Seated Chest Press vs Smith Machine Bench Press

Burr wrote:
> "rev" <mfw RemoveThis @volkmer.biz>
>> It isn't about balancing *skills* imo. It's about letting the
>> supporting/stabilizing tendons etc etc become stronger as well. Strong
>> muscles with weak supporting tissue leads to injury. You should know this
>> Andrzej.
>>
>> Cheers
>> --
>> Bob Volkmer
>
> But Bob,
> If you don't use them they won't get any better.
> If you can't control the weight then use less weight until you can, the
> Smith Machine will make your control weaker.
>
> Burr
>
>
Uhm, *confused* look. I thought that is what I was intimating. Apart
from a very few things, I agree with the statement (which I think Keith
made some years back) that the best use of the Smith is as a towel rack.


--
Bob Volkmer

Tom Anderson wrote:

> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>
>> rev wrote:
>>
>>>> Most of this stability hype is pure nonsense. Look at it that way - it doesn't
>>>> scale at all. If unstable movements are best (for whatever reason) then one
>>>> should strive to do some circus stuff, when lifting toothpicks is a challenge
>>>> only the best can attempt. On the other hand doing smith machine squats, like
>>>> strongmen do in competition, would be totally pointless.
>>>>
>>>> We do heavy resistance exercises to train muscles, not to train our balancing
>>>> skills.
>>>
>>> It isn't about balancing *skills* imo. It's about letting the
>>> supporting/stabilizing tendons etc etc become stronger as well.
>>
>> And I called this hype.
>
> Why?
>
> Your point about it not scaling is nonsense. There's an optimum, where you
> train the main muscles and their stabilisers in the right ratio to be able
> to lift things safely. Train your main muscles more, and you risk injury,
> or the inability to lift anything that's not a Smith machine bar, or an
> olympic bar sitting on a rack;

And there is a ton of good research or at least anecdotal evidence
showing this happening? Because if there isn't, we must call it
a speculation. On the other hand, we have plenty of examples of
imbalanced muscular development which resulted from training with
unstable free weight benching or doing gymnastics. It lead to
injuries, too.

(Actually I think that dumbbell bench is worse than barbell bench.
You can't do that "pull the bar apart" thingy with dumbbells.)

> train the stabilisers more and you just
> won't have the power to move things that you'd be able to stabilise.

But what are those "stabilizers"? Let's talk squat, like we started
here. At squat most people fail forward, so "stabilizers" should be
able to move the bar backwards. Well, you do it by hip extension. Looks
like prime movers to me...

> If
> you were eating only steak, and i said you should eat some potatoes as
> well, would you scoff, saying that it doesn't scale because you can't
> survive on potatoes alone?

Why, you can survive well enough on machines alone, and you can't do
pretty much anything at the extreme spectrum of instability. Machines
scale fine, bosu-balls do not. We are talking here about an analogy,
where one approach taken to extreme is proved to work beyond any doubt,
and a competing approach taken to extremes doesn't even have to be
proved to not work, so there is a difference and we should be able to
guess what is "the point" and what isn't.

> As for competitions - what? I'm not aware of a significant form of
> competition based on Smith machines.

Strongmen have at least three competitions which are pretty much machine
based gym lifts. Viking press, machine squat and machine deadlift.
(Beside that you have machine-like Conan's wheel, Fingal fingers and car
deadlift/wheelbarrow, and probably something I forgot.)

> Powerlifters and olympic lifters lift
> barbells, and there's a family of strongman sports based on lifting rocks,
> cabers, tractors, and god knows what, which is the exact opposite of the
> Smith machine.

No, it's not. Watch it sometimes. It's good fun.

>>> Strong muscles with weak supporting tissue leads to injury. You should
>>> know this Andrzej.
>>
>> I know that machines can be dangerous. Take motorcycles for example...
>
> Guns, Andrzej, you mean guns.

I never lost a friend to a gun. They seem harmless enough, especially if
nobody has them.

--
Andrzej Rosa