I
imported_andré
Guest
i like those hammerstrenght-types a lot.
try the legpress, the benchpressmachine and the seated rowing, if youve access to them.
try the legpress, the benchpressmachine and the seated rowing, if youve access to them.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]Don't tell me what Ronnie and the other knuckleheads are doing in the gym. What does that prove? Nothing.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]When is the last time we saw a study that used free weights?
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]At least Mike and Ray Mentzer brought some intelligence to bodybuilding and they embraced machines...
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] (JDK @ Oct. 04 2002,6:24)]i have access to the complete med-x equipment line
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] (JDK @ Oct. 08 2002,1:54)]lil popa pump, i`m living in Stuttgart, Germany and working in a facility called Kieser Training. We just have med.x ,nothing else. So for me training there is free. There are over 70 Kieser
facilities here in germany, so when you are here just take a look.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] (McRhomboids @ Oct. 09 2002,9:53)]When practical, dumbells are preferable. EMG studies for bench pressing and overhead pressing have shown slightly more activity in the pectorals and deltoids with dumbells rather than barbells. Dumbells also reduce one's risk of future injuries by making sure small stabilizer muscles are sufficiently strengthened in conjunction with the prime movers. Machines are the worst at this. And according to Fred Hatfield, studies have shown that the adaptations from using dumbells better translates into athletic functionality.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]Few machines, however adjusted, conforms optimally to the natural arc of an exercise motion. Sometimes, the machine doesn't offer enough range of motion.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]The MedX and Hammer machines are said to have very low friction coefficients. However, even a .05 coefficient increases the pos-neg difference by 10%
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]I would say that the fact a machine does not conform to the arc of its coresponding free weight movement is one of the advantages of a machine.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]The effect of friction is highly dependant not only on the bearings (or whatever mechanism) but also on other factors such as temperature and velocity. It is not as simple as saying "10%".
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]These machines allow for a +20% weight increase for the negative movement. I have only tried the Leg Press which I was too strong for (I think hydraulics are the basis for resistance, haven't had time to look at them too much).
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] (Vince Basile @ Oct. 10 2002,8:42)]I have sustained injuries with bench pressing and dead lifting and consider those two exercises dangerous if done with very heavy weights. It is usually demonstrating strength that leads to injuries. That some do not get injured is no argument that it is safe. Bodybuilders should never do heavy deadlifts if they want their biceps to stay in one piece. Bench pressers will eventually have sore shoulders or torn pecs. This is not a matter of opinion because the evidence is there.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]From a physics point of view, the friction coefficient has the same fractional effect, regardless of the other variables associated with it. A frictional coefficient of 0.05 on a 100lbs force produces a 5lbs oppositional force, ergo you essentially lift 105lbs and lower 95lbs. Temperature, lubrication, pulley/bearing design, material and other factors only effects the coefficient, not how the coefficient widens the pos-neg difference.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ][O]ther factors only effects the coefficient, not how the coefficient widens the pos-neg difference.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]Second, the coeffcients you are using are from approximation charts. They are not absolute and are just quick and dirty numbers to use in calculations.
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]constant velocity throughout the majority of the ROM, ie acceleration = 0), then the effects of friction can minimized to such an extent that they are not as noticeable as say "5lbs"
<span =''>[b said:Quote[/b] ]Lastly, I think it is a mistake to apply simple mechanics to movements that involve the human body because the human body is capable of metabolic work, which is not taken into account in simple mechanics problems.