So the actual question is “Are Partial Squats more effective for maximum quad hypertrophy?”?
No, they aren’t. Your reasoning makes no sense, goes against everything that the science i’ve seen suggests, as well as everything i’ve observed from both personal experience and successful trainees. I believe that you are wrong, and it seems like every other person on this thread also thinks that.
Do you have any of those cool “frontal thigh” cuts?
From my experience frontal thigh cuts are attained through diet and muscle control. Leg extensions are just an exercise. Muscle control will separate you from other competitors on the stage. Being able to make the sartorious (the longest muscle in the body) pop is really cool. That is done through muscle control.
Asking because I’m curious, how do you get that level of muscle control to make something like the Sartorius pop?
I found it accidently when practicing posing my thighs. I can only pose one leg at a time to get my sartorious to pop. I put my weight on the left leg and rotated the right thigh a few degrees that opens a slight inner thigh view. Then I try to raise my thigh, but don’t let your foot to leave the ground.
Here is a pic:
Some joker wasting time with hip belt partial deadlifts.
That’s pretty neat! Thanks!
I’m sure they were the major contributor to his size.
ok, you just won’t listen and think, enjoy the flawed outlook 
I’d be most interested if @Bane2 enjoys the results he is getting.
Agree, I can’t believe anyone (that can use a computer and type) could be this unwilling, or incapable of understanding ‘leverages’.
and even though a person can induce tension and ‘work’ at any muscle length, it’s the lack of understanding of ‘why’ we can use more load near the top that drives me nuts. It’s like trying to explain math to a stubbon 2 year old.
When I started lifting there was no science by USA to use as a reference. We looked at the results we were getting, and couldn’t care less about the science as to why what we did worked.
As I see it @Bane2 considers what he understands of what Arthur Jones has written is the final word on all things building muscle. He is not open to any contrary information. My question is “How are the results?” That is all that I was concerned about. Am I adding muscle? Am I getting stronger? Am I looking better?
Results matter for sure, I just cringe though when someone puts out something that is very wrong. Leverages aren’t even ‘science’ heavy stuff, just plain easy logic. Anyone that’s used a car jack, a crow bar etc should understand leverages.
Saying we are stronger in the top of a squat because it uses more muscle fibers makes my butt pucker it’s so freaken wrong lol
I don’t see why it is necessary to know “why.” (though it is simple leverage) What is important is should the strength difference be addressed. What can I do and does doing it help or hinder my goal?
knowing why prevents a person from making a wrong conclusion and training Rx if based on false premises.
Case in point, thinking the ‘muscles’ are stronger and we should ‘train’ just that part of the ROM, which will waste a lot of time, and might influence others to have a wrong understanding.
I do
so the reason for asking if i do is ?
Dude, you know. You’re obstinate, not stupid.
no dude. im correct here/ j reps are a thing .
