Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A friend of mine who is a fitness trainer in Boulder-CO sent me this link to the YMCA Bench Press test.
It appears that the evaluation is based only on age and the number of repetitions performed. IMO, it is flawed because it does not take % of bodyweight into consideration. A skinny little 160 pound guy like me is going head to head with behemoth 240 muscle heads the same age as me. For me, the 80 lbs used in this test is 50% of my bodyweight, while the 240 pound behemoth is using only 33.3% of their bodyweight.
Anyway, take it with a grain of salt. I've done it 2 occasions. The first time I used a smith machine and I was able to complete 51 reps. When I mentioned to my trainer friend that I did it on a smith machine, he said he thought that doing it on a smith machine made it easier. So I did again the next day with a regular 80 lb bar, and eked out 52 reps. So much for the smith machine being easier theory....at least in my case....this time around!
Though I did NOT use a metronome as suggested, my reps were high quality reps, complete movements without bouncing, back arching, or momentum. I lightly touched my chest on the down portion of each rep, without bouncing the bar upward for the next rep. At the top of the movement, I extended my arms just shy of locking my elbows.
For my age ( 64 ), 52 reps gives me a score of 173. I find it hard to believe the the average 64 yr old is able to complete only 9 reps. I think my disabled 88 yr old dad with alzheimers could do more than that, but he would need someone to count the reps for him. I imagine that some of the young guys can knock out a hundred reps.
If you want to give it a go, please post your results.
AGE:
REPS:
SCORE:
Last edited by CosmicWizard; 08-06-2013 at 06:50 PM..
- Any lifting comp not based on body weight is ridiculous, and who ever created it shows a lack of knowledge regarding lifting.
- The smith machine is easier because, if anything, the bar is lighter, 15 - 35lbs (depending on model, it is rare not to have a non-counterweight smith, and a seriously doubt the YMCA would, most are counter weighted to 15lbs.) versus 45lbs average (assuming olympic). On the smith machine you are on a fixed movement unlike the bench. On the smith you are raising both sides up at the same speed. On the smith there is one axis versus three axis on the bench to account for. So despite you thinking the smith is not easier, it is, this is common knowledge among all people who lift, not even really debatable as even the bar is lighter than on the bench (assuming olympic standards).
- Arching the back is the form used for powerlifting, flat back is for body building (generally speaking).
CW, I agree this bench press test is flawed. A person's weight IMHO should be accounted for.
How much do you weigh? Good for you doing 52 clean reps at 64. This sort of test does not appeal to me at all. For my age group the average is 19 for 41 year olds. But for a female it's 16, 3 less!
I checked the 64 female age group and it's 8! I'm pretty sure most females cannot rep 80lbs for 8 times at 64.
@boxus....The bar weight of the smith machine I used was 20lbs. I added an additional 60 lbs to make it 80. The smith machine would certainly seem to be easier in that no side to side or front to back balancing is required. However, you gotta get into that very specific up and down motion, so any tendency to veer off it it creates friction that you don't have to deal with when using a regular bar. If one way or the other actually IS easier, the difference is rather slight. As stated, I got 51 on the smith machine, and 52 with a regular bar.
@Stockyman.....Females use a 35 lb bar in this test.
@Stockyman.....As stated, I am one of those skinny little 160 pounders, so the 80 bar was approx 50% of my bodyweight.
I think the competition I did a few years ago was better. This was in conjunction with a 5K race. After the 5K, you got on a scale to determine your weight. They put your exact body weight (within a pound or two) on a barbell. You bench pressed your body weight as many times as you could. They subtracted 20 seconds from your 5K time for each rep to determine the winner.
villageidiot1 wrote:I think the competition I did a few years ago was better. This was in conjunction with a 5K race. After the 5K, you got on a scale to determine your weight. They put your exact body weight (within a pound or two) on a barbell. You bench pressed your body weight as many times as you could. They subtracted 20 seconds from your 5K time for each rep to determine the winner.
Good idea! I think a better way to score this 80lb bench press test would be like this: bodyweight % X number of repetitions, plus your age added in. My score would be as follows (( .5 * 52 ) + 64) = 90
^^^^I've been thinking about this over the course of the day. I think I put too much emphasis on the age factor and not enough on the bodyweight issue, so I have a revised formula as follows:
(( # of reps + age ) x 80 lbs) / bodyweight = score
I'll have to have my wife try. She could probably bench 35lbs indefinitely LOL.
What about arm length? With a two meter wingspan, I'll push the barbell nearly twice as far as a short guy. That means I have to exert considerably more effort to keep time. Both in distance and dynamic power to move the bar faster.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
