Vince taught that “bent-over squats” for most are not a true quad developer. He found that students would cheat and leverage themselves in the movement to produce a great butt, hip, and stomach expander.
However, Vince did acknowledge that in a few cases involving what he called “genetic superiors,” bent-over squats could be used. These individuals would have very small hips and short femurs that allowed them to squat in a fashion that allowed for quad development without overemphasizing the glutes.
Vince used Sergio Oliva as a good example of one who could get away with bent-over squats, but he felt most were not built to perform squats as a true quad developer.
Remember, when you widen your hips, you immediately give the appearance of narrower shoulders. A better quad developer would be exercises like hack or sissy squats.
In addressing the common tout and usage of the so called King… (anabolic back squat)is fine, so long as the trainer can keep his upper back upright throughout the entirety of the execution performed. This is the only direct way to place the mechanical stress on developing the tear drop quadriceps of the upper thighs in the most effiicient manner. I maintain that the major reason that most trainees favour the barbell back squat is simply 1) it’s more anabolic 2) it’s less hard to train than say, the side deltoid directly to see result as gratifying as stretching the tape measure 3) granted, if trained intensely, the quads will grow beyond one’s expectation (but the truth is, most do not train with the kind of intensity required to illicit such a growth with exception eg. Tom Platz). That’s enough for now other than to finish off in echoing the words of Vince in that to paraphrase, the physique should be sculpt that is pleasing to the human eye, by adding and subtracting in carefully placing the muscles.