Any of you mastered almost all machines in the gym?

Here is what I am trying to say:

http://www.answers.com/topic/weight-training

Although weight training is similar to bodybuilding, they have quite different goals. Bodybuilders compete in bodybuilding competitions, so they train to maximize their muscular size and develop extremely low levels of body fat. In contrast, most weight trainers train to improve their strength and endurance while not giving special attention to reducing body fat below normal. Weight trainers tend to focus on compound exercises to build basic strength, whereas bodybuilders often use isolation exercises to visually separate their muscles, and to improve muscular symmetry. Pre-contest training for bodybuilders is different again, in that they attempt to retain as much muscular tissue as possible while undergoing severe dieting.

 

However, the bodybuilding community has been the source of many of weight training's principles, techniques, vocabulary, and customs. One worrisome trend has been the spread of anabolic steroid use into neighbourhood gyms.

With Isolation, you can target certain areas of the muscle, such as the short head Biceps compared to the long head, and other things.

Also, http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/shockyourselfoutofthecomfortzonepart1.php

Basic Rules of the Superset

 

Supersets are basically broken down into two types of exercises. Mass and isolation exercises.

 

First let me explain what I mean by mass and isolation.

 

A compound movement is a exercise that involves two or more joint movements. These tend to build the most mass.

 

Isolated exercise involves one discernible joint movement and are used to target a muscle.

 

A general Weight Training Exercise Classification is as follows:

 

Mechanics-

 

Compound. Basic-Many/Auxiliary-Some

Isolation. Basic-some/Auxiliary-many

 

We can also describe them as closed chain or open chain movements.

 

A closed chain is an exercise in which the end segment of the exercised limb is fixed, or the end is supporting the weight. Most compound exercises tend to be closed chain movements.

 

An open chain exercise is one in which the end segment of the exercised limb is not fixed, or the end is not supporting the weight. Most isolated exercise are open chain movements.

 

"Mass exercises" and "isolation exercises" however are relative terms.

Since I can't seem to post the long-winded reply I have regarding isolation work, I'm simply going to link to a Word document that has what I've written. Nothing like writing for 30 minutes and not being able to post it!

http://www.veganessentials.com/images/Isolation.doc

If it asks for a username and password, click cancel and you should still be able to view the document (hopefully!)

Ryan

Since I can't seem to post the long-winded reply I have regarding isolation work, I'm simply going to link to a Word document that has what I've written. Nothing like writing for 30 minutes and not being able to post it!

 

http://www.veganessentials.com/images/Isolation.doc

 

If it asks for a username and password, click cancel and you should still be able to view the document (hopefully!)

 

Ryan

I believe the reason you coulding post it is because you had the word "c u r l" in it, but take away the spaces. Theres some sort of bug in this forum that doenst let you post the word, so put "c*rl", thats what I do. I remember I had that problem and it was frustrating.

While you do make a good point, and you are right, that is not the scenario I was painting out. I am talking about doing this in cycles. Of course you should start off and build the base with compounds, but I mean to cycle isolation with machines when you want to specialize a certain muscle part.

And yes it would be benficial to the biceps. The biceps are two different muscles, and therefore if you were to focus on the short head and not the long head, the short head would grow and not the long head. It is beneficial because it is two different muscles, just the same group.

Hi Koll, good morning

Let me answer to your last statement first:

So are you bad mouthing me now? I have been paying attention to the rolling eyes as well as your last statement?

 

BTW, I am getting a bit apprehensive of posting on this topic. If I am going to be mocked however slightly then I don't wanna talk. I don't take kindly to that. So I hope I understand what your points were.

Sorry that you got me wrong

I was never mocking you. I appreciate your opinion and enjoy this conversation. You say some very clever things sometimes and mostly we even have the same opinion, only not here.

When you stated all the possible movements of the pecs, I felt a little mocked.

What I was saying is that if you have vasodilation, via the pump, that is one step to growing muscle. And you are saying that that has nothing to do with growth? If you don't take the waste out of the tissues, its obvious whats going to happen. And what if you don't get enough nutrients? Blood flow is important in growing muscle.

Yes, it is. But it is no stimulus. AND you get increased blood flow in every worked muscle, wether you feel the pump or not. And the blood flow is a reason for stretching after weights, which i always do and advise to do.

By the way, even when you're a pump junkie, you can get awesome pump with free weights

And if you are focusing on a specific body part, why would you ever want to include another body part in it? For example, if you are trying to make your biceps standout more because it is being overshadowed by the delts, why would you want to work out the deltoids more than you have to?

Do you really believe that the deltoids would be worked too much in this scenario by doing barbell curls? That you wouldn't be able to make your biceps catch up because the deltoids benefit as much from curls?

You stated that you can't grow muscle with Cables, and that is why I responded because you can.

Okay.

I meant BIG muscles. You can get muscles to grow with cables, to a certain extend, as a beginner.

I agree with that. Sure compount exercises are good, and I am not disputing that. But if you just do that all the time, you will end up getting plateaued. You need to cycle things according to your goals.

You don't need to cycle away from free weights. Cycle the volume, the frequency, the rep range, the intensity, the exercises, everything - no need and no reason for doing machines.

If you want to focus on biceps, why would you even continue to use this type of cycle? You have to change it to match what you are trying to gain.

I think you can focus on biceps very well with dumbells or barbells. A machine can't replace your focus and concentration. In fact, i feel that with a dumbell the concentration is better than with a machine.

What you say about machines is very theoretic. I haven't found a machine that lets me isolate my biceps as well as dumbell do. The prescribed movement prevents it, instead of focusing on your biceps you have to follow a probably suboptimal way of movement. Machines are not perfectly copying the natural movement while taking away the need to stabilize (that sounds like from an advertising for gym machines ).

I don't think you understand what I am saying. If you are focusing on the biceps, you would work out the biceps in that fashion. Not necessarily all the body parts.

Okay, sorry, i did get that wrong. I'd still prefer free weights as isolation exercises, though

Split Training is good though. People grow diifferently and different training methods work for different people.

Yes, that's true! Agreed

It still doesn't make sense. If you are focusing on biceps, why would you want to include other muscles if those could be the ones overshadowing what you are trying to work out?

As i said above: i don't think the back, or delts, or legs would get more workout than the biceps by any biceps isolation exercise with free weights. Say standing barbell curls - you need to stand up straight and fix the upper arms while curling, so you need stabilizers. But the main focus is still on biceps. You won't give up on your last rep because the delts are grilled - the biceps are.

Weight trainers tend to focus on compound exercises to build basic strength, whereas bodybuilders often use isolation exercises to visually separate their muscles, and to improve muscular symmetry.

That is a common misconception.

I was talking about natural bodybuilding. For roid users apply different rules. They can grow with cable isolation work. Actually, i guess the reason why many hormone freaks do a lot of isolation exercises is not that they want to improve their symmetry, but that these exercises are done with lower weights and put them at a lower risk of tearing a muscle or tendon. Successful bodybuilders always rely on free weights.

This statement you quoted implies that bodybuilders are not as strong as they look and that machines/isolation is better for shaping your physique, i disagree with both (in natural BB).

Another point comes to me.

The weights you use on a machine are higher than with free weights, right? For example, incline bench, machine vs. free barbell. Topher just wrote that he did 350lbs on that machine. Now Topher sure is a muscular guy, but i guess he can't do the same weight on the barbell. This would be a LOT for free weights! Now if the machines put the focus on the worked muscle, and you use more weight, why don't you get much bigger from them? You should be bigger doing 350lbs in the machine than doing them free weight - you're focusing on pecs etc.!

And doing 350 free you'd already be a HUGE guy!

love and peace

Daywalker

Morning Daywalker.

Sorry that you got me wrong Sad

I was never mocking you. I appreciate your opinion and enjoy this conversation. You say some very clever things sometimes and mostly we even have the same opinion, only not here.

When you stated all the possible movements of the pecs, I felt a little mocked.

Sorry, I didn't mean to do so. I totally forgot that you were a doctor, and I didn't remember that. So sorry if I sounded as if I was trying to "school" you or act as if you were uneducated. Sorry for coming off that way.

I appreciate your inputs as well, I was just getting mixed signals and I wasn't sure so I thought I'd ask before saying that you did. Thanks for the clear up and sorry again

Yes, it is. But it is no stimulus. AND you get increased blood flow in every worked muscle, wether you feel the pump or not. And the blood flow is a reason for stretching after weights, which i always do and advise to do.

 

By the way, even when you're a pump junkie, you can get awesome pump with free weights Very Happy

I agree with that. I was just stating that the blood is a big facor in regards to growing muscles. Without stimulus, nothing would happen. But the same goes in regards to the blood.

Im not trying to say that the blood is more important than the stimulus, but that you need both to achieve great results. Like I also mentioned in regards to the nitric oxide, that's what it does and people have had great results with the supplement version. I have a friend that went on it and it worked great.

Do you really believe that the deltoids would be worked too much in this scenario by doing barbell curls? That you wouldn't be able to make your biceps catch up because the deltoids benefit as much from curls?

Not only the deltoids, but also the traps. A lot of muscles contract to add to the stabilization, and that alone would waste energy. Contraction of any particular muscle already starts to take out of the ATP stores.

I don't personally think that in general it would make a lot of difference in growing the deltoids alone, but my idea is that if you are focusing on the biceps alone, wouldn't you want to cancel out any other muscles that you are not focusing on to improve? This would leave you more energy to workout the biceps since you will not be contracting other muscles to stabilize the body, as well as avoid injury if you plan on going heavy. I'll address the rest in regards to what you said about Topher

Okay.

I meant BIG muscles. You can get muscles to grow with cables, to a certain extend, as a beginner.

Sorry about that. I hadthe impression that you were saying you would make no gains. But how could you not grow bigger muscles if you keep on meeting the demands of more and more weight? The principle that you need to increase weight in order to build stronger and bigger muscles alone should be enough to accept that cables could big bigger muscles, even for non beginners. Shouldn't it? If not, why is your opinion as to why it wouldn't?

You don't need to cycle away from free weights. Cycle the volume, the frequency, the rep range, the intensity, the exercises, everything - no need and no reason for doing machines.

I shouldve been more clear on that, I think I mixed things up there. Yes you can stay on free weights and still gain. What I meant was that for whatever you are planning, there are different avenues to take, therefore there are cycles. If you are trying to isolate a muscle the best you can, then you would go to machines so that you focus only on that muscle alone.

I think you can focus on biceps very well with dumbells or barbells. A machine can't replace your focus and concentration. In fact, i feel that with a dumbell the concentration is better than with a machine.

What you say about machines is very theoretic. I haven't found a machine that lets me isolate my biceps as well as dumbell do. The prescribed movement prevents it, instead of focusing on your biceps you have to follow a probably suboptimal way of movement. Machines are not perfectly copying the natural movement while taking away the need to stabilize (that sounds like from an advertising for gym machines Razz ).

I think your point made here is really good in terms of proving your idea. However I still disagree. The reason is that while it prevents other movement, if you were to do say a preacher curls, you are could fidget any which way because you have to stabilize your arm. If you do this on a machine, it is already controlled for you and therefore you wont need to involve other muscles in order to keep it in order.

Like you also said, that is why you can do free weight exercises with proper and strict form. My defense against that would be if you are doing it with proper and strict form, then you would be doing less weight in order to appease the stregnth of your stabilizer muscles.

Okay, sorry, i did get that wrong. I'd still prefer free weights as isolation exercises, though Wink

Okay, cool!

As i said above: i don't think the back, or delts, or legs would get more workout than the biceps by any biceps isolation exercise with free weights. Say standing barbell curls - you need to stand up straight and fix the upper arms while curling, so you need stabilizers. But the main focus is still on biceps. You won't give up on your last rep because the delts are grilled - the biceps are.

I mentioned the reasons I believe above

That is a common misconception.

I was talking about natural bodybuilding. For roid users apply different rules. They can grow with cable isolation work. Actually, i guess the reason why many hormone freaks do a lot of isolation exercises is not that they want to improve their symmetry, but that these exercises are done with lower weights and put them at a lower risk of tearing a muscle or tendon. Successful bodybuilders always rely on free weights.

This statement you quoted implies that bodybuilders are not as strong as they look and that machines/isolation is better for shaping your physique, i disagree with both (in natural BB).

 

Another point comes to me.

 

I take it that the reason why you say that it works for roid users is because the roids already build the muscles, even with little working out? I have noticed that a lot of BBers do use light weight, and that is mainly when they just do them really fast and even without proper technique.

Also they are pros. Why would their risk of getting a sprain or strain be any more important than natural BBers? If anything, Naturals should be more affraid since there lifts are probably not even close to the roids users. Also, they have the roids working for them at an anabolic level, so why would they be more concerned with tear than say a natural who doesn't use it. Also if they are on roids, we know that they use other supplements besides that.

The weights you use on a machine are higher than with free weights, right? For example, incline bench, machine vs. free barbell. Topher just wrote that he did 350lbs on that machine. Now Topher sure is a muscular guy, but i guess he can't do the same weight on the barbell. This would be a LOT for free weights! Now if the machines put the focus on the worked muscle, and you use more weight, why don't you get much bigger from them? You should be bigger doing 350lbs in the machine than doing them free weight - you're focusing on pecs etc.!

And doing 350 free you'd already be a HUGE guy!

Good point, I think thats your best statement since this entire debate!

Veganessentials and I already discussed the limiting factors in regards to machine. The cables, the angle, etc. that affects the actual resistance that is being applied.

I also had a friend that could do the 300s on the chest press, but for bench he was stuck at around 250. My idea for this would be, as stated the limiting factors, as well as the stabilization muscles and gravity together. When you are doing machines, the gravity isn't as strong as with free weights. Also when you do inclines, the handles are already there for you to grab, you don't have to pick it up first, and then go down.

We discussed that the weight issue with machines is a bit of a discrepency, I don't disagree with that.

Take care and sorry again for the confusion

I agree with that. I was just stating that the blood is a big facor in regards to growing muscles. Without stimulus, nothing would happen. But the same goes in regards to the blood.

Yes, but you always have blood flow in your muscles unless you're dead

Not only the deltoids, but also the traps. A lot of muscles contract to add to the stabilization, and that alone would waste energy. Contraction of any particular muscle already starts to take out of the ATP stores.

It's not a waste of energy. The ATP is stored in each muscle fibre directly! The different muscles do not share an ATP pool located somewhere outside the fibres. If this would be the case, then it would be a waste of energy.

I don't personally think that in general it would make a lot of difference in growing the deltoids alone, but my idea is that if you are focusing on the biceps alone, wouldn't you want to cancel out any other muscles that you are not focusing on to improve? This would leave you more energy to workout the biceps since you will not be contracting other muscles to stabilize the body, as well as avoid injury if you plan on going heavy.

No. Muscles are designed to work synergistic.

(Our body is capable of doing different things at the same time (providing energy to muscles and brain, coordinating nerves and muscles, while the kidneys are filtering the blood, the liver synthesizes protein and so on). )

I doubt you have more energy for the isolated muscle than you'd have for it using free weights. Plus you can add some slightly cheated reps after reaching muscle failure if you wish.

And i believe the risk of injury is no less due to the unnatural and forced movement.

But how could you not grow bigger muscles if you keep on meeting the demands of more and more weight? The principle that you need to increase weight in order to build stronger and bigger muscles alone should be enough to accept that cables could big bigger muscles, even for non beginners. Shouldn't it? If not, why is your opinion as to why it wouldn't?

There is a limit to that. At some point you would need huge weights for the isolation movement, which would consume time and energy to work with. You have only so much resources to spend on training and regeneration. Compound exercises are economic compared to isolation work, because they work more muscles in the same time. So while you'd be focusing on one part, you'd be losing on other parts, because you wouldn't be able to keep up the intensity in the main exercises.

Most people make the mistake of combining too much isolation work with compound exercises, which is too much for their regenerational ability.

And i think this is theoretical, because you cannot isolate a muscle in any movement. There will always be other muscles involved, even when you do machines.

Nobody grows huge arms (natural at least) doing only machine curls.

If you are trying to isolate a muscle the best you can, then you would go to machines so that you focus only on that muscle alone.

Okay, i get it. But i still disagree (i won't repeat myself now )

I think your point made here is really good in terms of proving your idea. However I still disagree. The reason is that while it prevents other movement, if you were to do say a preacher curls, you are could fidget any which way because you have to stabilize your arm. If you do this on a machine, it is already controlled for you and therefore you wont need to involve other muscles in order to keep it in order.

1 - you still contract other muscles on machines.

2 - the concentration on a muscle is a minor growth stimulus, if any. If you could grow by just concentrating, the atlas-program would be the only one in use You'd just stand there and contract your biceps as hard as you can. Then the triceps. Then the pecs etc. But this doesn't work, for it lacks the major stimulus for growth - weight. Weight moved is a growth stimulus, especially controlled negative with heavy weights. So while isolating your biceps on the preacher machine, you feel it being pumped but the microtrauma are less. Probably because you don't have to controll the movement!!!

Like you also said, that is why you can do free weight exercises with proper and strict form. My defense against that would be if you are doing it with proper and strict form, then you would be doing less weight in order to appease the stregnth of your stabilizer muscles.

Which is true. Then it comes down to what you want: isolation or weight. Doing an isolation exercise without proper form makes no sense, because then you don't isolate anymore. Rather do barbell rows with 80 than cheated curls with 40kg

But rather do strict curls with 30kg than cheated with 40 when you want to isolate the biceps! (Cheating is a good way to injuries )

I take it that the reason why you say that it works for roid users is because the roids already build the muscles, even with little working out? I have noticed that a lot of BBers do use light weight, and that is mainly when they just do them really fast and even without proper technique.

Don't call these jerks bodybuilders please

People who rely on drugs have no clue what kind of training really builds muscle!

Also they are pros. Why would their risk of getting a sprain or strain be any more important than natural BBers? If anything, Naturals should be more affraid since there lifts are probably not even close to the roids users. Also, they have the roids working for them at an anabolic level, so why would they be more concerned with tear than say a natural who doesn't use it.

Because roids make the muscle fibres grow, but at the same time make your connective tissue brittle. Why do you think do pro bodybuilders tear their pecs or biceps so often? Because they use so much weight? It's because the weight is too much for their fragile connective tissue, which did not grow adequately together with the muscle fibres. When you gain strength natural, your connective tissue will strengthen accordingly.

Good point, I think thats your best statement since this entire debate!

I'm glad that i said something decent at last

Veganessentials and I already discussed the limiting factors in regards to machine. The cables, the angle, etc. that affects the actual resistance that is being applied.

 

I also had a friend that could do the 300s on the chest press, but for bench he was stuck at around 250. My idea for this would be, as stated the limiting factors, as well as the stabilization muscles and gravity together. When you are doing machines, the gravity isn't as strong as with free weights. Also when you do inclines, the handles are already there for you to grab, you don't have to pick it up first, and then go down.

 

We discussed that the weight issue with machines is a bit of a discrepency, I don't disagree with that.

I don't get your explanation. WHY does a guy who benches 300lbs on a machine NOT have a bigger chest than the guy who benches them free?

I see your explanation why you can use more weight on the machine, but why doesn't make this grow you more? You have better focus on the muscles after all! According to your theory, they should grow big, only the stabilizers would remain weak.

Can you explain that?

Or do you finally see that i'm right and you're wrong?!

Yes, but you always have blood flow in your muscles unless you're dead Wink

Of course you have blood in your muscles unless you are dead. But if you are a smoker, you constict your blood vessels right? Thereby leading to hypertension, and worse. But what about the nutrients? Wouldn't this constriction also affect that?

It's not a waste of energy. The ATP is stored in each muscle fibre directly! The different muscles do not share an ATP pool located somewhere outside the fibres. If this would be the case, then it would be a waste of energy.

Made a mistake there, thanks for correcting me. Total energy is lost, not ATP.

No. Muscles are designed to work synergistic.

(Our body is capable of doing different things at the same time (providing energy to muscles and brain, coordinating nerves and muscles, while the kidneys are filtering the blood, the liver synthesizes protein and so on). )

I doubt you have more energy for the isolated muscle than you'd have for it using free weights. Plus you can add some slightly cheated reps after reaching muscle failure if you wish.

And i believe the risk of injury is no less due to the unnatural and forced movement.

Yes that is true and I agree with you. Even if you use machines, other muscles will be involved. But if you are lagging behind on a certain bodypart and want to catch up, why would you want to involve other muscles if you are just focusing on that? If you target is the biceps and biceps alone, why involve other muscles if they are not what your goal is? Why make things more complicated than you need to?

Heres some quotes of what I am trying to explain:

http://www.naturalstrength.com/features/detail2.asp?AuthorID=67&ArticleID=477

Another plus for machines is the fact that you can isolate an area that needs more emphasis. The synergistic effect mentioned earlier with free weight training isn't always desirable. In our opinion, there is a need to heighten the stimulation to a target area in order to force those muscles to perform the brunt of the work

http://www.24hourfitness.com/html/fitness/steele/fw_vs_mach/

Resistance machines are designed to emphasize a specific muscle or group of muscles. Free weights also emphasize a specific muscle but additionally they require the use of "stabilizing” muscles for support and control during an exercise.

http://www.bodytrends.com/articles/strength/machinesvs.htm

If you want to train one specific muscle group, machines aid in focus. It is difficult to do certain exercises (like a leg curl) with free weights, and a machine will hone right in on your desired goal.

http://www.webefit.com/articles/article_06_machvsfree.html

Isolation of muscle groups. You can work on specific body parts without engaging other supporting areas. Machines are sometimes the only option for clients with neck, back or leg problems.

If you have quotes, feel free to use them.

There is a limit to that. At some point you would need huge weights for the isolation movement, which would consume time and energy to work with. You have only so much resources to spend on training and regeneration. Compound exercises are economic compared to isolation work, because they work more muscles in the same time. So while you'd be focusing on one part, you'd be losing on other parts, because you wouldn't be able to keep up the intensity in the main exercises.

Most people make the mistake of combining too much isolation work with compound exercises, which is too much for their regenerational ability.

And i think this is theoretical, because you cannot isolate a muscle in any movement. There will always be other muscles involved, even when you do machines.

Nobody grows huge arms (natural at least) doing only machine curls.

But my argument is that you are cycling isolation for a certain muscle group. This isn't something that you will be doing for 3 months straight. And plus I am talking about one muscle group, not involving 2 3 or even 4 into this, just one.

You are right that there will always be muscles involved, but at what lengths? Machine will cancel out whatever possible muscles that don't need to be used, thereby leaving more focus on the bodypart.

1 - you still contract other muscles on machines.

2 - the concentration on a muscle is a minor growth stimulus, if any. If you could grow by just concentrating, the atlas-program would be the only one in use Wink You'd just stand there and contract your biceps as hard as you can. Then the triceps. Then the pecs etc. But this doesn't work, for it lacks the major stimulus for growth - weight. Weight moved is a growth stimulus, especially controlled negative with heavy weights. So while isolating your biceps on the preacher machine, you feel it being pumped but the microtrauma are less. Probably because you don't have to controll the movement!!!

1 - Discussed above

2 - How is the microtrauma less, and only talking about the microtrauma on the bicep. The control of the movement if you are doing curls are going to be the stabilization via the shoulders, the biceps have no control besides flexing the elbow and supination of the forearm. The rest of the control is taken by the shoulders.

Which is true. Then it comes down to what you want: isolation or weight. Doing an isolation exercise without proper form makes no sense, because then you don't isolate anymore. Rather do barbell rows with 80 than cheated curls with 40kg Wink

But rather do strict curls with 30kg than cheated with 40 when you want to isolate the biceps! (Cheating is a good way to injuries Wink )

Which is what I am trying to say. Like you mentioned, more than likely you will be able to do more weight (and lets say that the weight that you are on the machine is relative to the dumbbell and there are no limiting factors), which would lead to more growth stimulus as you put, which will lead to a better development of the muscles, correct? Correct me if I made a mistake in saying what you "said", I am thinking off the top of my head of what we talked about so far that's why, and I may have made a mistake.

Don't call these jerks bodybuilders please Razz

People who rely on drugs have no clue what kind of training really builds muscle!

Thats like me saying that people on supplements have no idea what real training is. I think theres a line that varies for each person. I still think that they do hard work even though they do take drugs.

Because roids make the muscle fibres grow, but at the same time make your connective tissue brittle. Why do you think do pro bodybuilders tear their pecs or biceps so often? Because they use so much weight? It's because the weight is too much for their fragile connective tissue, which did not grow adequately together with the muscle fibres. When you gain strength natural, your connective tissue will strengthen accordingly.

Ok that makes a lot of sense, thank you for clearing that up. I never thought of it that way so thanks!

So let me see if I get this right. The steroids only work on building muscle, but not connective tissue? Steroids are also catabolic for fats. However, the muscle gets bigger, while connective tissue stays the same? Thereby, the ratio (lets just call it that) of the muscle and connective tissue is no longer 1:1, but something like 4:1?

Laughing I'm glad that i said something decent at last Very Happy

No, you have been saying a lot of good things, but I think that one was the best of em all

I don't get your explanation. WHY does a guy who benches 300lbs on a machine NOT have a bigger chest than the guy who benches them free?

I see your explanation why you can use more weight on the machine, but why doesn't make this grow you more? You have better focus on the muscles after all! According to your theory, they should grow big, only the stabilizers would remain weak.

Can you explain that?

Even guys that bench on free are sometimes lagging. Theres a lot of factors that come into the equation as I mentioned. Also the timing of your reps, and stuff like that. Sometimes the weight doesn't even equate to the same thing, as the example that I gave with Tricep Pulldowns.

Like I said, lets say we live in a perfect world and the weights are relatively the same for each, with no limiting factors. The weights are the same, just that the involvement in the exercises are switched from stabilization and the intended muscle, to just the muscle alone.

Or do you finally see that i'm right and you're wrong?! Razz

Although you make valid points, no. I think we will keep on debating this no matter what, and we aren't the only ones to debate on this subject either. However I think that theres a place and time for machines, not to use them all the time. I'm not sure if you have read that in my posts, but I am talking about cycling isolation with machines, not doing them all the time.

Have a good one!