Comparison of Concentric and Eccentric Bench Press Repetitions to Failure
-
Kelly, Stephen B. [1] ; Brown, Lee E. [2] ; Hooker, Steven P. [3] ; Swan, Pamela D. [3] ; Buman, Matthew P. [3] ; Alvar, Brent A. [4] ; Black, Laurie E. [5]
-
[1] Vanguard University
Vanguard University
Estados Unidos
-
[2] California State University, Fullerton
California State University, Fullerton
Estados Unidos
-
[3] Arizona State University
Arizona State University
Estados Unidos
-
[4] Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions
Rocky Mountain University of Health Professions
Estados Unidos
-
[5] California Baptist University
California Baptist University
Estados Unidos
-
- Localización: Journal of strength and conditioning research: the research journal of the NSCA, ISSN 1064-8011, Vol. 29, Nº. 4, 2015, págs. 1027-1032
- Idioma: inglés
- Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
-
Resumen
Eccentric muscle actions (ECC) are characterized by muscle lengthening, despite actin-myosin crossbridge formation. Muscles acting eccentrically are capable of producing higher levels of force compared with muscles acting concentrically. The purpose of this study was to determine whether ECC bench press yields greater strength than concentric (CON) as determined by 1 repetition maximum (1RM). Additionally, a comparison was made examining differences in the number of repetitions to failure at different relative intensities of 1RM. Thirty healthy men (age = 24.63 ± 5.6 years) were tested for 1RM in CON and ECC bench press and the number of repetitions completed at 60, 70, 80, and 90% 1RM. For CON repetitions, the weight was mechanically lowered to the chest, and the participant pressed it up until the elbows were fully extended. The ECC bench press consisted of lowering a barbell from a fully extended elbow position to the chest in a continuous controlled manner for 3 seconds as determined by electronic metronome. Paired t-tests showed that ECC 1RM (115.99 ± 31.08 kg) was significantly (p <= 0.05) greater than CON 1RM (93.56 ± 26.56 kg), and the number of repetitions completed at 90% 1RM was significantly (p <= 0.05) greater in ECC (7.67 ± 3.24) as compared with CON (4.57 ± 2.21). There were no significant differences in number of completed repetitions during CON and ECC bench press at 60, 70, and 80% 1RM. These data indicate that ECC actions yield increased force capabilities (~120%) as compared with CON in the bench press and may be less prone to fatigue, especially at higher intensities. These differences suggest a need to develop unique strategies for training eccentrically.
