|
Next: Weight Lifting Equipment: Barbell Bent Over Row Form: Does This Look Right?
|
| Author |
Message |
External
Since: Apr 26, 2005
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 1) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 11:14 am
Post subject: Smith Machines
Archived from groups: misc>fitness>weights (more info?)
|
|
|
I'm probably going to stir up a hornets nest here but I want to grab
some opinions on Smith machines, I purchased a Body Solid Smith
machine for the sole reason that I train alone and things were getting
dodgy with free weights. Now the rub, I've read opinions that state it
is easier to Bench press 100kg on a smith machine than it is with free
weights and I just have to dispute this through my own experience, I
can Bench at least as much if not slightly more using free weights
than I do on the Smith machine. I believe that the inability to create
the arc that you naturally do with free weights actually hampers the
Smith machine press. Of course you can be more cavalier with the Smith
machine and attempt the second unachievable rep. Any comments welcome.
Ralph. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 | |
External
Since: May 01, 2005
Posts: 28
|
(Msg. 2) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:19 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Ralph Porter" <ralph.porter DeleteThis @ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:572cb9f8.0504260714.4b6620@posting.google.com...
> I'm probably going to stir up a hornets nest here
A safe prediction.
> I can Bench at least as much if not slightly more using free weights
> than I do on the Smith machine. I believe that the inability to create
> the arc that you naturally do with free weights actually hampers the
> Smith machine press. Of course you can be more cavalier with the Smith
> machine and attempt the second unachievable rep. Any comments welcome.
Everybody's body is different I guess, but you're the first person
I've heard of who finds that. Anyone I've ever talked to who's gone
from smith machines for bench or overhead presses to free weights
usually finds they have to significantly lower the weight they're lifting.
Its a pretty common occurence at the local gym ... often notified by a
"can someone help me here" coming from the bench area.
And most have to lower the weight even more if they go to using
dumbells instead of bars ... which leads me to my
suggestion. At home I bench dumbells instead of the bar. Won't
work if you're massively strong (ie the heavily easily available are
150 lbs) but its very safe, and you can go to failure without a spotter
so long as you have a good floor under you ... its very easy to
drop them safely to the side when your arms give out. I made a
couple of stands (though a couple strong chairs would work as well)
to make it easier to get the weights into position.
Good for
stabilizing muscles too.
-JS2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 13, 2005
Posts: 45
|
(Msg. 3) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 3:27 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
I've found that I use a little less weight on the Smith machine because
of the slight friction of the track. Thus overall it's slightly harder
to use than free weights. Overall I think the Smith Machine's an
advantage in terms of training to failure, the ability to be more
cavalier in training, as mentioned. No small thing. Sure, a rack should
allow the same, but in actual use i find the fixed motion and lower
risk makes the Smith Machine superior for getting those last reps out. >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 24, 2005
Posts: 1423
|
(Msg. 4) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 6:22 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Ralph Porter" <ralph.porter DeleteThis @ntlworld.com> wrote
> I'm probably going to stir up a hornets nest here but I want to grab
> some opinions on Smith machines, I purchased a Body Solid Smith
> machine for the sole reason that I train alone and things were getting
> dodgy with free weights.
The Body Solid Power Cage would have cost less, solved the same problem, and
been more useful.
> Now the rub,
Desitin cream or talcum powder.
> I've read opinions that state it
> is easier to Bench press 100kg on a smith machine than it is with free
> weights and I just have to dispute this through my own experience, I
> can Bench at least as much if not slightly more using free weights
> than I do on the Smith machine. I believe that the inability to create
> the arc that you naturally do with free weights actually hampers the
> Smith machine press. Of course you can be more cavalier with the Smith
> machine and attempt the second unachievable rep. Any comments welcome.
Your experience differs from most others. What anatomical anomolies do you
have to account for this? Hump back? Vestigial third arm from your partially
formed twin?
David >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 26, 2005
Posts: 3
|
(Msg. 5) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 6:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Most people, including myself, prefer free weights. However, it's
really just a matter of slowly getting stronger and increasing the
amount of weight that you use at each workout. If you're benching 135
lbs. on the smith machine now and you work your way up to 405 lbs. your
chest is going to be a lot bigger regardless of whether you used free
weights or not. >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 26, 2005
Posts: 440
|
(Msg. 6) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 6:35 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
On 2005-04-26, David Cohen <sammiesdad.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Your experience differs from most others. What anatomical anomolies do you
> have to account for this? Hump back? Vestigial third arm from your partially
> formed twin?
And if he has a spare arm, couldn't he "just" do a two-armed bench press, and
spot himself with the third ?
Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 09, 2005
Posts: 229
|
(Msg. 7) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 7:25 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
David Cohen wrote:
> "Ralph Porter" <ralph.porter DeleteThis @ntlworld.com> wrote
>> I'm probably going to stir up a hornets nest here but I want to grab
>> some opinions on Smith machines, I purchased a Body Solid Smith
>> machine for the sole reason that I train alone and things were
>> getting dodgy with free weights.
>
> The Body Solid Power Cage would have cost less, solved the same
> problem, and been more useful.
>
>> Now the rub,
>
> Desitin cream or talcum powder.
>
>> I've read opinions that state it
>> is easier to Bench press 100kg on a smith machine than it is with
>> free weights and I just have to dispute this through my own
>> experience, I can Bench at least as much if not slightly more using
>> free weights than I do on the Smith machine. I believe that the
>> inability to create the arc that you naturally do with free weights
>> actually hampers the Smith machine press. Of course you can be more
>> cavalier with the Smith machine and attempt the second unachievable
>> rep. Any comments welcome.
>
> Your experience differs from most others. What anatomical anomolies
> do you have to account for this? Hump back? Vestigial third arm from
> your partially formed twin?
I can't squat as much to proper depth in a smith machine as with free
weights. Though that's because my back gets pushed out of place and hurts in
a smith machine.
Peter >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 26, 2005
Posts: 16
|
(Msg. 8) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 7:26 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Ralph Porter <ralph.porter RemoveThis @ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I'm probably going to stir up a hornets nest here but I want to grab
> some opinions on Smith machines, I purchased a Body Solid Smith
> machine for the sole reason that I train alone and things were getting
> dodgy with free weights. Now the rub, I've read opinions that state it
> is easier to Bench press 100kg on a smith machine than it is with free
> weights and I just have to dispute this through my own experience, I
> can Bench at least as much if not slightly more using free weights
> than I do on the Smith machine. I believe that the inability to create
> the arc that you naturally do with free weights actually hampers the
> Smith machine press. Of course you can be more cavalier with the Smith
> machine and attempt the second unachievable rep. Any comments welcome.
How long ago did you start using Smith?
The reason for freewaight bench to be easier for you (for now)
might be just that you're not fully accustomed to the Smith yet.
After all, the movement is slightly different. Wait a little --
and your Smith press will overtake plain one. IMHO.
---
Signature has been removed to save disk space. >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: May 01, 2005
Posts: 28
|
(Msg. 9) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 7:26 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"AleX" <archerX.RemoveThis@whicheverX.org> wrote in message
news:d4m86h$18oi$1@unknown.whichever.org...
> Ralph Porter <ralph.porter.RemoveThis@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm probably going to stir up a hornets nest here but I want to grab
>> some opinions on Smith machines, I purchased a Body Solid Smith
>> machine for the sole reason that I train alone and things were getting
>> dodgy with free weights. Now the rub, I've read opinions that state it
>> is easier to Bench press 100kg on a smith machine than it is with free
>> weights and I just have to dispute this through my own experience, I
>> can Bench at least as much if not slightly more using free weights
>> than I do on the Smith machine. I believe that the inability to create
>> the arc that you naturally do with free weights actually hampers the
>> Smith machine press. Of course you can be more cavalier with the Smith
>> machine and attempt the second unachievable rep. Any comments welcome.
>
> How long ago did you start using Smith?
>
> The reason for freewaight bench to be easier for you (for now)
> might be just that you're not fully accustomed to the Smith yet.
> After all, the movement is slightly different. Wait a little --
> and your Smith press will overtake plain one. IMHO.
If you're just trying for muscle mass Smith's might be okay. They're
not useful if you lift to enchance sport performance, because you
don't develop the stabalizing muscles. This is especially true for
squats, but also true for the bench press ...
-JS2 >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 24, 2005
Posts: 1423
|
(Msg. 10) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:04 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Donovan Rebbechi" <abuse DeleteThis @aol.com> wrote
> David Cohen <sammiesdad DeleteThis @earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Your experience differs from most others. What anatomical anomolies do
>> you
>> have to account for this? Hump back? Vestigial third arm from your
>> partially
>> formed twin?
>
> And if he has a spare arm, couldn't he "just" do a two-armed bench press,
> and
> spot himself with the third ?
No. The vestigial arm has just enough strength to fondle himself while
lifting.
Wouldn't a hump backed dwarf win every bench press competitiopn, just by
showing up?
David >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 08, 2005
Posts: 2025
|
(Msg. 11) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:04 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"David Cohen" <sammiesdad.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:Kwube.13210$sp3.10395@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Donovan Rebbechi" <abuse.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote
>> David Cohen <sammiesdad.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Your experience differs from most others. What anatomical anomolies
>>> do you
>>> have to account for this? Hump back? Vestigial third arm from your
>>> partially
>>> formed twin?
>>
>> And if he has a spare arm, couldn't he "just" do a two-armed bench
>> press, and
>> spot himself with the third ?
>
>
> No. The vestigial arm has just enough strength to fondle himself while
> lifting.
>
> Wouldn't a hump backed dwarf win every bench press competitiopn, just
> by showing up?
Is that one of those "if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it
...." kind of questions?
Steve "questions only" Freides
http://www.kbnj.com
> David
> >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 11, 2005
Posts: 599
|
(Msg. 12) Posted: Tue Apr 26, 2005 8:04 pm
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
"Steve Freides" <steve RemoveThis @fridayscomputer.com> wrote in message
news:3d7b5mF6o0fulU1@individual.net...
> "David Cohen" <sammiesdad RemoveThis @earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:Kwube.13210$sp3.10395@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "Donovan Rebbechi" <abuse RemoveThis @aol.com> wrote
>>> David Cohen <sammiesdad RemoveThis @earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Your experience differs from most others. What anatomical anomolies do
>>>> you
>>>> have to account for this? Hump back? Vestigial third arm from your
>>>> partially
>>>> formed twin?
>>>
>>> And if he has a spare arm, couldn't he "just" do a two-armed bench
>>> press, and
>>> spot himself with the third ?
>>
>>
>> No. The vestigial arm has just enough strength to fondle himself while
>> lifting.
>>
>> Wouldn't a hump backed dwarf win every bench press competitiopn, just by
>> showing up?
>
> Is that one of those "if a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it
> ..." kind of questions?
>
I thought it was a suggestion that too much kettlebell training could result
in such a hump backed dwarf physique. >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Jan 09, 2005
Posts: 229
|
(Msg. 13) Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:16 am
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
Seth Breidbart wrote:
> In article <Kwube.13210$sp3.10395@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
> David Cohen <sammiesdad.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't a hump backed dwarf win every bench press competitiopn,
>> just by showing up?
>
> Imagine what he could do on the deadlift.
Speaking of which..
is there actually any rule that says you can't just go for a super wide
stance where you are already in the 'finish position' with the bar on the
floor?
Peter >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 26, 2005
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 14) Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2005 2:08 am
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Imported from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
External
Since: Apr 27, 2005
Posts: 1
|
(Msg. 15) Posted: Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:04 am
Post subject: Re: Smith Machines [Login to view extended thread Info.]
Archived from groups: per prev. post (more info?)
|
|
|
I guess there may well be something in that because most of my training
had been on free weights until the last 3 months or so. I guess if I
mix in some heavy dumbell presses then I should minimize the potential
drop off. >> Stay informed about: Smith Machines |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
FAQ
Search
Profile
Private Messages
Log in/Register/Password
