Showing posts with label deltoids. Show all posts
Showing posts with label deltoids. Show all posts

Sunday, October 23, 2016

EMG Study Can Tell Us Something About Using Dumbbells, Barbells and Machines During Chest & Triceps Workouts

The dumbbell bench press is a pec stretcher. Doesn't it already look like maximal pectoralis major activity?
No, a high EMG activity will not necessarily translate into improved long-term muscle or strength gains, but it can tell you a lot about the biomechanics of different exercises and/or, as in the latest study by de Araújo Farias et al. (2016), exercise equipment and order.

The true purpose of this study by scientists from Brazil and the US was to investigate muscle activation, total repetitions, and training volume for three bench press exercise modes, the smith machine (SMBP), barbell (BBP), and dumbbell (DBP) - all followed by a triceps extension (TE).
Want to try something very different? Try BFR and Hypoxia Training

BFR, Cortisol & GH Responses

BFR - Where are we now?

Hypoxia + HIIT = Win?

BFR for Injured Athletes

Strength ⇧ | Size ⇩ w/ BFR

Training & Living in Hypoxia
With nineteen trained men as subjects, the scientists had each study participant perform three testing protocols with 4 sets of bench presses (10RM) with dumbbells, barbells or smith machine being the primary exercises that were then followed up with triceps extensions and two minutes of rest.
Figure 1: EMG activity in pectoralis (left) and the anterior deltoids (right | de Araújo Farias. 2016).
Surface electromyographic (SEMG) activity was assessed for the pectoralis major (PM), anterior deltoid (AD), biceps brachii (BB), and triceps brachii (TB).
Figure 2: Bench press repetition performance and volume for each mode (de Araújo Farias. 2016).
The results of the scientists' EMG and total volume analyses indicat that (a) dumbbells elicit a significantly greater pectoralis major activity than barbells, that (b) the anterior deltoid (shoulder) activity peaks on the smith machine, and that (c) the triceps does the least while the biceps the most work when the bench press is done with dumbbells instead of smith machine or barbell.
ChestBicepsBackCoreLegsTricepsShoulders
Navigate the SuppVersity EMG Series - Click on the desired body part to see the optimal exercises.
Figure 3: Mean and standard deviation values for IEMG (a) bench press (pectoralis major activation) and (b) bench press (triceps brachii activation) with and without pre-exhaustion in Suares. 2016).
Why exactly, the triceps activity during the triceps extensions was still reduced after the dumbbell bench press is not clear, but one may argue that the higher EMG activity after barbell bench presses may be the consequence of pre-exhaustion, which has been shown to augment muscle activity in previous studies, already (Brennecke. 2009; Soares. 2016 - see Figure 2); this, obviously, implies that the muscle activity in the barbell trial was increased, which is different from the initially questioned assumption that using dumbbells despite (or rather due to) their low strain on the triceps yielded inferior results.

As previously pointed out, though, there is no way of using these results for reliable prediction about the long-term adaptational response to training with dumbbell, barbell and smith machine. If we go by the prognostic power of training volume, it should be the dumbbell with a total volume of 31.2 ± 3.2 reps (versus the BBP 27.8 ± 4.8) that builds the most muscle. In that, I will leave it up to you to decide whether it's a coincidence that the dumbbell bench press also produced the greatest EMG activity ... ;-)

What I can and still want to tell you, though is that using dumbbells had the added benefit of showing the least interference with the subsequent triceps extensions (total volume: BBP = 1204.4 ± 249.4 kg; DBP = 1216.8 ± 287.5kg SMBP = 1097.5 ± 193 kg) - an observation that appears logical, and still raises the question: what's more conducive for your gains? The pre-exhaustion of the triceps you get from barbell bench presses and the resulting increase in EMG activity, or the rest your triceps will get during dumbbell bench presses and the subsequently increased training volume during triceps extensions. Well, I can't tell, but based on previous studies, it would appear as if the increased activity and decreased volume would balance each other out and explain why previous research found conflicting results (Prestes. 2015).
The jury on "pre-exhaustion" is still out there. But there is evidence of its usefulness I've discussed in previous articles on suppversity.com | example
So what do I do? You remember the benefits of daily changing loads I discussed in June 2016? Well, what if you kept your body guessing on the type of equipment you use, as well? I would not necessarily recommend switching back and forth between barbells, dumbbells, and the smith machine within a single workout and/or from one workout to the next.

What may make sense, on the other hand, is using dumbbells for two, barbells for two weeks, each, and the (boring ;-) smith machine for another week in a 5-week cycle and thus making sure that you grasp the individual benefits of each of them and the added benefit of motivation and keeping the muscle guessing.

On a side note: The study confirms what many of you probably "felt" anyways. The "best" as in "most pectoralis specific way" of bench pressing is clearly the dumbbell, which - much in contrast to the barbell and smith machine - do not allow the pecs to rest while triceps and front delts take over and lift a sign. percentage of the weight | Comment on Facebook!
References:
  • Brennecke, Allan, et al. "Neuromuscular activity during bench press exercise performed with and without the pre exhaustion method." The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research 23.7 (2009): 1933-1940.
  • de Araújo Farias, D., et al. "Maximal strength performance and muscle activation for the bench press and triceps extension exercises adopting dumbbell, barbell and machine modalities over multiple sets." Journal of strength and conditioning research (2016).
  • Prestes, Jonato, et al. "Discussion of “The effects of pre-exhaustion, exercise order, and rest intervals in a full-body resistance training intervention”− Pre-exhaustion exercise and neuromuscular adaptations: an inefficient method?." Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism 40.8 (2015): 850-851.
  • Soares, Enrico Gori, et al. "Comparison between Pre-Exhaustion and Traditional Exercise Order on Muscle Activation and Performance in Trained Men." Journal of sports science & medicine 15.1 (2016): 111.

Friday, May 24, 2013

Dumbbell Chest & Shoulder Training Shoot Out: New EMG Data from Experienced and Novice Female Lifters

Does a woman's pectoralis react the same way to dumbbell bench, incline and shoulder presses as the one of their male training partners? Does it make a difference whether you are a novice or an advanced trainee? What about light vs. heavy weights - any effect on the activation patterns of pectoralis, delts, trapezius & co? Learn the answers to these & other questions in today's SuppVersity article (photo bodybuilding.com)
The SuppVersity EMG Series is still one of the the most popular article series, here at the SuppVersity and that despite the fact that I guess most of you will already know the results by heart. Therefore I am happy to present you some additional data from a recently conducted study from the Biodynamics and Human Performance Center at the Armstrong Atlantic State University in Abercorn. The study that was published in the Journal of Sports Medicine a couple of days ago is - according to the authors - the first to investigate, whether the previously observed differences in muscular activation patterns in response to modified trunk inclination angle on muscle activation using barbells and Smith machines in men would occur in women, as well.

Another distinctive feature of the experimental protocol, Joshua Luczak, Andy Bosak, and Bryan L. Riemann devised is the use of both experienced and novice trainees and the separate analysis of the eccentric and concentric potion of the dumbbell bench press, incline bench press and shoulder press.

Who? What? How?

The researchers recruited 24 healthy college-aged (mean age 22.5 years) recreational female athletes as subjects and divided them into two groups, twelve per group, based on their experience with upper body weight training.
"One group was identified as experienced resistance trained exercisers by regularly participating in upper body resistance exercise at least 1–3 times per week for the last six months. The second group was comprised of novice resistance trained females who did not regularly participate in upper body resistance training exercises but instead were physically active in cardiovascular exercise at least 1–3 times per week." (Lukczak. 2013)
Within the 2-way repeated measures design of the study the exercise protocols were administered in a
between-subjects counterbalanced order, to ...
"[...] measure muscle activity in the anterior deltoid, pectoralis major (clavicular and sternal portions), and upper trapezius muscles by way of surface  electromyography data collection during flat bench (0° trunk inclination), incline bench (45°), and shoulder (85°) presses and then compare the muscle activation data between the novice and experienced groups as well as between the different exercises during the concentric and eccentric phases." (Lukczak. 2013)
After being familiarized with the correct execution of the exercises, the participants completed one set of five repetitions of each of the exercises with pretty light (4.5 kg) dumbbells. The order of the exercises was completed according to the counterbalanced protocol that each subject was assigned. Initiation of each set of repetitions was self-initiated and three minutes of rest were given between sets.
Figure 1: Normalized EMG activity for all subjects (no inter-group differences measured) during the dumbbell bench, inlcine and shoulder press (Lukczak. 2013)
Due to the use of the light weights I had to normalize the EMG data on a per muscle base before plotting it in figure 1. What you are seeing here are thus not the absolute values, but the EMG activity expressed relative to the mean activation pattern for a given muscle group on the concentric / eccentric potion of the exercise.... hah? I guess, I better give you an example:
  • the absolute EMG value for the upper trapezius activity during the concentric phase of the bench, the incline and the shoulder press were 103.5, 374.0 and 1,164.7, respectively
It goes without saying that plotting these values would have made it very difficult to read the diagram, so I calculated the mean of these three values and plotted the ratio of the actually measured EMG value to this very mean - got it?

But didn't we know most of that already?

What we knew already: According to the study the SuppVersity EMG Series is based on, the best exercises for the pectoralis major using standard equipment are:
  1. BB Bench Press
  2. Cable Cross*
  3. DB Bench Press
  4. Pec Deck
  5. DB Flys
  6. DB Pullovers
* the cable cross exercise should be performed actually crossing one's arms low before your body (learn more)
Basically the way the data is displayed does not really change anything about what it's telling you and that's more or less what both previous studies and bro-science have told you as well:
"The results of this study largely confirm previous research related to performing these exercises with barbells. Specifically, the bench and incline presses produced the greatest activation for the two portions of the pectoralis major muscle, while the shoulder press elicited the greatest activation for the anterior deltoid and upper trapezius muscles." (Lukczak. 2013)
Moroever, the hypothesis that the activation patterns of novice and advanced trainees would differ was not confirmed. When the form is picture perfect and the weight light enough to keep this picture perfect form over the whole set, the activation patterns are identical. In that, it's actually important to point out that the same results have been observed in previous studies using different weights (in % of 1RM) for rookies and pros (Lagally. 2004; Schick. 2010) - so this is not a consequence of using "too little weight", guys ;-)

Ah, and lastly, the observed increased activation of the muscle during the concentric phase of pressing movements are likely related to the light weights, used in the study at hand, which did, as the scientists point out, not require "for as much stabilization of the weight during the descent" compared to what is required during the completion of the same exercise with higher weights.This hypothesis is supported by previous studies by Goodman et al. (2008) and Uribe et al. (2010), in which the subjects had to bench close to their 1RM or with still submaximal  but heavy weights and where no differences in the activation patterns between the eccentric and concentric phase were observed.



Bottom line: I am sorry to say that, but the study at hand does not really bring anything new to the table. You want more shoulder involvement? Increase the angle! ... ah, and don't forget that the eccentric potion of the exercise has it's merits as well - specifically, when you are using practically relevant loads in the 70% 1-RM range. Now get back to the gym and rock the weights!

References:
  • Goodman CA, Pearce AJ, Nicholes CJ, Gatt BM, Fairweather IH. No difference in 1RM strength and muscle activation during the barbell chest press on a stable and unstable surface. J Strength Cond Res. 2008 Jan;22(1):88-94.
  • Lagally KM, McCaw ST, Young GT, Medema HC, Thomas DQ. Ratings of perceived exertion and muscle activity during the bench press exercise in recreational and novice lifters. J Strength Cond Res. 2004 May;18(2):359-64.
  • Luczak L, Bosak A, Riemann BL. Shoulder Muscle Activation of Novice and Resistance Trained Women during Variations of Dumbbell Press Exercises. Journal of Sports Medicine. 2013; article ID 612650.
  • Schick EE, Coburn JW, Brown LE, Judelson DA, Khamoui AV, Tran TT, Uribe BP. A comparison of muscle activation between a Smith machine and free weight bench press. J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Mar;24(3):779-84.
  • Uribe BP, Coburn JW, Brown LE, Judelson DA, Khamoui AV, Nguyen D. Muscle activation when performing the chest press and shoulder press on a stable bench vs. a Swiss ball. J Strength Cond Res. 2010 Apr;24(4):1028-33.

Thursday, November 15, 2012

Shoulder Presses Ain't for Delts, Only! Standing, Seated w/ BB or DB, They Also Hammer the Core, Biceps & Triceps

Flex Wheeler doing BB presses in what vcertainly isn't the ideal position for the lower back - imagine him doing that standing *uhoh*
Don't worry, I am not going to repeat my SuppVersity Facebook news post on the activation of the rectus abdominis, the obliques and the lower back muscles many of you 'liked' on Facebook. I am rather going to expand on it by presenting the data from the unofficial follow-up (Saeterbakken. 2012). Before I do that, I will yet give you the usual preview of today's installment of the SuppVersity Science Round Up I am doing every Thursday (1PM EST, live!) with my friend Carl Lanore from Super Human Radio (in case you did not notice, the number of real scientists on the show has risen exponentially within the last weeks, so I highly recommend you download a couple of other podcasts as well).

SuppVersity Science Round Up - Preview

Just like today's blogpost the focus of today's Science Round Up is actually going to be on training and exercise and don't worry, we won't just be whimpering that people get way too less of it.
  • Twin study shows: We all age, but exercise determines the consequences on your health
  • Hormonally (over-)demanding plyometrics!?
  • HIIT, light intensity steady state and the thyroid gland
  • NSAIDs: Go or no go for an athlete interested to build muscle?
  • Glucose, insulin and their muscle building effects
  • Could your own sweat protect you from skin cancer?
  • Chinese medicine strikes again: P. Lobata stops liver fibrosis in its tracks
  • Non-reactive form of vitamin E could be gold standard for cancer therapy
By now you should know the procedure and will thus be aware that it is unrealistic to assume that Carl and I are going to pack all these, let alone any of the auxiliary items on my list, into one show. My best advise would be to tune in live at 1PM (or downlaod the show ~2h later from the sidebar link, here at the SuppVersity), listen and come back tomorrow, to read about the topics that did not make it into the show in the SuppVersity Science Round Up Seconds.

Back to where we came from: The shoulder press!

After the obligatory heads up on the potential topics of today's SuppVersity Science Round Up, let's now get back to the shoulder press. Even if you did miss the facebook post on how it activates the abs, the obliques and the lower back, the other day, you should remember from the SuppVersity EMG Series that different forms of the shoulder press (including behind the neck presses, which are not part of the study at hand) will yield differential activation patters in the musculature of the shoulder girdle.
ChestBicepsBackCoreLegsTricepsShoulders
Navigate the SuppVersity EMG Series - Click on the desired body part to see the optimal exercises.
In the follow up to their core activation study from last year, Saeterbakken and Fjmland did once again go one step further than Boeckh-Behrens & Buskies. Instead of measuring just the usual suspects, i.e. muscles you actually want to train when you do shoulder presses, the researchers expanded their existing data on the activation patters by measuring the activity of biceps and under both, seated and standing exercise conditions with a barbell or dumbbells as well as the 1-RM strength on the individual exercises.

With the auxiliary muscles, the body position, the loading modality (measured during sets of 5 reps at 80%)  and the maximal weight the participants were able to press in each of the four 1RM max attempts Saeterbakken and Fjmland's data on the shoulder presses, alone, is therefore about as extensive as Boeckh-Berhens' and Buskies' data on four or five totally different exercises. Plus their subjects, 22y old lifters with on average 5 years of training experience may be a better model for at least some of you.
Figure 1: Activity pattern of the deltoid and auxiliary muscles (* indicated p < 0.05; data based on Saeterbakken. 2012)
Let's get to the results, now. As the data if figure 1 goes to show you, there are a couple of statistically significant differences, which are in some cases (the asterisks on the lowest level, directly above the bar) related to the training equipment (i.e. dumbbell vs. barbell), in other cases, such as the activation of the posterior deltoid, for example due to doing the exercise standing vs. seated (asterisks about the lines connecting the respective bars denote p < 0.05).

For those who missed the original Facebook post on the first Saeterbakken study (Saeterbakken. 2011), here is a brief summary: Using electromyographic activity (EMG) of the superficial core muscles (i.e. rectus abdominis, external oblique and erector spinae) and comparing the data of seated, standing, bilateral and unilateral dumbbell shoulder presses the researchers found that their 15 healthy male study participants had the greatest core activitation, when they performed their five repetitions at 80% of one-repetition maximum... 
  • rectus abdominis (abs)
    - standing unilaterally
  • external oblique
    - standing unilaterally  
  • erector spinae (lower back) - standing unilaterally
For some of the muscles the different positioning does not really matter, but in each and every case the standing unilateral dumbbell press had a slight (if insignificant) edge on the rest of the exercises.
Just as in the unofficial prequel to this 2nd study by Saeterbakken and Fimland I discussed on Facebook earlier this week (see box to the right for a summary, if you don't want Facebook and the world to know the color of the boxer shorts you're wearing, today), the overall pattern that emerges from this very recent follow up study is that ...
"[...] the standing dumbbell press exercise, which was the exercise with the greatest stability requirement (standing + dumbbells), demonstrated the highest neuromuscular activity of the deltoid muscles." (Saeterbakken. 2012)
Now what's particularly intriguing to this result is that the superiority of the complex movements became obvious despite the fact that the subjects moved the least weight during this exercise. In the aforementioned study by Boeckh-Behrens & Buskies, for example, the exercises which allowed the greatest leverages, usually produced the highest muscular activity, as well.

How can we explain this difference?

Aside from the training status of the participants, the first thing that comes to mind is the rep range: While the subjects in the study at hand trained at a 5RM rep range (meaning they failed on rep 5), the sports students in the Boeckh-Behrens & Buskies study performed 10-12 reps and would thus necessarily have to use lighter weights. In conseuqence, every lbs more made a greater difference for the students, than for the 15 even-aged healthy men with an average of five years of strength training experience under their belts (they were no competitive powerlifters or o-lifters, though), who participated in the studies by Saeterbakken & Fjimland.

As far as the other parameter, the body position, was concerned the results are not as obvious as they were for the core muscles in the 2011 study by the same authors:
"Further, standing versus seated execution, and to some extent dumbbells versus barbell, both resulted in increased muscle activation of the deltoid muscles. Standing instead of seated presses raises the centre of the mass, and also provides a  smaller base of support as the contact points decreases from three to two, particularly when using a bench with a back-rest [comment: the back was set to 75°]. When using a pair of dumbbells instead of a barbell, the main difference is that the dumbbells must be controlled independently of each other. Hence, performing shoulder presses standing and with dumbbells should lead to greater instability." ( Saeterbakken. 2012)
Regardless of the intricate differences, though, the whole picture that emerges from the synopsis of both the 2011 and 2012 data Saeterbakken and Fjimland have collected is actually quite clear: Complex exercises and corresponding muscle activation patterns can make a very valuable tool in the arsenal of the experienced strength trainee.

A final word of caution and the real world difference you can expect

Are you looking for more shoulder exercises? Look no further read them up in the SuppVersity EMG Series and the respective part on the 'best' exercises for M. Deltoideus, M. Infraspinatus, Supraspinatus and Teres Minor (more...)
The lower back and the shoulders itself are however so liable to injury that even somebody with years of training experiences should start out with very light weights and see for 2 or 3 training sessions how his shoulders and lower back react. Against that background it does also appear questionable, whether it is wise to to include a heavily loaded variety (5-8RM) of the standing dumbbell shoulder press in the routine of any beginner or only slightly advanced trainee. The increased injury risk just is not worth it, because the complexity of the movement and the individual (often very) weak links will force a beginner to use very light weights. So light, in fact, that the original target muscle, which is obviously the shoulder, may not receive enough hammering, so that even in the fortunate case that they don't hurt themselves, beginners will probably see way better results with regular seated vs. standing dumbbell presses.
 
References:
  • Boeckh-Behrens WU, Buskies W. Fitness-Krafttraining. Rohwolt. 2010.
  • Saeterbakken AH, Fimland MS. Muscle activity of the core during bilateral, unilateral, seated and standing resistance exercise. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012 May;112(5):1671-8. Epub 2011 Aug 30.
  • Saeterbakken AH, Fimland MS. Effects of body position and loading modality on muscle activity and strength in shoulder presses. J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Oct 23.

Thursday, August 18, 2011

SuppVersity EMG Series - M. Deltoideus, M. Infraspinatus, Supraspinatus and Teres Minor: The Very Best Exercises for Broad Shoulders and Capped Delts

Image 1: The muscles of the deltoids (red) on the
front (left) and back (right) of the body and the
rotator cuff
(violett), the group of muscles
and tendons that stabilize the shoulder.
I don't know about you, but somehow I feel sad that this is already the last installment of the SuppVersity EMG Series. While it certainly was a hell lot of work to compile all the information, I am very pleased that (a few exceptions aside) you, the 'students' of the SuppVersity; appreciate and put into practice some of the information, I am putting out here. That being said, it is actually quite fitting that the series ends on a body part, even bodybuilders hardly ever stop fine-tuning: the complex musculature of the shoulder,
  • the anterior, lateral and posterior part of the m. deltoideus, also known as the pars clavicularis, which attaches to the clavicle, the pars acromialis attaching to the acromion and the pars spinalis that is directly attached to the spina scapulae,
  • the rotator cuffs, which comprise the m. infraspinatus, which arises from beneith the scapula at the fossa infraspinata scapulae and facilitates internal rotation, the m. supraspinatus, which is situated right above the former and is involved in the lateral adduction of the arm, and the m. teres minor, which is attached laterally to the scapula at the margo lateralis scapulae and figures in the abduction of the arm; the m subscapalaris, which completes this commonly overlooked muscular quartet attaches to the inner part of the scapula and facilitates internal rotation, abduction and adduction of the shoulder.
Of the two muscle groups the former, i.e. the "delts", is the one that will give your that broad-shouldered look, everyone is striving for, while the latter constitute a necessary yet commonly overlooked prerequisite to build it. Eventually the muscles of the rotator cuff provide the stability which is necessary to properly execute those front presses, lateral rises, reverse flys and all the other common exercises for round, muscular shoulders! It is vitally important to keep this synergism in mind, when designing a routine - and if the risk of shoulder injuries due to underdeveloped stabilizer muscles does not shock you, maybe the information that a strong foundation in form of properly trained rotator cuff muscles will help you with "increasing your bench", so that the next time a bro asks you "Hey bro, how much ya bench!" you may well impress him with a new personal best (in case that is what you're training for ;-)
ChestBicepsBackCoreLegsTricepsShoulders
Navigate the SuppVersity EMG Series - Click on the desired body part to see the optimal exercises.
But enough of the mourning and mocking, let's get some meat on your shoulders, or rather, let's get to the meat and potatoes of shoulder training - the SuppVersity proudly presents: The most effective exercises, as measured by electromyography (10 male resistance-trained subjects, mean age 22y, mean body-fat 13%; data from Boeckh-Behrens & Buskies. 2000) for building massive delts and a powerful rotator cuff...

I. The Best Exercises for the Anterior, Lateral and Posterior Parts of the Delts

Image 2: Turns out the injury-prone neck
press is the most versatile delt-exercise as
it hits both the anterior, as well as the lateral
part of the delts about as hard
(image from sportkrachtfitness.nl)
I probably will never get tired of telling you that complete isolation, as in "petri-dish" experiments, is nothing you will be able to achieve in the gym - not even if you use one of those fancy new devices, the name of which would suggest that they would facilitate exactly that ;-) In the real world (and, believe it or not, the gym is part of it) your muscles will always work synergistically to move the weight from point A to point B. It is however very well possible to influence which muscle group and even which individual muscle takes the lion's share of the workload by selecting the right exercises and / or manipulating the way you perform a given exercise.Always remember this, when you take a look at the following list of the "most effective exercises" (correctly I should say the exercises with the highest EMG activity).

    for the lateral part...

  1. Lateral raise - DB, internal rotation (view)
  2. Reverse fly - machine, ext. rotation
  3. Neck press - BB, seated
    for the posterior part...

  1. Reverse fly - machine, int. rotation (view)
  2. Reverse fly - DB, internal rotation
    for the anterior part...

  1. Military press - BB, seated
  2. Neck press - BB, seated
  3. Lateral raise - DB, internal rotation
  4. Bench press - BB
  5. Front raise - DB, external rotation

* BB = barbell; DB = dumbbell

Figure 1: EMG activity of anterior, lateral and posterior part of the m. deltoideus during selected exercises relative to the military press (anterior), the DB lateral raise (lateral) and the DB reverse fly (posterior); calculated based on data from  from Boeckh-Behrens & Buskies (2000)
The EMG data in figure 1 confirms what trainers all over the world have been propagating for decades. A pressing movement for the front delt (anterior part), some lateral raises for the lateral part and a few reverse flys for the posterior delts is all it really takes to built "cannon-ball delts". Another common wisdom, which says that front raises were among the most effective exercises for the anterior deltoid, on the other hand, gets busted. Even done with your ams externally rotated, the DB front raise is 41% less effective than the "gold standard", the barbell military press. A possible reason (and major drawback of all EMG data) for the "inferior" activation of front delt by the DB front raise are significantly lighter loads compared to the BB military press. If the subjects had used 120lbs for the military press, but only 25pounds per DB for front raises, for example, the muscle activity per pound of weight for the DB front raise would in fact have been roughly tree times higher - 929µV/120lbs=7.71 for the BB military press vs. 548µV/25lbs=21.92 for the DB front raise. That being said it stands out of question that, within a volume program, there certainly is a place for an isolation exercise such as the DB front raise, even if it is not a classic "mass building" exercise, the outstanding characteristic of which is maximal muscular overload, after all.
Image 3: With its naturally arched
movement, the DB shoulder press
may be a viable, if not preferable
alternative to the BB military and
BB neck press (image everkineti.com)
Exercise tip: While the respective EMG values for dumbbell exercises have not been measured in the study, it is very likely that exercises such as the DB overhead press provide an extra stimulus over their barbell equivalent that is related to the more natural arch of motion, where you get a good stretch at the bottom and can really squeeze the muscles in the contracted position, when the dumbbells approach (they do not cling!) each other at the top of the movement.

That being said, the DB overhead press is also a viable alternative for the BB neck press as the position center of gravity is more in line with your head throughout the movement. It may thus be assumed that the the stimulus shifts away from the front and towards the lateral deltoid, as it is the case with the neck vs. the military press.
Form, I cannot emphasize that enough, becomes more and more important with lighter weights, and as your shoulder is peculiarly prone to injury and generally much weaker than your legs, for example, it is not only advisable, but simply a matter of physical limitations to use lighter weights. That being said, the previously cited example of the DB front raise shows that lighter weights do not equal inferior muscle stimulation, as - done properly - respective isolation exercises generate way more torque per pound of weight you are handling than their mass building counterparts.
Figure 2: Reduction in EMG activity of selected variants of the DB lateral raise and the reverse fly relative to lateral raises with external rotation, DB raises with 90° arm/torso angle and internally rotated machine reverse flys; calculated based on data from  from Boeckh-Behrens & Buskies (2000)
Form does yet not only determine overall intensity, the way you are doing your shoulder exercises also has a profound influence on the degree to which the three parts of your deltoids are activated. Doing DB lateral raises internally rotated, for example, reduced the activation of the lateral part of your delts by -16%, using a neutral, i.e. a hammer grip (thumbs facing up) was associated with a -12% reduction in EMG activity. In the case of the DB reverse fly the use of an arm to torso angle of 45°, instead of 90°, reduces the load on the lateral part of the deltoids by -29% and gripping the handles of the reverse fly machine from the out- instead of the inside (external vs. internal rotation of the arm), takes away -20% of the stimulus (cf. figure 2).

Dessicating the Lateral Raise

If you make good use of what you have learned at the end of the previous paragraph, you can improve the load on the target muscle, while handling lighter weights and decreasing your risk of injury - I know, the big weights are more impressive, but after all what's the use of using the biggest weights, if you are not making progress, both strength- and size-wise, because of improper form? I mean, it is one thing to cheat on the last 1-2 reps of a set in order to squeeze out the very last drops of gasoline from your muscular tanks, it is however something completely different to compromise form, just to be "the guy who lifts the heavy weights". There is hardly any movement, where this becomes so obvious as with the DB lateral raise. If you do not do it yourself, you certainly know someone who grabs the 50lbs dumbbells, holds them vertically before his groin and then powers, or I should say, "rips" them up to his sides, lets them bang down and starts all over again until, after he eventually racked the weights, he grabs his shoulder or wrist in agony, yet not without the pride of having used a heavier weight than the guy next to him.
Note: The following analysis is based on a VERY simple mechanical model and does not consider factors such as increased load per square area of muscle fiber in the stretched position, effects of static or complete contraction etc... Notwithstanding, if you like the following part of this write-up, please spread the word (via Facebook, Twitter, etc.) and let me know (in the comment section or the SuppVersity Facebook page) that it would be worth the effort to do similar and even more depth analysis in the future!
You already know from the previous paragraphs and the EMG data in figure 2, that it is imperative to keep the arms externally rotated, i.e. to pretend you were trying to pour out an imaginary liquid from the dumbbell at the top of the movement, if you do not want to lose 16% of the muscle tension in the first place... Well, but what about the aforementioned guy who does not even get the chance to think about pouring out any liquid other than that in his shaker bottle, when he is performing his ballistic weight exercises? Which of his mistakes, do you think compromises the effectiveness of the lateral raise most?
  1. Flexing the elbow too much (often up to 90°) and thus reducing the lever? Or,
  2. Not raising the dumbbells to shoulder height, i.e. keeping the angle between arm and torso <<90° (often <<70°)
Well, from a physical perspective, which always provides a very selective and (over-)simplified view of reality, the answer would be "1. flexing the elbow too much". Surprised?
Figure 3: Effects of arm/torso angle and elbow flexion on torque during the DB lateral raise
(data calculated based on a very basic physical model)
While raising the dumbbells to 75°, takes away less than 5% of the torque (cf. figure 3), flexing the elbow to 90° reduces the torque on the lateral parts of your deltaoids have to overcome by a whopping -50%! Think about that, when you look at the guy with the 50lbs dumbbells the next time you are at the gym. Chances are that you, with your 30lbs DBs are way stronger than he is, as long as you do not give in and reduce your elbow flexion more than those 15% that relieve some of the stress on the joint, but only minimally reduce the torque on the muscle.

II. The Best Exercises for the Rotator Cuff

I hope that, over all that you have learned about delt-training by now, you did not forget, what I mentioned at the very beginning of this installment of the SuppVersity EMG Series: Rotator cuff training equals active injury prevention. While most trainees do not even feel them working, the muscles of the rotator cuff are crucial for the stability of the most flexible and volatile joint in your whole body, your shoulder. It is imperative for these largely overlooked and often undertrained muscles to hold the ligaments and bones of your shoulder in position so that your other muscles such as the deltoids or the pectoralis can do their job. To build a strong m. infraspinatus, m. supraspinatus and m. teres minor, is thus also the foundation of building a "bigger bench" to impress your bros at the gym. If you don't believe that, you may listen to strength coach Charles Poliquin, who has the following anecdote to tell:
One of my pro hockey players, Jim McKenzie, improved his 14-inch, close-grip bench by 51 pounds in 12 weeks, from 280 to 331 pounds, by focusing on rotator cuff strength.
And though I doubt the universality of Poliquin's "research", as far as the non-athletic regular gym-goer is concerned, it is certainly noteworthy that his years of experience in working with athletes have told him that "rotator cuff strength should be about 9.8 percent of what you can lift in the bench press [for] pain free bench pressing". That means, if you are benching 200lbs you should not wonder if your shoulder begins to hurt, if you are not able to use 20lbs dumbbells when doing external rotations lying on a mat on the floor ...
Figure 4: EMG activity of the major muscles of the rotator cuff during selected exercises relative to the DB external rotations done lying sideways on the floor; calculated based on data from  from Boeckh-Behrens & Buskies (2000)
A pros pos external rotations as the data in figure 4 goes to show this is by far the best isolation exercise for the muscles of the rotator cuff. In essence, it does not really matter if you want to do them with a dumbbell standing, lying on the floor or with an elbow on a bench, or if you prefer doing them using a cable pulley. The differences are negligible, in view of the huge difference improper exercise execution would make - so you better do an exercise you like with light weights and feel the muscle working than an exercise that has been shown in study XYZ to be the most effective with a weight you can hardly handle and where you do not feel the target muscles working. This, by the way applies to the static doorway pushback, which is basically an "inverted pectoral stretch" where you push with the backside of your arm (angle arms/torso 90°) backwards against an immobile object like a doorway, as well. If you do not feel like this static exercise is working for you chose a different one.
Image 4: DB lateral raise with
arms 30° horiz. adducted for the
m. supraspinatus (Jobe. 1986)
Isolating the m. supraspinatus with lateral raises: According to Jobe & Moynes (1986) the DB lateral raises performed with a 30° horizontal adduction of the arms fully isolates the m. supraspinatus if you rotate your shoulders so that your palms are facing the floor (the good old "emptying the bottle" technique). Doing 1-2 sets of lateral raises this way certainly is a time efficient way of incorporating a strengthening exercise for the upper part of the rotator cuff into your routine. You will have to use much lighter weights than on regular lateral raises, though.

III. Conclusion- Three Plus One Equals Injury-Free Strength and Size

An imperative prerequisite for building impressive deltoids and thus broad, rounded shoulders is a stable foundation in form of strong rotator cuff muscles, if you neglect the latter you will either plateau or - even worse - injure yourself sooner or later. That being said, especially your front delts are hit very hard during pretty much all pressing movements for chest and triceps, it is thus neither really necessary nor advisable to do more than one (if any) "isolation" exercise in the form of a compound movement like the barbell or dumbbell military press, a movement, which by the way will also greatly help to bring up "the upper chest" many bodybuilders feel they are lacking. If you complement this basic "mass builder" with some lateral raises and reverse flys, the one and only thing that is really left to do on "delt day" is a rotator cuff exercise of your choice and you are ready for some highly anabolic rest and recovery ;-)

An EMG-Optimized Routine

Image 5: You can rotate in some
Arnold Presses, if you feel you did
not hammer your front delts heavy
enough with the military press
There is of course a myriad of ways of combining the individual exercises, my personal recommendation for overall deltoid development and rotator cuff strength (based on EMG measures) would yet be as follows...
  1. Military Press - BB or DB seated, 6-8 reps
  2. Lateral raise - DB elbow-flexion <15°(!), 10-12 reps
  3. Reverse fly - machine or DB, internal rotation, 10-12 reps
  4. External DB rotations - lying on the floor, 12-15 reps
You may notice that I do not make volume (i.e. set) recommendations. This is due to the fact that I found that everyone has to find what works best for him / her in terms of optimal volume, training frequency and body part splits. This may also change over time / according to lifestyle factors / nutrition and supplementation.