Statistical analyses
To assess differences in 6-RM, lifting time, vertical displacement of the barbell, elbow positions and EMG activity between each bench press variation: grip width (wide, medium and narrow) and inclination (flat, inclined, and declined), a repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Bonferroni post-hoc corrections were used. All calculations were performed using SPSS (version 20.0; SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Statistical significance was accepted at p ≤ 0.05. All results are presented as means ± SD and Cohen’s d effect size (ES). An ES of 0.2 was considered small, 0.5 medium and 0.8 large (Cohen, 1988).
Bench Press online in Pakistan
Go to:
Results
Bench positions
Similar EMG activation in the PM (clavicular and sternocostal part), PD and LD in all three bench conditions (flat, inclined and declined) was observed (p = 0.105–1.000, Figure 2a, Table 2a). In the inclined bench condition, EMG muscle activity in TB was 58.5% and 62.6% lower than in the flat and declined bench, respectively (p ≤ 0.001–0.001; ES = 1.16–1.28). Similar TB activation was observed between the flat and declined bench (p = 1.000). In BB, 48.3% and 68.7% greater muscle activation was observed in the inclined bench condition compared with flat and declined, respectively (p = 0.003–0.005, ES = 0.99–1.17), with no differences in EMG in BB observed between the flat and declined bench (p = 0.401). In AD, similar EMG activity was observed between flat and the two inclined bench positions (p = 0.377–1.000), a 25.7% greater EMG activity was observed when performing in the inclined compared to the declined bench position (p = 0.002; ES = 0.50).
An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is hukin-57-061-g002.jpg
Figure 2a-b
The difference (%) in muscle activation comparing inclined and declined (2a) and narrow and medium grip wide (2b) with flat bench press.
# significant difference between inclined and declined condition (p < 0.05).
* significant difference from all other bench positions (p < 0.05)
Table 2a
RMS values (mV) in flat, inclined and declined bench positions.
All values are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
Muscles Wide Medium Narrow
PM sternocostal part 0.408 ± 0.327 0.390 ± 0.293 0.313 ± 0.124
PM clavicular part 0.505 ± 0.317 0.501 ± 0.284 0.457 ± 0.244
Triceps brachii 0.679 ± 0.290 0.616 ± 0.228 0.652 ± 0.261
Anterior deltoid 0.835 ± 0.341 0.775 ± 0.276 0.739 ± 0.387
Posterior deltoid 0.192 ± 0.052 0.190 ± 0.064 0.208 ± 0.094
Biceps brachii 0.227 ± 0.167 0.219 ± 0.198 0.174 ± 0.152 *
Latissimus dorsi 0.111 ± 0.058 0.111 ± 0.058 0.132 ± 0.130
*significantly different from all other bench positions (p < 0.05).
Grip widths
No significant differences in any muscles were observed (p = 0.076–1.000) with the exception of the BB (Figure 2b, Table 2b). In the narrow grip, BB muscle activation was 30.5% and 25.9% lower than in the medium and wide grip, respectively (p = 0.003–0.040, ES = 0.25–0.33). Similar muscle activation was observed in the medium and wide grip (p = 1.000).
Table 2b
RMS values (mV) of the wide, medium and narrow bench grip width.
All values are presented as mean ± standard derivation.
Muscles Horizontal Inclined Declined
PM sternocostal part 0.344 ± 0.341 0.287 ± 0.234 0.348 ± 0.370
PM clavicular part 0.492 ± 0.293 0.425 ± 0.218 0.444 ± 0.322
Triceps brachii 0.767 ± 0.302 0.484 ± 0.164 * 0.787 ± 0.291
Deltoideus anterior 0.705 ± 0.297 0.747 ± 0.294 0.594 ± 0.306 #
Deltoideus posterior 0.262 ± 0.071 0.195 ± 0.089 0.275 ± 0.134
Biceps brachii 0.174 ± 0.062 0.258 ± 0.103 * 0.152 ± 0.076
Latissimus dorsi 0.100 ± 0.054 0.125 ± 0.084 0.145 ± 0.105
6-RM loads
