Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
September 02, 2014, 01:13:48 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Why was there such an improvement in pro leg mass after the 1970s?  (Read 6680 times)
619Rules
Guest
« Reply #25 on: December 17, 2005, 08:32:19 PM »

Better leg machines shouldn't make much difference actually, since the squat is better than all other leg exercises combined, then or now.

With leg press machines the only advantage i can see is if guys are more willing to use em because they're less exhausting-a person's height won't make any difference on squats! Even if the newer press machines are an improvement, why would that help when they had squats and vertical leg press back in the day-where's the improvement from the 45 degree angle machines?


The squat is a better leg exercise b/c of the range of motion in the three joints it involves.....having said that many people are better off with a leg press b/c of  biomechanical disadvantage-like being very tall........so your argument that the squat is always better is not correct...


Second......if you have back problems, you have to do leg presses.....and trhat is why you would do leg presses instaed of squats
Report to moderator   Logged
pumpster
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18897

If you're reading this you have too much free time


« Reply #26 on: December 17, 2005, 08:36:04 PM »

Squats are usually better, for most people, most of the time. Box squats are an excellent variation which can help those with perceived biomechanical disadvantages. For the others, there were vertical leg press machines back in the day that were solid, yet they were still considered secondary. Platz didn't even do presses. The theory that being taller isn't condusive to squatting is just speculation that many adopt as truth.

Amongst the majority in their 20s and 30s, those with back probs are in the vast minority.
Report to moderator   Logged
knny187
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 21926



« Reply #27 on: December 17, 2005, 08:43:36 PM »

In Vince's gym....the squat was not allowed
Report to moderator   Logged
Loomis
Getbig III
***
Posts: 787



« Reply #28 on: December 17, 2005, 08:51:16 PM »

"My word!...what SPLENDID development!"...and then they look at the photos of the show afterwards and go "Damn his eyes!!..he FOOLED US AGAIN with his POSING!...Damn you ARNOLD!".....and to have it repeat for 7 more occasions.
funny Smiley
Report to moderator   Logged
suckmymuscle
Guest
« Reply #29 on: December 17, 2005, 09:40:29 PM »

It can't all be about a change and availability in drugs, surely? Back in Arnold's day - and before - the general consensus is that steroids were purer, more easily available (i.e., legal) and cheap.

If you look at that recent Photoshopped picture of Arnold and Ronnie together, their upper mass - from the front at least - is pretty comparable. Yes, Ronnie has better separation, lower BF etc, but there's not an enormous difference in the mass stakes. Their legs, however, are a world apart - Ronnie's look almost twice the size.

What actually changed after, say, the mid-1980s, that saw legs really start to grow in the majority of pros? Judges started actually looking at them?

I can't quite see that drugs have made any difference, so was it something like the availability of the leg press/hack squat machines etc that let to pros being really able to add weight and thus bulk to their quads, or did pros back in the day simply not pay as much attention to legs, and it was only uber-trainers like Platz who managed to take them to the next level, probably because he was doing as much/more work than the modern pro?

  There was? Huh

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Report to moderator   Logged
jwb
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5105


« Reply #30 on: December 17, 2005, 10:10:30 PM »

The angled leg press is/was the choice of many many pros for leg training...

Vince Taylor - Never squatted

Dorian Yates - Never squatted after 1987

Paul Dillet - very rarely if ever squatted

Flex Wheeler - no squats

Report to moderator   Logged
flexfan
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3990

Venice Versmilitude


« Reply #31 on: December 18, 2005, 12:18:55 AM »

Yeah, some guys benefit significantly from squats. Other don't. The 45-degree leg press is a fabulous machine if used properly.

BTW, Yates did very heavy smith squats in the '90s. So he did kinda use the squat. Besides, his quads were his second weakest bodypart (biceps as the obvious first).
Report to moderator   Logged

Sultan
brianX
Getbig IV
****
Posts: 2813

Kiwiol has 13" arms!


« Reply #32 on: December 18, 2005, 01:05:15 AM »

I think the old timers had a better sense of proportion. Huge legs look goofy to most people. Most pros can't even walk straight because their legs are so big.
Report to moderator   Logged

hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Zugzwang
Getbig II
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 283

adirtyjob.blogspot.com


WWW
« Reply #33 on: December 18, 2005, 02:12:58 AM »

I think the concept that the squat is better than 'all other leg exercises combined' is an interesting one, and potentially false; putting the ideas that pros did not concentrate as much on quads before the mid-1980s, if the squat was so good as a leg exercise - on a standalone basis - I'm pretty sure that genetically gifted guys would have seen their legs explode whether they were paying them enormous attention or not. Pretty much every pro squatted in the 1970s, right? While we may be able to excuse Arnold and Lou for being tall, why didn't Franco Columbo have monster legs? Genetics, sure, but you'd have thought capacity would have been there for him to really max out the wheels, even by default.

Yates squatted a lot and heavily in his youth, but completely abandoned the exercise in the 1990s - someone above mentioned he Smith-squatted then, but I've never heard nor seen that. In Blood and Guts and A Warrior's Journey it's leg extensions, hack squats and leg press and that's it. It seems to me that a superb foundation can be built on the squat, but it isn't essential for maintenance or indeed additional latter-career growth for most top pros. Of course, the flipside of this is that Ronnie, Jay and Branch all squat and they've got arguably the three best sets of wheels in the pro ranks today. But it very much does appear to be, as per usual, an exercise that works best if it suits you, and doesn't work best for everyone. It may well be the best single exercise, but clearly not for 100 per cent of the population.
Report to moderator   Logged

adirtyjob.blogspot.com
WillRiker
Getbig II
**
Posts: 267

Getbig!


« Reply #34 on: December 18, 2005, 04:32:27 AM »

I think the concept that the squat is better than 'all other leg exercises combined' is an interesting one, and potentially false; putting the ideas that pros did not concentrate as much on quads before the mid-1980s, if the squat was so good as a leg exercise - on a standalone basis - I'm pretty sure that genetically gifted guys would have seen their legs explode whether they were paying them enormous attention or not. Pretty much every pro squatted in the 1970s, right? While we may be able to excuse Arnold and Lou for being tall, why didn't Franco Columbo have monster legs? Genetics, sure, but you'd have thought capacity would have been there for him to really max out the wheels, even by default.

Yates squatted a lot and heavily in his youth, but completely abandoned the exercise in the 1990s - someone above mentioned he Smith-squatted then, but I've never heard nor seen that. In Blood and Guts and A Warrior's Journey it's leg extensions, hack squats and leg press and that's it. It seems to me that a superb foundation can be built on the squat, but it isn't essential for maintenance or indeed additional latter-career growth for most top pros. Of course, the flipside of this is that Ronnie, Jay and Branch all squat and they've got arguably the three best sets of wheels in the pro ranks today. But it very much does appear to be, as per usual, an exercise that works best if it suits you, and doesn't work best for everyone. It may well be the best single exercise, but clearly not for 100 per cent of the population.

The squat is indeed the king of all exercises, but it's not the best way to train the quads!

Before all those squats lover's fall over me, please let me elaborate. A proper squat, that is a powerlift, involves more hips, lower back and hams than it does the quads. That is the reason that most powerlifers use many exercises like good mornings to train their lower back and hams (also for deadlifting) High bar squatting, or bodybuilder squat, is awkward if you are tall, no discussion about that!

Same logic applies to bench presses, nice if you are short with short arms. But for longer limbed person's, dumbell presses or machine presses are Superior.

Report to moderator   Logged
sarcasm
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 12325


The Luke loves Dungeons and Dragons


« Reply #35 on: December 18, 2005, 09:01:13 AM »

The squat is indeed the king of all exercises, but it's not the best way to train the quads!

Before all those squats lover's fall over me, please let me elaborate. A proper squat, that is a powerlift, involves more hips, lower back and hams than it does the quads. That is the reason that most powerlifers use many exercises like good mornings to train their lower back and hams (also for deadlifting) High bar squatting, or bodybuilder squat, is awkward if you are tall, no discussion about that!

Same logic applies to bench presses, nice if you are short with short arms. But for longer limbed person's, dumbell presses or machine presses are Superior.


hahahahahahahaha.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jaejonna rows 125!!
NarcissisticDeity
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 43841


I dont care what Ronnie says bc hes not a credible


« Reply #36 on: December 18, 2005, 10:11:27 AM »

Jim Quinn did squat in an article Flex magazine December 1993 that he and Billy Smith both use to squat over 600lbs but stopped doing them and relied on hacks , leg presses and lex extensions.

And Yates did do Smith machine squats even after winning the Mr Olympia.


* Dorian-Smith-Squats.jpg (129.51 KB, 558x775 - viewed 436 times.)
Report to moderator   Logged
sarcasm
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 12325


The Luke loves Dungeons and Dragons


« Reply #37 on: December 18, 2005, 10:13:04 AM »

pussies.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jaejonna rows 125!!
pumpster
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18897

If you're reading this you have too much free time


« Reply #38 on: December 18, 2005, 11:00:35 AM »

Quote
I think the concept that the squat is better than 'all other leg exercises combined' is an interesting one, and potentially false; putting the ideas that pros did not concentrate as much on quads before the mid-1980s, if the squat was so good as a leg exercise - on a standalone basis - I'm pretty sure that genetically gifted guys would have seen their legs explode whether they were paying them enormous attention or not. Pretty much every pro squatted in the 1970s, right? While we may be able to excuse Arnold and Lou for being tall, why didn't Franco Columbo have monster legs?

So many assumptions, apparently made just to argue. Genetically gifted guys *did* see their legs explode before the 80s, or didn't you notice Platz and others? Duh! He didn't even do leg presses! Franco had legs that were as good as his potential through drugs, nutrition and squats, would carry him-what's complicated about figuring that out? There's no proof whatsoever that he left any potential on the table, as you're guessing.

The main difference now is that with competition much higher, guys can't afford to ignore legs and the hard workouts they require. In the old daze focusing on vanity muscles would've been good enough in many cases-Bill Grant and others come to mind. More efficient drug use, better nutrition and better training techniques also enter into it, and probably had more of a collective impact on areas bodybuilders ignored in the past, such as legs. Arms and chest were collectively already closer to potential ceilings of development in the old daze.

I'm still not clear on why better leg press machines now available help-less exhausting than squats, better for pussies who can't take it? Squats will always be the gold standard-the silly theory about a peron's height has no basis in fact, but is repeated and handed down often enough that some believe it anyway. It's a convenient excuse!
Report to moderator   Logged
619Rules
Guest
« Reply #39 on: December 18, 2005, 11:46:33 AM »

Jim Quinn did squat in an article Flex magazine December 1993 that he and Billy Smith both use to squat over 600lbs but stopped doing them and relied on hacks , leg presses and lex extensions.

And Yates did do Smith machine squats even after winning the Mr Olympia.

When I trained around Quinn for several yeas he never did a single rep on squats-ever.

Never did hack squats either.

Bill Smith used to work the counter at Gold's Venice in the  80's, and that was when Quinn came out to Venice...so  before Quinn made it down to San Diego he may have squatted-but not when he was around me in San Diego.
Report to moderator   Logged
sarcasm
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 12325


The Luke loves Dungeons and Dragons


« Reply #40 on: December 18, 2005, 01:23:59 PM »

i remember reading that Quinn and Smith used to do heavy ass leg presses a lot, 2,000lbs. plus.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jaejonna rows 125!!
WillRiker
Getbig II
**
Posts: 267

Getbig!


« Reply #41 on: December 18, 2005, 01:39:52 PM »

hahahahahahahaha.

Quite fascinating reaction, i will respond equally witted: hahahahahha
Report to moderator   Logged
sarcasm
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 12325


The Luke loves Dungeons and Dragons


« Reply #42 on: December 18, 2005, 01:42:50 PM »

i'm laughing because you're using every little bitch's excuse for not squatting and benching, you hear this bullshit every day.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jaejonna rows 125!!
WillRiker
Getbig II
**
Posts: 267

Getbig!


« Reply #43 on: December 18, 2005, 01:44:43 PM »

So many assumptions, apparently made just to argue. Genetically gifted guys *did* see their legs explode before the 80s, or didn't you notice Platz and others? Duh! He didn't even do leg presses! Franco had legs that were as good as his potential through drugs, nutrition and squats, would carry him-what's complicated about figuring that out? There's no proof whatsoever that he left any potential on the table, as you're guessing.

The main difference now is that with competition much higher, guys can't afford to ignore legs and the hard workouts they require. In the old daze focusing on vanity muscles would've been good enough in many cases-Bill Grant and others come to mind. More efficient drug use, better nutrition and better training techniques also enter into it, and probably had more of a collective impact on areas bodybuilders ignored in the past, such as legs. Arms and chest were collectively already closer to potential ceilings of development in the old daze.

I'm still not clear on why better leg press machines now available help-less exhausting than squats, better for pussies who can't take it? Squats will always be the gold standard-the silly theory about a peron's height has no basis in fact, but is repeated and handed down often enough that some believe it anyway. It's a convenient excuse!


With all due respect, why would somebody be a pussie if he does not squat! If he is not suited for it then why should he! It is bodybuilding, so if a leg press works better for the quads than squats then should use the former. Some people are made to squat, short guys, and some are made to deadlift (tall guys)

Squat is still the king of exercices, but not for the quads and not for everbody.
Report to moderator   Logged
WillRiker
Getbig II
**
Posts: 267

Getbig!


« Reply #44 on: December 18, 2005, 01:47:36 PM »

i'm laughing because you're using every little bitch's excuse for not squatting and benching, you hear this bullshit every day.

Your reaction is kinda of presumptive as my training is based on heavy deads, high pulls, clean and press, goodmorning heavy dumbell presses and yes also on smith squats. Why, because they work better for me.


BTW little bitch's excuse. what is that for a reaction? This will get you really far in real life, lol
Report to moderator   Logged
sarcasm
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 12325


The Luke loves Dungeons and Dragons


« Reply #45 on: December 18, 2005, 01:51:52 PM »

hahahaha, ok, "willriker", hahaha.
Report to moderator   Logged

Jaejonna rows 125!!
WillRiker
Getbig II
**
Posts: 267

Getbig!


« Reply #46 on: December 18, 2005, 01:53:35 PM »

hahahaha, ok, "willriker", hahaha.

So we are friends now Wink
Report to moderator   Logged
usa86
Getbig II
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 85

Getbig!


« Reply #47 on: December 18, 2005, 06:00:01 PM »



I'm still not clear on why better leg press machines now available help-less exhausting than squats, better for pussies who can't take it? Squats will always be the gold standard-the silly theory about a peron's height has no basis in fact, but is repeated and handed down often enough that some believe it anyway. It's a convenient excuse!

more height = longer bones = higher torque = more leverage = more difficult to squat in comparison to a shorter person - I suggest you revist your high school physics text if this isn't clear enough for you - the squat is a great excercise to be sure but just like most other exercises, it is more difficult for taller people
Report to moderator   Logged
pumpster
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18897

If you're reading this you have too much free time


« Reply #48 on: December 18, 2005, 06:05:18 PM »

Lighten up dude, we're having fun. Let off some steam with a few sets of squats and get back to me.

Squats are for everyone tho, if you're seriously ready to sweat. Most of the excuses about height and leverage don't hold water. Leg presses are for yuppies.
Report to moderator   Logged
Zugzwang
Getbig II
**
Gender: Male
Posts: 283

adirtyjob.blogspot.com


WWW
« Reply #49 on: December 19, 2005, 02:57:16 AM »

Lighten up dude, we're having fun. Let off some steam with a few sets of squats and get back to me.

Seems to be your calling card, Pumpster old chap. Somebody posts the reasons why X isn't Y, and you either ignore it or just repeat what you said before. Incidentally, I did mention Platz above - right from the very beginning - and as stated, he's the exception that proves the rule.

I concur that evidently it appears prioritisation is the main reason why legs exploded after this era.

Regarding squats vs leg press - the reason why the leg press is relatively easier is because (a) your back is supported and (b) it's more isolating for the quad (with some hams) than the squat, which as we know is probably THE ultimate all-body exercise (or the only one that comes close). Naturally the leg press will seem less taxing *on your body* as only really your legs are doing any work (and mostly your quads, depending on foot position - for most people it's mostly quads.) That doesn't mean as a *quad* exercise it isn't as effecient, or possibly even more so, depending on the weights being used (with full reps, proper form etc.)

Regarding squates and structure, Dorian Yates himself (and we know, we know, he's no Paul Dillet), stated that, "... I perservered with the exercise until October of 1989, when I finally accepted my structure - narrow hips, longish legs - was not ideal for heavy barbell squats. Instead, I began to rely on leg presses and Smith Machine squats as mass builders for thighs. However, I still recommend that everyone, beginners in particular, earn their thigh-building spurs with barbell squats. You should cease doing them only if you feel, as I did, that they're causing more harm than good."

He adds: "For stimulating sheer quad mass, the leg press is my exercise of choice. Beware, however, because it is one of the most abused and misused exercises in the bodybuilding repertoire. The sport abounds with erroneous claims from guys citing leg-preses in excess of 1,500 pounds. These guys may indeed have 1,500 pounds loaded on the machine, but they certainly aren't using a full range of motion. What most of these guys do is set the supporting backboard at such an extreme upright angle that their knees can only move four or five inches during their so-called 'reps'. They're doing only a partial movement and, thus, achieving only a partial stimulation of the thigh muscles."

Dorian, incidentally, claims he maxed out at 1,265 pounds on the leg press.

As usual, there are no hard and fasts - if it works for you, it works. And that's it.
Report to moderator   Logged

adirtyjob.blogspot.com
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!