Low Correlation Between Bench Press One-Repetition Maximum and Angle Specific Isometric Bench Press

Administration of bench press 1-repetition maximum (1RM) tests can be time consuming, require trained personnel, and are risky for beginners. Therefore, alternative testing procedures for upper body push strength should be considered. PURPOSE: To quantify strength and determine the relationship between dynamic bench press 1RM and angle specific isometric bench press. METHODS: Twelve recreationally trained males (age=24.83±2.89yrs, height=172.33±6.6cm, mass=83.18±8.53kg), capable of bench pressing a minimum of 1.25x their bodyweight, volunteered to participate. On day 1, subjects performed a bench press warm-up and had 5 attempts to reach their 1RM using a self-selected grip that remained the same for the entire study. On day 2, subjects performed an isometric bench press warm-up, then completed 2 max effort repetitions at 4 different angles of elbow flexion (60, 90, 120, and 150 degrees) and at 50% of their arm length in randomized order. RESULTS: Pearson correlations were very low and not-significant (P>0.05) between dynamic bench press 1RM (115.43±12.68kg) and isometric bench press at all angles (60°=56.60±9.72kg, r= -.04; 90°=65.25±9.77kg, r= -.26; 120°=110.39±20.79kg, r= -.11; 150°=121.46±29.83kg, r= -.24; 50% arm length=57.72±8.09kg, r= -.25). CONCLUSIONS: Traditionally, dynamic movements are the focus of strength testing. The 1RM bench press is dynamic while the isometric bench press produces no movement. Thus, muscular length-tension or force-velocity differences between modes may explain the low relationships. Therefore, isometric bench press may not be a proper substitute for a 1RM bench press test.