Robert DiMaggio said:didn't he already answer that?
Yes, but my answer did not come from the journal of Exercise and Kinesiology, so it was irrelevant to him.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Robert DiMaggio said:didn't he already answer that?
Wannabebig.com said:Yes, that was almost 2 years ago I believe. Things change.![]()
Wannabebig.com said:That is an inncorrect assumption on your part Go Pro. "Giving up" and "things change" are two different things. You're assuming something that you do not know anything about.![]()
Saturday Fever said:For someone who likes to help advanced lifters as well, I still only see very basic responses. Maybe we can hook up an EMG test and see if squats work the quads optimally.
Oh wait, I totally squashed all the EMG jabber. I guess all we have to go on is someone's word.
That's debatable, but I suppose.Robert DiMaggio said:didn't he already answer that?
gopro said:Listen tiny, I did not dance around anything.
My answers were clear and concise and something that every member could understand, relate to, and actually apply to their training, as always. Speaking with scientific mumbo jumbo is all well and good...and guess what, I can do it too...
gopro said:I am getting close to banning you...just for the fun of it! How did you get this smart? Can I be you?
well he didnt lie or bullshit anybody about it, he should have thrown in ''drunk'' as well!!!!"Tiny". How mature
Tank316 said:Now, since you know it all, why bother with it!!! If one frickin person gets results from a post/advice that he has given, then just leave it alone!!!!! Its more then Chris has to offer or yourself! the witch hunt better come to end ..NOW!!!!! If you dont like whats on tv, turn the channel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![]()
Chris, your past history with Eric is what this whole crap is all about!!!!chris mason said:It is cool that you have such loyalty to the guy Tank, I can appreciate that.
That said, let me ask you a question, if I disagree with something anyone posts on this board should I not type it? Isn't the point of "discussion" boards, to discuss matters?
Interestingly enough, through most of this thread I didn't even disagree with him I only asked him to provide more backing for his opinions.
Speaking of witch hunts, wasn't it a member on this site saying how he and Eric were talking at the Olympia about what a "great guy" (yes, that would be tongue in cheek) I am? If he was telling the truth I suppose I should be flattered. Eric has alwasy stated on this site how I am not worthy of his time or consideration. Interesting...
chris mason said:That's debatable, but I suppose.
Let me take a stab. Let's look at the squat. The squat is alternatively named the deep knee bend. Movement takes place at the hip, knee, and ankle joints.
There are many factors which will effect how someone squats, here are just a couple:
-The relative strength of the major involved muscles (how much force can they create).
- The ability of said muscles to express their generated force (this relates to the insertion points of the muscles and the subsequent leverage created).
Now, if someone tends to use more hip and back strength when they squat and less thigh strength then GoPro's assertation is that they are receiving less of a workout for their thighs than if they performed another movement. His rationale is that the thighs are not contracting forcibly enough to promote hypertrophy.
I don't agree with this assertation and here is why. If someone has relatively weak thighs (relative to their glutes, hip flexors, lower back etc.) it doesn't follow that when they squat they are not using their thighs. Now, these lifters may squat with a stance than minimizes the ROM for the thighs and places less emphasis on them, but that doesn't make the squat a poor exercise for that individual, it just means they need to alter their form to take the quads through a greater ROM.
Maybe said weak-legged squatter already uses a narrower stance and takes the legs through a greater ROM. Is he not contracting his quads as hard as possible on his near limit reps in order to lift the weight? Will his body/mind thwart his efforts by somehow not stimulating the thighs to contract maximally in order to accomplish the goal of getting the weight up? Of course not, the body is still going to maximally contract all of the involve muscles (within its momentary capability) to move the load. Those thighs are still going to be providing whatever force they can muster.
You see, those with weak legs whose legs may not respond well to squats are generally not going to respond well to anything. I have never known a bodybuilder to switch from squats to leg presses and have their thighs blow up unless they had some sort of a mental block/were afraid of lifting with a big weight on their back and were more comfortable with leg presses for that reason (and or a muscle imbalance which will be discussed below).
Does that mean squats are ineffective for them? Well, the exercise isn't the problem it is their weak will.
Now, I will also grant that for someone with very poor "core" development leg presses might work better because the lifter does not have to use the muscles of the trunk to aid in the lift (to the same degree). That said, even for a bodybuilder having such a strength imbalance using the leg press to develop the thighs at the expense of the muscles of the torso is not something that should be encouraged. Even a bodybuilder should endeavor to have some functionality to their musculature.
The squat can work for virtually anyone, but it is not the only method of developing good thighs. My point is that I don't agree that leg presses are better for some from a perspective of the exercise alone with respect to developing the thighs.
I will agree that hack squats can be the movement of choice if the bodybuilder wants to build his thighs relative to his hips and glutes. In other words, if he has a big ass and small thighs then while squats may give him large thighs they would also not help his symmetry problem with his big ass. A hack squat or leg press would be a better choice for that individual.
The_Chicken_Daddy said:I'm pretty sure a few months back Monstar said you "threaten" to abuse your moderator powers all too easy in order to get your way and again dance around answering. Suppose this is an example of it.
The_Chicken_Daddy said:"Tiny". How mature.
If anyone moans, here's where th name calling began.
Badly, yeah. A lot of the time you spout shit you have no clue about. I vaguely remember the whole 1st and 2nd pass of the liver shit you used to rally about on the forums. In fact, i'm pretty sure there's an entire thread dedicated to it on Avant.
Anyhoo, i only said what i said because there has been numerous occasions in the past where i've asked you to clarify something (or prove it) and you've failed, merely dancing around the questions without answering them properly - Just like you've done here.
If a new poster asks a question, then by all means answer them in a near-baby response. But if someone like Chris of SF asks you a question, the least you can do without insulting their intelligence is answer on a technical level. They thrive on this shit.