Are Squats worth 3kg of quad mass??

My quads have a tendency to swell with squats, even at 5 reps.

During GPP I only did PC lifts, my legs became a lot more balanced, I was down at 77.5k and got a huge PR over an electronic 40m (4.51s).

Enter SPP and with the hamstring demands of top speed sprinting, and the MS phase to think about, I re-introduced full squats, 3x5, 2xweek and jump squats, 3x5 1xweek. I put on a KG a week since… straight on the quads. :mad:

So, is the overall strength stimulus of the squats worth the added quad mass??

I’m tempted to drop squats to 4x3 or 3x3 1xweek, and add another lift that stresses the quads less, but doesn’t burn out the hammies for speed (clean? Snatch grip deads?).


Just from my experience Snatch grip deads will absolutely fry your hams for speed work and I would only really include them in gpp. Goodmornings might be a bit less taxing in that area… I wouldn’t worry too much about the added mass especially given your events.

Deadlift would kill your nervous system Period! At my first university year, i was doing 500pd deadlift after speed totally crap idea.

Maintain the squat, but with much lower volume.


Mid season
Squat 2x6
Romanian deadlift 3x6
Leg curl 3x8

Power Cleans 3x5
squat 2x5
GHR 3x6-8

Drop some hamstrings volume as top speed volume increase. Uphill GPP would be the best time to crank-up the volume for hamstring work.

Thanks for the feedback guys… your thoughts matched mine as far as SPP lifting goes… I was just shocked at the mass gain, especially in an unfavourable area. 81kg is heavy for jumpers.

Forgot to mention a couple of things.

  1. The mass I gain from squats I usually shed back off within 2 weeks conversion weights (jump squat).

  2. I dropped my PC lifts in SPP, even though they served me well in GPP. Therefore i’m thinking of re-introducing RDL’s at 2-3x8-10. Would this fry the hams too much?

What are your thoughts on introducing cleans? Afterall the squats are there for overall strength stimulus and cleans do recruit more motor units. I have watched CF’s weights series and although he mentions you cannot go as far with cleans as with squats, for a jumper/short sprinter, smaller cycles are advantageous… so cleans could work well.

As far as squat volumes, the reason I was thinkin of 3’s is because of the drop in volume… I feel I need higher intensity to make up for it.

How about tightening your diet up a smidge. You can’t gain much muscle mass, especially at the rate you’re discussing, without at least some excess calories. This assumes of course you’re not obese, and with your sprint times I’m confident that I assume correctly in that regard.

I’ve got a superfast metabolism and am very slim. My diet is the same as it was in GPP while doing hypertrophy weights upper+lower (minus quads) and I gained no significant mass… it is purely the advent of squats that lead to the mass, and i’m pretty sure it’s water-weight… they fill like balloons! I feel calorie counting isn’t necessary… the body uses what it needs, so excess calories won’t increase muscle mass unless there is a hypertrophy stimulus, otherwise you will gain fat… which isn’t the case for me.

how wide are you when you squat?

40m in 4.51? electronic? you are the fastes guy on the Earth! :slight_smile: Even Ben Johnson ran only 4.67… :frowning:
I would like to know your PR over 60m or 100m…

I use a wide stance… hits the glutes more I believe.

Full electronic yes… Another guy I know, a 17m triple jumper, has gone 4.57. And Ben MUST have been faster than that, are you counting reaction time or something?? Some football guys got him at 3.7 for 40y i heard?!

My 100m and 60m times are not up to scratch as I have not done them after a full preparation. I ran 10.7 in 100 from a months training after an operation. 60m was 6.94 a couple of years ago, but I’m sure that’ll be a lot faster this indoor… I’m excited.

You’ve never run 4.51 electronic, unless it was with a fly, making it irrelevant to this discussion. Think about it–with .15 reaction that is 4.66, making your 40-60m split 2.28. That is nonsensical.

Exactly… I ran 60m in 6.96 el. and over 40y (36.5m) dash in the competition I ran only 4.78 el. (40m ap. 5.12) My friend who has 6.71 el. over 60m ran 40y 4.54 el. (40m ap.4.85). You can see that 4.51 is impossible…

just found this!

My 60 time was as a skinny teenager a couple of years ago, making it irrelevant to this discussion.

The electronic timing at my facility doesn’t lie, 0-20m - 2.52, 20-40m 1.99. = 4.51!!!

There are several athletes I train with in the 4.6-4.7 range.

What kind of electronic timing. Im not trying to say you arent fast because Ive followed you on here for a while but 4.51 does seem insanely fast.

Yes it does. There is something very very wrong with those times, even if reaction time is not included in the time.

The following times are all without reaction time, from Berlin 09 Finals. The first number is their 0-20m time, and the second number is their 20-40m time.

Bolt: 2.74, 1.75
Gay: 2.78, 1.78
Powell: 2.78, 1.80
Bailey: 2.79, 1.81

Fraser: 2.88, 1.95
Steward: 2.94, 1.96
Jeter: 2.98, 1.97
Campbell-Brown: 2.98, 1.97

As rainy said, the times/splits just do not add up. Its clear that whatever your timing method- its being “generous” at the start and not registering until after you have moved (hence my comment earlier about timing with a fly) since your 20m time would put you way way ahead of Bolt in his WR race.

You have all got it twisted! Sound like you guys have no practical experience timing short accelerations using laser gates? Race stats say one thing, laser gates may say another.

A month ago pretty much fresh out of plaster I ran 2.76 out of blocks ELECTRONIC… Matt Allias ran the same time also.

Steven Shalders (ex 17m T Jumper) ran 4.57 a few years back! So it’s no timing glitch!

I ran 4.91 electronic at 17 years old

I ran 4.79 electronic at 20 years old.

All were run through laser timing gates, starting 50cm behind the beam.

As soon as I’m all rehabbed I’ll post video evidence… And then try and organise a 20m race with Bolt…

Brett Morse (UK discus no1) has ran 4.8x electronic also. He’s done 1.5x over 10m… And he’s 18 stone…:rolleyes:

If you’d included that in your original specs, we wouldn’t have had this discussion. That’s a very pertinent point.

In your very first post, you said

PR over an electronic 40m (4.51s)

which sure makes it seem like FAT timing, rather than laser gates with a 0.5m lead in.

And what started the timer?

(By the way, those race stats I posted are from the IAAF Biomechanical Report in which they had cameras/lasers setup all over the stadium & track.)

Did you even read my posts?

“Full electronic” = / = .5m fly-in through gates… thats why everyone was making comments about you claiming 4.51 40m.