wide squatting

[peanut butter]

because of my structure the only way i can reach any depth is by squatting wide. what are the advantages/disadvatages of doing so, and also what about the differences in form ie how wide is wide and direction of my toes.

 

[Brendon Katz]

wide squats work inner thigh muscles better and quads less.

 

[peanut butter]

i know they work the hips to. but does it matter how wide you go and the direction of your toes

 

[Aaron Howard]

wide squats work inner thigh muscles better and quads less.

You sure about this?

 

[Brendon Katz]

You sure about this?

yeh pretty sure , pulled it out of a biokinetics manual that most of the top guys use.

 

[colinm]

all i can tell you is this: i have seen very very very very few squats to parallel with a narrow stance that didnt look ass-horrible. personally, wide squatting takes the stress off my lower back and puts it all in my hips, ass, and hammies. i can stay more upright and my knees dont drift too far in front of my toes.

 

[Chad Hamilton]

You can move more weight with wide stance.

Hammy's and inner thighs.

 

[graedy]

for me its the same. i dont think there is aproblem with that.

 

[CarnalSalvation]

I think absolutely, everyone should be squatting with an "athletic" stance (shoulder width, slightly wider for the skinny folks) or wider for their main squat.

Doing highbar full squats as assistance is another matter and requires a lot of flexibility to perform correctly.

 

[BAS_FAN]

Wide squats work my ass ALOT and like everyone else who wrote here, i feel like i can handle alot more weight. Toes should be pointed forwards...small arch in back, butt out and chest up. I always train my clients to squat with a wide stance but always ask them to try a "normal" stance. First thing the notice is that they have less balance and that they cant go as low.
Anyway, point is wider is better

 

[rickdog]

I do wide squats. I find the form to be much more nataural and I find that the explosiveness i build from my hips and glutes ( compared to close stance) is much more beneficial for squats. The only difference is astheticaly they do not make your quads look as good but with the majority of anti-metorsexuals on this forum that shouldnt be a problme. Not to mention that the weight I put up with wide stance squats is much greater than close stance. Keep up the good works guys. Lest quit being pussies and putting up the same old numbers and weighing the same old weights and turn into a serious lifting forum. YOu know the direction a few such as Carnal has been pushing us since I have been here.

 

[Diligent]

BTW, a wide stance is also beneficial when you have to squat down to poop in a gross public bathroom and 'hover' right above the seat, so that, like, you don't get the pee and hair and doodoo all on your legs and stuff.... It gives you a more solid base to balance yourself. Trust me.

 

[Wild Dan Hibiki]

BTW, a wide stance is also beneficial when you have to squat down to poop in a gross public bathroom and 'hover' right above the seat, so that, like, you don't get the pee and hair and doodoo all on your legs and stuff.... It gives you a more solid base to balance yourself. Trust me.

ok i'll trust you cause it sounds like you're speaking from experience

 

[Ted-P]

Toes should be pointed forwards...small arch in back, butt out and chest up.

what????????????????

Squatting wide and Toes pointed forward?

Absolutely not.

THINK ABOUT THEM POOR KNEES!!

 

[Ted-P]

I think absolutely, everyone should be squatting with an "athletic" stance (shoulder width, slightly wider for the skinny folks) or wider for their main squat.

Doing highbar full squats as assistance is another matter and requires a lot of flexibility to perform correctly.

Interesting............. so you are saying narrow full squats are harder lifts compared to the wide stance squatting?

 

[Ted-P]

I do wide squats. I find the form to be much more nataural and I find that the explosiveness i build from my hips and glutes ( compared to close stance) is much more beneficial for squats.

I dont get the logic behind that.

Isn't it the deeper you go the more hip and hamstring muscles you activate? In that case you go much deeper with Close stance then Wide stance.

I think you can move much more weight is less distance you travel, the stretch reflex, and a much wider and stable base not because of your posterior chain. You use your posterior on both narrow and wide stance.

 

[Diligent]

ok i'll trust you cause it sounds like you're speaking from experience

this is true.

 

[Ted-P]

I have to say I guess I was partly right and partly wrong.


Research involving EMG has shown no significant difference in quadriceps activation between narrow and wide stances (12). Adductor activation has been shown to increase with a wide stance (12). This is because the thigh shows increased abduction and lateral rotation during the descent with a wide stance and, during the ascent, the adductors are therefore activated to draw the thigh back to the midline of the body and also medially rotate it back to a neutral position (12).

Gluteus maximus and hamstring activation also increases with a wide stance (6). It has been suggested, for the former, that this is due to the positioning of its' distal attachment, which causes the gluteus to lengthen with thigh abduction (12). This lengthening shifts it away from its' optimum position on the length-tension curve and hence greater activation is required to create the same tension as the narrower stance (12). Greater activation of hip extensor muscles may also occur because width stance effects torso inclination (see later).

http://www.drsquat.com/index.cfm?action=viewarticle&articleID=73

 

[CarnalSalvation]

Here is what I feel is used primarily by a wide stance, sitting back style powersquat:

My booty (I got a ghetto booty bitch!!)
My hams (the secret to my squat)
My hips/groin
My lower back

I can squat 700lbs and not feel like my quads did a single goddamn thing.

 

[cockysprinter]

narrow stance is the way to go.