Hello ! First, let me thank you for your great website. If
you do not answer questions from readers, just tell me, I would
understand this.
As far as I know squatting in the smith machine puts more
stress on your knees than free (to parallel) squats do and has
other problems as well. I got this information from Stuart's
book and various websites. My problem is I just joined a new
gym because the old one closed and immediately (after doing my
first set of free squats) got into a discussion with one of the
trainers (staff) there. He says that you can put your feet well
in front of the bar on the smith and lean back into the machine
and squat. That way your back will be straight and upright through
the movement and unless the angle between your upper and lower
leg is less than 90 deg., there would be no extra stress on the
knees compared to free squats. My thoughts on this were that
putting the feet in front of the bar creates a force on the knees
from your feet pushing forward on the floor. Also, if you put
your feet under the bar, squatting to 90 deg. is far from parallel,
and would make it something like a quarter squat. If you squat
to parallel with your feet under the bar it forces you to bend
forward excessively and your shins will move forward a lot as
well. Now I'm not active in sports science so I had no way to
prove my claims. I even did a few medline searches but only found
stuff on regular squats.
What do you think of squatting in the smith machine? I feel
the fixed path is unnatural and can't believe it's good for the
knees and or back can you point me to some scientific studies
that prove this? Or am I mistaken and there is no difference?
Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks a lot,
Mirko Bruess Hamburg, Germany
Stuart,
I am the author and webmaster of an ExRx on the Net. Dr. Eric
Serrano, the leading benefactor of ExRx and I have always been
a supporter of your low volume recommendation.
I recently received a question regarding the smith squat with
reference to your site. I read "Experiments in the Gym:
The Squat" by Bill Piche.
He states "...the only thing I got was very sore knees.
Avoid hack squats." I found his rational difficult to accept;
recommending others to avoid an exercise due to HIS biomechanical
deficiencies.
Before I post my response on the ExRx site I would like to
give you an chance to express your arguments. I am open to criticism.
If you are too busy to respond, I understand. I just want to
give you this opportunity to defend your position before I post.
Perhaps both of us can achieve a greater understanding to alternative
arguments.
Smith Squat (Rough draft enclosed)
James Griffing, ExRx
Hi James,
I'm responding, briefly, to your message re Smith machine
squatting.
I read your rough draft. I dislike the Smith machine squat
for several reasons. I go into them in detail in my books. In
a nutshell, three of the reasons are..
1. The machine locks the body into the machine's groove, and
prevents the body from determining its groove.
2. If you stand with your feet pretty much underneath the
bar, the knee flexion will be exaggerated, and stress there exaggerated
too.
3. If you put your feet forward, to reduce knee flexion, the
lower back is put in a weak position, with rounding of the lower
back likely. In addition, there is additional stress on the knees
as the feet want to slide forward but don't because of the friction
from the floor surface.
All in all, the Smith machine squat may give an illusion of
safety relative to the barbell squat, but in reality it's a bad
exercise. Sure there are degrees of "bad" depending
on the specific form used, and the individual, but it's still
a bad exercise. Rather than try to minimize the problems with
a bad exercise, why not just stick to exercises that have far
better potential? Of course, even the "safe" alternatives
can be ruinous if not done properly, but best to stick with movements
that have good potential.
Best wishes,
Stuart
|