Is it better to have a stronger lower back or stronger legs?

[brentbyrd1998]

Just as the title says. whats your guys's opinions on thsi?
Me and my friend where arguing about it. In my opinion a lower back is better.

[TJP33]

both

[kwong486]

both

Pretty much. Why would you want to decide between them? Can't squat a **** load without a strong back. Can't deadlift a ****load without strong legs. Can't do a **** load on either without a strong core

From a practical standpoint...You'd get pushed over pretty well with a strong back and weak legs. On the same note, you'd get man handled with strong legs and a weak back.

[sooby]

both

[TailEnd]

If you ever achieve one and not the other then there's something wrong with your programming. They should never be mutually exclusive.

[Xndndn]

If you ever achieve one and not the other then there's something wrong with your programming. They should never be mutually exclusive.

This opey, this is beauty of lifting. You don't want one part of your body overpowering another.

[haikaldingle]

Just as the title says. whats your guys's opinions on thsi?
Me and my friend where arguing about it. In my opinion a lower back is better.

Definitely both dude! They go hand in hand especially when you're going for heavy sets of squats and deadlifts.

[wowter]

[magician27]

its better to have a strong body.

[davisj3537]

On spread. Greatness

[ironwill2008]

Is it better to have a stronger lower back or stronger legs?

Yes.

[Garage Rat]

To pick just one,low back.
You have to have a strong low back to squat or you will not be strong on the squat.
I agree with everyone both is best but a strong posterior chain,muscles on the back side(hamstrings,glutes,lumbars)will help you out greatly.

[Grizvok]

To pick just one,low back.
You have to have a strong low back to squat or you will not be strong on the squat.
I agree with everyone both is best but a strong posterior chain,muscles on the back side(hamstrings,glutes,lumbars)will help you out greatly.

He never said "strong back of your body" he said specifically strong lower back. So okay you can't squat heavy without a strong lower back...can you squat heavy without strong legs?

[SwinginSinatra]

Just as the title says. whats your guys's opinions on thsi?
Me and my friend where arguing about it. In my opinion a lower back is better.

Honestly, you would always want both. I know that's technically not an answer but you have to think of it in a practical aspect. Think of this for deadlifts. If you only had a developed lower back but no legs whatsoever, you would eventually destroy your body because your lower back would be doing the majority of the work and you also would instantaneously get a hernia. A proper way to deadlift utilizes the legs (specifically the hammies and glutes) immensely. Normally you use your legs first and then lock out using you lower back to pop out at the top. If you lost the leg portion, you would be putting all the tension on your lower back and practically kill yourself at heavy weights.

I personally would rather have stronger legs because even if you have an underdeveloped lower back, if you have a stronger front core (abdomen), it can somewhat equal out and compensate for the posterior portion. Either way though, its always best to have both.

[chazzy1864]

Oh I love either / or land that so many posters on here live in. Such a fun place to visit. The land where you're stuck using 1, 2, or 3 exercises for the rest of your life while only training 1 or 2 body parts exclusively.