Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul 16:11:875.
doi: 10.3389/fphys.2020.00875. eCollection 2020.

A Comparison of Muscle Activity Between the Cambered and Standard Bar During the Bench Press Exercise

Affiliations

A Comparison of Muscle Activity Between the Cambered and Standard Bar During the Bench Press Exercise

Michal Krzysztofik et al. Front Physiol. .

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the electromyographic activity between the standard and cambered bar during the bench press (BP) exercise. Twelve resistance-trained males performed the flat BP with a standard and a cambered bar at selected loads (50%, 70%, and 90% 1RM). Muscle activation assessed by surface electromyography (sEMG) was recorded for the pectoralis major, anterior deltoid, and the lateral and long heads of the triceps brachii during each attempt. A three-way repeated measures ANOVA indicated statistically significant main interaction for bar × load × muscle (p < 0.01); bar × load (p < 0.01); bar × muscle (p < 0.01); load × muscle (p < 0.01). There was also a main effect for the bar (p < 0.01); load (p < 0.01); and muscle group (p < 0.01). The post hoc analysis for the main multiple interaction effect of bar × load × muscle showed a statistically significant increase in sEMG for the standard bar in the pectoralis major compared to the cambered bar at 50% 1RM (p < 0.01) and 90% 1RM (p < 0.01), as well as in the triceps brachii long at 90% 1RM (p < 0.01). Furthermore, a statistically significant decrease in sEMG was registered for the standard bar in the anterior deltoid compared to the cambered bar at 90% 1RM (p = 0.02). The results indicated that the cambered bar was superior in activating the anterior deltoid muscle compared to the standard bar during the BP exercise, whereas the standard bar provided higher pectoralis major and triceps brachii long head sEMG activity at 90% 1RM.

Keywords: EMG; internal movement structure; range of motion; resistance training; training equipment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
The cambered bar bench press.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
sEMG activity of selected muscles during bench press under different external loads.

References

    1. Ackland D. C., Pandy M. G. (2009). Lines of action and stabilizing potential of the shoulder musculature. J. Anat. 215 184–197. 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2009.01090.x - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bloomquist K., Langberg H., Karlsen S., Madsgaard S., Boesen M., Raastad T. (2013). Effect of range of motion in heavy load squatting on muscle and tendon adaptations. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 113 2133–2142. 10.1007/s00421-013-2642-7 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Caterisano A., Moss R. F., Pellinger T. K., Woodruff K., Lewis V. C., Booth W., et al. (2002). The effect of back squat depth on the EMG activity of 4 superficial hip and thigh muscles. J. Strength Cond. Res. 16 428–432. 10.1519/00124278-200208000-00014 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cohen J. (2013). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Burlington, NJ: Elsevier Science.
    1. Corey S. W. (1991). The cambered bar. Strength Cond. J. 13 36–38.

LinkOut - more resources