ExRx.net

Exercise Prescription on the Net
It is currently Tue Sep 30, 2014 2:59 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:20 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3986
Chris_A wrote:
KPj wrote:
I don't think anyone said they were ineffective... As far as I could tell, the general thought was 'they have their place'. Or, they are not 'as effective' as free weights.

Ironman says they are "utterly pointless" and a waste of time. I'd call that ineffective, wouldn't you?

Here’s a look at what Ironman has had to say.

Quote:
But I don't use machines because they suck.

I have to disagree on the smith squat. It puts excessive sheering force on the knees.

Like I said, bad for the knees. It locks you into a bad ROM and it takes out stabilizers.

Oh well golly gee, you can put your feet 12 inches forward and f*** your knees up.

How utterly pointless.


Yet, the studies I’ve shown indicate that a smith squat with feet forward REDUCES force on the knees. Further, Smith Squats have been shown to be more effective for some trainees.

If he can't prove they are utterly pointless, and concedes they are effective for gains, then there is nothing left to discuss since I've already said 100 times over that machines are a nice ADDITION to free weights for variety and special work.


Look here dumb ass. Don't put words into my mouth. The "utterly pointless" was right after the part about putting your feet 12 inches out and f***ing your knees up. I said machines have limited application, and the free weights are better. So you knock that load of bollocks off right now. You're not fooling anyone.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:51 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3986
What a lame argument. "see machines aren't totally worthless." Free weights are still better so I'm still right. And you keep bouncing back and forth between them being better and a must for every bodybuilder, to something that has some use and it isn't totally useless. I really just wonder which one you mean.

My position on the other hand hasn't changed. I've always maintained free weights are better, machines have limited applications, I don't use them hardly at all and smith machines are likely to be dangerous.

the knee thing? limited rom? Pattern overload? center of gravity? That's not good enough? I guess those just aren't things I look for when training.

Or maybe it's cognitive dissonance.

I am starting to think smith machines cause problems with reading comprehension too. I'll have to test that hypothesis sometime.


Of course we are forgetting the original argument. The one where I said you don't need machines for even an advanced bodybuilding routine. You could put them in, but they aren't needed. That is as easy to prove as the fact that bodybuilders were around before machines. They got just as big too (comparing natural to natural of course, since there were no steroids in the early days).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 4:08 am 
Offline
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:49 am
Posts: 3474
lol, that study definitely applies to steve austin. Maybe they used him?

Chris_A wrote:
You can't do it to near the same degree as on a smith machine. It's not possible to push your feet 10 or more inches forward in front of you and lean back into the bar with a regular barbell. But, there are other ways to work glutes and hams. Maybe even better ways. The point was, the Smith Machine can be a handy tool, and biomechanical models show the Smith "Glute Squat" is easy on the knees and will not F*** your knees up.


One study using a model of a human knee, created by humans who don't fully understand the human body yet, doesn't mean anything against all the other info out there opposing it.

There's loads of better ways to work your glutes and hams, that's why you've had so much grief from recommending it. I accept a Smith Machine may 'have it's place', but the thought and site of people squatting on it makes me cringe.

When you do a smith machine squat with feet out, what angle will your shins be at when your 'in the hole'? I'm genuinely asking. When you box squat with proper form, your shins will be around perpendicular. Some guys with very strong posterior chains can box squat to a level where there shins go further back then perpendicular (the opposite direction of 'knees over toes'). I would be interested to compare shin angles on a smith squat w/ feet out to a box squat performed properly. Or even an experienced PL free squating because the angle there shins are at when the free squat is not far off perpendicular. So whilst you can'tmove your feet forward in a free squat, you CAN move the rest of your body back, hence, 'sit back', when you squat.

It sounds to me like you don't get what I mean by squatting with the glutes and hams. I would advise you to learn the box squat, it's not just a PL exercise. Cressey has said in an article that next to DL's the box squat trains the posterior chain more than anything else. I hope I don't sound like a smart a$$. I thought the quads were the biggest squatting muscles up until about 18 months ago. And it probably took me about 4 months to finally learn and get the strength to 'sit back' in a squat.

Chris_A wrote:
See, that's the interesting thing about a debate like this. If you rely on a well respected coach/trainer that happens to agree with a less than accepted approach, then he gets discredited. That's the pick and chose thing I was talking about.


I agree. I think there's probably a study and/or article that will back up just about any point, be it a stupid point or a good point... You just need to use your own judgement and that will always lead to debate, and that's probably why we're all here.

In that particular example, though, I feel it's a 'no brainer'. When it comes to something like the smith machine, I think that Dr Squat quote is the first time I personally have seen anyone well respected (as a coach, and not just a lifter) say it's any good. It's also part of a product description.

When one person makes a claim that goes against what most would advise, you need to question it, whether it's Dr Squat, Eric Cressey, or Poliquin. Same with studies, one well carried out study means nothing in my opinion. There's too many variables to rely on just one or two, you need a lot. Either that or one or two studies, some good coaches who advise the same, and even better, personal experience before you make a judgement.

Chris_A wrote:
So, Poliquin, a well respected authority in training, says that a Leg Extension machine has its uses, he advocates a gunz day to build up your show muscles, and he pushes supplements. He’s starting to sound like that Joe guy. I like him!! lol


No one was talking about leg extensions, and no one criticised body part splits. It's only stupid body part splits that get criticised on here and normally beginners who do body part splits.....


Chris_A wrote:
What I meant by hypocrisy is how some people rely on certain gym lore and totally disregard others. They pick the parts they like such as how to squat, what rep range to use, etc, and discredit parts they don't like such as isolation exercises, machine use, multiple exercise per body part, etc.


Well, I don't know who does this, but me personally, I recommend and use all rep ranges. I squat every way - box squat, PL squat, Anderson squats, from pins, front squats, OH squats, Full deep OL type squats, close stance squats.

I use anything from 8 x 1 to 4 x 15. Most people, beginners especially and most people who ask for advise on this board do quarter squats in the same rep range they have used since they started. My biggest recommendation is something different. The only people i've seen who you could say don't need any posterior chain work are the guys in the local PL club, other than that, you can pretty much encourage anyone to hit the posterior chain more. It may not seem like it, but ALL of my recommendations are general recommendations, you just can't get specific over the net. Whether it's strength or posture related, I basically recommend more rows, DLs, and squats, and single leg work - posterior chain and external rotation focus. You can't go wrong with that for 99% of people, it's common sense.

There's also a common misconception that weight lifting = bodybuilding. Some people who lift weights use a body part split and they're not even interesting in bodybuilding, or getting huge because it's the only way they know how to train. I know about 3-4 MMA guys who train like body builders between fights because they think that's the only way to bulk up. Well, they'll bulk up all right - they'll get the job done. But will they have any sport specific carryover? They could easily get the job done AND get some carryover if they trained differently. BBing is a sport in itself and should be treated as such. A beginner should not do a body part split, should limit isolation exercises and machines use, and concentrate on building a foundation with the big lifts. It's normally beginners who ask the question in the first place.

Advice, regardless of the goals, should depend largely if not fully on experience. Body part splits get recommended too much, too often, not hear but just about every where else. It doesn't make body part splits bad.

KPj


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:14 pm 
Offline
Associate Member
Associate Member

Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:13 pm
Posts: 407
Ironman wrote:
Look here dumb ass. Don't put words into my mouth. The "utterly pointless" was right after the part about putting your feet 12 inches out and f***ing your knees up. I said machines have limited application, and the free weights are better. So you knock that load of bollocks off right now. You're not fooling anyone.


Oh how wonderfully intelligent. I can see you have completely lost the little grasp you had on an intelligent conversation and are resulting to silly ass caveman taunts. How preschool. I thought you were older than that.

I'm done. You hate machines, probably because you don’t know how to use them in a varied routine. You are really coming off as nothing more than a poser. You claim to be a serious bodybuilder but lack the knowledge of a hardcore veteran. You say free weights are better? Duh. Who said they weren’t. The point is, are machines a worthwhile addition. The answer is a resounding yes for those in the know. Any seasoned BB vet knows this. Sorry you missed the boat.

I’ve presented the science you wanted, and you were silent. I presented articles from renowned and respected coaches and trainers that say machines are useful and effective, and you are silent. Apparently, in face of all I've supplied for your reading pleasure, your silence shows you are the one with a problem with reading comprehension. Hooked On Phonics anyone? You’ve no leg to stand on and simply resort to calling me a “dumb ass”? Well you can kiss my dumb ass and my F***ing knees to boot.

You've reduced this to a sandbox name calling event. Great. This thread is yours, I’m out bright guy. Have the last word if you want.


Last edited by Chris_A on Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:33 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:57 pm 
Offline
Associate Member
Associate Member

Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 3:13 pm
Posts: 407
KPj wrote:
There's loads of better ways to work your glutes and hams, that's why you've had so much grief from recommending it. I accept a Smith Machine may 'have it's place', but the thought and site of people squatting on it makes me cringe.


Bodybuilding Article:
Quote:
They [regular squats] also develop the upper thighs too much while not building the lower thighs, creating what he called turnip-shaped thighs. Vince [Gironda] felt that sissy squats, Smith-machine squats done with the feet forward, and hack squats developed more aesthetically pleasing leg shape and mass while minimizing growth in the glutes, hips and waistline.

Smith-Machine Squats With Your Feet Six To 12 Inches Apart And Forward


http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/im2.htm

Also, this month's Flex magazine had an article on EMG studies [Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research] showing that forward placement works glutes and hams more, as well as a photo shoot with Toney Freeman doing feet forward ass to the grass SM squats. And he's got some of the best wheels in the IFBB.

From Jim Stoppani:

Quote:
A great time to do Smith machine squats is before you transition to the hamstring portion of a leg workout. For set one, place your feet directly under your shoulders to target your quads. With each successive set, move your feet forward about four inches. For the last set, place your heels about 18-20 inches in front of the bar to target the hamstrings and glutes. Follow this set with hamstring and/or glute exercises such as stiff-leg deadlifts and leg curls.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... 57906/pg_2

Heavier SM Squats (for occasional use or solo safety)
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m ... 33232/pg_1


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:39 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3986
Chris_A wrote:
Ironman wrote:
Look here dumb ass. Don't put words into my mouth. The "utterly pointless" was right after the part about putting your feet 12 inches out and f***ing your knees up. I said machines have limited application, and the free weights are better. So you knock that load of bollocks off right now. You're not fooling anyone.


Oh how wonderfully intelligent. I can see you have completely lost the little grasp you had on an intelligent conversation and are resulting to silly ass caveman taunts. How preschool. I thought you were older than that.

I'm done. You hate machines, probably because you don’t know how to use them in a varied routine. You are really coming off as nothing more than a poser. You claim to be a serious bodybuilder but lack the knowledge of a hardcore veteran. You say free weights are better? Duh. Who said they weren’t. The point is, are machines a worthwhile addition. The answer is a resounding yes for those in the know. Any seasoned BB vet knows this. Sorry you missed the boat.

I’ve presented the science you wanted, and you were silent. I presented articles from renowned and respected coaches and trainers that say machines are useful and effective, and you are silent. Apparently, in face of all I've supplied for your reading pleasure, your silence shows you are the one with a problem with reading comprehension. Hooked On Phonics anyone? You’ve no leg to stand on and simply resort to calling me a “dumb ass”? Well you can kiss my dumb ass and my F***ing knees to boot.

You've reduced this to a sandbox name calling event. Great. This thread is yours, I’m out bright guy. Have the last word if you want.


You're the one that went below the belt with the quote cut and paste. It was like Fox news.

I said nothing about your "science" because a lot was junk science, and you just ignore the original argument and try to restate my point in your rebuttal, which is another cheap dirty trick. The other reason I said nothing was KPJ already said everything I would have said. I saw no reason to repeat him.

I have more than my fair share of intelligence actually. Enough to not go along with all the bro talk nonsense.

I know how to use machines. I started with that. I have talked to other bodybuilders who also don't use machines. None of that crap is a must for bodybuilding. It is just dogma.

This guy shares my philosophy. He is one of the main coaches I learned from.

http://www.alwyncosgrove.com/philosophy
http://www.alwyncosgrove.com/SevenHabits.html

This guy is a lot like the one above.

http://www.t-nation.com/readTopic.do?id=459341


Besides that machines are partially a scam. Convince people they need them just so you can sell the expensive things.


So I guess all the old timers aren't real bodybuilders then. So I guess Reg Park, Jack Lalane and Steve Reeves weren't real bodybuilders because they didn't have any machines to use?

I still have yet to see any reason why machines don't just have limited application as I've been arguing. Lets not forget the very very beginning. That delt machine is super lame.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:42 am 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3986
And for the record I didn't lock it. Tim must have gotten sick of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 12:52 pm 
Offline
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Posts: 3129
Location: Va Beach, Va
You're right, it's way over the top,
Tim


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6


All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group