MAXIMAL STRENGTH PERFORMANCE AND MUSCLE

ACTIVATION FOR THE BENCH PRESS AND TRICEPS

LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8

EXTENSION EXERCISES ADOPTING DUMBBELL,

Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd

BARBELL, AND MACHINE MODALITIES OVER

MULTIPLE SETS
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

DÉBORAH DE ARAÚJO FARIAS,1,2 JEFFREY M. WILLARDSON,3 GABRIEL A. PAZ,1

EWERTTON DE S. BEZERRA,2,4 AND HUMBERTO MIRANDA1
1
School of Physical Education and Sports, Rio de Janeiro Federal University, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2Human Performance
Laboratory (LEDEHU), Physical Education and Physiotherapy College, Amazonas Federal University, Manaus, Brazil;
3
Department of Kinesiology and Sports Studies, Eastern Illinois University, Charleston, Illinois; and 4Biomechanics Laboratory,
Sports Center (CDS), Santa Catarina Federal University, Floriano´polis, Brazil

ABSTRACT AD activity vs. the BBP and DBP. During the different BP
Farias, DdA, Willardson, JM, Paz, GA, Bezerra, EdS, and modes, the SMBP and BBP elicited significantly greater TB
Miranda, H. Maximal strength performance and muscle activa- activity vs. the DBP. However, the DBP elicited significantly
tion for the bench press and triceps extension exercises greater BB activity vs. the SMBP and BBP, respectively. Dur-
adopting dumbbell, barbell and machine modalities over ing the succeeding TE exercise, significantly greater activity of
multiple sets. J Strength Cond Res 31(7): 1879–1887, the TB was observed when this exercise was performed after
2017—The purpose of this study was to investigate muscle the BBP vs. the SMBP and DBP. Therefore, it seems that the
activation, total repetitions, and training volume for 3 bench variation in BP modes does influence both repetition perfor-
press (BP) exercise modes (Smith machine [SMBP], barbell mance and muscle activation patterns during the TE when
[BBP], and dumbbell [DBP]) that were followed by a triceps these exercises are performed in succession.
extension (TE) exercise. Nineteen trained men performed 3 KEY WORDS electromyography, free weights, resistance
testing protocols in random order, which included: (P1) SMBP training
+ TE; (P2) BBP + TE; and (P3) DBP + TE. Each protocol
involved 4 sets with a 10-repetition maximum (RM) load, imme- INTRODUCTION

T
diately followed by a TE exercise that was also performed for 4
he bench press (BP) is a resistance exercise which
sets with a 10RM load. A 2-minute rest interval was adopted
has been widely used to optimize the performance
between sets and exercises. Surface electromyographic activ- of the upper extremities with the aim to increase
ity was assessed for the pectoralis major (PM), anterior deltoid muscle strength, hypertrophy, or athletic perfor-
(AD), biceps brachii (BB), and triceps brachii (TB). The results mance. The BP can be performed with different equipment
indicated that significantly higher total repetitions were such as a traditional barbell, dumbbells, or a Smith machine
achieved for the DBP (31.2 6 3.2) vs. the BBP (27.8 6 (8). These BP modes have been examined in prior investi-
4.8). For the TE, significantly greater volume was achieved gations with respect to different training methods (3,16) and
when this exercise was performed after the BBP (1,204.4 6 muscle activation patterns (3,19).
249.4 kg) and DBP (1,216.8 6 287.5 kg) vs. the SMBP Krosshaug (10) conducted a kinetic analysis of the BP
(1,097.5 6 193 kg). The DBP elicited significantly greater exercise using dumbbells and a barbell. The author noted
PM activity vs. the BBP. The SMBP elicited significantly greater that when using dumbbells, external reaction forces were
transmitted through the grip straight downward because
of gravitational pull; whereas, when using a barbell, the
Address correspondence to Humberto Miranda, humbertomiranda01@ external reactive forces had a medial-lateral component
gmail.com. due to friction. Therefore, the barbell BP (BBP) exercise is
31(7)/1879–1887 influenced by both gravitational force and a lateral force-
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research vector (;25% of the gravitational force), which may require
Ó 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association greater triceps brachii (TB) activation (7,19). Using

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 7 | JULY 2017 | 1879

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Muscle Activation and Strength Performance

dumbbells, the gravitational force vector requires an muscle activation when an exercise such as a triceps exten-
increase in the internal torque produced by the stabilizing sion (TE) is performed immediately after different BP
musculature of the shoulder, possibly eliciting greater acti- modes. This is often the case in practical scenarios when
vation of the long head of the biceps brachii (BB). However, the objective of a workout session is to train the PM and
LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8

for the BBP, the vertical force is distributed at the midpoint TB muscles. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to
of the bar, requiring less stabilization of the shoulder mus- investigate muscle activation, total repetitions, and training
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd

culature. Such a condition might be responsible for the volume for 3 BP exercise modes (Smith machine, barbell,
increase in muscle activation of the TB (10). and dumbbell) that were followed by a TE exercise per-
Saeterbakken et al. (19) compared maximal strength and formed on a pulley system. We hypothesized that the free
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

surface electromyographic (SEMG) activity of the pectoralis weight modes of BP (i.e., barbell and dumbbell) would
major (PM), anterior deltoid (AD), BB, and TB for 3 differ- increase the level of fatigue in the agonist (PM, AD, and
ent BP modes (barbell, dumbbell, and Smith machine) in TB) and stabilizing musculature (BB) vs. the Smith machine
trained men. It was observed that the BBP showed the great- BP (SMBP), and cause a greater decrease in performance
est values for maximal strength. In terms of muscle activity, during the succeeding TE exercise (2,8).
the BP performed with dumbbells showed lower activation
levels for the TB and higher activation levels for the BB. METHODS
During the eccentric phase, the PM, AD, BB, and TB Experimental Approach to the Problem
showed lower muscle activity for the Smith machine. After assessment of 10RM loads for the BP and TE, 3
To our knowledge, the first study to examine different sessions were conducted with 48 hours between sessions.
SEMG responses for the BP exercise using different modes Each session consisted of 4 sets of a given BP mode followed
was conducted by McCaw and Friday (14). This study aimed by 4 sets of a TE performed on a pulley system. The sessions
to calculate the values of integrated electromyographic activ- consisted of the following protocols in random order: (P1)
ity for the PM, anterior and medial deltoid, triceps, and BB SMBP plus TE (SMBP + TE); (P2) BBP plus TE (BBP +
during the ascending and descending phases of the BP. The TE); and (P3) dumbbell BP (DBP) plus TE (DBP + TE). The
authors compared low (60%) and high (80%) intensity loads total repetitions and volume were recorded for each BP
of 1-repetition maximum (RM) when using a free weight mode in conjunction with the TE; as well as SEMG activity
barbell or Smith machine. An increase in the integrated for the PM, AD, TB, and BB.
SEMG activity was observed in the anterior and medial
Subjects
deltoid muscles when using the free weight barbell for the
Nineteen healthy men with previous resistance training
low load condition. The increased activation during the free
experience participated in this study (Table 1). All subjects
weight condition was theorized to be due to greater stabi-
were active in approximately 1–3 hours of recreational resis-
lizing requirements of the shoulder musculature.
tance training with a training frequency of 3–6 days per
Schick et al. (20) analyzed the myoelectric activity of the
week. There was no control over nutritional intake. Subjects
PM and anterior and medial deltoid muscles during the con-
centric phase of the BP exercise using a free weight barbell
or Smith machine with moderate (70% 1RM) and high (90%
1RM) intensity loads in 12 novice and 14 experienced lifters.
The authors found that there was greater activation of the TABLE 1. Demographical characteristics and
medial deltoid using the barbell, but there were no significant 10RM loads.*
differences for the PM and AD, irrespective of intensity and
Measure Mean 6 SD
the training experience level.
In a practical sense, resistance exercise programming is Age (y) 27.9 6 4.5
often structured so that 1 or 2 primary muscles are trained Stature (m) 1.72 6 0.1
during a given workout session (e.g., plan A: chest and Body mass (kg) 80.3 6 9.2
biceps or plan B: back and triceps; or plan A: chest and BMI (kg$m22) 26.9 6 1.9
Resistance training experience 7.6 6 4.6
triceps and plan B: back and biceps). Depending on the BP BBP 10RM load (kg) 81.5 6 9.9†z
mode used, slightly different force vectors will act during the MBP 10RM load (kg) 74.6 6 8.1
movement, which may influence the strength performance DBP 10RM load (kg) 70.3 6 8.5
and SEMG activity not only during the BP but also during TE 10RM load (kg) 35.1 6 4.4
a succeeding exercise. *BMI = body mass index; BP = bench press; DBP =
Although there are studies in which different modes of the dumbbell BP; MBP = machine BP; TE = triceps exten-
BP were investigated (19,20,23), a gap exists in the literature sion.
†Significant difference vs. machine BP.
regarding the influence of different modes on repetition per- zSignificant difference vs. dumbbell BP.
formance and muscle activation. Additionally, to our knowl-
edge, no studies have examined repetition performance and
the TM

1880 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

TABLE 2. BP repetition performance and volume for each mode.*

Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 Total repetitions Volume Fatigue index (%)
LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8

BBP 9.2 6 1.2 7.1 6 1.1 5.9 6 1.2 5.4 6 1.6 27.8 6 4.8 2,193.4 6 327.8 58.4 6 12.2
MBP 10.3 6 1 7.7 6 1.5 6.4 6 1.3 6 6 1.5 30.5 6 4.6 2,269.8 6 377.1 58 6 14.5
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd

DBP 10.3 6 1.4 8 6 1.3† 6.6 6 1 6.2 6 1.1 31.2 6 3.2† 2,265.7 6 437.4 60.9 6 12.3

*BBP = barbell BP; DBP = dumbbell BP; MBP = machine BP.

†Significant difference vs. BBP.
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

were excluded from this study if they had any functional (head, shoulder girdle, and hips) remained flat on the bench
limitations (e.g., orthopedic or cardiovascular) that would (19). Because different speeds of movement execution can
be contraindicated by performance of the experimental pro- influence the myoelectric activity, a metronome controlled
tocol. The inclusion criteria consisted of the following: being the movement at a constant pace of 4 seconds per repeti-
male, age ranging between 20 and 40 years old, and at least 6 tion (2 seconds for the concentric phase and 2 seconds for
months resistance training experience with a frequency of at the eccentric phase) (9). Two researchers assisted subjects
least 3 times a week. by lifting the barbell or dumbbells and stabilizing the
The University Ethics Committee approved the project weight until subjects had fully extended their arms (initial
and subjects read and signed an informed consent form phase). The eccentric phase consisted in lowering the bar-
under the protocol CAE 26604714.4.0000.5020, as Resolu- bell until it touched the chest (eccentric phase) (19).
tion 466/2012 of the National Health Council for research To minimize possible errors in the 10RM tests, the
on human subjects. Subjects were instructed to refrain from following strategies were adopted: (a) subjects received
any additional resistance training targeting the upper body standardized instructions on exercise technique, (b) the
muscles during the data collection. exercise technique of subjects during all testing sessions
was monitored and corrected as needed, (c) subjects
Ten Repetition Maximum Load Determination
received verbal encouragement during testing (12), and (d)
The 10RM load was determined for each subject for the
the mass of all weight plates, bars (Smith machine and free
SMBP, BBP, DBP, and TE. The 10RM tests were con-
barbell), and dumbbells used was determined with a precision
ducted over 6 sessions, with 48 hours between sessions, and
scale. The sum of the 10RM loads for the Smith machine
in the following order: sessions 1 and 4—SMBP + TE, ses-
and barbell was realized through the sum of the weight
sions 2 and 5—BBP, and sessions 3 and 6—DBP. All
plates + the barbell weight. For the dumbbell, the sum of
machine-based exercises were performed on Life Fitness
the 10RM loads was considered the sum of the 2 dumbbells
equipment (Brunswick Company, Franklin Park, IL,
combined. The heaviest load achieved on either of the test
USA). During the 10RM testing, a maximum of five
days was recorded as the 10RM.
10RM attempts were performed for each exercise on
a given day, with a five-minute rest between attempts and Exercise Sessions
a 10 minutes rest between exercises (SMBP and TE) (21). A Forty-eight hours after the last 10RM testing session,
biacromial distance was adopted to standardize the grip subjects performed the first of 3 experimental protocols in
width. During the tests and retests, the body segments a randomized design on nonconsecutive days: (P1) SMBP

TABLE 3. Triceps extension repetition performance and volume after each BP mode.*

Set 1 Set 2 Set 3 Set 4 Total repetitions Volume Fatigue index (%)

BBP + TE 9.6 6 1.5 8.9 6 1.5 8 6 1.4† 7.6 6 1.8† 34.4 6 5.9 1,204.4 6 249.4† 80.4 6 16.1†
MBP + TE 9.6 6 1.3 8.2 6 1.4 6.8 6 1.1 6.5 6 1.5 31.3 6 4.3 1,097.5 6 193.0 58 6 14.5
DBP + TE 9.8 6 1.5 9.2 6 1.9† 8.1 6 1.7† 7.2 6 1.6† 34.3 6 5.7† 1,216.8 6 287.5† 72.2 6 12.4†

*BBP = barbell BP; DBP = dumbbell BP; MBP = machine BP; TE = triceps extension.
†Significant difference vs. MBP + TE.

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 7 | JULY 2017 | 1881

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Muscle Activation and Strength Performance
LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

Figure 1. Comparison of pectoralis major activity between BP modes; †significant difference vs. barbell BP (p # 0.05); BP: bench press.

plus TE (SMBP + TE); (P2) BBP plus TE (BBP + TE); and trained practitioners who perform multiple RM sets; this
(P3) DBP plus TE (DBP + TE). A 48-hour rest interval was study used only 2 exercises for analysis, which involved
given between each experimental session. Although Macha- a smaller total training volume, and we believed that a 48-
do et al. (11) reported that a 72-hour recovery interval is hour rest interval between protocols provided sufficient
required for muscle repair, recovery, and adaptation for recovery.

Figure 2. Comparison of anterior deltoid activity between BP modes; *significant difference vs. machine BP (p # 0.05); BP: bench press.

the TM

1882 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

Figure 3. Comparison of triceps brachii activity between BP modes; *significant difference vs. machine BP (p # 0.05); †significant difference vs. barbell BP
(p # 0.05); BP: bench press.

Each experimental session was preceded by a warm-up set of electrodes using a signal frequency of 25 Hz. For acquisi-
of 20 repetitions at 40% of the 10RM load for the BP mode tion of muscle activity, surface signals were collected using
selected for that day. A 2-minute rest interval was given a MyoSystemTM 1400A with 8 input channels. The EMG
following the warm-up set and before beginning each signal was filtered with a band pass between 20 and 450 Hz.
experimental protocol. Each BP mode was performed for 4 The sampling rate of the signal was 1,000 Hz. Skin prepara-
sets and was followed by performance of 4 sets of the TE. All tion included shaving hair, abrading, and cleaning the surface
sets were performed for a RM (muscular failure), using 100% with alcohol. Elastic tape was applied to ensure electrode
of the 10RM load and with 2-minute rest intervals between and cable placement and provide cable strain relief. Surface
sets and exercises. As in the 10RM test, during the exercise electrodes were connected to an amplifier and streamed
sessions, a metronome controlled the movement at a con- continuously through an analog-to-digital converter to
stant pace of 4 seconds per repetition (2 seconds for the a windows-compatible notebook computer.
concentric phase and 2 seconds for the eccentric phase). Surface electromyographic data for the PM, AD, TB, and
BB muscles were collected during all BP modes and the TE
Training Volume
exercise. Electrodes were placed according to the recom-
The equation: (set 3 repetition 3 load) was used to calculate
mendations of Cram, Kasman, and Holtz (5). For the PM,
the training volume for each exercise, set, and protocol. The
the electrodes were placed midway between the axilla and
fatigue index was calculated using the equation proposed by
the areola. For the AD, the electrodes were placed approx-
Dipla et al. (6) F = ([repetitions performed on the fourth set/
imately 4 centimeters below the clavicle parallel to the mus-
repetitions performed on the first set] 3 100), where greater
cle fibers of the AD. For the BB, the electrodes were
fatigue resistance was indicated by higher percentages.
positioned at the midpoint of the muscle belly, in the longi-
Surface Electromyography tudinal direction of the fibers. For the TB, the electrodes
Before the experimental procedure, the skin was shaved, were placed parallel to the muscle fibers, about 2 cm lateral
washed with alcohol, and abraded for the placement of the from the midline of the arm, about 50% of the distance
bipolar surface electrodes (Kendal Medi Trace 200; Tyco between the acromion and the olecranon processes.
Healthcare, Pointe-Claire, Canada). The electrodes were
placed on the right side of the body (15). After electrode Data Processing
positioning, impedance was verified and accepted with less Root mean square of SEMG signal processing was calcu-
than 5 kV (22). The impedance was observed between pairs lated over a 125-millisecond moving window and used on

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 7 | JULY 2017 | 1883

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Muscle Activation and Strength Performance
LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

Figure 4. Comparison of biceps brachii activity between BP modes; *significant difference vs. machine BP (p # 0.05); †significant difference vs. barbell BP
(p # 0.05); BP: bench press.

all SEMG data for the duration of the exercise obtained RESULTS
relative to all exercise modes (PM, AD, BB, and TB), in The test–retest ICC of the EMG measures for the 4
which the signal amplitude and muscle activity was monitored muscles ranged between 0.91 and 0.97. Sig-
presented as a percentage of the peak. The myoelectric nificant differences were noted in 10RM loads between
activity was quantified by the peak of SEMG muscle BP modes where the BBP . SMBP . DBP (F = 12.90;
activity during the performance of each exercise, set, and p = 0.002) (Table 1). For the BP, significant main effects
protocol for each muscle. The SEMG values were deter- were noted between modes in the repetitions per set (F =
mined by an average of the SEMG values of 3 central
159.21; p = 0.0001) and total repetitions (F = 3.75; p =
repetitions of each set. Normalization was performed using
0.033) (DBP . SMBP and BBP). Significantly, higher
the highest peak SEMG value (24).
total repetitions were achieved for the DBP (31.2 6 3.2)
Statistical Analyses vs. the BBP (27.8 6 4.8). No difference was noted
Test–retest reliability of 10RM loads and EMG spectral between SMBP and DBP (Table 2). However, no signifi-
parameters were assessed using the intraclass correlation cant differences were noted between BP modes for the
coefficient {ICC = [MSb 2 MSw]/[MSb + (k 2 1) MSw]}, volume and fatigue index.
where MSb = mean-square between, MSw = mean-square For the TE, significant main effects were noted in the
within, and k = average group size. The Shapiro–Wilk test repetitions per set (F = 7.30; p = 0.002), total repetitions
and homoscedasticity (Bartlett criterion) showed that all (F = 76.91; p = 0.0001), volume (F = 7.340; p = 0.002), and
variables presented normal distribution and homoscedas- fatigue index (F = 5.806; p = 0.007). For the TE, signifi-
ticity. Two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance cantly greater training volume and total repetitions was
were used to determine whether there were significant observed when this exercise was performed after the BBP
main effects or interactions between BP modes in the rep- and DBP vs. the SMBP, respectively (Table 3). Fatigue
etitions per set, total repetitions, volume, fatigue index, index was significantly higher under following BBP and
and muscle activity. Post-hoc tests using the Bonferroni DBP vs. SMBP, respectively.
correction were applied when necessary. The level of sta- The PM muscle presented higher activity under DBP vs.
tistical significance was set at p # 0.05 for all tests. The BBP conditions over the 4 sets performed (Figure 1). No
statistical analysis was performed with SPSS version 20.0 difference was noted between DBP and SMBP or between
(Chicago, IL, USA). BBP and SMBP, respectively (p . 0.05). For AD muscle, the
the TM

1884 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

SMBP showed higher muscle activity vs. DBP and BBP Considering the TE exercise, greater TB muscle activity
during set 2 and set 4. Thus, greater muscle activity was also was noted under BBP vs. MBP and DBP over the 4 sets
noted between SMBP vs. BBP during set 3 (Figure 2). performed, respectively (Figure 5). However, the SMBP pre-
The TB muscle presented higher activity under BBP and sented higher muscle activity than DBP condition during set
LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8

SMBP vs. DBP over the 4 sets performed (p # 0.05; Figure 1, and lower muscle activity than DBP during set 4, respec-
3). No difference was noted between BBP and SMBP con- tively. The BB muscle showed higher muscle activity under
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd

ditions. For the BB muscle, greater activity was observed SMBP vs. BBP over the 4 sets. Thus, the DBP presented
under DBP vs. SMBP and BBP over the 4 sets, respectively greater muscle activity vs. BBP during sets 1, 2, and 3,
(Figure 4). Greater BB muscle activity was also noted under respectively. No difference was noted between BBP and
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

BBP vs. MBP condition over the 4 sets. DBP during set 4.

Figure 5. Comparison of triceps brachii and biceps brachii activity during a triceps extension exercise after each BP mode. *significant difference vs. machine
BP (p # 0.05); †significant difference vs. barbell BP (p # 0.05). BP: bench press.

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 7 | JULY 2017 | 1885

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Muscle Activation and Strength Performance

DISCUSSION AD muscles when comparing 80% 1RM for the BP exercise

The purpose of this study was to investigate strength using a barbell or Smith machine. Additionally, Shick et al.
performance (total repetitions and volume) and muscle (20) found greater activation of the medial deltoid for a BBP,
activation for 3 BP modes that were followed by a TE on but no significant differences in pectorals major and AD
LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8

activity vs. a SMBP. However, none of these studies aimed

a pulley system. We hypothesized that the free weight modes
to compare strength performance (total repetitions and vol-
of BP (i.e., barbell and dumbbell) would increase the level of
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd

ume) as in this study, which would ultimately determine the

fatigue in the agonist (PM, AD, and TB) and stabilizing
training outcomes.
musculature (BB) vs. the SMBP, and cause a greater decrease
The DBP also elicited significantly greater activity of the
in performance during the succeeding TE exercise (2,8).
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

PM vs. the BBP, and BB vs. the BBP and SMBP. Such
However, our hypothesis was rejected in that the total vol-
findings are consistent with the greater instability inherent
ume achieved for the TE exercise was significantly greater
for the DBP vs. the BBP and SMBP. Krousshaug (10) found
when following the BBP and DBP vs. the SMBP.
that for the DBP, vertical reactive forces transmitted down-
These findings can be explained by the relatively higher
ward through the handgrip, increase the internal torque re-
activation level of the PM and lower activation level of the
quirements of the shoulder stabilizing muscles, thereby
TB during the DBP vs. the SMBP. Thus, when the TE was
promoting greater activation of the BB. The absence of a lat-
performed after the DBP, the TB was in a lesser fatigued
eral force vector with the DBP results in lesser recruitment of
state, enabling greater volume vs. when this exercise was
the TB with the shift in emphasis to the PM (10,17).
performed after the SMBP. As for the BBP, relatively lower
As the TE was performed with a pulley and had no
activity of the PM and similar activity of the TB was
variations, the 10RM load remained constant through the
evident in comparison with the SMBP. Fewer total
protocols (35.1 6 4.4 kg). For the TE, significant differences
repetitions and lesser volume were noted during the BBP
were observed in total repetitions and training volumne (TV)
vs. the SMBP. However, during the succeeding TE, the
when this exercise was preceded by the BBP (total repeti-
activity of the TB was significantly greater when following
tions = 34.4 6 5.9; TV = 1,204.4 6 249.4 kg) and DBP (total
the BBP vs. the SMBP, which may have enabled signifi-
repetitions = 31.3 6 4.3; TV = 1,216.8 6 287.5 kg) vs. the
cantly greater volume.
SMBP (total repetitions = 31.3 6 4.3; TV = 1,097 6 193 kg).
Regarding the 10RM loads, the BBP was significantly
It can be inferred that, since the highest volume among the
higher vs. the SMBP and DBP. These findings were
BP modes was achieved for the SMBP, the TB muscles were
consistent with Saeterbakken et al. (19) who observed
pre-exhausted for the succeeding TE. In absolute terms, the
a higher 1RM load when the BP was performed with a bar-
SMBP also elicited the highest activity of the TB, which
bell vs. Smith machine and dumbbells. Although the DBP suggests that these muscles may have been fatigued before
presented the lowest 10RM load, surprisingly, this mode the onset of the succeeding TE exercise.
showed the greatest total repetitions and fatigue resistance Greater antagonistic co-activation was observed when the
(comparing the repetitions completed on the fourth set vs. TE was performed after the SMBP and DBP, as evidenced
the first set). One possible explanation for these results might by the greater activity of the BB and concomitantly lower
be the fact that subjects who participated in this study used activity of the TB. The main purpose of antagonistic co-
dumbbells with greater regularity vs. the other BP modes. activation is to increase joint stability to prevent injury (18).
The SMBP elicited significantly greater activity of the Antagonistic muscles produce a torque in the opposite direc-
AD vs. the BBP and DBP; and also significantly greater tion to the movement performed by the agonist muscles (1).
activity of the TB vs. the DBP. Duffey and Challis (7) Moreover, a high level of activation of the antagonistic
observed that during the BP, the lateral force vector trans- muscles can reciprocally inhibit activity and force produc-
mitted to the bar through the grip accounted for approxi- tion of agonist muscles (13). When the TE was performed
mately 25% of the load, which would elicit greater elbow after the DBP, significantly greater total repetitions and vol-
extensor torque. Although not assessed in this study, the ume were achieved vs. when the TE was performed after the
lateral force vector applied to the bar during the SMBP SMBP. However, during the DBP, there was significantly
may have elicited greater activity of the TB. Another expla- greater co-activation of the antagonistic BB vs. during the
nation for these findings is the single degree of freedom SMBP, which appeared to reciprocally inhibit the TB and
inherent with the SMBP, allowing displacement of the facilitate compensatory activity in the PM.
bar in only the vertical direction. At the end of the down- This study was the first to our knowledge to analyze the
ward portion of the movement (i.e., the bar must touch the performance of different BP modes on strength performance
chest), the shoulder joints internally rotate, which may and muscle activation in combination with a succeeding TE.
elicit greater recruitment of the ADs (4). Therefore, the results of this study can be readily applied in
However, the findings of this study were in contrast to practical scenarios because the PM and triceps are often
McCaw and Friday (14) who found no significant differences trained together in a split routine for the purpose of muscle
in the integrated electromyographic activity of the PM and building. This study demonstrated that different BP modes
the TM

1886 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

(Smith machine, barbell, and dumbbell) result in different 9. Gentil, P, Oliveira, E, de Araujo Rocha Junior, V, do Carmo, J, and
patterns of muscle activity and strength performance (PM, Bottaro, M. Effects of exercise order on upper-body muscle
activation and exercise performance. J Strength Cond Res 21: 1082–
AD, TB, and BB), but also elicited different patterns of 1086, 2007.
muscle activity and strength performance during a succeed- 10. Krosshaug, T. Revealing “secrets”of strength training exercises with
LkvNLsqpw0FGXvNHp7coy3HyOlOTeSofmQ0xetQZ8WbbtiwfkPwUL5YKyq5apIyKLrKoGdolywSmXrSOSBBH0DLpa6VTjG5z+UA8

ing TE exercise. kinetic analyses. In: 8th International Conference on Strength Training
(ICTS 2012). Oslo, Norway, Marco Machado, 2012. pp. 81–83.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS 11. Machado, M, Koch, AJ, Willardson, JM, Pereira, LS, Cardoso, MI,
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by 97qFecIzPki6E+rW9p7m+3jQGOvs4/IR2gi1h9TtpXWsOCd

Motta, MKS, Pereira, R, and Monteiro, AN. Effect of varying rest

The results of this study suggest that the best combination of intervals between sets of assistance exercises on creatine kinase and
exercises to promote the highest overall training volume was lactate dehydrogenase responses. J Strength Cond Res 25: 1339–1345,
4j5OdjGvSjH0G7v+O2Du0xHHRVGoC6fg5CBDfHunFnl03IokWmAFfMKQ= on 06/06/2024

the DBP followed by the TE. From a muscle activation 2011.

perspective, the DBP elicited the greatest activity of the PM 12. Maia, MF, Willardson, JM, Paz, GA, and Miranda, H. Effects of
different rest intervals between antagonist paired sets on repetition
and BB, whereas the Smith machine elicited the greatest performance and muscle activation. J Strength Cond Res 28: 2529–
activity of the AD and TB muscles. However, if any BP 2535, 2014.
mode is combined with a TE on a pulley, then the BBP 13. Maynard, J and Ebben, WP. The effects of antagonist prefatigue on
might be the preferred choice to elicit greater activity of the agonist torque and electromyography. J Strength Cond Res 17: 469–
TB. It is important to note the exercise sequence when 474, 2003.
program planning, so that a practitioner can place greater 14. McCaw, ST and Friday, JJ. A comparison of muscle activity between
a free weight and machine bench press. J Strength Cond Res 8: 259–
emphasis on the target musculature. 264, 1994.
15. McGill, SM, Cannon, J, and Andersen, JT. Analysis of pushing
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS exercises: Muscle activity and spine load while contrasting
Dr. H. Miranda thanks the Research and Development techniques on stable surfaces with a labile suspension strap training
system. J Strength Cond Res 28: 105–116, 2014.
Foundation of Rio de Janeiro State (FAPERJ). The authors
16. Miranda, F, Simão, R, Rhea, M, Bunker, D, Prestes, J, Leite, RD,
thank the Companhia Athletica Manauara and Studio 5 unit Miranda, H, de Salles, BF, and Novaes, J. Effects of linear vs. daily
and the Norte Fitness gym for releasing the space for data undulatory periodized resistance training on maximal and
collection and also the Foundation for Research Support of submaximal strength gains. J Strength Cond Res 25: 1824–1830,
2011.
the State of Amazonas (FAPEAM/Brazil) for the master
17. Pinto, RS, Cadore, EL, Correa, CS, Cordeiro da Silva, BG, Alberton,
scholarship conceded to D. d. A. Farias.
CL, Lima, CS, and Carlos de Moraes, A. Relationship between
worload and neuromuscular activity in the bench press exercise. Med
REFERENCES Sportiva 17: 1–6, 2013.
1. Baratta, R, Solomonow, M, Zhou, BH, Letson, D, Chuinard, R, and 18. Robbins, DW, Young, WB, Behm, DG, and Payne, WR. Agonist-
D’Ambrosia, R. Muscular coactivation. The role of the antagonist antagonist paired set resistance training: A brief review. J Strength
musculature in maintaining knee stability. Am J Sports Med 16: 113– Cond Res 24: 2873–2882, 2010.
122, 1988.
19. Saeterbakken, AH, Van Den Tillaar, R, and Fimland, MS. A
2. Behm, DG and Anderson, KG. The role of instability with resistance comparison of muscle activity and 1-RM strength of three chest-
training. J Strength Cond Res 20: 716–722, 2006. press exercises with different stability requirements. J Sport Sci 29:
3. Brennecke, A, Guimarães, TM, Leone, R, Cadarci, M, Mochizuki, L, 1–6, 2011.
Simão, R, Amadio, AC, and Serrão, JC. Neuromuscular activity 20. Schick, EE, Coburn, JW, Brown, LE, Judelson, DA, Khamoui, AV,
during bench press exercise performed with and without the Tran, TT, and Uribe, BP. A comparison of muscle activation
preexhaustion method. J Strength Cond Res 23: 1933–1940, 2009. between a Smith machine and free weight bench press. J Strength
4. Carpes, FP, Bini, RR, Diefenthaeler, F, and Vaz, MA. Functional Cond Res 24: 779–784, 2010.
Anatomy [in Portuguese]. São Paulo, Brazil: Phorte Editora, 2011. 21. Simão, R, Farinatti Pde, T, Polito, MD, Maior, AS, and Fleck, SJ.
5. Cram, JR, Kasman, GS, and Holtz, J. Introduction to Surface Influence of exercise order on the number of repetitions performed
Electromyography. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen publishers Inc, 1998. and perceived exertion during resistance exercises. J Strength Cond
6. Dipla, K, Tsirini, T, Zafeiridis, A, Manou, V, Dalamitros, A, Kellis, E, Res 19: 152–156, 2005.
and Kellis, S. Fatigue resistance during high-intensity intermittent 22. Tarata, MT. Mechanomyography versus electromyography, in
exercise from childhood to adulthood in males and females. Eur J monitoring the muscular fatigue. Biomed Eng Online 2: 3, 2003.
Appl Physiol 106: 645–653, 2009. 23. Welsch, EA, Bird, M, and Mayhew, JL. Electromyographic activity
7. Duffey, MJ and Challis, JH. Vertical and lateral forces applied to the of the pectoralis major and anterior deltoid muscles during three
bar during the bench press in novice lifters. J Strength Cond Res 25: upper-body lifts. J Strength Cond Res 19: 449–452, 2005.
2442–2447, 2011. 24. Wright, GA, Delong, TH, and Gehlsen, G. Electromyographic
8. Garhammer, J. Strength training modes: Free weight equipment for activity of the hamstrings during performance of the leg curl, stiff-
the development of athletic strength and power-part I. Strength Cond leg deadlift, and back squat movements. J Strength Cond Res 13: 168–
J 3: 24–26, 1981. 174, 1999.

VOLUME 31 | NUMBER 7 | JULY 2017 | 1887

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.