Cargando…

The effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press

The intrathoracic pressure and breathing strategy on bench press (BP) performance is highly discussed in strength competition practice. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze whether different breathing techniques can influence the time and track characteristics of the sticking region (...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Blazek, Dusan, Kolinger, Dominik, Petruzela, Jan, Kubovy, Petr, Golas, Artur, Petr, Miroslav, Pisz, Anna, Stastny, Petr
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Institute of Sport in Warsaw 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8329978/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34475625
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2021.100362
_version_ 1783732606484873216
author Blazek, Dusan
Kolinger, Dominik
Petruzela, Jan
Kubovy, Petr
Golas, Artur
Petr, Miroslav
Pisz, Anna
Stastny, Petr
author_facet Blazek, Dusan
Kolinger, Dominik
Petruzela, Jan
Kubovy, Petr
Golas, Artur
Petr, Miroslav
Pisz, Anna
Stastny, Petr
author_sort Blazek, Dusan
collection PubMed
description The intrathoracic pressure and breathing strategy on bench press (BP) performance is highly discussed in strength competition practice. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze whether different breathing techniques can influence the time and track characteristics of the sticking region (SR) during the 1RM BP exercise. 24 healthy, male adults (age 23 ± 2.4 yrs., body mass 85 ± 9.2 kg, height 181 ± 5.4 cm) performed a 1 repetition BP using the breathing technique of Valsalva maneuver (VM), hold breath, lung packing (PAC), and reverse breathing (REVB), while maximum lifted load and concentric phase kinematics were recorded. The results of ANOVA showed that the REVB breathing decreased absolute (p < 0.04) and relative lifted load (p < 0.01). The VM showed lower (p = 0.01) concentric time of the lift than the other breathing techniques. The VM and PAC showed lower SR time than other breathing techniques, where PAC showed a lower SR time than VM (p = 0.02). The PAC techniques resulted in shorter SR and pre-SR track than other breathing techniques and the REVB showed longer SR track than the other considered breathing techniques (p = 0.04). Thus, PAC or VM should be used for 1RM BP lifting according to preferences, experiences and lifting comfort of an athlete. The hold breath technique does not seem to excessively decrease the lifting load, but this method will increase the lifting time and the time spend in the sticking region, therefore its use does not provide any lifting benefit. The authors suggest that the REVB should not be used during 1 RM lifts.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8329978
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Institute of Sport in Warsaw
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83299782021-09-01 The effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press Blazek, Dusan Kolinger, Dominik Petruzela, Jan Kubovy, Petr Golas, Artur Petr, Miroslav Pisz, Anna Stastny, Petr Biol Sport Original Paper The intrathoracic pressure and breathing strategy on bench press (BP) performance is highly discussed in strength competition practice. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to analyze whether different breathing techniques can influence the time and track characteristics of the sticking region (SR) during the 1RM BP exercise. 24 healthy, male adults (age 23 ± 2.4 yrs., body mass 85 ± 9.2 kg, height 181 ± 5.4 cm) performed a 1 repetition BP using the breathing technique of Valsalva maneuver (VM), hold breath, lung packing (PAC), and reverse breathing (REVB), while maximum lifted load and concentric phase kinematics were recorded. The results of ANOVA showed that the REVB breathing decreased absolute (p < 0.04) and relative lifted load (p < 0.01). The VM showed lower (p = 0.01) concentric time of the lift than the other breathing techniques. The VM and PAC showed lower SR time than other breathing techniques, where PAC showed a lower SR time than VM (p = 0.02). The PAC techniques resulted in shorter SR and pre-SR track than other breathing techniques and the REVB showed longer SR track than the other considered breathing techniques (p = 0.04). Thus, PAC or VM should be used for 1RM BP lifting according to preferences, experiences and lifting comfort of an athlete. The hold breath technique does not seem to excessively decrease the lifting load, but this method will increase the lifting time and the time spend in the sticking region, therefore its use does not provide any lifting benefit. The authors suggest that the REVB should not be used during 1 RM lifts. Institute of Sport in Warsaw 2020-11-04 2021-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8329978/ /pubmed/34475625 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2021.100362 Text en Copyright © Biology of Sport 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Blazek, Dusan
Kolinger, Dominik
Petruzela, Jan
Kubovy, Petr
Golas, Artur
Petr, Miroslav
Pisz, Anna
Stastny, Petr
The effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press
title The effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press
title_full The effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press
title_fullStr The effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press
title_full_unstemmed The effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press
title_short The effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press
title_sort effect of breathing technique on sticking region during maximal bench press
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8329978/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34475625
http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2021.100362
work_keys_str_mv AT blazekdusan theeffectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT kolingerdominik theeffectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT petruzelajan theeffectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT kubovypetr theeffectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT golasartur theeffectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT petrmiroslav theeffectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT piszanna theeffectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT stastnypetr theeffectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT blazekdusan effectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT kolingerdominik effectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT petruzelajan effectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT kubovypetr effectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT golasartur effectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT petrmiroslav effectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT piszanna effectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress
AT stastnypetr effectofbreathingtechniqueonstickingregionduringmaximalbenchpress