Next Article in Journal
Moderate Intensity Intermittent Exercise Modality May Prevent Cardiovascular Drift
Next Article in Special Issue
Effect of Descent Velocity upon Muscle Activation and Performance in Two-Legged Free Weight Back Squats
Previous Article in Journal
Sport Courage, Worry and Fear in Relation to Success of Alpine Ski Learning
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Effect of Set Up Position on EMG Amplitude, Lumbar Spine Kinetics, and Total Force Output During Maximal Isometric Conventional-Stance Deadlifts
Article

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

1
Department of Kinesiology, California State University, Fullerton, CA 92831, USA
2
School of Life Sciences, Pharmacy and Chemistry, Kingston University, Kingston upon Thames, KT1 1LQ, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Sports 2018, 6(3), 97; https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6030097
Received: 22 August 2018 / Revised: 4 September 2018 / Accepted: 12 September 2018 / Published: 15 September 2018
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. View Full-Text
Keywords: bar mechanics; grip width; linear position transducer; maximal power; optimal load; power profile; upper-body strength bar mechanics; grip width; linear position transducer; maximal power; optimal load; power profile; upper-body strength
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Lockie, R.G.; Callaghan, S.J.; Orjalo, A.J.; Moreno, M.R. Loading Range for the Development of Peak Power in the Close-Grip Bench Press versus the Traditional Bench Press. Sports 2018, 6, 97. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6030097

AMA Style

Lockie RG, Callaghan SJ, Orjalo AJ, Moreno MR. Loading Range for the Development of Peak Power in the Close-Grip Bench Press versus the Traditional Bench Press. Sports. 2018; 6(3):97. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6030097

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lockie, Robert G., Samuel J. Callaghan, Ashley J. Orjalo, and Matthew R. Moreno 2018. "Loading Range for the Development of Peak Power in the Close-Grip Bench Press versus the Traditional Bench Press" Sports 6, no. 3: 97. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports6030097

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop