Squat anomaly...

Lift2Live · 20-May-05, 04:40 PM

I have just what the title says. I won't get too into the substance of my workout but, I have a problem with my squat strength. I was abnormally weak today but on one of my squats I got stuck at the bottom and I had to come out from it. I was able to get it partially back up by moving each side individually. As it was then in a place I could get under it with some force, I went sumo on it. My feet were jammed against the bottom rails and as I pushed, the weight went up like buttuh'! I say this because I normally go shoulder width apart with toes pointing out slightly. I was struggling with EVERY aspect of them today, form was horrible, I couldn't stay in one position and I was leaning back and forth trying to get it on my legs. Nothing was right, even my warmups looked like I was a mental patient! Now, keep all of this in mind. As a person looking for the greatest amount of hypertrophy from his squat, would going extra wide (which was cake, comparitively) make too much of a difference in the target muscle that I would be doing myself a disservice? I'm also in a bad spot where my hams are not proportionate to my quads and I don't want to do anything that would hinder my work in getting them caught up. My quads actually grow well enough but what makes them look small is from the profile view due to the hams. I am most concerned with them in this question although I don't want my quads to take a back seat, just a side step. I would love to hear any ideas on this particular squat issue AND hamstring suggestions if possible. Thanks alot guys!

gcs118 · 21-May-05, 09:57 AM

The closer your feet, the more quads you use. But if you go extra wide like that, you not only use the big muscles like hamstrings, glutes, hips, etc. but you also shorten the range of motion as well, resulting in an easier squat.

Lift2Live · 21-May-05, 03:03 PM

So, is it worth going wider than more narrow if one is looking for 'more' overall leg development?

Cort · 21-May-05, 03:08 PM

Why not just hit all the stances if you are looking for the best overall developement? Going wider hits some of the bigger muscles, and keeping it close also has its advantages. Get the best of both worlds

:

Variety is usually a good thing, you never want to get stuck doing the same exact variation of an exercise week in, week out without changing it up a little.

gcs118 · 21-May-05, 03:42 PM

If you do want the variety, you could start with a closer stance, and each set (as weight increase), move your feet out some. I leave mine at a semi-wide stance for all sets though.

Lift2Live · 21-May-05, 04:01 PM

That's my main problem though. If I go close, I can't go down all the way. By close I mean less than shoulder width. Even at low weight, like 95 during warmups, I can only go to just above parallel. If I go shoulder or wider, I can go down to my hams on calves or "a$$ to grass".

gcs118 · 21-May-05, 04:08 PM

Well I wouldn't go too close, the closest I'd go is shoulder width or slightly out further.

Cort · 21-May-05, 05:39 PM

Why go closer than shoulder width?

At that width just squat down until your ass hits your calves

Lift2Live · 21-May-05, 06:25 PM

I guess i'll go back to a wider stance then. I've been trying out some new things and well...it didn't work. I was sort of under the impression that my squat width was too wide to start with (slightly past shoulder width). Close to me is maybe 10-12" between the heels. This was my attempt as hitting the wuads harder but, I see that may be too close, which would account for my balance problems Friday.

**Firehawk** · 22-May-05, 09:34 AM

You can't go "too" wide. You hit more overall muscle the wider you go. The wider you go, it does limit the range a bit, but thats' why you go heavier. It's not "easier" in my opinion lol.

Since you like volume, you could do other things for your quads. You can't do too many other things for your hamstrings and glutes because (at least from what I gather) you don't have the equipment available.

Try shoulder width and a half wide. Meaning, 1 shoulder width + half a shoulder width apart. Give that one a try. If you want your hams to catch up, the wider width is how you should go IMO.

Lift2Live · 22-May-05, 12:07 PM

I think i'll try just that then. My ROM is great with how my knees function, when i go wider. I'm obviously not going to start doing them with my feet jammed against the rails. 1 1/2 wide sounds really good to me, gonna give that a shot. Good to hear the hams will be more involved there!

**.V.** · 23-May-05, 09:27 AM

This was discussed pretty well in the powerlifting forum. I'm by no means close to being a powerlifter (too weak), but I took the advice from firehawk and jaster from that thread and it really has made my squats more effective. Instead of just crippling quad pain the next day, I can now feel ALL of the leg muscles have been worked. I go about 1.5X shoulder width I think. I also use the box. It has helped me improve the quality - not the strength yet, but with more muscle involved in the lift, more strenght will come.

gcs118 · 23-May-05, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by a_welch503

This was discussed pretty well in the powerlifting forum. I'm by no means close to being a powerlifter (too weak)

You don't have to be a beast to consider yourself a powerlifter. I'm sure you could outlift some people at meets. It's about training and goals, not current strength really.

**Firehawk** · 23-May-05, 10:06 AM

Nobody laughs at a person who is lifting lighter weight (relative to what some of them can lift). Usually they are more helpful to the beginners.

**.V.** · 23-May-05, 10:26 AM

Yeah guys I guess so, but I was just qualifying my statement. I'm not that strong and can't really give advice to anyone about how to get bigger, stronger, better. I was just relaying information from others that I found helpful in hopes that it can be helpful to someone else. And the information was most definitely helpful to me.