He also looks to be starting the squat with his knees.

I've got the correct form down, I started out using dumbells too Built. I've done them with the bar with no weights on it, but I've never added weights to the bar (not including the smith). The guy in that clip looks like he's scooching, lol. Back dat azz up! I do them with the wider stance because of you and I also steer clear of the hip adductor/abductor machine. This thread is getting hugeeeeeeeee. Guess we all want a nice butt ! :-)
Thunder, thanks for the advice and encouragement.
There is so many conflicting opinions on lifting, but let's remember what we all have in common, that's the love of working our muscles!

1. NSAIDs drastically reduce post-exercise protein synthesis.

2. They can do a number on your stomach in the long-term (and possibly the short-term).

3. Often, the NSAIDs are just providing symptomatic relief; in other words, are they just mask the pain instead of actually reducing the causative inflammation.

It has to do more with acute vs. chronic use. While it is beneficial to get past the inflammation stage ASAP with high-dose NSAIDs with acute injuries, they markedly blunt protein synthesis, which is a crucial factor in tissue regeneration, etc. The use of anti-inflammatories can also reduce prostaglandin synthesis, which is part of the pain signal, but also a part of the hypertrophy process as well, which can mean a lack of growth or a negative protein balance in a chronic setting.

NSAIDs certainly have a place in acute inflammation scenarios, as in the case of a traumatic injury or the initial onset of tendonitis. Decrease the inflammation with very high doses, and you can get into the initial stages of physical therapy much sooner

I don't think Dogbone said that Smith squats were the only leg movement she has ever done.

Free weight squats may be the king of all exercises, but I'll put myself out there and say that Smiths squats CAN be used (assuming proper form) with success to add variety to any training program. I have been using them for years, and they have not caused me any knee pain. Years of running did that for me. This is not evidence, just my personal experience.

I have searched for awhile looking for studies that would prove or disprove the "Smith machines are dangerous" myth. I come up with alot of anecdotal info, a great deal of opinion, and some conjecture, but no studies/hard science.

If anyone has any that directly addresses the issue, please share.

Something of interest that I just read.

University of Memphis

Knees allowed to travel past the toes, as is typical in a free bar squat resulted in a 28% increase in knee torque. However, when the knee does not pass the toe, the stress instead goes straight to the hips and low back. Squatting with the knees behind the toes (as in Smith squats with the feet out in front, which is how most seem to do it) resulted in a more than 1000% increase in hip torque.

That is interesting.

I wonder what would happen if they studied the Smith machine squat in the same manner?

I'm curious to see if the results on the transferrance to the hips/low back would be the same, since on the Smith, you get to lean back against the bar, which will reduce hip stress.

Would be cool to see how they would tie together.

No, actually it wouldn't reduce the stress. Feet out in front means that you're leaning back against the bar. You can't have the feet out in front without leaning back against the bar, and you can't have the feet out in front unless you're on a machine. (this foot position is impossible with a free bar squat)

So, feet out in front (knees not passing toes) by default puts you in the same position as leaning back against the machine. And the previously stated results would therefore apply.

I understand all of that.

What I am saying is that I would like to see the numbers. Leaning back does mean feet out in front.

The study you cited didn't use feet out in front. It blocked the knees from travelling beyond the toes by using a piece of wood.

Leaning back against the bar does take some of the load off of your hips, but according to the cited study, restricting knee movement places force on them.

A study on a Smith machine to measure it would clearly prove it. I would like to see how different it would be.

I wonder who would fund that one though.

The pattern overload issues with the Smith machine are still relevant and very real. And it's not unique to just the smith obviously, but anything machine that locks you into one plane.

I can see where you are coming from here in terms of machines-- but I think one important thing to remember (especially in this forum, which is first and foremost a low-carb support website, and not a bodybuilding site) is that form is everything, and it is MUCH easier to go awry on form with free weights.

I use quite a few dumbbell and barbell exercises in my lifting routine, but I do incorporate some machine movements as well-- not only for variety, but also because there are some areas where the machine really encourage proper form. For example, leg curls just plain work better on a machine. I realize that there is a benefit to be derived from using core muscle groups etc...to maintain balance etc... But the point of many machine exercises is to isolate a muscle group and really focus on it.

Anyway, that`s my non-scientific 2 cents.

-db

Yanno, throwing my hat in the ring here... I don't like machines for anything a free-weight can do. You just don't hit the stabilizer muscles, and over time, this is a recipe for injury. I don't like the idea of "lies we tell children" - oversimplifying a concept so anybody can grasp it led us to "cardio is the way to leanness" and "a low fat diet is a healthy diet for all". There ARE a few machines that are useful in a gym - hack sled, leg press, leg extensions (although my orthopedic surgeon hates these, too), but I wouldn't let anyone I liked use a Smith machine for squats without warning them of the physics. I'd rather see someone drop the weight down, connect properly to their body, and build it up properly. Why learn it wrong several times when you can learn it right, once?

My .02

Well now we are way off topic ...



That's the key. Periodization covers this.

This thread will go on forever if we get into the free weights vs. mixed approach to training debate that had been raging on for as long as I can remember.

I believe in using a variety of methods for training. I cycle a few methods depending on what I am doing that season ... usually geared toward the athletic end of it all.

Okay, so you think that folks who know so little about lifting that they can't be trusted with free weights are going to understand periodization?

That's a really good point actually.