Thinking about my squatting stance in relation to how my legs have grown over the past year.

I find it most cofortable and natural to squat with my feet a tad wider than shoulder width with my toes pointing out slightly. As im not a kick in the ball off 6 foot tall, this seems to keep me stable as i go down and helps me avoid letting my torso bending forward and letting the weight drift beyond the correct lines of movement.

I have noticed that the biggest changes has been the upper inner area and my arse! everyting has improved...don't get me wrong, this is the parts I notice the most for obvious reasons.

So..the questions are

How importaint is the stance when squatting and how should it vary to suit structure. What effect wil the different widths have?

Good post Rab, i would be interested to know as well. I squat in a similar fashion to you!

Jake The Muss wrote:Good post Rab, i would be interested to know as well. I squat in a similar fashion to you!

Its a bit silly for me now i think. Im far from being big, but my legs rub together at the top now. when i jog and it gets sweaty its not nice. Im also growing an arse that sticks out way too far for the size of my hamstrings.

Mines always stuck out,even before i lifted!

Ive experimented with several stances and id like to think i know what hits what for me.

My standard PL squat stance is pretty wide id say a good 3-5 inches outside shoulder width. This is the point that i feel gives me good recruitment of my quads, hamstrings and glutes.

If i come in to shoulder width or narrower my hamstrings and glutes do less and my quads become more dominant. I find it difficult going over 150kg or so with a narrower stance as i feel less stable, especially on the drop into the hole.

Same can be said if i go to wide, ill find the drop down very easy as my fat arse can do all the work and the rom is a little shorter, but ill find it very hard to drive back up out the hole.

So back squat i go the optimal width so i can push decent(ish) weights and front squat i go slightly narrower to give my quads a slap as well as my core.

Rab wrote:How important is the stance when squatting?

very. For example, use the same stance for say 6 workouts, then change it slightly for then next 6. Why? Cos then you' re hitting muscles of lower body area in different ways to thus make you more balanced and stronger overall, rather than let your body get used to the same thing.

And as you've already intimated at, squat stance does indeed affect the muscles involved differently.

Rab wrote:How should it vary to suit structure?

generally this doesn't matter. Sure, some people will find certain stances harder, but who said the iron game was easy

Rab wrote:What effect will the different widths have?

Narrow stance: maximum stress on the quads (but the greater knee angle increases stress on the knee joints).
Wide stance: maximum stress on the hip and gluteal muscles (but increased stress on the hip joints).

An example: cyclists should perform a "Cyclist Squat" (funny that!). Heels elevated 4 inches, feet closer than shoulder width, front barbell. Front squats show an increase in electrical activity in the quadriceps and hamstrings and a decrease in the erector spinae and gluteus. And with the cyclist squat variation that is exacerbated even more; which is beneficial to cyclists.

A narrow stance definitely hits the quads harder, although I think most people find it more uncomfortable. My ass is big and hard (oooh errr) from taking a wider than shoulder-width stance and going to full depth for about a year straight...since switching to a more narrow stance I definitely find it hits the quads harder and takes the emphasis off the hams and glutes.

Front squats are always worth doing as well because of the quad involvement.

I do wide PL squats, narrow oly squats and front squats. I agree with whats been mentioned thus far, but i will also add that if bringing up quad size (or strength) is a goal and you've got strong hams and glutes, than naturally they are going to be robbing your quads of stimulation progressively, by doing most of the workload.

So mark..don't neglect your front squats and olys unless you want some major imbalances!

but a massive arse and skinny frogs legs are what ive always dreamed of

Ive been leg pressing and doing extensions to hit my quads but just started front squatting also as i could feel my hams and glutes were getting hammered a lot more.

Recent electromyography (EMG) research revealed that variation in stance width during the squat did not affect isolation of leg muscles, which is contrary to what many lifters believe.

Ref: The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 16(3), pp. 428–432, 2002.

Canuck PT wrote:Recent electromyography (EMG) research revealed that variation in stance width during the squat did not affect isolation of leg muscles, which is contrary to what many lifters believe.

Ref: The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 16(3), pp. 428–432, 2002.

So sumo stance squats aren't more glute and ham dominant compared to shoulder stance squats?

I think they need a new EMG machine!

Either way bar positioning does make a difference, high/low, back/front when squatting.

I think you can put more stress on certain areas when squating. However a lot of leg growth is genetic. If you find a stance thats comfortable thats usualy the best bet for you to get growth from. I squat with my legs just outside my shoulder width and with toes pointed out a bit. I Think at our level overall growth and progressive restistance will build better quads that playing around with various stances. Train hard train heavy and grow

Canuck PT wrote:Recent electromyography (EMG) research revealed that variation in stance width during the squat did not affect isolation of leg muscles, which is contrary to what many lifters believe.

Ref: The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 16(3), pp. 428–432, 2002.

Interesting, if stances do not effect the recruitment levels of the quads/glutes/hams though, why does squatting effect the doms i get?

For example
PL Squat
RDL
Calf raise
...WILL give me tight hams and gluteals the following day, but not my quads. Add front squat, leg press or leg extension into that, which to me work my quads more as my squat is glute/ham dominant (or so i believe) and ill also have tightness at the front of my legs. However without them my quads are fresh as a daisy.
I know doms are not an indication of what muscles have been effectively worked, but surely that are at least an indicator.

Umm,,, here http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12173958

Sorry, can't post PDFs or full articles.

The stance in itself does not affect recruitment, but other variables such as depth do.

There are more variables as well, including flexibility, form, cadence etc., but I also think that DOMS is dependent on these variables, as White blood cell count (a sign of inflammation) and creatine kinase (a marker of muscle damage) levels will remain the same if 2 exact same workouts are performed up to 6 weeks apart.

Well that makes sense, my knees arent happy the closer my stance get so my depth is effected, my PL squat stance is where i have found i can comfortably get sub parallel.

Canuck PT wrote:Recent electromyography (EMG) research revealed that variation in stance width during the squat did not affect isolation of leg muscles, which is contrary to what many lifters believe.

Ref: The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 16(3), pp. 428–432, 2002.

Canuck PT wrote:Umm,,, here http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12173958

Sorry, can't post PDFs or full articles.

The stance in itself does not affect recruitment, but other variables such as depth do.

I do not agree. And that's just one study.

In real life us lifters know that stance does affect muscle recruitment.

Also, "Optimal Muscle Training: Biomechanics of Lifting for Maximum Growth and Strength" by Ken Kinakin is where I got the info about the stance info in my first post above. This dude knows his onions

This is why EMG studies fail.

Well I'm a simple soul and always have been, whilst I enjoy reading about studies for this and that, I'm afraid with me it all comes down to what works.

When I used to squat heavily in my youth (not any more) I used to vary my stance from workout to workout. It honestly depended how I felt at the time. I'm not one to follow an (alleged) scientific belief that one way is better than another.

An example is squats & over the years when I was at MP I had so many discussions with members that you should not squat in a smith....Well I am sorry that is total bollocks. I agree is may not be as beneficial as free squats but I have yet to see any argument whatsoever that smiths are bad!

One thing I would say (and again its frowned on in certain quarters) I always found that leg extensions were a great exercise to help with growth of the quads. Now days apparently there not a great exercise. You tell that to Tom Platz!!!

I agree with you Ressie,i always found smith machine squats to be a great exercise. Also the ability to use more weight with a smith,due to the increased stability,must count as an advantage over free weight squats?

I dont think smith squats are a bad exercise, i think they are tricky to get a comfy position in.

Leg extentions are something I should do more often.

I think it varies from smith to smith. The one in my gym is shit, its vertical travel is on a strange 10-15 degree slope, so you are forced into this movement, not too bad for pressing but for things like rowing and squatting its awful as you either end up in un natural start or finish positions.

On a good smith the only disadvantage i can think of over free squatting is the reduced need to stabilise the weight and the ability to push back and lean into the bar.

Your upper inner thighs (that's hip adductors to non bodybuilders) are worked increasingly as a hip extensor the further out your knees are at the bottom. Since knee position is determined by toe position your stance will have an effect on this. The study didn't refer to hip adductors, so it's not really relevant to Rab's "upper inner thighs."

I am fairly certain that if knee position is correct in relation to toes the knee extensor muscles will be worked in a balanced manner.