## 4 Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, no previous study has investigated force production during isometric elbow flexion in different positions (i.e., \(\mathrm{SiP}\) vs. \(\mathrm{StP}\)). In contrast, some studies have evaluated the influence of position on other movements [33; 34; 32]. [PERSON] et al. (2013) indicated in their research that the \(1\)\(\mathrm{RM}\) strength and lifting time were the same in \(\mathrm{SiP}\) compared with \(\mathrm{StP}\) when performing a barbell shoulder press [34]. In terms of force production between D + ND vs. \(\mathrm{BL}\), we found differences in peak force when comparing the \(\mathrm{SiP}\).D + ND gesture to the \(\mathrm{BL}\) gesture, regardless of whether it was in \(\mathrm{SiP}\) or \(\mathrm{StP}\). In \(\mathrm{SiP}\) movement, force production is higher because greater stability is achieved in execution facilitated by a better support base and a larger number of contact points [34]. In addition, force production in D + ND is higher than that in \(\mathrm{BL}\) due to the action of psychological, task-related, physiological, and neurophysiological factors [6]. On the other hand, when we compared the sum of D + ND in \(\mathrm{StP}\) with the \(\mathrm{BL}\) movements, we did not find any statistically significant differences. The main reason for this result is that having a smaller base of support than that in \(\mathrm{SiP}\) makes the force production somewhat lower than that in \(\mathrm{StP}\)[34] and equalizes the results to those obtained in the \(\mathrm{BL}\) movement. According to the results obtained after conducting this research, if we compare a gesture performed unilaterally (D or ND) with a gesture performed bilaterally (D + ND or \(\mathrm{BL}\)), regardless of the position (\(\mathrm{SiP}\) or \(\mathrm{SiP}\)), we observe that force production is always higher in gestures performed bilaterally than in gestures performed unilaterally. These results cannot be justified by any specific article because, to our knowledge, none of them make such a comparison. Despite this, we can, however, compare tables of results and figures from different articles, which seem to be in line with our results [6]. This finding is closely related to the conclusions obtained by [PERSON] et al. (2006) that \(\mathrm{BL}\) strength training generates greater strength gains than unilateral strength training [31]. Finally, regarding dominance, it was observed that among the unilateral movements when comparing D with ND (\(p=0.210\)), the results obtained agree with those previously published by [PERSON] et al. (2018) [21]. In that review, the authors concluded that there was no difference between elbow flexion with the D arm and elbow flexion with the ND arm (\(p=0.312\)). The present study was limited by the non-use of electromyographic control in both the lower limbs and the core area to control possible modifications to postural and core stability when modifying the type of movement. Although it was already justified by previous studies, the use of this tool could have provided more robust conclusions. Additionally, we note that the present results are limited to only healthy resistance-trained men; therefore, these results cannot necessarily be generalized to other populations. Future research should evaluate both BLD and the influence of position on the manifestation of strength in individuals in different population groups (sedentary, with some type of pathology, advanced age, etc.). Furthermore, the neuromuscular patterns of exercises with higher and lower stability requirements and intensities should be investigated. Finally, it would be interesting to investigate how core strength improvement affects BLD.