Marcos-Frutos Daniel, Miras-Moreno Sergio, Márquez Gonzalo, García-Ramos Amador
Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sports Sciences and Physical Education, University of A Coruña, A Coruña, Spain.
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2025 Dec 31;20(2):292-300. doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2024-0274. Print 2025 Feb 1.
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.
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.
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.
The general population, unconcerned with the specificity of strength adaptations, can choose a training modality (FW or SM) based on personal preferences.
尽管先前的研究比较了自由重量训练（FW）和器械辅助训练之间的力量训练适应性，但这些研究未使用与自由重量训练动作最为相似的史密斯机（SM）。因此，本研究的目的是调查使用自由重量训练与史密斯机进行以力量为重点、基于速度的训练方案的长期效果。
37名运动科学专业学生（14名女性）根据性别和相对力量进行均衡分组，分别进入自由重量训练组或史密斯机训练组。训练计划持续8周（每周2次训练），参与者针对每个训练动作（后深蹲和卧推）以1次最大重复量的70%进行4组训练，训练强度适中（速度损失20%-25%）。在训练计划前后评估负荷-速度曲线参数（负荷轴截距、速度轴截距以及负荷-速度关系线下的面积）、股外侧肌和胸大肌的横截面积以及卧推训练至力竭的重复次数。使用自由重量训练和史密斯机训练分别评估力学变量。
除后深蹲速度轴截距外（P = 0.124），两个训练组的所有变量均有所改善。当训练和测试条件匹配时，负荷轴截距和负荷-速度关系线下面积的变化更为明显。两个训练组在卧推训练至力竭的情况以及股外侧肌和胸大肌横截面积方面的改善相当，而速度轴截距在史密斯机训练组中改善更为明显。
对于不关注力量适应性特异性的普通人群而言，可以根据个人喜好选择训练方式（自由重量训练或史密斯机训练）。
