All the hype over barbells?

[EMPIREMIND]

I will start this by saying I love the bar, can't get much better than some heavy compound movements, but I often see and hear people who are so hung ho about using only barbells, yet hypertrophy is thier main goal.... Now I'm not saying that tradional barbell work isn't the meat and potatoes of a solid foundation, because it is, but I grew leaps and bounds using the Smith machine, and I'm not the only one. It amuses me when guys in my gym see me squatting 5 plates banded in the Smith machine for reps, and have the nerve to ask me why I don't just use the bar.... "Real men use the barbell" etc etc.... My first through is why don't you get bigger and stronger, as I just watched them load on 225 and do singles in the squat rack. For back training I have found that barbell is king for me, deads, rows etc etc, but for chest, shoulders, even legs I have seen alot more growth from machines than from the bar. And alot less chance of injury, which for me is the deal breaker. ISO hammer machines, squat press, Smith machine. I will not down talk the importance of the squat, but I can say it's not the only way.

 

[APC80]

I'm the opposite I never feel right with the smith machine I've had a couple of tweaks using them. I just can't seem to position myself right or something I just prefer the free movement of a barbell. Although I'd argue dumbbells are better for chest than barbells.

 

[Shrugmax]

As someone who works out by themselves in their basement I can say Smith machine has been a real asset to me. Especially in regards to the bench press.

 

[Yomo]

"It amuses me when guys in my gym see me squatting 5 plates banded in the Smith machine for reps" <<< seeing that would be fairly amusing as well...


all jokes aside, if you're trying to improve your squat, the smith machine is useless...you'd be kidding yourself if you think there's any real carryover...

and if your argument is, say, time under tension, which is irrelevant in terms of squat improvement, there are literally dozens of other exercises/machines dedicated to isolation of quads, hammies, calves, etc...

if your argument is injuries, you have the Buffalo or better yet the Duffalo Bar, Belt Squats, Safety Bar Squats, Zercher Squats, Front Squat Harnesses to aid with front squats, squatting to parallel boxes with different specialty bars, etc...


the barbell may not be the end all, in terms of strength and size gains...but taking into consideration you specifically mentioned SQUATS, I can't see any real argument holding up against it...

 

[EMPIREMIND]

"It amuses me when guys in my gym see me squatting 5 plates banded in the Smith machine for reps" <<< seeing that would be fairly amusing as well...


all jokes aside, if you're trying to improve your squat, the smith machine is useless...you'd be kidding yourself if you think there's any real carryover...

and if your argument is, say, time under tension, which is irrelevant in terms of squat improvement, there are literally dozens of other exercises/machines dedicated to isolation of quads, hammies, calves, etc...

if your argument is injuries, you have the Buffalo or better yet the Duffalo Bar, Belt Squats, Safety Bar Squats, Zercher Squats, Front Squat Harnesses to aid with front squats, squatting to parallel boxes with different specialty bars, etc...


the barbell may not be the end all, in terms of strength and size gains...but taking into consideration you specifically mentioned SQUATS, I can't see any real argument holding up against it...

Honestly I could care less about carry over. But no matter what I have experienced carry over regardless. I don't care about a one rep max, my goal is hypertrophy. With the Smith I can stay in a range that put so much stress on my quads, but not on my knees or lower back. Obviously we all have our own preferences, but I don't understand people who tilt thier noses up at machines.... I don't get it. It's just another tool to use.

 

[Yomo]

machines get a bad rep because of the horrible carryover...whether you care or not, that really is the reason...

...most guys who boast an "8 plate bench on the loaded plate incline, bro", can barely barbell bench 225 for 3-5 strict reps...I see it all the time...my soul especially hurts when people use the Smith for "Squats" and "Deadlifts"

if I had a choice, I would go plate loaded over a Smith machine that locks the "bar" into a set pattern, any day of the week...hack squats, leg press,and similar machines are all better for lower body growth than the Smith...

and I'm not knocking your hustle or trying to come off like a dickhead, just trying to answer your question...there are better ways to isolate your quads...

 

[EMPIREMIND]

machines get a bad rep because of the horrible carryover...whether you care or not, that really is the reason...

...most guys who boast an "8 plate bench on the loaded plate incline, bro", can barely barbell bench 225 for 3-5 strict reps...I see it all the time...my soul especially hurts when people use the Smith for "Squats" and "Deadlifts"

if I had a choice, I would go plate loaded over a Smith machine that locks the "bar" into a set pattern, any day of the week...hack squats, leg press,and similar machines are all better for lower body growth than the Smith...

and I'm not knocking your hustle or trying to come off like a dickhead, just trying to answer your question...there are better ways to isolate your quads...

I'll provide some reasoning from my experience. I used to be stuck at 275 flat bench. I had a coach work with me and he eliminated all free bench and had me almost exclusive do DC hit training on incline Smith and some incline DBs as well. We did no flat bench at all. Other than that we did pec deck flyes and db flies. But the most intense chest work was on incline bench. Legs... Leg press, all widow Maker sets and then Smith squats. Back training was barbell. I won't discount barbell deadlifts or rack deads at all.

But back to chest, I progressed week to week until my incline on the Smith was around 3-45's and 1-25 for, 10-15 rest pause. One day out of the blue some guys talked me into flat Barbell benching... 365 x 4. Mind you I haven't done any barbell or flat bench in half a year, maybe even longer. On the machines I listed I put on easily 20lbs of muscle over 2 years.

But regardless of all of that I just feel like there are more than one way to do something and every body is different. Our genetics, tie ins, height, weight etc.i don't discredit squats which is like one of most natural movements, nor am I saying it can be replaced, but I am saying you can build legs without them.

 

[Juicedeez utz]

most guys who boast an "8 plate bench on the loaded plate incline, bro", can barely barbell bench 225 for 3-5 strict reps...I see it all the time...my soul especially hurts when people use the Smith for "Squats" and "Deadlifts"

if I had a choice, I would go plate loaded over a Smith machine that locks the "bar" into a set pattern, any day of the week...hack squats, leg press,and similar machines are all better for lower body growth than the Smith...
.

Try telling that to someone like jay cutler, who advocates smith machines... if your goal is size or TuT, the smith is an amazing tool to create tension and focusing on a specific muscles without worrying about stabilisers. If functional strength and stabilisers are what you want, go with a bar, personally I use both for all exercises to mix it up. By the way smith, leg press and hack squat are all fixed path movements and you can change foot position on all to accommodate different muscle groups. Only a power lifter can nock a smith and that's because they have no use for them haha

 

[Yomo]

right...because the chance for anyone here becoming the next 4x MR. O is the same as myself becoming the next Ed Coan...

once again, the only argument I'm making is in defense of any Big 3 movement being better utilized with a barbell...machines clearly have their use and should be put to use religiously to exploit specific isolation...

And Cutler's a horrible example to use...he himself can be quoted as saying the Barbell Squat is the king of all movements and that he only switched to machine variations in fear of injury later on in his career as well as giving his upper body a chance to catch up during his younger years...

the Smith machine will always be far inferior as far as compound movements are concerned...and there's a HUGE difference between a machine limiting the bar movement to a set pattern, and say an incline plate loaded variation where you can still position your torso in a way that accommodates the lifter...

you can claim whatever you want, but nothing will ever change the fact that a Barbell Squat will always reign supreme in comparison to a "Smith" machine Squat...the Smith Machine does have it's moments, especially when taking into consideration the wear and tear that can be avoided on joints for accessory style movements and variations...

and you obviously aren't very versed in most PL routines...a majority have reverted back to the old days of Big 3 Top Sets, accompanied by many Bodybuilder style movements to address weaknesses...

it's just funny to watch "Big Strong" looking gym rats, humbled by an actual movement like a fundamental Barbell Squat...even funnier watching them wrap up there knees to do knee bends with a weight they couldn't dream of moving without the machine...

 

[ericos_bob]

To each their own. I've seen best overall body growth from barbell squats. It's certainly more efficient IME as it's kind of hard to squat heavy poundages without the upper body also becoming exceptionally strong in the process. Less so the case with the smith machine or leg press. To take the load off the lower back in times of excessive fatigue I've found weighted pistol squats provide a great freeweight alternative to challenge both the stabilizer muscles and take a substantial load off the upper body.

 

[BennyMagoo79]

Barbell will always be far superior to the smith machine for hypertrophy because the need for you to balance the load provides greater stress, and hypertrophy is a response to stress. Smith Machine may be great for isolation work as an accessory to free weight movements, however I feel that, for squats and even benchpress, other accessory movements are more valuable so time spent on the smith machine is wasted. Having said this, I also believe that if something works for you, then keep doing it.

 

[VO2Maxima]

machines get a bad rep because of the horrible carryover...whether you care or not, that really is the reason...

Only if you don't know how to use them.

Only a power lifter can nock a smith and that's because they have no use for them haha

Not sure if srs...why would a powerlifter have no use for a Smith machine?

a majority have reverted back to the old days of Big 3 Top Sets, accompanied by many Bodybuilder style movements to address weaknesses...

I actually think here is one area where things like machines shine. Let's take someone who gets hip shoot squatting. For them, doing things like hack squats (on a hack machine or doing hack squats on the Smith...either way it's a fixed straight line motion and pretty much the same) and close stance leg presses SHOULD have a lot of carryover to the actual squat. I often use the Smith for split squats too since if you load barbell split squats enough, there's a balance factor in there that I may not care to address that workout. You could do front squats instead, but your CNS can really only take so much, and for most people, it'll be easier to get in assistance work volume on a machine.

 

[Juicedeez utz]

It was intended as a joke, I just didn't want to argue over something I didn't say haha yes the squat is the better exercise in muscle fibre recruitment but I said the smith is a good tool and people should utilise it nothing else haha I also said jay cutler advocated the smith not that it was god.

 

[Yomo]

Only if you don't know how to use them.

there's a reason why you don't see Smith machines in any legitimate PL routine...when talking specifically about carryover to a Big 3 lift, there is no real right way to use them...there's a reason even a complete newb of a lifter can move more on a Smith...and if you want to claim overload, there are much better ways; Slingshot, off blocks, etc...

specificity is much more relevant...with isolation only addressing weak points...bench for example...weak at lockout; isolate the tris - skullcrushers, dips, pushdowns, etc...weak off the chest; build the chest - flyes, dumbbell press, pec deck, etc...in PL specificity would result in a movement like Close Grip Paused Bench, to address both issues at the same time...a lift with much better carryover executed with a barbell over a Smith....

now if we're just talking about improving aesthetics, than pick your poison, Smith, stationary machines, whatever you dream of...but comparing numbers in a Smith with their related Big 3 Barbell movement is just silly.

 

[ericos_bob]

It was intended as a joke, I just didn't want to argue over something I didn't say haha yes the squat is the better exercise in muscle fibre recruitment but I said the smith is a good tool and people should utilise it nothing else haha I also said jay cutler advocated the smith not that it was god.

Am I the only one who felt like superman the first time using the leg press after years of heavy barbell squats. Load up a volkswagen and it's still easy.

 

[VO2Maxima]

there's a reason why you don't see Smith machines in any legitimate PL routine...when talking specifically about carryover to a Big 3 lift, there is no real right way to use them...there's a reason even a complete newb of a lifter can move more on a Smith...and if you want to claim overload, there are much better ways; Slingshot, off blocks, etc...

specificity is much more relevant...with isolation only addressing weak points...bench for example...weak at lockout; isolate the tris - skullcrushers, dips, pushdowns, etc...weak off the chest; build the chest - flyes, dumbbell press, pec deck, etc...in PL specificity would result in a movement like Close Grip Paused Bench, to address both issues at the same time...a lift with much better carryover executed with a barbell over a Smith....

now if we're just talking about improving aesthetics, than pick your poison, Smith, stationary machines, whatever you dream of...but comparing numbers in a Smith with their related Big 3 Barbell movement is just silly.

I would agree with you, assuming we are talking about a beginner or early/mid-intermediate. After that, there's more to it than just specificity, especially when addressing weak points. You use flies and pec deck as examples of addressing weak points, and they lack specificity, yet they still have plenty of utility for someone for whom chest is the weak point of their bench. Plus, while no one would argue that more specific accessories like close grip or board press aren't useful exercises, there is no way that an advanced lifter would be able to get in sufficient volume trying to use them for the majority of their accessories without destroying their CNS.

As for the Smith, I've seen stronger powerlifters than both of us using it for close stance hack squats, ultra-wide stance hack squats, kneeling good mornings, etc as accessory work following the main lift of the day. It may be because Conjugate seems to be the predominant training philosophy at my gym, and therefore accessories are specific to individual weaknesses and also designed to not completely burn people out (there's no way that someone who just pulled 800+ off blocks can turn around and do another deadlift variation as their accessory work). And to be fair, I have seen other powerlifters who literally do nothing but variations of the big 3 (usually the high frequency guys, often doing lower volume per day...and I actually tried it myself for a while before my current coach gave me the "lol no"), so it's not like you can't build a routine based on being very specific either...there is more than one way to go about getting strong. But to say that no legitimate powerlifting routines utilize the Smith is incorrect.

 

[Yomo]

I would agree with you, assuming we are talking about a beginner or early/mid-intermediate. After that, there's more to it than just specificity, especially when addressing weak points. You use flies and pec deck as examples of addressing weak points, and they lack specificity, yet they still have plenty of utility for someone for whom chest is the weak point of their bench. Plus, while no one would argue that more specific accessories like close grip or board press aren't useful exercises, there is no way that an advanced lifter would be able to get in sufficient volume trying to use them for the majority of their accessories without destroying their CNS.

As for the Smith, I've seen stronger powerlifters than both of us using it for close stance hack squats, ultra-wide stance hack squats, kneeling good mornings, etc as accessory work following the main lift of the day. It may be because Conjugate seems to be the predominant training philosophy at my gym, and therefore accessories are specific to individual weaknesses and also designed to not completely burn people out (there's no way that someone who just pulled 800+ off blocks can turn around and do another deadlift variation as their accessory work). And I have seen other powerlifters who literally do nothing but variations of the big 3 (usually the high frequency guys, often doing lower volume per day), so it's not like you can't build a routine based on being very specific either...there is more than one way to go about getting strong. But to say that no legitimate powerlifting routines utilize the Smith is incorrect.

if you could name me more than 3 relevant Elite Power Lifters who employ the Smith with any sort of consistency, specifically for carryover, and not for isolation, ie, TuT for quads, I'd like to know who...

and I never mentioned not utilizing isolation...I myself use the main lift, a variation of the main lift as a supplemental, and similar light weight high rep isolation movement as a designated accessory..

and now a days, auto regulation is used more and more in order to prevent burning CNS on a regular basis...supplemental lifts more than any should be almost directly influenced in this manner...and a majority choose to implement their supplemental or variation such as a pause variation, pin variation, etc on a day where the main top set is a completely different Big 3 Lift to avoid same day wear and tear.

 

[VO2Maxima]

if you could name me more than 3 relevant Elite Power Lifters who employ the Smith with any sort of consistency, specifically for carryover, and not for isolation, ie, TuT for quads, I'd like to know who...

and I never mentioned not utilizing isolation...I myself use the main lift, a variation of the main lift as a supplemental, and similar light weight high rep isolation movement as a designated accessory..

and now a days, auto regulation is used more and more in order to prevent burning CNS on a regular basis...supplemental lifts more than any should be almost directly influenced in this manner...and a majority choose to implement their supplemental or variation such as a pause variation, pin variation, etc on a day where the main top set is a completely different Big 3 Lift to avoid same day wear and tear.

How does isolation not have carryover? If your quads get stronger using the Smith as an accessory, you squat should also get better. Or are you also going to argue that hack squats have no carryover to squats? And if you use a high rep isolation exercise as an accessory, is there some reason that for certain people, the Smith couldn't serve this purpose, other than some random matter of principle?

Just curious, are you a USAPL guy? No judgement either way, just seems like a large majority of the time, they're the ones who are really advocating for auto regulation. No one is saying RPE isn't a valid training method. Just that it's not the only training method, and I'm not even sure it's the predominant training method, at least outside of the USAPL. And it's definitely not the predominant training method for the equipped guys.

 

[Yomo]

How does isolation not have carryover? If your quads get stronger using the Smith as an accessory, you squat should also get better. Or are you also going to argue that hack squats have no carryover to squats? And if you use a high rep isolation exercise as an accessory, is there some reason that for certain people, the Smith couldn't serve this purpose, other than some random matter of principle?

Just curious, are you a USAPL guy? No judgement either way, just seems like a large majority of the time, they're the ones who are really advocating for auto regulation. No one is saying RPE isn't a valid training method. Just that it's not the only training method, and I'm not even sure it's the predominant training method, at least outside of the USAPL. And it's definitely not the predominant training method for the equipped guys.

once again, not once did I say isolation has no carryover....

All I'm saying is the chances of improving your squat are greater when working a variant...pause squats, front squats, pin squats, etc, especially when directly compared to isolating a single muscle like calves, quads, hamstrings in order to try and improve said lift in a similar manner...not sure how you can argue against that.

and the only reason I even mentioned RPE, is because you mentioned CNS recovery...I have yet to implement the practice, but I am very far from being considered a strong Powerlifter by my own personal standards, let alone within the sport itself...but I do enjoy learning more and more about the sport everyday and am very well versed in relevant and past all time lifters and their proven methods...

 

[VO2Maxima]

once again, not once did I say isolation has no carryover....

All I'm saying is the chances of improving your squat are greater when working a variant...pause squats, front squats, pin squats, etc, especially when directly compared to isolating a single muscle like calves, quads, hamstrings in order to try and improve said lift in a similar manner...not sure how you can argue against that.

For the beginner and early/mid-intermediate, who still needs to improve at how to do the movement, yes. For the advanced lifter, maybe, maybe not. It depends on training program and the lifter. Smaller lifters would probably be able to handle that better than larger lifters, most women would probably be able to handle that better than most men, and small raw lifters would probably be able to handle that better than equipped lifters. I think you'd be very surprised by what a lot of very strong people are doing for accessory work. That's not to say they're not using the main lifts (or a variation of the main lifts that happen to target their weaknesses), just that only makes up one or two exercises per day, and the rest is more isolation-oriented assistance work.

and the only reason I even mentioned RPE, is because you mentioned CNS recovery...I have yet to implement the practice, but I am very far from being considered a strong Powerlifter by my own personal standards, let alone within the sport itself...but I do enjoy learning more and more about the sport everyday and am very well versed in relevant and past all time lifters and their proven methods...

I'm glad you enjoy learning about the sport...that's how it should be. Keep an open mind. And remember that most people aren't really detailing how they actually train publicly for the world to see. I did the "squat more to improve squatting" thing for quite a while and was pretty set in that belief, but then continued to talk to more and more people stronger than me, and suddenly you learn that there's more than one way to go about this, and sometimes what works at one point in your career isn't necessarily optimal at another point (otherwise we would all still be running 5x5 or 5/3/1 forever). And I hope that I continue to have the opportunity to talk to more of this sport's legends and continue to learn. Never get so set in your ways that you assume that yours is the best way or the only way.

 

[fitfreak_CP]

The smith machine takes away using your stabilization muscles around the main muscle that your primary focus is on. It allows you to focus on the muscle your trying to work with better isolation. It takes away using things such as lower back at times when squatting and isolates your quads more.

 

[Justlooking5]

For the past two years since I started bodybuilding again (I'm almost 35 now have been training since 17) I have only been using free weights (other than calf raise/leg press). No smith machine, no other machines. I've noticed I have fewer joint issues with my shoulders etc. by doing this, and I tend to think it has to do with going with your body's natural ROM.

That said, I used to use the smith machine back in the day (I was on AAS then also), and was certainly bigger and stronger in those days.