Cargando…
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 gr...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
De Gruyter Open
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5765782/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29339982 http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2017-0109 |
_version_ | 1783292287244042240 |
---|---|
author | Lockie, Robert G. Callaghan, Samuel J. Moreno, Matthew R. Risso, Fabrice G. Liu, Tricia M. Stage, Alyssa A. Birmingham-Babauta, Samantha A. Stokes, John J. Giuliano, Dominic V. Lazar, Adrina Davis, DeShaun L. Orjalo, Ashley J. |
author_facet | Lockie, Robert G. Callaghan, Samuel J. Moreno, Matthew R. Risso, Fabrice G. Liu, Tricia M. Stage, Alyssa A. Birmingham-Babauta, Samantha A. Stokes, John J. Giuliano, Dominic V. Lazar, Adrina Davis, DeShaun L. Orjalo, Ashley J. |
author_sort | Lockie, Robert G. |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5765782 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | De Gruyter Open |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57657822018-01-16 Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press Lockie, Robert G. Callaghan, Samuel J. Moreno, Matthew R. Risso, Fabrice G. Liu, Tricia M. Stage, Alyssa A. Birmingham-Babauta, Samantha A. Stokes, John J. Giuliano, Dominic V. Lazar, Adrina Davis, DeShaun L. Orjalo, Ashley J. J Hum Kinet Section I – Kinesiology 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. De Gruyter Open 2017-12-28 /pmc/articles/PMC5765782/ /pubmed/29339982 http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2017-0109 Text en © 2017 Editorial Committee of Journal of Human Kinetics |
spellingShingle | Section I – Kinesiology Lockie, Robert G. Callaghan, Samuel J. Moreno, Matthew R. Risso, Fabrice G. Liu, Tricia M. Stage, Alyssa A. Birmingham-Babauta, Samantha A. Stokes, John J. Giuliano, Dominic V. Lazar, Adrina Davis, DeShaun L. Orjalo, Ashley J. Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press |
title | Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press |
title_full | Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press |
title_fullStr | Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press |
title_full_unstemmed | Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press |
title_short | Relationships between Mechanical Variables in the Traditional and Close-Grip Bench Press |
title_sort | relationships between mechanical variables in the traditional and close-grip bench press |
topic | Section I – Kinesiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5765782/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29339982 http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/hukin-2017-0109 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lockierobertg relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT callaghansamuelj relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT morenomatthewr relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT rissofabriceg relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT liutriciam relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT stagealyssaa relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT birminghambabautasamanthaa relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT stokesjohnj relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT giulianodominicv relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT lazaradrina relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT davisdeshaunl relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress AT orjaloashleyj relationshipsbetweenmechanicalvariablesinthetraditionalandclosegripbenchpress |