The Squat is the most overrated exercise for Bodybuilding. True or false?

[Heavychevss]

“The Squat is the most overrated exercise for Bodybuilding. True or false?”
False- one of the best core exercises that helps build much more than just leg mass. What leg exercise would help build your back, shoulders, arms, and legs?

Let’s kick this up a notch-
Physique Contestants are not Bodybuilders? True or False

True, different efforts and goals.

 

[The Solution]

TUT When studied doesn't outweight the benefits of progressive overload or beating the log book.
Anyone can put a muscle under time under tension. Ayone can do a leg curl and hold a static hold for a minute. Does that mean its going to make your muscles grow or your body look better? Absolutely not.

[video=youtube;WMIWsOBF2ik]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=WMIWsOBF2ik[/video]

and while you think TUT is important, its not the main factor, and there is plenty of research to prove you wrong yet again in another worthless rant.

Invalid Link Removed
There was no difference in the load lifted for SLOW (31 ± 2 kg) or CTL (30 ± 2 kg) conditions
NO Difference when those who used TUT compared to controlled lifting.

Invalid Link Removed
Our results disprove the conventional belief that the use of external momentum (Extra TUT)necessarily reduces the overload of the target muscles. A moderate use of external momentum increases both the per-repetition peak torque and the total hypertrophy stimulus in a set.

TUT is more of a tool and intensity technique, its not a form of training. It doesn't provide a greater muscle stimulate to Type I muscle fibers (which benefit greater from strength training). Anyone can do a 3 rep squat and prolong it. Does that mean it helps increase protein synthesis or breakdown muscle fibers for muscle growth? Nope, and there is no research to prove TUT is a factor above progressive overload in beating the log book.

Slave yourself to training one way, one rep range, or one tactic and your negating your body's true potential of growing. There are far more benefits to a Squat then any isolation movement (More muscle fibers recruited, more testosterone, more growth hormone release). A lunge is just as dangerous as a squat pending form. Lunges can absolutely destroy your knees and if done wrong can put a lot of pressure on your low back and cause pain in your spine (some people have very weak cores and can't keep a neutral spine).

You have yet to post any knowledge, any research to prove your point. Then again you never have in any thread you make. It is more of you ranting about being natural, always wanting to diet, thinking bodybuilding is stupid yet your name is "Compete", and that women are bimbo's. Instead of stereotyping have some common knowledge and science to back your statements.

Invalid Link Removed
insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) (ng·mL⁻¹) was higher with the 2/0/2 tempo only (pre-exercise: 277.4 ± 21.8, post-exercise: 308.1 ± 22.9; 2/0/4 tempo pre-exercise: 277.2 ± 17.6, post-exercise: 284.8 ± 21.2)

So higher IGF compared to the longer TUT Group

Invalid Link Removed
. However, under the same conditions, or even after more prolonged stimulation, no change in rates of protein synthesis was detected.

Invalid Link Removed
Training fast produces greater strength increases than training slow(TUT)

Invalid Link Removed
very-slow training resulted in lower levels of peak force and power when compared with a normal, self-regulated tempo.

Invalid Link Removed
a traditional training tempo resulted in greater strength in the Squat and greater peak power compared to time under tension training.

Invalid Link Removed
University of Oklahoma found that 4 weeks of traditional resistance training was more effective for increasing strength than super-slow training.

Crickets .....






........



.........


Invalid Link Removed





......

 

[MrKleen73]

I like your post and the information in it and agree with most of it and I am in no way trying to debate anything you wrote, but you did acknowledge that your legs grow the most with squats and leg presses, which is what I was trying to say. There are plenty of other exercises that will work, but add squats to them and your leg development would be BETTER with squats than without, not just as good.

Well, you have to really break that down though because it was kind of a ladder with rungs on it but this was the shorthand gist of it for me.

Squats alone = good growth but limited quads

Squats & Deads = same limitation as above minimal quad development.

Leg Press Alone - Better than just squats for my legs - but glutes took a small hit

Leg Press + Squats = both hips and quads get hit well - excellent progress

Leg Press + Dead Lifts = same as Leg Press + Squat, so excellent progress but also added back thickness with the deads...

In the end I found Leg Press and Dead Lifts to be the most efficient combo for me personally when referring to hypertrophy. Just because all things were equal regarding my posterior chain and I could lift much more on leg press to really crush my quads and then add to that the extra back development and you see why I chose this pairing for hypertrophy. I can deadlift and crush my posterior chain then move over to leg press and crush my thighs and quads with weights I could never squat, and the fact that my lower back is thrashed from the deadlifts doesn't matter. For me, this allows for more intense leg training than squats where the lower back is the week link.

 

[thebraingaz]

Anybody who wants to build a better body is a bodybuilder, the different catergories are for how far you want to go with it

 

[CompeteNPC]

Tends to be wishy washy. Some swear by it, others don't do it because they either hurt themselves or have an injury preventing them from doing it.

Some realize genetics prevent them from being great at squats so they focus on other exercises instead. Simple logic.

 

[ericos_bob]

Front Squats and narrow stance back squats limited to parallel make a brilliant quad builder.
People shy away from squats because when done right to depth and to muscular failure especially at high reps they're just extremely difficult. Your lungs are bursting for air, arms are trembling from supporting the load and your core is struggling to keep you from folding in half all the while your legs are burnt to a crisp. Perhaps where strict leg development is concerned you can find reasonable substitutes for the squat but the whole body benefits the squat provides are hard to replicate. I don't know if it's a case of squats building character or revealing strong character but it seems those that put in the hard yards on this exercise often have better whole body development than those who avoid them completely.

 

[CompeteNPC]

Front Squats and narrow stance back squats limited to parallel make a brilliant quad builder.
People shy away from squats because when done right to depth and to muscular failure especially at high reps they're just extremely difficult. Your lungs are bursting for air, arms are trembling from supporting the load and your core is struggling to keep you from folding in half all the while your legs are burnt to a crisp. Perhaps where strict leg development is concerned you can find reasonable substitutes for the squat but the whole body benefits the squat provides are hard to replicate. I don't know if it's a case of squats building character or revealing strong character but it seems those that put in the hard yards on this exercise often have better whole body development than those who avoid them completely.

Strict leg development is the focus here. Squats are unnecessary. Now would a person benefit from them to build strength? Absolutely.

 

[ericos_bob]

Not necessary but not overrated and a person will benefit from them to build both strength and muscle.

 

[MrKleen73]

Front Squats and narrow stance back squats limited to parallel make a brilliant quad builder.
People shy away from squats because when done right to depth and to muscular failure especially at high reps they're just extremely difficult. Your lungs are bursting for air, arms are trembling from supporting the load and your core is struggling to keep you from folding in half all the while your legs are burnt to a crisp. Perhaps where strict leg development is concerned you can find reasonable substitutes for the squat but the whole body benefits the squat provides are hard to replicate. I don't know if it's a case of squats building character or revealing strong character but it seems those that put in the hard yards on this exercise often have better whole body development than those who avoid them completely.

Well said!

Strict leg development is the focus here. Squats are unnecessary. Now would a person benefit from them to build strength? Absolutely.

Yes but the question was are squats the most over rated exercise ever. Still the answer is no, as many times as we can say you don't need squats for leg development which is true will not change the fact that as a singular movement you won't find much else that provides as much benefit. So just that alone means that it is not over rated.

Not necessary but not overrated and a person will benefit from them to build both strength and muscle.

This!

 

[CompeteNPC]

Well said!

Yes but the question was are squats the most over rated exercise ever. Still the answer is no, as many times as we can say you don't need squats for leg development which is true will not change the fact that as a singular movement you won't find much else that provides as much benefit. So just that alone means that it is not over rated.


This!

I agree with that, but I should have been more direct in my question. It should have been "Are squats really necessary for leg development?"

 

[MrKleen73]

I agree with that, but I should have been more direct in my question. It should have been "Are squats really necessary for leg development?"

Okay cool, in that case, no they are not, but they are ONE of the best tools we have available to do so. If nothing else the hormonal cascade that results from doing them for natty folk puts them up there as one of the best.

 

[bhl08090]

I was hoping this was an early April fools joke

 

[muscleupcrohn]

I agree with that, but I should have been more direct in my question. It should have been "Are squats really necessary for leg development?"

I would wager to say that no one exercise is “necessary” for solid development of any muscle. Sure, some exercises will provide the most return on investment, or provide the fastest or most ideal results, but that doesn’t mean that they are the only option. There are also many variables that will determine if a given exercise is a good idea for a given lifter.

 

[John Smeton]

Who here believes that the squat is the most overrated exercise for bodybuilding? We are not talking about powerlifting here. If muscle growth is your primary goal then the squat is pretty much unnecessary. Strength is secondary in bodybuilding as we all know. Plenty of high level amateurs and pro's who built a solid physique on moderate weight, more volume and higher reps. They do not award trophies on strength in bodybuilding. Plenty of men and women out there that have found other leg exercises and techniques to build muscle work better for them.

I think it depends on if they work for you. I did them in my earlier years and my upper legs have always been big, but I can say hack squats, leg extensions, leg press are what seem to give my legs their best look. Guys with longer femur bones usually squat can give them issues. For most guys , esp if your built for it, shorter and medium height guys, sure it s a good exercise for them. Thats not to say i dont do them sometimes, just other exercises work better for my body.

 

[jbatts77]

True. Use leg presses and deadlifts and the squat machine.

 

[jbatts77]

My best physique at 197lbs 6% and 5'8... I did zero squats.

 

[CompeteNPC]

I think it depends on if they work for you. I did them in my earlier years and my upper legs have always been big, but I can say hack squats, leg extensions, leg press are what seem to give my legs their best look. Guys with longer femur bones usually squat can give them issues. For most guys , esp if your built for it, shorter and medium height guys, sure it s a good exercise for them. Thats not to say i dont do them sometimes, just other exercises work better for my body.

Well said and great answer. Thank you

 

[MrKleen73]

My best physique at 197lbs 6% and 5'8... I did zero squats.

That must have been impressive!

 

[jbatts77]

That must have been impressive!

Top heavy but it was to me.

 

[MrKleen73]

Top heavy but it was to me.

That's all that matters! If you are not an actual bodybuilder there is no need to have legs so big walking is not comfortable. Now if they were tiny well there is something to be said for balance but if they are big enough for you then that's perfect because that is all you need for confidence.

 

[jbatts77]

That's all that matters! If you are not an actual bodybuilder there is no need to have legs so big walking is not comfortable. Now if they were tiny well there is something to be said for balance but if they are big enough for you then that's perfect because that is all you need for confidence.

It made medium shirts look really good.

 

[MrKleen73]

It made medium shirts look really good.

LMAO!!!! I can't even imagine that. I am 215 in the 18% range and would look so ridiculous in a medium, if I could even get it on that is... Trying to picture being big swole and ripped in one... LOL

 

[jbatts77]

You lose a lot of size when you go from 18% to 6%. A medium was super tight but it looks like you're built, not like yours stupid. Low bodyfat makes all the difference.

Those who spend a lot on clothes: at 6% almost everything looks good on you.

 

[jbatts77]

By the way, I think if squats are perfectly performed there is no problem with them. But there are alternatives that give (Normal mortals) the same results and are more forgiving on your body even with less than perfect form.
If I had to do squats I'd do front squats.

 

[MrKleen73]

You lose a lot of size when you go from 18% to 6%. A medium was super tight but it looks like you're built, not like yours stupid. Low bodyfat makes all the difference.

Those who spend a lot on clothes: at 6% almost everything looks good on you.

Oh yeah I know but I wouldn't be 197 @6% either. I think closer to 190 or so.

I have a tightness level at which I won't go beyond in a shirt. If it is not a compression or workout shirt then it should not be tight on my waist at all. I like my chest, shoulders and sleeves to be tight but then to kind of hang a bit looser in my abdomen area. Just show the highlights without looking like I am intentionally showing off. Make no mistake I am but I want it to be somewhat incognito!

You see guys with sleeve lines up by their traps and the bottom of the sleeve barely covers the rear delts. It can look a bit silly.

By the way, I think if squats are perfectly performed there is no problem with them. But there are alternatives that give (Normal mortals) the same results and are more forgiving on your body even with less than perfect form.
If I had to do squats I'd do front squats.

Squats when done correctly are an excellent part of any program they are in. You have to know how to apply them to your body though. Are you hip dominant, or quad dominant when squatting, once you know that you can build the rest of your program around that. You can also just find stuff that are not squats to build all the same muscles and for certain muscles or people the squat may be more effective, or maybe leg press or something. You never really know. Too many variables. Just work hard and don't neglect legs...

 

[jbatts77]

Oh yeah I know but I wouldn't be 197 @6% either. I think closer to 190 or so.

I have a tightness level at which I won't go beyond in a shirt. If it is not a compression or workout shirt then it should not be tight on my waist at all. I like my chest, shoulders and sleeves to be tight but then to kind of hang a bit looser in my abdomen area. Just show the highlights without looking like I am intentionally showing off. Make no mistake I am but I want it to be somewhat incognito!

You see guys with sleeve lines up by their traps and the bottom of the sleeve barely covers the rear delts. It can look a bit silly.



Squats when done correctly are an excellent part of any program they are in. You have to know how to apply them to your body though. Are you hip dominant, or quad dominant when squatting, once you know that you can build the rest of your program around that. You can also just find stuff that are not squats to build all the same muscles and for certain muscles or people the squat may be more effective, or maybe leg press or something. You never really know. Too many variables. Just work hard and don't neglect legs...

To be clear I'm not half that physically fit now; I have a dad bod. 173 at 11%.
You can lose muscle and gain fat soooo fast with a kid and stressful job.

 

[MrKleen73]

To be clear I'm not half that physically fit now; I have a dad bod. 173 at 11%.
You can lose muscle and gain fat soooo fast with a kid and stressful job.

Yeah, and sounds like you are not a naturally big guy. When I slack my size tends to stick around, and I just get softer and heavier. Sure I will lose some size but not much. SOunds like you probably had to build up quite a bit to get to 197 especially @ 6%. Me I am 220+ any time I am not eating and training correctly.