Reason #432987 to never read Flex

[Grizzly]

"but it's not that the squat directly stimulates any more muscle fibers than let's say the leg curl,"

I won't touch this one, but maybe some else would like to.

 

[muslhed1971]

I'm not sure it's about the squats building the legs as much as it them being very good for increasing natural test and having an effect on almost every other muscle in the body .. You can throw my friend on a few leg machines for a few weeks and his legs will blow up but put a bar on his back and he'll fall flat on his face. I said decent size legs not Ronnie's legs but it's not that the squat directly stimulates any more muscle fibers than let's say the leg curl,it's more of a higher stimulation of the nervous system just as pullups being a better back and bi builder than pulldowns ... i was always at the squat rack and can't even remember when i used leg curls or extensions. of course you get more work done in a shorter amount of time,but it has to do with more than just the legs

WTF?
Post a pic of your friend's legs.

 

[MANWHORE]

WTF?
Post a pic of your friend's legs.

lol OK let me call him and ask if i can get a pic of his sexy legs

 

[MANWHORE]

"but it's not that the squat directly stimulates any more muscle fibers than let's say the leg curl,"

I won't touch this one, but maybe some else would like to.

Notice i said DIRECTLY ... it's more about the extra stimulation of the nervous system from moving the body through space

 

[MANWHORE]

Let's say the squat is needed to build big legs that the machines can't .... why is that?

 

[Madcow2]

Let's say the squat is needed to build big legs that the machines can't .... why is that?

Am I reading this wrong? This needs to be pinned down a bit better. Do you honestly feel that machines are supperior or equivalent to building muscle? Granted some genetically gifted guys are born with big legs or might be able to develop them without squatting, but I'm talking about accross the entire population - do you honestly feel machines are as good as the squat for adding muscle to the legs and body?

 

[MANWHORE]

Am I reading this wrong? This needs to be pinned down a bit better. Do you honestly feel that machines are supperior or equivalent to building muscle? Granted some genetically gifted guys are born with big legs or might be able to develop them without squatting, but I'm talking about accross the entire population - do you honestly feel machines are as good as the squat for adding muscle to the legs and body?

No but i want to hear everyones opinion WHY they are not and i'm not arguing with anyone

 

[CyniQ]

No but i want to hear everyones opinion WHY they are not and i'm not arguing with anyone

You can't start an arguement and just sit back and watch...

That ain't Christian!

 

[MANWHORE]

You can't start an arguement and just sit back and watch...

That ain't Christian!

lol i just see people on other boards who worship the squat but other than their experiences,don't exactly know why they are better than machines. it's more macho being seen doing squats than leg curls. how can someone who hasn't given machines a chance say they aren't as good as freeweights.

 

[Madcow2]

how can someone who hasn't given machines a chance say they aren't as good as freeweights.

They can't speak from experience but to be honest, I think a lot of people would be a lot happier and bigger if they just took everyone's word for it, ignored the machines, pounded on the squat for a few years, and never sought to prove this to themselves. Sadly I can speak from experience and regret a lot of early training errors - then again back in the late 1980s the machine craze was in full force and the BBers hardly every squatted and the deadlift (along with all forms of pulling from the floor) was 'dead' for all intents and purposes (and people think deads and cleans are rare now in commercial gyms). That said, machines can certainly serve a purpose for targeted assistance work to improve weak links or imbalances, rehab, and the infirm.

 

[MANWHORE]

They can't speak from experience but to be honest, I think a lot of people would be a lot happier and bigger if they just took everyone's word for it, ignored the machines, pounded on the squat for a few years, and never sought to prove this to themselves. Sadly I can speak from experience and regret a lot of early training errors - then again back in the late 1980s the machine craze was in full force and the BBers hardly every squatted and the deadlift (along with all forms of pulling from the floor) was 'dead' for all intents and purposes (and people think deads and cleans are rare now in commercial gyms). That said, machines can certainly serve a purpose for targeted assistance work to improve weak links or imbalances, rehab, and the infirm.

fair enough

 

[CyniQ]

it's more macho being seen doing squats than leg curls.

Yep. That's enough for me.

 

[MANWHORE]

AND ANOTHER THING! .. nah that's it

 

[MANWHORE]

Yep. That's enough for me.

i've been thinking of PMing you but just give me at least until after this weekend. I think i need someone to talk to and i think your the best for this problem ... if it is a problem

 

[oarkinsm]

I have to say that free weights compunds are far supioer than machines. How can he say hack squats are safer than squats which he said in that article. Hacks fuck the knees up like nothing else can. Free weights used propley are far more safer. Its not that machines are safer its that people are not being shown how to use free weights right. Machines are more unnatural because you are fixed as fee weights allow more natural movement. When in life do you lift something in the real world which as th same movement of the machine. Nearly every movement in life uses the squat.


I am currenlty traing with my own version of the 5 by 5 and have taken on a 14 year old lad. His mates piss around on machine and havnt gained size, strentgh or lost weight they look the same. In one 3 weeks this lad as gained 6lbs in weight and lost size on his waist. His strentgh as increase massiveley.