
REQUIRED EXECUTION FOR THE
LOW- AND HIGH-HANDLE HEX BAR
DEADLIFT, HEX BAR FARMER’S
WALK, AND HEX BAR JUMP SQUAT
WILL BE DOCUMENTED.
INTRODUCTION
The trap bar was first introduced
in the strength and conditioning
literature by Gentry et al. (12) in
1987. This initial model was diamond
shaped with 4 sides in the lifting frame.
The frame has been adapted over the
years, and the most common design is
now known as hexagonal (i.e., 6 sides)
(Figure 1). The design of the hexagonal
bar (hereafter referred to as the hex
bar) was designed to increase the safety
of lifting exercises, specifically the
deadlift, by allowing the load to be kept
closer to the body by creating a barbell
frame that the athlete could lift within
(7,12,35). As seen in Figure 1, hex bars
can feature low and high handles, and
the dimensions of the bar are relatively
consistent across different manufac-
turers. For example, the distance within
the frame between the centers of the
handles is approximately 0.64 m,
whereas the distance between the
low and high handles is approximately
0.10 m. However, despite increasing
availability in training facilities, there
is still relatively little information
regarding the use of the hex bar.
This article will provide 3 exercise ex-
amples where the hex bar could be
used in the resistance training pro-
grams of athletes. These exercises will
be the deadlift, farmer’s walk, and jump
squat. In each instance, supporting
research literature will be provided as
to why the hex bar is applicable as
a training device. In addition to this,
information regarding the execution
of each exercise will be provided, as
well as load and volume recommenda-
tions. This information may have value
for the strength and conditioning pro-
fessional because it will demonstrate
how certain exercises can be adapted
depending on the characteristics of the
individual, and the availability of equip-
ment within the training facility.
THE DEADLIFT
The conventional deadlift performed
with a standard bar is a popular
strength exercise that targets the legs,
hip, back, and torso muscles
(11,16,20,32,34,35,37). However, this
exercise can be difficult to perform for
some individuals because of certain
physical limitations; anthropometrical
factors such as height, torso, leg, and
arm length can all influence an individ-
ual’s ability to successfully perform the
conventional deadlift (16). The impact
of these limitations formed part of the
justification for the original trap bar
design. When discussing the theoretical
advantages of this bar, Gentry et al. (12)
suggested that the trap bar: allowed the
load to be kept closer to the individual’s
center of mass; potentially reduced
stress on the lower back by keeping
the individual in a more upright
Address correspondence to Robert G. Lockie,
rlockie@fullerton.edu.
KEY WORDS:
deadlift; farmer’s walk; force; hex bar;
jump squat; power
Copyright National Strength and Conditioning Association Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 1
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
position; and positioned the forearms in
a more natural position, potentially
reducing stress on the wrist, elbow,
and biceps. As stated, the 6-sided bar
frame has become more commonly
used for performing the deadlift exer-
cise, and thus, several researchers have
investigated the potential benefits of
using the hex bar for this exercise
(7,20,25,35). The results from these
studies have provided some support to
the initial assertions of Gentry et al. (12).
Swinton et al. (35) compared the hex
bardeadliftperformedwiththelow
handles to the conventional deadlift
across loads ranging from 10 to 80%
of the 1 repetition maximum (1RM)
among elite male powerlifters. A greater
1RM load was lifted in the hex bar
deadlift (265.0 641.8 kg) versus the
conventional deadlift (244.5 639.5
kg), which could be related to a more
advantageous lifting position and
reduced bar displacement. When com-
pared with the conventional deadlift,
the hex bar led to lower moment arms
at the lumbar spine, hip, knee, and
ankle, which Swinton et al. (35) related
to the lifting position provided by the
hex bar design. Swinton et al. (35) found
that for loads above 60% of the 1RM,
bar displacement was reduced by
approximately 22% in the hex bar dead-
lift. Furthermore, the hex bar deadlift
reduced peak moments at the lumbar
spine and hip across a range of loads
and increased peak moment at the knee.
Swinton et al. (35) detailed that when
lifting with the hex bar, the position of
the bar created a flexion moment at the
knee, as the load was positioned behind
the knee for the majority of the lift. This
placed an increased demand on the
knee extensors to move the bar, while
reducing the lifting demands on the low
back muscles. Last, peak velocity and
power were greater in the hex bar dead-
lift for the 30–80% of the 1RM loads,
which could also be related to a more
advantageous lifting position provided
by the hex bar deadlift. Taken together,
Swinton et al. (35) recommended the
hex bar deadlift above the conventional
deadlift for individuals who may expe-
rience low back issues and also noted
the potential stimulus provided by the
greater power generated in this lift.
The results from Swinton et al. (35)
were also supported by Camara et al.
(7). In an analysis of strength-trained
men, Camara et al. (7) documented
that that when compared with the con-
ventional deadlift being lifted with
loads of 65 and 85% of the 1RM, the
hex bar deadlift performed with the
low handles resulted in greater activity
of the vastus lateralis in both the con-
centric and eccentric phases of the lift.
This relates to the findings from Swin-
ton et al. (35), who illustrated that the
moment arm created at the knee
placed greater demands on the knee
extensors. In further support of Swin-
ton et al. (35), Camara et al. (7) found
that peak force, power, and velocity as
measured by a force plate were all
greater in the hex bar deadlift.
Although many hex bar designs fea-
ture low and high handles (Figure 1),
there is very little research that has
investigated how using high handles
may affect the resulting movement pat-
tern of the deadlift. Most studies inves-
tigating the hex bar deadlift have used
the low handles (7,25,35), and only 1
study has exclusively investigated the
hex bar deadlift performed with the
high handles (20). Lockie et al. (20)
compared the 1RM high-handle hex
bar deadlift with the conventional
deadlift in strength-trained men and
women. Similar to Swinton et al. (35),
Lockie et al. (20) found that a greater
load was lifted using the hex bar
(154.50 645.29 kg) when compared
with the deadlift with the bar (134.72
640.63 kg). As measured by a linear
position transducer, lift distance and
duration were reduced by approxi-
mately 22 and 25% in the high-
handle hex bar deadlift, respectively.
The 1RM high-handle hex bar deadlift
was also found to have greater peak
power, peak velocity, and peak and
mean force when compared with the
1RM conventional deadlift. This sup-
ports the data for the low-handle hex
bar deadlift provided by Swinton et al.
(35) and Camara et al. (7).
Collectively, the results from these
studies demonstrate several potential
benefits to using the hex bar with
either the low or high handles. This
includes a more advantageous lift posi-
tion, greater work completed by the
knee extensors, less stress on the lower
back, and high peak power, peak
velocity, and peak and mean force gen-
eration. Strength and conditioning
professionals who decide to use the
hex bar deadlift in programs for their
athletes or clients should use the typi-
cal guidelines for resistance training.
The examples shown in the Table fol-
low the general load, volume, and
intensity guidelines provided by the
National Strength and Conditioning
Association (1). It is suggested that
the hex bar deadlift could be used in
programs that focus on either hyper-
trophy or strength. Furthermore, given
there is application for the hex bar
deadlift in the training of athletes,
and strength and conditioning
Figure 1. The hexagonal bar with high and low handles.
Training With the Hexagonal Bar
VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2017
2
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
professionals should also know how to
correctly execute this exercise.
EXECUTION OF THE HEXAGONAL
BAR DEADLIFT
Numerous authors have described the
technique and execution of the deadlift
(4,5,14–16,32). However, the execution
of the hex bar deadlift will be described
here and adapted from the deadlift
description provided by Graham (15).
Figure 2A shows the start position for
the low-handle hex bar deadlift,
whereas Figure 2B displays the start
position for the high-handle deadlift.
The standing position for the low-
and high-handle deadlifts is shown in
Figures 3A and 3B, respectively.
STARTING POSITION
The hex bar should be positioned on
the floor, with an equal load on each
side. The individual should step
inside the frame of the hex bar and
position themselves such that they
are in line with the handles and
weight plates.
The feet should be approximately
shoulder-width apart, with the toes
pointing forward or slightly outward
due to external rotation at the hips.
The individual should squat down by
flexing at the hips, knees, and ankles
to grasp either the low (Figure 2A)
or high (Figure 2B) handles with
a closed, neutral grip.
The shoulders should be in line with
the handles, and the head and chest
should be positioned in a manner
that allows for natural curvature of
the spine. The hips should be lower
than the shoulders because of flexion
at the hips and knees. As noted by
Graham (15) for the conventional
deadlift, the trapezius and upper
back should be relaxed and in a slight
state of stretch.
The feet should be flat on the floor,
with body weight evenly balanced
between these 2 points of contact.
This is the starting position for the
hex bar deadlift.
ASCENT—CONCENTRIC PHASE
The lift is initiated by driving down
into the floor (force production
should be evenly distributed
between each leg such that the resul-
tant body weight is centered
between the feet) and extending at
the hips and knees. The extension in
these joints should occur simulta-
neously, and the torso angle with
the floor should remain constant.
To achieve this, the head and chest
should be kept up, and the back
Table
Training guidelines for the hexagonal (hex) bar deadlift (hypertrophy and strength), hex bar farmer’s walk (strength
and/or conditioning), and hex bar jump squat (power)
Training focus
Deadlift Farmer’s walk Jump squat
Hypertrophy Strength Strength and/or
conditioning
Power
Load 67–85% $85% 70–80% 10–60%
Sets 3–6 2–6 3–5 3–5
Repetitions or distance 6–12 #6 10–50 m #6
Rest ½–1½ min 2–5 min 1–4 min 2–5 min
The load is presented as a percentage of 1 repetition maximum.
Figure 2. The start position for the low-handle (A) and high-handle (B) hexagonal bar deadlift.
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 3
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
muscles should be contracted to
retract the shoulder blades.
The hips should not rise faster than
the shoulders, and the back must
remain slightly arched or flat
throughout the ascent. The arms
should also be extended at the el-
bows and held by the sides of the
body throughout the duration of
bar ascent. The load (i.e., the weight
plates) should remain in line with
the body.
During the conventional deadlift,
Graham (15) recommends that the
breath should be held until the bar
reaches the knees before exhaling
and then breathing normally. The
same breathing approach could be
taken for the hex bar deadlift.
The individual should continue to
simultaneously extend at the hips
and knees until a standing position
is achieved (Figure 3). Ideally, the
lifter should look forward to ensure
the head is positioned to encourage
a natural spine alignment in the
standing position.
DESCENT—ECCENTRIC PHASE
The descent is initiated by simulta-
neous flexion of the hips and knees.
The back should remain rigid and
flat or slightly arched. The head
and chest positions should allow
the maintenance of the torso posi-
tion and normal spine curvature.
The arms should remain extended
at the elbows and held by the sides
of the body throughout the descent.
The bar should be lowered with
control, and the load should remain
in line with the body. The individual
should inhale during the
descent (15).
Flexion of the hips and knees con-
tinues until the weight plates contact
the floor. This position should be the
same as that for the starting position
in the low- or high-handle hex bar
deadlift (Figure 2). Depending on the
goal of the set and repetition, the
weight plates should slightly touch
the floor before the next repetition
is initiated (“a touch-and-go” proce-
dure) (42), or the bar can come to
a complete stop on the floor, so no
momentum is present for the next
repetition.
FARMER’S WALK
The farmer’s walk is a strongman event
that involves an individual picking up
a heavy load (in a motion similar to the
hex bar deadlift) in each hand and then
walking a certain distance (usually
between 20 and 50 m) as quickly as
possible (18,45,47). This event has also
been recommended for the strength
training of athletes because it could
allow for the transfer of strength into
more “functional” actions (9,26,41,49).
Indeed, the farmer’s walk results in
high force production both during
the lift, and also when walking with
the load (45). This could have transfer
into maximal running. For example,
fast sprinting speeds require high force
production in both the vertical and
horizontal planes (23,28,29,43), and
this capacity may be developed
through the regular use of the farmer’s
walk. In addition to this, a faster farm-
er’s walk features a greater step length,
faster step frequency, and lower ground
contact times (18), which is also typical
of faster sprint performances
(6,21,22,24,30). The farmer’s walk
could potentially aid in developing
the strength and force capacities that
could be transferred into a sport-
specific action such as running and
sprinting.
As the load must be held throughout
the lift and walk, grip strength is
another physical component that
could be improved through the use
of the farmer’s walk (27,48,49). Zemke
and Wright (49) related the use of
strongman exercises such as the farm-
er’s walk to develop the grip required in
sports such as wrestling. Demands are
also placed on the linkages within the
body between those muscles that drive
the movement (i.e., the upper- and
Figure 3. The standing position for the low-handle (A) and high-handle (B) hexagonal bar deadlift.
Training With the Hexagonal Bar
VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2017
4
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
lower-body muscles required to lift,
carry, and walk with the weight) and
those that need to stabilize the trunk
and core (27). This is notable because
the farmer’s walk with 70% of the 1RM
deadlift load caused greater trunk flex-
ion when compared with normal walk-
ing in male strongman athletes (45).
McGill (26) recommended using an
exercise such as the farmer’s walk to
strengthen the core musculature to
optimize the training of other sections
(i.e., the prime movers) of the body and
facilitate best athletic performance.
Therefore, in addition to being a spe-
cific training exercise for strongman
athletes, there may be benefits for other
athletes who use the farmer’s walk reg-
ularly in their training programs.
The load for the farmer’s walk is typi-
cally provided by specifically designed
bars (45,48). However, the farmer’s
walk is another exercise for which
the hex bar could be used. Lockie
et al. (20) noted similarities between
the high-handle hex bar deadlift with
the farmer’s walk. This is because the
farmer’s walk bars feature high handles
such as those on the hex bar. In addi-
tion to this, the hex bar frame should
allow enough space for an individual to
adopt an appropriate gait pattern to
walk with the load. Understanding
how the farmer’s walk could be per-
formed with the hex bar is especially
applicable for individuals who may not
have access to specific strongman
equipment, or those strength and con-
ditioning professionals who do not
have the finances to purchase extra
bars that may only be used for 1 exer-
cise. This will be described in the next
section. Furthermore, some training
recommendations for the farmer’s walk
with the hex bar have been provided in
the literature (13,41,45,46,48,49) and
are adapted here in the Table. Win-
wood et al. (47) noted that the most
common walking distance used by
strongman athletes was 20 m, although
distances up to 50 m have also been
featured when training with the farmer’s
walk. The load used for the hex bar
farmer’s walk will be dependent on the
strength and experience levels of the
individual. For those individuals less
experienced with performing the hex
bar farmer’s walk, a lighter resistance
should be prescribed (13). Shorter
recovery periods between sets can
also be set if the farmer’s walk is being
used as a conditioning activity (48,49).
Strongman athletes tend to rest for
longer periods (;4minutes)toin-
crease their ability to exhibit maximal
strength and power (47).
EXECUTION OF THE FARMER’S
WALK WITH THE HEXAGONAL BAR
There have been some brief descrip-
tions provided for the execution of
the farmer’s walk (18,45,47,48). How-
ever, none has incorporated the hex
bar, and therefore that information will
be provided here. The lift-off position
and start position use the same move-
ment pattern as the high-handle hex
bar deadlift, which is shown in Figures
2B and 3B, respectively. The walking
gait pattern for the hex bar farmer’s
walk is shown in Figure 4.
LIFT-OFF AND START POSITION
Set the distance the individual is
required to walk.
The bar should be positioned on the
ground with equal load on both
sides. The individual should pick
up the bar with the high handles in
the same manner as the first phase of
the hex bar deadlift (Figure 2B). The
standing position following bar
ascent is the starting position for
the hex bar farmer’s walk
(Figure 3B).
WALKING WITH THE HEXAGONAL
BAR
While keeping the arms extended at
the elbows and kept by the sides of
the body, the individual should start
to walk with the load (Figure 4). The
arms should remain extended at
the elbows and held at the sides of
the body throughout the walk, and
care should be taken to not swing
the load. A closed grip should be
maintained on the handle to control
the load. The trunk should remain
relatively upright (45), and the head
and chest should be up.
The individual should attempt to
cover the required distance as
quickly as possible. A correct balance
between step length and frequency
specific to the individual should be
adopted, within the context of the
spacing in the hex bar frame. The
individual should not attempt to
overstride to walk quickly, as this
will incur greater braking forces with
each ground impact (8). In addition,
walking with too high a step fre-
quency will shorten step length
because of the negative relationship
between these 2 variables (17).
Once the required walking distance
has been covered, the load should be
returned to the floor in the same
manner as the descent phase in the
hex bar deadlift.
JUMP SQUATS
In addition to strength, athletes need
to be able to express this strength
quickly in sport-specific situations.
This highlights the importance of
power for many athletes. Numerous
studies have shown relationships
between greater lower-body power
and enhanced athletic performance,
which has been documented by supe-
rior jumping or sprinting speed
(2,10,22,31,40). As a result, strength
and conditioning professionals will
use exercises that can encourage a high
movement velocity during training
(19). An example of a popular exercise
used to achieve this is the loaded jump
squat. The loaded jump squat is typi-
cally performed with a barbell held
across the shoulders, while the individ-
ual performs a countermovement jump
(36). However, there are limitations to
the use of a barbell. The individual
must actively hold down the bar across
the shoulders, cervical spine, and tra-
pezius such that it does not move dur-
ing the jump and landing. In addition,
the positioning of the load across the
shoulders during the jump squat can
increase the moment arm of the trunk,
which could cause the individual to
deviate from their unloaded counter-
movement jump technique (36). This
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 5
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
has led to research investigating the use
of the hex bar in the jump squat
(36,39,40).
In the hex bar jump squat, the bar is
held at arm’s length while the individ-
ual performs the jump while positioned
within the frame. Swinton et al. (36)
argued that the benefit of using the
hex bar for jump squatting is that
the load can be positioned closer to
the body’s center of mass and moved
independently of the torso. As a result,
Swinton et al. (36) suggested that this
could result in the individual more
closely reproducing their unloaded
countermovement jump technique,
with the potential benefits provided by
the external resistance. In addition to
this, a high external resistance may not
be required for the hex bar jump squat
to attain peak power, which is a training
focus when using loaded jump squats
(38–40,44). Turner et al. (39) found that
peak power in a hex bar jump squat
was generated when using a load of
10–20% of a 1RM box squat in profes-
sional male rugby union players. Fur-
thermore, Turner et al. (40) found that
peak power generated in the hex bar
jump squat significantly correlated
with countermovement jump (P,
0.01, correlation coefficient [r]5
0.80), 10-m sprint time (P,0.01, r
520.70), and 20-m (P,0.01, r5
20.75) sprint time in professional male
rugby union players. The positive rela-
tionship for the vertical jump indicated
that those rugby players who gener-
ated greater peak power in the hex
bar jump squat tended to have a higher
countermovement jump. The negative
relationships found by Turner et al.
(40) for the 10-m and 20-m sprints
indicated that rugby players with
a greater peak power in the hex bar
jump squat were faster over 10 and
20 m (i.e., they had lower sprint times).
Figure 4. The walking gait pattern for the hexagonal bar farmer’s walk, frontal (A) and sagittal (B) plane views.
Figure 5. The start (A), countermovement (B), and flight (C) positions for the hexagonal bar jump squat.
Training With the Hexagonal Bar
VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2017
6
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Thus, the hex bar jump squat does
relate to sport-specific performance
and has application for the strength
and conditioning professional. If the
strength and conditioning professional
is using the hex bar jump squat to max-
imize power, it is recommended that
a load equaling approximately 10–
60% of the 1RM is used (39,40,44).
The wide range provided here relates
to the findings of Turner et al. (39), in
addition to the analysis of Baker et al.
(3) on jump squat peak power devel-
opment in rugby league players. Baker
et al. (3) found that stronger athletes
were able to generate peak power in
the jump squat with a greater percent-
age of their 1RM back squat. There-
fore, the actual load prescribed by the
strength and conditioning professional
will be dependent on the strength level
of the individual. Further training rec-
ommendations are shown in the Table.
A description of how the hex bar jump
squat should be executed is detailed
hereafter.
EXECUTION OF THE JUMP SQUAT
WITH A HEXAGONAL BAR
The jump squat has been described
previously, although this was with
either a barbell, Smith machine, or
dumbbells (33). The section will specif-
ically describe the technique used for
the hex bar jump squat. Figure 5 dis-
plays the start position, countermove-
ment, and flight phases for this
exercise.
STARTING POSITION
The bar should be positioned on the
ground with equal load on both
sides. The individual should pick
up the bar (with either the low or
high handles) in the same manner
as the first phase of the hex bar dead-
lift (Figure 2). The individual should
then stand upright with the bar, and
the arms should be fully extended
at the elbows and held at the sides
of the body (Figure 5A). The body
should be in line with the handles
and load. This is the starting
position.
COUNTERMOVEMENT AND FLIGHT
The arms should remain extended at
the elbows throughout the counter-
movement, with the load kept in line
with the body.
The individual should squat down
into an approximate half-squat posi-
tion, such that the knee angle between
the thigh and shank for each leg is
approximately 908(Figure 5B).
Immediately after reaching this posi-
tion, the jump is initiated by driving
down into the floor (the resultant
body weight should be centered
between the feet) and forcefully ex-
tending at the hips, knees, and ankles.
When airborne, the legs should
remain extended (Figure 5C). The
trunk should also extend, such that
the individual has a straight body
position while airborne.
LANDING
The individual should land with
both feet contacting the ground
simultaneously. Flexion should
occur at the hips, knees, and ankles
to cushion the landing in a manner
similar to that for the countermove-
ment (Figure 5B).
The arms should remain extended at
the elbows, and the trunk should flex
to control the load. The body should
remain in line with the weight
throughout the landing.
After the landing has been absorbed,
the individual should extend the
knees and hips to return to a standing
position (Figure 5A).
CONCLUSION
This article detailed the potential
advantages for using the hex bar dur-
ing exercises, such as the deadlift,
farmer’s walk, and jump squat. This
does not discount the value of using
the bar (or even dumbbells) for the
deadlift and jump squats, or the specific
farmer’s walk bars. Rather, this article
highlights how the hex bar could be
applied for these exercises as a form
of variation. Depending on the
strengths or physical limitations of
the individual, or the availability of
equipment, the strength and condition-
ing professional could use the hex bar
as a different form of resistance in the
deadlift, farmer’s walk, and jump squat.
Conflicts of Interest and Source of Funding:
The authors report no conflicts of interest
and no source of funding.
Robert G.
Lockie is an
Assistant Professor
in Strength and
Conditioning at
the Department
of Kinesiology
within California
State University,
Fullerton, and
conducts research into speed and agility,
strength and conditioning, post-activation
potentiation, team sport analysis, and
analysis of law enforcement and tactical
populations.
Adrina Lazar is
aBachelorof
Kinesiology grad-
uate and was
astrengthand
conditioning
intern from
California State
University,
Northridge, and has conducted research into
strength exercises and team sport analysis.
REFERENCES
1. Baechle TR, Earle RW, and Wathen D.
Resistance training. In: Essentials of
Strength Training and Conditioning.
Baechle TR and Earle RW, eds. Champaign,
IL: Human Kinetics, 2008. pp. 381–412.
2. Baker D and Nance S. The relation between
running speedand measures of strengthand
power in professional rugby league players.
JStrengthCondRes13: 230–235, 1999.
3. Baker D, Nance S, and Moore M. The load
that maximizes the average mechanical
power output during jump squats in power-
trained athletes. J Strength Cond Res 15:
92–97, 2001.
4. Benford G. Kinesiology corner: Technique
of the deadlift. Strength Cond J 2: 34–35,
1980.
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 7
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
5. Bird S and Barrington-Higgs B. Exploring the
deadlift. Strength Cond J 32: 46–51, 2010.
6. Callaghan SJ, Lockie RG, Jeffriess MD, and
Nimphius S. The kinematics of faster
acceleration performance of the quick
single in experienced cricketers. J Strength
Cond Res 29: 2623–2634, 2015.
7. Camara KD, Coburn JW, Dunnick DD,
Brown LE, Galpin AJ, and Costa PB. An
examination of muscle activation and power
characteristics while performing the
deadlift exercise with straight and
hexagonal barbells. J Strength Cond Res
30: 1183–1188, 2016.
8. Challis JH. The variability in running gait
caused by force plate targeting. J Appl
Biomech 17: 77–83, 2001.
9. Corcoran G and Bird S. Preseason
strength training for rugby union: The
general and specific preparatory phases.
Strength Cond J 31: 66–74, 2009.
10. de Lacey J, Brughelli ME, McGuigan MR,
and Hansen KT. Strength, speed and
power characteristics of elite rugby league
players. J Strength Cond Res 28: 2372–
2375, 2014.
11. Farley K. Analysis of the conventional
deadlift. Strength Cond J 17: 55–57,
1995.
12. Gentry M, Pratt D, and Caterisano T.
Introducing the trap bar. Strength Cond J
9: 54–56, 1987.
13. Ghigiarelli JJ, Sell KM, Raddock JM, and
Taveras K. Effects of strongman training on
salivary testosterone levels in a sample of
trained men. J Strength Cond Res 27:
738–747, 2013.
14. Gotshalk L. Sports performance series:
Analysis of the deadlift. Strength Cond J 6:
4–9, 1984.
15. Graham JF. Exercise: Deadlift. Strength
Cond J 22: 18–20, 2000.
16. Hales M. Improving the deadlift:
Understanding biomechanical constraints
and physiological adaptations to resistance
exercise. Strength Cond J 32: 44–51,
2010.
17. Hunter JP, Marshall RN, and McNair PJ.
Interaction of step length and step rate
during sprint running. Med Sci Sports
Exerc 36: 261–271, 2004.
18. Keogh J, Kattan A, Logan S, Bensley J,
Muller C, and Powell L. A preliminary
kinematic gait analysis of a strongman
event: The farmer’s walk. Sports 2, 2014.
doi:10.3390/sports2010024.
19. Kraemer WJ and Newton RU. Training for
muscular power. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N
Am 11: 341–368, 2000.
20. Lockie RG, Moreno MR, Lazar A, Risso FG,
Tomita TM, Stage AA, Birmingham-
Babauta SA, Torne IA, Stokes JJ, Giuliano
DV, Davis DL, Orjalo AJ, and Callaghan SJ.
The one-repetition maximum mechanics of
a high-handle hexagonal bar deadlift
compared to a conventional deadlift as
measured by a linear position transducer.
J Strength Cond Res 2017. doi:10.1519/
JSC.0000000000001781. Epub ahead of
print.
21. Lockie RG, Murphy AJ, Jeffriess MD, and
Callaghan SJ. Step kinematic predictors of
short sprint performance in field sport
athletes. Serb J Sports Sci 7: 71–77,
2013.
22. Lockie RG, Murphy AJ, Knight TJ, and
Janse de Jonge XAK. Factors that
differentiate acceleration ability in field
sport athletes. J Strength Cond Res 25:
2704–2714, 2011.
23. Lockie RG, Murphy AJ, Schultz AB,
Jeffriess MD, and Callaghan SJ. Influence
of sprint acceleration stance kinetics on
velocity and step kinematics in field sport
athletes. J Strength Cond Res 27: 2494–
2503, 2013.
24. Lockie RG, Murphy AJ, Schultz AB, Knight
TJ, and Janse de Jonge XAK. The effects of
different speed training protocols on sprint
acceleration kinematics and muscle
strength and power in field sport athletes.
J Strength Cond Res 26: 1539–1500,
2012.
25. Malyszek KK, Harmon RA, Dunnick DD,
Costa PB, Coburn JW, and Brown LE.
Comparison of Olympic and hexagonal
barbells with mid-thigh pull, deadlift, and
countermovement jump. J Strength Cond
Res 31: 140–145, 2017.
26. McGill S. Core training: Evidence
translating to better performance and injury
prevention. Strength Cond J 32: 33–46,
2010.
27. McGill SM, McDermott A, and Fenwick
CM. Comparison of different strongman
events: Trunk muscle activation and lumbar
spine motion, load, and stiffness.
J Strength Cond Res 23: 1148–1161,
2009.
28. Morin JB, Bourdin M, Edouard P, Peyrot N,
Samozino P, and Lacour JR. Mechanical
determinants of 100-m sprint running
performance. Eur J Appl Physiol 112:
3921–3930, 2012.
29. Morin JB, Edouard P, and Samozino P.
Technical ability of force application as
a determinant factor of sprint performance.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 43: 1680–1688,
2011.
30. Murphy AJ, Lockie RG, and Coutts AJ.
Kinematic determinants of early
acceleration in field sport athletes. J Sports
Sci Med 2: 144–150, 2003.
31. Nimphius S, McGuigan MR, and Newton
RU. Changes in muscle architecture and
performance during a competitive season
in female softball players. J Strength Cond
Res 26: 2655–2666, 2012.
32. Piper TJ and Waller MA. Variations of the
deadlift. Strength Cond J 23: 66–73,
2001.
33. Schuna JMJ and Christensen BK. The jump
squat: Free weight barbell, Smith machine,
or dumbbells? Strength Cond J 32: 38–
41, 2010.
34. Stock MS and Thompson BJ. Sex
comparisons of strength and coactivation
following ten weeks of deadlift training.
J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 14:
387–397, 2014.
35. Swinton PA, Stewart A, Agouris I, Keogh
JW, and Lloyd R. A biomechanical analysis
of straight and hexagonal barbell deadlifts
using submaximal loads. J Strength Cond
Res 25: 2000–2009, 2011.
36. Swinton PA, Stewart AD, Lloyd R, Agouris
I, and Keogh JW. Effect of load positioning
on the kinematics and kinetics of weighted
vertical jumps. J Strength Cond Res 26:
906–913, 2012.
37. Thompson BJ, Stock MS, Shields JE, Luera
MJ, Munayer IK, Mota JA, Carrillo EC, and
Olinghouse KD. Barbell deadlift training
increases the rate of torque development
and vertical jump performance in novices.
J Strength Cond Res 29: 1–10, 2015.
38. Turner AP, Unholz CN, Potts N, and
Coleman SG. Peak power, force, and
velocity during jump squats in professional
rugby players. J Strength Cond Res 26:
1594–1600, 2012.
39. Turner TS, Tobin DP, and Delahunt E.
Optimal loading range for the development
of peak power output in the hexagonal
barbell jump squat. J Strength Cond Res
29: 1627–1632, 2015.
40. Turner TS, Tobin DP, and Delahunt E. Peak
power in the hexagonal barbell jump squat
and its relationship to jump performance and
acceleration in elite rugby union players.
J Strength Cond Res 29: 1234–1239, 2015.
41. Waller M, Piper T, and Townsend R.
Strongman events and strength and
conditioning programs. Strength Cond J
25: 44–52, 2003.
42. Ware JS, Clemens CT, Mayhew JL, and
Johnston TJ. Muscular endurance
repetitions to predict bench press and
Training With the Hexagonal Bar
VOLUME 0 | NUMBER 0 | MONTH 2017
8
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
squat strength in college football players.
J Strength Cond Res 9: 99–103, 1995.
43. Weyand PG, Sternlight DB, Bellizzi MJ, and
Wright S. Faster top running speeds are
achieved with greater ground forces not
more rapid leg movements. J Appl Physiol
89: 1991–1999, 2000.
44. Wilson GJ, Newton RU, Murphy AJ, and
Humphries BJ. The optimal training load for
the development of dynamic athletic
performance. Med Sci Sports Exerc 25:
1279–1286, 1993.
45. Winwood PW, Cronin JB, Brown SR, and
Keogh JWL. A biomechanical analysis of
the farmer’s walk, and comparison with the
deadlift and unloaded walk. Int J Sports Sci
Coach 9: 1127–1143, 2014.
46. Winwood PW, Cronin JB, Posthumus LR,
Finlayson SJ, Gill ND, and Keogh JW.
Strongman vs. traditional resistance
training effects on muscular function and
performance. J Strength Cond Res 29:
429–439, 2015.
47. Winwood PW, Keogh JW, and Harris NK.
The strength and conditioning practices of
strongman competitors. J Strength Cond
Res 25: 3118–3128, 2011.
48. Woulfe C, Harris N, Keogh J, and Wood M.
The physiology of strongman training.
Strength Cond J 36: 84–95, 2014.
49. Zemke B and Wright G. The use of
strongman type implements and training
to increase sport performance in
collegiate athletes. Strength Cond J 33:
1–7, 2011.
Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-scj.com 9
Copyright ªNational Strength and Conditioning Association. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
