Are Smith Machines being a bad thing just a fucking meme? Why are they bad tho? I need some reasons why you hate them.
>>36262457
You don't build any core/ stabilising strength.
Squat your max in the smith and then the next day try it in the squat rack, see what happens.
Only thing it's useful for is calf raises.
>>36262457
They have specific uses but do not replace a barbell for compund lifts
doesnt build stabilizers, if you try and lift a barbell youll be shaky and unstable
Doesn't build stabilizers. I try to keep my core lifts free weights and barbell, makes my routine transferable to other gyms and also helps with stabilizers.
Don't depend on things like machines.
>con
You have to work against the machine to do literally anything.
The bar weighs up to 15lbs.
It stabilizes the weight for you.
>pro
Its resistance training
Its better than nothing
OK for accessory work
If you do a lift, let's say for instance bench press in a smith machine, and do it extremely slowly, with an emphasis on form, would this help you have better form doing bench press outside the smith machine?
or would the same rule apply as
>>36262515
?
Enables bad form, takes up space that could be used for a power rack
So could a smith machine potentially be useful for accesory lifts? Like shrugs, forearm curls, maybe upright rows?
Or would they all still be more appropriate with bars and dumbbells?
>>36262536
Think about this. The Smith locks you into a straight up and down path.
>>36262545
>shrugs
Sure.
>curls
Nah
>upright rows
Don't do em
>>36262536
The correct bench press form cannot be duplicated on a smith machine
>>36262457
Just thought of this, does it matter if the weight is balanced on a smith machine? Like if I put two 45lbs on one side and nothing on the other would it still work?
>>36262536
It doesnt matter how slow you go or correct your form is, you use muscles when benching with a barbell that cannot be activated on a smith machine since its held in place. If you bench exclusively on smith, you will virtually make zero gains on your stabilisers.
>>36262515
>memeilizers
Noob here. Just tried this machine today. I felt like I was leaning into the machine as I was going down on a squat. You can't really lean forward into a squat without this machine guiding you. I feel like it makes the weight a lot less.
>>36262457
They're good for helping some people with certain injuries lift. Or old people.
But some exercises done with it can cause more harm than good. I think Blaha made a few videos about it.
>>36262607
This. The bar path when benching doesn't go straight up.
>>36262577
>>upright rows
>Don't do em
Do them with a wide grip, and not on a smith machine. I have a torn labrum, and it's one shoulder exercise I can do safely.
They are a machine, and therefore have the same inherent weaknesses of any machine as compared to its free weight equivalent.
There's nothing *specifically* bad about the Smith machine other than that. It just usually gets the most scorn because it's typically kept in the free weights section at most gyms (since you still have to put plates on it) which can trick noobs into thinking it's the same as free weights.
they are bad for your joints
free weights are GOAT
source:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19855308
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20093960
>>36262457
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WS989Ei31k
Smith squats will ruin your joints, don't do them
>>36262841
D y e l
Its good for calf raises, behind the back shrugs, probs it
>>36262457
On a smith you just make it go up and on a bench you have to control the motion.
First time I benched for realies it was everywhere
>>36262457
When people call the Smith machine useless, it's due to the sad fact that most people only think in black/white. There are no compromises, only amazing and total shit. A funny example of this is when people on here debate the almost daily "SS vs SL" and seem to agree that one is absolutely great while the other is the worst piece of garbage ever invented despite the fact that they're almost similar.
Look, the fact of the matter is that 90% of the time there are better tools for whatever you want to do in the gym than the Smith machine. Does that mean that you can't accomplish anything using the machine? No. You can. But why opt to use the worse tool when there are better options?
As a general rule, if a machine makes a given lift easier than the corresponding barbell or dumbbell lift at a given weight then it's because it's not forcing you to recruit as many of the smaller muscles used to keep things stable.
Why would you want to make a lift easier by means other than becoming stronger? That defeats the whole purpose.
>>36262629
not in the sense that you mean
It's basically because the machine handles your stabilizers for you. It's taking some pressure off of the lift and this makes it easier. Easier enough that you can actually lift a lot more with the machine than you can alone.
I've literally never seen anyone squat with good form on a smith machine. Is this because of the machine or are they all just idiots? Seriously watch people squat on them, it's horrific.
>>36264657
Both. Exrx.net has an article on how to squat in a smith machine properly, but people also have shitty squat form anyway because legs aren't a normie priority
>>36262536
You can't bench in a smith machine with correct form. The bar path in the bench press is slightly diagonal which is not achievable with the smith machine.
