Yates' Guide to a Better Back

Training
44

i’m gonna add to the slight highjack. Funny a back thread has turned into a chest thread. Anyway, am I reading these statements right? That there is an assumption that incline will not preferentially target the fibers of the pec that are closer to the clavical? (trying to avoid using “upper pec” verbage as I understand that there isn’t “multiple heads”).

It has been my understanding, and experience, that since the fibers do have different angles to them that the effective recruitment of them would be determined by the angle you are pressing. I certainly have felt distinct soreness in only the area just below the clavicle when only performing inclines. It WAS NOT an across the board soreness. If there isn’t anyway to “target” then why wasn’t it across the board? I could say the inverse for a flat/decline press.

If I hold my arm out and up at a 45° angle, contract my pec, and feel the upper portion and the lower portion, the upper portion is contracting harder than the lower. Continuing to hold the contraction, lowering my arm to a downward 45° angle, the inverse is true. The upper portion is looser while the lower portion is harder.

Maybe I’m just an idiot, but I can’t see how this doesn’t mean you can’t preferentially hit a certain area of you pec. Unless this isn’t what anybody is saying and I failed at comprehension.

45

Great picture btw. Slick read.

46

[quote]cueball wrote:
i’m gonna add to the slight highjack. Funny a back thread has turned into a chest thread. Anyway, am I reading these statements right? That there is an assumption that incline will not preferentially target the fibers of the pec that are closer to the clavical? (trying to avoid using “upper pec” verbage as I understand that there isn’t “multiple heads”).

It has been my understanding, and experience, that since the fibers do have different angles to them that the effective recruitment of them would be determined by the angle you are pressing. I certainly have felt distinct soreness in only the area just below the clavicle when only performing inclines. It WAS NOT an across the board soreness. If there isn’t anyway to “target” then why wasn’t it across the board? I could say the inverse for a flat/decline press.

If I hold my arm out and up at a 45° angle, contract my pec, and feel the upper portion and the lower portion, the upper portion is contracting harder than the lower. Continuing to hold the contraction, lowering my arm to a downward 45° angle, the inverse is true. The upper portion is looser while the lower portion is harder.

Maybe I’m just an idiot, but I can’t see how this doesn’t mean you can’t preferentially hit a certain area of you pec. Unless this isn’t what anybody is saying and I failed at comprehension.

[/quote]

I agree. I just did inclines a few days ago, and I did not do them the previous session. Upper chest had DOMS after the last session but not the other.

I’ve also noticed a decrease in upper chest mass after not being able to consistently perform incline bench presses.

This shouldn’t be questioned IMO. Incline movements clearly target your upper chest more so than other angles.

47

[quote]MeinHerzBrennt wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:
i’m gonna add to the slight highjack. Funny a back thread has turned into a chest thread. Anyway, am I reading these statements right? That there is an assumption that incline will not preferentially target the fibers of the pec that are closer to the clavical? (trying to avoid using “upper pec” verbage as I understand that there isn’t “multiple heads”).

It has been my understanding, and experience, that since the fibers do have different angles to them that the effective recruitment of them would be determined by the angle you are pressing. I certainly have felt distinct soreness in only the area just below the clavicle when only performing inclines. It WAS NOT an across the board soreness. If there isn’t anyway to “target” then why wasn’t it across the board? I could say the inverse for a flat/decline press.

If I hold my arm out and up at a 45�° angle, contract my pec, and feel the upper portion and the lower portion, the upper portion is contracting harder than the lower. Continuing to hold the contraction, lowering my arm to a downward 45�° angle, the inverse is true. The upper portion is looser while the lower portion is harder.

Maybe I’m just an idiot, but I can’t see how this doesn’t mean you can’t preferentially hit a certain area of you pec. Unless this isn’t what anybody is saying and I failed at comprehension.

[/quote]

I agree. I just did inclines a few days ago, and I did not do them the previous session. Upper chest had DOMS after the last session but not the other.

I’ve also noticed a decrease in upper chest mass after not being able to consistently perform incline bench presses.

This shouldn’t be questioned IMO. Incline movements clearly target your upper chest more so than other angles.[/quote]

It’s confusing to read that Dorian claims you can’t target a certain portion and that he feels decline is the best chest builder due to the greatest range of motion (paraphrased from dre1986’s post) when I distinctly remember seeing him rep out 405 on incline in (I believe it was) his Blood and Guts video.

In regards to buzza and his EMG post, just because more TOTAL fibers are recruited in a certain angle doesn’t, IMO, mean that all fibers are being recruited optimally. I just don’t see how you will get any significant recruitment of the upper fibers doing a decline press.

48

i think in my post i addressed both sides of it, sure there isn’t a way to just stimulate the upper but for yrs folks have been doing inclines to place more emphasis on that area.

as mentioned dorian did heavy inclines, EMG be damned, i think it goes back to developing motor patterns, that incline angle creates a certain squeeze, all things considered -angle of the press and it’s effects on stimulation and contraction- i think inclines do help and to not do incline in addition to other angles would be negligent.

genetics, insertion, shape of muscles relative to skeletal structure -some folks are going to just fill out up top better than others. all we can do is keep trying to add more quality muscle.

Back to back, unless i should start a Dorian Chest thread and we can discuss back approaches there.

I’m off to train my back tonight.

49

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]MeinHerzBrennt wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:
i’m gonna add to the slight highjack. Funny a back thread has turned into a chest thread. Anyway, am I reading these statements right? That there is an assumption that incline will not preferentially target the fibers of the pec that are closer to the clavical? (trying to avoid using “upper pec” verbage as I understand that there isn’t “multiple heads”).

It has been my understanding, and experience, that since the fibers do have different angles to them that the effective recruitment of them would be determined by the angle you are pressing. I certainly have felt distinct soreness in only the area just below the clavicle when only performing inclines. It WAS NOT an across the board soreness. If there isn’t anyway to “target” then why wasn’t it across the board? I could say the inverse for a flat/decline press.

If I hold my arm out and up at a 45�?�° angle, contract my pec, and feel the upper portion and the lower portion, the upper portion is contracting harder than the lower. Continuing to hold the contraction, lowering my arm to a downward 45�?�° angle, the inverse is true. The upper portion is looser while the lower portion is harder.

Maybe I’m just an idiot, but I can’t see how this doesn’t mean you can’t preferentially hit a certain area of you pec. Unless this isn’t what anybody is saying and I failed at comprehension.

[/quote]

I agree. I just did inclines a few days ago, and I did not do them the previous session. Upper chest had DOMS after the last session but not the other.

I’ve also noticed a decrease in upper chest mass after not being able to consistently perform incline bench presses.

This shouldn’t be questioned IMO. Incline movements clearly target your upper chest more so than other angles.[/quote]

It’s confusing to read that Dorian claims you can’t target a certain portion and that he feels decline is the best chest builder due to the greatest range of motion (paraphrased from dre1986’s post) when I distinctly remember seeing him rep out 405 on incline in (I believe it was) his Blood and Guts video.

In regards to buzza and his EMG post, just because more TOTAL fibers are recruited in a certain angle doesn’t, IMO, mean that all fibers are being recruited optimally. I just don’t see how you will get any significant recruitment of the upper fibers doing a decline press.[/quote]

I do understand your doubts about targeting just one “part” of the chest,
wanna just point out two things:

  • this the link to the university of queensland EMG study on chest (flat/incline/decline bench)

http://www.daveywaveyfitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Effects-of-Variations-of-the-Bench-Press-Exercise-on-the-EMG-Activity-of-Five-Shoulder-Muscles.pdf

-about DY doing heavy bb inclines for chest (and his statement that it is NOT possible to recruit just one part of muscle:for example) IF you watch carefully at DY grip (Blood and guts) you see that is a narrower than usuall grip,this could explain something (according to EMG study of U of Q)…

just my thoughts

50

[quote]buzza wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]MeinHerzBrennt wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:
i’m gonna add to the slight highjack. Funny a back thread has turned into a chest thread. Anyway, am I reading these statements right? That there is an assumption that incline will not preferentially target the fibers of the pec that are closer to the clavical? (trying to avoid using “upper pec” verbage as I understand that there isn’t “multiple heads”).

It has been my understanding, and experience, that since the fibers do have different angles to them that the effective recruitment of them would be determined by the angle you are pressing. I certainly have felt distinct soreness in only the area just below the clavicle when only performing inclines. It WAS NOT an across the board soreness. If there isn’t anyway to “target” then why wasn’t it across the board? I could say the inverse for a flat/decline press.

If I hold my arm out and up at a 45�??�??�??�?�° angle, contract my pec, and feel the upper portion and the lower portion, the upper portion is contracting harder than the lower. Continuing to hold the contraction, lowering my arm to a downward 45�??�??�??�?�° angle, the inverse is true. The upper portion is looser while the lower portion is harder.

Maybe I’m just an idiot, but I can’t see how this doesn’t mean you can’t preferentially hit a certain area of you pec. Unless this isn’t what anybody is saying and I failed at comprehension.

[/quote]

I agree. I just did inclines a few days ago, and I did not do them the previous session. Upper chest had DOMS after the last session but not the other.

I’ve also noticed a decrease in upper chest mass after not being able to consistently perform incline bench presses.

This shouldn’t be questioned IMO. Incline movements clearly target your upper chest more so than other angles.[/quote]

It’s confusing to read that Dorian claims you can’t target a certain portion and that he feels decline is the best chest builder due to the greatest range of motion (paraphrased from dre1986’s post) when I distinctly remember seeing him rep out 405 on incline in (I believe it was) his Blood and Guts video.

In regards to buzza and his EMG post, just because more TOTAL fibers are recruited in a certain angle doesn’t, IMO, mean that all fibers are being recruited optimally. I just don’t see how you will get any significant recruitment of the upper fibers doing a decline press.[/quote]

I do understand your doubts about targeting just one “part” of the chest,
wanna just point out two things:

  • this the link to the university of queensland EMG study on chest (flat/incline/decline bench)

http://www.daveywaveyfitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Effects-of-Variations-of-the-Bench-Press-Exercise-on-the-EMG-Activity-of-Five-Shoulder-Muscles.pdf

-about DY doing heavy bb inclines for chest (and his statement that it is NOT possible to recruit just one part of muscle:for example) IF you watch carefully at DY grip (Blood and guts) you see that is a narrower than usuall grip,this could explain something (according to EMG study of U of Q)…

just my thoughts
[/quote]

I think maybe you should read the study again, a little more carefully. Specifically the Results portion. That study reinforces everything I’ve talked about.

From “Results-Clavicular Head of the Pectoralis Major”
“Concerning inclination alone, a significant increase (p<0.05) in activity of the clavicular head of the pectoralis major was evident in the transition from decline to incline press (Figure 3).”

Also, from “Main Effects”
Trunk inclination. The significant reduction in activity of the clavicular head of the pectoralis major during the decline press versus the incline press is due to either a reduction in the flexion component at the shoulder joint or a reduced glenohumeral range of motion."

The hand spacing issue seems to be most relevant to the sternocostal head.

From “Results-Sternocostal Head of Pectoralis Major”:
“With narrow hand spacing, the activity during incline press was less than for the horizontal press (p<0.05). Generally, hand spacing had no effect on muscle activation except during incline press when the wide grip elicited greater activity (p<0.05).”

*Edited

51

winner winner chicken dinner.

as previously stated, hook up a little “Back to Future” gaget on someone and it’s likely to beep beep beep more often within the upper region of the chest when doing inclines.

my instincts are instinctual.

On a differnt note, did rope pullovers for my lats last night, wow…have to go pretty light on those, dug them though, right after i went to the pullover machine just to make sure i didn’t miss any fibers…smoked em’! Sweet.

thank you dorian, thank you stu.

52

One aspect everybody is overlooking is the People aspect. Just as people have different muscle bellies some have different percentages of muscle fibers at each insert as well as, different concentration when focusing on them. Someone who doesn’t have a great mind muscle connection for the upper chest would not see much difference then someone who is more genetically predisposed for the upper chest.

The other thing is aesthetic upper chest and anatomical upper chest. Working the inclines in certain ways can build the shoulder and chest in a way to make it look like the upper chest is bigger. Versus shoulder exercises and chest separately where the shoulders look more like boulders standing out on the chest.

53

[quote]cyruseven75 wrote:
winner winner chicken dinner.

as previously stated, hook up a little “Back to Future” gaget on someone and it’s likely to beep beep beep more often within the upper region of the chest when doing inclines.

my instincts are instinctual.

On a differnt note, did rope pullovers for my lats last night, wow…have to go pretty light on those, dug them though, right after i went to the pullover machine just to make sure i didn’t miss any fibers…smoked em’! Sweet.

thank you dorian, thank you stu.[/quote]

Lol, ah yes,… it seems quite a few people have latched onto that Winner-winner phrase lately :slight_smile:

The rope pullovers are just one of the best ways to start a back session IMO. You can adjust your body position to get more of a lat specific target, or the usual, midback area most gym rats would expect. I employed these immediately followed by narrow pullups/pulldowns from my 2009 to 2010 contest seasons, and my lats thickened up considerably.

S

54

[quote]cyruseven75 wrote:

[quote]dre1986 wrote:

[quote]hungry4more wrote:

[quote]dre1986 wrote:

[quote]jake_j_m wrote:
Thanks a ton for this article. Always love what Yates has to say. In fact, come to think of it, is there anything Yates has said which has even been disproved? Seems like he seems on point with pretty much everything exercise selection/form wise (not really talking about HIT etc.)[/quote]

First off let me say Yates is a legend.

Right, now the patriotic bits been done, to answer your questions, yes.

He ran a small seminar a while back whereby he was discussing chest training. In the seminar he proceeded to advice everyone that when training the chest it was impossible, anatomically, to target a single portion of the chest with any sort of effectivness. Ie, if you want to hit upper chest and you’re doing incline bench to do this, it wont work. He firmly believes that you cannot target a particular portion of the chest. He also claims that doing decline bench presses are the best exercise for chest, as they offer the most ROM.

I got caught hook, line and sinker when i saw the seminar until i got put straight by a couple of guys on here and looked a bit more into the anatomy and the fact that there are multiple heads to the pec blah blah etc…[/quote]

Not sure if serious…[/quote]

Yes, i am. [/quote]

jesus man…there are not “multiple heads” to the pec. Yates is correct you cannot truly target the heads hehehehe. major minor of the pec involves where they insert regarding angle and depth of the muscle, e.g. sitting under the surface of the skin…meaning…can i touch it?

feel my biceps, they are really pumped vs feel my subscapularis muscles (rotator cuff). see the difference?

Yates saying you cannot specificaly target the dual functioning muscles of the pecs is true, during pressing or fly movements the entire muscle is “in use.”

he’s simply saying the pecs are not like the triceps, or better yet, the individually target(able) heads of the deltoids.

Yates likes the bang for your buck you get from decline press.

BY ALL FUCKING MEANS THOUGH, training inclines does help the upper chest, think of an electromagnetic “Back to the Future” type gaget hooked up to your chest and a fancy computer monitor, add lights and beep beep beep things in your mind if it helps. the upper chest would/will likely light up and beep w/ more vigor during upper chest work…but the whole muscle is activated.

Silly, silly, silly…this is a good thread.[/quote]

Bit late now, but want to clarify my original post. When i refered to multiple heads it was a poor use of terminology. I was refering more to the different portions of the pec major, ie the clavicular, abdominal and sternocostal. Not that it matters, the thread has moved way past this now.

55

Thoughts on kayak rows vs straight rope pulldowns and full ROM close grip PD vs partial ROM?

56

nice post Delta

Gotta love DY.

57

I had read this before and started to apply a narrow grip to the majority of my back exercises and it has worked pretty good. It worked pretty good and I had a friend use this technique while getting ready for a show recently. Here is before using a narrow grip on most exercises Rx Muscle Contest Gallery and here is 6 months later while using narrow grip during his contest prep Rx Muscle Contest Gallery

58

Tomorrow is back day - my favorite day of the week!

Going to start with rope pulldowns and some bodyweight pullups, then onto my latest favorite exercise - underhand BB rows. I can get a good pump even without a bar just by doing the ROM.

Yates deadlifts then a machine or two followed by back extensions.

LET’S DO THIS SHIT

59

Thanks for posting this - I have been doing Pendlay rows and underhand BB rows lately but now I really want to try and work in some rope pullovers.

60

Wow, I really thought I was doing everything needed to build a bigger back. After reading this thread tomorrows back day will be seeing a couple changes. This just may be the thing I needed for new stimulation. Thanks!

61

@Stu - Love these rope pullovers, I have always done cable pullovers on a incline bench with a straight bar but these feel better to me.

62

[quote]flat6nut wrote:
Wow, I really thought I was doing everything needed to build a bigger back. After reading this thread tomorrows back day will be seeing a couple changes. This just may be the thing I needed for new stimulation. Thanks![/quote]

You’ve got a great back, Flat. And damn, you’re 45?

I guess old dogs CAN learn new tricks!

:wink:

63

[quote]View 1 wrote:
@Stu - Love these rope pullovers, I have always done cable pullovers on a incline bench with a straight bar but these feel better to me. [/quote]

I’ve done the bench variation myself (with DBs actually), but what I like so much about just standing at the high cable, is that you can really position your torso and hit the lower attachments well (an area I’ve really focused on the last 2 years to offset my waist). Also, with the rope, you have the option of keeping your hands together, or pulling them apart. My preference is to let them touch at the stretch point, but pull apart at the full contraction. Sort of the best of both worlds in terms of what I want out of the movement.

S