Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below Its kinda pissing me off. Its not a full rep right? I see guys who go like 4-5 inches from their chest and push up again. It doesnt seem right. Why do so many people do it? And they dont even fully extend their arms all the way when coming up! And they think they're the shit because they do more weights. Thats not correct form right?
Benching and chest touching
- Thread starter Eric1987
- Start date
![[CinnamonBuns]](/forum/data/avatars/m/171/171869.jpg?1674492025){kind=avatar}
[CinnamonBuns]
New member
full reps top to bottom for me
pappad
New member
There is a difference in a power lifter and a body builder. Two different animals. Do some research on the Omega method chest workout and you will see what I mean. When you go all the way down you move past the pecs and it is the shoulders that take the hit for the explosion back up. When you do restricted movements you are isolating the pecs and keeping constant stress on them. I am sure Guardian will way in on this!
DaveTSI
New member
most of the time when training i stop just short of lockout to avoid pressure on my elbows except on max doubles or singles. I bench very fast and explosive and it is counterproductive to lockout every rep. Not touching your chest is pointless though, they are shortchanging themselves and stroking their egos because they can move more weight like that.
automaticj5
New member
You get a stretch in your outter pecs when you go down to your chest -- your shoulders are involved in the every moment as well.. Full rep for me is barely tap the chest then up to lock out. DB and BB a full rep is a full rep is a full rep -- you will see me at the end of a set only do half reps which I guess is what some of you are saying is a "rep" ill come down to about 5 inches from my chest and return up to get an extra burn when I dont have the energy left at the end of a set.
artificialaspirations
New member
I can do 275-300 for reps partial range of motion haha. Doesn't count. Sometimes I want to help these people so badly but don't want to seem judgemental, pushy or rude. Usually the young kids struggling w/ 135 doing 1/2 reps. I want to tell them to drop to 75-90 and do it the right way. The weight will come quicker this way.
hockeyshot
New member
I don't go all the way down to save my shoulders. I have shoulder problems and this will allow me to still get a good shoulder work out in.
I have shoulder problems so I no longer touch the bar to my chest. I am 175 lbs. and pretty strong on bench but I just can't go down to my chest or my shoulders will really start to hurt.
Every now and then I try to go down to my chest but my shoulders lack the flexibility needed to do a full rep. Nevertheless, I always feel it in my chest and my chest has gotten bigger, stronger, and more developed even though I don't touch the bar to my chest.
Anybody that thinks you HAVE to go all the way down to your chest needs to take an anatomy class. When the bar touches your chest your elbows are below your shoulders, this means your shoulders are now going to move the weight from this position. Your chest really doesn't take over till you hit about 90 degrees in the elbow.
I can get much better range of motion with dumbbells and I can throw up 100's on DB press so I don't think I really don't think I'm short changing my chest by not touching the bar to it.
And I can't stand guys that mug me at the gym while I'm benching because I'm not touching the bar to my chest. Mind your own business, I'm here to workout for myself, not for you.
Every now and then I try to go down to my chest but my shoulders lack the flexibility needed to do a full rep. Nevertheless, I always feel it in my chest and my chest has gotten bigger, stronger, and more developed even though I don't touch the bar to my chest.
Anybody that thinks you HAVE to go all the way down to your chest needs to take an anatomy class. When the bar touches your chest your elbows are below your shoulders, this means your shoulders are now going to move the weight from this position. Your chest really doesn't take over till you hit about 90 degrees in the elbow.
I can get much better range of motion with dumbbells and I can throw up 100's on DB press so I don't think I really don't think I'm short changing my chest by not touching the bar to it.
And I can't stand guys that mug me at the gym while I'm benching because I'm not touching the bar to my chest. Mind your own business, I'm here to workout for myself, not for you.
automaticj5
New member
automaticj5
New member
Btw if you have shoulder problems -- LIKE I DO... I used to not be able to bench because of my shoulders.... MOVE YOUR GRIP IN and you will be fine... even as small as a finger farther in, and waaaallaaaaa --- no shoulder probs... at worst you should be no more than an inch away from your chest.
DaveTSI
New member
Improvise said:
either move your grip in, or learn how to tuck your elbows on your decent rather than flaring them out and touching really high on your chest. This places tremendous strain on the shoulders and is how alot of lifters get hurt. Tucking your elbows and touching your sternum will transfer the majority of the weight off your shoulders and onto your back (yes back), tris and chest. Moving your grip in will make you do this almost automatically(ever notice that your shoulders dont really hurt when doing closegrip bench?), but it can be done using a wide grip also with practice.
And yes if you want to call it a proper benchpress, you do HAVE to touch your chest. Those guys at your gym probably get annoyed with the fact that they have to watch you butcher a basic movement like the benchpress every time they see you do it. And i was using 100's when i was 17 and 160lbs, big deal, if you learned how to benchpress properly, you could move alot more than that. If you can get a full range of motion with DB's, you can do it with the bar. Seriously take my advice and just try it next time your going to bench. Just think on your decent, tuck your elbows in towards your ribcage, flare your lats, and bring the bar to the lowest part of your sternum. TRY IT!
enigma4dub
Active member
regardless of goal; strength or aesthetics, a full range of motion is always best. whether ohp or benching i use a more narrow grip, like shoulder width. more bang for your buck. you will stimulate more muscle growth taking a movement through its full range of motion.
Elementality
New member
Eric1987 said:
I kinda posted something similar to this. I tried taking advice from someone to go all the way down, but not all the way back up. you go like 50 - 60% of the way up and then back down and its much harder for me and im much more sore the next day. Kinda the idea that when your arms are straight you are relaxing. much easier to hold and remain with 300 above your head than it is to hold it with your elbows bent to like 70 degrees. this way you never rest and the muscles are always squeezing.
DaveTSI said:
I've experimented with grip width time and time again, some are more comfortable than others but they all put strain on my shoulders for the most part. And I don't use an usually wide grip anyway, moving my hands further in would put them in the same plane as my shoulders and that is too narrow.
markmark
New member
Very interesting subject. At shoulder width I bring the bar all the way down and up 90% just short from locking my elbows. At close grip I bring the bar down to about 4" from chest..With half reps I would probably move a lot more weight but that's something I don't believe in { not to mention but that will add me to the "moron at the gym" thread}....
machine316
New member
Full range of motion thats my opinion. regardless of your goals. If you want to put more of the workload on the pecs, then take a wide grip.
Now if you can do a full range of motion with a particular weight but you choose to do "partial reps" fine. to each his own. but what bothers me is when people have too much weight and do partials only because they can't handle the weight, but then they come up with all these reasons why they do partials like " That's how Ronnie Coleman does them" ......your not ronnie coleman
Now if you can do a full range of motion with a particular weight but you choose to do "partial reps" fine. to each his own. but what bothers me is when people have too much weight and do partials only because they can't handle the weight, but then they come up with all these reasons why they do partials like " That's how Ronnie Coleman does them" ......your not ronnie coleman
bob saget here explains the bench pretty well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hsr1-xcXFL8&NR=1
and no it isnt bob saget but it sure looks like him
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hsr1-xcXFL8&NR=1
and no it isnt bob saget but it sure looks like him
DaveTSI
New member
keasbey said:
basically exactly what i explained in a previous post. I disagree with the placement of the bar, it should be below his nipples IMO(which would be done by tucking his elbows even more). And slow reps are overrated IMO. If you can control it and they are clean reps, they should be fast and explosive.
DaveTSI
New member
touch low and squat high
Improvise said:
This all sounds very educational, but it's really pseudo science. Maybe it's your way of justifying partial reps.
Your pecs are involved from the fully stretched postion all the way to the fully contracted position. When the elbows drop below the shoulders, that's a stretched position. Shoulder flexibility becomes severly limited if your bench press ROM is limited.
I understand you have a shoulder injury, but using heavier weights for partial reps could be part of your problem. You are unknowingly weakening your rotator cuff and limiting your flexibility which could become detrimental in a lot of areas.
deathdroprob
Banned
All the way down is the best way.
I sometimes do a half reps when Im at failing point, just to keep on it
I sometimes do a half reps when Im at failing point, just to keep on it
Elementality
New member
So back to my comment about going all the way down but only half way back up and then all the way back down again. I did the same weight as I usually bench with, but i felt much more pump and stres s on my muscles this way. I was also incredibly sore the next day, way more than usual. Am i more sore (keep in mind same sets, same weight, less reps) because its just a different angle of attack or because this method actually works the muscles harder?
Powerbuilder333
Timeout? No, timeouts are for Plats
I new what was coming and I still was fuckin' shocked.DaveTSI said:
They call that a suicide grip for a reason!!!
Strongbow
New member
Why does that piss you off so bad? They ain't cheating you brother, they are cheating theirselves. I actually think its kinda a funny to see assholes doing shit like that and then get up all swole up and cocky like they have done something. Seen a dipshit the other day do 800 pounds on a leg press, might have moved the weight six inches total and jumped up like he was fucking Arnold or sumthin. You gotta laugh at that shit, Bro.Eric1987 said:
automaticj5
New member
DaveTSI said:
Ohhhh shit -- I wasnt ready for that, that hurt me lol
Powerbuilder333 said:
I had the same reaction. I was thinking... why the heck is he not wrapping his thumb around the bar so he can grip it then .... BAM! He was crushed.
Bad day for him.
artificialaspirations
New member
Strongbow said:
I think because it skews the sport so much in conversation. Every other sport has standards like 90 ft bases, 100 yd goal line, 10 ft hoop etc. For us its a full range of motion squat or bench.
For instance, In conversation someone says they squat 315, I think dedication and years of hard work to get there. Later I see them doing 1/4 squats and realize thats just one summer of ill-informed training, so on and so forth. We all should measure with the same yard stick.
artificialaspirations
New member
Strongbow said:
I think because it skews the sport so much in conversation. Every other sport has standards like 90 ft bases, 100 yd goal line, 10 ft hoop etc. For us its a full range of motion squat or bench. Apples to apples, if you will. I'd love to be able to say I can bench 300 but I'd be cheating myself cause I can't do it full range.
For instance, In conversation someone says they squat 315, I think dedication and years of hard work to get there. Later I see them doing 1/4 squats and realize thats just one summer of ill-informed training, so on and so forth. We all should measure with the same yard stick.
imo, full range of motion is always your best option. if you hit a plateau, only then may you change and do partial reps. but when doing partial reps you must do them correctly, or you are only cheating yourself. i do partial inclines when i want to focus on my chest, and yes it does seem to work. but i always touch, i just may not lock out. when i do flat bench i always use full range of motion
JLowe02 said:
I'm still confused on the whole partial rep thing ever since I read Omega's theories. I always use a full range of motion.
However, I've tried the partial reps when I was stuck on squats. I added 10 lbs to each side and I could only do partials. Next day I was really sore. I think it shocked me, having more weight than I was used to. Next week, I was able to perform full reps.
automaticj5
New member
1999TL said:
Yeah but you used full reps til you couldnt do them anymore... partial reps arent bad when you CANT do full reps any longer cuz such a hard workout -- Like I said before, at the end of sets, ill try to push out a couple half reps if I can...
Although I may be comparing apples to oranges, consider the squat, where partial reps are heresy due to the knees taking the brunt of the load anywhere above parallel. It is in my opinion (consolidated by Mark Rippetoe's advice) that nothing but a below-parallel squat (the criteria for which is the inguinal fold - the fold between the inner thigh and the genitalia - being lower than the level of the patella, or kneecap) is a legitimate squat because the weight is safely transmitted from the knees to the comparatively stronger gluteal muscles (the butt).
I can't help but draw a parallel between the knees being put in a precarious position for trainees who do not know how to squat correctly, and the partial rep ideology that bench pressers advocate. In this case, I see the elbows in the same way that I see the knees during the squat - they, along with the shoulders, have to stop a weight dead in the middle of its natural range of motion and begin upward acceleration. The natural use of the myotatic (stretch) reflex is abandoned and the advantage of the rebound is lost. The joints cannot be benefiting from this, in my eyes. Plus, from a micro-physiological standpoint, the smaller the degree of muscle fiber stretch, the smaller the extent of stretch-induced calcium release from the sarcoplasmic reticulum of the muscle, resulting in less force production (a weaker muscle contraction).
Please correct me if I'm wrong in my way of thinking.
I can't help but draw a parallel between the knees being put in a precarious position for trainees who do not know how to squat correctly, and the partial rep ideology that bench pressers advocate. In this case, I see the elbows in the same way that I see the knees during the squat - they, along with the shoulders, have to stop a weight dead in the middle of its natural range of motion and begin upward acceleration. The natural use of the myotatic (stretch) reflex is abandoned and the advantage of the rebound is lost. The joints cannot be benefiting from this, in my eyes. Plus, from a micro-physiological standpoint, the smaller the degree of muscle fiber stretch, the smaller the extent of stretch-induced calcium release from the sarcoplasmic reticulum of the muscle, resulting in less force production (a weaker muscle contraction).
Please correct me if I'm wrong in my way of thinking.
IrishHandGrenade
New member
I'm not sure why everyone gets so upset about people doing a partial range of motion unless they're walking around like they're bad cuz of the weight they can do. Even then I dont really give a crap what everyone else is doing. I know what I'm in there to do and thats all I worry about.
For purely bodybuilding purposes a 3/4 range of motion on chest presses keeps more tension on the pecs. When you go past parallel your shoulders start to take a mojority of the load which is fine unless you want to target your pecs. You'll be able to fatigue your chest much better stopping at about parallel and not locking out. It does take a few workouts for your delts to stop taking over and allow your pecs to do most of the work.
I've been going all the way down for years and that style definitly has a place in bodybuilding and more so in strength training however I never lock out. Locking out is too hard on your joints and reduces you time under tension.
For purely bodybuilding purposes a 3/4 range of motion on chest presses keeps more tension on the pecs. When you go past parallel your shoulders start to take a mojority of the load which is fine unless you want to target your pecs. You'll be able to fatigue your chest much better stopping at about parallel and not locking out. It does take a few workouts for your delts to stop taking over and allow your pecs to do most of the work.
I've been going all the way down for years and that style definitly has a place in bodybuilding and more so in strength training however I never lock out. Locking out is too hard on your joints and reduces you time under tension.
enigma4dub
Active member
IrishHandGrenade said:
time under tension is completely overrated. the bench press is not a chest exercise it is an upper body press. the lats, shoulder and chest are all heavily involved. the idea is to have strength through the entire range of motion. this results in added hypertrophy. narrow grip on all presses is safer on your elbows and shoulder because it forces you to tuck your elbows in.
IrishHandGrenade
New member
enigma4dub said:
Anyway the whole point was that not everything is best for everyone and it isn't fair to assume someones reason for doing a lift a certain way.
Btw, not trying to argue or anything so if I come off as a dick I apologize.
IrishHandGrenade
New member
Also, from the looks of your pic you're pretty big and obviously know what your doing and it's working well for you. I just think that there are many different means to the same end.
Elementality
New member
Seems to me that your back and chest are fully exhausted by the time you hit 90 degrees. From there it seems to me that on up to lockout its mainly triceps and some shoulders.
What are you trying to work? if just chest with some minor back recruitment don't go all the way up. Thats what I've been doing for the last month and my chest has been more sore than ever in my life while my triceps/shoulders not so much <but i work them seperately bodybuilder style on a different day>
I tested my full 1rm bench max the other day and it had significantly gone up so I know doing it this way has made my chest stronger, although I will admit that from 90 degrees n up I had some trouble pushing. But, I like what I see in the mirror and that is my dominant benchmark for my personal weightlifting progress report.
What are you trying to work? if just chest with some minor back recruitment don't go all the way up. Thats what I've been doing for the last month and my chest has been more sore than ever in my life while my triceps/shoulders not so much <but i work them seperately bodybuilder style on a different day>
I tested my full 1rm bench max the other day and it had significantly gone up so I know doing it this way has made my chest stronger, although I will admit that from 90 degrees n up I had some trouble pushing. But, I like what I see in the mirror and that is my dominant benchmark for my personal weightlifting progress report.
IrishHandGrenade
New member
Elementality said:
+1
enigma4dub
Active member
IrishHandGrenade said:Anyway the whole point was that not everything is best for everyone and it isn't fair to assume someones reason for doing a lift a certain way.
Btw, not trying to argue or anything so if I come off as a dick I apologize.
its all good man, debate is good... my thought process is stronger = bigger. now i train exercises not bodyparts so for me, my "chest" work consists of close grip bench, weighted dips, incline press and behind the neck push press (i split these presses up into two days paired with squats). i try to get as strong as possible at these exercises and the chest will figure itself out.
ghettostudmuffin
New member
I pretty much have to agree that full range ofmotion is the way to go except in certain cases.
If you have an existing injury or range limitation do to previous injury then you go through as much range as you can.
Certain exercises can be done with a partial rom for specific goals though.
Squats stopped above parallel with a medium to close stance really do fry your quads. If the motion is smooth and controlled and you push your butt back, the stress on the knees is not bad.
Arnold used to squat like this because A. he actually does have a somewhat thick waist and B. he did not want his ass to get bigger because it would ruin the look he wanted.
Now I know Arnold is not widely regarded for having good legs, but in peak shape they were still very good. In the 73 or 74 olympia his quads looked fuckin awesome.
Actually that's about the only reason I could see doing a partial movement.
I personally squat atg, but there are "some" reasons one might do a partial exercise.
I'm pretty sure "some" people think I'm a dumbass when I do 2 hands anyhow, or turkish getup and especially bent press because they are uncommon exercises even though they existed before the bench press or squat as we know it came to be.
But, that does not stop them from being excellent strength building exercises throughout the whole body and especially core strength and shoulder power and stability.
If you have an existing injury or range limitation do to previous injury then you go through as much range as you can.
Certain exercises can be done with a partial rom for specific goals though.
Squats stopped above parallel with a medium to close stance really do fry your quads. If the motion is smooth and controlled and you push your butt back, the stress on the knees is not bad.
Arnold used to squat like this because A. he actually does have a somewhat thick waist and B. he did not want his ass to get bigger because it would ruin the look he wanted.
Now I know Arnold is not widely regarded for having good legs, but in peak shape they were still very good. In the 73 or 74 olympia his quads looked fuckin awesome.
Actually that's about the only reason I could see doing a partial movement.
I personally squat atg, but there are "some" reasons one might do a partial exercise.
I'm pretty sure "some" people think I'm a dumbass when I do 2 hands anyhow, or turkish getup and especially bent press because they are uncommon exercises even though they existed before the bench press or squat as we know it came to be.
But, that does not stop them from being excellent strength building exercises throughout the whole body and especially core strength and shoulder power and stability.
enigma4dub
Active member
ghettostudmuffin said:
this is the only thing that i disagree with. arnold was a pin cushion with the amount of aas/gh in his body his legs were gonna develop regardless of doing an exercise correctly.
and partial rep squats are definately stressfull on the knee. the load stays at the knee instead of transfering to the hips.
but glad to hear your an atg man!
ghettostudmuffin
New member
Arnold didn't use gh. None of the bodybuilders did back then. And noone can definitively say just how much aas he used, but incomparison to today's bodybuilder it was like a drop in the ocean and compared to his peers in competition he was not anymore advanced due to sky high amounts of aas use. He just has amazing genetics and a very appealing and unique aesthetic to his build.
Men like Serge Nubret, Franco Columbo, Robby Robinson etc were equally as muscular if not more so for their frame size, but noone carried the weight like arnold did. Not to mention charisma.
Squatting like that does place stress on the knees, but like I said, if you push your ass back rather than trying to squat straight up and down, it is not bad. The range of motion on this is like maybe 15-20 degrees above parallel at bottom position and this is how arnold squatted.
Also arnold's leg's were his worst body part and the hardest for him to develope.
He spent countless hours developing his calves which became fantastic later in his bodybuilding career from experimentation and tips he learned from training with Reg Park, his idol.
Men like Serge Nubret, Franco Columbo, Robby Robinson etc were equally as muscular if not more so for their frame size, but noone carried the weight like arnold did. Not to mention charisma.
Squatting like that does place stress on the knees, but like I said, if you push your ass back rather than trying to squat straight up and down, it is not bad. The range of motion on this is like maybe 15-20 degrees above parallel at bottom position and this is how arnold squatted.
Also arnold's leg's were his worst body part and the hardest for him to develope.
He spent countless hours developing his calves which became fantastic later in his bodybuilding career from experimentation and tips he learned from training with Reg Park, his idol.
enigma4dub
Active member
ghettostudmuffin said:
i agree about all the genetics and positives about arnold you stated. its hard to say if his method of squatating induced the best results though.
i am ignorant as shit when it comes to aas an gh. but im pretty sure they were gettin gh from cadivers back then someone else could chime in. but i do know he was greatly aided by aas from a very young age. great genetics and all. he was weiders pet project.
arnold had poor leverages and quad genetics. tom platz did a full range of motion. mostly free weight fronts and oly backs. but of course he was built to squat. and his legs were ridiculous.
oh and the idea wasnt to discount some of the physiques that you referenced
above, they are some of my favorites. serge is my idol. and i know its nothing compared to todays obscene usage. but it did a lot.
yes i have read his encyclopedia as well. i know his calve routine. that book imho is for entertainment purpouses only. i really like the pictures though.
There is a guy in my gym I know quite well who uses a block of wood on his chest. This after getting frustrated with his poor performance at full range.
He benched 250 for the first time last Spring...with the board on his chest. He was so happy that he told everyone of his new max...never mentioned a thing about the block of wood on his chest. Sad!
He benched 250 for the first time last Spring...with the board on his chest. He was so happy that he told everyone of his new max...never mentioned a thing about the block of wood on his chest. Sad!
Lambster said:
i don't use the actual wood on my chest but i act like there is a 2x4 on my chest. if i go down to my chest it kills a bad shoulder of mine. if you think 1 3/4" makes a differece in a lift you are crazy bro. people that hit their chest usually get a little bounce that helps them on the upward motion anyways.
Thanks, Dave. I will keep touching.
Wow 250 isnt even anything much too. I am near there and I am a small kid who eats like shit.
You guys should take the advice from pappad.. It all depends on what your going for. If your only benching 225 I would think your form and the number or reps is the most important thing for you to focus on right now, not how much you can push up. But if your in a competition for the most wieght, a chest touch with no bounce is a complete press.. full lock out. bumbells will also help increase your bench.
Similar threads
