TPT
10-26-2009, 10:16 AM
most of us use some variation in latpulldowns during our back workouts. changing our bodymechanics we assume different muscles are stressed in different ways. what might happen during variations of lat pulldowns?
sperndei et al. (2009) studied the emg activity of three lat pulldown exercises: behind the neck, front of the neck, and a v-bar. the v-bar was a atypical bar that allowed greater range of motion than the behind the neck pull because it was shaped as a v. emg activation of pec major, lat dorsi, posterior delt, and biceps brachii were measured.
pecs showed significantly greater activation for the front lat pulls than the others. this is interesting because we do not think of front lat pulls as a chest exercise. but, lets talk this through. in the front lat pull our shoulders are in the horizontal plane of adduction (i.e., in front) and we extend (pull down). pecs should be activated similar to when we perform cable flyes for lower pecs. also, pecs were activated more during the eccentric phase during the front or v-bar pulls.
interestingly, no differences of activation were found for the lats between all three exercies. this calls into question whether we are affecting lats any differently with the exerices. but, of course we may not perform a specific lat pulldown just to stress lats.
posterior delts were activatied greater for the behind the neck exercise in concentric phase and eccentric phase.
biceps brachii activated the least during the behind the neck pulls.
i do observe that people still perform behind the neck pulls and i will address them later.
Electromyographic Analysis of Three Different Types of Lat Pull-Down (http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Fulltext/2009/10000/Electromyographic_Analysis_of_Three_Different.17.a spx)
Sperandei, Sandro; Barros, Marcos A P; Silveira-Júnior, Paulo C S; Oliveira, Carlos G
The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 23(7):2033-2038, October 2009.
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b8d30a
Abstract:
Sperandei, S, Barros, MAP, Silveira-Junior, PCS, and Oliveira, CG. Electromyographic analysis of three different types of lat pull-down. J Strength Cond Res 23(7): 2033-2038, 2009-The purpose of this work was to evaluate the activity of the primary motor muscles during the performance of 3 lat pull-down techniques through surface electromyography (EMG). Twenty-four trained adult men performed 5 repetitions of behind-the-neck (BNL), front-of-the-neck (FNL), and V-bar exercises at 80% of 1 repetition maximum. For each technique, the root mean square from the EMG signal was registered from the pectoralis major (PM), latissimus dorsi (LD), posterior deltoid (PD), and biceps brachii (BB) and further normalized in respect to that which presented the highest value of all the techniques. A series of two-way repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare the results, with Tukey-Kramer as the post hoc test and [alpha] = 0.05. During the concentric phase, PM value showed the FNL to be significantly higher than V-bar/BNL and V-bar higher than BNL. During the eccentric phase, FNL/V-bar was higher than BNL. For LD, there was no difference between techniques. PD presented BNL higher than FNL/V-bar and FNL higher than V-bar in the concentric phase and BNL higher than V-bar in the eccentric phase. BB exhibited BNL higher than V-bar/FNL and V-bar higher than FNL in both concentric and eccentric phases. Considering the main objectives of lat pull-down, we concluded that FNL is the better choice, whereas BNL is not a good lat pull-down technique and should be avoided. V-bar could be used as an alternative.
(C) 2009 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Go to Full Text of this Article (http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Fulltext/2009/10000/Electromyographic_Analysis_of_Three_Different.17.a spx)
sperndei et al. (2009) studied the emg activity of three lat pulldown exercises: behind the neck, front of the neck, and a v-bar. the v-bar was a atypical bar that allowed greater range of motion than the behind the neck pull because it was shaped as a v. emg activation of pec major, lat dorsi, posterior delt, and biceps brachii were measured.
pecs showed significantly greater activation for the front lat pulls than the others. this is interesting because we do not think of front lat pulls as a chest exercise. but, lets talk this through. in the front lat pull our shoulders are in the horizontal plane of adduction (i.e., in front) and we extend (pull down). pecs should be activated similar to when we perform cable flyes for lower pecs. also, pecs were activated more during the eccentric phase during the front or v-bar pulls.
interestingly, no differences of activation were found for the lats between all three exercies. this calls into question whether we are affecting lats any differently with the exerices. but, of course we may not perform a specific lat pulldown just to stress lats.
posterior delts were activatied greater for the behind the neck exercise in concentric phase and eccentric phase.
biceps brachii activated the least during the behind the neck pulls.
i do observe that people still perform behind the neck pulls and i will address them later.
Electromyographic Analysis of Three Different Types of Lat Pull-Down (http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Fulltext/2009/10000/Electromyographic_Analysis_of_Three_Different.17.a spx)
Sperandei, Sandro; Barros, Marcos A P; Silveira-Júnior, Paulo C S; Oliveira, Carlos G
The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 23(7):2033-2038, October 2009.
doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181b8d30a
Abstract:
Sperandei, S, Barros, MAP, Silveira-Junior, PCS, and Oliveira, CG. Electromyographic analysis of three different types of lat pull-down. J Strength Cond Res 23(7): 2033-2038, 2009-The purpose of this work was to evaluate the activity of the primary motor muscles during the performance of 3 lat pull-down techniques through surface electromyography (EMG). Twenty-four trained adult men performed 5 repetitions of behind-the-neck (BNL), front-of-the-neck (FNL), and V-bar exercises at 80% of 1 repetition maximum. For each technique, the root mean square from the EMG signal was registered from the pectoralis major (PM), latissimus dorsi (LD), posterior deltoid (PD), and biceps brachii (BB) and further normalized in respect to that which presented the highest value of all the techniques. A series of two-way repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare the results, with Tukey-Kramer as the post hoc test and [alpha] = 0.05. During the concentric phase, PM value showed the FNL to be significantly higher than V-bar/BNL and V-bar higher than BNL. During the eccentric phase, FNL/V-bar was higher than BNL. For LD, there was no difference between techniques. PD presented BNL higher than FNL/V-bar and FNL higher than V-bar in the concentric phase and BNL higher than V-bar in the eccentric phase. BB exhibited BNL higher than V-bar/FNL and V-bar higher than FNL in both concentric and eccentric phases. Considering the main objectives of lat pull-down, we concluded that FNL is the better choice, whereas BNL is not a good lat pull-down technique and should be avoided. V-bar could be used as an alternative.
(C) 2009 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Go to Full Text of this Article (http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr/Fulltext/2009/10000/Electromyographic_Analysis_of_Three_Different.17.a spx)