Serious question about Smith machine

[heinz83]

The smart money would add chest press and pulldown/row for maximum stimulation.

This approach being for those seeking pure benefit and not maximum reward, for which Rip’s method is arguably supreme.

What is the difference between pure benefit and maximum reward?

[McBee99]

What is the difference between pure benefit and maximum reward?

Risk/Reward

If leg press/chest press/ pulldown gives me 90% of what Im going to get from strength training, with little to no wear and tear, I may choose that over maxing out my squat/bench/dead.

Depends on how much you want/need that last 10%, and what you’re willing to give to reach it.

[Jason Donaldson]

Risk/Reward

If leg press/chest press/ pulldown gives me 90% of what Im going to get from strength training, with little to no wear and tear, I may choose that over maxing out my squat/bench/dead.

Depends on how much you want/need that last 10%, and what you’re willing to give to reach it.

How do your proposed machine exercises cause "little to no wear and tear" in a way that barbell exercises cause them significantly?

[McBee99]

Isn’t a benefit the same thing as a reward?

The former is from the Latin literally translated as “it makes well” or “to make well;” the latter is from the Old French for “payment for an act done.”

Some prefer a minimum effective dose, some will accept the trade offs to obtain maximum result.

Like how some prefer their chili as prepared, and some like to add Tabasco sauce, which is a perfectly acceptable thing to do.

[eddieoak]

Couldn’t you get 90% of maxing out squat/bench/dead (I’m assuming “max” means real progressive overload of those movements and max single reps) by progressing slower in those movements? Meaning - do cautious but progressive 5s or occasionally 3s - and avoid maxed out single rep attempts like the plague?

I think the concern (for me, based on my experience only) is that machine leg/chest press don’t give 90% of what I get from squat/bench free-weight movements … but more like 40% if generous. And can cause similar or worse (sudden and scary) wear and tear when pushed legitimately hard - and I need to push them hard or they’re not even getting me 40% or sometimes zero transferable strength gains. Which seems like a lot more work and risk for way lower reward - but YMMV. On a separate note - I actually like machine pulldowns but would compare them pretty favorably to chins/pullups (not deadlifts as you did, which confused me). I think a lot of machines can help with chapter 6 work if you want - maybe not optimally - but close enough that it isn’t a total whackadoodle discussion to have.

But again, If the machines legit are getting you 90% to your potential - that’s great for you - but I have not seen similar outcomes with my comparisons as of yet. All luck to you!

[heinz83]

Risk/Reward

If leg press/chest press/ pulldown gives me 90% of what Im going to get from strength training, with little to no wear and tear, I may choose that over maxing out my squat/bench/dead.

Depends on how much you want/need that last 10%, and what you’re willing to give to reach it.

Why walk to the steakhouse when you can drive to McDonald's, eh?

[McBee99]

Why walk to the steakhouse when you can drive to McDonald's, eh?

Stay home and cook a Texas Cafe Classic

[Alexander Dargatz]

Why walk to the steakhouse when you can drive to McDonald's, eh?

Oh, I know, I know that one!
Because Jenni already gave us the correct answer to that question.

And I'm quite sure McBee is trolling us.

But in regard to the leg press, smith machine or machines in general being safer and giving you less "wear and tear": that's total bullshit. The movement path that is forced upon you might well be so unnatural for you that it hurts you, especially when you try to work hard (heavy).
I had two surgeries in my left knee, and while it is perfect for squatting and walking and everyday life, I physically can't do leg extensions, and leg press really hurts.

[McBee99]

How do your proposed machine exercises cause "little to no wear and tear" in a way that barbell exercises cause them significantly?

I didn't say barbell’s cause them significantly, but even Rip says you will get your numbers up till at some point you get hurt.

Couldn’t you get 90% of maxing out squat/bench/dead (I’m assuming “max” means real progressive overload of those movements and max single reps) by progressing slower in those movements? Meaning - do cautious but progressive 5s or occasionally 3s - and avoid maxed out single rep attempts like the plague?

I think the concern (for me, based on my experience only) is that machine leg/chest press don’t give 90% of what I get from squat/bench free-weight movements … but more like 40% if generous. And can cause similar or worse (sudden and scary) wear and tear when pushed legitimately hard - and I need to push them hard or they’re not even getting me 40% or sometimes zero transferable strength gains. Which seems like a lot more work and risk for way lower reward - but YMMV. On a separate note - I actually like machine pulldowns but would compare them pretty favorably to chins/pullups (not deadlifts as you did, which confused me). I think a lot of machines can help with chapter 6 work if you want - maybe not optimally - but close enough that it isn’t a total whackadoodle discussion to have.

But again, If the machines legit are getting you 90% to your potential - that’s great for you - but I have not seen similar outcomes with my comparisons as of yet. All luck to you!

Yes you probably could.

How do you quantify those percentages? And what do you mean by “transferable strength gains”. I thought we understand that strength is general.

I don't really compare pulldowns to deadlifts, though you may want to check out the MedX Lumbar Extension, if you don’t compete as a lifter that is.

[Mark Rippetoe]

I didn't say barbell’s cause them significantly, but even Rip says you will get your numbers up till at some point you get hurt.

But you did say that machines are better.