Are you tired of your bench press being limited by the same old sticking point? We’ve all heard the phrase ‘a chain is only as strong as its weakest link’. But what causes it and more importantly, what can be done about this troublesome region?

What is the sticking point?

The sticking point is not necessarily where the bar stops or where it begins to slow down. Really, it is where the lift becomes most challenging. It can occur on successful and unsuccessful attempts. The exact spot can vary from rep to rep as much as it does between individuals.

What probably doesn’t cause the sticking point?

Self-proclaimed experts will be quick to offer easy to accept but unproven solutions – maybe it came from their five minutes of gym experience! Anecdotes and personal experience are invaluable and equally persuasive, but are not evidence. Maybe it was from something they read in an article, probably written by someone else equally clueless who read another article. If it’s on the internet, then it must be true! And worth mindlessly repeating. But what is quick to consume is not always easy to digest, and despite not fully understanding the complexities, these helpful souls are still keen to serve it up to everyone else. 

It is an easy sell. There is no shortage of lifters who want quick, salient and agreeable answers and these sorts would no doubt be the first in line to drink the Kool-Aid. I remain skeptical of quick fixes, unless they become long term answers. 

Contrary to popular belief, the sticking point isn’t where there is a muscular weakness, or an inability to produce maximal force against the bar. Neither is it caused by changing lever length, mechanical disadvantage or even confined to just one particular point. It may not even be where all these effects overlap. 

Do not assume a 1% improvement in power, strength or muscle size will equate to a 1% improvement in your bench press or that it would only take 1% more effort or work to accomplish. Even a big improvement in any or all of these factors may only produce negligible gains in your performance (if any). 

As a result, the typical strategies used to overcome this constantly moving target are largely ineffective. Knowing this, we can avoid wasting time on speed work, strengthening specific regions of the lift or building individual muscles.

Usually, around now someone will chime in and say ‘well it worked for me!’ Yes, it all works – in that you may have used these methods and seen progress, but that says very little. This stuff may win small battles, but not the war. Progress will not always be easy, but it can almost always be safely assumed. You’d have to be doing something pretty bad to be working out regularly for good few years without seeing any improvements. There are plenty of lifters with delusions of adequacy saying that they have gotten stronger – remember stronger is a far cry from strong and doesn’t mean ‘strong enough’.

Don’t deconstruct the lift too much. Pretending it can be seen as a series of isolated components could lead you to thinking a) they can be altered independently and b) changing one would lead to any meaningful change. Focusing on the minutiae before true limits have been found just condemns us to mediocre purgatory.

So what does cause the sticking point?

As a lifter strains their way through those difficult reps the muscles may be forced to grow, but at the same time the movement itself atrophies and weakens. You may end up with bigger, stronger muscles but a weaker and less skilled bench press, ‘Fine by me!’ you may say. But I believe that the sticking point is caused by, not overcome by, grinding out those more strenuous reps and much more finesse is needed.

It is only by training your bench press to be a smooth and continuous motion that you will ever develop and enhance the synchronous coordination of individual muscles and impulses. These beautiful, unwrinkled reps will reduce any delay in the muscles coordinating and working together to make bench pressing a more seamless effort.

This process is called synaptic facilitation and is a statement of ‘Hebbian theory’, which is neatly described as ’neurons wire together if they fire together’ – i.e. you learn to coordinate the muscles with the movement. The aim is not only to learn how to push as hard as possible or be able to simply ‘repeat on demand’. 

To take the bench press to the next level and to weights you have not yet lifted, you need to develop both the movement and the muscle, not just one or the other. The aim is to produce consistent and adaptable movement patterns whilst using enough load to challenge the muscles.

This means every rep should be performed with as much force as is needed, not simply as much as can be produced. Push too hard and that is all you learn how to do. How can you overcome the sticking point which is precisely where this is a problem? The force required will differ from rep to rep and vary at different points of each rep. To become a good bench presser it is not you vs the bar; you must learn how to ‘feel’ the bar during the bench and react to the feedback it provides. 

“Skilled motor activity comes from making optimal use of body levers, decreasing or increasing their length as occasion demands, and timing the muscular control to act on them with only an optimal amount of force”.

Just as the music will not change based on how you dance, you must also learn to almost press to the beat of the bar.

This will give the impression of a flat, uniform bar speed, although the internal effort required to produce this effect may be anything but.

It does mean some reps (and some portions of reps) will feel relatively easy and if you are new to this style of lifting, you will have to contend with stopping sets seemingly prematurely. You may be able to push the bar to lockout a couple more times, but not with the constant tempo required. We should accept that training can be tough, but we do not have to actively seek out discomfort. If you want this method to work, you must accept that usually you will decide when a set needs to end, not what the plan says and not when the body thinks.

‘It is in self-limitation that a master first shows himself’

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Results are produced not just by the quantity of reps or the quality of the reps, but by the quantity of the quality. Bad reps are not only wasted effort but negate the work leading up to it too.

Reps should flow

A single silky rep can’t make you strong and strength is built over the course of sets, so only one of these isn’t sufficient either. The work begins as soon as the bar has been received and from here the lifter is switched on and ‘benching’ until the bar gets re-racked. There should be no rest between reps. A set is made up from a series of repetitions. The reps should not pulse – there may be deliberate pauses at the chest, but the lockout should move seamlessly into the starting point of the next rep. This gives a sort of tidal quality to the movement rather than a jerky, stop-start style of lifting. 

That’s too easy

Here is the point that gets missed. Your reps will look comfortable and they may be less physically demanding, but this style of training is not easy. You are not getting out of ‘proper training’. The loads used must still challenge your muscles and build strength. We are just adding an extra element to the mix. You are also learning and developing your skill.


A comparison of successful and unsuccessful attempts in maximal bench pressing.

van den Tillaar R, Ettema G.

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009 Nov;41(11):2056-63. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181a8c360.

Understanding and Overcoming the Sticking Point in Resistance Exercise.

Kompf J, Arandjelović O.

Sports Med. 2016 Jun;46(6):751-62. doi: 10.1007/s40279-015-0460-2. Review.

A comparison of muscle activity in concentric and counter movement maximum bench press.

van den Tillaar R, Ettema G.

J Hum Kinet. 2013 Oct 8;38:63-71. doi: 10.2478/hukin-2013-0046. eCollection 2013.

Is the occurrence of the sticking region the result of diminishing potentiation in bench press?

Tillaar Rv, Saeterbakken AH, Ettema G.

J Sports Sci. 2012;30(6):591-9. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2012.658844. Epub 2012 Feb 3.

An analysis of full range of motion vs. partial range of motion training in the development of strength in untrained men.

Massey CD, Vincent J, Maneval M, Moore M, Johnson JT.

J Strength Cond Res. 2004 Aug;18(3):518-21.

Specificity of limited range of motion variable resistance training.

Graves JE, Pollock ML, Jones AE, Colvin AB, Leggett SH.

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1989 Feb;21(1):84-9.

Generality versus specificity: a comparison of dynamic and isometric measures of strength and speed-strength.

Baker D, Wilson G, Carlyon B.

Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1994;68(4):350-5.

Optimal effort investment for overcoming the weakest point: new insights from a computational model of neuromuscular adaptation.

Arandjelović O.

Eur J Appl Physiol. 2011 Aug;111(8):1715-23. doi: 10.1007/s00421-010-1814-y. Epub 2011 Jan 7.

Specificity of joint angle in isometric training.

Kitai TA, Sale DG.

Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1989;58(7):744-8.

An analysis of full range of motion vs. partial range of motion training in the development of strength in untrained men.

Massey CD, Vincent J, Maneval M, Moore M, Johnson JT.

J Strength Cond Res. 2004 Aug;18(3):518-21.

[O’Connell, A. L., & Gardner, E. B. Understanding the scientific bases of human movement. Baltimore: Williams & 48] .” 

A mathematical model of neuromuscular adaptation to resistance training and its application in a computer simulation of accommodating loads.

Arandjelović O.

Eur J Appl Physiol. 2010 Oct;110(3):523-38. doi: 10.1007/s00421-010-1526-3. Epub 2010 Jun 11.

Fatigue effects on bar kinematics during the bench press.

Duffey MJ, Challis JH.

J Strength Cond Res. 2007 May;21(2):556-60.

Contemporary training practices in elite British powerlifters: survey results from an international competition.

Swinton PA, Lloyd R, Agouris I, Stewart A.

J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Mar;23(2):380-4. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e31819424bd.

Importance of the propulsive phase in strength assessment.

Sanchez-Medina L, Perez CE, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ.

Int J Sports Med. 2010 Feb;31(2):123-9. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1242815. Epub 2009 Dec 17.

Reliability Analysis of Traditional and Ballistic Bench Press Exercises at Different Loads.

García-Ramos A, Padial P, García-Ramos M, Conde-Pipó J, Argüelles-Cienfuegos J, Štirn I, Feriche B.

J Hum Kinet. 2015 Oct 14;47:51-9. doi: 10.1515/hukin-2015-0061. eCollection 2015 Sep 29.

Validation of an optical encoder during free weight resistance movements and analysis of bench press sticking point power during fatigue.

Drinkwater EJ, Galna B, McKenna MJ, Hunt PH, Pyne DB.

J Strength Cond Res. 2007 May;21(2):510-7.

Resistance training for explosive and maximal strength: effects on early and late rate of force development.

Oliveira FB, Oliveira AS, Rizatto GF, Denadai BS.

J Sports Sci Med. 2013 Sep 1;12(3):402-8. eCollection 2013.

The effects of a 7-week heavy elastic band and weight chain program on upper-body strength and upper-body power in a sample of division 1-AA football players.

Ghigiarelli JJ, Nagle EF, Gross FL, Robertson RJ, Irrgang JJ, Myslinski T.

J Strength Cond Res. 2009 May;23(3):756-64. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181a2b8a2.

Effect of compensatory acceleration training in combination with accommodating resistance on upper body strength in collegiate athletes.

Jones MT.

Open Access J Sports Med. 2014 Aug 4;5:183-9. doi: 10.2147/OAJSM.S65877. eCollection 2014.

Effectiveness of Traditional Strength vs. Power Training on Muscle Strength, Power and Speed with Youth: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Behm DG, Young JD, Whitten JHD, Reid JC, Quigley PJ, Low J, Li Y, Lima CD, Hodgson DD, Chaouachi A, Prieske O, Granacher U.

Front Physiol. 2017 Jun 30;8:423. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00423. eCollection 2017. Review.

Relationship between muscle mass and muscle strength, and the impact of comorbidities: a population-based, cross-sectional study of older adults in the United States.

Chen L, Nelson DR, Zhao Y, Cui Z, Johnston JA.

BMC Geriatr. 2013 Jul 16;13:74. doi: 10.1186/1471-2318-13-74.

McLaughlin TN. The biomechanics of powerlifting: assistance exercise, developing the chest and lats. Powerlift USA. 1984;7(9):20–21.

The sticking region in three chest-press exercises with increasing degrees of freedom.

Tillaar RV, Sæterbakken A.

J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Nov;26(11):2962-9. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182443430.

A biomechanical analysis of the sticking region in the bench press.

Elliott BC, Wilson GJ, Kerr GK.

Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1989 Aug;21(4):450-62.

The “sticking period” in a maximum bench press.

van den Tillaar R, Ettema G.

J Sports Sci. 2010 Mar;28(5):529-35. doi: 10.1080/02640411003628022.

The sticking region in three chest-press exercises with increasing degrees of freedom.

Tillaar RV, Sæterbakken A.

J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Nov;26(11):2962-9. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182443430.

Complex analysis of movement in evaluation of flat bench press performance.

Król H, Golas A, Sobota G.

Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2010;12(2):93-8.

The need for evidence in an anecdotal world.

Limb CJ.

Trends Amplif. 2011 Mar-Jun;15(1):3-4. doi: 10.1177/1084713811425751.

A comparison of force curve profiles between the bench press and ballistic bench throws.

Clark RA, Bryant AL, Humphries B.

J Strength Cond Res. 2008 Nov;22(6):1755-9. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181874735.

Hochmuth G. The Biomechanics of Sportive Movements. Berlin, Germany: Sportverlag, 1981.

Löwel, S. and Singer, W. (1992) Science 255 (published January 10, 1992) “Selection of Intrinsic Horizontal Connections in the Visual Cortex by Correlated Neuronal Activity”. United States: American Association for the Advancement of Science. pp. 209–212. ISSN 0036-8075.

Hebb, D.O. (1949). The Organization of Behavior. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Sakurai, S., & Ohtsuki, T. (2000). Muscle activity and accuracy of performance of the smash stroke in badminton with reference to skill and practice. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18, 901–914.