Pecs

[RippedCity]

Hey guys a buddy of mine who has been lifting for a long time says if you work only dumbells you won't add weight on to your bench is this true? I'm more into body building than weight lifting but at the same time I would like to add weight to the bench

[vygah]

I have always found that if I only train with db for a while that as long as I increase strength in db press then bb will go up as well. Though the increase is not always proportionate. It also takes my body a workout or two in order to readjust.

[RippedCity]

I have always found that if I only train with db for a while that as long as I increase strength in db press then bb will go up as well. Though the increase is not always proportionate. It also takes my body a workout or two in order to readjust.

Thanks for the reply bro

[Rodja]

They're very different lifts and have techniques. DBs can help to strengthen weaknesses in your bench, but you still have to bench.

[Young Gotti]

Hey guys a buddy of mine who has been lifting for a long time says if you work only dumbells you won't add weight on to your bench is this true? I'm more into body building than weight lifting but at the same time I would like to add weight to the bench

if your into bodybuilding then the weight isn't as important here but a lot of ppl have scraped the bench press all together since it's an inferior chest exercise to the db's

Best For Overall Chest Mass: Dumbbell Bench PressRecent research from Las Vegas based StrengthPro Inc., headed by David Sandler, MS, CSCS, showed that the dumbbell bench press involves the front delts far less than the barbell bench press, since the arms come out to the sides more with dumbbells. Less delt involvement means more pec stimulation, which is exactly what you want for maximal chest development.

so for bodybuilding purposes i wouldn't stress too much over the strength on barbell bench

[ThunderHumper]

if your into bodybuilding then the weight isn't as important here but a lot of ppl have scraped the bench press all together since it's an inferior chest exercise to the db's

Best For Overall Chest Mass: Dumbbell Bench PressRecent research from Las Vegas based StrengthPro Inc., headed by David Sandler, MS, CSCS, showed that the dumbbell bench press involves the front delts far less than the barbell bench press, since the arms come out to the sides more with dumbbells. Less delt involvement means more pec stimulation, which is exactly what you want for maximal chest development.

so for bodybuilding purposes i wouldn't stress too much over the strength on barbell bench

but bb bench is known for one of the best compound upper body exercises. if chest isolation is the goal, wouldnt the chest press machine smash both? or cable crossovers maybe?

[Airborne42]

They're very different lifts and have techniques. DBs can help to strengthen weaknesses in your bench, but you still have to bench.

This 100%
Flat press for power, Db for stability and keeping muscle equal

[NYiron]

This 100%
Flat press for power, Db for stability and keeping muscle equal

I Wouldn't necessarily call flat bench a power exercise unless your doing speed bench and its variations. Power = force x velocity. Strength yes but power no unless that equation is rounded out with high velocity.

[ThunderHumper]

I Wouldn't necessarily call flat bench a power exercise unless your doing speed bench and its variations. Power = force x velocity. Strength yes but power no unless that equation is rounded out with high velocity.

lol im gonna go out and say i think he ment strength and db = stability

or maybe he benches and throws the bar into the air, that would make it power

[Young Gotti]

but bb bench is known for one of the best compound upper body exercises. if chest isolation is the goal, wouldnt the chest press machine smash both? or cable crossovers maybe?

A db press is a compound exercise though. Just a better chest exercise for development. I do however enjoy db or machine fly's for isolation.

I have seen BBer's not use either. I believe Ronnie Rockel in one video says he barely uses either exercise anymore and for that whole video used a press machine and a fly machine

[Airborne42]

You get more power in bb then Db. Strength tho yes

[NYiron]

You get more power in bb then Db. Strength tho yes

Not necessarily, if you move equivalent weight with dumbells faster then you move a barbell you will yield a higher power output with dumbells over the barbell in that instance. It's all related to the force applied and the speed at which it is executed as the equation states.

[Airborne42]

Not necessarily, if you move equivalent weight with dumbells faster then you move a barbell you will yield a higher power output with dumbells over the barbell in that instance. It's all related to the force applied and the speed at which it is executed as the equation states.

Max flat press was 500... I havnt seen Db that would suit me for that. I get where your comin from tho. I'm a PL we push heavy. Db are a diff story for me

[NYiron]

Max flat press was 500... I havnt seen Db that would suit me for that. I get where your comin from tho. I'm a PL we push heavy. Db are a diff story for me

Thats strength not power...

[Rodja]

Not necessarily, if you move equivalent weight with dumbells faster then you move a barbell you will yield a higher power output with dumbells over the barbell in that instance. It's all related to the force applied and the speed at which it is executed as the equation states.

With proper technique, you will get more power out of BB than DB due to the leg drive and the fact that you can get your lats more involved with a BB due to the setup.

[NYiron]

With proper technique, you will get more power out of BB than DB due to the leg drive and the fact that you can get your lats more involved with a BB due to the setup.

I understand that very well, but that's only due to the potential to create a higher bar velocity as a result of the increased muscle mass being activated. To say that barbell bench is a power exercise in general is incorrect like I said unless its done as a speed bench.

For example his statement involving a 500 lb bench press.

X = 500lb barbell bp x 1m/s bar speed
X = 500 Watts

Y = (90 lb Dbs) 180 lbs x 3 m/s db speed
Y = 540 watts

X < Y therefore, power is a dependent variable hinging heavily on velocity. So to say that bp is a power exercise would be incorrect it has potential to be more of a power exercise but unless completed in a certain protocol it will not necessarily be such. Clean and jerk, snatch, etc those are power exercises due to their foundations in creating high bar velocities across the board.

[Rodja]

You still require a high amount of force to move a high resistance. It may not fit the classical example of a lift that requires high amounts of power, but you also can't compare movements when one does not have an eccentric phase. I've seen studies that show the highest rate of force development and power with only 30% of your 1RM, but is that really going to have a lot of carryover? Absolutely not.

[NYiron]

You still require a high amount of force to move a high resistance. It may not fit the classical example of a lift that requires high amounts of power, but you also can't compare movements when one does not have an eccentric phase. I've seen studies that show the highest rate of force development and power with only 30% of your 1RM, but is that really going to have a lot of carryover? Absolutely not.

There is a difference between force and power that's the point I'm trying to establish. Regardless of the weight being moved or muscle being activated unless movement occurs at high velocities power output will be relatively low. Like I have said, bench press can result in high power outputs but only when done under speed protocols. It's calling a bench press a power exercise because of the weight that can be moved which is incorrect.

Power output is a direct result of the concentric phase, the eccentric phase of a lift isn't applicable when it comes to power output so that comparison can most definitely be drawn. As far as the question of 30% 1 RM power output and carry over that in essence is more or less the basis for the west side dynamic effort days. There undoubtably will be carry over with regards to power output in submax loads and completion of 1 RM loads.

[Rodja]

There is a difference between force and power that's the point I'm trying to establish. Regardless of the weight being moved or muscle being activated unless movement occurs at high velocities power output will be relatively low. Like I have said, bench press can result in high power outputs but only when done under speed protocols. It's calling a bench press a power exercise because of the weight that can be moved which is incorrect.

Power output is a direct result of the concentric phase, the eccentric phase of a lift isn't applicable when it comes to power output so that comparison can most definitely be drawn. As far as the question of 30% 1 RM power output and carry over that in essence is more or less the basis for the west side dynamic effort days. There undoubtably will be carry over with regards to power output in submax loads and completion of 1 RM loads.

One of the primary components of power is rate of force development. You can't move a heavy weight slow, so the statement of lower power output with a heavy weight is far from correct. Regarding the lack of eccentric motion, since there is not a stretch-reflex involved in these movements (e.g. cleans), they cannot be directly compared to movements that do involve an eccentric phase (e.g. bench).

You have a general idea of how the DE day works, but you also have some incorrect information. 30% is far too low of a load to have transfer to increasing the 1RM even if accommodating resistance is added into the equation even for the 100% raw lifter. The lowest bar weight that I've ever seen recommended is 40%, but that is for highly advanced lifters and accommodating resistance is added to this. You should also know that the DE for bench in particular is slowly being phased out by many top lifters because of the lack of transfer between raw benching and shirted benching as it is very common to get ~200lbs out of a shirt.

[NYiron]

Exactly! Power = force x VELOCITY

You just defined power (rate of force development = joules/s = watts) which is what I have been saying across all of my posts, but you are incorrect in saying that heavy weight will be moved fast as the equation in my previous post demonstrates. Show me anyone who can bench max loads faster than submax loads. Bench presses done under max loading with inevitably have lower bar velocities when compared to bench presses done under submax loads. Max loads will produce less power no matter how you put it. Its physics higher loads require higher force but as a result the velocity will suffer. Submax loads require less force and as a result velocity will increase yielding higher power outputs.

As far as stretch reflex goes it would be an advantageous condition so in that aspect maybe it could not 100 percent be compared. I will say though that in the case of power the concentric phase is being analyzed so with that and power in mind pure physics there can be comparisons drawn.

With respect to the DE day I did not outline the protocol so to say I have misinformation wouldn't be correct and it is exactly why I chose my words "in essence and more or less" when relating it to your statement on 30% 1RM. The physiological effect of high velocity submax loading is what I was relating the DE day and you statement on 30% 1RM to.

[Rodja]

Exactly! Power = force x VELOCITY

You just defined power (rate of force development = joules/s = watts) which is what I have been saying across all of my posts, but you are incorrect in saying that heavy weight will be moved fast as the equation in my previous post demonstrates. Show me anyone who can bench max loads faster than submax loads. Bench presses done under max loading with inevitably have lower bar velocities when compared to bench presses done under submax loads. Max loads will produce less power no matter how you put it. Its physics higher loads require higher force but as a result the velocity will suffer. Submax loads require less force and as a result velocity will increase yielding higher power outputs.

As far as stretch reflex goes it would be an advantageous condition so in that aspect maybe it could not 100 percent be compared. I will say though that in the case of power the concentric phase is being analyzed so with that and power in mind pure physics there can be comparisons drawn.

With respect to the DE day I did not outline the protocol so to say I have misinformation wouldn't be correct and it is exactly why I chose my words "in essence and more or less" when relating it to your statement on 30% 1RM. The physiological effect of high velocity submax loading is what I was relating the DE day and you statement on 30% 1RM to.

You've missed my point despite this long diatribe. You're harping so much about the time aspect that you're ignoring that significant power is still produced at near/max loads. This position that you're taking is the exact position taken by people that do not have a great understanding about powerlifting.

[NYiron]

You've missed my point despite this long diatribe. You're harping so much about the time aspect that you're ignoring that significant power is still produced at near/max loads. This position that you're taking is the exact position taken by people that do not have a great understanding about powerlifting.

I haven't missed your point but rather pointed out it is incorrect. The position you are taking is one that is indicative of someone that does not have a great understanding of physics applied to physiology.

[Airborne42]

Ima stand by Rodja on this one! This is his practice

[Rodja]

I haven't missed your point but rather pointed out it is incorrect. The position you are taking is one that is indicative of someone that does not have a great understanding of physics applied to physiology.

"You can't move a heavy weight slow."
- Dr Fred Hatfield

At no point did I say bar velocities will be the same, but you are taking the erroneous position that maximal weight will not have a high amount of power by comparing them to Olympic lifts, which cannot be compared due to the lack of eccentric movement and stretch reflex, or a dynamic effort, which changes immensely for a raw lifter to a geared lifter.

[RippedCity]

I understand that very well, but that's only due to the potential to create a higher bar velocity as a result of the increased muscle mass being activated. To say that barbell bench is a power exercise in general is incorrect like I said unless its done as a speed bench.

For example his statement involving a 500 lb bench press.

X = 500lb barbell bp x 1m/s bar speed
X = 500 Watts

Y = (90 lb Dbs) 180 lbs x 3 m/s db speed
Y = 540 watts

X < Y therefore, power is a dependent variable hinging heavily on velocity. So to say that bp is a power exercise would be incorrect it has potential to be more of a power exercise but unless completed in a certain protocol it will not necessarily be such. Clean and jerk, snatch, etc those are power exercises due to their foundations in creating high bar velocities across the board.

Why are you comparing the rate of power of dumbells and barbell at different speeds. 1 m/s vs 3m/s. If you want to compare straight power both velocities should be the same right?

[napalm]

Why are you comparing the rate of power of dumbells and barbell at different speeds. 1 m/s vs 3m/s. If you want to compare straight power both velocities should be the same right?

More weight on bb = slower velocity

[NYiron]

"You can't move a heavy weight slow."- Dr Fred HatfieldAt no point did I say bar velocities will be the same, but you are taking the erroneous position that maximal weight will not have a high amount of power by comparing them to Olympic lifts, which cannot be compared due to the lack of eccentric movement and stretch reflex, or a dynamic effort, which changes immensely for a raw lifter to a geared lifter.

Maximum power, optimal load and optimal power spectrum for power training in upper-body (bench press): a review - Editorial Elsevier

Thats exactly my point the bar velocities will not be the same. No matter what you will move a max load slower than a submax load. The loss of velocity associated with the higher load will result in a reduced power output no matter how you put it. With a lighter load the higher bar velocity will produce a higher power output.

No, i haven't taken "the erroneous" stance that max weight will not have a high amount of power out through comparison with olympic lifts, that doesn't make any sense. I took the stance that 1RM pressing will not have a high power output because of decreased bar velocity. I made the statement concerning olympic lifts as a clarifier as to what constitutes a power exercise. Olympic lifts emphasize bar velocity across the board submax and max while, bench press does not unless it is completed under speed bench protocols, and that caveat to my stance was mentioned several times.

[Rodja]

Maximum power, optimal load and optimal power spectrum for power training in upper-body (bench press): a review - Editorial Elsevier

Thats exactly my point the bar velocities will not be the same. No matter what you will move a max load slower than a submax load. The loss of velocity associated with the higher load will result in a reduced power output no matter how you put it. With a lighter load the higher bar velocity will produce a higher power output.

No, i haven't taken "the erroneous" stance that max weight will not have a high amount of power out through comparison with olympic lifts, that doesn't make any sense. I took the stance that 1RM pressing will not have a high power output because of decreased bar velocity. I made the statement concerning olympic lifts as a clarifier as to what constitutes a power exercise. Olympic lifts emphasize bar velocity across the board submax and max while, bench press does not unless it is completed under speed bench protocols, and that caveat to my stance was mentioned several times.

Too bad that article mentions improper bench press technique by ignoring leg drive and the lats. Bar speed is ALWAYS emphasized no matter the load on the bar despite the speed that it may have. This is the most important aspect of the dynamic effort; not the load itself, but the bar speed. No person but you has said anything about maximal force output in regards to bar weight as that is very myopic in terms of the purpose of the movement itself. Like I said, you have some basic ideas right regarding the conjugate system, but you need to go into more detail about it before you start making all of these proclamations on topics that are beyond your scope.

[NYiron]

Too bad that article mentions improper bench press technique by ignoring leg drive and the lats. Bar speed is ALWAYS emphasized no matter the load on the bar despite the speed that it may have. This is the most important aspect of the dynamic effort; not the load itself, but the bar speed. No person but you has said anything about maximal force output in regards to bar weight as that is very myopic in terms of the purpose of the movement itself. Like I said, you have some basic ideas right regarding the conjugate system, but you need to go into more detail about it before you start making all of these proclamations on topics that are beyond your scope.

Ah damn sorry not every article is catered to the point at hand. Regardless of your nay say based on leg drive and lat activation it still raises valid points specifically "For multiple-joint muscle actions, optimal load varies with exercise. It is often said that, for lower body movements, optimal power appears at 0%^17-21 and 55-59% 1RM²² in jump squat, 60-70% 1RM²³ and 40-65% 1RM²⁴ in half squat, and 56-78% 1RM25 in leg press. Optimal load for weightlifting movements, such as clean and/or snatch has been identified at 70-80% 1RM²⁶. For upper-body movements, as for example bench press, countermovement bench press and bench press throw, optimal load is achieved between 30% and 70% of 1RM.Aspects such as movement mechanics^18,19,27-29 age⁹, gender²⁵, fibre type³⁰, muscle-tendon morphology³¹, muscular fatigue³², training level strength and training experience^33,34 are some parameters that can affect the load percentage at which maximum power is reached in a technical gesture^12,35.Consequently, the optimal load at which power output is reached is the load intensity in which the perfect combination between velocity and load displacement is produced¹⁶. This is known asoptimal load (OL)^{7,18,26,35-37}. From a practice point of view, OL and similar power loads where there are no significant differences (optimal power spectrum) are considered as more appropriate loads to develop power at a specific technical gesture⁷."

Bar speed may be emphasized but unless it occurs power output will be low. Thats saying, "I thought about going to the gym today but I didn't does it still count as a workout?"

We are the only two discussing the subject so how could anyone else say anything about max force output in regards to bar weight? While it may be myopic thats what is being discussed the ability to produce power under max force output. The reference to max bench press as a power exercise is what is being questioned, so Im not sure where you were going with that one.

Lastly never did I claim to be an expert on the conjugate method, so your personal attack on my scope means nothing, I raised one point which you, yourself, have just validated in saying "This is the most important aspect of the dynamic effort; not the load itself, but the bar speed" as my statement concerned DE and submax loading in effort to create torque and power.

[NYiron]

Too bad that article mentions improper bench press technique by ignoring leg drive and the lats. Bar speed is ALWAYS emphasized no matter the load on the bar despite the speed that it may have. This is the most important aspect of the dynamic effort; not the load itself, but the bar speed. No person but you has said anything about maximal force output in regards to bar weight as that is very myopic in terms of the purpose of the movement itself. Like I said, you have some basic ideas right regarding the conjugate system, but you need to go into more detail about it before you start making all of these proclamations on topics that are beyond your scope.

Just curious as well what medical or strength and conditioning governing body advocates the powerlifting bench press form as proper? Not to say it isn't most effective but I'd like to see which advocates for it NSCA, ACSM?

[Rodja]

Bar speed may be emphasized but unless it occurs power output will be low. Thats saying, "I thought about going to the gym today but I didn't does it still count as a workout?"

We are the only two discussing the subject so how could anyone else say anything about max force output in regards to bar weight? While it may be myopic thats what is being discussed the ability to produce power under max force output. The reference to max bench press as a power exercise is what is being questioned, so Im not sure where you were going with that one.

Lastly never did I claim to be an expert on the conjugate method, so your personal attack on my scope means nothing, I raised one point which you, yourself, have just validated in saying "This is the most important aspect of the dynamic effort; not the load itself, but the bar speed" as my statement concerned DE and submax loading in effort to create torque and power.

It's invalid to the discussion because it is not using appropriate technique. Bench is meant as a whole-body lift, not as solely as an upper-body lift.

Your straw man is awful on the analogy, but that's another issue altogether. Like I've already said several times, but you can't seem to grasp, just because it doesn't fall under the classical tense of a "power" exercise does not mean that a 1RM will not move significant power to it. Will be equal or great than a submaximal load? Probably not, but that is not the point and, regarding the dynamic effort, the primary reason for its development was because you can only have so many days devoted to maximal strength and, for raw lifters, the recommendations are much higher than what would fall under "power" terms.

[Rodja]

Just curious as well what medical or strength and conditioning governing body advocates the powerlifting bench press form as proper? Not to say it isn't most effective but I'd like to see which advocates for it NSCA, ACSM?

The NSCA, NASM, ACSM, etc. does not know how to bench properly and are stuck in the BB'ing mentality of solely upper-body. Proper form is dictated by maximal strength and safety, which are the two primary aspects on technique as taught throughout the powerlifting community.

[NYiron]

It's invalid to the discussion because it is not using appropriate technique. Bench is meant as a whole-body lift, not as solely as an upper-body lift.

Your straw man is awful on the analogy, but that's another issue altogether. Like I've already said several times, but you can't seem to grasp, just because it doesn't fall under the classical tense of a "power" exercise does not mean that a 1RM will not move significant power to it. Will be equal or great than a submaximal load? Probably not, but that is not the point and, regarding the dynamic effort, the primary reason for its development was because you can only have so many days devoted to maximal strength and, for raw lifters, the recommendations are much higher than what would fall under "power" terms.

Your argument has morphed several times over the last few posts, so grasping your point is rather difficult when every post includes a new aspect.

[NYiron]

The NSCA, NASM, ACSM, etc. does not know how to bench properly and are stuck in the BB'ing mentality of solely upper-body. Proper form is dictated by maximal strength and safety, which are the two primary aspects on technique as taught throughout the powerlifting community.

Exactly why I said "not to say it isn't most effective" because I practice it myself
and know its efficacy. To deem it proper, where is your basis? Do you have studies supporting the safety?

[Rodja]

Exactly why I said "not to say it isn't most effective" because I practice it myself
and know its efficacy. To deem it proper, where is your basis? Do you have studies supporting the safety?

Proper is by engaging as many motor units as possible throughout the body by emphasizing tightness and the entire body. Safety is by reducing ROM and a more neutral angle of the elbow and lower bar position on the chest for less strain upon the shoulder capsule.

[NYiron]

It's invalid to the discussion because it is not using appropriate technique. Bench is meant as a whole-body lift, not as solely as an upper-body lift.

Your straw man is awful on the analogy, but that's another issue altogether. Like I've already said several times, but you can't seem to grasp, just because it doesn't fall under the classical tense of a "power" exercise does not mean that a 1RM will not move significant power to it. Will be equal or great than a submaximal load? Probably not, but that is not the point and, regarding the dynamic effort, the primary reason for its development was because you can only have so many days devoted to maximal strength and, for raw lifters, the recommendations are much higher than what would fall under "power" terms.

You haven't discussed this once at any other point. There is no classical sense of power, what the hell is that? Power is power, physics is physics you can not dispute power = force x velocity as the classical sense, as if there is some new law of physics applying to low power output max effort bench dictating that it is actually a high power output exercise. There either is high or low output no grey area, new or classical sense, on this. In italics you have agreed with me then quickly diverted away saying its not the point when that is exactly the point and has been since my first post concerning airborne's statement of barbell bench being a power exercise.

Edit: There is a certain degree of power, some higher than others, associated with every exercise, but does that make a heavy barbell bent over row a power exercise because of the weight that can be moved and the degree of assisting isometric contractions, no. The way you are thinking every exercise can be considered a power exercise as long as there is a significant amount of force applied. That is only one side of the equation and power output rides heavily on velocity which has been my point across every single one of my statements.

[NYiron]

Proper is by engaging as many motor units as possible throughout the body by emphasizing tightness and the entire body. Safety is by reducing ROM and a more neutral angle of the elbow and lower bar position on the chest for less strain upon the shoulder capsule.

EMG data? Why is reduced range safer? Brings in questioning on decreased mobility, strength and stability through full ROM. Do you have data on the biomechanics of a shortened range and lower bar position and GH integrity over time? What are these claims based in other than anecdotal evidence? Im not saying i completely disagree but there is a lot open for questioning and unless you have data to support your claims they are trivial. Also, what is the effect of the dorsal vertebral compression and excessive anterior pelvic tilting, associated with the arch, under load?

[Rodja]

You haven't discussed this once at any other point. There is no classical sense of power, what the hell is that? Power is power, physics is physics you can not dispute power = force x velocity as the classical sense, as if there is some new law of physics applying to low power output max effort bench dictating that it is actually a high power output exercise. There either is high or low output no grey area, new or classical sense, on this. In italics you have agreed with me then quickly diverted away saying its not the point when that is exactly the point and has been since my first post concerning airborne's statement of barbell bench being a power exercise.

I said it in post #17. When I say classical sense, I mean a movement that is swift and high bar velocity. However, you're stuck in the view that this is the only example of a movement that requires significant power. You think that the only form of a movement requiring significant power is something with high bar velocity and submaximal weight when that is not true.

[NYiron]

I said it in post #17. When I say classical sense, I mean a movement that is swift and high bar velocity. However, you're stuck in the view that this is the only example of a movement that requires significant power. You think that the only form of a movement requiring significant power is something with high bar velocity and submaximal weight when that is not true.

I stand corrected on that I do apologize. Please enlighten me then as to what you mean, because i am not stuck in anything I am only stating the physics.

Edit: power is a measure of energy transfer so a movement can't require power it can only yield a power output. A movement will require force to overcome inertia and power is a measure of the rate of that force production that overcomes said inertia.

[napalm]

Epic