Decline Bench Press

following these articles/studies... I'm curious to know who actually believe more in dumbells than barbells when exercising the chest..

points here seemed to be that barbell can allow you to use more weight, hence more hypertrophy in some way

and dumbell are recruiting more muscles than barbell...

rock.gif
rock.gif
 
yep thats a tough one,i like to think that dumbells cause more muscle trauma in general due to the amount of stretch(full range of movement)you can get,and also use more stabilizing muscles than barbell.but i guess you can use more weight with barbell.its down to individual preference,ive always loved dumbell so i tend to do them after a few cycles with barbell,your body has to adapt to dumbells again so you do get some benefit there.
 
I agree 100% with Icars on the stretch with the DB's. Regarding more weight with the BB, it's mainly do the the assistance the triceps add's when forcing the lockout. With DB's, the the tricep only asists a minor amount to keep the fore arm vertical, where in BB press, it gives 100% contraction, hence more weigh will always be lifted.

So my feeling is you'll get more overall from the compound lifting in the BB press (fully works the tricep) than doing DB's, however its good to mix things up & DB press's are perfect for that (great stretch).
Personally, I have rarely done DB presses & have good chest & tri development.
O
 
Yeah i wasnt saying dips arent the best exercise as im using them right now and they seem to be working well for me, but from what ive read i was questioning the idea that using decline activates the lower chest more than flat as peak was saying he'd compare them to dips for that reason. With decline you have a smaller range of motion also which means many people can use more weight doing it which would surely effect the emg results?

The other studys says declines better than incline sure, but flat may still be even better for activating the lower chest than decline and it also allows a greater ROM.

Anyway this is probably not all that significant, i thought people with more noticably defined lower chests had simply developed there chest more and gravity had caused it to create that effect.
 
<div>
(JonnyH @ Aug. 26 2006,16:11)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The other studys says declines better than incline sure, but flat may still be even better for activating the lower chest than decline and it also allows a greater ROM.</div>
I for one feel that flat is much better than decline. When doing flat, most will arch their back giving more angle &amp; therefore hitting lower chest a bit more. Also, incline is important so as to build the upper pecs as well (see next below).

<div>
(JonnyH @ Aug. 26 2006,16:11)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Anyway this is probably not all that significant, i thought people with more noticably defined lower chests had simply developed there chest more and gravity had caused it to create that effect.</div>
This is significant....This is me... I have done maybe 10 sets of decline in my life (hated the limited range of motion) &amp; but NEVER never left out flat or incline. If the chest is developed enough, gravity definitely pulls on the muscle mass making it &quot;look&quot; like you have really worked your lower chest (declines) but actually have not.

O
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top