I’m not sure about why there is so much preaching against quad dominance. My best guess is just that the people who that is directed towards (and the vast majority of athletes) are so quad dominant that they are out of balance. By learning how to sit back and engage their hips, they are tapping into some very powerful muscles that they previously were not making much use of, and bringing their bodies into balance by learning how to use their hips and quads together.
The thing is, a guy like me who is completely untrained comes along, and I’m reading all this “sit back, learn how to use your glutes and hams” information. Only my quads aren’t strong at all, so I build up the OPPOSITE imbalance. Strong ass posterior chain and weak quads. So now, I have to FORCE myself to feel like I am squatting in a “quad dominant” way, when in reality all I am doing is working to balance out my quads with my posterior chain. Overall, my goal is to sit straight down, but with my feet wide enough so I get a lot of hip drive, AND i’m able to load my quads and use them as well. Balance is key.
Also, there is the whole aspect that powerlifting is a sport, and the squat that moves the most weight is the squat that wins competitions. I think that is a big part of the reason for the SUPER wide, sit way back squat. It works best for geared lifters, and even a lot of raw lifters. It reduces the distance the weight has to be moved, and if you can get really strong with that sort of squat you are goign to kick ass at powerlifting, which is why I think it is preached so often.
However, like I said in my earlier post, while I absolutely want to be the best powerlifter/squatted that I can be, I also want to be as healthy and athletic as possible, and I felt that the “sit way back wide squat just to paralell” was taking away from my flexibility and overall athleticism. I know that, with a more moderate stance, deeper squat that is a medium between an olympic squat and a powerlifting squat, I can still get insanely strong, and I just think it is a better option for me. In the end, like everything to do with squatting, it comes down to personal preference. There are a lot of great ways to become big, strong, and awesome at squatting. [/quote]
In my opinion Louie/Tate/Westside has fucked up a lot raw powerlifters. Superwide squatting ala Chuck seems to be great for multiply squatting, but NOT for raw or single-ply squatting. It seems that nobody wants to say anything bad about Louie&co, because he seems to be a very helpful&stand-up person, but I think it’s downright misinformation to NOT stress the difference between multiply squat technique and raw/singleply. Of course, most lifters will figure it our eventually.[/quote]
Well, yes and no IMO. Louie has said some crazy out there things, but on the flip side of the same coin a ton, and I mean a TON of people misread, misunderstand, and just plain fuck up a lot of what he HAS said. So it goes both ways. The amount of people out there doing shit that they really never tried to understand is crazy and that’s their fault, not his. He’s been using this system for like 30 years and getting people really strong with it, raw or not. I think it is fair to say he knows it inside and out and that most people learning about it do not take the time to study it as they should in order to understand it fully. They want one side fits all–all you need to do is take a look at the “Westside Methods Thread” to see all the depth you can get into.
Also I am not a fan of superwide raw squatting, but some people really swear by it. I think you can squat moderately wide raw, but superwide gets potentially injurious on the hips.
A third thing ot keep in mind is that some of Louie’s strong opinion might be traced back to his attempt to “move the pendulum back” i.e. persuade a lot of people of the importance of the posterior chain when too many people are doing dumbass shit that doesn’t even count as a squat. The pendulum analogy (90s = fat is DEATH, now carbs are DEATH, one side swings to the other) I believe is apt. It’s not that he was so wrong as much as that he was fighting the inertia of the “weight culture” and now it’s all swung back to the other end.
All that being said, I think NK you hit the nail on the head with your first paragraph–there are, still, tons and tons of people who have weak posterior chains from improper training or a variety of terrible mobility problems or technical problems. I think this is more of a problem of understanding “intended audiences” than what is actually being preached. As for your circumstance, you’re probably right about not being quad dominant from being untrained. On the other hand if you’re a PL, then going too deep is bad for competition numbers. You could train deep, and then practice parallel for competition purposes leading into a meet. This solves both problems