Correlation Between Different Presses

Hey folks, so I’m doing floor presses today, full pause at bottom, explode up… you know the drill. And I did almost as much weight as my flat bench (270 for a triple, can single 300 on flat). Apparently floor presses are supposed to be a whole lot harder than flat bench because you can’t use any leg drive, and the stretch reflex is reduced because of the pause. I went on to do close grip bench afterwards and got a dismal 245x4, a whooole lot less than my floor press.

So my question to you guys is, first of all, how does your floor press compare to your flat bench and possibly your close grip? And also, if my floor press is almost the same as my flat bench what would you guess is up with that?

And also, if my floor press is almost the same as my flat bench what would you guess is up with that?

^i’d guess then that your flat bench form sucks.

Or you’re weak off the chest… which could be.

weak lats
weak pecs
you’re slow

I’d guess that your form sucks… but i really don’t know shit.

you know I guess everyone is different but I have two comments.

To some extent it makes sense that a floor press is stronger than full bench, everyone can board press
and do lock outs off the rack with more than they can
bench. It’s not a really solid argument but I dont see
it as being too much of a surprise.

This isn’t really related but I think that leg drive is
over rated. I don’t see how it can add much help. The legs stay stationary and obviously help the lifter create a solid base from which to press, but I don’t understand how this leg drive is supposed to work.

I’m open to hear the theory behind it.

I forgot to add:

It is true the floor press removes much of the stretch reflex from lift, at the same time it requires less energy
because during the amortization phase the load is supported by the floor rather than the muscles involved (too a large extent anyway). While I do ultimately agree that the removal of the stretch reflex results in the lift being harder to complete, I think it’s not as drastic as people often think.

sorry bit of a hijack I guess

I have been using floor presses a lot on my light day. A typical workout might be 275 or 295 for 5 with pointer fingers on the smooth part of the bar. In recent weeks using a contest grip, I have hit 315 for 8 and 355 for 4.

The gap between your floor press and bench varies becuase of any number of things- arm length, torso thickness, technique, triceps strength, etc. I really wouldn’t sweat what and why the gap is.

Haven’t floor pressed in a few months, but I think I could do 100 kg. (220 lb., was in England at the time) for maybe 3 on the floor press, could bench the same for 6-8 reps.

Basically your floor press is going to be less because of leg drive.

As to the poster who said he doesn’t see how leg drive can significantly increase your bench, you do more than just keep your feet firmly planted to create a base. You push with your legs which transfers energy. You can actually push quite a bit with your legs with practice, you can get good at having no weight on the bench besides your upper back(your butt only has to touch the bench doesn’t have to have weight on it).

Also your flat bench and floor press are probably closer because your weaker just as you come off your chest. I would suggest throwing in some 2board presses. I had the same problem and the 2board presses have really helped.

Mar

[quote]GETSTRENGTH wrote:

This isn’t really related but I think that leg drive is
over rated. I don’t see how it can add much help. The legs stay stationary and obviously help the lifter create a solid base from which to press, but I don’t understand how this leg drive is supposed to work.
[/quote]

You’re argument for leg drive being overrated is borderline retarded, and I say that in the most honest of ways. Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean it is overrated. If you aren’t getting anything from your leg drive, then you aren’t doing it right. You should either read up or find a powerlifter to teach you how and where to set your feet and how to drive and you’ll see a difference.

[quote]threewhitelights wrote:
GETSTRENGTH wrote:

This isn’t really related but I think that leg drive is
over rated. I don’t see how it can add much help. The legs stay stationary and obviously help the lifter create a solid base from which to press, but I don’t understand how this leg drive is supposed to work.

You’re argument for leg drive being overrated is borderline retarded, and I say that in the most honest of ways. Just because you don’t understand something doesn’t mean it is overrated. If you aren’t getting anything from your leg drive, then you aren’t doing it right. You should either read up or find a powerlifter to teach you how and where to set your feet and how to drive and you’ll see a difference. [/quote]

I didn’t say I thought leg drive is overrated BECAUSE I don’t understand how it is supposed to work. I agree just because someone doesn’t understand something does not mean it is overrated.

What I was getting at while trying not to get flamed by people is: Leg drive is overrated. Sure it can make a minimal difference. For most people who don’t really have the best strength levels to begin with it might be better if they just focussed on getting stronger.

I often am in the gym with people who are not as strong as me on the bench who are heavier than me. Not that it is anything amazing but my raw bench is 350 weighing 198, I seem to be doing ok compared to all these people and theit leg drive. There is almost more talk about technique and leg drive than just getting on with it and putting in the hrs.

My argument that leg drive is in no way retarded. I based it on a degree in exercise science with a miomechanics major. In terms of force transfer because of the angle the legs are on in relation to the torso, it makes the transfer of force from the lower extremity through the torso to the shoulders difficult.

I competed in powerlifting for a number of years and although not world class I did win the NZ under 24 division for 3 years in a row and attained an Oceania bench press record. I also won the NZ strongest man under 110kg class in 2006. I’m just pointing this out to show you that it is likely I have talked to powerlifters and read a fair amount on things related. One thing I have noticed in powerlifting is that there is a lot of monkey see monkey do. Someone does something because so and so does it and they have a great bench. This logic is flawed. Often when I ask how things are supposed to work the reasoning which sounds ok to the uneducated is odd.

I want to stress that I am not saying leg drive does not come into it, I am saying it is overrated. This applies more so to people who aren’t at an elite level. Sure someone who benches 405 might hit 410 with some leg drive. someone benching 300 pounds isn’t going to be gaining much from it.

[quote]GETSTRENGTH wrote:

I often am in the gym with people who are not as strong as me on the bench who are heavier than me. Not that it is anything amazing but my raw bench is 350 weighing 198, I seem to be doing ok compared to all these people and theit leg drive. There is almost more talk about technique and leg drive than just getting on with it and putting in the hrs.

[/quote]

That’s a pretty important point.

[quote]GETSTRENGTH wrote:
My argument that leg drive is in no way retarded. I based it on a degree in exercise science with a miomechanics major. [/quote]

It may not be the kindest phrase for it but ignoring (or filtering with astounding bias) practical experience and rejecting it on account of being unable personally to figure out how it could work, is not sound.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
GETSTRENGTH wrote:
My argument that leg drive is in no way retarded. I based it on a degree in exercise science with a miomechanics major.

It may not be the kindest phrase for it but ignoring (or filtering with astounding bias) practical experience and rejecting it on account of being unable personally to figure out how it could work, is not sound.[/quote]

You seem to think that I am ignoring practical experience and rejecting because I cannot figure out how it could work. This is not the case. I am basing my statements on practical experience (not that it matters) and biomechanical/physics knowledge.

I’m not sure what you mean by filtering it with bias…The fact that mechanically leg drive does not offer a large contribution to someones bench press is not biased. Practical experience does not count for anything in this case, it either makes sense mechanically or it does not.

It seems like you are posting just to disagree. This is way off topic, how I came to my statement doesn’t really matter. It is my statement that matters. If what I’m saying is incorrect why don’t you explain why it is incorrect or clarify holes in my statement rather than focussing on how I came to this conclusion.

You are assuming I am rejecting the notoin of leg drive based on being unable to figure out how it could work. As I stated in a previous post, rejecting something and not understanding it are not necessarily correlated. At no point did I say I will ignore leg drive because I cannot figure out how it could contribute.

Yeah, I’m posting “just to disagree.”

Perhaps you can find a group of powerlifters and try asking them how many pounds each gets off of leg drive. If the average answer is 5 lb then you are right.

I’d be astounded if that is your average reply, unless you pick a really odd group to ask. So, I think, would most of the rest of us.

Your post implied that your figure is based on results from others: my statement that I expected there was filtered bias is a way of accounting for how your statement could seem correct to you, while not being correct. E.g. if you keep in mind only results from those that agree with you, then it may indeed seem that the average powerlifter gains only 5 lb from leg drive.

But, if there is this filtered bias, the actual average is 5 lb only of those you asked or those you remember.

Though frankly it seems surprising to me you would have asked this question of any large number of lifters in the first place. Not saying you didn’t, but it seems surprising.

Funny how you think that if someone disagrees with you, they must be disagreeing with you just because they like to disagree.

You don’t even seem to recognize it as a possibility that perhaps your experience does not match others.

[quote]GETSTRENGTH wrote:
You are assuming I am rejecting the notoin of leg drive based on being unable to figure out how it could work. As I stated in a previous post, rejecting something and not understanding it are not necessarily correlated. At no point did I say I will ignore leg drive because I cannot figure out how it could contribute.
[/quote]

No, you said:

Obviously that has you claiming that a “degree in exercise science” etc was the basis for your claim. That does not differ substantively if at all from how I described what you were doing. Clearly, if that education had you understanding how it worked then you wouldn’t have made your post, and you’ve made clear you don’t understand how it works, and base your rejection on that being your conclusion from your school education.

If anyone is disagreeing just to disagree, it’s you, now claiming that this wasn’t your reason when before you said it was.

Waste of time. Therefore, finis. I’m sure few here bought into your claim that leg drive is in general worth only about 5 lb: therefore responding further to it is not something I need to continue with. It is only you that is confused, and your opinion will not change no matter what is said, I am pretty sure.

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Yeah, I’m posting “just to disagree.”

Perhaps you can find a group of powerlifters and try asking them how many pounds each gets off of leg drive. If the average answer is 5 lb then you are right.

What would this have to do with anything? Why are we assuming these powerlifters have a clue what they are talking about? It is pretty easy to confuse leg drive with a solid base of support.

I’d be astounded if that is your average reply, unless you pick a really odd group to ask. So, I think, would most of the rest of us.

So would I, that is part of the problem. A bunch of people not knowing what they are doing following what the next guy does and taking his words as gospel while not thinking critically at all.

Your post implied that your figure is based on results from others: my statement that I expected there was filtered bias is a way of accounting for how your statement could seem correct to you, while not being correct. E.g. if you keep in mind only results from those that agree with you, then it may indeed seem that the average powerlifter gains only 5 lb from leg drive.

But, if there is this filtered bias, the actual average is 5 lb only of those you asked or those you remember.

Though frankly it seems surprising to me you would have asked this question of any large number of lifters in the first place. Not saying you didn’t, but it seems surprising.

I havn’t asked many people this question directly. Often just through casual conversation their stance on leg drive has become apparent. Often their opinion is in fact that leg drive contributes greatly.

The issue is that most of these guys have hand me down information from others who are fumbling along also doing what the next guy is doing. They aren’t thinking critically about why they are doing what they’re doing etc.

Funny how you think that if someone disagrees with you, they must be disagreeing with you just because they like to disagree.

I don’t think if someone disagrees with me that they are doing it for the sake of it. I suggested that it seemed that way. I didn’t say you were, I said it seemed that way. They are two different things. I suggested this because you are focussing on how I come to my conclusion rather than focussing on what we are discussing.

I challenge you to explain how leg drive works from a biomechanical point of view. This is what we are talking about. If you wish to prove me wrong it would be more obvious if you made it clear that my statements were incorrect.

You don’t even seem to recognize it as a possibility that perhaps your experience does not match others.

My experience doesn’t come into it. Of course my experience my differ to others, regardless leg drive either contributes greatly and can be explained or it cannot.

GETSTRENGTH wrote:
You are assuming I am rejecting the notoin of leg drive based on being unable to figure out how it could work. As I stated in a previous post, rejecting something and not understanding it are not necessarily correlated. At no point did I say I will ignore leg drive because I cannot figure out how it could contribute.

No, you said:

My argument that leg drive is in no way retarded. I based it on a degree in exercise science with a miomechanics major.

Obviously that has you claiming that a “degree in exercise science” etc was the basis for your claim. That does not differ substantively if at all from how I described what you were doing.

Clearly, if that education had you understanding how it worked then you wouldn’t have made your post, and you’ve made clear you don’t understand how it works, and base your rejection on that being your conclusion from your school education.

This is partly true. If my education had me understanding how leg drive contributed substantially then yes I would not have made my post. The problem is: my education does not leave me wondering how it could work, it leaves me knowing it does not contribute greatly. I can accept this to be wrong but in order to do so, someone who can explain how leg drive works will be needed. We are still lacking this.

This is part of why I said you seemed to be disagreeing for the sake of it. You don’t appear to know how leg drive is supposed to work, you also don’t appear to know how it is doe snot make sense mechanically. You are picking apart how I came up with my statements while not actually refuting the statements or offering an explanation on leg drive and how it contributes.

If anyone is disagreeing just to disagree, it’s you, now claiming that this wasn’t your reason when before you said it was.

What do you mean? I did not state that I am disagreeing for the sake of it.

Waste of time. Therefore, finis. I’m sure few here bought into your claim that leg drive is in general worth only about 5 lb: therefore responding further to it is not something I need to continue with. It is only you that is confused, and your opinion will not change no matter what is said, I am pretty sure.[/quote]

It does not matter if many people bought my claims. I posted to offer my view on something for the benefit of the original poster.

This is interesting: just because the masses believe something or have a certain opinion does not make it any more relevant or likely to be true than if few people hold an opinion. At one point everyone believe the earth to be flat. Heck people still believe in god.

Please if you have issue with my statements, would you clarify how leg drive contributes a large amount of force to the bench press. That would really shut me up.

by the way, I dont know how the quote works so it came out as a massive quote apart from the end.

Back to the original point, I found that there is definitely a difference between my floor press and bench. Not a huge one but probably 15lbs.

I think that leg drive is clearly important. I certainly use it and I can lift more weight with than without.

I think the that the specific difference between floor pressing and benching can be affected by how you set up to floor press though. I used to keep my legs bent and feet on the floor which allowed me to arch quite hard. I now prefer to put my legs down flat which makes the exercise a bit harder.

I agree with GETSTRENGTH. With a rudimentary look at the bench press from a mechanics perspective, the drive from the legs cannot be transferred to the bar in any substantial fashion.

The reason for this being that the scapulae are “anchored” to the bench so any force transferred by the legs is only cancelled by the support reaction of the point of contact on the bench. This creates a static equilibrium of forces. Drawing a free-body diagram should reveal this.

The REAL reason why leg drive helps the bench is in substantially improving the leverage of the upper body,shortening the range of motion, and improving stability. By raising/rotating the chest upwards towards the bar, the upper body muscles are afforded a much stronger position.

Leg drive works and adds pounds to the bench press, but not by transferring force to the bar.

[quote]Willus wrote:

Leg drive works and adds pounds to the bench press, but not by transferring force to the bar. [/quote]

Obviously this is an accurate statement.

[quote]Willus wrote:
I agree with GETSTRENGTH. With a rudimentary look at the bench press from a mechanics perspective, the drive from the legs cannot be transferred to the bar in any substantial fashion.

The reason for this being that the scapulae are “anchored” to the bench so any force transferred by the legs is only cancelled by the support reaction of the point of contact on the bench. This creates a static equilibrium of forces. Drawing a free-body diagram should reveal this.

The REAL reason why leg drive helps the bench is in substantially improving the leverage of the upper body,shortening the range of motion, and improving stability. By raising/rotating the chest upwards towards the bar, the upper body muscles are afforded a much stronger position.

Leg drive works and adds pounds to the bench press, but not by transferring force to the bar. [/quote]

This is what I was saying.

[quote]GETSTRENGTH wrote:
You are assuming I am rejecting the notoin of leg drive based on being unable to figure out how it could work. As I stated in a previous post, rejecting something and not understanding it are not necessarily correlated.

At no point did I say I will ignore leg drive because I cannot figure out how it could contribute.
[/quote]

That makes a little more sense then what you originally posted. However, you’re looking at it wrong. Leg drive does more than provide a stable base, it keeps everything tight. As someone that studied biomechanics (what i’m going to grad school for) you already understand irradiation. A tight muscle allows for the next muscle to be tighter. It’s just like bracing the abs or squeezing the bar.

Try squeezing your fist as hard as you can. You’ll feel all the muscles, forearm through the bicep up to the shoulder and trap, will all tense up. This is what leg drive does, but on a bigger scale.

As for how much a 400lb bencher gets, maybe there are some that only get 5 lbs out of leg drive, but 5lbs is still big. However, I disagree. I trained with a 400lb raw presser in the 165’s last summer that wanted to go for the raw national record, and I’ve seen him miss 385 because his feet were a few inches off, correct that, and then smash 405 later in the workout.

Also, from MY experience when I was benching (also as a 165 at the time) if I didn’t set up right I could miss something as light as 240, but hit 275 if everything was tight. This isn’t just because “the masses told me” but rather because it’s what happens, and I’ve seen it over and over.

Mechanically, it is a sound principle. Practically, it’s sound and proven.