Health And General Life Care: Re: [Supertraining] Free weights versus machine weights

Hi Nick,

let me first point out errors in your post.--------------

Having said that what I would like to see is someone compare what I believe
to be an Ideal freeweight protocol (probably your design) and one using both
free weights and specific machines. I believe machines have their place and may
even be required for max performance.

I am now more inclined, after your post, to believe if a coach can't teach a
free weight squat and power clean s/he probably cant teach proper "machine"
performance either.

Jerry

Jerry Telle
Lakewood CO USA

> HI Jerry
>
> In your response you wrote
> "On the other hand it has been my experience that the Olympic lifts require
> such an elite performance, that many athletes have not the time, proper
> supervision and or athletic ability to learn these movements to the point of
>
> productivity. Many even have problems with productive nonnconstrained squat
> performance! Yet given the use of a properly designed leaper or smith
> machine these
> limitations were, anecdotal, more easily resolved."
>
> I'm not sure but I seem to be able to teach Olympic lifts to a good level
> fairly quickly , form is good with in weeks. Is this the optimal time line
> who knows, but it seems to help athletes, who have a long term goals, as
> training is not about next week, but about my plan for the season, the next
> season the Olympics. There are different uses for machines and I have
> recently started training with one designed specifically for rugby scrums,
> that has great carry over to leg drive and hip extension required in scrums,
> rucks and mauls. However I would unlikely ever stop using exercizes like
> squats, cleans, overhead squats, lunges etc as they a very valuable tools.
>
> The whole stability thing has a continuum. Low instability guided movement
> at one end and highly unstable circus tricks at the other. For most
> athletes time constraint seems to be the issue. In my mind using exercises
> that capture more training uses are better. When selecting a barbell squat
> for example, as opposed to a smith machine squat or a Swiss ball squat, I do
> this because it challenges the muscle with large loads, which is not
> possible with a swiss ball squat, but it has stability elements that
> challenge the athlete to stabilise the weight (while producing force) that
> the Smith Machine does not challenge. Overhead squatting challenges the
> stability function more than back squats, but force development is reduced
> as less weight can be handled. So I select the lifts for a reason, time
> effectiveness.
>
> A problem that I have (not what you wrote but a point that it raises) " that
> many athletes have not the time, proper supervision and or athletic ability
> to learn these movements" Is that is exactly the problem, poor supervision
> and poor teaching ability. I hope that groups like this and others are
> impacting on the strength community to improve supervision for athletes
> and are improving industry skills. To say that we invent machines because
> people are unable to learn is living with the problem not fixing the
> problem, putting a band aid on not stitching the cut. Machines invented to
> do specific task are useful, but lifting a barbel and some weights is a
> cheap and easy way to equip a gym. a platform and some rubber training
> discs and you are away. I have yet (with the exception of the para-Olympic
> athletes) to see athletes who have not mastered squats, dead lifts and some
> form of Olympic lift variation to productivity. Even Oscar Pistorious (no
> legs) learned to snatch at some point. Even non sporting clients with
> aesthetic goals can learn these basic lifts.
>
> As a question about heel raises, have you noticed that during a clean,
> snatch or squat jump, high pulls the athlete or trainee trains heel raises
> as part of the movement, is there a need to train heel raises specifically?
> Do we need machines do do this. If the athlete needs this training you can
> stand on a step holding dumbbells (touch a wall if balance is an issue), a
> barbell on your shoulders teaches balance too that a machine may not, yet
> you could load the weight to develop the movement concerned.
>
> Tools are tool, but it seems that David argues in favour of machines as he
> sells them. I fabricate and sell a machine called the ScrumTruk (under
> licence from Australia), that is very useful for some rugby related
> strengths (and other sports e.g. bob sledding although we don't get much
> snow around here), but I sell this not as a replacement for classical weight
> training but as an enhancement for it. Yet the gym where I trained did not
> have machines until a recent upgrade of facility and change of location (no
> space). The new tools, cable machine mostly and a ScrumTruck and leg
> press, we have improved the offering, but the basics remain, in my mind at
> least, firmly in place at the platform.
>
> Best Regards
> Nick Tatalias
> Johannesburg
> South Africa
>

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (37) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic

Messages

Modify/cancel your subscription at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/mygroups

Sign all letters with full name & city of residence if you
wish them to be published!

MARKETPLACE

Earn your degree in as few as 2 years - Advance your career with an AS, BS, MS degree - College-Finder.net.