I did find a thread that briefly touched on this in the context of a conversation about incline presses and upper chest, and rather than necro that one (which really wasnt about decline's specifically) I thought it would make a potentially beneficial stand alone.
Im in the middle of a rather indepth and recently stalemated debate over the decline press with my lifting partner. I personally believe at this point the decline is the most effective at working the pectorals as a WHOLE and should be the "base" exercise of our chest routine. I didn't always feel this way as for years I subscribed to the "upper - incline, middle -flat, lower - decline" school simply because that was the most spoken of information.
What has made me change my thoughts is reading yet another article contradicting this 3 way specific type of theory. I have read others in the past but they were the minority, so I simply disregarded them. This most recent article just happened to explain it in a way that finally made me think. I then simply did the following action, that has me, personally, thinking in the current mindframe.
I extended both arms out directly in front of me zombie style. Then I concentrated on flexing my chest. Next, i elevated my arms to an angle such as that used in an incline press and flexed again. Lastly I lowered them to the angle of a decline. The difference was dramatic to say the least. In the "decline" position i was able to achieve a significantly superior contraction of the majority of the pecs. I then took the theory to the gym and experimented with some dumbells to evaluate the feeling in the context of the entirity of the range of motion. When thinking about it with a newly opened mind I noticed the same dramatic difference throughout the exercise. For years I simply ignored the exercise and when I did do it, I admittedly never gave it the appropriate amount of attention to give it a fair and objective chance.
A scientific study undoubtedly conclusive? HELL NO...I REALIZE THAT...LOL....but try it...see how it feels. At the very least it opened my mind to the idea that there is something to be said about the decline. Often we hear of how people can decline more than they can in the other positions. If it is as much an isolation exercise as the incline, it should be equally challenging to use heavier weight unless just maybe, more pec fibers are in fact being activated.
I often wonder how much of what we do, and what we SWEAR to be "true" is perhaps bias based on what we have heard and readily accepted simply because it is so prevalent.
Now, before somebody else says it...allow me to inject my disclaimer...I realize we are all individuals with unique builds and construction. The context of this question and conversation is "generally speaking" and merely to perhaps entertain a healthy exchange.
What are your thoughts?
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by thabeastmaster
Don't be a 'Bro'..... Believe nothing....Question everything 
