Fatigue and Metabolic Responses during Repeated Sets of Bench Press Exercise to Exhaustion at Different Ranges of Motion

Abstract

This study compared the acute effects of different ranges of motion (ROM) on fatigue and metabolic responses during repeated sets of bench press exercise. Ten resistance trained men performed three sets to momentary failure with two-min rest intervals at three different ROM: full ROM (FULL), and partial ROM in which the barbell was moved either at the bottom half (BOTTOM) or the top half (TOP) of the full barbell vertical displacement. In TOP, a higher load was lifted, and a higher total number of repetitions was performed compared to FULL and BOTTOM (130 ± 17.6 vs. 102.5 ± 15.9 vs. 98.8 ± 17.5 kg; 55.2 ± 9.8, 32.2 ± 6.5 vs. 49.1 ± 16.5 kg, respectively p < 0.01). Work per repetition was higher in FULL than TOP and BOTTOM (283 ± 43 vs. 205 ± 32 vs. 164 ± 31 J/repetition, p < 0.01). Mean barbell velocity at the start of set 1 was 21.7% and 12.8% higher in FULL compared to TOP and BOTTOM, respectively. The rate of decline in mean barbell velocity was doubled from set 1 to set 3 (p < 0.01) and was higher in FULL than both TOP and BOTTOM (p < 0.001). Also, the rate of mean barbell velocity decline was higher in BOTTOM compared to TOP (p = 0.045). Blood lactate concentration was similarly increased in all ROM (p < 0.001). Training at TOP ROM allowed not only to lift a higher load, but also to perform more repetitions with a lower rate of decline in mean barbell velocity. Despite the lower absolute load and work per repetition, fatigue was higher in BOTTOM than TOP and this may be attributed to differences in muscle length.

The Impact of Range of Motion on Applied Force Characteristics and Electromyographic Activity during Repeated Sets of Bench Press Exercise

“…A previous study showed differences in applied force between different ROMs in the bench press exercise, but this was in isometric muscle actions (Murphy et al, 1996). Those authors found that maximal isometric force was almost 30% higher at an elbow angle of 120 ⁰ which is close to the starting angles in the present study (TOP: 114 ± 4 ⁰ ) compared to an angle of 90 ⁰ (Murphy et al, 1996) which is also close to the starting angles of the FULL and BOTTOM ROMs in the present study (BOTTOM: 77 ± 9 ⁰ and FULL: 78 ± 12 ⁰ ) (Tsoukos et al, 2024). Interestingly, the percentage difference in force among TOP, FULL and BOTTOM ROM in that study were similar to the values reported in the present study (Murphy et al, 1996).…”

“…Also, impulse was higher in TOP compared to FULL and BOTTOM ROMs. Impulse is the integral of force with respect to time and, as force and time under tension were significantly higher in TOP compared to FULL and BOTTOM, it is reasonable for impulse to be significantly higher in TOP compared to FULL and BOTTOM ROMs (Tsoukos et al, 2024). Thus, it may be suggested that the TOP ROM may be used to increase absolute loading in the bench press exercise and help athletes in sports where the absolute maximum force of elbow extensors is essential, i.e., individuals whose sports involve Journal of Human Kinetics, volume 91, March 2024 http://www.johk.pl forceful pushing or throwing actions, such as the shot put or boxing (Lopez-Laval et al, 2020;Terzis et al, 2003).…”

“…Mean and peak power output was higher in TOP and FULL than in BOTTOM ROM. Power is defined as the product of force and velocity, and thus the higher power is a result of both higher force in FULL compared to BOTTOM ( Figure 2 ), and higher velocities in FULL than BOTTOM ( Tsoukos et al, 2024 ). This finding may be related to a combination of a higher force production and sEMG activity of the TB muscle in TOP ( Figures 2 and 3 ) compared to BOTTOM and because of the existence of the sticking region (i.e., mechanical disadvantage during the initial phase of the lift) during BOTTOM ROM ( Martínez-Cava et al, 2019 ) which has been shown to present significantly lower power values ( Drinkwater et al, 2007 ).…”

“…Preliminary measurements showed that the number of repetitions required to equalize the time under tension under the three conditions was three repetitions for the TOP and BOTTOM ROM and two repetitions for the FULL ROM. This procedure has been presented in detail elsewhere and results in a time under tension of around 2.2 s in the initial repetitions ( Tsoukos et al, 2024 ).…”

“…The main dependent variables for the three different ROMs were: mean and peak force, mean and peak power, and sEMG variables of the pectoralis major, triceps brachii and anterior deltoid muscles (i.e., sEMG Root Mean Square (RMS), integrated sEMG (iEMG) and median frequency (MF) of the EMG power spectrum). Changes in the number of repetitions, mean and peak barbell velocity, time under tension and fatigue have been published elsewhere ( Tsoukos et al, 2024 ).…”