Machines, my thoughts.

[Goosey]

I was thinking about barbell exercises.

When a boxer throws the killer punch, he instinctively stands shoulder width distance with dominant foot forward, arm at a 90 degree angle, fist clenched and torso slightly twisted.

The power starts at the feet builds up in the legs and hip, torso bent forward untwists and the fist that began at shoulder width moves towards the mid line of the body and makes contact when all muscles are contracted and in their strongest position at impact.

So much power is generated that a properly timed skilled punch will break bone.

At the end the movement resembles a shoulder press more than anything else.

I'm not talking about "functional exercises" but more trying to understand the movement of the body.

Some might say and do, that machines don't allow for natural movement.

There are good and bad machines, but a good machine where the biomechanics are sound is a far more efficiant and safer exercise than a barbell.

And in the case of the bench press, one would benefit more using a dumbbell standing, rather than lying down.
I was going to say that a machine with a converging movement was better until I started writing.

 

[JazDSpaz]

They serve their purpose I guess, but alot of machines are purely isolatating one or two muscles, where anything with a barbell uses your whole body becuase there is no assistance.

Theres only a few machines I like and use. I mean squats with a barbell for instance there is nothing more natural then a squat, you use it unknowingly all the time since you could walk, same with deadlifts, they are naturally occuring movements for the body only slightly adjusted to insure the exercise is excuted properly (with heavy weights) so as not to injure ones self.

This is my opinion anyway.

 

[Goosey]

Nothing will replace the barbell squat in terms of $ and productivity.

 

[Goosey]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFwjR664ISQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player]H Squat 14 plates x 15 reps - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Neddysmith]

I think machines have their place, but more from a BBing stand point rather than from a PL or WL stand point, all because generally each machine is designed (whether they achieve their objective is another point and varies on every machine) to isolate an individual muscle.

 

[Brick]

I only like 1 machine and thats the cable pull, gotta say tricep rope pulls are the only exercise I can't do in my garage that I miss.

 

[Rambodian]

I'm a fan of free weights, but agree that machines have their place. Actually I would love to own some machines for more variety if nothing else. Plus I really like the chest press I used once, it just hit my chest so dam good, like nothing else lol. So yeh they are great for isolation movements, and the cable ones are great for keeping tension in certain movements. I used the cable machine when I was going to the gym for lying chest flys, they worked my pecks way better than dumbells in that movement.
But in general, free weights FTW.

 

[RyanF]

Machines definitely have their place. Most of them don't fit much in my own training, but that doesn't make them bad.

 

[0ni]

Those shitty Life Fitness machines and the hammer strength plate loaded machines are the only pressing exercises where I have ever felt my chest contracting hard. I know a lot of pro bodybuilders swear by the hammer incline press

 

[rino60]

H Squat 14 plates x 15 reps - YouTube

... just... why.... ?

I am a big fan of good machines - they are damn hard to find in a commercial gym, but something that is bio-mechanically orientated, and smooth; is almost irreplaceable as far as efficiency goes. As a result of their difficulty in being found, I predominantly use free weights.

Gotta use those compounds to keep packing on size.