• Keep up to date with Ausbb via Twitter and Facebook. Please add us!
  • Join the Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

    The Ausbb - Australian BodyBuilding forum is dedicated to no nonsense muscle and strength building. If you need advice that works, you have come to the right place. This forum focuses on building strength and muscle using the basics. You will also find that the Ausbb- Australian Bodybuilding Forum stresses encouragement and respect. Trolls and name calling are not allowed here. No matter what your personal goals are, you will be given effective advice that produces results.

    Please consider registering. It takes 30 seconds, and will allow you to get the most out of the forum.

Building legs without squats or presses

I haven't squatted in the last 12 months. The only quad exercise I did was leg extensions. For the 1st 10 months I did them three times every 2 weeks (10 sets of 20). Even though I cut down and my wasit went from 85cm to 78cm, my quads stayed at 67cm. That was with bugger all training to be honest.

I'm now training them more often in hopes of getting them a bit bigger. Doing 5 sets of 20 reps 5 days a week, won't be taking a measurement for another few months.

I also do barbell hip trusts and light SLDL.

Not going to lie, I stopped squatting and started this cause I got sick of squatting. Don't really care what people think, I'm getting my desired results so far with much less effort.
 
Well done on your effort mate. As I have stated in the OP, there are only 3 groups of people who need to squat, the bodybuilder does not qualify as belonging to one of those three groups, i.e. the Olympic weightlifter with his front squat; the powerlifter with his back squat, and the strongman with (perhaps) both.

Edit: just realised I haven't mentioned the above in the OP. I must've written it in another thread somewhere.
 
Last edited:
I will be increasing the reps for the leg extensions and leg curls by 100%, taking it up to 200 reps. I feel I can do with more muscle stimulus here, and if 200 reps is a bit much (as dictated by my recovery), I will reduce the numbers down to where I find the balance between maximum muscle stimulation, with just enough time to allow for recovery and growth.
 
Wow
What's your current layout Fadi? Apologies if I've missed it in this thread somewhere but I couldn't see it. Will you do more reps per set or just more sets of the same reps?
 
White_Lie said:
Wow
What's your current layout Fadi? Apologies if I've missed it in this thread somewhere but I couldn't see it. Will you do more reps per set or just more sets of the same reps?
Click to expand...
Great question mate. More than likely more sets of the same reps, in order to keep the same load. In other words, I'd be upping the volume by 100% to affect a more pronounced effect, and then reduce reps from there if need be. I simply do not wish to waste my time "looking" for an effect from the workout after a certain period have elapsed (like 36 hours for peak DOMS for example). Instead, I want the pain to meet me head on rather than me having to look for it. I believe by increasing the volume as I've mentioned, my legs would have no other choice but to "speak" to me, the same way the 200 reps of pullovers have (and are still very much) "speaking" to me right now. Thank you for your question sir, I most certainly appreciate it.
 


I am interested, but why would 200 be any better than say 60, 80, or 100?
 

can't disagree with that. I use lunges to target certain parts of lower body, notably glutes. For quads, I prefer steups and leg extensions.
 
spartacus said:
I am interested, but why would 200 be any better than say 60, 80, or 100?
Click to expand...
I don't fully get your question brother, but I'll attempt to answer it in few different ways if you will.

1. I am already doing 100 reps.

2. I've decided to add another 100 on top of that to elicit a response without having to wait forever for it by trying different reps gradually. In other words, I can add 25 reps extra on top of the 100 to make it 125 total, but then if and when that addition is not enough, I would have to add some more. All a while time is passing me by, not something I want to waste.

3. If 1 # 2 above did not answer your question, then perhaps this would. 200 reps is 100% more volume of work than 100 reps, and it's done abruptly. By that I mean I did not work up to it gradually, so if muscle damage was going to occur based on a sudden shock to my muscle fibers, it would most definitely occur with the 200 reps, minus the time wasting on the one hand, and the introduction of a shock tactic (due to me not having been gradually acclimatised) to such a high volume of work on the other hand.
 
I voiced my concern previously about the lack of big compound movements to stimulate a hormonal response in our aging bodies, but what about the lack of 'big load bearing exercises' to stimulate Bone density as we age @Fadi;

Sticking those big ass weights on your front or back has to be good for your bone density*. Missing out on that be a problem Fadi?

Thanks.


* I'm not talking about real big ass weights that may cause degenerative issues like RC.
 
I think "big arse load" is a relative term stiff.
i think as long as there is load, muscular contraction and growth and or maintenance bone density improves.

doing 100's of reps of a given exercise in a workout to me seems overkill and a tad risky but that's me.
 

So the 'bone density adaption' isn't in direct proportion to the load. Probably makes sense.

I just remembered reading that the very act of a muscle contracting is supposed to stimulate 'bone density adaption'.

Cheers.
 
You're forgetting: health.

Just being able to get off the couch, pick up kids or grandkids, walk up stairs, be less likely to need a hip or knee replacement, run around for a social soccer game without worrying about popping an ACL, and so on. Now, for health a person doesn't need to squat 200kg, and they sure as shit don't need to do 100 reps. But they do need to squat.

Some of you need to look beyond your own training and past the studies to see what most people need. Some of you get it, some don't.
 
Don't know too much but I think it's more of a manifold thing, the body just adapts the stress placed upon it.
 

concur.
 

I would agree squats done properly with good form are an excellent choice. However, lunges and step ups combined can also be a great option.
 
spartacus said:
I would agree squats done properly with good form are an excellent choice. However, lunges and step ups combined can also be a great option.
Click to expand...

This. Squats are not a pre-requsite for good health and mobility. Movement is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register