bulldoze said:
Me and Bugsy have disagreed on this subject in the past on this forum, he seems to think biceps play the more important role, but I believe the back muscles contribute more to the movement.
Yes we have had this before, bulldoze, and the very fact that you're mentioning it again means youâve learned nothing about basic anatomy in the meantime.
The reason why Iâve decided to address your tiresome post is because you seem determined to give people false information on the (erroneous) basis of "if-I-believe-it,-it must-be-true". The sad thing is that people might tend to think you have a point if you say it often enough. So let's clear up this point and then you can go back to your doubtful and ill-informed training methods and continue to wonder why you're making no progress.
The muscles involved in pull-ups are the biceps and, to a very much lesser extent, the latissmus dorsi muscles (the long muscles along the edges of the back which give the upper torso its V-shape). The biceps pull the upper arms to the forearms (and thus to the bar), while the lats (working on a VERY short-lever basis) pull the upper arms against the body. These muscles are so strong and have such a lever-advantage that theyâll easily bear ten times the stress put on the biceps.
The only time when the latissmus dorsi (and you didnât actually stipulate which âback musclesâ, bulldoze) play a dominant part in pull-ups is wide-grip, palms-away pull-ups, which are expressly carried out to develop those very muscles.
But if youâre so convinced that âback musclesâ play the predominant part in ordinary pull-ups, hereâs a question for you, bulldoze: just how many people do you know who reach/ed their maximum in ordinary (British Army style) pull-ups and then complained that it was because their âback musclesâ gave/had given out?
Having said that, Iâd certainly like to hear opinions from others who know much more about training and anatomy than bulldoze seems to.
MsG