Traditional Bench Press Research Articles

Electromyographic Activity of the Pectoralis Major Muscle during Traditional Bench Press and Other Variants of Pectoral Exercises: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The popularity of the bench press (BP) is justified by being one of the most effective exercises to improve strength and power in the upper body. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the electromyography activity (EMG) of pectoralis muscle between BP and other variants of pectoral exercises (OP). Methods: This study was conducted according to the PRISMA. Original research articles published by March 2023, were located using an electronic search of four databases and yielded 951 original publications. This review included studies that compared the EMG activity of pectoralis muscle between BP and OP. Data were extracted and independently coded by three researchers. Finally, 23 studies were included for systematic review and meta-analysis. Meta-analysis with fixed or random effect model was performed to infer the pooled estimated standardized mean difference, depending on the heterogeneity. The studies were grouped according to the type of the comparison: grip widths, type of grip, inclination of the bench, stability, or exercise type. Results: The original option of BP activates the sternal portion significantly more than the variant with the inclined bench (SMD = 1.80; 95%CI 0.40 to 3.19; p = 0.017). Performing the exercise in an unstable situation produced significantly more activation during the concentric phase than performing the exercise in a stable situation (SMD = −0.18; 95%CI −0.33 to 3.74; p = 0.029). When comparing by type of exercise, greater activations are also seen in the original bench press vs. the comparisons (p = 0.023 to 0.001). Conclusions: The results suggest that the traditional bench press performed with the bench in a horizontal position, with a bar and a grip width between 150% and 200% of the biacromial distance (BAD) results from a greater EMG involvement of the pectoralis major in most variations with the same relative load. However, the sternal portion of pectoralis major showed greater activation with the declined variant of bench press.

The Acute Effect of Accentuated Eccentric Overloading upon the Kinematics and Myoelectric Activity in the Eccentric and Concentric Phase of a Traditional Bench Press.

The target of this study was to investigate the acute effect of a supramaximal augmented eccentric load on the kinematics and myoelectric activity during the concentric phase of the lift in a traditional bench press. Ten resistance-trained males (age 24 ± 6.4 years, height 1.80 ± 0.07 m, body-mass 87.2 ± 16.9 kg) performed two repetitions at 110/85% of the 1-RM in the dynamic accentuated external resistance (DAER) group and two repetitions at 85/85% of the 1-RM for the control group in a traditional bench press. The barbell kinematics, joint kinematics and myoelectric activity of eight muscles were measured in the eccentric phase and the pre-sticking, sticking and post-sticking regions. The main findings were that the sticking region started at a lower barbell height and that a lower barbell velocity was observed in the sticking region during the second repetition in the DAER condition compared to the control condition. Additionally, the lateral deltoid muscle and clavicle part of the pectoralis were more active during the eccentric loading compared to the control condition for the second repetition. Furthermore, higher myoelectric activity was measured during the second repetition in the sticking region for the eccentric loading condition in both pectoralis muscles, while the sternal parts of the pectoralis and anterior deltoid were more active during the second repetition of the control condition in the post-sticking region. Based on our findings, it can be concluded that the supramaximal loading in the descending phase with 110% of the 1-RM in the bench press does not have an acute and positive effect of enhanced performance in the ascending phase of the lift at 85% of 1-RM. Instead, fatigue occurs when using this eccentric load during a bench press.

RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN ARM SPAN AND THE MECHANICS OF THE ONE-REPETITION MAXIMUM TRADITIONAL AND CLOSE-GRIP BENCH PRESS

The traditional bench press (TBP), performed with a grip width that maximizes strength, is a popular exercise for developing the upper-body. The close-grip bench press (CGBP) is a variation of the TBP often used to emphasize the triceps brachii over prime movers such as the pectoralis major. An individual’s arm span (AS; distance between the middle fingers of each hand while the arms are outstretched) could affect the mechanics of each exercise, which may be exacerbated by the change in grip. This study investigated relationships between AS and TBP and CGBP mechanics in resistance-trained men. Twenty-one participants completed a one-repetition maximum (1RM) TBP and CGBP. The TBP was performed with the preferred grip (measured relative to biacromial distance [BAD]), and the CGBP with a grip width of 95% BAD. A linear position transducer measured: lift distance; peak and mean power, velocity, and force; the distance and time when peak power occurred; and work. Pearson’s correlations (r; p < 0.05) computed relationships between AS and TBP and CGBP mechanics. There were significant positive relationships between AS and TBP lift distance and work (r = 0.46 and 0.51, respectively). For the CGBP, there was a significant positive relationship between AS and work (r = 0.48). There were no other significant correlations between AS and lift mechanics. Resistance-trained men with a longer AS may move the bar further and perform more work in the 1RM TBP and CGBP. This could influence how coaches measure training volume, and intensity for individuals with different AS.

The addition of very light loads into the routine testing of the bench press increases the reliability of the force-velocity relationship.

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to examine whether the addition of very light loads for modeling the force–velocity (F–V) relationship during the bench press (BP) exercise can confirm its experimental linearity as well as to increase the reliability and concurrent validity of the F–V relationship parameters (maximum force (F0), maximum velocity (V0), F–V slope, and maximum power (Pmax)).MethodThe F–V relationship of 19 healthy men were determined using three different methods: (I) 6-loads free method: six loads performed during the traditional free-weight BP exercise (≈ 1–8–29–39–49–59 kg), (II) 4-loads free method: four loads performed during the traditional free-weight BP exercise (≈ 29–39–49–59 kg), and (III) 4-loads Smith method: four loads performed during the ballistic bench press throw exercise in a Smith machine (≈ 29–39–49–59 kg).ResultsThe linearity of the F–V relationship was very high and comparable for the three F–V methods (p = 0.204; median Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r) = 0.99). The three methods were ranked from the most to the least reliable as follows: 6-loads free (coefficient of variation (CV) range = 3.6–6.7%) > 4-loads Smith (CV range = 4.6–12.4%) > 4-loads free (CV range = 3.8–14.5%). The higher reliability of the 6-loads free method was especially pronounced for F–V slope (CVratio ≥ 1.85) and V0 (CVratio ≥ 1.49) parameters, while the lowest difference in reliability was observed for F0 (CVratio ≤ 1.27). The 6-loads free and 4-loads free methods showed a very high concurrent validity respect to the 4-loads Smith method for F0 and Pmax (r ≥ 0.89), a moderate validity for the F–V slope (r = 0.66–0.82), and a low validity for V0 (r ≤ 0.37).DiscussionThe routine testing of the F–V relationship of upper-body muscles through the BP exercise should include trials with very light loading conditions to enhance the reliability of the F–V relationship.

The Acute Effects of Different Forms of Suspension Push-Ups on Oxygen Consumption, Salivary Testosterone and Cortisol and Isometric Strength.

Suspension exercise systems are being used in strength and conditioning facilities, fitness centers, rehabilitation centers and home gyms. Though some evidence exists regarding the impact of training with these systems, more work is needed for a better understanding. The purpose of the present investigation was to examine the acute effects of an exercise session with 2 (hands only) and 4 straps (hands and feet) in the push-up exercise compared to a work-matched bench press exercise session. The participants for this repeated measures, cross-over investigation were 18 healthy college-aged males (age: 24.8 ± 3.5 yrs, body mass: 81.8 ± 7.8 kg, body height: 178.9 ± 4.5 cm). The conditions were 6 sets of 10 repetitions of suspension push-ups using two straps (DUAL) for the hands, fours straps (QUAD) for hands and feet and a traditional bench press exercise matched to the average resistance during the suspension push-up. The participants performed all repetitions at a controlled cadence. Expired gases, and heart rate were monitored continuously during the exercise session. Pre and post exercise saliva samples were collected to quantify changes in testosterone and cortisol. Upper body isometric strength tests ( UBIST) were performed (Post, 1 hr, 24 hr, 48 hr) to evaluate changes in force production during recovery. Data analysis via repeated measures ANOVA revealed a significant trend for increased oxygen consumption in the QUAD condition compared to the bench press (p = 0.019). Additionally, both suspension conditions resulted in a reduced respiratory exchange ratio as compared to the bench press (p < 0.05). A significant main effect was noted for time in all conditions regarding isometric strength (p < 0.001), but no differences between conditions were revealed. Testosterone and cortisol responses did not differ between conditions. Based upon these data, it appears that when matched for work, suspension exercise results in equivalent reductions in muscle force, but greater oxygen consumption compared to isotonic exercise.

Loading Range for the Development of Peak Power in the Close-Grip Bench Press versus the Traditional Bench Press.

The close-grip bench press (CGBP) is a variation of the traditional bench press (TBP) that uses a narrower grip (~95% biacromial distance) and has application for athletes performing explosive arm actions where the hands are positioned close to the torso. Limited research has investigated CGBP peak power. Twenty-six strength-trained individuals completed a one-repetition maximum TBP and CGBP. During two other sessions, subjects completed two repetitions as explosively as possible with loads from 20% to 90% for each exercise, with peak power measured by a linear position transducer. A factorial ANOVA calculated between- and within-exercise differences in peak power. Partial correlations controlling for sex determined relationships between absolute and relative strength and peak power load. Peak power for the TBP occurred at 50% 1RM, and 30% 1RM for the CGBP. There were no significant (p = 0.680) differences between peak power at each load when comparing the TBP and CGBP. For the within-exercise analysis, there were generally no significant differences in TBP and CGBP peak power for the 20–50% 1RM loads. There were no significant relationships between strength and peak power load (p = 0.100–0.587). A peak power loading range of 20–50% 1RM for the TBP and CGBP is suggested for strength-trained individuals.

Power output in traditional and ballistic bench press in elite athletes: Influence of training background

ABSTRACTThis study aimed to compare the power production in traditional bench-press (TBP) and ballistic bench-throw (BBT) exercises. Furthermore, we assessed the differences in velocity, force, and power outputs between TBP and BBT. Finally, we tested the differences between the loads used to optimize power (optimum power load; OPL) in both exercises, using three distinct power-variables: mean power (MP), mean propulsive power (MPP), and peak power (PP). Sixty athletes from different sports were divided into two groups, according to their training characteristics: hypertrophy-based trained athletes (HTA), thirty-one athletes performing hypertrophy training programmes for (at least) 12-weeks; and power-based trained athletes (PTA), twenty-nine athletes performing power-oriented training sessions for (at least) 12-weeks. Magnitude-based inferences were used to test for differences between groups. Independent of the variable analyzed (MP, MPP, or PP), the PTA produced greater power values in BBT, whereas the HTA generated higher outputs during TBP. The OPL in the HTA was likely heavier in TBP than in BBT, whereas no differences related to this variable were found in the PTA. Despite the apparent superiority of ballistics to produce power, it seems that in elite athletes, the strength-power training routine might affect the ability to apply high forces at very-high velocities.

Effect of Progressive Calisthenic Push-up Training on Muscle Strength and Thickness.

Kotarsky, CJ, Christensen, BK, Miller, JS, and Hackney, KJ. Effect of progressive calisthenic push-up training on muscle strength and thickness. J Strength Cond Res 32(3): 651-659, 2018-Calisthenics, a form of resistance training, continue to increase in popularity; however, few studies have examined their effectiveness for muscle strength improvement. The purpose of this study was to determine whether progressive calisthenic push-up training (PUSH) is comparable with traditional bench press training (BENCH) as a technique for increasing muscle strength and thickness. Twenty-three healthy, moderately trained men (mean ± SD: age 23 ± 6.8 years) completed the study. Subjects were randomly assigned to PUSH (n = 14) and BENCH (n = 9) groups and were trained 3 days per week for 4 weeks. Muscle thickness (MT), seated medicine ball put (MBP), 1 repetition maximum (1RM) bench press, and push-up progression (PUP) were measured before and after training. Results revealed significant increases in 1RM (p < 0.001) and PUP (p < 0.001) for both groups after training. The increase in PUP was significantly greater for PUSH (p < 0.001). No significant differences were found within groups for MT and MBP (p > 0.05). This study is the first to demonstrate that calisthenics, using different progressive variations to maintain strength training programming variables, can improve upper-body muscle strength.

Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press.

The study aim was to determine relationships between mechanical variables in the one-repetition maximum (1RM) traditional bench press (TBP) and close-grip bench press (CGBP). Twenty resistance-trained men completed a TBP and CGBP 1RM. The TBP was performed with the preferred grip; the CGBP with a grip width of 95% biacromial distance. A linear position transducer measured: lift distance and duration; work; and peak and mean power, velocity, and force. Paired samples t-tests (p < 0.05) compared the 1RM and mechanical variables for the TBP and CGBP; effect sizes (d) were also calculated. Pearson’s correlations (r; p < 0.05) computed relationships between the TBP and CGBP. 1RM, lift duration, and mean force were greater in the TBP (d = 0.30-3.20). Peak power and velocity was greater for the CGBP (d = 0.50-1.29). The 1RM TBP correlated with CGBP 1RM, power, and force (r = 0.685-0.982). TBP work correlated with CGBP 1RM, lift distance, power, force, and work (r = 0.542-0.931). TBP power correlated with CGBP 1RM, power, force, velocity, and work (r = 0.484-0.704). TBP peak and mean force related to CGBP 1RM, power, and force (r = 0.596-0.980). Due to relationships between the load, work, power, and force for the TBP and CGBP, the CGBP could provide similar strength adaptations to the TBP with long-term use. The velocity profile for the CGBP was different to that of the TBP. The CGBP could be used specifically to improve high-velocity, upper-body pushing movements.

Effect of rest-pause vs. traditional bench press training on muscle strength, electromyography, and lifting volume in randomized trial protocols.

Rest-pause (4-s unloaded rest between repetitions) training effects on one repetition maximum (1 RM), lifting volume, and neural activation via electromyography (EMG) are currently vague in the literature and can benefit strength and conditioning professionals for resistance training programme design. Therefore, this study compared 1 RM, neural activation via (EMG), and volume differences between rest-pause vs. traditional resistance training. Trained males (N=20) were randomly assigned to either a rest-pause or a traditional training group. Pre- and post-1 RM testing was recorded. Training sessions were completed twice a week for 4 weeks and consisted of four sets of bench press to volitional fatigue at 80% of pre-test 1 RM with a 2-min rest between sets. Total volume completed was recorded on each training day. Neural activation of the pectoralis major was measured on the first and last training days. A two-way repeated-measures ANOVA indicated both groups significantly increased their 1 RMs following the 4-week training protocol (p<.05). However, no significant differences were found in 1 RM and neural activation between the two groups (p>.05). An independent samples t test indicated that total volume lifted was significantly higher for the rest-pause group (56,778 vs. 38,315lbs; p<.05) throughout the protocol and independently during weeks 2, 3, and 4. While strength and neural activation changes did not differ between groups, both increased 1 RMs and the rest-pause group achieved greater increases in volume than the traditional group. If volume is the focus of training, the rest-pause method should be utilized.

An Investigation of the Mechanics and Sticking Region of a One-Repetition Maximum Close-Grip Bench Press versus the Traditional Bench Press.

The close-grip bench press (CGBP) is a variation of the traditional bench press (TBP) that uses a narrower grip (~95% of biacromial distance (BAD)) and has potential application for athletes performing explosive arm actions from positions where the hands are held close to the torso. Limited research has investigated CGBP mechanics compared to the TBP. Twenty-seven resistance-trained individuals completed a one-repetition maximum TBP and CGBP. The TBP was performed with the preferred grip; the CGBP with a grip width of 95% BAD. A linear position transducer measured lift distance and duration; peak and mean power, velocity, and force; distance and time when peak power occurred; and work. Pre-sticking region (PrSR), sticking region, and post-sticking region distance and duration for each lift was measured. A repeated measures ANOVA was used to derive differences between TBP and CGBP mechanics (p < 0.01); effect sizes (d) were also calculated. A greater load was lifted in the TBP, thus mean force was greater (d = 0.16–0.17). Peak power and velocity were higher in the CGBP, which had a longer PrSR distance (d = 0.49–1.32). The CGBP could emphasize power for athletes that initiate explosive upper-body actions with the hands positioned close to the torso.

Peak Muscle Activity across Four Sets to Volitional Fatigue between Rest-Pause and Traditional Bench Press.

Peak Muscle Activity across Four Sets to Volitional Fatigue between Rest-Pause and Traditional Bench Press.

Effects Of Rest-pause Vs Traditional Bench Press Training On Muscle Strength, Electromyography, And Lifting Volume.

This study compared one repetition maximum (1RM), muscle activity (EMG), and volume differences between rest-pause or traditional resistance training. Trained males (N = 20) were randomly assigned to either a rest-pause or a traditional training group. Training sessions were completed twice a week for 4 weeks and consisted of four sets of bench press to volitional fatigue at 80% of pretest 1RM with 2-minutes rests between sets. Each participant completed a bench press 1RM before and after the training intervention. Total volume completed was recorded on each training day. Muscle activity of the pectoralis major was measured on the first and last training days. The RMS signals of the last repetition in the last set were normalized to the RMS peak values of the first repetition in the first set for each participant during the 1st and 8th training sessions. A 2-way repeated measures ANOVA indicated both groups significantly increased their 1RMs following the four week training protocol (p < .05). However, no significant differences were found in 1RM and muscle activity between the two groups (p > .05). Lastly, an independent samples t-test indicated total volume lifted was significantly higher for the rest-pause group (M = 56,778lbs, SD = 23,522lbs, N = 10) in comparison to the traditional training group (M = 38,315lbs, SD = 7,870lbs, N = 10). T (18) = 2.354, p <.05. While strength and muscle activity changes did not differ between groups, the rest-pause group achieved greater increases in volume than the traditional group. If volume is the focus of training (i.e., hypertrophy phases), the rest-pause resistance training method should be utilized. Future studies should assess changes in muscle size between these bench press methods.

A Comparison of Force Curve Profiles Between the Bench Press and Ballistic Bench Throws

The purpose of this study was to compare the peak force and force curve characteristics during a traditional bench press (BP) and a ballistic bench throw (BT). Eight (age = 21.0 +/- 2.3 years, height = 182.3 +/- 7.4 cm, body mass = 85.9 +/- 5.5 kg) semi-professional rugby league players with resistance and power training experience performed both BP and BT exercises at loads of 55 and 80% of their predicted one-repetition maximum. The force curves for each test were then divided into three intensity levels, set at low to moderate (0-75%), high (75-95%), and near-maximal force (95-100%). These values were obtained by determining the percentage of the range of motion (ROM) in which the force produced during each test was within these thresholds. The BT exercise produced significantly (p < 0.05) higher peak force than BP under both loading conditions. A significantly greater portion of the ROM during the 80% BT was at a high intensity in comparison with the BP. No significant differences were found between force intensity conditions at 55% loads. It can be concluded that performing the BT exercise results in a greater peak force output when compared with the traditional BP movement under both resistance training and maximal power loading conditions. Furthermore, performing the BT exercise with heavy loads results in a more efficient training method for maintaining high force levels throughout the ROM.

A KINETIC AND ELECTROMYOGRAPHIC COMPARISON OF THE STANDING CABLE PRESS AND BENCH PRESS

This study compared the standing cable press (SCP) and the traditional bench press (BP) to better understand the biomechanical limitations of pushing from a standing position together with the activation amplitudes of trunk and shoulder muscles. A static biomechanical model (4D Watbak) was used to assess the forces that can be pushed with 2 arms in a standing position. Then, 14 recreationally trained men performed 1 repetition maximum (1RM) BP and 1RM single-arm SP exercises while superficial electromyography (EMG) of various shoulder and torso muscles was measured. The 1RM BP performance resulted in an average load (74.2 ± 17.6 kg) significantly higher than 1RM single-arm SP (26.0 = 4.4 kg). In addition, the model predicted that pushing forces from a standing position under ideal mechanical conditions are limited to 40.8% of the subject's body weight. For the 1RM BP, anterior deltoid and pectoralis major were more activated than most of the trunk muscles. In contrast, for the 1RM single-arm SP, the left internal oblique and left latissimus dorsi activities were similar to those of the anterior deltoid and pectoralis major. The EMG amplitudes of pectoralis major and the erector muscles were larger for 1RM BP. Conversely, the activation levels of left abdominal muscles and left latissimus dorsi were higher for 1RM right-arm SP. The BP emphasizes the activation of the shoulder and chest muscles and challenges the capability to develop great shoulder torques. The SCP performance also relies on the strength of shoulder and chest musculature; however, it is whole-body stability and equilibrium together with joint stability that present the major limitation in force generation. Our EMG findings show that SCP performance is limited by the activation and neuromuscular coordination of torso muscles, not maximal muscle activation of the chest and shoulder muscles. This has implications for the utility of these exercise approaches to achieve different training goals.

A Kinetic and Electromyographic Comparison of the Standing Cable Press and Bench Press

This study compared the standing cable press (SCP) and the traditional bench press (BP) to better understand the biomechanical limitations of pushing from a standing position together with the activation amplitudes of trunk and shoulder muscles. A static biomechanical model (4D Watbak) was used to assess the forces that can be pushed with 2 arms in a standing position. Then, 14 recreationally trained men performed 1 repetition maximum (1RM) BP and 1RM single-arm SP exercises while superficial electromyography (EMG) of various shoulder and torso muscles was measured. The 1RM BP performance resulted in an average load (74.2 +/- 17.6 kg) significantly higher than 1RM single-arm SP (26.0 +/- 4.4 kg). In addition, the model predicted that pushing forces from a standing position under ideal mechanical conditions are limited to 40.8% of the subject's body weight. For the 1RM BP, anterior deltoid and pectoralis major were more activated than most of the trunk muscles. In contrast, for the 1RM single-arm SP, the left internal oblique and left latissimus dorsi activities were similar to those of the anterior deltoid and pectoralis major. The EMG amplitudes of pectoralis major and the erector muscles were larger for 1RM BP. Conversely, the activation levels of left abdominal muscles and left latissimus dorsi were higher for 1RM right-arm SP. The BP emphasizes the activation of the shoulder and chest muscles and challenges the capability to develop great shoulder torques. The SCP performance also relies on the strength of shoulder and chest musculature; however, it is whole-body stability and equilibrium together with joint stability that present the major limitation in force generation. Our EMG findings show that SCP performance is limited by the activation and neuromuscular coordination of torso muscles, not maximal muscle activation of the chest and shoulder muscles. This has implications for the utility of these exercise approaches to achieve different training goals.

Kinematics, Kinetics, and Muscle Activation during Explosive Upper Body Movements

The aim of this study was to investigate the kinematics, kinetics, and neural activation of the traditional bench press movement performed explosively and the explosive bench throw in which the barbell was projected from the hands. Seventeen male subjects completed three trials with a bar weight of 45% of the subject's previously determined 1RM. Performance was significantly higher during the throw movement compared to the press for average velocity, peak velocity, average force, average power, and peak power. Average muscle activity during the concentric phase for pectoralis major, anterior deltoid, triceps brachii, and biceps brachii was higher for the throw condition. It was concluded that performing traditional press movements rapidly with light loads does not create ideal loading conditions for the neuromuscular system with regard to explosive strength production, especially in the final stages of the movement, because ballistic weight loading conditions where the resistance was accelerated throughout the movement resulted in a greater velocity of movement, force output, and EMG activity.