I'm not challenging you for the sake of challenging you, but..aren't you really doing the same thing? Smith Machine is then new guy on the block, not free weights. When I see all of your posts above, I don't see medical and scientific explanations of why Smith Machine sucks, but what I do see is someone who is resisting an idea - namely the idea of using a smith machine as a supplemental aspect of chest and shoulder development. You sound a lot like the naysayers regarding the Lean Gains diet, lol. People still smashing IF diets yet all the guys that do it are walking around sub 10% BF and enjoying the sport of bodybuilding to a much greater degree. Its as if the results don't matter to naysayers. Are you one of these guys?
First, lets look at the common trends in resistance exercise. There was a mass swing from free weights to machine emphasis beginning in the late 80s and spanning about 15+ years. Its only been recently that we are seeing this swing start to level out.
Next I actually did provide a scientific explanation. Not so much saying that its useless, but rather that the idea that it is "safer" "carries less risk of injury" or is good to use if you have shoulder joint issues is false.
The smith machine is especially deleterious to use if you have shoulder injuries for several reasons.
A. The ROM is not natural, and as such it puts the joint angle out of alignment. This results in increased impingement and friction in the joints and can lead to tendonitis in the shoulder joint, especially of the biceps tendon and infraspinatus tendon.
B. The movement of the bar is fixed. During normal movement the bar does not move in straight line as it does on the smith machine. This is particularly trouble some when performing squats where instead of the bar moving horizontally as the body ascends, the spine must compensate for this fixed movement and go through an unnatural plane. The result is abnormal disc compression.
Now, your reference to IF is quite random, and obviously you haven't seen some of my posts regarding IF. I've both supported IF and provided scientific evidence to support it.
For what its worth, I've switched over to Smith Machine for a few weeks at a time after a 10-12 week routine and I've always gotten extremely sore from the workout. I personally have found that the smith is more versatile in the angle at which you train the chest and shoulders and I have also noticed that it does a much better job of isolating the chest muscles alone. I consider it an iso workout personally. And since I can pack on a ton of weight, that makes the smith machine unique to all other exercises. Isolated + heavy! It's also a good option for core and tear drop training when you do front squats.
I'm not sure how the smith machine is a good option to train the core. If anything, there is less core involvement when performing exercises on the smith machine.
Is the smith superior for developing the quads, according to this research, you get LESS quad recruitment during smith squats:
J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Dec;23(9):2588-91.
[h=1]A comparison of free weight squat to Smith machine squat using electromyography.[/h]
Schwanbeck S,
Chilibeck PD,
Binsted G.
[h=3]Source[/h]College of Kinesiology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
[h=3]Abstract[/h]The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether free weight or Smith machine squats were optimal for activating the prime movers of the legs and the stabilizers of the legs and the trunk. Six healthy participants performed 1 set of 8 repetitions (using a weight they could lift 8 times, i.e., 8RM, or 8 repetition maximum) for each of the free weight squat and Smith machine squat in a randomized order with a minimum of 3 days between sessions, while electromyographic (EMG) activity of the tibialis anterior, gastrocnemius, vastus medialis, vastus lateralis, biceps femoris, lumbar erector spinae, and rectus abdominus were simultaneously measured. Electromyographic activity was significantly higher by 34, 26, and 49 in the gastrocnemius, biceps femoris, and vastus medialis, respectively, during the free weight squat compared to the Smith machine squat (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences between free weight and Smith machine squat for any of the other muscles; however, the EMG averaged over all muscles during the free weight squat was 43% higher when compared to the Smith machine squat (p < 0.05).
The free weight squat may be more beneficial than the Smith machine squat for individuals who are looking to strengthen plantar flexors, knee flexors, and knee extensors.
PMID:19855308 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
As for squats on the smith machine..I'll repeat what I wrote about safety concerns.
The smith machine locks the spine into its fixed movement since the bar cannot move horizontally. As a result, the spine must bend according to this trajectory versus remaining natural during a normal squat. The result is unsymetrical disc compression, and can lead to disc degeneration or rupture.
Now, can you squat safely on the smith machine...according to this research..yes; HOWEVER, joint angle must be properly aligned, and the risk of ACL strain or other injury is greater when joint angle are not aligned on the smith vs. the free weight.
J Sports Sci. 2011 Mar;29(5):457-69.
[h=1]Modelling the joint torques and loadings during squatting at the Smith machine.[/h]
Biscarini A,
Benvenuti P,
Botti F,
Mastrandrea F,
Zanuso S.
[h=3]Source[/h]Department of Surgical, Radiological and Odontostomatologic Sciences, Medical Physics Section, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
[email protected]
[h=3]Abstract[/h]An analytical biomechanical model was developed to establish the relevant properties of the Smith squat exercise, and the main differences from the free barbell squat.
The Smith squat may be largely patterned to modulate the distributions of muscle activities and joint loadings. For a given value of the included knee angle (θ(knee)), bending the trunk forward, moving the feet forward in front of the knees, and displacing the weight distribution towards the forefoot emphasizes hip and lumbosacral torques, while also reducing knee torque and compressive tibiofemoral and patellofemoral forces (and vice versa). The tibiofemoral shear force φ(t) displays more complex trends that strongly depend on θ(knee). Notably, for 180° ≥ θ(knee) ≥ 130°, φ(t) and cruciate ligament strain forces can be suppressed by selecting proper pairs of ankle and hip angles. Loading of the posterior cruciate ligament increases (decreases) in the range 180° ≥ θ(knee) ≥ 150° (θ(knee) ≤ 130°) with knee extension, bending the trunk forward, and moving the feet forward in front of the knees. In the range 150° > θ(knee) > 130°, the behaviour changes depending on the foot weight distribution. The conditions for the development of anterior cruciate ligament strain forces are explained. This work enables careful use of the Smith squat in strengthening and rehabilitation programmes.
PMID:21225486 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
The part in bold above also shows an increase strain on the lower back when performing smith squats the way most do in the gym.
Br