Here’s a question for you if you are interested in Jones or Nautilus. In several of Ken Hutchins recent books he makes quite a few questionable statements about Jones and his machines. If Hutchins is wrong why is there no one of substance standing up and addressing any of these statements?
Scott
What are the questionable things he says about Jones? I’m not very familiar with Hutchins, except that Super Slow is divisive even amongst HIT practitioners.
There’s a lot but here’s an example . He describes the Nautilus abdominal , 10 , 40 and 70 degree chest machines as utterly useless .
Scott
That just seems outright wrong to me. I haven’t personally used any of those machines but if it stimulates and fatigues the muscle fibers of the chest then it serves its purpose i would say, and should at least get some points. What’s his reason for saying they’re useless?
What is his reasoning for saying they are utterly useless?
I have yet to train in any Nautilus machine that would be considered useless. I have especially liked the different chest and ab machines. What’s Hutchens agenda? Seems not so objective, merely subjective.
It would be more interesting to make a comparison between similar machines from different brands. I am certain Nautilus would pass this test.
1 Like
His reasoning can be too complex to just repeat here in a few words . I find there’s some truth to his critiques of certain machines but he goes overboard in his number rating . It’s almost like if someone could bump their head exiting a machine the machine would rate zero no matter how other wise it might be very useful . Way to critical and nit picky over machines that at the time were miles ahead of anything else. Same thinking about Jones.
Scott
That they cater to the falsity of building upper, middle and lower chest.
He did do that, which is a major part i still disagree with. If he ever got hurt on a machine(his fault or not), the rating was lowered.
I’m not clear what Hutchins agenda is ? I’m guessing he wants to clear the air about his and Jones past by telling his side of the story. I can’t say that I agree with all he says but it does sound like he’s right on many of them, not so on others. It is very interesting reading!! I wish someone with better knowledge than I have would address his positions.
Scott
That criticism sounds about like calling the decline flat and incline bench useless with that logic. I definitely disagree with him.
1 Like
Scott, Like you, I have read the AJ Evaluation book and the CPB book. I also found them interesting to read. I thought he brought up many valid points on a number of things.
And I too, disagree with some of what he wrote. As far as the 10, 40, and 70 degree (which is actually a shoulder machine, and was marketed as such) machines, having used them all I think they’re all good machines. Certainly, not useless. Nautilus was in the business of selling machines. Giving customers what they want is a part of successful business.
A quote I got from the HARD TRAINING Newsletter (put out by Hammer Strength when it was owned by Kim Wood and Pete Brown) pretty much sums up how I view anything I read on Training. Although it can be applied to almost any subject. “Read Not to believe, but to Weigh and Consider”. Arthur Jones, as brilliant and successful as he was in his day, was not infallible. Reading Ken Hutchins, it is apparent he is a very intelligent, knowledgeable, and astute individual. Doesn’t mean everything he writes is necessarily always correct. In the end, it is up to the individual to decide what they believe and how to apply (or not apply) that information to their own training or life.
Could it be possible that it was not written for the fans of Nautilus machines but for business owners?
Like, I’d look at any chain drive on a cam as a severing hazard unless it can be enclosed and made inaccessible to the user. Or redesigned for belt drive.
There’s a lot of stuff like that to consider beyond “I like these things, I like their history”.
No one wants to own (commercially) or produce a machine that is a finger chopper/crusher, back snapper, etc.
I mean, I’ve heard you guys talk about the duo squat or what ever, and it sounds like a massive liability from a gym owner/operator and manufacturer perspective, and the lat machine that pretty much guarantees injury by the nature of its design.
To me, nothing is unassailable. Quite literally everything about a given article or mechanism is and should be open to criticism, especially when it comes to reducing liability/improving the end user experience.
1 Like
I think that’s an interesting point, discussing people who would actually purchase the machines for commercial outlets. Many of the gyms that I have trained over the years are run by businessman, who pretty much either believe everything ad copy tells them, or only care about appearance and their bottom line, usually resulting in spending as little as possible.
Even when you discuss the people using such machines in a commercial facility, how many are going to truly notice and appreciate subtle nuances in performance compared to those who blindly follow the latest routine they read in an article online or in a magazine?
S
== Scott ==
As one who is very critical with just about everything, I agree. I just want to be sure the criticism is valid. I’m sure he would have condemned the barbell if a plate slid off and mashed his toe, ha ha ! Nothing is perfect.
I am all for criticism…i criticize all day, 
…but, why didn’t he criticize years ago when he was with Jones or did he that I am unaware of
Oh he tried to tell Jones about issues many times and Hutchins illustrates how Jones would come down on him for daring to question him. I think Hutchins is sick now so he’s had time to sit and write down things from the past? True or not I find anything about the inner workings of Nautilus great reading!
Scott
Yeah. When I sold welding equipment I was usually talking to an owner or production manager. They want to know how much it cost and how much it makes. You plug in the doofliger and money comes out over here. That’s it. And as an owner of some welding equipment I look at it and say “It cost me $xxxx.xx ten years ago and I’ve made xyz $ with it since then. It never breaks. That’s a good machine!”.
I could really care less about James Lincoln or Niels Miller. It either works when I need it to or I don’t need it. As long as nothing gets broken and no one gets hurt (my two golden rules) I’m happy.
It’s just speculation, but I’d bet that my thinking on this isn’t much different than a typical gym owner/operator.
Big machine=big footprint, big expense, etc. It better make money. If it doesn’t, It doesn’t matter if member A is in love with its story. If a thing costs more than it makes its heading to the smelter.
Through the years I have developed a bias against weight machines. I see three areas of concern:
- Friction: The concentric is more difficult and the eccentric is too easy. Exactly opposite the desired function
- Less involvement of balancing and stabilizing muscles.
- Any machine that restricts the path of movement
While I had the most success in bodybuilding, I truly enjoyed powerlifting. So, I spent a considerable portion of my weight training with free weights. My favorite exercises are mostly free weights:
- Squats
- Bench Press
- Bent Over Rows
- Hanging Cleans
- Weighted Dips
- Weighted Chins
- Deadlifts
- Scott Bench Curls
My favorite machines are:
- Pullover Machine (I prefer the free weight Nautilus Pullover to the Cybex pullover)
- Leg Press
- Leg Extension (especially the Strive plate loaded leg extension)
- Hammer Row Machine
- Seated row machine (cable)
- Seated Leg Curl Machine
I stand corrected Scott…thanks