Category
Applied
Description
INTRODUCTION: The push-up test has been widely used in populations with low-training age and military performance for muscular endurance testing. Comparatively, 1-rep-max (1RM) bench press testing has been used to determine maximal strength in resistance training settings across ages and disciplines. However, there is no current literature assessing the relationship between the 60-second AMRAP (as many reps as possible) push-up test and the 1RM bench press, or the practical application of utilizing the push-up test as a maximum strength testing method. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between a 60-second AMRAP push-up test and a 1RM bench press. METHODS: The study included 11 resistance-trained males (mean age 21.0 ± 1.3 years). Subjects were required to have at least 6 months of recreational lifting experience and be able to perform multiple push-ups and a bench press test successfully, as well as complete both an informed consent form and PAR-Q+ form prior to beginning the research study. Using a randomized, counterbalanced crossover design, subjects completed either a 60-second AMRAP push-up (PU) test or a 1RM bench press test in their first session, then completed the alternate test 3–4 days later. Prior to testing, body composition was assessed using an InBody 770 bioelectrical impedance analysis system, along with height (cm) and bodyweight (kg). Each session began with a standardized static warm-up, followed by a task-specific warm-up (5 knee push-ups or 4 standardized bench press warm-up sets). The highest successful 1RM (maximum of 5 attempts) and total push-ups completed in 60 seconds were recorded. Simple (bivariate) Pearson correlations were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics to examine the relationship between push-up and 1RM bench press performance. RESULTS: PU showed a low positive, yet non-significant relationship with 1RM (r = 0.235, p = 0.487). Although there appears to be no major relationship, it is important to note that individual variability may play a role as 2 individuals that performed in the top 2 for PU also performed in the top 3 for 1RM. Conversely, the 2 individuals that performed in the bottom 2 for PU also performed outside the top 5 for 1RM. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Although push-ups showed a low positive, non-significant relationship with 1RM bench press, individuals who completed more push-ups generally ranked higher in 1RM performance while those with fewer push-ups ranked lower. Future research should assess the relationship between PU and 1RM performance regarding the impact of gender, larger subject population, and body fat percentage. In practical terms, participants who performed more PU lifted more for their 1RM, and those who performed less PU tended to lift less for their 1RM, suggesting a meaningful relationship despite the weak statistical correlations. In other words, PU performance might have some predictive relevance for bench press performance when individual variability is taken into account.
Assessing the Relationship Between 60-Second Push-Up Performance and 1-Rep-Max Bench Press
Applied
INTRODUCTION: The push-up test has been widely used in populations with low-training age and military performance for muscular endurance testing. Comparatively, 1-rep-max (1RM) bench press testing has been used to determine maximal strength in resistance training settings across ages and disciplines. However, there is no current literature assessing the relationship between the 60-second AMRAP (as many reps as possible) push-up test and the 1RM bench press, or the practical application of utilizing the push-up test as a maximum strength testing method. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between a 60-second AMRAP push-up test and a 1RM bench press. METHODS: The study included 11 resistance-trained males (mean age 21.0 ± 1.3 years). Subjects were required to have at least 6 months of recreational lifting experience and be able to perform multiple push-ups and a bench press test successfully, as well as complete both an informed consent form and PAR-Q+ form prior to beginning the research study. Using a randomized, counterbalanced crossover design, subjects completed either a 60-second AMRAP push-up (PU) test or a 1RM bench press test in their first session, then completed the alternate test 3–4 days later. Prior to testing, body composition was assessed using an InBody 770 bioelectrical impedance analysis system, along with height (cm) and bodyweight (kg). Each session began with a standardized static warm-up, followed by a task-specific warm-up (5 knee push-ups or 4 standardized bench press warm-up sets). The highest successful 1RM (maximum of 5 attempts) and total push-ups completed in 60 seconds were recorded. Simple (bivariate) Pearson correlations were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics to examine the relationship between push-up and 1RM bench press performance. RESULTS: PU showed a low positive, yet non-significant relationship with 1RM (r = 0.235, p = 0.487). Although there appears to be no major relationship, it is important to note that individual variability may play a role as 2 individuals that performed in the top 2 for PU also performed in the top 3 for 1RM. Conversely, the 2 individuals that performed in the bottom 2 for PU also performed outside the top 5 for 1RM. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Although push-ups showed a low positive, non-significant relationship with 1RM bench press, individuals who completed more push-ups generally ranked higher in 1RM performance while those with fewer push-ups ranked lower. Future research should assess the relationship between PU and 1RM performance regarding the impact of gender, larger subject population, and body fat percentage. In practical terms, participants who performed more PU lifted more for their 1RM, and those who performed less PU tended to lift less for their 1RM, suggesting a meaningful relationship despite the weak statistical correlations. In other words, PU performance might have some predictive relevance for bench press performance when individual variability is taken into account.
