Squat stance advice needed

I'm a male and have relatively wide hips and a big butt, but my legs
are on the thin side. My goal is to become more proportional. When
doing squats, would a narrower stance be better for me? In my research
it seems that a wider stance will help work the hamstrings, which I
need, but also will work the hips and butt more, which I definitely
don't need. Thanks for any advice!

bryanck@gmail.com wrote:

> I'm a male and have relatively wide hips and a big butt, but my legs
> are on the thin side. My goal is to become more proportional. When
> doing squats, would a narrower stance be better for me? In my research
> it seems that a wider stance will help work the hamstrings, which I
> need, but also will work the hips and butt more, which I definitely
> don't need. Thanks for any advice!

Squat deep. Use a stance which allows you to go deep, and you'll be
fine. Squat in between your legs too, not back. If you have
problems with depth, try front squats, step-ups, Bulgarian split
squats and back lunges.

--
Andrzej Rosa

bryanck@gmail.com wrote:
> I'm a male and have relatively wide hips and a big butt, but my legs
> are on the thin side. My goal is to become more proportional. When
> doing squats, would a narrower stance be better for me? In my research
> it seems that a wider stance will help work the hamstrings, which I
> need, but also will work the hips and butt more, which I definitely
> don't need. Thanks for any advice!

Front squats will target the quadriceps.

But IMO thin legs and big butt indicates a fat, not a muscular, butt. So
I wouldnt worry about putting muscle on my butt if I were you.

"223rem" <223rem@sgbcglobal.com> schreef:

> Front squats will target the quadriceps.

> But IMO thin legs and big butt indicates a fat, not a muscular, butt.

Only in a system dominated by estrogens ;-O

--
Pete

<bryanck@gmail.com> schreef:

> I'm a male and have relatively wide hips and a big butt, but my legs
> are on the thin side. My goal is to become more proportional. When
> doing squats, would a narrower stance be better for me? In my research
> it seems that a wider stance will help work the hamstrings...

And the glutes!

IMO, the stance has nothing to do with hams. It has to do with the ratio of
hip flexion/knee flexion.

Seems to me that the typical PL style will shift more load to the hams, but
also the glutes. They work together. Yes, PLers seem to have a wide stance,
but that results in more hip flexion and less knee flexion on your way down.

What you are asking for is impossible. BOTH hams and glutes extend the hip
in squats and squat like movements. Develop one, and you develop the other.

You should do SLDLs instead. That will shift the load a little more towards
the hams. And leg curls. Dont forget leg curls.

> which I need, but also will work the hips and butt more, which I
> definitely
> don't need.

Having a good developed butt, wether you male or female, is ALWAYS a good
thing.

For whatever reason. Trust me.

--
Pete