Is there a way avoid hypertrophy, to increase squat without blowing

more weight low reps

>>39308467
3-6 reps max per set, add more weight

Not really.
Lower reps might help but you ain't gonna get a 5pl8 squat 1RM without beastly quads.

>>39308467
eating at maintenance is a tried and true tactic employed by DYELs all over the world to avoid adding mass.

and honestly your legs are supposed to be pretty big.

>>39308467
Switch to lowbar. If youre doing high bar your quads will blow up no matter the rep range.
Anyone saying low reps high weight is wrong.

>>39308603

Because powerlifters have small quads rite.

>>39308608
he's objectively correct. high bar places more emphasis on quads

>>39308608
A lot of powerlifters squat high bar and only start mainly squatting low bar if there is a meet coming up.
Most "powerlifters" who only do lowbar usually have small quads.

>>39308620

That isn't the point.
He implied low bar will stop or limit quad growth.
The difference in quad involvement between low bar and high bar isn't THAT big. You won't find someone with small quads squatting 4plate with any bar position.

What kind of freak doesn't want huge leg muscles? Your legs are what carry you around in this world and help hold you up.

Besides. You're halfway to being totally *clicks tongue* why not just gain more mass on upper body?

>>39308652
If youre gonna be such a fag about it then just stop squatting completely.

>>39308620
But the difference with lowbar is negligible at best.

>>39308670

I'm not OP you sack sniffer. I like big quads.

>>39308666
Nice trips satan
Not OP but i dont want huge legs. It doesnt look good at all. I know you all have stories about how a girl started sucking your cock just from seeing your quads but to me big legs arent visually appealing.

>>39308719
OP here. agreed. strong hamstrings look better imo. thanks for the tips everyone.

File: maxx.png (425KB, 505x458px) Image search: [Google]

425KB, 505x458px

>>39308652
Maxx Chewning squats 480lbs (almost 5pl8) and has babby quads

https://youtu.be/Vh0uaQuhX3k?t=375

It more has to do with how you train, how much you eat and genetics.

Low bar takes emphasis of of the quads and more onto the glutes/lowerback the more you "fold over" into a squat morning which allows you to increase your squat while getting little quad hypertrophy.

>>39309300
>Low bar takes emphasis of of the quads and more onto the glutes/lowerback the more you "fold over" into a squat morning
Nope.

File: big quads.png (1MB, 616x713px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 616x713px

>>39308719
I disagree. I love the way well developed quads look. I want some big ass quads and biceps. Having legs gives a well balanced look to a physique imo

>>39309300
The quads are still working as hard as they can in the low bar position. I think low bar just improves the extent to which you can use your back to power through the movement I. E. Good morning squat

>>39309465
The back stays straight pretty much the whole time, so it can't aid in moving the weight.

>>39308467
>Is there a way avoid hypertrophy
Heresy

File: pepemad1.jpg (92KB, 679x631px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 679x631px

>>39309447
>not a natty in sight

>>39309380
Please elaborate why "no"
Every single powerlifter, coach, strength professional I know agrees with me.

So please tell me why i'm wrong and why you're correct?

High bar emphasises quads, engaging less of the posterior chain. High-bar requires more forward knee travel to keep the bar over mid foot (your centre of gravity) putting more torque on the knee joint (compared to the hips) which is why you're typically more upright.
Low bar emphasises the glutes more, with more stress on the hips and less on the knees. The bar is lower on the bar requiring the hips to travel backwards more to keep the bar over mid foot (your centre of gravity) putting more torque on the hip joint which limits forward knee travel and is why low bar is typically less upright. Since the bar to hip distance is lessened in low bar the lever created is shortened meaning less torque is required to move the same weight as in high bar making the exercise mechanically more efficient which is why people typically lift more low bar.

>>39308467
Don't lift any heavier and do the same amount of leg work or less. Some people don't develop those wide as legs from the front because that's genetics. I only do front squats and my quads look wider from the front than my legs really are in comparison.

>>39309637
Strengtheory.com has a number of very in-depth articles on this.
Here's a link:
http://strengtheory.com/category/technique/squat

My gf likes my huge quads :^)

File: natty quads.png (1MB, 824x661px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 824x661px

>>39309533
What does not being natty have to do with anything?

I can easily find a bunch of naturals with good quad development

wew big quads :^)

>>39309711
Yes I've read a lot of greg nuckol's articles and they all agree.

Here are some articles for you to educate yourself since you can't seem to make a counter argument that elaborates more than a "no"

http://70sbig.com/blog/2012/01/low-bar-vs-high-bar-squatting/


http://strengtheory.com/its-time-to-end-this-nonsense-high-bar-vs-low-bar-squatting/

An excerpt from greg

"There are two main things you have to overcome to stand up from the bottom of a squat. You have to extend your knees, and you have to extend your hips. This means that your quads have to contract hard enough to produce the required knee extension torque, and your glutes, hamstrings, and abductors magni have to contract hard enough to produce the required hip extension torque."

"Just to preempt a potential criticism – this doesn’t deal with every possible iteration of squat form. Sure, you could low bar squat much more upright with a ton of forward knee tracking, and then there would probably be more knee torque. Or you could high bar squat with a silly amount of forward lean, and then there would be more hip torque. "

Like I said before
>Low bar takes emphasis off of the quads and more onto the glutes the more you "fold over" into a squat morning

Less knee travel means your hips are further back to keep the weight over the centre of balance (typically mid foot) which increases the amount of hip torque required for hip extension which is produced by glutes, hamstrings and abductors magni from the words of greg himself.

>>39309909
70sbig blog is shit.

You're misinterpreting some of the points greg makes.
I'm not gonna go into a pissing match with you.
If you've legitematly read all greg's articles, then there's nothing I could say to show you otherwise within a reasonable amount of time.
And if you haven't actually read his articles, then I can only recommend you to do so.

In the end, it hardly matters if you actually understand the kinesiology of the lifts, with regards to getting stronger and bigger.
It's good for a coach to know, but just potentially fun for a lifter to know.

>>39309909
>>39309967
Oh, I'll just add that pretty much any time I've seen someone preface their statements with "educate yourself", that person isn't open to a discussion.
It just devolves in a pissing match, where neither party learns anything.

I've had some good discussions online, and I try to learn how to differentiate between interesting and pointless conversations early-on.

>>39309967
It's not about a pissing match. Why not have a discussion instead of replying with deflection? If I'm misinterpreting his points why not tell me what they are and my mistakes? You can type out a reply but can't type out anything meaningful? you make out like you know better and can tell me i've made a mistake but not tell me what that is? cmon mate

>>39310078
I said
>educate yourself since you can't seem to make a counter argument that elaborates more than a "no"

Why reply no with no other information to back your viewpoint?

Why post link to a list of articles on squats instead of on a specific articles on low bar vs high bar that he has done. That just leaves someone to read through a bunch of articles which may not have relevant information to the difference of high bar vs low bar which this whole discussion is about which started from this
>>39308620
>>39308652
>>39309300

>>39308552
I hope

>>39310123
Why I replied with no other information is explained in my previous two posts.

I posted the link to a list of articles, because the extra information from the other articles is necessary in my opinion to better understand the differences, as it's a pretty complex issue.