Daniel Marcos-Frutos, Sergio Miras-Moreno, Gonzalo Márquez, Amador García-Ramos
{"title":"自由重量和史密斯机深蹲和卧推的比较效果:特异性对力量适应的重要作用。","authors":"Daniel Marcos-Frutos, Sergio Miras-Moreno, Gonzalo Márquez, Amador García-Ramos","doi":"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although previous studies have compared strength-training adaptations between free weights (FW) and machine-guided exercises, those studies did not use a Smith machine (SM), which most closely replicates the exercises performed with FW. Thus, the aim of the present study was to investigate the chronic effects of strength-focused, velocity-based training regimens using FW versus SM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-seven sport-science students (14 female) were assigned, balanced by sex and relative strength, to either an FW or SM training group. The training program lasted 8 weeks (2 sessions/wk), and participants performed 4 sets per exercise (back squat and bench press) at 70% of their 1-repetition maximum with moderate effort levels (20%-25% velocity loss). Load-velocity profile parameters (load-axis intercept, velocity-axis intercept, and area under the load-velocity relationship line), cross-sectional areas of the vastus lateralis and pectoralis major muscles, and the number of repetitions to failure in the bench-press exercise were assessed before and after the training program. Mechanical variables were assessed using both FW and SM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All variables, with the exception of back-squat velocity-axis intercept (P = .124), improved in both training groups. The changes in load-axis intercept and area under the load-velocity relationship line were more pronounced when the training and testing conditions matched. Failure in the bench-press exercise and cross-sectional areas of the vastus lateralis and pectoralis major showed comparable improvements for both training groups, while velocity-axis intercept tended to improve more in the SM group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The general population, unconcerned with the specificity of strength adaptations, can choose a training modality (FW or SM) based on personal preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":14295,"journal":{"name":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","volume":" ","pages":"292-300"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Effects of the Free Weights and Smith Machine Squat and Bench Press: The Important Role of Specificity for Strength Adaptations.\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Marcos-Frutos, Sergio Miras-Moreno, Gonzalo Márquez, Amador García-Ramos\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/ijspp.2024-0274\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although previous studies have compared strength-training adaptations between free weights (FW) and machine-guided exercises, those studies did not use a Smith machine (SM), which most closely replicates the exercises performed with FW. Thus, the aim of the present study was to investigate the chronic effects of strength-focused, velocity-based training regimens using FW versus SM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Thirty-seven sport-science students (14 female) were assigned, balanced by sex and relative strength, to either an FW or SM training group. The training program lasted 8 weeks (2 sessions/wk), and participants performed 4 sets per exercise (back squat and bench press) at 70% of their 1-repetition maximum with moderate effort levels (20%-25% velocity loss). Load-velocity profile parameters (load-axis intercept, velocity-axis intercept, and area under the load-velocity relationship line), cross-sectional areas of the vastus lateralis and pectoralis major muscles, and the number of repetitions to failure in the bench-press exercise were assessed before and after the training program. Mechanical variables were assessed using both FW and SM.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All variables, with the exception of back-squat velocity-axis intercept (P = .124), improved in both training groups. The changes in load-axis intercept and area under the load-velocity relationship line were more pronounced when the training and testing conditions matched. Failure in the bench-press exercise and cross-sectional areas of the vastus lateralis and pectoralis major showed comparable improvements for both training groups, while velocity-axis intercept tended to improve more in the SM group.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The general population, unconcerned with the specificity of strength adaptations, can choose a training modality (FW or SM) based on personal preferences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of sports physiology and performance\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"292-300\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of sports physiology and performance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0274\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of sports physiology and performance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2024-0274","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative Effects of the Free Weights and Smith Machine Squat and Bench Press: The Important Role of Specificity for Strength Adaptations.
Purpose: Although previous studies have compared strength-training adaptations between free weights (FW) and machine-guided exercises, those studies did not use a Smith machine (SM), which most closely replicates the exercises performed with FW. Thus, the aim of the present study was to investigate the chronic effects of strength-focused, velocity-based training regimens using FW versus SM.
Methods: Thirty-seven sport-science students (14 female) were assigned, balanced by sex and relative strength, to either an FW or SM training group. The training program lasted 8 weeks (2 sessions/wk), and participants performed 4 sets per exercise (back squat and bench press) at 70% of their 1-repetition maximum with moderate effort levels (20%-25% velocity loss). Load-velocity profile parameters (load-axis intercept, velocity-axis intercept, and area under the load-velocity relationship line), cross-sectional areas of the vastus lateralis and pectoralis major muscles, and the number of repetitions to failure in the bench-press exercise were assessed before and after the training program. Mechanical variables were assessed using both FW and SM.
Results: All variables, with the exception of back-squat velocity-axis intercept (P = .124), improved in both training groups. The changes in load-axis intercept and area under the load-velocity relationship line were more pronounced when the training and testing conditions matched. Failure in the bench-press exercise and cross-sectional areas of the vastus lateralis and pectoralis major showed comparable improvements for both training groups, while velocity-axis intercept tended to improve more in the SM group.
Conclusions: The general population, unconcerned with the specificity of strength adaptations, can choose a training modality (FW or SM) based on personal preferences.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance (IJSPP) focuses on sport physiology and performance and is dedicated to advancing the knowledge of sport and exercise physiologists, sport-performance researchers, and other sport scientists. The journal publishes authoritative peer-reviewed research in sport physiology and related disciplines, with an emphasis on work having direct practical applications in enhancing sport performance in sport physiology and related disciplines. IJSPP publishes 10 issues per year: January, February, March, April, May, July, August, September, October, and November.