military press/shoulder press question

Jeff D · Post by **Jeff D** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 9:18 am

Hi, i was wondering why the Clavicular portion of the pecs is listed as a synergist on the standing military press, but not on the barbell shoulder press (seated)? Whats the difference?

Post by **Ironman** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 10:06 am

It is because when you are seated the bench is the synergist.

Jeff D · Post by **Jeff D** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 10:12 am

Ironman wrote:It is because when you are seated the bench is the synergist.

What does it mean to be a synergist? I thought it meant that muscle was an assistor in the move? Like biceps would be to barbell rows???

Im not understanding why the upper pecs would be worked just because you're standing and not sitting...when the movement appears to be the same.

Matt Z · Post by **Matt Z** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 11:20 am

I think they're worked in both, especially if you take a wide grip and lean backwards.

Jeff D · Post by **Jeff D** » Tue Jul 11, 2006 12:39 pm

Hmmm...so maybe its the leaning part thats the key. I can see from the little visuals of the exercises on this site the one thats standing has a little lean to him. Otherwise they seem exactly the same

Post by **Ironman** » Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:02 am

They both feel like 100% delts and triceps to me. I'm sure lots of muscles keep you standing and keep the weight ballanced when standing. I would think your back works more. You could lean back and get the chest into it, but that would probably be bad for your back. I would do a high incline bench. That way your back is supported and you get the mostly delts but a little clavicular and no sternal sort of effect you seem to be looking for.