I am a big believer in the standing overhead press as the premiere heavy "press" exercise for developing functional strength, and most importantly for myself, grappling and MMA strength. I believe that it should be the focus of an athletes training in terms of upper body movements while benching has a smaller, auxiliary role to play. But before I go into that a quick note: this is NOT a military press anti is NOT a push press or a layback press like you saw before it was taken out of the olympics. It is a Tommy Suggs/Bill Starr style slight lean back very slight knee bend standing overhead press.
Anyway...
Why I believe the OHP needs to be top upper-body exercise for mma athletes and functional strength trainees:
1.It uses more muscles than a bench press does, and has a far greater ROM hence it's description as "the upperbody squat" and as mark rippetoe and other strength guru's say...the more muscles an exercise uses the better the exercise is.
2.The kinetic chain's energy is originating from the ground in the OHP just as it is when we are clinching, throwing strikes, or pushing someone up against the cage, where in the Bench press the kinetic energy is coming from the chest/bench. This leads to inferior application of strength than in athletes well versed in the OHP.
3. The OHP begins with a concentric or "positive" phase not the eccentric or "negative" phase seen in the bench or the squat. This forces the lifter to hoist the weight without the aid of the stretch reflex, a reality we see exclusively in the world of mma, where one hardly ever, perhaps never, has a use of the stretch reflex in their movements (one does not for example drop someone on top of them in order to bench them back off in side control)
4. Greater CNS activation through the requirement of stabilizing the heavy weight while standing.
5. The direction of force found in the OHP is much closer to those found in MMA then the bench press. In many ways the mma athletes exerts force in the same position as an offensive lineman in football, standing up, pushing against a resisting object at an angle most likely far from 90 degrees like found in the bench.
Now this is not to say that the Bench is the best choice for EVERYONE. Though lagging behind the OHP in athletic development is better at general strength development as a greater amount of weight can be lifted due to the aforementioned ROM and kinetic chain differences. SO focus on it if PL or other purely strength based goals are most important ( its valid to lift simply for the ability to lift more weight lol) but focus on the OHP if your goal is better sports performance.
Interesting. Thanks.
I've always been a fan of the OHP and regularly rotate it in to my routines.
Don'tpanic42,
I agree that the OHP is a great exercise, however, I disagree that the OHP is somehow a functional movement for MMA or any (non weight-lifting) sport.
There is no skill transfer from a weight room exercise to a totally different athletic skill done in competition. The principle of specificity clearly states that for a positive transfer to occur, exactness in a number of factors must be present. The fact is, no weight room exercise exactly replicates any sport skill (other than the sports of weight-lifting and power-lifting). That is why one should practice his / her sport skills separately, then generally improve total-body, weight room strength.
TAKU
What TAKU said . . . and really, when do you 'ever' project force directly overhead in MMA?
It's a find upper body exercise but benching is easier on the shoulders if you do it correctly. I've seen a few coaches write that they 'rarely' have high-level athletes over-head press because it's not worth the risk to shoulder health.
It is true that a degree of specificity is needed to transfer over to athletic performance and it will not improve your SKILL that much is true. But I contest the implication that weight room work has little carryover benefit as a result. If that were true the only athletes in the weight room would be powerlifters or olympic lifters. Also I never said train these things, skills and strength/athletic development during the same session. I simply made the case for the OHP doing a better job of transferring the work you put in there to specific movements and tasks in MMA and that this is beneficial to the athlete's performance. A point I still stand by, and here is why;
1.Greater functional strength is an asset in implementing the skills that a balanced mma training program should have ALREADY produced relative to skill level and the amount of time spent in the weight room is not enough (if programmed correctly) to hinder the time needed to develop as a mixed martial artist. If skill is the same (or close) as it often is at the amateur or lower level pro scene then the person with greater strength and/or explosiveness will prevail. Therefore, weight training, imo is a worthwhile pursuit if what you are doing in there will help you express your strength in all possible planes.
2. It is true that a high degree of specificity is needed but the amount is dependent on your degree of athletic development or your experience and skill in the technical side of mma. What GSP needs to do (a lot of sparring, specific technical work) is different than what is most time effective for the amateur or lower level pro seeking to maximize results needs to do. The former still need to sort out their proper body composition and weight and develop more athletically and thus can benefit greatly from multi-joint compound lifts for strength and power.
Also doing weighted exercises that are too close to the movement you are seeking to improve are counter productive to skill development aka the movement doesn't have to, and in fact SHOULDN'T look like the exact skill. For example punching with weighted gloves or light dumbbells often leads to poor form and injury where as using a rotational medicine ball toss, diagonal chop or something like that might increase the relative power of the athletes hook, technique being equal. Striking is a tricker thing to improve in the weight room but the clinch and grappling examples are easier and more proven.
As long as the kinetic chain is similar and originating in the same way and place as the stimuli in sport a benefit will be incurred from the weight work, especially for beginning and intermediate athletes who have yet to reach their true potential for athletic development.
I would have to totally disagree with the premise in #1 that at the ammy or even lower level pro scene that skill levels are usually close. If at ANY level of MMA it could be surmised that a great difference in relative skill levels exist, it is at those levels.
It is at the upper level pros that the difference in skill levels falls to within 1 percent of each other, overall.
"If that were true the only athletes in the weight room would be powerlifters or olympic lifters."
Did Taku claim athletes should avoid the weight room?
No, he did not.
He just correctly said that "sport-specific" training is garbage unless your sport is powerlifting or weightlifting.
I don't think the OP is claiming the OHP is better because it's sport specific, more because it builds strength in a similar set of muscles to those used in striking.
From an anecdotal perspective, i've found improving strength in overhead pressing (for me generally handstand press ups) gave the most obvious improvements in upper body strength of any exercise.
This is kind of an interesting arguement to try and make. I agree with Taku that no movement you perform in the weight room will mimic the movements you perform in sport (and I think you acknowledged that). I set up my workouts in an upper/lower split, so I try to incorporate vertical and horizontal push and pulls as the meat of my workout. So for me, I dont necessarily need to pick between the two. They both have their advantages and I dont really know if you can say that one is better than the other. Just a few thoughts:
1. In the article it claims that the overhead press is better than a push press, which I dont necessarily believe is true. I find when I perform push presses I use more weight and I move the bar with more speed. You can make the arguement that the leg drive makes the exercise easier, but I would argue that any movement that gets the entire body working together to acheive the same goal is better for athletic performance. Most movements in sport require the use of both upper and lower body musculature in conjunction to produce the most force.
2. In point #2 you dont seem to acknowledge the fact that the bench uses (or at least should) utilize leg drive which also connects the kinetic chain to the ground. I personally create a lot of force against the ground when benching.
3. In point #4 you state that the OHP is more CNS intensive than the bench press... Is this true? Just because you are standing it doesnt mean that you are necessarily fatiguing your CNS more. You could argue that since you are moving more weight with the bench press that it would be more CNS intensive. I think the effect on your CNS has more to do with how you are lifting that what movement you are making. More core and stability intensive, yes.
how about the push press?
compared to a strict OHP
just wondering everyones thoughts
I just like it because it feels more natural to me
OldManMinerva -
how about the push press?
compared to a strict OHP
in my opinion any overhead lifting is good
I like to do 1 arm clean and presses
Whats the difference between push press and normal OHP?
DEADLIFT .......... the cure for everything
do you get the bounce from a full body bounce?
how does the OHP compare to the military press? obviously the OHP engages more muscle groups, since you're standing, but i'm wondering if the military press is significantly less useful
(i really enjoy military pressing but dont really do the OHP)
Thought OHP and military press were the same? 
cheggers, i was under the impression that the military press is done sitting down, whereas the OHP is done standing
i could be wrong
turducken - a military press is always done standing and with a barbell. an overhead press is just a generic phrase for an exercise where you press something overhead. an overhead press could be seated or standing, with barbells, dumbells, bands, machine, etc.
thats how i always understood it
I had thought a military press is traditionally done standing with feet together and an OHP is done with feet at shoulder width.