Arched back bench setup

[Oli]

All arching the back does is decrease the range of motion. This is why it is safer. If your range of motion is such that your shoulders will not be in a bad position then you will not get injured

The vertical bar path would be the default best mechanical situation, since anything other than a straight vertical line involves a moment around the joint in question that has to be handled. This eats up force that could otherwise be used to move the bar. So if we were perfect creatures, the bar would travel directly over the shoulder joints. But this interferes with our anatomical limitations -- the rotator cuff muscles are impinged with the humerus is at 90 degrees to the torso, the position in which the bar is plumb to the glenoid. At the top in the lockout position this is where the bar is carried, but as it drops down to the chest, the elbows must drop into less than90 degrees so that the shoulders don't impinge. Let's put them at 75 degrees. This then places the bar about 2" down the sternum from a point parallel with the glenoids. This displacement is necessary for the safety of the shoulders, but it comes at the expense of a 2" moment arm between the bar and the shoulder joint. It also results in a non-vertical bar path, the shape of which varies but straight lines are better.

Now, an experienced bencher with a flexible upper back can return most of the verticality to the bar path by squeezing the scapulas together and arching the back up into a position that drags the glenoids back up under the sternum. This allows the humerus to operate at that 75 degree angle and still lets you use a nearly vertical bar path. That why squeezing the chest up and the scapulas together works so well -- it improves the mechanics of the shoulder under the bar while letting the bar path shorten and the shoulder joint stay safer.

emu

 

[Goosey]

I'm lost, like most threads on this forum regarding building strength, which I *think* this is what this and every thread should be about.

Flat backed, to me- describes the user on his back maintaining the natural curvatures of *the back* no?

Possibly the OP should have asked the question differently?

Like;

In competition conditions, is there an advantage to having an excessive arch to my lower back?

Yes answer is - yes!
Partly what 0ni states and also the fact that the increased angle of the torso places the user in a stronger position, using more more muscleture of the upper body, like the bigger muscles, the chest and lat's.

 

[Bench Polkov]

All arching the back does is decrease the range of motion. This is why it is safer. If your range of motion is such that your shoulders will not be in a bad position then you will not get injured

Dafuq you on about Oni? That's a pile of bullshit. People who can't bench for shit shouldn't be trying to tell people how to bench. Knowwhatimsayin?

 

[Bench Polkov]

wanting someone not to get injured is hardly analysis paralysis...

By floppers do you mean chest?

I bench for a big bench, and since this article is in the strength section I am replying to it accordingly.

Modern benchers generally use an arch as it has proven to be more biomechanically efficient (again generally).

Hence as a general rule beginner who want a better bench should learn how to arch as it generally increases shoulder safety and load potential. That is not to say that they can't just bench with a natural arch if they prefer to do so, or to say that won't be one of those less common individuals who bench stronger in this way. It is just advice given the evidence from modern bench results.

I don't give a fuck how you bench as long as you're benching to the best of your potential so bench how you want but you're stupid if you don't try to learn the arch.

 

[Bench Polkov]

I'm lost, like most threads on this forum regarding building strength, which I *think* this is what this and every thread should be about.

Flat backed, to me- describes the user on his back maintaining the natural curvatures of *the back* no?

Possibly the OP should have asked the question differently?

Like;

In competition conditions, is there an advantage to having an excessive arch to my lower back?

Yes answer is - yes!
Partly what 0ni states and also the fact that the increased angle of the torso places the user in a stronger position, using more more muscleture of the upper body, like the bigger muscles, the chest and lat's.

I have heard flat-back benching describe both a natural arch and spine to the bench so it can be confusing.

I also admit that some powerlifting exponents can get a bit single-minded when it comes to form and I was personally trying to avoid doing such as there is never just one way to do anything. There can be a method that works better most of the time though and this is the point I was trying to get across and which Mr "I can cut and paste from Chaos&Pain's blog but can't actually bench" was neglecting to consider.

 

[Oli]

If someone wants to do something dumb in their training thats one thing, all they're going to waste is their time.

If someone wants to do something that's going to potentially injure themselves then theres a problem. Traditional flat back benching is one of those things.

Nobody says your back needs to look like the sydney harbour bridge, but you still need to try and arch.

 

[Bench Polkov]

If someone wants to do something dumb in their training thats one thing, all they're going to waste is their time.

If someone wants to do something that's going to potentially injure themselves then theres a problem. Traditional flat back benching is one of those things.

Nobody says your back needs to look like the sydney harbour bridge, but you still need to try and arch.

Depending on your definition of "flat back" I may disagree with you on this.

 

[Oli]

Depending on your definition of "flat back" I may disagree with you on this.

no natural arch.

 

[Goosey]

no natural arch.

Is that traditional? fuck me.

 

[Darkoz]

Is that traditional? fuck me.

Only on another planet

 

[Goosey]

Only on another planet

It's called; diggin a hole.

 

[Sticky]

Im not sure what this needs further discussion?


It was answered on the first page, at least twice.

maybe Oni is trolling.

 

[0ni]

Dafuq you on about Oni? That's a pile of bullshit. People who can't bench for shit shouldn't be trying to tell people how to bench. Knowwhatimsayin?

I know what you're saying but the fact is that many, many people don't bench with an arch and have huge benches. There is a Dave Tate bench seminar where he tells someone that he shouldn't have a huge arch because it decreases the length of the torso which is the main thing that makes a natural bencher. He says to just bring the bar lower instead.

I didn't once fucking tell people how they should be fucking benching, I just said that there is more to it than "this bench form is the only way to bench" and anyone who actually believes that is arrogant and ignorant at best because there are so many fucking differences in body sizes, proportions and relative muscle strengths

 

[Bench Polkov]

I know what you're saying but the fact is that many, many people don't bench with an arch and have huge benches. There is a Dave Tate bench seminar where he tells someone that he shouldn't have a huge arch because it decreases the length of the torso which is the main thing that makes a natural bencher. He says to just bring the bar lower instead.

Depending on the fed you can't bring the bar below your sternum anyway. Dave does teach SPF style benching where anything goes.

I didn't once fucking tell people how they should be fucking benching, I just said that there is more to it than "this bench form is the only way to bench" and anyone who actually believes that is arrogant and ignorant at best because there are so many fucking differences in body sizes, proportions and relative muscle strengths

But your last post was quite factually innaccurate in its reasons for arched benching. It showed a great lack of understanding in my opinion which betrays your lack of experience. I have said before that I respect your knowledge, but at the same time your often show great lack of lifting experience in some of your replies.

I do agree that the "one way is the only way" is a very flawed theory but its logical that you would teach beginners the most commonly used method (in PL this is an arched bench) to begin with and let see if it works for them. I do this myself with deadlifting. I teach a textbook deadlift but lift with a rounded back myself. I always say, listen to what I say but don't copy me, I've worked out what's best for me.

Your copy/paste of C&P doesn't isn't best for beginners. He's an advanced lifter, he speaks only from his own experience and he is very inflexible in his opinions. I respect his opinions but I don't always agree with him.

 

[0ni]

This isn't a thread about teaching beginners though, the op just asked which type was better - to which my answer was "the one that gets you white lighted and allows you to lift the most weight". if you don't compete, the first part is largely irrelevant (within reason) and everyone will end up with their own, slightly different form. It's impossible to say that one type of benching will be better than another type. Although typical bench form will work well with the majority of people it may not be the best. I think your signature covers this point adequately lol

 

[Sticky]

I'm not sure how tightness (or lack there of) can be argued.....

 

[0ni]

I'm not sure how tightness (or lack there of) can be argued.....

I don't remember mentioning anything about tightness

 

[Bench Polkov]

This isn't a thread about teaching beginners though, the op just asked which type was better - to which my answer was "the one that gets you white lighted and allows you to lift the most weight". if you don't compete, the first part is largely irrelevant (within reason) and everyone will end up with their own, slightly different form. It's impossible to say that one type of benching will be better than another type. Although typical bench form will work well with the majority of people it may not be the best. I think your signature covers this point adequately lol

You don't give beginners too many options or they will hang themselves with it. They should take adequate time to learn the most commonly used form, its ins and outs, and then see how they progress with it. They have to have the basic training experience required to be able to make these decisions properly. Learn a method, learn its dynamics, learn its benefits and flaws, see how you progress... then you can try other methods when you know what the fuck you're talking about!

 

[0ni]

You don't give beginners too many options or they will hang themselves with it. They should take adequate time to learn the most commonly used form, its ins and outs, and then see how they progress with it. They have to have the basic training experience required to be able to make these decisions properly. Learn a method, learn its dynamics, learn its benefits and flaws, see how you progress... then you can try other methods when you know what the fuck you're talking about!

This is correct but not what I was talking about

 

[wingman]

This is correct but not what I was talking about

Troll of the year award.