A movement that I am most familiar with from powerlifting would be a maximal effort competition bench press. Utilizing the model proposed by Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968), one can first look at the relevant learning and performing skills. Structurally speaking and following with this, the first thing one could look at is the sensory register. This also coincides with a skill that one may have to filter eventually, which is your visual field during performance of the bench press. One thing that I have personally had to filter out would be something as simple as the direction of the tiles. If the bench wasn’t perfectly parallel to the wall to make the tiles go perfectly in a left-right up-down direction, I found it quite distracting and had to attempt to filter it out as my brain didn’t interpret it as “straight.”
As you
progress beyond the initial stage, one must next look at proper body
positioning. Generally in my coaching practice, I’ve advised the feet to be
planted in the floor below the knees, glutes on the bench, a slight arch in the
back, and shoulders squeezed together. One point of contention could be the
arched back. Though preferences may vary on the use of it, a narrative review
on injuries by Bengtsson et al. (2019) did not find any instances of back
injuries being caused by a “powerlifting” style bench press. That information
makes me feel confident that you can safely have a slight arch without
increasing injury risk to your back. This, of course, discounts some of the
extreme outliers that one could find through the Internet where the lordosis
becomes an almost “Exorcist” movie style proportion.
The next
cue would be the lift-off. As a personal point, I usually advise that the
lifter performs the lift-off on their own. This could mitigate another
distraction that would need to be filtered out, the first “shock” of how the
weight feels. I find this to be especially true with heavier weights. As one
lifts the weight off and can feel it, it tends to decrease the distraction of
having a spotter lift it off and not feeling the full weight until you’re at a locked-out
position.
After
this is the cue for the eccentric phase of the movement. As there is a required
pause in competition, the cue that I use is to pretend that there is a piece of
glass on your chest. You want to lower the weight controlled, and touch is on your
chest. If you let the weight sink into your chest, you are possibly delaying
the next cue. The next cue is an auditory one, which is the command of “Press”
from the judge. The command is usually not given until the bar is on the chest
and not moving; something that could possibly take more time if one is letting
the bar sink into the chest and it takes longer to stop in place.
The next
part would be the concentric phase. One background cue would be to ensure your
feet are planted into the floor, and you are getting a drive upward with your
legs. This can’t be so much drive that your glutes come off the bench. Beyond
that, there are two parts to consider in the concentric phase, bar path and bar
velocity. A 1984 study by McLaughlin and Madsen looked at bar path from
lifters, focusing on novice, intermediate, and advanced lifters. Figure 3 on p
64 (McLaughlin & Madsen, 1984) split them into the groups based on bar
path. The novice lifter had a bar path that started straight up off the chest,
then moving back towards the had after the mid-range point. The intermediate
had more of a general “straight” line back towards the head as the bar path
moved through the motion. The advanced had a movement that moved towards the
head off the chest, then straightened out into a movement more perpendicular to
the floor as it moved. Figure 2 on p. 63 of the same study found that the
novice bar path required the greatest amount of force on the bar immediately
off the chest, with a sharp drop-off in force as the bar moves through its
path. On the other hand, the advanced bar path showed the most even
distribution of force throughout the movement. That in mind, it seems
reasonable that you could cue the lifter to push the weight off the chest
towards the head to begin, before straightening out the bar. One could
accomplish this with auditory cues, or if possible, film from the side to allow
the lifter to have a visual representation. This would be dependent on getting
to know your lifter and how they best learn.
The
other part of the concentric movement would be the bar velocity. Krol et al.
(2010) looked at bar velocity through the movement. The bar velocity was slower
and constant through the first half of the movement, until moving through the
“sticking” point (about halfway through the concentric portion) before velocity
increased markedly. The results also noted that one issue with the strength
would be a delay in the pectoral muscles and the deltoid muscles being more
activated than the triceps. With this in mind, an external cue that would need
to be filtered would be any noise at this point in the movement. When in
competition, a lot of times there are spectators cheering loudly, with volume
increasing as the lifter hits their sticking point. If a lifter is unable to
properly filter these cues and becomes distracted, the delay could in theory
become longer, resulting in a failed lift.
References
Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory:
a proposed system and its control processes. Psychology of Learning and
Motivation, 2(1), 89-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60422-3
Bengtsson, V., Berglund, L., & Aasa, U. (2018). Narrative
review of injuries in powerlifting with special reference to their association
to the squat, bench press and deadlift. BMJ Open Sport & Exercise
Medicine, 4(e000382), 108. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000382
McLaughlin, T. M., & Madsen, N. H. (1984). Bench press
technique of elite heavyweight powerlifters. Strength and Conditioning
Journal, 6(4), 44, 62-65. https://journals.lww.com/nsca-scj/Abstract/1984/08000/Bench_Press__Bench_press_techniques_of_elite.10.aspx
Krol, H., Golas, A., & Sobota, G. (2010). Complex analysis of movement in evaluation of flat bench press performance. Acta of Bioengineering and Biomechanics, 12(2), 93-98. http://www.actabio.pwr.wroc.pl/Vol12No2/10.pdf
