Smith machine Anyone?

[iron addict]

This is an excerpt from a Charles Poliquin Q & A

Exercise prescription specialist Paul Chek of San Diego has identified what he calls pattern overload syndrome. In his seminar and videos, he stresses that the Smith machine bench press is one of the most common sources of shoulder injuries:

"People get a pattern overload from using the Smith machine. The more fixed the object, the more likely you are to develop a pattern overload. This is due to the fact that training in a fixed pathway repetitively loads the same muscles, tendons, ligaments and joints in the same pattern, encouraging micro-trauma that eventually leads to injury. If Johnny Lunchpail always uses a Smith machine for his bench presses, he ends up working the same fibers of the prime movers in the bench press all of the time: triceps brachii, pectoralis major, long-head of the biceps, anterior deltoids, and serratus anterior. But he can't change the pathway?the bar will always be in the same position."

Because of the mechanics of the human shoulder joint, the body will alter the natural bar pathway during a free-weight bench press to accommodate efficient movement at the shoulder. A fixed bar pathway doesn't allow alteration of this pathway for efficient movement of the joint, thereby predisposing the shoulder to harmful overload via lack of accommodation.

All in all, the Smith machine is a training piece for dorks. If you're interested in training longevity, you're far better off sticking to the standard barbell and dumbbell exercises or try the newer chest machines from Magnum and Flex.

 

[pretty ricky]

yeah thats what i always thought!just a pice of equipment i see girls use!

 

[huskyguy]

Think of the smith machine as a last resort item, if there is not anyone around to spot you then I can see why some people justify the smith machine otherwise stick to free weights they will build better coordination in your lifts.

 

[Who is Mike Jones?]

If anyone knows it's THAT guy . . . . reitterates what I have always thought. Good post

 

[TPH76]

I use the smith machine to max out to failure when I have no spotter....it might not be a good idea to use it continuously but is sure does keep the barbel from crushing my chest in those instances.


Also....

How does this:

This is due to the fact that training in a fixed pathway repetitively loads the same muscles, tendons, ligaments and joints in the same pattern, encouraging micro-trauma that eventually leads to injury..(snip)...he ends up working the same fibers of the prime movers in the bench press all of the time: triceps brachii, pectoralis major, long-head of the biceps, anterior deltoids, and serratus anterior.

...affect the asssertion made regularly on the board that you always train the whole muscle...

If fibre overload in part of the muscle is possible it stands to reason that its also possible (theoretically) to train with emphasize on just part of the same muscle.

From that follows that if you do not work it to injury it is possible to affect relatively more growth in some part of the muscle than in other parts.

From that then follows that if you do not train to genetic max you can change the shape of the muscle. Granted its within a certain frame work of limits....like for example: not training to full development potential and applicability in practice and not applicable to points along the length of the fibre (like inner chest)....

It may not be possible but how does that work in practice given the statements made in the article? Both are somewhat at odds with each other.

 

[iron addict]

Dude,

Get off that I can change the shape of my muscle BULLSHIT. We have had 40 years worth of advanced lifters that state it can't be done, and now we have some 23 year old kid (YOU) stating none of those guys know what they are talking about. I have been training for 25 years now, train 70+ training clients at a time, and have NEVER seen it done, and I don't know anyone else that has either short of using synthol.

IA

 

[TPH76]

Dude,
Get off that I can change the shape of my muscle BULLSHIT. We have had 40 years worth of advanced lifters that state it can't be done, and now we have some 23 year old kid (YOU) stating none of those guys know what they are talking about. I have been training for 25 years now, train 70+ training clients at a time, and have NEVER seen it done, and I don't know anyone else that has either short of using synthol.
IA

Hmm... It seems to me I am not questioning either your experience or your knowledge...I am asking to help me with it.

You and others have told me it is not possible to change the shape of your muscle and in my post I was asking how that is possible. I want to accept that fact and I am asking you for some more arguments then I have been egtting so far.

So far all I have heard is: its never been done...I have never seen it done, nobody reported it ever seeing done of having done it. Is it very unreasable to ask some more elaboration than that without having others resort to inflamatory remarks?

After all...100 years ago nobody had seen anybody walk the surface of the moon, see anybody walk the surface of the moon, heard anybody talking about having walked the surface of the moon or having walked it himself.

If someone doens't understand things because he has neither the experience or the benefit of the knowledge you have then is our normal reaction to get mad? Isn't the forum here partly to enlighten those with less knowledge and less experience and have everybody share information and knowledge.

My question was simple: how is it possible that you can not change the shape of your muscle...yet it is possible to work just part of it repettetively? After all I read here on the board that part of growing is through damage overloading part of the muscle and it seems to me that that part of the muscle should then get more impulse to grow....I'd like to know why that isn't the case and why you can not then change the shape of your muscle if you do not train to genetic maximum potential.

I would like a more substantial answer than bullshit or moron...I'd like to understand the mechanics behind it.

some 23 year old kid (YOU)

you get two more guesses

 

[blackbeard]

TPH show IA a little respect
He knows what hes talking about..dont hijack the the thread and turn it into somethintg else..you wanna beleive you can change the shape of a muscle fine you do it!!!

Unless you are the only person in the gym the smith sucks..i trained alone for a long time but i was friendly enough to ask however many people i needed for a spot-and i gladly return the favor to anyone who asks me for a spot whether its 155 or 500..

good post IA

 

[TPH76]

TPH show IA a little respect
He knows what hes talking about..dont hijack the the thread and turn it into somethintg else..you wanna beleive you can change the shape of a muscle fine you do it!!!

Unless you are the only person in the gym the smith sucks..i trained alone for a long time but i was friendly enough to ask however many people i needed for a spot-and i gladly return the favor to anyone who asks me for a spot whether its 155 or 500..

good post IA

I am neither disrespecting him or anyone else for that matter...
As I said: I am not questioning his experience and knowledge. In fact I also told You and him I did not have the knowledge and experience to understand the info you guys have given me and I am asking for your help and explanation to do that. It seems to me like that is showing respect.

I am not hijacking the thread...I am asking a question about info in the posted article...so a question related and relevant to the article and use of the smith machine.



As for the second part of your post...you maybe right, certainly given the information in the post. Most people want to help in the gym, but my gym focusses more on the general fitness public. So yes...anybody can and will help if you ask them...but not everybody is able to handle the weight if I fail. If someone is there that is able to help with what I want them to do...I don't use the Smith machine. If not then I have no choice if I want to stick to my schedule and routines.

 

[blackbeard]

: Most people want to help in the gym, but my gym focusses more on the general fitness public. So yes...anybody can and will help if you ask them...but not everybody is able to handle the weight if I fail. If someone is there that is able to help with what I want them to do...I don't use the Smith machine. If not then I have no choice if I want to stick to my schedule and routines.

unfortunately that is true of many gyms.family fitness is what they want..they sure as hell do not want someone like me in the gym im not abusive nor do i makeloud noises..its just a stereotype..gyms would rather have you sign a 1 yr memebeship and then never show up

 

[TPH76]

unfortunately that is true of many gyms.family fitness is what they want..they sure as hell do not want someone like me in the gym im not abusive nor do i makeloud noises..its just a stereotype..gyms would rather have you sign a 1 yr memebeship and then never show up

Apparantly size is considered intimidating... though I don't have that problem ...yet...I am still in the group who is considered general fitness public...size wise.

I would love to train somewhere else, but this gym is right between the busstop from home and work. Its too damned convenient. Personally I don't get the right training information and I do not have real examples to look to for guidance...

Though its a good gym if you want to do steps and general fitness...its not a good gym for BB and certainly not for PL...I got a stern reprimand in my gym...for deadlifting (wtf?). I am the only one who does. Apparantly that sends a "wrong message" to the younger members because its an "unsafe" exercise....what exercise isn't if you do it wrong? Now I can only deadlift if there are no kids around.

I think they are afraid that Body Builders deter skinny people to join...after all...nobody feels comfortable to curl 5 kg next to a guy (or worse...girl) who curls 6 times that amount. Personally it only motivates me more and gives me that small extra push to go just that extra mile.

 

[Slayer]

I use the smith machine to max out to failure when I have no spotter....cle? Both are somewhat at odds with each other.

IMO that is exactly when you shouldn't be using the sm and are at greatest risk of injury. I tried the sm to do floor presses recently on an ME day, and though I didn't injure myself, I could see how you could easily injure yourself. The motion is just not natural.

 

[TPH76]

IMO that is exactly when you shouldn't be using the sm and are at greatest risk of injury. I tried the sm to do floor presses recently on an ME day, and though I didn't injure myself, I could see how you could easily injure yourself. The motion is just not natural.

Perhaps that is true.,

wouldn't the same danger exist with most all machines? after all, most machines run in fixed paths.

 

[PowerBuilder]

I use the smith machine to max out to failure when I have no spotter....it might not be a good idea to use it continuously but is sure does keep the barbel from crushing my chest in those instances.


Also....

How does this:



...affect the asssertion made regularly on the board that you always train the whole muscle...

If fibre overload in part of the muscle is possible it stands to reason that its also possible (theoretically) to train with emphasize on just part of the same muscle.

From that follows that if you do not work it to injury it is possible to affect relatively more growth in some part of the muscle than in other parts.

From that then follows that if you do not train to genetic max you can change the shape of the muscle. Granted its within a certain frame work of limits....like for example: not training to full development potential and applicability in practice and not applicable to points along the length of the fibre (like inner chest)....

It may not be possible but how does that work in practice given the statements made in the article? Both are somewhat at odds with each other.

It’s good to see someone thinking critically about bodybuilding theories and not blindly accepting the dogma of the latest accepted training methods. The 'perfect' bodybuilding methods continue to change over the years. In the old days - about 40 years ago everyone thought that you had to workout every other day. At that time people also didn’t think it was necessary to go to complete failure on every set and then do negatives as well to spark muscle growth. Over time the popular opinion became that you must workout to failure more often and as workouts became more brutal, workout frequency tended to decrease. I believe that there has always been way too much training dogma that the ‘experts’ expect you to accept without any critical thinking. For one thing, it seems that these days everyone thinks that working out more frequently than once a week will not allow your body time to recuperate and that over time your body will deteriorate if you workout every other day. What people have to realize is that the human body can adapt to a lot of brutal punishment. For example, you can bet that old time lumberjacks or railroad workers were pretty damn strong, yet they had to lift every single day, for long periods of time. Now I’m not saying that their exercise practices would produce superior muscle size and strength, I’m just saying that they were strong and that the human body can take that much stress without withering away.

As for your argument about site specific muscle growth based on the trauma to specific parts of the muscle, that was an interesting idea. This is why I believe your argument for the possibility of site specific growth in those parts of the muscles is wrong. For one thing, working a muscle to the point that it will signal growth factors is not the same as tearing parts of a muscle. I think that good training may cause a build up of lactic acid which can cause pain. That type of pain is ok and may indicate that growth factors will begin to progress. Injury such as tears in parts of the muscle or tendons will also cause pain but is not what results in biological mechanism for muscle hypertrophy. One other flaw that I believe you have in your argument is that the premise that the article was correct. I personally don’t believe that the smith machine really does cause repetitive damage to specific parts of a muscle.

 

[getfitdoc]

the smith is usefull for specific needs.

For example, I only used it after i hurt my back, and could not do normal squats. I used it for front squats. Smith front squats were the only way i could work my legs. I tried all other approaches.

Now that my back is better, im on to real squats, haven't touched the smith since.

Thats just me.

 

[huskyguy]

the smith is usefull for specific needs.

For example, I only used it after i hurt my back, and could not do normal squats. I used it for front squats. Smith front squats were the only way i could work my legs. I tried all other approaches.

Now that my back is better, im on to real squats, haven't touched the smith since.

Thats just me.

I agree, the smith machine is a last resorts approach to squats, if you can by all means do real squats. Find someone to spot you if that makes you feel better.

 

[ManOfMuscle]

TPH: If you train one "part" of a muscle (for example pec minor) more heavily and more frequently and then undertrain the other part (pec major) then you aren't changing the shape of the muscle you are simply overtraining one area and undertraining another.