which is better

What’s better? Working out with bad form, or not working out at all?

Someone asked me this question recently: “you’re probably better off doing no squats than poor technique squats, right?”

I was thrown off. They expected me to agree but - I very firmly believe that something is better than nothing.

Take any exercise routine for example. Maybe it isn’t optimal or perfect, but it can still be effective. And it’s obvious to me that it’s more effective than nothing at all.

So are bad squats better than no squats? I think yes. It follows the something is better than nothing rule.

I don’t think bad or sloppy squats are a desirable training effect, but nonetheless, at least it’s something. When I say bad squats, I mean not-ideal, but that doesn’t automatically jump them to the extremely dangerous movement category.

But what about injuries? Is the person not training at all more likely to injure themselves from not having an exercise routine or doing 30 non-perfect squat reps per week?

And a lot of things will make you stronger, fitter and more resilient.

The plan doesn’t need to be perfect.
The movements don’t need to be perfect.

What makes strength and conditioning so beautiful is that there are ways to modify movements, ranges of motion and intensity so you can get the stimulus you need to get stronger, fitter and healthier.

—Justin Miner