O.K. I have wanted to ask this question for a while. I know powerlifters have huge quads and also bodybuilders do to. Which do you think is going to be the best for building size? I know you do varied reps and sets. and obviously both are capable of building great size.
Curious of as a consensus which one would have an advantage. I know wide or full squats may hit more glutes. I don't care if my butt gets big as long as my legs do.
Currently I'm doing a powerlifters wide stance and finish with a couple of close stance sets. Any opinions.
I think it depends on the person - build and so on.
Personally, were I bodybuilding, I'd do close stance deep squats most of the time.
Squats work better than supplements.
"You know, if I thought like that, I'd never put more than one plate on the bar for anything, I'd never use bands or chains, I'd never squat to parallel or below, and I'd never let out the slightest grunt when I lift. At some point in your lifting career (assuming you're planning on getting reasonably strong and big), you're going to have to accept that most people think you are some kind of freak." -Sensei
"You're wrong, and I have a completely irrelevant pubmed abstract that may or may not say so." - Belial
I has a blog.
I has a facebook.
I prefer close stance, deep squats. I'd do those over wide stance powersquats if you're looking for muscular size.
If you have relatively long femurs, you'll have a harder time hitting an olympic full squat. So in the end I'd do whichever I could perform the most safely and progressively.
Thanks guys, just average femur i suppose 5'11" and I origanally thought i was stronger with the wide stance, but it doesn't seem to make a lot of difference. What about reps in general would you 6-8 be your range for most of the time?
Closer stance is somewhat more comfy.
That rep range is fine. I have wrist issues so I don't do larger rep counts. I do four 3 rep sets with a small rest between sets. I prefer wider stance because I feel I can keep better form that way.
Rep range is highly individual. So whichever lets you work the hardest is probably best, IMO.
I prefer higher reps b/c I like the effect it has on my lungs and the pump it gives if I go hard enough.
Either stance will build the quads, although a narrower stance places more emphasis on the quads. For me, a wider stance is the more natural stance, but an unfortunate injury forces me to use a narrower stance these days (really limits the weight I can use). I go quite deep these days as well, but squatting to parallel will build up your lower body quite nicely as well.
In the end, I would pick the stance that allowed me to move the most weight in a safe fashion.
AtLarge Nutrition Supplements – Get the best supplements and help support Wannabebig!
Cool guys, I 'm glad for the comments and I'm a late bloomer to squats so I'm finally seeing some development.
i squat with a "wide" stance, some peopel say its wide, to me it feels comfortable and i get alot of power out of it. ive tried close stance squats but i have big thick hips and legs and its kinda weird feeling, i do them from time to time but i prefer my natural stance which is kinda wide.
Why live if one can not Deadlift?- John Paul Sigmasson
Accept that which is useful and reject what is not- Bruce Lee
Reason and Logic trump religion- Me
Restriction of education, Censorship of knowledge, and Proliferation of religion helps keep the masses tamed- Me
"Money does not fix everything, Smart fixes everything"
I consider myself a bodybuilder, but I use a wide PL type stance with toes pointed out. I do this because it feels more comfortable/natural than narrow stance.
Weight: Not Big Enough
“Take things as they are. Punch when you have to punch. Kick when you have to kick.” — Bruce Lee
6 o' one, half a dozen of the other. Though the angle is changing, power is being produced by the legs in essentially the same manner regardless of stance. There is a marginal increase in quad emphasis when the stance is narrower, but probably not hugely significant. The way to increase quad emphasis is to force a more upright stance... forward lean engages the hamstrings more. This is one of the main reasons front squats are "better" quad builders. Try 'em all.
"Except Belial. He knows everything. This isn't a sarcastic attack, either. He really knows everything." -----Organichu
"Alex is all knowing and perfect"-----Jane (loosely paraphrased)
Current mile time: 4:23
Century races: 3
Current supps: http://www.atlargenutrition.com/prod...covery/results
Thanks again fella's, I thinks I will start at a low wt. again and work back up as my hips have been killing me and don't want to injure myself. I'm finally making gains in leg muscle so the strength will come, but I don't want to do anything to jeopardize that.
i feel the difference with foot placement more on front squats, wide stance i shift an extra 40kg but i dont necesarily feel it in my thighs,i drop the weight, move my feet to shoulder width and my quads are spent
Stance matters not. Mechanics is what matters. Chuck Vogelpohl damn near does the splits when he squats. Brent Mikesell is just about shoulder width. The real determining factor is in your mechanics. Not whether you "stand" like a powerlifter, but whether you "squat" like a powerlifter.
I agree with the whatever works for you thing. I prefer a wider stance.