Chin-up technique and bigger lats (question to Slizz)

Now, I've been doing chins for some time. I can do about 10-15 good deadhang chins without any leg movement, and about 4x6-7 sets with a minute of rest. However, i don't really feel it in my back at all, which I believe is quite a common problem. My biceps get really tired, but my back doesn't. I haven't really been concerned with this, but i have noticed that my lats haven't grown at all, really.

Today, I tried something my friend suggested. He said that in order to get the lats really work, one must have a tightly arched back the whole time, and the shoulders musn't move forward at all. All in all it should be like a chin up where you lean away from the bar. Anyway, I tried this technique, and I couldn't quite get my chest to the bar - perhaps it was a lack of mobility, or strength, or both, but I stopped with the bar level with my mouth. That's where in order to get higher, I had to roll the shoulders to the front. i did 3x6 of these, with about one second of contraction at the top and a second in the bottom with the scapulae shrugged. It felt much different in my back, and strangely enough my triceps felt rather pumped.

So, should I do this version, even though I can't do full ROM reps, or should I stick to the old version? My goal for now is bigger lats, 'cause they are very small in comparison to the front of my body. My plan is to progress from 3x5 to 5x10 and then add weight.

Any other tips on proper lat activation in chins is also greatly appreciated. And anyone can answer, I just pointed the question to Slizz 'cause he feels like the guru of the board on getting bigger muscles )

You could try doing sternum pullups I suppose. That will certainly engage the back more.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_art ... _exercises

However, hypertrophy will generally also require a caloric surplus in addition to training.

My advice, don't get too carried away with "muscle building". If you want to "look good for the ladies", your best bet is to be "fit" (meaning lower bodyfat). Look at some of the movie stars (brad pitt, matthew mc-whatever). They were rail thin but looked muscular. That's what the ladies dig (if that is what you are going for).

Uzeeh said:

Any other tips on proper lat activation in chins is also greatly appreciated.

Don't try to pull yourself to the bar. Instead, hold onto the bar and try to push your elbows behind you. Run through this mentally on every rep.

However, hypertrophy will generally also require a caloric surplus in addition to training.

Already am running a small surplus (about 200kcal a day).

My advice, don't get too carried away with "muscle building". If you want to "look good for the ladies", your best bet is to be "fit" (meaning lower bodyfat). Look at some of the movie stars (brad pitt, matthew mc-whatever). They were rail thin but looked muscular. That's what the ladies dig (if that is what you are going for).

I already am very fit. I'm 187cm and 74kg, with very low bodyfat (veiny, a very clear sixpack, very good definition everywhere), but that just isn't enough for me. As I said, my lats are quite poor compared to my other muscles, and so my back looks quite thin. It isn't that ladies don't like it, but I dont

Oh, and I just can't do those sternum chins. I can't touch my sternum to the bar

Don't try to pull yourself to the bar. Instead, hold onto the bar and try to push your elbows behind you. Run through this mentally on every rep.

This is exactly what the technique I mentioned accomplished, so I suppose it's good I've heard about this in the past, and applied it to rows with success. I've been lazy with rows nowadays, though, but I still keep IR's twice a week.

Hello Guys!

I don't want to interrupt your topic but I have a question related to pullups and I want to ask it briefly if you don't mind.

So it goes like this:

-Can I use the XRings for this lat dominant pull up type or not?

I want to use slizzardman's method to increase the numbers but I dont want it to be biceps dominant.

So what do you think? Rings to chest. Pull with lats? is it possible?

norbeex3

Have a good look at someone doing a slow muscle up on rings. You can't get the transition wthout getting rings to chest. So hell yes it is possible and a prerequisite for more advanced rings training.

The key, as myself and a friend have found, is to intentionally activate the lats and use them. This is done by pushing the elbows and shoulders DOWN strongly throughout the whole pull up. Not necessarily down and BACK, but straight down through the hips. You should feel a long cord of muscle pop into a strong contraction, that's the lower part of your lats that attaches to the hips. From there, depending on the angle of your body lean, you can focus on more specific areas of the lats if that is your goal, but don't let the back posture change. If you have a strong arch in the entire spine you will be working the middle and higher portion of the lats much more than the long part that attaches to the hips. If you have a strong arch with the exception of the upper thoracic spine you will be causing yourself problems in the long run... especially if you are trying to develop the strength to perform full lay Yewkis or front pulls. The arch, even if the upper thoracic is arched, will work against you in this respect. It is, however, much easier to work the traps this way if done properly.

The part of the back that needs to arch is the upper thoracic spine. Lower thoracic and lumbar can, and probably should, stay in neutral-ish position. Arching the upper thoracic spine will, by nature of the movement, pull the neck backwards. You don't have to look up, but if you do don't look too far. You want the neck moving backwards, not the head. Tilting the head itself tends to push the neck FORWARD, which will round the upper thoracic spine and alter scapular movement, which has a long list of dysfunctional patterns that can be adopted by accident this way.

The protraction of the shoulders is not strictly necessary for a muscle up, but you have to be MONSTROUSLY strong in the shoulders and triceps to do a muscle up without it. That is the eventual goal (to me), but it will be a long time in coming.

With the rows, you want to think of the elbows going back behind you WHILE being pressed towards the hips. That will give you the best lat contraction.

r2473 said:

You could try doing sternum pullups I suppose. That will certainly engage the back more.

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_art ... _exercises

However, hypertrophy will generally also require a caloric surplus in addition to training.

My advice, don't get too carried away with "muscle building". If you want to "look good for the ladies", your best bet is to be "fit" (meaning lower bodyfat). Look at some of the movie stars (brad pitt, matthew mc-whatever). They were rail thin but looked muscular. That's what the ladies dig (if that is what you are going for).

By and large, this is sort of true. What ladies 'dig' the most is confidence. Being lean enough to look muscular is great, but skinny and ripped is not the MOST attractive look to most women.

The vast majority that I have known prefer someone more my build. There is something inherently sexy about a man who can clearly handle himself (and them) when the situation is appropriate. I don't pretend to understand this, and I don't pay attention myself, but my ex, my friends and my current girlfriend have all pointed something out that I have apparently missed: When I walk into a room, nearly every woman notices me. Apparently I get checked out all the time. I don't notice because I don't care, I have my woman and that is all I want. It is, however, kind of cool to know I have that effect. 8)

The camera makes those movie stars LOOK much bigger than they are. The camera makes ME look like something of a monster at times, but in person I look exactly like what they fantasize about: lean, strong, and well proportioned. Big, but not TOO big. Whatever THAT means.

Almost without fail, if you pack on muscle you will be more attractive to the fairer ***. It obviously works best when you stay lean while doing so.

However, if you're thinking about women just learn how to be your own man. That's the most attractive thing you can do. Become comfortable enough with yourself and your value to genuinely laugh off your mistakes, enjoy other peoples' successes and say what is on your mind without trying to intentionally influence people towards your beliefs. Learn when to comment, when to just smile, when to let them keep talking and when to change the subject. Be comfortable with yourself and proud of who you are and you will be attractive. No amount of muscle will give you that.

Of course, all of that requires that you mold yourself into that sort of person by building habits that support the kind of lifestyle that builds this kind of confidence, which is a very nice segue into Coach's recent post about habits:

http://www.gymnasticbodies.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=7634#p68231

Here's what Ido has to say on the pull-up and lat recruitment: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_i ... 2849274036

That's pretty much exactly what I am trying to explain. It is key to understand that the lats have a strong downward pull, as nearly all of the fibers have a downward orientation relative to the insertion on the upper arm. If you aren't reaching your elbows towards your hips while you pull them to the sides you won't get complete activation. This does make a huge difference in difficulty and muscular development. Whatever words make sense to you, use those, but try to do the pull ups as strictly as you can. It's very difficult.

I'm trying to clear everything about this in my head but It's not the easiest thing.

Could you answer my question please?

Can I activate my lats on the XR's the same way as I could on a bar?

Because it seems harder since the rings can move away from me.

Since I have only the XR's now this is my only option but I want to develop my lats the proper way. What do you think?

Of course. Whether you need to learn on a bar first is something you will have to figure out for yourself though!

This conversation raises a question or thought.

It seems that there are two variations of pull up. The one i believe is being described here which is sometimes called the bodybuilders pull up. Taking the photo Ido used to illustrate this -

which is essentially an arched pull up with the elbows flaring into the waist

vs

What Pavel calls the fighters pull up which is completed in a hollow with elbows rolling more backwards, illustrated here -

to quote Pavel on this -

The pullup is the logical choice of an exercise to strengthen your lats. If you ask

an experienced bodybuilder how to work the latissimus most thoroughly he

will tell you to look up, force your chest open, and draw your shoulder blades

together on the top of the pullup. This may be okay for bodybuilders, but what

does this have to do with fighting? You move in the ring in what gymnasts call

“the hollow position” the scapulae flared and the chest caved in. This is the

way you should finish your pullups. Look straight ahead and hunch over the

bar. Touch your neck or upper chest to the bar to make sure there is no

question that you have completed the rep.

For whatever reason i've been working from this variation more of late mostly due to working the hollow position, and also the feeling that this gets me more over the bar, and sets up the muscle up better.

I'd love to know others opinion on this though. Ido certainly seems to imply that the fighter style will lead to shoulder issues..

A correctly performed MU will have only a very slight to no hollow (depending upon the next skill in the strength sequence); beginners will however begin their MU work being overly hollow due to a lack of strength.

The shoulder issues with the second variation will arise from the fact that it is relatively ineffective in terms of both mobilizing and strengthening the scaps through a full ROM. In terms of scapular strength the first variation as demonstrated by Franco Columbo is far superior. Another choice is to focus on one arm chin work which also hits the scaps quite strongly.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach Sommer said:

A correctly performed MU will have only a very slight to no hollow (depending upon the next skill in the strength sequence); beginners will however begin their MU work being overly hollow due to a lack of strength.

The shoulder issues with the second variation will arise from the fact that it is relatively ineffective in terms of both mobilizing and strengthening the scaps through a full ROM. In terms of scapular strength the first variation as demonstrated by Franco Columbo is far superior. Another choice is to focus on one arm chin work which also hits the scaps quite strongly.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

I'm glad this came up, my thinking has been wrong on this.

Coach Sommer said:

A correctly performed MU will have only a very slight to no hollow (depending upon the next skill in the strength sequence); beginners will however begin their MU work being overly hollow due to a lack of strength.

The shoulder issues with the second variation will arise from the fact that it is relatively ineffective in terms of both mobilizing and strengthening the scaps through a full ROM. In terms of scapular strength the first variation as demonstrated by Franco Columbo is far superior. Another choice is to focus on one arm chin work which also hits the scaps quite strongly.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Coach, I agree for both statements presented in your text, and yes first choice is better for scap. strength, but slight to no hollow MU is almost different move then arch back chest up. It is very hard to do MU with arched back directly under the bar and the elbows on the side.The transition in this case must go in oposite direction. Is this correct way to do then, or go slight to no hollow from the start bottom ?

Coach Sommer said:

... A correctly performed MU will have only a very slight to no hollow ...

Good question; however no mention made of an arched MU. Cole had expressed an initial opinion that perhaps the extremely hollow pullups would be more beneficial to his MU training based on a flawed essay he had read. The end product for a MU will in fact bear far more resemblance to a bent-arm iron cross than to the extreme hollow body pullup.

The arched pull-ups and the MU are very different movements that I use for different purposes. I consider the arched pull-ups to be primarily for scapular health and mobility. If you want to train strength for the muscle up, I recommend rope climbs and OAC.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

Thank you Coach for your answer, now its clear.

Yes indeed, thank you! This is what has led me to work on the no lean muscle up (which I suppose is a truly neutral to very slight hollow, as Coach described) and oh my GOD it is way too hard to do with my full bodyweight... I'm working on the basic musculature with rings-width cables and it's tough with half my bodyweight. Absolutely enormous difference in difficulty.

Interestingly enough, to me anyways, this harder version also requires MUCH stronger lats. I have seen significant lat growth as I have worked on this variation, as it requires conscious recruitment of the lats. I only use the arched pull ups for scapular strength, as Coach Sommer mentioned using them for, and with the combination I have seen a marked improvement in my bodyweight muscle up performance, both in form and ease of execution. I hope that in 2 or 3 years I can show off a pretty nice neutral position, no lean muscle up but it's probably at least 2 years away. I had no idea how much harder this was until I started training it.

This has turned into another one of the eye opening posts for me. I certainly appreciate everyone's comments and the curiosity that led to this illuminating discussion. I always find it helpful to understand movements in terms of their various range of expression which the two types of pull-ups mentioned span, but in this case i believe that led me astray.

Coach Sommer said:

The arched pull-ups and the MU are very different movements that I use for different purposes. I consider the arched pull-ups to be primarily for scapular health and mobility. If you want to train strength for the muscle up, I recommend rope climbs and OAC.

Coach,

I understand why the arched back pull-up can be a very valuable exercise for shoulder health, but I have two questions.

Coach Sommer said:

The shoulder issues with the second variation will arise from the fact that it is relatively ineffective in terms of both mobilizing and strengthening the scaps through a full ROM. In terms of scapular strength the first variation as demonstrated by Franco Columbo is far superior. Another choice is to focus on one arm chin work which also hits the scaps quite strongly.

I can't possibly imagine a rope climb or an OAC done without a rounded back (to some extent, that is), and I believe that this is the exercise's nature. Is this a cause of concern in terms of shoulder health?

The other question is, are arched back rows (preferably done on rings for extended ROM) a decent substitute for arched back pull-ups regarding scap mobilization and strengthening for someone who can't do them yet?

... I can't possibly imagine a rope climb or an OAC done without a rounded back (to some extent, that is), and I believe that this is the exercise's nature. Is this a cause of concern in terms of shoulder health? ...

No, this is no cause for concern as long as the appropriate scapular mobility exercises are performed to maintain proper muscle balance within the shoulde girdle.

... The other question is, are arched back rows (preferably done on rings for extended ROM) a decent substitute for arched back pull-ups regarding scap mobilization and strengthening for someone who can't do them yet? ...

Yes.

Yours in Fitness,

Coach Sommer

xiLkn0EbXwQ

Arnold said that for wider lats you have to do at first 30 wide grip chins (aka pullups) per training session (no matter how many sets) until you can do them in two series. Then go to 50 reps per session. When you can do them in 2-3 sets it's time to do weighted pullups. "When you can do 10 chins with 50 pounds attached to your body, you will not recognize your lat development or your shoulder width"