Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:agree this sounds fishy as I was told more women are likely to have strong 'front sides' instead of back, which is often ignored by exercises (e.g., stronger quadriceps, instead of hamstrings; strong front abs instead of back muscles). I was advised to strive for 'compound' movements which engage multiple portions of the body at one time.
lol, it "sounds fishy" bc you personally were "told" women were "likely"???
i believe you OP
i also have very (naturally?) strong hamstrings. and prob normal quads
not sure why folks think this is so weird.
NP here. I also think this is really weird. The OP said she has spent years(!) working on her quads and not had any progress. That sounds very ridiculous to me. I could see somebody saying I’ve been working on them for a month and not had progress and asking for help, but years?! You don’t find that odd?
I used to have crazy strong hamstrings in my 20s from decades of sprinting I did each week playing soccer. Now 50 myself, I think OP would have to be engaging in sometime of activity that would be keeping her hamstrings so strong.
OP – can you explain more about how you’ve assessed or determine that your hamstrings are so strong and your quads are so weak? Maybe if you give more detail we can give helpful responses.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:agree this sounds fishy as I was told more women are likely to have strong 'front sides' instead of back, which is often ignored by exercises (e.g., stronger quadriceps, instead of hamstrings; strong front abs instead of back muscles). I was advised to strive for 'compound' movements which engage multiple portions of the body at one time.
lol, it "sounds fishy" bc you personally were "told" women were "likely"???
i believe you OP
i also have very (naturally?) strong hamstrings. and prob normal quads
not sure why folks think this is so weird.
Anonymous wrote:agree this sounds fishy as I was told more women are likely to have strong 'front sides' instead of back, which is often ignored by exercises (e.g., stronger quadriceps, instead of hamstrings; strong front abs instead of back muscles). I was advised to strive for 'compound' movements which engage multiple portions of the body at one time.
Anonymous wrote:Look up quad dominant vs hamstring dominant. Most people are quad dominant.
You can be hamstring dominant with flexible hamstrings, though not very likely. Are you very flexible in general.
How much can you deadlift and squat? Is there a huge difference?
This is OP. I work out on machines since I have had wrist issues the past few years. The leg curl (not sure the name) that works the hamstring I can easily rep on the second to heaviest weight-- not sure how many pounds, but it's more than most men. For my quads, the leg extension machine, I lift at the second lightest. Lighter than the old ladies. I stretch most days and am pretty flexible for my age, but nothing exceptional.
I never thought twice about the imbalance until I started working out with DH recently, and he noticed and commented on it. I am going to google hamstring dominant. Thank you.
Anonymous wrote:I am having such a hard time imagining what "ridiculously strong hamstrings" look and feel like!
I don't have advice but have you considered seeing a trainer? There might be specific equipment that can help you isolate the quads more.