Guess how much UFC fighters can bench press?

[liverkick83]

Stipe - 315
DC - 330
Ngannou - 405
Overeem - 330
Lewis - 365
Yoel - 315
Rockhold - 275
Bones - 295
Tank Abbot - 550

I'm 5'10 155 and bench 250 I've worked hard to get my bench up over the years but I think You are really underestimating some of these athletes

 

[shortlefthook]

Which is a better gauge of functional strength in your opinion?

in terms of functional
I would say dumbells because you have to balance them, and having a girthy ribcage won't help limit your r.o.m like it will with a barbell, there's not much cheating with dumbells

But it's harder to add weight to your dumbells press, barbell press will prime your cns with pushing a heavier load than ever achieveable with dumbells. So basically you should do both, someone who only dumbell presses will be weaker in the end than someone who only barbell presses. if you have two guys, and one barbell presses more it doesn't mean he can dumbell press more.

Also most gyms only have dumbell up to 90 or 100 for someone who really is trying to grain strength eventually that will be too light to effectively work with a low volume

 

[Thepaintbucket]

Seems like a whole lotta people here can bench a lot

I've gone to many different gyms in my lifetime and I rarely see people bench 315 unless it's a hardcore PR type environment. 315 is a BIG lift. You don't just wake up one day and bench 315 as an average joe. It takes years and years of benching.

If you were 150 lbs and benching 3 plates that's considered elite lifting.
Being 200lbs and benching 3 plates puts you in advance lifting, a couple of dozen kilos away from Elite status.

I don't know Sherdog.

 

[AnotherOldGuy]

That goes with everything it's just a tool, and I disagree about the military press,
A true millitary press is strict the fact that your standing has very little benefit other than activating stabilizers that keep you upright, and this can be accomplished much better with a front squat..
Bench is better for upper body it uses more of the upper body, and it's much safer to go heavy on a flat or incline vs millitary press.

Don't get me wrong they both are great movements that have their place but if you only had two compounds for upper body it's would be bench and row.
The bench already hits the delts, lats and chest, millitary press does not hit the chest or lats at all in comparison.

Actually standing with a heavy weight over your head requires considerably more stabilizer work than doing so with a squat, especially the back squat. If you watch Olympic lifting you'll note that its quite common for a lifter to be able to jerk the bar overhead, but not control it sufficiently to be awarded the lift; stabilizing the bar overhead is much harder than it looks (something most don't realize until they have to try it).

Front squats are better than back squats for working stabilizers, but still not as good as overhead. The extension amplifies every wobble, making it deceptively hard - its pretty common to have to 'drop' the weight not because its too heavy, but because you lose control, which I suppose would be a problem in many gyms, where the sound might get you kicked out. Bench is, as you say, better for the chest, but the military is better for the shoulders. It can debated which is more important for MMA, I guess I'm in the shoulder's camp.

In terms of safety, I'm not sure there's much difference. Both are safe lifts if done correctly, and very hard on the body if done incorrectly. The bench allows heavier weights, but works the stabilizers less, and even the difference in weight isn't as much as many believe. For instance, the heaviest unequipped bench is 335 kg, the heaviest clean and jerk is 263 kg, which is about the ratio most non-specialists find between their bench and military press maxes (I sadly note that even in my dreams I cannot comprehend matching either of those numbers).

As you say, they're both great lifts, but for general athletic performance, I'd pick as my upper body exercises rows (everyone agrees on that) and the military press. For MMA I wouldn't spend a great amount of time on either; squats and deadlifts are far more important.

 

[DarkneT]

Well that would be pretty sick, I bench 400 in 205 class, and I train powerlifting and I'm on that Jon Jones supplements

What tainted BCAA's??
Who is your hook up brah

 

[shortlefthook]

Actually standing with a heavy weight over your head requires considerably more stabilizer work than doing so with a squat, especially the back squat. If you watch Olympic lifting you'll note that its quite common for a lifter to be able to jerk the bar overhead, but not control it sufficiently to be awarded the lift; stabilizing the bar overhead is much harder than it looks (something most don't realize until they have to try it).

Front squats are better than back squats for working stabilizers, but still not as good as overhead. The extension amplifies every wobble, making it deceptively hard - its pretty common to have to 'drop' the weight not because its too heavy, but because you lose control, which I suppose would be a problem in many gyms, where the sound might get you kicked out. Bench is, as you say, better for the chest, but the military is better for the shoulders. It can debated which is more important for MMA, I guess I'm in the shoulder's camp.

In terms of safety, I'm not sure there's much difference. Both are safe lifts if done correctly, and very hard on the body if done incorrectly. The bench allows heavier weights, but works the stabilizers less, and even the difference in weight isn't as much as many believe. For instance, the heaviest unequipped bench is 335 kg, the heaviest clean and jerk is 263 kg, which is about the ratio most non-specialists find between their bench and military press maxes (I sadly note that even in my dreams I cannot comprehend matching either of those numbers).

As you say, they're both great lifts, but for general athletic performance, I'd pick as my upper body exercises rows (everyone agrees on that) and the military press. For MMA I wouldn't spend a great amount of time on either; squats and deadlifts are far more important.

Everyone will have have different opinions and everybody is different on their limitations/ injuries/ goals.
As you said it can be debated which is better.
I believe if you take two identical people, one did bench for 12 weeks the other did military presses for 12 weeks, then the guy benched for 12 weeks gets 3 weeks of millitary pressing and vice versa.
The guy who benched for 12 weeks will have a higher total in the end imo.
Bench translates better to the military press than vice versa which Is why I personally view it as a Superior upper body compound.

 

[HI SCOTT NEWMAN]

Tank Abbott max bench press is 720 Ibs. Deadlift is just shy of 1,000 Ibs.

 

[Deleted member 535377]

I'm 6ft6 and around 280lbs. I fight, but I'm a kickboxer so I'm not making weight at 265lbs.
When I'm injury free and lift the barbell, the only thing that makes me feel remotely more powerful for crossing over (as far as barbells are concerned) are squats (ass to grass), deadlifts and some kind of clean or clean and press.
It is very hard to maintain lifting strength and not compromise my work rate immensely.
It's easier to get moderately close to powerlifting strong as long as I'm happy to be a one round k.o king but I never want to be the guy doubled over for oxygen after 3 minutes.
I bench 396 to powerlifting pause standard. During my boxing/kickboxing training, which is 11 months of the year, I'm lucky to hit 308. Same with squats and deads. Absolute strength is fussed over here, really bad, as we saw in the John Jones deadlift thread.

I get the obsession that SD has with fighter lifting strength. It fills some kind of obscure delusion that is very American and maybe slightly a little less, but Western.
It's the same with Hollywood actors. "I bet he could be a professional athlete" or "such and such benched 400lb for his *insert Marvel* role".
It's fanboydom and hope that your favourite fighter is also some kind of all around superhero. But weight lifting for MMA is so far different from general powerlifting or bodybuilding that sometimes I lose my mind at some of the stupid shit people come out with on here.

 

[jeremyemilio]

Bench has no correlation to any physical activity you'd ever do in real life. When would one use a bench press type movement? When a car rolls on top of you while you're lying down? Lmao it just seems like one of the least practical exercises that a lot of guys seem to be obsessed about.

Or so that's been the mantra for the lest decade or so. It's bullshit, though.

Bench press is an excellent measure and builder of all around upper body strength. When you want to move something heavy, or hit something with force, or create space between yourself and something, there's generally going to be some sort of shove involved.

That's why the NFL still cares about bench press, even as all the bros are abandoning it as "worthless."

Two player vs player contact incidents in this gif. Both of them using their bench press muscles:

There are like 6 or so examples in this gif:

You could pretend that's all about the rules sets... but it's the first thing a lot of people go to regardless of rules set:

And that's true even in everyday life:

It's not all about aggression, either. Sometimes it's damned useful:

All sorts of fighting applications as well. You don't figure strong bench press muscles make you more effective at this?

Or this?

You're wrong.

Does that mean it's common to have heavy objects just end up sitting motionless on your chest so you can lift them with perfect bench press form? Nope. But that holds for every one of the exercises that you mentioned.

 

[Mangar]

If this is true I find it weird that I can out bench most of them, and I'm a pussy.

 

[AnotherOldGuy]

Everyone will have have different opinions and everybody is different on their limitations/ injuries/ goals.
As you said it can be debated which is better.
I believe if you take two identical people, one did bench for 12 weeks the other did military presses for 12 weeks, then the guy benched for 12 weeks gets 3 weeks of millitary pressing and vice versa.
The guy who benched for 12 weeks will have a higher total in the end imo.
Bench translates better to the military press than vice versa which Is why I personally view it as a Superior upper body compound.

That's an interesting experiment. I'd say to be fair you'd have to compare percentages rather than taking absolute total, simply because bench totals are always going to be higher, so 10% better bench gives more total than 10% better military. But with that caveat, I think it'd be a good test of which is more helpful (agreeing with you that ultimately both are needed). My suspicion is opposite to yours (I think the military guy would do better with total percentages), but I admit its just a guess - in practice I don't know anyone who only does one of the two, though I do know people who concentrate on one (not useful for the experiment).

I wonder where we can find a statistically significant number of people who've never done either who want to help us with a 15 week experiment?

 

[jono83]

Or so that's been the mantra for the lest decade or so. It's bullshit, though.

Bench press is an excellent measure and builder of all around upper body strength. When you want to move something heavy, or hit something with force, or create space between yourself and something, there's generally going to be some sort of shove involved.

That's why the NFL still cares about bench press, even as all the bros are abandoning it as "worthless."

Two player vs player contact incidents in this gif. Both of them using their bench press muscles:

There are like 6 or so examples in this gif:

You could pretend that's all about the rules sets... but it's the first thing a lot of people go to regardless of rules set:

And that's true even in everyday life:

It's not all about aggression, either. Sometimes it's damned useful:

All sorts of fighting applications as well. You don't figure strong bench press muscles make you more effective at this?

Or this?

You're wrong.

Does that mean it's common to have heavy objects just end up sitting motionless on your chest so you can lift them with perfect bench press form? Nope. But that holds for every one of the exercises that you mentioned.

Every gif you showed was an example of how a standing military press would be better for real world situations than a bench press off of a bench considering all those people used their legs and shoulders to push other people or objects. A clean to a shoulder press would actually be even more effective. Anytime you push things in the real world, your legs, triceps, and shoulders do most of the work not just your pecs in a controlled lift while lying on a bench. I've wrestled with guys who could bench more than I can I could move some of them much easier than they moved me because my base and core were stronger from doing cleans and deadlifts etc. One of the guys I "out powered" could bench 365 for reps while I was only benching 275 for reps but because I could deadlift and clean more then him I could push him around. He was jacked up top but with little chicken legs.

 

[mmaknight]

Well that would be pretty sick, I bench 400 in 205 class, and I train powerlifting and I'm on that Jon Jones supplements

I need said supplements

 

[PabloMEX]

I would take a punch from a power lifter all day over anyone on that list lol.

 

[ZOD66]

I'm a powerlifting competitor so I know Cro Cop had a few training sessions with Srele Brutal Team powerlifting club in Croatia and he benched 170kg (375) touch and go (with no pause on chest, but touching the chest with the bar.
In powerlifting circles that is not impressive for his bodyweight, but being a fighter it's certanly good.

An elite bench would be 2 x bw bench RAW and more.

CrosteroidCop. Stipe je prava legenda

 

[Pancake Sprawl]

No one will convince me that Reem's bench press is only 330. I could bench 300 when I was 22. I weighed 180 lbs and was clean as a whistle. My buddy could bench 340 in high school, weighing around 190. (In hindsight, he was like juiced to the gills, but nevertheless, he was 17).

Rockhold is surprising, too... but I have known guys to look like that and not be able to push what you would expect.

Stipe just looks like a big strong guy who has never really put any effort into increasing his bench press strength, or anything other sort of powerlifting motion. I'm sure he could be doing 400 within a year if he felt any reason to try.

it's not that surprising if you take into account their builds. Overeem is huge, but the way he's built isn't optimal for bench pressing. even Ngannou doesn't have an optimal build for it. while someone like Matt Hughes does. short arms, thickly muscled, wide chest, broad shoulders.

Overeem and Ngannou have more narrow shoulders not as robust of a chest, and extremely long arms.

while Matt Hughes is diminutive in comparison to Overeem or Ngannou, he's just built right for the bench press. on the other hand, Overeem and Ngannou can most likely deadlift like beasts.

 

[shortlefthook]

That's an interesting experiment. I'd say to be fair you'd have to compare percentages rather than taking absolute total, simply because bench totals are always going to be higher, so 10% better bench gives more total than 10% better military. But with that caveat, I think it'd be a good test of which is more helpful (agreeing with you that ultimately both are needed). My suspicion is opposite to yours (I think the military guy would do better with total percentages), but I admit its just a guess - in practice I don't know anyone who only does one of the two, though I do know people who concentrate on one (not useful for the experiment).

I wonder where we can find a statistically significant number of people who've never done either who want to help us with a 15 week experiment?

Yea it's a very opinionated statement that I formed off my own experiences, I don't think an experiment could be done reliable to prove it.
When I started lifting my bench and millitary press were very close in weight as far as working sets we're concerned.
But as you get stronger the millitary press starts to plateau while the bench keeps growing assuming you are only doing one.
That's why doing both is key they both compliment each other, but since the military press is easier to plateau thats why I consider the bench a primary press over military

 

[XxWolfXx]

Bench press don't mean shit in the fight game.

 

[JT RIPPER]

Good thing they’re fighters and not power lifters then...

 

[Kframe]

Bench has no correlation to any physical activity you'd ever do in real life. When would one use a bench press type movement? When a car rolls on top of you while you're lying down? Lmao it just seems like one of the least practical exercises that a lot of guys seem to be obsessed about.

But it is the best way to work the chest muscles.