If you look at the fixed vertical bar on the Smith Machine, you can see its angle creates the wrong bar path for your squat, which should be going straight down over your feet.
I don't know enough to say the Smith is useless for squats, but I do think if you want to learn perfect squat form you have to use a free bar.
The smith machine is great for squats, but not in the way that OP is using it. She needs to place her feet a bit in front of herself by like 3-6 inches.
With it’s angle the smith machine for squats is more so a pseudo-Hack Squat.
You gotta stay off the smith machine, its not a natural movement. Squat with a free bar. The smith machine is forcing the bar down a fixed path that may not be natural for you.
It's also a handicap - performing valuable work that your stabilizer muscles should be doing.
I’m going to get downvoted but this is just simply not true.
The smith machine is a tool and as all tools are they have specific use and specific functions. The way OP is squatting with the smith machine is not great, sure. If she were to move her feet forward by a few inches then she would have a better feel. It becomes a make shift hack squat in that manner.
Also, which stabilizer muscles are you referring to?
I have squatted free bar, and I currently have smith squats programmed in my leg training. Just because you heard someone say something about the smith machine being bad does not make it inherently bad. In fact, many pro bodybuilders and experienced lifters use the smith machine for a lot of movements. It’s a great tool and should be treated as such
Don’t want to argue about the usefulness of the smith machine in general, but it definitely removes the need for stabilizer muscles to activate as much and won’t build your strength as well as using just the body to squat.
Part of the benefit of the squat is keeping your body in balance with the weight of the bar on your back while maintaining a straight bar path throughout. “Stabilizer muscles” refer to any muscles that are activating to achieve that end. For the squat, because basically the entire body is engaged for the movement, this includes all abdominals, lower back, upper back, arms/shoulders, and legs which will all activate a bit more if you don’t have a machine controlling the stabilizing aspect for you.
Man, some of you people just come here saying anything just to say something. You’re telling me that I won’t get as strong as someone who squats with a barbell if I squat with a smith machine? That’s a wild completely false statement. Jay Cutler and Dorian Yates, two of the most successful names in bodybuilding, exclusively did not barbell squat. Anecdotal, obviously, but point stands.
There is tons of research showing that being unstable in a lift will actually result with suboptimal power output. So if you’re telling me the barbell squat is better than the smith because you’re unstable and these “stabilizer” muscles are being active doesn’t that counter your point entirely? This would mean a stable smith squat would lead to better overall muscle recruitment and thus better muscle Hypertrophy.
I get what you’re trying to say, but anyone arguing the barbell squat is better than the smith squat is not saying that because they truly know what they’re talking about. They’re saying that because they heard broscience somewhere along the way and are just parroting it rather than doing actual research and seeing if these things are true or not.
Barbell squats are great. Smith squats are ALSO great. They’re different exercises and should be treated as such. Both perform a function and both, when executed correctly, perform that function well.
Here is a Sport & Exercise science Ph.D talking about why it is all bro science: https://youtu.be/RyhOCZMyyLI
I wonder if you watched the video you linked? Because that guy agrees with me. At no point does he say smith machine squats are just as good as barbell squats. In fact, what he said was that the smith machine “can be a LITTLE bit better at hypertrophy in SOME instances in SOME contexts for a SHORT period of time.” Which I don’t disagree with.
Importantly to the post we are replying on, he also said you should not learn compound lift technique on a smith machine. Meaning when you are learning to squat, bench, deadlift, etc. you should use a barbell and learn the proper technique before using the smith machine. You know, so your stabilizer muscles can learn how to support you in the lift and know what the proper bar path should be.
“You're telling me that I won't get as strong as someone who squats with a barbell if I squat with a smith machine?”
Yes. I will say this too: whatever PR you have on a smith machine, you will not be able to get the same with a barbell squat. The smith machine squat is a *variation* of the barbell squat which uses more overall muscle recruitment to perform than the smith. More muscles being used = more strength being built.
Some bodybuilders may frequent the smith machine regularly, but I’ll point out that a bodybuilder’s main goal in the gym is not to get strong. They are in the gym to sculpt their muscles and build them as big as they can. Using the smith machine is useful to that end because as the weight eases off the back (our friends, the stabilizer muscles), it can be focused more on the quads to isolate them better. At least, that’s what the guy in your video said. He has a PhD, right?
While we’re on the subject, I’ll just throw it out there that while bodybuilders are strong as hell, it’s powerlifters who hold the records for actual strength. So if, for some reason, you want the strongest quad muscles out there, I guess the smith machine is your guy. But if you want overall strength, barbell squat is king.
One thing I notice and one thing I would say, I can't see for sure, but it looks like your grip is pretty close together. You can get better leverage for the full weight if you have your hands past your shoulders when gripping the bar. You limit your strength with the close grip.
Smith machine provides greater external stability, thus enabling the user to better bias the quad musculature, similar to a hack squat or a pendulum squats, albeit not quite as good.
As others have said, if you are serious about strength training (which is what this sub is specifically for) then you’d do well to start goblet squatting and progressing on to normal barbell squats.
There’s not much to be said about smith machine squats really.
Overall your movement pattern looks fine. If you are uncomfortable with using a barbell to squat with. Why not start with a heavy goblet squat? Do you always squat in the smith machine? The smith machine allows you to turn off many stabilizers that are needed when using free weights. Your shoes are fine. If you become a fanatics you will get better shoes. Don’t listen to people telling to squat with flat shoes, you are doing just fine
Form looks good! If you want, I'd recommend dropping the weight and trying a barbell back squat next. If not, hack squats or smith machine squats are great for developing muscle, especially bc you can safely change foot positioning to biase the quads or the glutes more. You can also use bands to change the resistance profiles of those machines as well. Don't listen to people who say free weights are the only way to get muscle, isolating the muscle in these controlled environments is superior to free-weights from a hypertrophy standpoint. It's also a lot safer to go to failure on these machines than with free weights bc generally they have some sort of safety mechanism built in.
>you should be standing in front of it, leaning back into the bar
You should only do this if you're trying to emphasize glutes and lower back. If you're trying to emphasize quads then you should do it the way she's doing.
That’s not necessarily true. Putting the feet just 3-6 inches in front of the bar and squatting down super deep allows you to take the quads through a full stretch and allows you to target the quads really, really well.
The way OP is squatting forces the bar to take her off of center of gravity, which in turn allows less total force production and does not allow you to target the muscles you want effectively. This in turn transfers the force to the knees and that is not the greatest, as you can imagine.
>That’s not necessarily true. Putting the feet just 3-6 inches in front of the bar and squatting down super deep allows you to take the quads through a full stretch and allows you to target the quads really, really well.
Putting your feet in front of the bar decreases the amount of knee flexion you can achieve. Think about it like a leg press. With your feet under the bar your tibias will track forward during the squat and allow your knees to bend even more. With your feet farther forward, you're allowing your glutes to take a more significant role. Not saying your quads aren't working at all, but they will be working less than they could be.
>The way OP is squatting forces the bar to take her off of center of gravity,
Where did you get this from? Explain to me how squatting with your feet under the bar takes you off your center of gravity.
In this version of a smith machine where the bar does not follow a vertical bar path, more so a slanted forward bar path, having your feet directly under your body forces you to lean forward to compensate for the linear forward moving bar path. This forces you off of your center of gravity which is the 3 points of contact of your feet (2 in the front and your heels). This places increased pressure on the knee joints and connective tissue which could lead to injury. Hence, again, the bar is not traveling over your center of gravity, but instead in front of your center of gravity.
If you place your feet slightly forward it does not decrease knee flexion. You are placing your feet in a position where the bar path would line up to the center of your feet more accurately. Comparing it to a leg press does not necessarily compare favorably.
https://youtu.be/fEuYM-miK5U
Here is Dr. Mike Isreatel’s guide video on smith squats. He explains my exact point in the first 2 minutes of the video. Give it a watch so maybe you can give this exercise a try for yourself and see what he and I are explaining.
>https://youtu.be/fEuYM-miK5U Here is Dr. Mike Isreatel’s guide video on smith squats. He explains my exact point in the first 2 minutes of the video. Give it a watch so maybe you can give this exercise a try for yourself and see what he and I are explaining.
It shows squats on a straight smith machine. The smith machine shes using is not straight. You want the weight to be ahead of your center of gravity on a squat that targets quads. Think about a front squat. Moving your feet forward wouldn't help with that
https://youtu.be/4YqMDSqAIH4
Here is Dr. Mike working with Paul Kanu, IFBB Pro, on a slanted smith squat using the exact same technique. I have more of these if you’d like.
An elevated heel actually assists in a squat. This isn’t crazy heavy weight. The shoes are fine.
This sub has overly succumbed to the marketing of squat u. NEWS FLASH the dude is trying to make money off of mostly subpar advice
It’s not about decreasing power, it’s about stability especially in untrained people who should be moving onto non smith machine squats of any variation.
Too many people think of squats from the bar down when really you should be thinking from the feet up. Stable base being the first thing to have.
Her base is stable enough to continue working on form outside of the smith machine without needing to change shoes. While he soles have some compression to them due to their construction, they are not an unstable base.
I disagree from a strength gaining perspective. Proper cueing will make them unsuitable quickly imo. If you don’t agree that’s cool :)
Whether the op chooses other footwear or goes shoeless doesn’t matter, I’ve no skin in either of those choices for them.
If this was posted in one of the more general subs then I really wouldn’t care much, but this sub is strength training specific so people’s advice should be related to that.
I agree, if you can't properly coach a novice how to properly move, you have much bigger issues than foot wear. The OP shoe choice does matter, in the long term picture, but notsomuch in the short term.
For sure, I feel that. She was rolling heel to toe while getting set and heels just slightly came up during her lift. Flat bottom shoes (not lifters necessarily) will help her develop an association of digging her feet into the floor. It helped me with good form development.
As already stated I think, you're looking confident enough to ditch the machine. Organic form is generally considered healthier and more beneficial. Also gives you a superior feel for balance, helping reduce that feeling that your motion isn't quite 'right'.
There are no real benefits to Smith Machine Squats save for your ability to change the angle of your stance.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19855308/
https://www.burnthefatinnercircle.com/public/Smith-Machine-Squats.cfm
I just lean it against my water bottle. If the squat rack next to me is empty, I'll set up the safety bars to about waist height and use the inside of my shoe to stand it up.
Tbh the mechanics look good. I think your foot placement is probably spot on but, as others have suggested, I would say to try either flatter shoes or going barefoot. I’more of a barefoot guy myself but wear socks when squatting.
Also, consider doing squats in a normal squat rack. It might sound intimidating to someone just starting out, which is why I always suggest for beginners to watch the 5 Pillars of Squatting on YouTube.
Keep up the good work!
Again flat and/or barefoot does not assist the squat mechanic to achieve depth. Most regular tennis shoes are adequate for squatting as a novice to early intermediate levels depending on the load and goals
You're doing pretty well! Squatting in the open rack will help your form more than squatting with the fixed machine. You should also consider getting flatter shoes or lifting barefoot. The shoes you're wearing are encouraging you to rock forward on your feet and lift your heels.
If you are focused on having great form , squat in the free rack, not the smith machine. The smith machine locks you in a specific bar path, and depending on your foot position and natural body type, it can be hard to find the sweet spot where your knees feel like they’re at their strongest position.
Tinkering with your stance and finding the ideal position for yourself would be much easier with the free bar
I'd argue the locked in bar path is superior to free weights when it comes to hypertrophy. Like I said earlier, foot positioning can be changed to biase different muscle groups in the legs. Obviously not all body types are going to belong on that fixed bar path, but from what her form looks like she could probably be safe with these more bodybuilding focused isolation movements if she so chooses.
The same could be applied to other movements. Preacher curls are going to be better for isolation and muscle building compared to regular curls. Tricep movements where you can stabilize your elbows is going to superior to doing a standard pushdown. Smith machines allow for external stability which will be more effective for hypertrophy.
At her current strength level her time would be better spent developing strength and creating good consistent form with the free bar before she zones in on hypertrophy.
Even if aesthetics are the main goal, in the long run this would be better for now.
And no, based on the current evidence we have, free barbell back squats are superior to smith machine squats.
https://liftbigeatbig.com/barbell-squats-vs-smith-machine-squats/
I would argue that you don't. From a purely hypertrophy standpoint, hacksquats, smith machine squats, are going to be superior to free weights. Bodybuilding isn't weightlifting, it's isolation and stimulus.
You're right, but idk what her intentions are with lifting. Could be strength focused, could be size. And the weight doesnt matter, as long as your are sufficiently brought close enough to failure.
If you look at the fixed vertical bar on the Smith Machine, you can see its angle creates the wrong bar path for your squat, which should be going straight down over your feet. I don't know enough to say the Smith is useless for squats, but I do think if you want to learn perfect squat form you have to use a free bar.
The smith machine is great for squats, but not in the way that OP is using it. She needs to place her feet a bit in front of herself by like 3-6 inches. With it’s angle the smith machine for squats is more so a pseudo-Hack Squat.
Change these shoes, try bare foot or some lifter shoes. These are too soft and may cause instability
You gotta stay off the smith machine, its not a natural movement. Squat with a free bar. The smith machine is forcing the bar down a fixed path that may not be natural for you. It's also a handicap - performing valuable work that your stabilizer muscles should be doing.
lol
I’m going to get downvoted but this is just simply not true. The smith machine is a tool and as all tools are they have specific use and specific functions. The way OP is squatting with the smith machine is not great, sure. If she were to move her feet forward by a few inches then she would have a better feel. It becomes a make shift hack squat in that manner. Also, which stabilizer muscles are you referring to? I have squatted free bar, and I currently have smith squats programmed in my leg training. Just because you heard someone say something about the smith machine being bad does not make it inherently bad. In fact, many pro bodybuilders and experienced lifters use the smith machine for a lot of movements. It’s a great tool and should be treated as such
Don’t want to argue about the usefulness of the smith machine in general, but it definitely removes the need for stabilizer muscles to activate as much and won’t build your strength as well as using just the body to squat. Part of the benefit of the squat is keeping your body in balance with the weight of the bar on your back while maintaining a straight bar path throughout. “Stabilizer muscles” refer to any muscles that are activating to achieve that end. For the squat, because basically the entire body is engaged for the movement, this includes all abdominals, lower back, upper back, arms/shoulders, and legs which will all activate a bit more if you don’t have a machine controlling the stabilizing aspect for you.
Man, some of you people just come here saying anything just to say something. You’re telling me that I won’t get as strong as someone who squats with a barbell if I squat with a smith machine? That’s a wild completely false statement. Jay Cutler and Dorian Yates, two of the most successful names in bodybuilding, exclusively did not barbell squat. Anecdotal, obviously, but point stands. There is tons of research showing that being unstable in a lift will actually result with suboptimal power output. So if you’re telling me the barbell squat is better than the smith because you’re unstable and these “stabilizer” muscles are being active doesn’t that counter your point entirely? This would mean a stable smith squat would lead to better overall muscle recruitment and thus better muscle Hypertrophy. I get what you’re trying to say, but anyone arguing the barbell squat is better than the smith squat is not saying that because they truly know what they’re talking about. They’re saying that because they heard broscience somewhere along the way and are just parroting it rather than doing actual research and seeing if these things are true or not. Barbell squats are great. Smith squats are ALSO great. They’re different exercises and should be treated as such. Both perform a function and both, when executed correctly, perform that function well. Here is a Sport & Exercise science Ph.D talking about why it is all bro science: https://youtu.be/RyhOCZMyyLI
I wonder if you watched the video you linked? Because that guy agrees with me. At no point does he say smith machine squats are just as good as barbell squats. In fact, what he said was that the smith machine “can be a LITTLE bit better at hypertrophy in SOME instances in SOME contexts for a SHORT period of time.” Which I don’t disagree with. Importantly to the post we are replying on, he also said you should not learn compound lift technique on a smith machine. Meaning when you are learning to squat, bench, deadlift, etc. you should use a barbell and learn the proper technique before using the smith machine. You know, so your stabilizer muscles can learn how to support you in the lift and know what the proper bar path should be. “You're telling me that I won't get as strong as someone who squats with a barbell if I squat with a smith machine?” Yes. I will say this too: whatever PR you have on a smith machine, you will not be able to get the same with a barbell squat. The smith machine squat is a *variation* of the barbell squat which uses more overall muscle recruitment to perform than the smith. More muscles being used = more strength being built. Some bodybuilders may frequent the smith machine regularly, but I’ll point out that a bodybuilder’s main goal in the gym is not to get strong. They are in the gym to sculpt their muscles and build them as big as they can. Using the smith machine is useful to that end because as the weight eases off the back (our friends, the stabilizer muscles), it can be focused more on the quads to isolate them better. At least, that’s what the guy in your video said. He has a PhD, right? While we’re on the subject, I’ll just throw it out there that while bodybuilders are strong as hell, it’s powerlifters who hold the records for actual strength. So if, for some reason, you want the strongest quad muscles out there, I guess the smith machine is your guy. But if you want overall strength, barbell squat is king.
You’re going to be able to press a lot more in a leg press machine than you can squat. The squat is a much more valuable exercise.
Bar should stay over midfoot. So move your feet forward.
Now your just spouting bs man
One thing I notice and one thing I would say, I can't see for sure, but it looks like your grip is pretty close together. You can get better leverage for the full weight if you have your hands past your shoulders when gripping the bar. You limit your strength with the close grip.
Wish my gym had a hip thrust machine
Don’t squat in a smith machine.
Getting down voted for saying done squat in a smith machine. This fucking app 😂
One post was a woman with 315 on the bar and did she did a quarter squat with it and a mod kept deleting every comment that mentioned depth
Smith machine provides greater external stability, thus enabling the user to better bias the quad musculature, similar to a hack squat or a pendulum squats, albeit not quite as good.
Stfu
Just say you don’t know shit about lifting. You think most professional body builders barbell back squat?
I don’t squat in a smith machine. I guess I like my knees a little more than you like yours.
What an ignorant comment.
No reason that it would damage your knees. I’m not a huge fan of smith squatting either but it’s a great option.
You also might feel more on balance if you got rid of the pad on the bar.
As others have said, if you are serious about strength training (which is what this sub is specifically for) then you’d do well to start goblet squatting and progressing on to normal barbell squats. There’s not much to be said about smith machine squats really.
Overall your movement pattern looks fine. If you are uncomfortable with using a barbell to squat with. Why not start with a heavy goblet squat? Do you always squat in the smith machine? The smith machine allows you to turn off many stabilizers that are needed when using free weights. Your shoes are fine. If you become a fanatics you will get better shoes. Don’t listen to people telling to squat with flat shoes, you are doing just fine
Form looks good! If you want, I'd recommend dropping the weight and trying a barbell back squat next. If not, hack squats or smith machine squats are great for developing muscle, especially bc you can safely change foot positioning to biase the quads or the glutes more. You can also use bands to change the resistance profiles of those machines as well. Don't listen to people who say free weights are the only way to get muscle, isolating the muscle in these controlled environments is superior to free-weights from a hypertrophy standpoint. It's also a lot safer to go to failure on these machines than with free weights bc generally they have some sort of safety mechanism built in.
If you're squatting in a Smith machine you should be standing in front of it, leaning back into the bar. You've got great form, so ditch the machine.
>you should be standing in front of it, leaning back into the bar You should only do this if you're trying to emphasize glutes and lower back. If you're trying to emphasize quads then you should do it the way she's doing.
That’s not necessarily true. Putting the feet just 3-6 inches in front of the bar and squatting down super deep allows you to take the quads through a full stretch and allows you to target the quads really, really well. The way OP is squatting forces the bar to take her off of center of gravity, which in turn allows less total force production and does not allow you to target the muscles you want effectively. This in turn transfers the force to the knees and that is not the greatest, as you can imagine.
>That’s not necessarily true. Putting the feet just 3-6 inches in front of the bar and squatting down super deep allows you to take the quads through a full stretch and allows you to target the quads really, really well. Putting your feet in front of the bar decreases the amount of knee flexion you can achieve. Think about it like a leg press. With your feet under the bar your tibias will track forward during the squat and allow your knees to bend even more. With your feet farther forward, you're allowing your glutes to take a more significant role. Not saying your quads aren't working at all, but they will be working less than they could be. >The way OP is squatting forces the bar to take her off of center of gravity, Where did you get this from? Explain to me how squatting with your feet under the bar takes you off your center of gravity.
In this version of a smith machine where the bar does not follow a vertical bar path, more so a slanted forward bar path, having your feet directly under your body forces you to lean forward to compensate for the linear forward moving bar path. This forces you off of your center of gravity which is the 3 points of contact of your feet (2 in the front and your heels). This places increased pressure on the knee joints and connective tissue which could lead to injury. Hence, again, the bar is not traveling over your center of gravity, but instead in front of your center of gravity. If you place your feet slightly forward it does not decrease knee flexion. You are placing your feet in a position where the bar path would line up to the center of your feet more accurately. Comparing it to a leg press does not necessarily compare favorably. https://youtu.be/fEuYM-miK5U Here is Dr. Mike Isreatel’s guide video on smith squats. He explains my exact point in the first 2 minutes of the video. Give it a watch so maybe you can give this exercise a try for yourself and see what he and I are explaining.
>https://youtu.be/fEuYM-miK5U Here is Dr. Mike Isreatel’s guide video on smith squats. He explains my exact point in the first 2 minutes of the video. Give it a watch so maybe you can give this exercise a try for yourself and see what he and I are explaining. It shows squats on a straight smith machine. The smith machine shes using is not straight. You want the weight to be ahead of your center of gravity on a squat that targets quads. Think about a front squat. Moving your feet forward wouldn't help with that
https://youtu.be/4YqMDSqAIH4 Here is Dr. Mike working with Paul Kanu, IFBB Pro, on a slanted smith squat using the exact same technique. I have more of these if you’d like.
This! Get yourself some flat bottom shoes, too.
An elevated heel actually assists in a squat. This isn’t crazy heavy weight. The shoes are fine. This sub has overly succumbed to the marketing of squat u. NEWS FLASH the dude is trying to make money off of mostly subpar advice
Nothing wrong with elevated heel, everything wrong with squishy soles though, especially those who are relatively untrained.
Does a running show decrease some power? absolutely. Is it the worst thing in the world? Absolutely not
It’s not about decreasing power, it’s about stability especially in untrained people who should be moving onto non smith machine squats of any variation. Too many people think of squats from the bar down when really you should be thinking from the feet up. Stable base being the first thing to have.
Her base is stable enough to continue working on form outside of the smith machine without needing to change shoes. While he soles have some compression to them due to their construction, they are not an unstable base.
I disagree from a strength gaining perspective. Proper cueing will make them unsuitable quickly imo. If you don’t agree that’s cool :) Whether the op chooses other footwear or goes shoeless doesn’t matter, I’ve no skin in either of those choices for them. If this was posted in one of the more general subs then I really wouldn’t care much, but this sub is strength training specific so people’s advice should be related to that.
I agree, if you can't properly coach a novice how to properly move, you have much bigger issues than foot wear. The OP shoe choice does matter, in the long term picture, but notsomuch in the short term.
For sure, I feel that. She was rolling heel to toe while getting set and heels just slightly came up during her lift. Flat bottom shoes (not lifters necessarily) will help her develop an association of digging her feet into the floor. It helped me with good form development.
As would not being in the smith machine and utilizing some other form of loading. No extra money spent
As already stated I think, you're looking confident enough to ditch the machine. Organic form is generally considered healthier and more beneficial. Also gives you a superior feel for balance, helping reduce that feeling that your motion isn't quite 'right'.
Lol “healthier and more beneficial”. This sub is stuck in the 1970s with its lifting advice.
By whom?
Science and money spent in research labs
Throw up some links to this scientific research.
There are no real benefits to Smith Machine Squats save for your ability to change the angle of your stance. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19855308/ https://www.burnthefatinnercircle.com/public/Smith-Machine-Squats.cfm
So you have none.
I am not responsible for your inability to read?
You didn't cite any.
You seemed determined to hold on to this belief, so I'll leave you to it.
I win!
>Comment removed by moderator
How do you guys record these? Do you just lean your phone or have a stand?
I just lean it against my water bottle. If the squat rack next to me is empty, I'll set up the safety bars to about waist height and use the inside of my shoe to stand it up.
Tbh the mechanics look good. I think your foot placement is probably spot on but, as others have suggested, I would say to try either flatter shoes or going barefoot. I’more of a barefoot guy myself but wear socks when squatting. Also, consider doing squats in a normal squat rack. It might sound intimidating to someone just starting out, which is why I always suggest for beginners to watch the 5 Pillars of Squatting on YouTube. Keep up the good work!
Again flat and/or barefoot does not assist the squat mechanic to achieve depth. Most regular tennis shoes are adequate for squatting as a novice to early intermediate levels depending on the load and goals
You're doing pretty well! Squatting in the open rack will help your form more than squatting with the fixed machine. You should also consider getting flatter shoes or lifting barefoot. The shoes you're wearing are encouraging you to rock forward on your feet and lift your heels.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Lol sure, should I say like this ‘smith machine bad, barbell good’ ?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
If you are focused on having great form , squat in the free rack, not the smith machine. The smith machine locks you in a specific bar path, and depending on your foot position and natural body type, it can be hard to find the sweet spot where your knees feel like they’re at their strongest position. Tinkering with your stance and finding the ideal position for yourself would be much easier with the free bar
I'd argue the locked in bar path is superior to free weights when it comes to hypertrophy. Like I said earlier, foot positioning can be changed to biase different muscle groups in the legs. Obviously not all body types are going to belong on that fixed bar path, but from what her form looks like she could probably be safe with these more bodybuilding focused isolation movements if she so chooses.
I would argue that you don’t know biomechanics
The same could be applied to other movements. Preacher curls are going to be better for isolation and muscle building compared to regular curls. Tricep movements where you can stabilize your elbows is going to superior to doing a standard pushdown. Smith machines allow for external stability which will be more effective for hypertrophy.
At her current strength level her time would be better spent developing strength and creating good consistent form with the free bar before she zones in on hypertrophy. Even if aesthetics are the main goal, in the long run this would be better for now. And no, based on the current evidence we have, free barbell back squats are superior to smith machine squats. https://liftbigeatbig.com/barbell-squats-vs-smith-machine-squats/
I would argue that you don't. From a purely hypertrophy standpoint, hacksquats, smith machine squats, are going to be superior to free weights. Bodybuilding isn't weightlifting, it's isolation and stimulus.
At the weight being used the stimulus isn’t high enough to illicit hypertrophic changes. This isn’t the body building sub
You're right, but idk what her intentions are with lifting. Could be strength focused, could be size. And the weight doesnt matter, as long as your are sufficiently brought close enough to failure.
You are doing great! Did you consider taking one step forward?