all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Machines, free weights and strength training

Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Anna C said:
Yes, yoga helps tie things together, but not in fast or powerful movement, and not in externally loaded movement.
Click to expand...
I think this might be the one of the essential points.

Pesonally I would think that adding some locomotion, like crawling, carries or even sprinting would have more carryover in terms of tying everything together. But of course I am heavily influenced by Original Strength.

But I have heard of worse plans :)
 
I feel the biggest issue with this discussion is the lack of evidence freeweight training produces a substantially better athletic outcome. A secondary consideration is that freeweights are a known quantity and machine based outcomes might vary considerably from one design to the next.

An interesting study (of the usual small sample size and short duration common to fitness interventions) comparing machine vs freeweweigt vs control on basic agility drills.

 
From what I've seen you have to be a fairly dedicated strength enthusiast or muscle head before machines vs free weights, this program or that, high reps or low reps, long rest periods vs short, makes any difference whatsoever. Most people are whatever they're going to be simply on the basis of turning up. They never exercise with enough dedication or intensity to truly tease out differences in approach. Tell your buddy just to keep turning up and he'll look good and feel great
 
@North Coast Miller
Good point. I think the discussion is based on a number of reasonable assumptions which do not necessarily need to be true.

Like:
Assumption A1: Strength training should have a carryover to everyday movements (or sports).
Assumption A2: Machine training will lead to less carryover than calisthenics or free weight training.
Assumption A3: Compound, whole-body movements lead to more carryover than isolated movements (due to more complex motor patterns).

Another set of assumptions:
Assumption B1: Strength matters and more strength is better.
Assumption B2: Training in any way will be better than no training.
Assumption B3: Machine training is safer.
Assumption B4: A movement practice will be able to increase coordination (tie the body together) and thus mediate the relationship between strength training and carryover effects.

Or:
Assumption C1: It is more important to follow an enjoyable routine than to follow an "optimal" routine that was prescribed.
etc.

We could further have assumptions about sets, weights, rep ranges, frequency, etc. Those are better researched. However, not necessarily their role in a complex setting (sometimes this, sometimes that; with or without a physical labour; with or without an additional movement practice or martial art).

As long as we don't have sufficient data to evaluate these assumptions, our conclusion will be guesswork. Which can be fun! I will hasten to add.
 
Bauer said:
Pesonally I would think that adding some locomotion, like crawling, carries or even sprinting would have more carryover in terms of tying everything together. But of course I am heavily influenced by Original Strength.
Click to expand...
This has made such a difference for me personally. I ditched KBs completely in favor of OS. A couple of years ago in another thread I wrote about how KBs "filled the gaps" in my strength. For me OS does the same, but better. So now I do the basic barbell compounds for max strength, LSD running for endurance and OS for everthing in-between. It's probably the results from OS that made me even open for a discussion like this (machines vs weights).

North Coast Miller said:
An interesting study (of the usual small sample size and short duration common to fitness interventions) comparing machine vs freeweweigt vs control on basic agility drills.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that.

LukeV said:
From what I've seen you have to be a fairly dedicated strength enthusiast or muscle head before machines vs free weights, this program or that, high reps or low reps, long rest periods vs short, makes any difference whatsoever. Most people are whatever they're going to be simply on the basis of turning up. They never exercise with enough dedication or intensity to truly tease out differences in approach.
Click to expand...
Interesting view and there's some truth to that.
Genetics also play a big role. Comparable to other players of his height and weight Lamar Jackson doesn't have the highest squat, highest bench press, best vertical, best 40-dash and other things. He's still considered one of the best if not the best athlete in a league that's full of professional athletes. Same with Aaron Donald, not the biggest, strongest or fastest player on his position (based on tests like squat, vertical etc.), but definitely the most productive.
Would be interesting to know if people like that even are at their genetic potential and/or would be even better or worse with different training approaches.
 
Last edited:
When I go the gym. I see a lot of folks squatting (machine, smith machine, and dumbell, and goblet), pushing, and pulling. One movement that is missing is the hinge. I think it is one fundamental human movement that gets ignored. Also, there are no power/explosive movements like swings.

For me, barbells are my bread and butter primary modality for building strength (and kettlebells are probably my secondary one). But a lot of people dont care about studying and focusing on improving in a technical lift. Some folks, probably a majority of folks, just want to to go to a gym 3 times a week for 1 hour, turn off their brains, and get a good workout in (on the machines and dumbbells). This is not ideal, in my opinion, and also not what Strongfirst teaches: However, if these folks are disciplined and stick with it they can get strong as well.

My wife is one of these folks. She is very active. We walk a lot. And 3 times a week she goes to PF and does her standard workout. 15 min on that elliptical machine, followed by machines and dumbells. She has no interest using barbells and kbells. She has made results, there is no doubt. But I do believe that she could make more progress if she met the barbell.

So she wouldn't join me, so last year I joined her. I still do my workouts, but 1 day per week I go to PF with her. A lot of my misconceptions about machine and dumbbell training were broken. Dont get me wrong, I am not going to ever replace my barbell squats with leg extensions and leg curls, lol. But these machines / dumbbells do provide some value.
 
I've practiced yoga off and on for years. It has a definite WTH?! effect that has to experienced to be understood. It has benefitted my outdoor sports in ways that don't seem fitting for an activity that "easy." I'm not alone, many pro MTB, skiers, surfers, climbers etc. swear by the benefits they get from time spent on the mat.
 
This thread reminded me of a video i saw a while ago. "is that good, is the high score good"


Oscar said:
I cant think of a good power exercise with a machine.
Click to expand...
Assault bike...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bro Mo said:
Assault bike...
Click to expand...
Of course there are machines and then there are machines if you know what I mean :)
I wouldn't put things like the assault bike or C2 rower in the same "machine category" as a leg extension machine.

There are also things like belt squat machines (see vid below) or those "football tackle machines" (I don't know the name, but they simulate what lineman do -> pushing other players away) which can be used to build tremendous strength and power, but those are rare specialized machines.
What I meant with "machines" in my OP are the typical machines like leg press, butterfly, lat pulldown etc.


That's definitely a good power exercise using a machine, but those machines are not found in your normal commercial gym.
 
Last edited:
vegpedlr said:
I've practiced yoga off and on for years. It has a definite WTH?! effect that has to experienced to be understood. It has just benefitted my outdoor sports in ways that don't seem fitting for an activity that "easy." I'm not alone, many pro MTB, skiers, surfers, climbers etc. swear by the benefits they get from time spent on the mat.
Click to expand...

I took up boxing because wrestling was too hard and when my wife convinced me to join her at yoga class I hurried back to barbells for the same reason. Yoga was hard. There was nothing easy about it. The instructors were lean, wiry and merciless - little 5' females but every muscle rippled as they performed the human pretzel. At the end of a cycle of downward dogs turned into reverse warriors my heart rate hit about 200bpm. None of them appeared to break a sweat. When it came time to contemplate the inner narrative I pretended mine was an entire Shakespeare play, kept my eyes closed, ignored them getting back into it, just to get a few more moments to bring my heart rate under control. When I opened my eyes they were doing something with their elbows and knees that looked impossible. I gave up. Those guys are super fit and very strong and all they do is Yoga.
 
The way I see it your friend is training his body and he is enjoying it in a way he feels safe after an injury. That's all that should matter, they are staying healthy in a way that is safe and they enjoy.
Everyone here has had great points, mine is that this person is still getting the job done in a way they enjoy. They are not the 40%+ of people sitting around , fat as heck and not doing anything. And while free weights are better for tying the whole body together, machines are just fine for someone that has already developed strength and for one reason or another has decided to make a move to something they feel works better for them.
 
Really interesting thread.

Most of us free-weighters would like to believe that, if nothing else, the neural lessons learned by manipulating heavy, unsecured loads have carryover in the real world that cannot be replicated with other training. But maybe the real world just doesn't look like a heavy, unsecured load as often as we might like to believe.

Thinking about the typical athletic movements - running, throwing, jumping, climbing, striking - the load involved is typically very low relative to the max strength of the musculature being asked to move it, and excelling at these activities is all about learning how to apply the strength you do have in a skill-specific manner. Maybe it really doesn't matter how you acquire that strength, as long as you're coupling it with something that teaches your body some measure of full-body tension (like yoga or resets or whatever).

One thing I tend to believe is that free-weighters are probably better at getting hit - absorbing force without getting hurt. I would suspect that absorbing a heavy impact is something you're not going to get out of machine work and yoga. But realistically, most people also don't want to subject themselves to activities where they get hit.

With all that said - the sound of 400# hitting the floor after a deadlift is far sweeter than the sound of a hip sled sliding back onto the bumpers. So we've got that going for us.
 
WhatWouldHulkDo said:
Really interesting thread.

Most of us free-weighters would like to believe that, if nothing else, the neural lessons learned by manipulating heavy, unsecured loads have carryover in the real world that cannot be replicated with other training. But maybe the real world just doesn't look like a heavy, unsecured load as often as we might like to believe.

Thinking about the typical athletic movements - running, throwing, jumping, climbing, striking - the load involved is typically very low relative to the max strength of the musculature being asked to move it, and excelling at these activities is all about learning how to apply the strength you do have in a skill-specific manner. Maybe it really doesn't matter how you acquire that strength, as long as you're coupling it with something that teaches your body some measure of full-body tension (like yoga or resets or whatever).

One thing I tend to believe is that free-weighters are probably better at getting hit - absorbing force without getting hurt. I would suspect that absorbing a heavy impact is something you're not going to get out of machine work and yoga. But realistically, most people also don't want to subject themselves to activities where they get hit.

With all that said - the sound of 400# hitting the floor after a deadlift is far sweeter than the sound of a hip sled sliding back onto the bumpers. So we've got that going for us.
Click to expand...

When training some of my explosive sandbag lifts, I'll fling it as high as I can and still keep a hand on it, let it come back down on my shoulder. Fir a few reps I'll actually do a jerk mechanics and fire up into the bag as it comes back down, making sure my lats/pecs etc are all keeping my shoulder tight in the socket. Very satisfying to rebound 70 lbs of sand and steel shot back up in the air via collision.

This sort of thing seems to really help when dealing with stubborn activities in the real world.
 
@Kettlebelephant, these three articles by Brad Schoenfeld (aka hypertrophy specialist) might be of your interest:




nicktumminello.com

Home - Strength Zone Training

TRUE full range of motion strength training with author, speaker and pro trainer Nick Tumminello. Earn more money as a personal trainer. Apply practical, no BS techniques instantly with our Online Courses and Certifications.
nicktumminello.com nicktumminello.com

I’m not a big fan of trying to prove a point that machines are functional when using elderly barely walking people as an example. But at the same time no one will challenge that it does not work in such an example.

So, as already said, no point to convince someone who is already showing up and it serves all his needs. Until it no longer does ;).
 
Kettlebelephant said:
What are your thoughts on this? Can machines + "movement training" (yoga, OS, Ground Force, Ido Portal stuff etc.) get you to the same results/benefits as free weights training?
Click to expand...
If your goal is to be able to pick up free weights, then I would say the answer is "No." I'd like to see anyone train for a decent deadlift using machines + yoga.

-S-
 
That depends entirely what your goals are and what levels of advancement you are at.

If you have a good base of muscle then is it really beneficial for a bodybuilder to keep doing heavy free weight squats and deadlifts? I would argue no, there are exercise variations that offer far greater risk to reward ratio.

For a powerlifters is there any benefit to increase axial loading and spinal compression doing bent over rows? I would argue no, save the compression for lifts with a high carry over to the competition lifts.

However for yourself? Well what are your goals?
 
Kettlebelephant said:
Of course there are machines and then there are machines if you know what I mean :)
I wouldn't put things like the assault bike or C2 rower in the same "machine category" as a leg extension machine.

There are also things like belt squat machines (see vid below) or those "football tackle machines" (I don't know the name, but they simulate what lineman do -> pushing other players away) which can be used to build tremendous strength and power, but those are rare specialized machines.
What I meant with "machines" in my OP are the typical machines like leg press, butterfly, lat pulldown etc.


That's definitely a good power exercise using a machine, but those machines are not found in your normal commercial gym.
Click to expand...


The belt squat is an invaluable tool. I have the Matt Wenning belt squat in my gym. It is a great being able to squat without compressing the spine. An amazing follow up after heavy good mornings.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom