Slate's Bizbox
sports nut: The stadium scene.

The Lamest Exercise in the WorldWhy Pat Robertson should stop bragging about the leg press.

By Mike DeBonis
Updated Saturday, May 27, 2006, at 12:23 PM ET

In a New York Times Magazine interview last month, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright mentioned that she can leg press 400 pounds. Now evangelical sparkplug Pat Robertson is shilling protein shakes by claiming he can leg press 2,000 pounds. That's right, one ton—about four-fifths the curb weight of a Mini Cooper.

Are America's aging public intellectuals getting buffer? Possibly. But before they start shooting their mouths off, Albright and Robertson need a primer in gym etiquette. Only wusses brag about their leg press.

Dropping your leg-press numbers in casual conversation is like bragging about how fast you can do the TV Guide crossword puzzle. Simply put, the leg press is an ego boost for the beginner lifter. There's no easier way to move a large amount of weight. When I was in college, I witnessed many a meathead pick up girls from the elliptical machines by inviting them over to the leg press machine, loading up four plates, and marveling at how easily they could do 180 pounds. Gosh, was this really your first time?

Let's get Pat Robertson's bonkers claims out of the way right now. As CBS Sportsline's Clay Travis reported earlier this week, there's no way the 76-year-old Robertson broke the leg press record—by more than 600 pounds—of a former Florida State quarterback. Check out this video, in which Robertson claims he's legpressing 1,000 pounds. It appears as if 16 plates are loaded on the machine. Four of them look like 100-pound plates, and the rest are 45s. That adds up to 940 pounds. What else are you fibbing about, Pat?

Even when doing (what he claims to be) 1,000 pounds, Robertson's form is wack. First, he helps his legs by pushing on his knees with his arms. That's a no-no. He also achieves nowhere near the recommended full range of motion, which is to bring the knees to at least a 90-degree angle. And if he's going to double the weight, where's it going to fit? Neither Andrew Sullivan nor I have seen a machine capable of holding 20 plates of 100 pounds each.

Most telling is that Robertson has two staffers loading the machine for him. A big knock against the leg press is that it's inefficient. Most leg press machines are constructed as either a sled angled at 45 degrees or a lever. (There are some that use cables, too.) In all cases, some of the weight gets borne by the machine. You may be loading 400 pounds, but your muscles are feeling only 200. In other words, eight plates on the machine are only four plates worth of effective weight. And by the time you're finished loading and unloading, you could have done an extra set or two of squats.

The squat, of course, is the real man/woman's lower-body workout. It's such a crucial part of the basic regimen that it's known as the "king of exercises." While some consider the dead lift a rival to the throne, the leg press isn't even close. It's the zoning-board commissioner of exercises.

The squat not only works the quadriceps, as the leg press does, but it also works the muscles in the back of the thigh, the butt, and the back. When you're doing squats with a barbell, keeping your balance requires the use of still more muscles. That's not to mention that it's a more efficient exercise, since your body supports all the weight you load on the bar.

Just as important, it's impossible to look cool on a leg press machine. You're sitting on your ass, making it hard to really show off. Much better, then, to step into a chrome cage, set a steel bar on your shoulders, recruit a spotter or three, and really show off your lower-body acumen.

Of course, the leg press does have a few advantages. It's great for bodybuilders who want disgustingly huge quads. It's also a good choice for older folks with back problems who want to take some stress off their lumbar muscles. Maybe that's your excuse, Pat and Madge—but it's a handy one. If you're leg-pressing 400, that means you're only squatting around 225. And that just doesn't sound as good in the pages of the New York Times Magazine.

Correction, May 30: Because of a copy-editing error, an incorrect byline appeared on the piece when it was originally published. The author is Mike DeBonis.

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
Mike DeBonis is the political columnist for Washington City Paper.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Remarks from the Fray:

Come on, the guy's 70 some-odd years old, the fact that he can even do leg presses is in of itself great. [...]

The argument about the isolation machine taking half the weight is absurd and belies a poor understanding of physics. It doesn't matter how small that angle is, you still have to push the weight from point "a" to point "b". Its mass hasn't changed, the energy required to lift it has, the total work you do has not.

--Eigenvenctor

(To reply, click here.)

If the sled is angled theta degrees from the ground, the amount of lifting you have to do against gravity is sin(theta) * mass. If old Pat really had 1000 pounds of weight on the sled, that means he'd have to be pressing 707lbs against gravity. The writer critiques his form. Well of course his form is poor, but that's not the issue. How is he able to press 707 lbs even one inch? That amount of mass should be effectively immobile to a young male in good health, let alone a 76 year old man with huge ears, no matter what is in his protein shake. Pat isn't pressing this kind of weight because the leg press is a silly exercise... He's not pressing this kind of weight at all. My guess is that his sycophantic handlers have balsa wood plates in the gym. Why are the critics of this claim (which should be everyone) focusing on the availability of equipment that take 2000lbs, or on the rarity of 100lb plates, or Pat's form, or anything like that. The obvious truth is that this christian gnome couldn't move that kind of weight an inch without his old bones turning to dust.

--Barnacle_Junior

(To reply, click here.)

(5/27)