Do pull-ups and pulldowns build biceps more effectively than rows?

There is some tentative evidence suggesting that vertical pulling exercises like pulldowns might be slightly better for bicep development than horizontal pulling (rows). One study found similar bicep thickness increases from wide-grip overhand pulldowns compared to barbell curls, which was not the case for rows in another study.

Is 'muscle feel' a reliable indicator of exercise effectiveness for hypertrophy?

The common fitness audience practice of using muscle 'feel' as an indication of effectiveness lacks strong evidentiary basis. While it can guide subjective experience, there's no direct scientific support that feeling a muscle more strongly correlates with better hypertrophy outcomes, especially when compared to specific scientific principles.

How does neuromechanical matching influence muscle recruitment during resistance training?

Neuromechanical matching suggests the nervous system preferentially recruits muscles with the most bioenergetically efficient leverage for a joint action. However, this principle becomes less relevant as exercise intensity increases and sets approach failure, as the body recruits more musculature to meet torque demands rather than optimize efficiency.

Why is there limited direct research on back muscle hypertrophy?

Studying back muscle hypertrophy is challenging due to several factors: difficulty with ultrasound measurements (superficial vs. deep muscles, subcutaneous adipose tissue), the expense and time of MRI, and the need for prior reliability studies for new measurement sites. Additionally, funding is often directed towards research related to disease states or activities of daily living, which typically prioritize lower body strength.

Is it necessary to include both vertical and horizontal pulling movements for complete back development?

Yes, for complete and maximal muscular development of the back, it is generally recommended to include both vertical pulling (e.g., pulldowns, pull-ups) and horizontal pulling (e.g., various rows). These different movement patterns effectively stimulate distinct muscle groups of the back, such as the lats/teres major and the mid-traps/rhomboids/lower traps.

Are pullovers a lat exercise, or primarily a teres major exercise?

While pullovers involve both the lats and teres major, the debate on which muscle is predominantly worked often centers on neuromechanical matching. Given that pullovers stretch the lats meaningfully and sets are taken to failure, the lats are likely worked effectively. Even if it primarily targets the teres major, its contribution to overall back width is significant, making it a valuable exercise for those seeking a 'wide barn door' back.

Are deadlifts suitable for back hypertrophy, especially erectors?

Deadlifts can contribute to erector spinae development and overall back thickness, particularly in those who train them with high intensity and volume. However, they may not be the most efficient exercise for hypertrophy of other back muscles like the lats or rhomboids compared to more targeted isolation exercises. While athletes in strength sports often develop impressive backs from deadlifts, direct back exercises are still recommended for maximizing hypertrophy.

Is it optimal to spread back exercises throughout the week (one per day)?

Spreading out back work across multiple training days can be beneficial, especially due to limiting factors like grip strength and hand fatigue common in back exercises. This approach ensures that hand fatigue doesn't limit the stimulus on the target back muscles. Research on training frequency generally shows neutral to slightly positive effects on hypertrophy for spreading volume out, making it a valid and practical strategy.

Are 'cheaty' rows good for hypertrophy or primarily strength?

Cheaty rows are likely more beneficial for strength outcomes, especially deadlift strength, due to increased specificity. For hypertrophy, their benefit might come from allowing heavier loads in the lengthened position by using momentum to overcome the shortened, most challenging part of the lift. However, strict form with controlled eccentrics often provides a more targeted stimulus. While they can be effective if done with maximum intent, dedicated pull-ups and pulldowns are often more efficient for lat development.

Should personal enjoyment be a factor in exercise selection despite discussions of optimality?

Yes, personal enjoyment is a crucial factor, especially for long-term consistency and adherence. While maximizing efficiency is a valid goal for competitive athletes, most recreational lifters train because they love it. Including enjoyable, even if not 'most optimal,' exercises can significantly improve adherence and overall satisfaction with training, which is vital for sustained progress after initial rapid gains slow down.

How To Train The Back (Episode 135)

Stronger By Science

Sports5 min read185 min video

Jun 12, 2024|6,629 views|211|58

Save to Pod

Key Moments

On this page

TL;DR

Limited research on back training means relying on biomechanics and generalized principles from other muscle groups for optimal gains.

Key Insights

Direct research on back muscle hypertrophy is scarce, with most studies focusing on biceps, triceps, and quads due to ease of measurement.

Bicep hypertrophy is greater from curls than from rows, and potentially better from vertical pulling (pull-downs/pull-ups) than horizontal pulling (rows), implying specificity.

Neuromechanical matching, favoring efficient muscle recruitment, is less relevant during hard training as the body recruits all available musculature to meet high torque demands.

Back training should generally include exercises that cover shoulder extension/adduction (lats/teres major), scapular adduction/depression (mid/lower traps, rhomboids), spinal extension/lateral flexion (erector spinae), and scapular elevation (upper traps/levator scapulae).

Spreading back training volume across multiple days is often beneficial, particularly due to hand fatigue issues common with compound back exercises.

While theoretically less efficient, performing exercises like cheat rows for enjoyment can still be effective for hypertrophy, especially for recreational lifters with ample training time.

THE SCARCITY OF DIRECT BACK HYPERTROPHY RESEARCH

The scientific community faces a significant gap in direct research concerning back muscle hypertrophy. Unlike muscle groups such as the biceps, triceps, and quadriceps, which are extensively studied due to their superficial nature and ease of measurement via ultrasound, the back musculature presents challenges. Its numerous, varied, and often deep-lying muscles, coupled with difficulties in standardizing measurement points, make direct hypertrophy studies costly, time-consuming, and logistically complex. Consequently, understanding optimal back training often relies on inferences from studies on other muscle groups, biomechanical principles, and anecdotal evidence.

BICPEPS HYPERTROPHY: CURLS VERSUS ROWS AND VERTICAL VERSUS HORIZONTAL PULLING

Research, despite its limitations, provides preliminary insights into bicep hypertrophy relative to back exercises. One study found that dumbbell curls led to significantly more bicep growth than underhand dumbbell rows. Another compared wide-grip overhand pull-downs to barbell curls, showing similar elbow flexor thickness increases. These findings tentatively suggest that direct bicep isolation exercises are more effective for bicep growth than compound rows, and that vertical pulling movements like pull-downs may be slightly better bicep builders than horizontal rows. However, these insights are specific to bicep development and offer limited direct evidence for back hypertrophy itself.

NEUROMECHANICAL MATCHING AND TRAINING INTENSITY

Neuromechanical matching, the principle that the nervous system preferentially recruits muscles most efficient for a given task, is a concept often discussed in exercise science. While relevant for low-effort activities like walking or breathing, its importance diminishes significantly during hard resistance training. As exercise intensity and proximity to failure increase, the body recruits a broader range of musculature to meet torque demands, overriding subtle biomechanical efficiencies. Therefore, for truly effective hypertrophy training, ensuring maximal effort and challenging the muscle to failure is more critical than meticulously optimizing for neuromechanical matching.

CHALLENGES IN BACK MUSCLE MEASUREMENT

The primary reason for the lack of direct back hypertrophy studies stems from measurement difficulties. While MRI can assess deeper back muscles, it's expensive, slow, and requires specialized facilities, making it impractical for large-scale hypertrophy research. Ultrasound, a more accessible alternative, struggles with the back's varied muscle depths, intermingled fascia, and the presence of subcutaneous adipose tissue, which can obscure clear images vital for reliable measurements. This logistical hurdle funnels researchers towards more easily measurable muscle groups, despite the back's importance for overall physique and strength.

PRACTICAL GUIDELINES FOR COMPREHENSIVE BACK DEVELOPMENT

Given the limited research, effective back training relies on practical, biomechanically informed guidelines. The back musculature can be broadly categorized into four functional groups: lats and teres major (shoulder extension/adduction), mid/lower traps and rhomboids (scapular adduction/depression), erector spinae (spinal extension/lateral flexion), and upper traps/levator scapulae (scapular elevation). A well-rounded program should include at least one exercise targeting each of these functions, combining vertical pulls (e.g., pull-downs, pull-ups), horizontal pulls (e.g., rows), an erector spinae exercise (e.g., deadlifts, RDLs, back extensions), and a shrug variation.

VOLUME, FREQUENCY, AND REP RANGES

For most muscle groups, including the back, a variety of rep ranges is beneficial, with most sets typically falling between 5-12 repetitions to maximize proximity to failure. Back training, given its large muscle groups and high work capacity, can often handle higher volumes and frequencies than other body parts. Spreading back exercises throughout the week (e.g., one exercise per training session) helps mitigate hand and grip fatigue, which can otherwise limit effective muscle stimulation in high-volume, single-session workouts.

EXERCISE VARIATION AND GRIP CHOICE

Incorporating diverse exercises and grip variations (overhand, underhand, neutral) can promote more homogeneous hypertrophy across the complex back musculature. While some grips may feel more effective for specific muscles, the most crucial aspect is consistently performing exercises that allow for sufficient load and proximity to failure, emphasizing a full range of motion. Preferences for certain grips should be respected, as enjoyment often correlates with adherence and long-term progress.

EMPHASIZING THE LENGTHENED POSITION AND UNILATERAL TRAINING

Many back exercises are most challenging in the shortened, contracted position. To maximize hypertrophy, it may be beneficial to emphasize the lengthened position, either through techniques like lengthened partials (performing partial reps in the lengthened range after full-range failure) or by strategically 'cheating' to lift heavier loads into the lengthened position and control the eccentric. Unilateral (single-arm) back training can also be highly effective, allowing for a deeper stretch in the lats and potentially improving mind-muscle connection, especially for individuals who struggle to engage their back muscles bilaterally.

THE ROLE OF DEADLIFTS IN BACK DEVELOPMENT

Deadlifts are often debated as a back exercise. While they are highly effective for developing the erector spinae due to the spinal extension demands, their efficacy for lat and upper back hypertrophy is less clear. Many powerlifters and weightlifters exhibit impressive overall back thickness, even with minimal direct accessory work, suggesting that heavy deadlifts and pulls contribute significantly. However, for targeted lat width or comprehensive upper back development, incorporating specific vertical and horizontal pulling movements in addition to deadlifts is likely more efficient.

THE CHEAT ROW DILEMMA: EFFICIENCY VS. ENJOYMENT

Cheat rows, while not always the most theoretically 'efficient' exercise for hypertrophy due to increased accessory muscle involvement and potential for reduced tension on the target muscles, can still be effective. They allow for handling heavier loads, which can challenge the lengthened position more. For recreational lifters, whose primary goal may be enjoyment and sustainable progress rather than hyper-optimization, cheat rows can be a valuable and fun addition to a comprehensive back routine, provided they are performed with maximum intent on the target muscles and with controlled eccentrics. The 'ego lift' often serves a critical psychological role in long-term adherence.

Mentioned in This Episode

●Products

●Software & Apps

●Companies

●Organizations

●Studies Cited

●Concepts

●People Referenced

Common Questions

Research suggests that direct bicep curls are superior for bicep hypertrophy compared to rowing exercises. One study found bicep hypertrophy was twice as large from curls versus rows. While pulling exercises do involve biceps, they are generally not as effective for bicep-specific growth.

Topics

Back Training Biceps Training Rows Pulldowns Pullovers Deadlifts Erector Spinae Lats Traps Rhomboids Neuromechanical Matching Regional Hypertrophy

Mentioned in this video

conceptQuadratus Lumborum (QL)

A deep lower back muscle, rarely discussed in fitness outside of therapeutic contexts, that contributes to lateral flexion of the spine.

personJoe Sullivan

A strong powerlifter known for his squat and deadlift strength, whose back, though impressive, is not as developed as a bodybuilder focusing specifically on back training.

studyCalf Raise Study (Lengthened Partials)

Compared full range of motion calf raises to adding lengthened partials past failure, resulting in nominally around 40% more gastroc hypertrophy with lengthened partials.

personKakas Grizzly

Individual with whom the host trained and experienced extreme forearm fatigue during a high-rep drop set of back training.

studyLeg Extension Study (Rectus Femoris)

Compared leg extensions with a 40° hip angle (rectus femoris lengthened) vs. 90° hip angle (rectus femoris shortened), finding greater rectus femoris hypertrophy with the more extended hip angle.

organizationStronger by Science Subreddit (reddit.com/r/StrongerbyScience)

A Reddit community for Stronger by Science content and discussion.

personKyler Wam

An individual mentioned in the context of performing extremely 'cheaty' rows with heavy weight.

personStan Larson

Collaborated on two range of motion studies, one on leg extensions and another on calf raises. He spearheaded data collection for these studies.

organizationStronger by Science Community (Facebook Group)

A Facebook group for staying updated with Stronger by Science content and engaging with the community.

studyManarino et al. (2021) Dumbbell Row vs. Dumbbell Supernated Curl Study

A study comparing underhand dumbbell rows to supinated dumbbell curls, finding superior bicep hypertrophy from curls, with strength gains being specific to the exercise.

studyCroll and Gois (2017) Bench Press Study

A study on bench press looking at pec, front delt, and tricep EMG activation as loads increased from 70% to 100% of 1RM.

softwareStronger by Science Coaching

toolStronger by Science newsletter