PT Ques: Are Lats Considered Back or Shoulders?

[jamezgt]

Lats = back.

Lats connect to the shoulder and are responsible of a lot of shoulder movement, but they are not considered a part of the shoulder.

/end of discussion!

[nickmanzoni]

Far far too many posts on the subject.


Lat's are situated on the back. Not a shoulder muscle. END TOPIC.

[askthetrainer]

Originally Posted by nickmanzoni

Far far too many posts on the subject.


Lat's are situated on the back. Not a shoulder muscle. END TOPIC.

Exactly

The real question is


Are Traps Shoulders or Back?

Answer is both!

[BSCSCS]

Originally Posted by askthetrainer

Exactly

The real question is


Are Traps Shoulders or Back?

Answer is both!

Forgot the neck.

[Macrobolic]

Originally Posted by askthetrainer

Exactly

The real question is


Are Traps Shoulders or Back?

Answer is both!

I disagree!















not.

[askthetrainer]

Originally Posted by BSCSCS

Forgot the neck.

Neck is back but the neck bone is connected to the head bone

[redwings_snipe]

Originally Posted by askthetrainer

Ask Dorian what he thinks




I think the confusion arises because of the trapezeus which is considered the upper shoulders and mid to upper back.

holy back

[BSCSCS]

Originally Posted by askthetrainer

Neck is back but the neck bone is connected to the head bone

So is it a head muscle???

I'm confused.

[askthetrainer]

Originally Posted by BSCSCS

So is it a head muscle???

I'm confused.

[BSCSCS]

Originally Posted by askthetrainer

You know I'm joking right?

[askthetrainer]

Originally Posted by BSCSCS

You know I'm joking right?

I'm just trying to prolong this thread that should have been done after 2 posts

[McJimmie]

Dorsal - relating to the back, or spinal part of the body.

From the Latin Dorsum: back

[mc-]

Originally Posted by jamezgt

Lats = back.

Lats connect to the shoulder and are responsible of a lot of shoulder movement, but they are not considered a part of the shoulder.

/end of discussion!

lats are not connected to the shoulder at all

if you're interested in what the lats do and how they act, take a look at this article (link)

or perhaps i've missed the whole point. sorry.

[askthetrainer]

Originally Posted by McJimmie

Dorsal - relating to the back, or spinal part of the body.

From the Latin Dorsum: back

Everybody should rep this ^^^^^ best answer to this unnecessary long thread..

[LouV]

^^^^ perfect!

Originally Posted by J.X

I have heard some athlete's calling them shoulders but when I look up programs for myself, they are listed as back?

But to answer this one again.
I've actually heard many people say it's a shoulder exercise.
More simply put: When an uneducated athlete does a 'lat pull down', most of the movement appears to be in the shoulder, assuming that the delt is the lat. They typically clench their shoulders while pulling down the weight because they really think that it's a shoulder exercise. They don't quite understand where or what the 'lat' is. Hopefully now you get it and can help your fellow athletes.

[mc-]

Originally Posted by askthetrainer

Everybody should rep this ^^^^^ best answer to this unnecessary long thread..

well so what? that lat means the back. That means here, if you point here you will see them. Does that tell us anything about their function?

they're attached to the back but where do they insert and what is their job? What is the action of the lat? How do you train them? you can't train the lat without working that insertion right?

So personally, i find it an intelligent question to want to understand why something that when it hypertrophies shows up in the back, but when its action is considered has little to do with the back - considering it's size it's just a synergist for lumbar flexion/extension not even a prime mover..

that's just me perhaps.

mc

[Keltron]

The real issue...
if you're training someone to be a more fit [less fat], healthier, more functional, stronger, and improve their quality of life.... thinking of workouts in terms of movement patterns [eg horizontal push, horizontal pull, hip dominant leg movements] makes much more sense.

If you are training someone who just wants to be like a bodybuilder and is concerned mostly with hypertrophy and aesthetics w/not much regard for performance and lasting health/ functional strenth then you think in terms of individual muscles so that all muscles grow evenly.

[askthetrainer]

Originally Posted by Keltron

The real issue...
if you're training someone to be a more fit [less fat], healthier, more functional, stronger, and improve their quality of life.... thinking of workouts in terms of movement patterns [eg horizontal push, horizontal pull, hip dominant leg movements] makes much more sense.

If you are training someone who just wants to be like a bodybuilder and is concerned mostly with hypertrophy and aesthetics w/not much regard for performance and lasting health/ functional strenth then you think in terms of individual muscles so that all muscles grow evenly.

This thread is like Brett Favre's career, just won't die... and I will do my best to keep it alive...

[Macrobolic]

Originally Posted by askthetrainer

This thread is like Brett Favre's career, just won't die... and I will do my best to keep it alive...

I'll raise you (no homo):

[Keltron]

They are part of the posterior chain and that's ALL anyone should be concerned about.

[carl.c]

sophieM: You are correct in naming the muscle of the shouder girdle.
However you are stuck between the personal trainers training and the athletic trainers world. For workout creation for the nonathlete only the deltoid and rotator cuff muscles need to be consiered shoulder muscles. However when looking at and evalating injury or movment problems you use the whole girdle since the muscles you listed act on the shoulder in diffrent ways.
Best exsample of this is BCCSCS asking if you think the biceps are forarm muscles. I think BSCSCS is very knowagable and gives great training advice, I would have no trouble with him training people I know. But the biceps are a forearm muscle, it acts directly on the forearm but we inter the personal trainer world and most people will say no, ask some one in the clinical world and they will say yes.

[BSCSCS]

Originally Posted by carl.c

sophieM: You are correct in naming the muscle of the shouder girdle.
However you are stuck between the personal trainers training and the athletic trainers world. For workout creation for the nonathlete only the deltoid and rotator cuff muscles need to be consiered shoulder muscles. However when looking at and evalating injury or movment problems you use the whole girdle since the muscles you listed act on the shoulder in diffrent ways.
Best exsample of this is BCCSCS asking if you think the biceps are forarm muscles. I think BSCSCS is very knowagable and gives great training advice, I would have no trouble with him training people I know. But the biceps are a forearm muscle, it acts directly on the forearm but we inter the personal trainer world and most people will say no, ask some one in the clinical world and they will say yes.

Thank you for the kind words carl.c. But I think if you ask most clinical people to name the forearm muscles, they would name the brachioradialis, forearm flexors/extensors, and wrist flexors/extensors, and then MIGHT add biceps brachii as an upper arm muscle that acts on the forearm. Ask them to name the upper arm muscles and they will tell you biceps brachii, triceps, and brachialis. Usually muscles are classified as to where they are primarily located, not necessarily on what they articulate, although they can be named for a joint they articulate. For example a wrist extensor/flexor is not considered a wrist muscle, but a forearm muscle...but it articulates the wrist. Another example would be the hamstrings, although they insert below the knee, they are not thought of as "lower leg muscles". As well as the quadriceps which articulate the lower leg, are not thought of as "lower leg muscles". All this was learned in the academic world which I would think the "clinical world" an extension of.

[carl.c]

BSCSCS: Now that I've thought on it I think I gave a wind bag answer to the problem. I think I should have simply said, " muscles that act on, V.S. muscles of".

[BSCSCS]

Originally Posted by carl.c

BSCSCS: Now that I've thought on it I think I gave a wind bag answer to the problem. I think I should have simply said, " muscles that act on, V.S. muscles of".

I guess we're both a little full of hot air.