Leg press instead of squat

[b-boy]

So I do leg press, but differently than most - I lower the backrest all the way down and go very low with my legs - this is the way I make the quads really hard, leg extensions, horizontal leg press and Bulgarian squats

Placing the back rest all the way down actually puts more on your hams and glutes, seat upward puts more on your quads. Jusy like squats when you go ass to grass your diverting the force to your glutes and hams, parallel hits more quads.

 

[alfresco]

These were the machines that everyone back in the day said were responsible for Jeff King's quad sweep.
We called them the "duck press"...no idea why...maybe they were good for squashing water fowl...

I think I posted a link to an interview with Jeff King. In it he said that front squats
were responsible for his quad development (he forgot to mention Mom and Dad ).

I would never use that leg press machine I posed a picture of. Something about
pressing heavy weights with your heart and head upside down. I think the 'internal'
pressure in that position is not good. Had a guy blow a blood vessel in his eye ball
using that machine.

It has been a long time since I have seen one of these machines in a gym. Tell you
something? If memory serves, the original Golds had one, or was it when they
moved to Santa Monica? Memory fuzzy here. I remember seeing Mike Mentzer using
one and Arnold, but it could have been a memory of a foto I saw. (Getting old sucks.)

I think Emeric posted something about this, except he referenced the 45 deg.
leg press machine as another example.

Now, I have been using the a duck like stance when I do leg presses. Easier on the
hips and low back. Still constant tension, not locking out. Great burn, better than
squats. And for squats now, my feet now are wider and I go all the way down and
3/4 of the way (YouTube is good for something) , constant tension on the quads
and now I can pretty much squat pain free in the lower back and hips, albeit with
lighter weighs.. And when pain did occur, it came the next day . . . weird. May it
was rocking the hips forward at the top of the movement (standing). Who knows.

Maybe this will help the OP.

 

[alfresco]

Placing the back rest all the way down actually puts more on your hams and glutes, seat upward puts more on your quads. Jusy like squats when you go ass to grass your diverting the force to your glutes and hams, parallel hits more quads.

I have tried it both ways, but the seat up as far as it can go is how I have and will do
then shortly. I find that the 'compression' of the body at the low position, even with
a duck foot position, my knees flaring out at the bottom, helps me or maybe I am just
fooling myself? Certainly more comfortable.

I alternate them with the squats I mentioned above. Pure torture on the quads but
growth seems be evading me

 

[juggy38]

Leg curl 2-3 sets to failire
45 degree leg press 3-4 sets
Smith high bar feet slightly out front or hack machine 2-3 sets
Lunge variation 2 sets
RDL 2 sets

Get ridiculously strong on those and you’ll have great legs

 

[taz]

I squatted like crazy for years and never had much luck wth my leg development. What changed it all for me, and granted, my legs aren't great but they are pretty decent. I stopped doing heavy work. And I stopped bar-squatting. I started from a zero point after a knee surgery btw.

I now will use a leg press with moderate weight and I no longer use a bar for squats. It is bodyweight only at this point.

I cant afford another knee injury at my age. Plus, no health insurance. But my legs still do ok and I have been training this way for a long time.

 

[buck]

The leg press was my go to exercise for the most part for decades. I wold have people make comments about my legs in and out of the gym. I could move good weights with the squat and hack squat as well with all the other movements. But to be honest my legs were decent from doing presses in high school as we had no way to squat. And years of bike riding, with doing hill sprints got me better legs then then many guys get after years of hitting the gym.

 

[Elvia1023]

The leg press was my go to exercise for the most part for decades. I wold have people make comments about my legs in and out of the gym. I could move good weights with the squat and hack squat as well with all the other movements. But to be honest my legs were decent from doing presses in high school as we had no way to squat. And years of bike riding, with doing hill sprints got me better legs then then many guys get after years of hitting the gym.

It's borderline ridiculous but my legs have pretty much improved more from a few months of intervals on the exercise bike and also using the stairmaster compared to pretty much abusing them with heavy weight and great form on hack squats and leg press etc.

 

[Mr OZ]

Pendulum squat is my go to now, dont have the hip flexibility anymore for traditional squats

first time trying this machine with what I thought was a 'warm up weight' I nearly got stuck at the bottom

 

[Cito33189]

Exhaust your legs first then do light squats at the end. Squats is the foundation of big legs. Anyone with huge ass legs goes under the bar.

 

[Biggerp73]

You ever seen those guys with absolutely huge, tree trunk thighs, that are just simply massive... Yet they look ugly, not remotely functional, with a weird shape to the sweep and the tear drop, etc? In my opinion, this is probably sometimes due in part to training them in mostly "non functional" ways that don't mimic actual human movements, like sprinting, walking, squatting, lunging. Obviously beautiful, huge, impressively aesthetic, world class legs have been built, almost all of them, using the leg press as part of their arsenal. But I would wonder if their legs would have looked as functional and aesthetic if they didn't do more "natural" movements like squats, machine squats, lunges, hack squats, etc, too.

 

[luki7788]

The matter is simple, if your knees do not hurt and let you squats (hack squats because I think they are just as good or even better for a bodybuilder than classic squats) do them because there is no better tool to build powerful legs. But if you have problems you need to find a way and train around the injury then legpress is a really good alternative as a base exercise

In my opinion, of course

 

[Kaladryn]

Consider keeping very light squats in for hip health and muscular balance.

 

[Kaladryn]

You ever seen those guys with absolutely huge, tree trunk thighs, that are just simply massive... Yet they look ugly, not remotely functional, with a weird shape to the sweep and the tear drop, etc? In my opinion, this is probably sometimes due in part to training them in mostly "non functional" ways that don't mimic actual human movements, like sprinting, walking, squatting, lunging. Obviously beautiful, huge, impressively aesthetic, world class legs have been built, almost all of them, using the leg press as part of their arsenal. But I would wonder if their legs would have looked as functional and aesthetic if they didn't do more "natural" movements like squats, machine squats, lunges, hack squats, etc, too.

I totally disagree, I think humans are supposed to have tree trunk thighs and most are severely underdeveloped in the leg department. "Aesthetic" is purely point of view, a large percentage of the population thinks that aesthetic is incredibly underdeveloped and skinny. Also, there is nothing 'natural' about machine squats and especially not hack squats (probably the most unnatural of all).

 

[IronLion2]

Honestly most high level bodybuilders shouldn't barbell back squat. They're too big and too stiff. I see some fugly ass squats from some jacked bros.

Now with that said most of you who are team squat build big legs don't have big legs and guys who say squats don't build their legs can't squat.

It's an amazing leg developer, nothing else can fully load and contract the entire leg like a deep pause squat. Fact is it takes people years to get there and for most that price is too high.

Imo the best leg developer that never gets used are deep lunges and sled drags. If half y'all got away from the weider bull shit ass 3 x 10 type of thinking and just did drags till failure, you'd see bigger legs. The leg press and hack squat fail to work the quad across multiple plains, guys who only use supported machines have no fucking ass or thighs, just baby outer quad sweeps, legs don't work like that. The muscles are very tightly connected and grow ideally when evenly taxed.

 

[kingpeon]

I totally disagree, I think humans are supposed to have tree trunk thighs and most are severely underdeveloped in the leg department. "Aesthetic" is purely point of view, a large percentage of the population thinks that aesthetic is incredibly underdeveloped and skinny. Also, there is nothing 'natural' about machine squats and especially not hack squats (probably the most unnatural of all).

Strange how that works. The more 'natural' the movement is, most often than not, the more productive a muscle-builder it is

 

[IronLion2]

I totally disagree, I think humans are supposed to have tree trunk thighs and most are severely underdeveloped in the leg department. "Aesthetic" is purely point of view, a large percentage of the population thinks that aesthetic is incredibly underdeveloped and skinny. Also, there is nothing 'natural' about machine squats and especially not hack squats (probably the most unnatural of all).

No we're super off topic but take a look at what Greek and Roman statues look like, that's what your body looks like when it's strong and functional, not a quad dominant Ken doll. Nothing against people who pursue bodybuilding, you do you boo, but don't let their build tell you what strong or function is suppose to look like.

 

[Biggerp73]

I totally disagree, I think humans are supposed to have tree trunk thighs and most are severely underdeveloped in the leg department. "Aesthetic" is purely point of view, a large percentage of the population thinks that aesthetic is incredibly underdeveloped and skinny. Also, there is nothing 'natural' about machine squats and especially not hack squats (probably the most unnatural of all).

I wasn't saying "aesthetic" is small. Jay Cutler has aesthetic thighs (well, his left thigh was aesthetic - his right not as much lol). Tom Platz had aesthetic thighs. Even Ronnie Coleman, in his prime, had aesthetic thighs. I'm talking more about guys like Art Atwood, etc, with huge legs, but just shaped unsightly. They don't look functional. They don't look good. Here is one example I saw yesterday on instagram.

 

[Butters]

I wasn't saying "aesthetic" is small. Jay Cutler has aesthetic thighs (well, his left thigh was aesthetic - his right not as much lol). Tom Platz had aesthetic thighs. Even Ronnie Coleman, in his prime, had aesthetic thighs. I'm talking more about guys like Art Atwood, etc, with huge legs, but just shaped unsightly. They don't look functional. They don't look good. Here is one example I saw yesterday on instagram.

i feel like that is largely genetic

look at Paco Bautista... absurdly massive, but basically an assembly of random body parts. legs look pretty wonky

 

[buck]

No we're super off topic but take a look at what Greek and Roman statues look like, that's what your body looks like when it's strong and functional, not a quad dominant Ken doll. Nothing against people who pursue bodybuilding, you do you boo, but don't let their build tell you what strong or function is suppose to look like.

People are often trained to think that the Greeks and Roman statues are what is the peak for humans. But that is just one more opinion. I am sure if a person went back in time looking like that thousands of years ago would have made you look like a freak compared to the rest of the population. The idea of what is freaky has grown since then just like other things. My idea of aesthetic looks is a much more powerful look then what most consider pleasing.

 

[luki7788]

I wasn't saying "aesthetic" is small. Jay Cutler has aesthetic thighs (well, his left thigh was aesthetic - his right not as much lol). Tom Platz had aesthetic thighs. Even Ronnie Coleman, in his prime, had aesthetic thighs. I'm talking more about guys like Art Atwood, etc, with huge legs, but just shaped unsightly. They don't look functional. They don't look good. Here is one example I saw yesterday on instagram.

the shape of the muscles is not a matter of training but genetics, so they are hooked and do not look good but no training will change that, you can only change the size of your muscles but not the shape

ago we have so many bodybuilders but only a small% are you with perfect symmetry and shapes and they are and will always be on top

bodybuilding is a very unfair sport because you can put a lot more work and effort into it than someone with super symmetries and shapes and you will still be behind them in the competition