Anyone train pretty much machine only

[alfresco]

The question probably comes down to will more muscle fibers in the body be engages from a free weight movement or from one where the machine helps stabilize the load. Can't say i have seen any good studies along the lines of an EMG to have any clear understanding. Opinions will differ.

Not trying to be a dick, just trying understand your post as I may be misinterpreting your post or meaning.

Regarding muscular contraction, a muscle contracts in a ‘all of nothing’ fashion.

Meaning you can’t just recruit just part of the muscle. It is all or nothing at all. (A Bobby Caldwell song.) You don’t have a choice and you can’t change it.

And machines don’t care.

Your thoughts?

 

[buck]

Not trying to be a dick, just trying understand your post as I may be misinterpreting your post or meaning.

Regarding muscular contraction, a muscle contracts in a ‘all of nothing’ fashion.

Meaning you can’t just recruit just part of the muscle. It is all or nothing at all. (A Bobby Caldwell song.) You don’t have a choice and you can’t change it.

And machines don’t care.

Your thoughts?

That is totally my understanding as well. But with free weights more auxiliary muscles are used to stabilize the whole body i am guessing i.e. bent over row vs sitting in a machine and being supported row. The more volume the more work the more growth. 300# bent over rows seem harder then 300# in a machine too, at least for me. Legs and glutes etc are worked with bent over row, not hardly at all with the machine. So i am guessing there is more total muscle worked in a weeks time with free weights then with machines. At least from my perspective and experience. if machines weren't easier i would still be lifting free weights at this stage of life. But free weights are much more work so i use machines as they will do the job well enough.
And you can call me a dick if you want, usually it is family and friends that say that but the truth is the truth!

 

[Mufasa123]

Not trying to be a dick, just trying understand your post as I may be misinterpreting your post or meaning.

Regarding muscular contraction, a muscle contracts in a ‘all of nothing’ fashion.

Meaning you can’t just recruit just part of the muscle. It is all or nothing at all. (A Bobby Caldwell song.) You don’t have a choice and you can’t change it.

And machines don’t care.

Your thoughts?

It's close and for all intents and purposes correct. Reality is that fibers of individual muscles get contracted. More load, the closer you get to using all of them (and all at once) as that's the first way you exert more force. I forget exactly but basically your first reps of a 10RM set or 15RM don't recruit all the fibers but once you get to your last let's say 7-6 reps of a 10RM set assuming you are going for 10 reps, all of those reps will recruit all fibers.

Where we go next as you get closer and closer to failure is that fibers/motor units start dropping out and coming back on line. Your nervous system produces higher and higher levels of rate coding to keep them up and get them back on the game faster and faster (this actually increases systemic fatigue significantly and makes each rep more and more expensive as the nervous system increases and eventually maxes out rate coding).

Where training comes in is that a lifter becomes both more proficient as well as efficient in a practiced/trained movement. Less slop making a lift harder, but also improved synchronization or synchronized recruitment of fibers/motor units (mind muscle connection properly defined). This kind of rapid adaptation is what's behind the newbie gain phenomenon in that this high improvement rate at both muscle and nervous system adaptations enables fast and consistent levels of load progression.

Might be a little deep for this thread but you/I have talked before and I figured you might like the details.

 

[TheRoid]

That is totally my understanding as well. But with free weights more auxiliary muscles are used to stabilize the whole body i am guessing i.e. bent over row vs sitting in a machine and being supported row. The more volume the more work the more growth. 300# bent over rows seem harder then 300# in a machine too, at least for me. Legs and glutes etc are worked with bent over row, not hardly at all with the machine. So i am guessing there is more total muscle worked in a weeks time with free weights then with machines. At least from my perspective and experience. if machines weren't easier i would still be lifting free weights at this stage of life. But free weights are much more work so i use machines as they will do the job well enough.
And you can call me a dick if you want, usually it is family and friends that say that but the truth is the truth!

OR...a different perspective would highlight that the significant role played by the stabilizers impedes the maximum intervention of the target muscle.

 

[buck]

OR...a different perspective would highlight that the significant role played by the stabilizers impedes the maximum intervention of the target muscle.

Maybe. But then i would think the target muscle would get so strong and out of balance with the surrounding structure that damaging the other muscles or joint would become more likely setting back total growth. For example i have never heard of where a persons rotator muscles became so big and strong of a problem that they damaged the pec muscle. But i suppose it could happen.

 

[brokenarrow]

I'm 50% Machines and 50% free weights on all body parts except back. 75% machines and 25% free weights, and my back is my best body part. Hmmmm.

 

[TheRoid]

Maybe. But then i would think the target muscle would get so strong and out of balance with the surrounding structure that damaging the other muscles or joint would become more likely setting back total growth. For example i have never heard of where a persons rotator muscles became so big and strong of a problem that they damaged the pec muscle. But i suppose it could happen.

You have a point here and albeit I stick to machine for the bulk of my sessions, I almost always integrate some free weights movements (light) toward the end as a sort of insurance against injuries in everyday activities.

 

[buck]

You have a point here and albeit I stick to machine for the bulk of my sessions, I almost always integrate some free weights movements (light) toward the end as a sort of insurance against injuries in everyday activities.

I can understand we all do what we think is best. And there really is no way to know if it is or isn't. In my early years i used free weights in my home gym as that is all i had and would use machines at school as that is all they had. Later when i got serious i started all my workouts with free weights then switched to machines towards the end of the workout when i thought my stabilizers were trashed so that i could extend my workout. Who knows if that was best. I only have my experience.

 

[alfresco]

This is a really good thread

 

[alfresco]

It's close and for all intents and purposes correct. Reality is that fibers of individual muscles get contracted. More load, the closer you get to using all of them (and all at once) as that's the first way you exert more force. I forget exactly but basically your first reps of a 10RM set or 15RM don't recruit all the fibers but once you get to your last let's say 7-6 reps of a 10RM set assuming you are going for 10 reps, all of those reps will recruit all fibers.

Where we go next as you get closer and closer to failure is that fibers/motor units start dropping out and coming back on line. Your nervous system produces higher and higher levels of rate coding to keep them up and get them back on the game faster and faster (this actually increases systemic fatigue significantly and makes each rep more and more expensive as the nervous system increases and eventually maxes out rate coding).

Where training comes in is that a lifter becomes both more proficient as well as efficient in a practiced/trained movement. Less slop making a lift harder, but also improved synchronization or synchronized recruitment of fibers/motor units (mind muscle connection properly defined). This kind of rapid adaptation is what's behind the newbie gain phenomenon in that this high improvement rate at both muscle and nervous system adaptations enables fast and consistent levels of load progression.

Might be a little deep for this thread but you/I have talked before and I figured you might like the details.

Will save you and everyone else my copious dribble, diarrhea of the mouth, polemic diatrade by saying just this . . . if you curl 100lbs you are activating 100% of your muscle fibers. If you curl 30lbs you are still activating 100% of your muscle fibers regardless of the number of reps performed in either case, i.e., 1st rep 100%, second rep, 100% and so on until failure.

The number of muscle fibers used are exactly the same regardless of the weight, the intensity of effort, the number of reps, the range of motion, the speed of movement or the position of the muscle, it does not matter. It is all the fibers or none of the fibers, on or off, just like a light switch.

This is my understanding (and is very brief for me ).

Could go on and on but don’t want to be boring.

 

[Mufasa123]

Will save you and everyone else my copious dribble, diarrhea of the mouth, polemic diatrade by saying just this . . . if you curl 100lbs you are activating 100% of your muscle fibers. If you curl 30lbs you are still activating 100% of your muscle fibers regardless of the number of reps performed in either case, i.e., 1st rep 100%, second rep, 100% and so on until failure.

The number of muscle fibers used are exactly the same regardless of the weight, the intensity of effort, the number of reps, the range of motion, the speed of movement or the position of the muscle, it does not matter. It is all the fibers or none of the fibers, on or off, just like a light switch.

This is my understanding (and is very brief for me ).

Could go on and on but don’t want to be boring.

The all/nothing refers to individual fibers/motor units not entire muscles composed of groups of these and when they are recruited. This is an okay summary on different fiber types within a muscle and when they are recruited. Beginning with Type I and then Type II A and B as required by force production. Recruitment descrimination is how we modulate force production otherwise ever time we used a muscle it would be a near maximum force generated - break a lot of shit and no ability to finesse anything or even walk as it's greatly sub maximal. https://www.acefitness.org/resource...s/5411/10-things-to-know-about-muscle-fibers/

This is a recent study (hard to believe people got paid for this one) where it is a known, proven, given that higher loads increase motor unit activation within a muscle (what we are discussing - more load more recruitment as you need more units active to generate more force) BUT the authors postulate that an exercise performed to failure or rep maximum regardless of load can achieve full activation (ie what I said above that while the initial reps of a higher rep set won't see 100% motor unit recruitment, as fatigue build your intra set rep max, rep by rep until you reach the range where you are using all fibers/motor units).

https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/jp278056

 

[dantes]

Honestly, I’ve gone back to basic lifts with machines of course and I’m noticing more positive changes in my physique and my strength is going back up. Also, machine strength is going up which endures more hypertrophy. So , machines have their place, but I truly believe free weights are what builds that density that we saw in certain eras

I definitely think barbell benching makes for a very dense thick chest and all the guys in the 90s did this and they had the best chest of any era as a whole. Honestly though I don’t barbell press as I had many close calls with near pec tears and I am glad I stopped. If I do barbell press it’s in the smith with no more than 225 at the very end of my chest workout when I am heavily fatigued

 

[Lift2staysane]

I do free weights from home and machines mostly in the gym. I've found the variety of routines to be very beneficial. Machines are great when injured; I can often do movements I would not with free weights; thus keeping me in action.

 

[TheRoid]

Guys forgive me but, for the life of me, God help me, I can't see any relationship between "DENSITY" and your preference for machines or free weights.

 

[luki7788]

Markus ruhl did all his chest training on machines and had one of the largest and densest chests in history

 

[3clipseGT]

If I can use a machine to hit the intended muscle, I will because on a machine you can brace better, contract better because of the better bracing and should get a better end result.

The whole notion of “stabilizer muscles” and compound movements lead to denser bigger muscles is an out dated thought process and just not true.

If you enjoy training with compound movements by all means get after it, it’s mainly machines for me and I program my clients training the same way unless they specifically request compound movements.

 

[Hatchet]

It just depends on goals. Powerlifters who want to get big and strong wont be using many machines.
Folks who want to pump up their pecs, sure. Stabilizers are real (when it comes to strength) proven many times over.

Also, again, if one wants to spend their "workout" on their butt, that's up to them.
Many prefer barbell/dumbbell training and heavy basics. Age/injury absolutely can dictate preference.

 

[Biggerp73]

"Young lifters need to learn the basics! Stick to the bread and butter"
But also
"Young lifters need to train hard...they need to understand where failure is..."

VERY hard to do both of these. I was a football player and powerlifter and lived on the basic barbell movements, and i was strong as fuck at them. BUT, i needed someone around me to make sure i wasnt going to fucking kill myself. I would go up to random 50-year-old men in the gym at 5AM asking them to spot me on bench as I need to hit a triple with 455....like whattt...asking for a problem there lol

Yes, young lifters need to know/learn/understand the basic movement, but you dont NEED those specific movements to build a quality foundation and physique. I havent squatted, benched or DLed in years. Im allll machines now as i train to failure. Its ALOT easier for me to bail out of 5pps on Hammer Incline then it is to get out of 405 on Barbell Incline Bench.

5pps on hammer incline is a lot easier than 405 incline bench period lol

 

[Biggerp73]

I use 95%+ machines. Safer and IME more effective, as I can push harder and do rest pause sets.

The only exercises where I grip a free bar are SDLs, hammer curls, shrugs, and the occasional side laterals.

The shrug machines are way nice bro

 

[Biggerp73]

My gym has hand selected pieces from Atlantis, Prime, Hammer Strength, Cybex, Arsenal, Body Masters, Nautilus, Flex Leverage, Kore Strength, Gymleco, Rogers Athletics, Life Fitness, Magnum, Precor and Panatta (probably missing a few).

All of these are not random pieces but the best pieces from each line. Not sure how long ago you used Panatta, but they are fantastic machines. They are probably the smoothest machines and basically an improved version of all the classic pieces with better movement but more importantly improved path/motion to really enable (almost force you to use correct form) islotating the target muscle. Out of all the machines they get used the most.

Now if you want to talk about overrated, the most overrate piece is the Nautilus Pullover. Yes we have the orginal Dorian one. This piece is almost a myth due to it's reputation built up by people who never even seen one in real life, only have seen Dorian use it in old videos and are parrating about how they know some guy who used it and says it is amazing. And those that have the opportunity to use it, I would guess 90% of them don't even know how to or actually target their lats using it. Not saying it's a bad machine, but there is nothing magical about it. It is not what built Dorian's back.

Idk about the nautilus specifically but a plate loaded pullover machine is unparalleled brother