Machines vs. Free Weights
By: Andrew W. Cleveland III
Since the
development of assisted lifting "machines" such as those made my
Nautilus, Hammer Strength, etc., the fitness world has undergone a
revolution. Gyms and fitness clubs have expanded to sizes previously
unrecorded in order to incorporate the latest and trendiest innovations in
machine design. But have machines really made gym-goers and athletes
better off? Do the benefits provided by a vast array of machines outweigh
the costs and the harm they can cause to the undereducated?
Exercise and
lifting heavy objects have long been a part of human culture. Most
people might not be familiar with the legend of Milo of Cortona, the
progenitor of progressive overload. Milo began lifting a calf as a
regular routine of exercise. As the calf ate and grew larger, Milo
grew stronger as he progressively lifted a heavier amount. After the calf
had fully grown into what could correctly be described as a cow, Milo was still
able to consistently lift the cow, a much greater feat of strength, which
was beyond his abilities at the beginning. Now the point of this story is
not to go in-depth about the finer points of program design and
progressive overload but on the more simple level that, Milo didn't have the
luxury of machines to work with in order to become stronger and
healthier! He was forced to use what he had available. Although
PETA supporters today might argue that using a cow in such a fashion is cruel
and unusual, the basic message can still be applied in practice, it just
doesn't have to involve using livestock.
Ask
yourself, how often are you ever doing any strenuous exertions while lying or
sitting down? Does anyone comfortably sit in a rolling chair in order to
move something heavy such as a sofa or a desk? Do you lie or sit down in
order to perform a vertical jump? Real world actions such as these
require total body coordination, balance, and strength. When your own two
feet are the only points of contact between a stable base (i.e. the ground) and
the rest of your musculo-skeletal system, you are forced to maintain harmony
and equilibrium between all of your joints or suffer getting tackled, falling
over, or dropping whatever you are carrying, depending on the situation.
Being in the seated or lying position in a machine effectively removes the
majority of the balance effort required to lift a weight. Sounds great,
that makes it easier, right?
To answer
this simply, yes. Most people can biceps machine curl more than they can
strict barbell curl, machine press more than they can bench press, leg press
more than they can correctly squat, etc. However, what is the cost of
this false appearance of strength?
First, is
the lost opportunity to work additional muscle groups whose actions are
forfeited from sitting or lying down? For example, a machine shoulder
press, performed seated, primarily works the anterior and medial deltoids as
well as the triceps with a stabilizing effect from the traps and deeper
shoulder muscles. However, when performed standing with dumbbells, not
only are all those previously listed worked to the same, if not greater,
degree, but also the spinal erectors and the trunk, as well as the legs and
hips are employed also to maintain balance and a stable center of gravity while
lifting free weight overhead.
Second, is
the associated risk of injury accompanied by lifting with machines. Using
the example of the machine shoulder press vs. the standing overhead dumbbell
press, the machine version places the lifter in a seated upright
position. The seat of the machine is the surface through which the normal
force of the lift will be redirected back into the lifter, right into the
lumbar spinal region. Compared to the standing dumbbell version, this
normal force is instead directed into the bottoms of the feet, which can distribute
the effort across several stronger muscle groups in the legs and hips.
The lower spine carries the brunt of the normal force by itself in the seated
position, which can lead to any number of lower back problems.
Machines
have also contributed to a large increase in the occurrence of overuse injuries
in the past two decades. This is, of course, a long-term cost associated
with extensive machine usage. Due to the fixed motion pattern of a
machine, again looking at the machine shoulder press as an example, the lifter
is forced to adhere to the same movement groove on every rep, which may or may
not be the most optimal for his or her bone structure. Repeated use of
the machine on a weekly (or yearly, for that matter) basis will cause a greater
degree of joint wear-and-tear than performing the standing dumbbell
exercise. In the standing dumbbell exercise, the weight does not
force the repeated use of specific joint tissues through a motion pattern but
allows the free distribution of effort across the entire joint, enabling the
stabilizers of the shoulder to maintain a more efficient weight trajectory.
Machines,
however, would not be so popular today if they didn't offer SOME benefit.
Most beginners can attest to the fact that machines are easier to learn than
the correct technique for free weight exercises. Machines also offer
those with bodybuilding interests the ability to isolate specific muscle groups
to a greater degree than could be achieved with free weights.
The take
home message here (accompanied with a bit of shameless self advertisement) is
that you should evaluate your current lifting program to see if perhaps you
could benefit from some instruction in the use of free weights from a qualified
Recreational Sports personal trainer, like me.
