[quote]tareila wrote:
Any of you ever try the john meadows stretchers? I do them after 5-6 sets of pull ups and it feels ridiculous by the end of a long set with 1-second pauses on both ends of every rep… Stretchers - YouTube
I love some form of stretcher or a reverse Pulldown after I get a solid pump in my back workout.
[quote]KingKai25 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Well, I won’t be balancing any barbells on my crotch.
My lats grew well without it.
I suppose penis pressure may help some people with lat development though. Maybe even increase testosterone due to fear of threat to the balls.
For fear of the fan boy brigade…I guess I should add “jk”.
That seems like a lot of set up for not much return…[/quote]
Yeah, I definitely would prefer weighted chins to these. Rack chins just seem like one step along the lines of progression to full chins. Why add weight to rack chins if you can do full chins?[/quote]
I could do full chins and pull ups. I did 4 sets of pull ups followed by 4 sets of chin ups each to failure before I went down the basement and tried the rack chins. I was looking for a temporary replacement for the lat pull downs for the next month and I’ve heard good things about rack chins on this and the DC site in the past. I’m just now able to train my back semi-normally after having my L4-L5 disc removed so my options are limited.
Thanks for the input.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]JBL5 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Diddy Ryder wrote:
When you guys mention lots of volume for a big back, how much is “lots”?[/quote]
I do much more volume than I would advocate anyone who is not used to doing. For back though for a normal person I would say 4 exercise with different grips and angles with 3-5 sets an exercise would be a solid back workout. [/quote]
Do you think deads thrown in at the end (like Meadows recommends) is worthwhile?[/quote]
That’s actualky how I ended mine today. I’d rather do them at the end when your lats are fried. And really focus on flexing them hard. I actually supersetted wide grip pulldowns and then quick moved and did a set of Deads with a hard flex on each rep. Ouch. [/quote]
Thanks, never tried it before and have been thinking about it. Guess I will have to set aside the ego and be prepared to drop the poundage as I will be deadlifting baby weight after 15-20 sets of back work.
[quote]JBL5 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]JBL5 wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Diddy Ryder wrote:
When you guys mention lots of volume for a big back, how much is “lots”?[/quote]
I do much more volume than I would advocate anyone who is not used to doing. For back though for a normal person I would say 4 exercise with different grips and angles with 3-5 sets an exercise would be a solid back workout. [/quote]
Do you think deads thrown in at the end (like Meadows recommends) is worthwhile?[/quote]
That’s actualky how I ended mine today. I’d rather do them at the end when your lats are fried. And really focus on flexing them hard. I actually supersetted wide grip pulldowns and then quick moved and did a set of Deads with a hard flex on each rep. Ouch. [/quote]
Thanks, never tried it before and have been thinking about it. Guess I will have to set aside the ego and be prepared to drop the poundage as I will be deadlifting baby weight after 15-20 sets of back work.[/quote]
The feel is much different at the end of the workout. I love it especially when focusing on flexing your lats hard
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Waittz wrote:
Ive noticed alot of talk about chins/pulldowns but, and this is strictly annecdotal, I have seen lots of guys who do tons of chins/pulldowns etc but do not have wide backs. Seen guys who do damage on the deadlift who do not have wide backs. NEVER met anybody who can row some serious weight in any fashion with a narrow or small back.
Just an observation, anyone else notice this? [/quote]
For me personally chins are not a mass builder neither are Deads at least how I used to do them I am experimenting messing with from and supersets and location in my workout with these now. Mainly because I like them and I want them to work.
Edit so yes I completely agree [/quote]
Your edit made me lol. I used to focus my backworks on DL and Chins with rows secondary. This past year if I do let’s say 5 back exercises 3-4 are rowing version with 1-2 being DL/Chins and the results were pretty substantial. Again all annecdotal but worth mentioning.
[quote]Waittz wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Waittz wrote:
Ive noticed alot of talk about chins/pulldowns but, and this is strictly annecdotal, I have seen lots of guys who do tons of chins/pulldowns etc but do not have wide backs. Seen guys who do damage on the deadlift who do not have wide backs. NEVER met anybody who can row some serious weight in any fashion with a narrow or small back.
Just an observation, anyone else notice this? [/quote]
For me personally chins are not a mass builder neither are Deads at least how I used to do them I am experimenting messing with from and supersets and location in my workout with these now. Mainly because I like them and I want them to work.
Edit so yes I completely agree [/quote]
Your edit made me lol. I used to focus my backworks on DL and Chins with rows secondary. This past year if I do let’s say 5 back exercises 3-4 are rowing version with 1-2 being DL/Chins and the results were pretty substantial. Again all annecdotal but worth mentioning. [/quote]
Rows and pulldowns are my staples now as well and changing form in chins and moving DLs to the end when my low back can take is my new experiment. Focusing on rows and pulldowns spurred much better growth exactly how you said. Now I am hoping with these new tweaks growth will be even better. Too early to say anything yet.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Exactly…but I see things like this alot lately…some people seem to be looking for that “new thing” so badly they will warp good exercises until they are even less effective.
[/quote]
I get what you’re saying but that’s not the case here. You remember Cephalic_Carnage, he’s always given solid advice especially with exercise selection. Could you fault me for trying a back exercise that he recommended?
For those who focus on rows, which variants do you seem to get the most from? Bent rows? Dead-stop/pendlay rows? One-arm DB Rows? T-bar Rows? Meadows Rows?
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I have never tried rack chins before, and though I know a lot of folks in the DC crowd are big on them, I can’t understand mechnically what would make them a better (or even different) option than weighted chins. Maybe they would be better trained unilaterally? That at least seems like something that would be harder to replicate without the rack set up.[/quote]
There are a couple of things that are different:
less stabilization required due to legs being supported (minor I know)
Decreases the ability to “cheat” (kipping etc)
due to your legs being higher then your hips it allows you to round your lower back at the bottom of the movement (the lat stretch is way better on these)
Most importantly (imo) they allow you to alter the line of pull by letting you change your torso angle (between more vertical and more horizontal) allowing you to find the angle that you feel best stimulates your lats.
They are not just a progression onto normal pull ups.
[quote]sam_sneed wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Exactly…but I see things like this alot lately…some people seem to be looking for that “new thing” so badly they will warp good exercises until they are even less effective.
[/quote]
I get what you’re saying but that’s not the case here. You remember Cephalic_Carnage, he’s always given solid advice especially with exercise selection. Could you fault me for trying a back exercise that he recommended? [/quote]
I am not faulting you at all. I don’t know much aboiut how you train.
It was more a cautionary statement to newer trainers.
Every personal trainer out there wants to make a name for themselves somehow…and since you can’t exactly keep coming up with some brand new eating strategy, sometimes it just comes down to making up some new movement so your name can get attached to it.
To a real bodybuilder, this can set back progress by making it seem that all of these different tactics are even necessary.
They are not.
Doggcrap gets respect since he was just posting on message boards in the 90’s…however, just because he does something doesn’t mean it is the latest and greatest.
Do what works, but avoid getting caught up in “that next new thing”. You will make more progress in the long run.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
For those who focus on rows, which variants do you seem to get the most from? Bent rows? Dead-stop/pendlay rows? One-arm DB Rows? T-bar Rows? Meadows Rows? [/quote]
T-Bar rows, barbell rows and now HS rows single handed. I can kill those on the hs machine and really squeeze that muscle.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
For those who focus on rows, which variants do you seem to get the most from? Bent rows? Dead-stop/pendlay rows? One-arm DB Rows? T-bar Rows? Meadows Rows? [/quote]
DB rows, meadows rows, chest supported row neutral and overhand, single arm cable rows. I also consider stretches as a row
I would love to use a Hs machine or two but no gym near me has any
[quote]LoRez wrote:
For those who focus on rows, which variants do you seem to get the most from? Bent rows? Dead-stop/pendlay rows? One-arm DB Rows? T-bar Rows? Meadows Rows? [/quote]
I went for years doing nothing but DB rows as my rowing movement with great results. I’m also in love with meadows rows with a handle these days. They promote a ridiculous stretch. I also don’t mind old school t-bar rows, but I feel like this is more for middle back thickness than width. Never liked barbell rows.
[quote]Iron_Made wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I have never tried rack chins before, and though I know a lot of folks in the DC crowd are big on them, I can’t understand mechnically what would make them a better (or even different) option than weighted chins. Maybe they would be better trained unilaterally? That at least seems like something that would be harder to replicate without the rack set up.[/quote]
There are a couple of things that are different:
less stabilization required due to legs being supported (minor I know)
Decreases the ability to “cheat” (kipping etc)
due to your legs being higher then your hips it allows you to round your lower back at the bottom of the movement (the lat stretch is way better on these)
Most importantly (imo) they allow you to alter the line of pull by letting you change your torso angle (between more vertical and more horizontal) allowing you to find the angle that you feel best stimulates your lats.
They are not just a progression onto normal pull ups.[/quote]
Those last 2 points are interesting. Something I’ll have to consider.
For those that do dumbbell rows, whats the consensus on the optimum method? Deadstart db rows, regular style or kroc rows (high weight/lots of reps/bit of body english).
[quote]JBL5 wrote:
For those that do dumbbell rows, whats the consensus on the optimum method? Deadstart db rows, regular style or kroc rows (high weight/lots of reps/bit of body english).[/quote]
All of them 
Those 2 threads have some good info for those more interested in rack chins
[quote]JBL5 wrote:
For those that do dumbbell rows, whats the consensus on the optimum method? Deadstart db rows, regular style or kroc rows (high weight/lots of reps/bit of body english).[/quote]
Maybe a mix?
^^^Exactly. The idea of “optimum method” is ultimately destructive for progress. Use everything you can.
I would do DB rows deadstop until they got too heavy, and then move on to a more traditional row, and then onto one with more body english. Just use the method that hits your lats.
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]JBL5 wrote:
For those that do dumbbell rows, whats the consensus on the optimum method? Deadstart db rows, regular style or kroc rows (high weight/lots of reps/bit of body english).[/quote]
Maybe a mix?[/quote]
Yeah that’s what I had been thinking. I know Meadows recommends deadstart rows but then Matt Kroc also has a freaky looking back, so a mix seems like the way to go.