Again, no one said do away with free weights. But using a cable machine for rows or delt raises after a bentrow, or a leg press after a BB squat, is a nice addition to your routine.KPj wrote:They're for people who are too lazy or intimidated to get on the floor and lift some real weights.
Yes. And it shows that the Smith Machine has some advantages. It's not evil.It's trying to determine a way of converting loads used on a SM to FW. Why do you need to take any more than that away from it?
Machines in general really, but the article with the biomechanical device showed that a smith machine squat with feet forward reduces force on the knees.I though it was the smith machine we were talking about in relation to knees, not the leg press.
Whoa, calm down. I wasn't attacking you. I was just stating that some of those studies are dry and whacky reads, but if you trudge through it, you can often get a useful bit of info. Usually that is.Pfff. In advance, Apologies to the moderators for taking this beyond a debate, but the street language thing really pi$$ed me off. What was the best part, then? Did the biomechanical model jump to attention and declare "johnny five, IS ALIVE".
And speaking of bad movies......Johnny Five?!?!?!
No, we're talking about machines in addition to free weights. And it all started with small machines such as a Lateral Delt Raise for isolation. When isolating the lateral delts, you use low weights (compared to bench and squat), so stabilizers aren't a big concern. Stabilizers only become a big issue on heavy compound lifts like a squat but not on a lateral raise. And this discussion doesn't say to exclude free weights at all, so your regular squat will hit your stabilizers.Lack of stabilisers isn't relevant to discussion on machines, or safety? What is relevant, then?
I don't see how adding a Lateral Delt Raise, or a Leg Press exercise on a machine is going to undermine your stabilizers? You're still squatting, dead lifting, benching, etc. How does adding some isolation work on a machine for your rear delts weaken your stabilizers?Stabilisers can get weak, or lazy. Then can fire at the wrong time during movement, causing a host of compensation. Machines ENFORCE this, not CAUSE it, ENFORCE it.
Ok.However, I agree 100% that if your training is based around compound movements, then the effects I just described are irrelevant.
If the study is correct, then risk of injury is very slim when squatting to parallel. Now, you have a choice, do you play it safe and only go to parallel, or do you roll the dice and go lower thus subjecting yourself to the “less safe” version of the squat.Again, your interpretation baffles me. Increases risk of injury, and subjecting you to injury are entirely different things.
The incredible thing is, I have.Find the great lifters, find the great coaches, and learn from them.
A man named Frederick C. Hatfield, a.k.a. Dr. Squat, says that Smith Machine Squats are ok. More over, his ideal squat is the Safety Squat which utilizes a funky bar and a rack with handles for you to hold onto (nice toy). Certainly not the “old school” straight bar on the back grind.
Here’s what he has to say.
http://staff.washington.edu/griffin/dr_squat.txtSafety Squats: The "safety squat bar" (sometimes called the
"Hatfield Bar") is, in my opinion, the safest method of squatting because
the shear on knees and low back are reduced significantly. The
accompanying sidebar compares safety squats with the conventional methods
Smith Machine Squats: Assuming that the machine is bolted to the
floor (most are not) and has a safety device (most do not), it's a pretty
safe alternative to conventional or safety squats.
Even more interesting than that, good ole Dr. Squat actually gave his stamp of approval to a weight training machine. A machine! Not free weights. Wow. Would you say Dr. Squat is too lazy to lift some real weight?
And I’m sure some of you know of Vince Gironda who used all sorts of machines and the incredibly intense 8x8 honest workout routine with incredible and undeniable results.