Health And General Life Care: [Supertraining] Re: Free weights and "geeks"

Jerry,

You are right! I posted a correction for my mistake but it never was sent out or posted.

[Mod: See message no. 44721]

The quote should have read "Machines were created to keep the geeks OFF of the free weights"

Thanks for applying the biomechanics to my opinions of machine based training. The way I look at it and have heard many other experts say:

Machines decrease: balance, inter & intra-muscular coordination, athleticism, calorie expenditure and other bio-motor abilities. ( I am referring to the 8 bio-motor abilities as described by Dr. Tudor Bompa - strength , power, speed, endurance, flexibility, balance, coordination, agility) and only increase 1 bio-motor ability; strength as well as hypertrophy.

Machines further increase risk of muscle imbalances, improper loading of joints, unnatural recruitment pathways and movement patterns as well. All of which lead to increased risk of injury!

Although it is only my opinion (again formed by first-hand experience and reading / attending many lectures & workshops by experts such as yourself) that if machines increase risk of injury and decrease many necessary bio-motor abilities, they only reason to teach people to exercise on machines (other than purely cosmetic endeavors like bodybuilding) is because a trainer / coach / therapist does not have the skill or knowledge to design a program without machines or they are trying to get as many people through their program in 1 day to maximize profits while conserving their own energy which can be seen as laziness. (again, I have only encountered this in commercial gyms and not every trainer in these gyms does this, but the exceptions are few and far between - hence my severe dis-like of commercial gyms and their staff)

Since the average person (not just athletes) must walk, step, squat, bend, push, pull, and rotate their body weight & external loads every day in a three-dimensional environment it would NOT be teaching useless skills or mechanics to teach people to do these movements without machines EVEN if their primary goal is cosmetic. The greater muscle recruitment would also lead to a greater EPOC and calorie expenditure overall resulting in lower body fat (if nutrition is correct).

I like to say that a three-dimensional person can not improve performance on a two-dimensional fixed axis machine; would you agree?

Thanks for your input! It is the responses of experts such as yourself that makes me feel that my opinions are valid and that I am doing the best I can for my clients by teaching them only three-dimensional, non-machine based exercises.

Gordon Waddell,
NJ, USA

================================

To: Supertraining@yahoogroups.com
From: JRTELLE@AOL.COM
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:35:18 -0500
Subject: [Supertraining] Re: Free weights and "geeks"

In a message dated 1/21/08 4:19:45 AM, g_k_waddell@hotmail.com writes:

>>"Machines were created to keep the geeks of the free weights!"

Greetings all;

I think that the above should be "'Machines were created to keep the geeks

from training trainees on free weights!"

Believe it or not I also believe exercises such as the squat and bench press

should be taught first via free patterns, e. g. squatting down onto a chair

poking the butt rearward, the chest poked forward and elevated with the head in

commensurate position while pushing through the middle of the heels. With

really deconditioned clients I would still use the same free weight introduction

and use some exercise in the purported similar class such as leg press to begin

initial base strength. When clients have attained a functional level of

mechanical sufficiency I would switch them off and on machines especially if the

machines had shoulder yoke athlete interfaces like all standing calf machines.

Only squats without back supports address the trunk-hip-legs chain with bar on

back squats addressing the back erectors more so.

Regarding the bench press recent research suggests that some variations are

potentially GH joint hazardous. Thus using a machine with the pivot above the

head not below the butt/feet more closely approximates typical bench press

dynamics. Using a narrow elbow style vs. the wider technique is purportedly less

stressful -- all the while teaching dumbbell technique for eventual use. Then

again the average recreational trainer may not be affected by any type of

biomechanical machine. misalignments. Slow HIT style of training may further reduce

recreational dysfunction.

It seems to me that the reason for the mild arc or "J" style movements are in

large part due to reducing vertical bar travel distance facilitating greater

weights. Bringing the bar down to the neck or upper pecs, with wide elbows,

not only limits the amount of weight lifted but increases joint ROM (range of

motion) past? normal ranges. Also bars, as my buddy Stan Jones says, are a

"first order machine" creating possible unusual joint force interfacings.

Dumbbells on the other hand seem to rectify the mechanical problems. I would

also assume db. bench presses are a great assistant exercise for competitive

bench presses -- over all making them the preferred exercise for all athletes

except power lifters.

==============================

__._,_.___

Messages in this topic (2) 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.