not permitted.

It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo,
means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies
(either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other

REVIEWS
J SPORTS MED PHYS FITNESS 2015;55:604-8

Bench press exercise: the key points

J. PADULO 1, 2, G. LAFFAYE 3, A. CHAOUACHI 4, K. CHAMARI 2, 5

® A
T C
H DI
The bench press exercise (BPE) is receiving increasing in- 1University e Campus, Novedrate, Italy
terest as a field testing, training/therapeutic modality to im- 2Tunisian Research Laboratory
prove neuromuscular performance or to increase bone mass “Sports Performance Optimization”,
density. Several studies have been performed using BPE as National Center of Medicine and Science in Sport,

IG E
a standard for increasing upper-limb strength. For this pur-
pose, the position of the bar, the loads, the sets, the number of
repetitions, the recovery time in-between sets, the movement
Tunis, Tunisia
3UR CIAMS – Motor Control and Perception Group,
Department of Sport Sciences,
R M
speed, the muscular work and the use of the determination of Université Paris‑ Sud, Orsay, France
4AUT University, Sports Performance Research
the one repetition maximum (1-RM) are the classical tools in-
vestigated in the literature that have been shown to affect the Institute New Zeland, Auckland, New Zeland
5Aspetar, Qatar Orthopedic and Sports Medicine Hospital,
BPE effect on neuromuscular. The goal of the present short
P A

review is to make a picture of the current knowledge on the Research and Education Centre, Doha, Qatar
bench press exercise, which could be very helpful for a bet-
O V

ter understanding of this standard movement and its effects.

Based on the related literature, several recommendations on
these key points are presented here. study report can be understood by others at the level
C ER

Key words: Exercise - Muscle strength - Test taking skills. of important variables such as modalities’ precision
Y

and accuracy of measurements.10 This inclusion will

D uring the past decade there has been increas- allow drawing a picture of the current knowledge on
ing interest to the use of the Bench Press ex- the BPE, especially the elements that characterize
IN

ercise (BPE) as a simple test for assessing upper this movement in eight possible contexts: Position,
limb strength.1-3 Many BPE treatment studies also Load, Repetitions, Sets, Recovery, Speed, Muscular
aimed at improving some aspects of neuromuscu- work, and One Repetition Maximum (1-RM) testing.
M

lar performance.1, 2, 4-6 For instance, for a constant

load, a training program that is based on fast or slow
movements, induce different training adaptations.7, 8 Position
Moreover, it has been shown that for identical train-
ing designs, just changing the recovery pattern dif- The bench press typically employs the following
ferently affected males and females strength devel- procedure: the subject lies supine on the bench with
opment.9 These examples all showed that the design flexed knees, dismounts the barbell from the rack
over upper chest using wide oblique overhand grip
or other proprietary information of the Publisher.

of a training program impacts differently on the neu-

romuscular adaptations. However, a scientific study and lowers weight to mid-chest; then she/he pushes
can lead to scientific progress only if the resulting the bar upward until arms are totally extended with
the head, hips, and feet remaining in contact with
Corresponding author. J. Padulo, Via Isimbardi 10, 22060, Novedrate the bench throughout the lift.11 The choice of the
(CO), Italy. E-mail: [email protected] grip width is of importance, because it influences the

604 THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS June 2015
not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo,
means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies
(either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other

Bench press exercise PADULO

myoelectric activity 12 and the pronation/supination (>50% 1-RM) also in consideration of the training
forearm as well. Indeed, a narrow grip increases the macro-cycle.23 Moreover, except for novices, in all
triceps brachii activity whereas a wide grip increases other cases, the load should be normalized in relation
the sternoclavicular portion of the pectoral major.12 to 1-RM (%1-RM). Several authors have classified
The higher strength value occurring in a range of hand the load related to the corresponding energy expendi-
spacing between 165-200% of the biacromial width.11 ture: for large versus small muscle mass exercises,24
The standard warm-up technique is performed with a slow-to-moderate versus fast 25 and super-slow 26 lift-
supine (flat) bench press (BP) using free weights and ing velocities, high (80-90% of 1-RM), moderate (60-
“touch-and-go” technique. Moreover, on the market 70% of 1-RM), low intensity (20-50% of 1-RM),27
there are different benches with different inclina- and high (multiple sets) versus low volume (low
tions 13 and degrees of freedom.14 The standard mod- number or even single sets).28 It has been shown that

® A
el should have a bench inclination of 0° (flat bench after 60 years of age, the muscular strength tends to
press). The movement should be performed without decrease 29, 30 and that the same protocol (in relative
a rebound of the barbell. Indeed, using a rebound al-

T C
charge) has different effect on males and females for
lows an increase in averaged velocity (+12.3%) and the induced increase in strength 31 and changes in
force peak (from +5% to +14.1%).15-19 This gain is bone mineral density,32 with higher benefits in males.

H DI
primarily explained by (1) a better efficiency of the
stretch shortening cycle 16 which is different accord-
ing to the load and the time-dependent characteristics Repetitions

IG E
of the motion and (2) by the fact that the rebound
BP movement coincide with the natural frequency of The repetitions paradigm represents the key point
R M
oscillation of the series elastic component.18 Some related to: goals, training experience, and muscular
authors used benches with Smith Machine 20 where solicitation. The number of the repetition and load are
the guided barbell follows a linear secured path. In related, in fact the effect of the fatigue shown when
this context, it is good to know the friction between the muscular work is extended over time for push of
P A

the two (Steel) materials;21 in fact the coefficient of the barbell. Moreover Padulo et al. showed that the
friction between steel is 0.78 µrs for static friction and number of the repetitions with the same load are also
O V

0.42 µrd for dynamic friction. Working on guided ma- related to the pushing speed of the barbell.2 Indeed,
chines secures the subject, but arising the issue of the when the speed is controlled and the number of the
repetition is not predefined, the limit can be related to
C ER

friction that can vary depending on the fact that the

device is regularly under grease maintenance or not. the subject’s ability to maintain a speed range 2 induc-
Y

ing recruitment of fast-twitch motor units. Moreover,

the repetition can only be in pushing (positive work)
Load or negative and positive work of the barbell.33 Not by
IN

chance that speed may change: slow repetitions (2

Load is set in relation to the goals, age of the subject, or 3-s per stroke) would do less repetitions than fast
sex, and training experience. It could be expressed ei- ones (<1-s) self-selected.34 Usually in body building
ther in % of the 1-RM, or in % of body weight/mass, training the number of the repetitions is always very
M

depending on the goal and the sample of the studies high (>10) because the goal is to perform slow and
(1-RM for novices is indeed more difficult to assess). continuous repetitions until exhaustion.
It is well known that a high load (>80% of 1-RM)
will induce recruitment of fast-twitch motor units 22
while a lighter load requires a lower contribution of Sets
fast-twitch motor units and thus emphasizes more on
the slow twitch fibers.2 For novice lifters (first experi- The sets and repetitions represent the key of the
or other proprietary information of the Publisher.

ence) it is desirable to lower the load (<50% of body BPE, the combination (sets and repetitions) deter-
weight, BW) as it enables them to get familiar with mines the energy choice. The normalization of the
the BP technique and to improve the muscle tendon session on BPE for energetic threshold revealed that
adaptation to the specific exercise gesture.2 Greater the higher number of reps reduces the number of sets
experience would allow a selection of a higher load and vice-versa. Particularly, when the recovery time

Vol. 55 - No. 6 THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS 605
not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo,
means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies
(either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other

PADULO Bench press exercise

is high (>3’) the number of sets (at 75/85% 1-RM) of the thrust (upper point), the measurement of this
can be increased up to 6,35 while for short recovery distance is very reproducible. Therefore, with a good
(<1’) intensity is decreased (15-55%); resulting in a approximation the speed(s) m·s-1 can be calculated
reduction of sets (<3) to maintain BPE performance.36 using the equation: S= ∆d × ∆t-1 (∆d=measurement
Besides, multiplying the repetitions (r) with the load of the displacement; ∆t-1=time in s). The acceleration
(l) it is possible to estimate the workload (wl) with a (A) m·s-2 can be calculated using the equation: A=∆S
simple equation (wl= r × l),37 so as to modulate the × ∆t-1 (∆S=is the difference between the S of the con-
load and repetitions to obtain similar workload. sidered elementary displacement and the S of the pre-
ceding elementary displacement). While the force (F
in Newton’s) can be calculate: F=(m × g) + (m × A);
Recovery where m is the load and g is the acceleration due to

® A
gravity (9.81 m·s-2). The mechanical power (P) watts,
Energetic metabolism during exercise is depend- can therefore be calculated as: P= F × S (Watts).
ent on ratio between work and recovery. In this case,

T C
the recovery is different in both sets and repetitions
respectively. A standard protocol during the sets is Muscular work

H DI
no less than 2 min with very short recovery (<2 s)
between repetitions. Moreover, the combination of: The muscular activity during BPE is related to po-
repetitions – sets and recovery will dictate the spe- sition, load, repetitions, sets, recovery, speed. Differ-

IG E
cific energy requirement (aerobic-anaerobic) and to
classify the intensity of exercise.10 The length (time)
ent inclination (i.e., 56-44-28°) in relation to 0° (flat)
require a greater muscle strength 13 of the pectoralis
major and anterior deltoid. Different loads at constant
R M
between each sets could affect the expected result
from the second to third sets, especially when the speed result in different muscle recruitment. More rep-
recovery is lower than 2 min.35 According to Gentil etitions cause a localized muscle fatigue while more
et al.38 it is useful to administer the passive recovery sets causes a total body fatigue.2 The selected recov-
P A

(work rest ratio) between sets calculating the recov- ery time (repetitions/sets) can modify the muscular
ery in relation to the work time (i.e., 1:3 – 1:6). Fur- activity causing a decrement in speed of movement or
O V

ther, another method consists in introducing a short time of execution;2 as well as high speed recruitment
resting time (12<100-s) between the repetitions dur- fast-twitch fibers (>80% speed) with low reps.2
ing the same set, called “the cluster set configura-
C ER

tion” 9, 20, 39, 40, 41 by using single, doubles or triples One repetition maximum (1-RM)
Y

configuration (e.g., 6 × 1 with 20-s rest, 3 × 2 with

50-s rest or 2 × 3 with 100-s rest.20 This method al- The 1-RM is the gold standard for muscular test-
lows to increase the training volumes,41 to attenuate ing and conditioning. Two methods have been used
IN

the decrease in power and velocity through the set 40 for this purpose. The first method is to try to deter-
and to increase the number of repetitions and the mine 1-RM in 3 to 5 trials with large recovery time
total power output 20 in comparison with traditional (3-5 min). As proposed by Kraemer et al.43 this will
continuous repetition’ set design. be performed after an ascending warm-up from 40%
M

to 80% athlete’s estimated maximum. The other the

1-RM method to assess 1-RM is to predict it through
Speed regression equation from several predictors, such as
the number of repetitions at sub-maximal loads,44, 45
The speed at which the bar is lifted is another key anthropometric parameters,46-48 age, sex, ethnicity
point in the BPE. Indeed, the variability can be solved and training status.
with individual speed.2 Bosco’ studies indicate that Concerning the link between sub-maximal repeti-
or other proprietary information of the Publisher.

the speed can be calculated with a Linear Encoder tions and 1-RM estimation, the higher the load with
(low cost tool) connected to the barbell and interfaced which the sub-maximal set is performed, the more
with a computer.42 Considering that the upper limbs accurate the prediction of the 1-RM. Indeed, the
are bound when the rocker arm touches the chest of 5-RM is more accurate in predicting 1-RM than 10
the subject (lowest point) and extended at the end or 20-RM.44 The range of repetition used in such test-

606 THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS June 2015
not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo,
means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies
(either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other

Bench press exercise PADULO

ing are usually ranging between 2 7, 49 and 15 reps.8 mass influence positively the prediction of 1-RM
The equation are sometimes linear 44, 48-52 or non lin- bench press performance.47
ear. They are all highly predictive (r>0.96) but the
linear equations seems to be more accurate except
the equation of Reynolds.48 Another way to predict Conclusions
the 1-RM is to use a fixed load, which consists re-
peating a load to exhaustion. The most famous test is The present articles synthesizes the current knowl-
the NFL-225, used by professional football players, edge about the use of the bench press 1-RM and
with a load of 102.3 kg (225 pounds).53-55 The 1-RM therefore can be of interest for the strength coaches
(lb) is predicted as 1-RM (lb)=221.7+7.11 reps @ and sport scientists for better use of this simple field
225 lb.56 The prediction is quite comparable to the test aiming at assessing upper limbs’ strength.

® A
previous ones (r=0.94) but necessitates a high level
in strength to repeat such a heavy load.

T C
1-RM estimation describes the mathematical re- References
lationship between the number of repetitions per-
 1. Buitrago S, Wirtz N, Yue Z, Kleinoder H, Mester J. Mechani-
formed to fatigue, several methods are described:

H DI
cal load and physiological responses of four different resistance
—— Brzycki equation:49 Load (kg) ÷ [1.0278 - training methods in bench press exercise. J Strength Cond Res
(0.0278 × number of reps)] 2013;27:1091-100.
 2. Padulo J, Mignogna P, Mignardi S, Tonni F, D’Ottavio S. Ef-
—— Baechle equation:45 Load (kg) × [1 + (0.033 × fect of different pushing speeds on bench press. Int J Sports Med
number of reps)]
IG E
—— Landers equation:51 (100 × load (kg)) ÷ (101.3
2012;33:376-80.
 3. van den TR, Ettema G. A comparison of successful and unsuc-
R M
cessful attempts in maximal bench pressing. Med Sci Sports Exerc
– 2.67123 × number of reps) 2009;41:2056-63.
—— Epley equation:50 Load (kg) × (1 + 0.0333 ×   4. Moras G, Rodriguez-Jimenez S, Busquets A, Tous-Fajardo J, Pozzo
M, Mujika I. A metronome for controlling the mean velocity during
number of reps) the bench press exercise. J Strength Cond Res 2009;23:926-31.
—— Lombardi equation:57 Load (kg) × number of   5. Osteras H, Helgerud J, Hoff J. Maximal strength-training effects on
P A

reps (0.1) force-velocity and force-power relationships explain increases in

aerobic performance in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol 2002;88:255-63.
—— Mayhew equation:8 (100 × load (kg)) ÷ [52.2 +
O V

  6. Judge LW, Burke JR. The effect of recovery time on strength per-
(41.9 × e-0.055 × number of reps)] formance following a high-intensity bench press workout in males
and females. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2010;5:184-96.
—— O’Conner equation:52 Load (kg) × (1 + 0.025
C ER

  7. Brzycki M. Assessing strength. Fitness Manage 2000;34-7.

× number of reps)   8. Mayhew JL, Ball TE, Arnold MD, Bowen J. Relative muscular en-
—— Wathen equation:58 (100) × load (kg)/48.8 + durance performance as a predictor of bench press strength in col-
Y

lege men and women. J Appl Sport Sci Res 1992;6:200-6.

53.8 · e - 0.075 reps)   9. Haff GG, Whitley A, McCoy LB, O’Bryant HS, Kilgore JL, Haff EE
—— Kraemer equation:43 1st sets (8-10 reps) × et al. Effects of different set configurations on barbell velocity and dis-
IN

(Load 50% 1-RM e(estimated)) - 5’ of recovery - 2nd placement during a clean pull. J Strength Cond Res 2003;17:95-103.
10. Winter EM, Fowler N. Exercise defined and quantified according to
sets (3-5 reps) × (load 75% 1-RM e) 5’ recovery - 3rd the Systeme International d’Unites. J Sports Sci 2009;27:447-60.
sets (1-3 reps) × (load 90% 1-RM e). 11. Garcia-Lopez D, Izquierdo M, Rodriguez S, Gonzalez-Calvo G,
Sainz N, Abadia O et al. Interset stretching does not influence the
As suggested by Kramer and Fry,43 they empha-
M

kinematic profile of consecutive bench-press sets. J Strength Cond

size that ongoing encouragement and communica- Res 2010;24:1361-8.
tion with the subject during this testing is crucial to 12. Lehman GJ. The influence of grip width and forearm pronation/
supination on upper-body myoelectric activity during the flat bench
obtain the best performance. Also estimated 1-RM press. J Strength Cond Res 2005;19:587-91.
will have to be verified in the next two days. When 13. Trebs AA, Brandenburg JP, Pitney WA. An electromyography anal-
focusing on anthropometric parameters,46-48 the ysis of 3 muscles surrounding the shoulder joint during the perform-
ance of a chest press exercise at several angles. J Strength Cond Res
body mass is correlated with the 1-RM (r=0.56) and 2010;24:1925-30.
becomes highly correlated when expressed in lean 14. Terzis G, Karampatsos G, Georgiadis G. Neuromuscular control
or other proprietary information of the Publisher.

and performance in shot-put athletes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness

body mass (r=0.73 to 0.77). Others anthropomet- 2007;47:284-90.
ric parameters, such as arm girth, chest girth or re- 15. Cronin JB, McNair PJ, Marshall RN. Force-velocity analysis of
gional muscle mass 48 are also good 1-RM predictors strength-training techniques and load: implications for training
strategy and research. J Strength Cond Res 2003;17:148-55.
(r=0.56 to 0.83). The combination of having short 16. Cronin JB, McNair PJ, Marshall RN. Magnitude and decay of
arms, large chest circumference and high muscular stretch-induced enhancement of power output. Eur J Appl Physiol

Vol. 55 - No. 6 THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS 607
not permitted. It is not permitted to remove, cover, overlay, obscure, block, or change any copyright notices or terms of use which the Publisher may post on the Article. It is not permitted to frame or use framing techniques to enclose any trademark, logo,
means which may allow access to the Article. The use of all or any part of the Article for any Commercial Use is not permitted. The creation of derivative works from the Article is not permitted. The production of reprints for personal or commercial use is
This document is protected by international copyright laws. No additional reproduction is authorized. It is permitted for personal use to download and save only one file and print only one copy of this Article. It is not permitted to make additional copies
(either sporadically or systematically, either printed or electronic) of the Article for any purpose. It is not permitted to distribute the electronic copy of the article through online internet and/or intranet file sharing systems, electronic mailing or any other

PADULO Bench press exercise

2001;84:575-81. Chronic effects of different between-set rest durations on muscle

17. Buddhadev HH, Vingren JL, Duplanty AA, Hill DW. Mechanisms strength in nonresistance trained young men. J Strength Cond Res
underlying the reduced performance measures from using equip- 2010;24:37-42.
ment with a counterbalance weight system. J Strength Cond Res 39. Haff GG, Hobbs RT, Sands WA, Pierce KC, Stone MH. Cluster
2012;26:641-7. training: A novel method for introducing training program varia-
18. Wilson GJ, Wood GA, Elliott BC. Optimal stiffness of series elas- tion. J Strength Cond Res 2008;30:67-76.
tic component in a stretch-shorten cycle activity. J Appl Physiol 40. Hansen KT, Cronin JB, Newton MJ. The effect of cluster loading on
1991;70:825-33. force, velocity, and power during ballistic jump squat training. Int J
19. Cronin JB, McNair PJ, Marshall RN. The role of maximal strength Sports Physiol Perform 2011;6:455-68.
and load on initial power production. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41. Iglesias E, Boullosa DA, Dopico X, Carballeira E. Analysis of fac-
2000;32:1763-9. tors that influence the maximum number of repetitions in two upper-
20. Lawton TW, Cronin JB, Lindsell RP. Effect of interrepetition rest body resistance exercises: curl biceps and bench press. J Strength
intervals on weight training repetition power output. J Strength Cond Res 2010;24:1566-72.
Cond Res 2006;20:172-6. 42. Bosco C, Belli A, Astrua M, Tihanyi J, Pozzo R, Kellis S et al. A
21. Lawton T, Cronin J, Drinkwater E, Lindsell R, Pyne D. The effect dynamometer for evaluation of dynamic muscle work. Eur J Appl

® A
of continuous repetition training and intra-set rest training on bench Physiol Occup Physiol 1995;70:379-86.
press strength and power. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2004;44:361-7. 43. Kraemer WJ, Fry AC. Strength testing: development and evalua-
22. Kawamori N, Haff GG. The optimal training load for the develop- tion of methodology. Physiological assessment of human fitness. P.

T C
ment of muscular power. J Strength Cond Res 2004;18:675-84. Maud & C. Foster; 1995. p. 115-38.
23. Baker D. Comparison of upper-body strength and power between 44. Abadie BR, Wentworth M. Prediction of 1-RM strength from a 5-10
professional and college-aged rugby league players. J Strength repetition submaximal strength test in college-aged females. J Exerc

H DI
Cond Res 2001;15:30-5. Physiol 2000;3:1-5.
24. Kalb JS, Hunter GR. Weight training economy as a function of in- 45. Baechle TR, Earle RW. Essentials of strength training and condi-
tensity of the squat and overhead press exercise. J Sports Med Phys tioning. 3rd ed. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2008.
Fitness 1991;31:154-60. 46. Caruso JF, Taylor ST, Lutz BM, Olson NM, Mason ML, Borgsmill-
25. Ballor DL, Becque MD, Katch VL. Metabolic responses during hy- er JA et al. Anthropometry as a predictor of bench press perform-

IG E
draulic resistance exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1987;19:363-7.
26. Hunter GR, Seelhorst D, Snyder S. Comparison of metabolic and
heart rate responses to super slow vs. traditional resistance training.
ance done at different loads. J Strength Cond Res 2012;26:2460-7.
47. Mayhew JL, Ball TE, Ward TE, Hart CL, Arnold MD. Relationships
of structural dimensions to bench press strength in college males. J
R M
J Strength Cond Res 2003;17:76-81. Sports Med Phys Fitness 1991;31:135-41.
27. Collins MA, Cureton KJ, Hill DW, Ray CA. Relation of plasma 48. Reynolds JM, Gordon TJ, Robergs RA. Prediction of one repetition
volume change to intensity of weight lifting. Med Sci Sports Exerc maximum strength from multiple repetition maximum testing and
1989;21:178-85. anthropometry. J Strength Cond Res 2006;20:584-92.
28. Haddock BL, Wilkin LD. Resistance training volume and post exer- 49. Brzycki M. Strength testing: Predicting a one-rep max from reps to
P A

cise energy expenditure. Int J Sports Med 2006;27:143-8. fatigue. J Health Phys Ed Rec Dance 1993;64:88-90.
29. Hakkinen K, Pakarinen A. Muscle strength and serum testosterone, 50. Epley B. Poundage chart. In: Boyd Epley Workout. Lincoln, NE:
O V

cortisol and SHBG concentrations in middle-aged and elderly men Body Enterprises; 1985. p. 86.
and women. Acta Physiol Scand 1993;148:199-207. 51. Landers J. Maximum based on reps. Natl Strength Cond Assoc J
30. Hakkinen K, Pakarinen A, Newton RU, Kraemer WJ. Acute hor- 1985;6:60-1.
mone responses to heavy resistance lower and upper extremity ex-
C ER

52. O’Connor B, Simmons J, O’Shea P. Weight training today. St Paul,

ercise in young versus old men. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol MN: West Publishing 1989.
1998;77:312-9. 53. Chapman PP, Whitehead J, Binkert R. The 225-lb reps-to fatigue
Y

31. Mayhew JL, Brechue WF, Smith AE, Kemmler W, Lauber D, Koch test as a submaximal estimate of 1-RM bench press performance. J
AJ. Impact of testing strategy on expression of upper-body work Strength Cond Res 1998;12:258-61.
capacity and one-repetition maximum prediction after resistance 54. Slovak JP. Cross-validation of NFL-225 tests for predicting 1 repeti-
IN

training in college-aged men and women. J Strength Cond Res tion maximum bench press performance for a college football team.
2011;25:2796-807. J Strength Cond Res 1999;14:433.
32. Almstedt HC, Canepa JA, Ramirez DA, Shoepe TC. Changes in bone 55. Welday J. Should you check for strength with periodic max lifts?
mineral density in response to 24 weeks of resistance training in col- Scholas Coach 1998;57:49-68.
lege-age men and women. J Strength Cond Res 2011;25:1098-103. 56. Mayhew JL, Ware JS, Cannon K, Corbett S, Chapman PP, Bemben
M

33. Bosco C, Komi PV, Ito A. Prestretch potentiation of human skel- MG et al. Validation of the NFL-225 test for predicting 1-RM bench
etal muscle during ballistic movement. Acta Physiol Scand press performance in college football players. J Sports Med Phys
1981;111:135-40. Fitness 2002;42:304-8.
34. Bottaro M, Machado SN, Nogueira W, Scales R, Veloso J. Effect 57. Lombardi VP. Beginning weight training. Dubuque, IA: WC Brown;
of high versus low-velocity resistance training on muscular fit- 1989.
ness and functional performance in older men. Eur J Appl Physiol 58. Whisenant MJ, Panton LB, East WB, Broeder CE. Validation of
2007;99:257-64. submaximal prediction equations for the 1 repetition maximum
35. Senna G, Salles BF, Prestes J, Mello RA, Simao R. Influence of two bench press test on a group of collegiate football players. J Strength
different rest interval lengths in resistance training sessions for up- Cond Res 2003;17:221-7.
per and lower body. J Sports Sci Med 2009;8:197-202.
or other proprietary information of the Publisher.

36. Ratamess NA, Falvo MJ, Mangine GT, Hoffman JR, Faigenbaum Conflicts of interest.—The authors certify that there is no conflict of
AD, Kang J. The effect of rest interval length on metabolic respons- interest with any financial organization regarding the material discussed
es to the bench press exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol 2007;100:1-17. in the manuscript.
37. Veloso J, Polito MD, Riera T, Celes R, Vidal JC, Bottaro M. [Effects
of rest interval between exercise sets on blood pressure after resist- Received on July 26, 2013.
ance exercises]. Arq Bras Cardiol 2010;94:512-8. Accepted for publication on February 12, 2014.
38. Gentil P, Bottaro M, Oliveira E, Veloso J, Amorim N, Saiuri A et al. Epub ahead of print on May 13, 2014.

608 THE JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE AND PHYSICAL FITNESS June 2015