Weighted pushups vs benchpress

[kimotherapy]

Ok i have tried to ask this question many times and never got a straight answer so i will ask again.

Pullups are more superior than pulldowns, as in one, more stabiliser muscles are used and your body is moving through an area.

So practically Pullups is to pulldowns as pushups is to benchpress.

Ofcourse the true equivalent of a bench press for lats would be hanging up side down and pulling the weights "up" towards you, but even then your core is not moving.

And also is there a safe way to add weights for pushups ? Thx

[nykwan]

I don't think you can make that comparison. A benchpress probably uses as many stabilizers as a pushup. Actually probably more, since on a pushup you are like a tripod (two arms and feet), and benchpress you are only holding up the weight with only 2 arms. Which do you think uses more stabilizers.

The proper comparison is pullup is to pulldowns, as benchpress is to smith machine benchpress.

[kimotherapy]

Originally posted by nykwan
Actually probably more, since on a pushup you are like a tripod (two arms and feet), and benchpress you are only holding up the weight with only 2 arms. Which do you think uses more stabilizers.
[/B]

well you gotta focus on keeping your legs in one place :P and in a pushup you dont get a bench to rest on. Which do YOU think uses more stabilizers

[MiloMan]

Originally posted by kimotherapy
well you gotta focus on keeping your legs in one place :P and in a pushup you dont get a bench to rest on. Which do YOU think uses more stabilizers

Are you here to ask a question, or to argue? The latter seems likely.

[Stagger]

To add weights for pushups, just put some weight in a backpack and wear it while you do pushups. It'd probably help to stabilize it if it had a waist strap.

[nykwan]

Originally posted by kimotherapy
well you gotta focus on keeping your legs in one place :P and in a pushup you dont get a bench to rest on. Which do YOU think uses more stabilizers

I already said which one I thought uses more.

Think of it this way. A pushup is like doing bench on a universal machine. Your feet are like the pivot point on the machine. There's not much to stabilize when doing a pushup compared to freeweights.

Take someone who only works out on machines. I'll bet they can do a ton of pushups, even with a weighted backpack, because it's equivalent. Then see if they can benchpress anywhere close to the same weight on freeweights. I doubt it.

[hyp3r3xt3nsion]

movements that look similar are not similar for muscle recruitment, and other stuff

and for machines:

Originally posted by Five
The difference between the smith machine and a free weight bench press is significant in terms of overall gains. There are several important neurological factors at play here:

balance proprioception: In every exercise you do there is an element of balance, or to put it more technically a feedback loop that constantly adjusts recruitment of agonist, antagonist and synergists in order to maintain the desired output. This is a facet of the CNS, so it's centrally controlled and can be improved by using primarily free weight exercises, and even more so by using CKCE exercise, closed kinetic chain exercises. Squats on the smith machine would be a very seriously bad idea, as squatting is THE exercise which improves balance proprioception to the greatest extent. For bench press it's less of a concern, but it's still a concern.
Other than the effect on the CNS, the fact is that using EMG study and simply common sense, a free weight bench press recruits more muscle fibres it's as simple as that. The body does not and cannot hypertrophy on the scale of an individual muscle, the synergists of that muscle must also hypertrophy or the body would be in a constant state of imbalance and injury.

force proprioception: force proprioception is another attribute that operates both peripherally and centrally, and boils down to this, how heavy does an exercise feel and in what is the specific adaption required to deal with that force? Many people erroneously think that the squat is the king of exercises because of hormone release, which obviously is completely wrong, the actual amount or change in hormone release whilst squatting is insignificant. If you want to release a lot of test go to bed, if you want to release a lot of GH go do some endurance training. The real power of squatting is that as a load bearing exercise is has an extremely strong effect on the force proprioception of the CNS.
Although you may be able to apply a RPE (rating of percieved effort) of 100% to both smith bench and free weight bench, or in other words you will be pushing with everything you have for both exercises. The actual response of the body will be quite different given the demands of the exercise. It just isn't true that load is load is load no matter what the source is, the body can tell a cable from a free weight from a machine.

In terms of injury I don't believe that it matters, it's not WHAT you do it's HOW you do it that determines injury rates. The body can adapt to cope with almost anything.

[SmokeMadTrees]

i asked this question before too, and for the same reasons, and like you, never got a straight answer from anyone. ill agree with you, especially on the pull ups vs. pulldown. everyone here says that more weight, the better, but for a pullup you only use your body weight plus whatever weight if you can do more, but for a pulldown you can do much more weight, yet people say pull ups are better, and they are, and i know the reasons, so wouldnt the exact same thing be true for bench press vs. push ups, youre mimicking the same motion in both exercises, and in everyones logic since pull ups are better because of the stabalizers all that **** ( i know theres more reasons but work with me) shouldnt the same thing be true for push ups, even though you may not notice it you have to balance yourself through the whole thing. also another point, everyone on this site can agree that body weight exercises (squats, pull ups, dips) are the best exercises you can do and get the most results, so why should push ups be any different. in bench pressing all you are moving is your arms, thats it, in push ups your whole body goes through space. so can anyone have a real reason with some back up on why bench pressing would be better. in fact after reading this again, im just going to start doing weighted push ups instead of bench pressing, and only use the bench for the real ****, the incline press.

[hyp3r3xt3nsion]

Originally posted by SmokeMadTrees
, so wouldnt the exact same thing be true for bench press vs. push ups, youre mimicking the same motion in both exercises, and in everyones logic since pull ups are better because of the stabalizers .

Originally posted by hyp3r3xt3nsion
movements that look similar are not similar for muscle recruitment, and other stuff

and there's more FAR more reasons than just more stabilizers.

[nykwan]

Originally posted by SmokeMadTrees
i asked this question before too, and for the same reasons, and like you, never got a straight answer from anyone. ill agree with you, especially on the pull ups vs. pulldown. everyone here says that more weight, the better, but for a pullup you only use your body weight plus whatever weight if you can do more, but for a pulldown you can do much more weight, yet people say pull ups are better, and they are, and i know the reasons, so wouldnt the exact same thing be true for bench press vs. push ups, youre mimicking the same motion in both exercises, and in everyones logic since pull ups are better because of the stabalizers all that **** ( i know theres more reasons but work with me) shouldnt the same thing be true for push ups, even though you may not notice it you have to balance yourself through the whole thing. also another point, everyone on this site can agree that body weight exercises (squats, pull ups, dips) are the best exercises you can do and get the most results, so why should push ups be any different. in bench pressing all you are moving is your arms, thats it, in push ups your whole body goes through space. so can anyone have a real reason with some back up on why bench pressing would be better. in fact after reading this again, im just going to start doing weighted push ups instead of bench pressing, and only use the bench for the real ****, the incline press.

Pushups would be better than bench, if you could do them without your feet touching the ground. If you could balance them in the air and the only parts of the body touching the ground is your hands, then pushups would be better. But with your legs on the ground balancing you, you are NOT using more stabilizers (although you may be using more back muscles to stay straight). Your legs are acting like a hinge, similar to the guides on a smith machine, or more like the hinge on a universal weight machine.
Someone who can do lots of pushups or lots of weight on a universal machine will not do equivalent freeweights. But a freeweight benchpresser will be able to do a lot more weight on the universal and do a lot of weighted pushups.

I have experience with this. I used to do only pushups before I started using weights. And then I used the universal machine only. So after awhile, I could do lots of pushups and the entire 220lb stack on the machine. But my first time with freeweights made me feel like a pussy. I could barely do my own body weight (130lb at the time) without wobbling all over the place. It was after that that I understood what everyone was saying about freeweights and stabilizers and never touched the machine again.

[SmokeMadTrees]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by hyp3r3xt3nsion
[B]movements that look similar are not similar for muscle recruitment, and other stuff

well obviously if something is similar but not the same its going to recruit more or less, we all know that, still that doesnt explain anything

[hyp3r3xt3nsion]

Originally posted by SmokeMadTrees

well obviously if something is similar but not the same its going to recruit more or less

!NO!

If nobody else responds i'll elaborate more later, but AJ tired now....being in hospital makes AJ sleepy.

[Cerbinator]

I dunno about you, but I dont feel comfortable putting 300 lb on my back while I do pushups..Sounds kinda dangerous. I'll stick to bench press, thanks.

[hyp3r3xt3nsion]

Originally posted by Cerbinator
I dunno about you, but I dont feel comfortable putting 300 lb on my back while I do pushups..Sounds kinda dangerous. I'll stick to bench press, thanks.

i only managed 4plates before i figured it was getting to dangerous

[lucubration]

Originally posted by hyp3r3xt3nsion
i only managed 4plates before i figured it was getting to dangerous

How did you secure the plates?

[hyp3r3xt3nsion]

Originally posted by lucubration
How did you secure the plates?

i had my dad hold them...he was/is my weight donkey

[SmokeMadTrees]

Originally posted by hyp3r3xt3nsion
!NO!

If nobody else responds i'll elaborate more later, but AJ tired now....being in hospital makes AJ sleepy.

no? no what? and yea elaborate on this **** i want to know

[hyp3r3xt3nsion]

Originally posted by SmokeMadTrees
no? no what? and yea elaborate on this **** i want to know

just because something appears similar (e.g., pushups/bench, pulldowns/pullups) does not guarantee similar muscle fiber emphasis/recruitment.

read what i copied from Five above, it explains it more or less, using machines vs freeweights instead of exercise 1 vs 2

[lucubration]

Originally posted by hyp3r3xt3nsion
i had my dad hold them...he was/is my weight donkey

[kimotherapy]

Hmm well whoever said that if you can do pushups with your legs in the air may have a point. Gymnastic guys do them and they are really strong for their size. But you guys are really exxagerating if you compare a smith machine with a pushup.

[lucubration]

Originally posted by kimotherapy
But you guys are really exxagerating if you compare a smith machine with a pushup.

I agree.

[hyp3r3xt3nsion]

Originally posted by lucubration

[BPP]

Originally posted by kimotherapy
Ok i have tried to ask this question many times and never got a straight answer so i will ask again.

Pullups are more superior than pulldowns, as in one, more stabiliser muscles are used and your body is moving through an area.

So practically Pullups is to pulldowns as pushups is to benchpress.

Ofcourse the true equivalent of a bench press for lats would be hanging up side down and pulling the weights "up" towards you, but even then your core is not moving.

And also is there a safe way to add weights for pushups ? Thx

your reasoning is off

pullups are a compound, freeweight movement, AGAINST gravity...thats why their better

[ozza]

O/T But do u have any pictures hyper ?

I'd say Bench uses more in the shoulder girdle area, whilst pushups uses more in the midsection.

[SmokeMadTrees]

Originally posted by hyp3r3xt3nsion
just because something appears similar (e.g., pushups/bench, pulldowns/pullups) does not guarantee similar muscle fiber emphasis/recruitment.

read what i copied from Five above, it explains it more or less, using machines vs freeweights instead of exercise 1 vs 2

I know it doesnt, you just said that, and i just agreed. The fact is that post doesnt explain anything at all, you are comparing a smith bench press to a free weight bench press, and we all obviously know which one is better. You still havent explained anything on why pushups would be better. Im not looking for a fight, just youre explaining something else that has nothing to do with the question. And by that post, push ups woudl be better because of the balancing act, which would be harder to balance, the barbell held up with two arms and going just up and down, or your whole body moving up and down?

[SmokeMadTrees]

Originally posted by nykwan
Pushups would be better than bench, if you could do them without your feet touching the ground. If you could balance them in the air and the only parts of the body touching the ground is your hands, then pushups would be better. But with your legs on the ground balancing you, you are NOT using more stabilizers (although you may be using more back muscles to stay straight). Your legs are acting like a hinge, similar to the guides on a smith machine, or more like the hinge on a universal weight machine.
Someone who can do lots of pushups or lots of weight on a universal machine will not do equivalent freeweights. But a freeweight benchpresser will be able to do a lot more weight on the universal and do a lot of weighted pushups.

I have experience with this. I used to do only pushups before I started using weights. And then I used the universal machine only. So after awhile, I could do lots of pushups and the entire 220lb stack on the machine. But my first time with freeweights made me feel like a pussy. I could barely do my own body weight (130lb at the time) without wobbling all over the place. It was after that that I understood what everyone was saying about freeweights and stabilizers and never touched the machine again.

You cant possibly compare the balancing act of a push up versus a smith machinem they are completely different in every way, the smith machine just goes in a linear motion, while in contrast push ups you arent limited to a straight line, your body can move anywhere during a push up. Also you are saying that if you do a lot of push ups (and when you said a lot im assuming you mean just doing them often, as much as you could, without weight), then your bench press wouldnt go up, well theres an obvious reason, youre doing them as an endurance exercise, and not using weight. Another point is, is that you said you then switched a universal machine only, then you couldnt free weight bench press a lot, well no **** since we all know the reasons why a machine is inferior to free weight exercises, so that has nothing to do at all with push ups.

[nykwan]

Originally posted by SmokeMadTrees
And by that post, push ups woudl be better because of the balancing act, which would be harder to balance, the barbell held up with two arms and going just up and down, or your whole body moving up and down?

That reasoning is wrong like I mentioned in 2 posts before. The barbell goes up and down, but you are forgetting that it is also held so that it doesn't fall forwards or backwards, or tips over to one side. And the benchpress path of motion is NOT just a straight up and down either. Pushups are pretty much a linear motion, pivoting off your feet. Pushups are kinda like an opposite T-bar row, except that your body is the bar and your feet act as the hinge. And they are like doing a bench on a universal machine.
A pushup is up and down, but unless you are doing it with your feet suspended in the air, balancing on your hands only, your legs are keeping your body from moving backwards and forwards. So pushups aren't really a better "balancing act".
Again, find someone who has never ever done benchpress and see if he can bench without being wobbly. Then ask him to do pushups and see if he loses his balance.

Plus, your lower back would probably tire out before you could ever put on enough weight on your back that you would get as good a chest, shoulder and tricep workout compared in bench.

But if you believe in something, you can give it a try for a while just to see. Nothing wrong with that.

[nykwan]

Originally posted by SmokeMadTrees
You cant possibly compare the balancing act of a push up versus a smith machinem they are completely different in every way, the smith machine just goes in a linear motion, while in contrast push ups you arent limited to a straight line, your body can move anywhere during a push up. Also you are saying that if you do a lot of push ups (and when you said a lot im assuming you mean just doing them often, as much as you could, without weight), then your bench press wouldnt go up, well theres an obvious reason, youre doing them as an endurance exercise, and not using weight. Another point is, is that you said you then switched a universal machine only, then you couldnt free weight bench press a lot, well no **** since we all know the reasons why a machine is inferior to free weight exercises, so that has nothing to do at all with push ups.

You can compare machine to pushups. Pushups are only balanced side to side. Anyone off the street can do pushups without losing balance, but not everyone can do freeweight benchpress.

And yes, when I was doing pushups, I could do the stack on a universal, and I could do pushups with a girlfriend sitting on my back. There is not much to balance. Try it. Grab someone who only does pushups and sit on his back. He will be able to lift you if he is strong. But I bet he can't do the same weight on freeweight bench if he really has never done it before.

[nykwan]

If all you who think weighted pushups are so much better, why aren't you doing them already? Stop trying to convince everyone and actually do them yourself and then report back your results in a month. If you get spectacular gains then we won't need this thread anymore.

[kimotherapy]

Ok who ever said that people who do a lot of pushups wobble the bar on the bench press DO have a point. I am quite open minded , and I am not going to argue against it as I experienced it myself. Now for another question. Since one handed pushups are obviously test your balance more than a bench press, are they considered a good exercise ( especially during the holidays) ?