Threadbearer
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2007
- Messages
- 2,747
- Reaction score
- 652
What's your preference, walking lunges, stationary lunges, or do you feel the need to do both?
STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
I do stationary lunges/split squats because my gym doesn't have enough room for me to do walking lunges with a barbell on my back. I would do walking lunges if I had the space though.
I've already got the space to do stationary lunges, just not walking. There's no Smith machine here, and I wouldn't use it for anything squat or lunge-related even if there was. Or anything else for that matter, except perhaps calf raises. I'd only touch it if it were one of those new things which move back and forth as well as up and down, and even then I'd prefer a barbell.
Well, when you bench, military press, or squat with a free bar, the natural bar path is never straight up and down. Not only that, but no two reps you do will have exactly the same bar path. So I don't like the Smith machine because it forces you into a fixed movement pattern, which is unnatural. It may not injure you right away, but I do think that it will weaken your support of natural movements. Less importantly, I don't really like the slight counterweight effect, either.
^Yep. Years ago I used to do Smith bench sometimes. Mostly because it let me stack more weight on the bar.
I would submit the smith helps you because for many exercises you have to follow a same unaltered path, bench, bent row, military press.
I would submit the smith actually helps you.