Using the chin up machine to work towards a real chin up

[likwidswords]

Some people say that it's bad because it takes out all the stabilizers needed for a real chin up. I can see why that's true, but then don't the partner assisted pull ups and band pull ups work the same way? And aren't the main movers, the lats, getting enough work done anyways? Is it getting a bad rep just because it's a machine? I don't have a partner or bands, and I didn't find negatives to be so helpful, so I need to work on machines, and when I get up to something like 5-8 reps on a machine with 5 pounds of assistance, I can't see why I wouldn't be able to do at least one real one.

Anyways, if you can suggest a method of doing a real chin without a partner or bands, please do so.

[mc-]

you mean an assited pull up machine?
nothing wrong with it
it's the lat pull down that changes the work and distribution of force.
you're still hanging with an assisted pull up machine

you go!

mc

[Tyciol]

Some people say that it's bad because it takes out all the stabilizers needed for a real chin up. I can see why that's true

Can you? How? It's controversial to say it and I'll probably get negged, but I don't think vertical pulls require stabilizing. They don't involve keeping a weight balanced above your point of contact with the earth using skeletal alignment. You're below your point of contact, and everything falls in line below it. You have to do weird things like kipping just to get out of that line. Deviation from ideal form is created by the body spasming or being weird, not by teetering off a balance point. Everyone can visualize falling over in any direction during an overhead press, I challenge people to visualize any single direction you could "fall" during a pull up except down, by letting go of the bar.

don't the partner assisted pull ups and band pull ups work the same way? And aren't the main movers, the lats, getting enough work done anyways? Is it getting a bad rep just because it's a machine?

Basically, although I usually don't hear of the assistance machines getting flack like other ones. If you were kneeling off-center from the handles, you'd probably slide into place, unless the counterweight were extremely huge and generating too much friction with your chins for that to happen. A good reason for beginners to use the lat pulldown instead, for people who need to use 100+ pounds of counterweights, my guess is they'd probably have trouble safely getting off of it at the end, you have to be careful or it slams down and makes noisy damage, something people might lack the coordination for if they were really pushing themselves into deep fatigue. Lat pulldown's easier to set down safely, and easier to change the resistance or grips.

Idon't have a partner or bands, and I didn't find negatives to be so helpful, so I need to work on machines, and when I get up to something like 5-8 reps on a machine with 5 pounds of assistance, I can't see why I wouldn't be able to do at least one real one.

Sounds reasonable enough. You could even work up to 10-20 reps, the lats can have a lot of endurance and a lot of people would probably like to do that many pull ups anyway.

it's the lat pull down that changes the work and distribution of force.

WTF is this? Elaborate?

[Tread0123]

Some people say that it's bad because it takes out all the stabilizers needed for a real chin up. I can see why that's true, but then don't the partner assisted pull ups and band pull ups work the same way? And aren't the main movers, the lats, getting enough work done anyways? Is it getting a bad rep just because it's a machine? I don't have a partner or bands, and I didn't find negatives to be so helpful, so I need to work on machines, and when I get up to something like 5-8 reps on a machine with 5 pounds of assistance, I can't see why I wouldn't be able to do at least one real one.

Anyways, if you can suggest a method of doing a real chin without a partner or bands, please do so.

Lik, when I started to lift again I was in the same boat as you. I used the assisted machine and it did help. So I say keep using it. I felt like I wasn't progressing fast enough though so I started to go to the pull-up bar and try to pull myself up after I had done 3 sets on the assisted machine. I was pretty embarrassed not being able to do a pull-up but it seemed to put me over the top. I went from progressing slowly to doing pull-ups in no time.

[marinevet63031]

I have a shoulder injury among others. But who doesn't right? Well anyway the fact of the matter is this. Assisted pullup/dip machines are awesome for me. Thing is this, I have found that going slow on the ecentric and concentric with rest / pause in the middle really stimulates the growth you want.

[trev71]

Used it for Pullups...

Don't need it anymore

Would use it again... Lovely machine

[mc-]

WTF is this? Elaborate?

Wow i'm really encouraged to do so from this kindly phrased request. YOu or someone with your name and very similar background left a note on my blog about this point, and i went into a detailed reply there.
So rather than repost again, i'd suggest anyone who's interested look at the comments to this post - and the few references
http://www.begin2dig.com/2008/08/pul...resources.html. For those not interested who want the executive summary: lat pull downs have been shown to work the muscles v.differently to pull ups. - distribution of forces, etc.

[Tyciol]

Wow i'm really encouraged to do so from this kindly phrased request.

I know rite?

You left a note on my blog about this point, and i went into a detailed reply there. So rather than repost again, i'd suggest anyone who's interested look at the comments to this post - and the few references http://www.begin2dig.com/2008/08/pul...resources.html.

Thanks, think I forgot to put on e-mail notify, it looks big so will begin reading now.

For those not interested who want the executive summary: lat pull downs have been shown to work the muscles v.differently to pull ups. - distribution of forces, etc.

Yeah but like, differently how? What gets worked less, what takes up the slack? Variations in form/grip exist in both pull ups and lat pulldowns, so I am wondering if this is accounted for in the study comparison? Like is it the same width grip and same angle of arms to pull v. bar and stuff.

Assuming that's accounted for and it's still different, the question of 'why' still remains, hopefully there is a theory to explain.

[Tyciol]

Prior to continuing discussion, I am impressed with your calm maintained in the light of my abrasive rudeness, mad respect for that.

What a fascinating focus on *just* the lat pull downs vs pull ups part of this article

I ask about the stuff I don't understand. I felt like I understood the rest and had no objections, good job.

asserting that the article promotes a "false dichotomy" and "bad information"

I'm merely making assertions based on the collective impression I get from other works and my limited perception of physics. It's cool if I'm wrong, I'd rather blurt it out and get educated than remain silent and confused.

You ask "someone" to fix the reference to a link and find more research than an article and a refernce text to support YOUR need to show that a pull down is different than a pull up.

I don't have a need to show they are different. I think they're more similar than some people let on. This article was making claims about differences in their training effects. The source linked was
http://www.mensfitness.com/fitness/b...t_training/172 which did not function. Had you cited a study I could certainly go look it up through other means if a URL was down, but I had no idea what MF.com article said or what it sourced.

As a student, are you not capable of searching out a link that's no longer retrieving a source?

Actually, I am, could possibly have used WayBack machine on Archive.org to find a past version of URL, come to think of it. But that option doesn't always occur to me. Ideally I think it would be good if we rehosted lost information in a place that's easier for people to access. If I linked the archive.org URL here it'd look quite long eh?

wouldn't you be the one all fired up to go and see if your assumptions about sitting not being an issue are correct? Then you might contribute evidence for your own claims?

I don't know the means of proving this, there are a lot of variables involved in such an experiment, I don't have the resources to run or document one. I also lack experience in research to know how to properly arrange a study like that.

I'm not sure what 'claims' though, I'm making an assumption the exercises are similar and calling into questions that they possess unexplained and undemonstrated difference.

1) sitting to workout with weights in general (which is added mainly as context) You say that sitting isn't an issue in the lat pulldown because the lat doesn't cross the hip.

If you mean something like the body being fixed and not moving in space, it's better to say this than sitting, because that's a problem that would exist if one were doing pulldowns kneeling, lunging, or squatting too. I think it was valuable to point out that the 'back problems' associated with sitting should not be a factor here, because the part I quoted here alluded that it was.

Have you looked at mcgill's work - just wondering - before you reiterate that his research about the problems with sitting when working out are idiotic. The book is likely in your school or uni library.

Yes, I have. The problems with sitting are well documented, and not idiotic at all. But they're unrelated to this because the problems are weight-released and pulldowns remove weight from the spine.

To give an example: sitting doing pulldowns for half the weight of your torso (which is pretty light, most people can pull more) would likely be, at most, half as stressful as sitting normally, because your spine is bearing half the weight. Not only that, but people tend to pay more attention to posture while exercising (not slouching) so it would be even less stressful due to that superior alignment. The amount of time people spend doing it should also be relatively short compared to the long periods people are sitting. If people are doing lat pulldowns with a weight continuously for 10 minutes without standing up, they could probably be pulling a heavier load, which would deload the spine even more, for an even briefer period of sitting.

Sitting-related concerns are valid for things like pressing because they load the spine more, they shouldn't be a concern with vertical pulling movements.

So let's do a little here: the neuromuscular adaptations - i'm sure you're familiar with closed vs open chain exercises, right? lat pulldowns are closed; pullups open.

Yes. However, all studies analyzing closed v. open that I've seen are based around pressing movements like squats v. leg press, pushup v. bench. The ones based on things like knee extension machines aren't even worth mentioning since the compound v. isolation thing is a whole other argument. I haven't seen any studies that do this closed/open thing with pulling movements. I'm suspicious they're not a major factor because pulling doesn't involve balance challenges in the same fashion that pressing movements do.

So where does that take us? Well, when seated feet on the floor and load balancing coming from that, as the lat pulls, there's not as much demand on the synergistic muscles, the stabilizers

Stabilizers are for presses. Keeping balance. How do you fall over during a pull-up? What type of failure is having the feet on the floor (or, at higher weights, the knees pulling up into the pad) during a pulldown preventing? What would happen if that was suddenly removed? You wouldn't fall down, you wouldn't fall forward, backward, or sideways, you would simply be pulled up.

Also, the pull up means load is distributed more to the shoulder and elbow joints. You get a more multi-joint movement, effectively.

I'm interested in seeing the source for this claim, the elbow flexors and shoulder muscles are involved in both movements, what factor do you think diminishes them in -downs or enhances their contribution in -ups?

As for getting in higher reps - well as you might note from the rest of the article there are quite a few ways to increase getting in pull up reps too.[/quote]I agree, but I'm talking about in a single set, not spaced out or whatever. GTG is cool but I personally find it confusing. My mind is simpler and gets simpler when doing compound movements, the fewer sets to keep track of, the happier I can be. It adds options. Most of the training methods with -ups should exist with -downs (although I admit, downs would require a training partner for heavy eccentrics, pull-ups have an advantage in being able to use the legs for that, I'll admit).

No one is saying the lat pull down is evil - tho i'm inclined to go with StuM on sitting as evil generally - but that it is different.

I'd agree with 'generally', I just think vertical pulling machines are a distinct exception to this because of how they don't load the spine, and even deload it. Seated horizantal rows and presses are also probably not that bad, perhaps slightly more risky than sitting normally, possibly even safer since you're paying attention to posture. I think the culprit that deserves the **** is seated overhead presses, and a lot of people even manage to do that well.

But enough of my ranting, I already mentioned, since we can do pulldowns kneeling, sitting isn't an inherent factor to pull-downs (for heavies you could put a sandbag on your calves) so would rather focus on the other ones.

Also - the assertion that one can do more lat pull downs than pull ups when relative to 1RM of either? apparently not so: see http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19387371

I'm not sure which assertion you're referring to and attempting to contradict, quote plz? I can use the 'find' function with a snippet, my eyes may be bad tonight.

I read the abstract of this study just now but I am unsure what point you're making drawing from this, could you rephrase? Women having more reps at 80% max of pull-ups makes sense since they tend to have less max-strength and more endurance compare to men, but I did get confused at how women and men scored the same reps at that intensity of lat pulldown. What meaning do you think can be derived here?

Indeed, in another study, just with gals, there was a poor correlation between lat pull 1rm strength and pull up strength so using one to train for the other, perhaps not such a great idea.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19620915

The primary trouble citing these studies is there are (at least not visible in the abstracts) illustrations of the people training. They could, for example, be doing pulldowns with the very wide overhand grip, while doing pull ups with the very narrow underhand grip. That would explain a lower correlation. Clearly doing narrow underhand downs would have more specific transfer to narrow underhand ups, and wide overhand downs would transfer better to wide overhand ups.

To quote from the article's conclusion: "These results confirmed that the seemingly analogous exercises of pull-ups and lat-pulls were not highly related and should not be substituted for one another in a training regimen."

The validity of this conclusion is questionable depending on how people are doing the exercises. Unless they were using the same type of grip, the study is flawed, and I don't see a mention of this. Where is the guarantee this study has been properly designed?

You have to remember here, people are doing a % of whatver their 1-rep max is. They're not necessarily handling the same weight. Ideas about down>up transfer are usually weight based. Like "if I can pull down with a greater force than the weight of my body (thigh pads working to hold you down like madness is an initial indicator), then I have the ability to generate enough force to pull myself up".

Indeed, from another perspective, that of motor learning and the SAID principle, it's important to get as much practice with the full movement as possible - so i would also (and do) encourage athletes to practice pull ups directly with whatever aids necessary so they get as many reps with that neural pattern as possible.

If the arms are moving through the same dimensions relative to the body, exerting against force aligned in the same direction gravity is during pull ups, the only difference in neural patterns should be those in the ears and eyes perceiving a shift of the head through space. Now odds are people aren't going to get exactly this angle during pulldowns, but actually, there ISN'T an exact angle because people lean forward or back to varying degrees during pull-ups anyway.

PS: here's one more ref to StuM on the evils of seated work http://www.begin2dig.com/2008/11/sta...-work-out.html

Read this, he mentions things like cycling and rowing (I believe he means the type of rowing where you lean forward and round the lower back with those cables) and military presses. These movements do have risks to the spine. He doesn't mention anything like lat pulldowns, I'm sure if McGill thought about it, he'd be fine with pulldowns done seated. sitting=bad is a gross oversimplification. It's a good default rule on the fly to tell people who don't analyze the movements, but if we look at the specific forces involved, the spine should not be under the sitting-involved stresses during pulldowns. Whatever ones exist do so more at the lighter weights, and if someone is THAT weak, they wouldn't even have pull ups as an option.

[hamworld05]

Lik, when I started to lift again I was in the same boat as you. I used the assisted machine and it did help. So I say keep using it. I felt like I wasn't progressing fast enough though so I started to go to the pull-up bar and try to pull myself up after I had done 3 sets on the assisted machine. I was pretty embarrassed not being able to do a pull-up but it seemed to put me over the top. I went from progressing slowly to doing pull-ups in no time.

How did you progress on the assistance machine? I tried to progress by 2.5 pounds each time but it didn't work so I just switched to negatives.

I've read stories of people being able to pull their bw on the lat pulldown but they still couldn't do a pullup.

[Tread0123]

How did you progress on the assistance machine? I tried to progress by 2.5 pounds each time but it didn't work so I just switched to negatives.

I've read stories of people being able to pull their bw on the lat pulldown but they still couldn't do a pullup.

The assisted machine at my gym goes by 15lb increments. I started with 75lbs of assistance and reduced the weight every couple weeks. By the time I was doing 45lb assisted pull-ups for 10 reps I was able to do a few pull-ups. From not being able to do a pull-up to being able to do one took me roughly six weeks.

I have never really benefited like others from the lat pull down exercise when talking about pull-ups. For some reason the two exercises have never really benefited the other in my case.

[trev71]

I have never really benefited like others from the lat pull down exercise when talking about pull-ups. For some reason the two exercises have never really benefited the other in my case.

I haven't done a single lat pull down since I was able to do pullups.

I should ask that my gym get rid of that machine. Make room for a bench press... wtf... no bench press at my gym cause "they don't want those kind of people"... holy crap I am about to go on a rant here... lemme hit reply and move on.. one second.. there it is.. kk... see ya in another thread.

[Tyciol]

I haven't done a single lat pull down since I was able to do pullups. I should ask that my gym get rid of that machine. Make room for a bench press... wtf... no bench press at my gym cause "they don't want those kind of people"... holy crap I am about to go on a rant here... lemme hit reply and move on.. one second.. there it is.. kk... see ya in another thread.

Does your gym not have benches or something? Or do you mean a benching rack? If worse came to worse, couldn't you lay on the ground and get a couple step-up blocks to set your barbell on as a makeshift rack?

[chescori]

Some people say that it's bad because it takes out all the stabilizers needed for a real chin up. I can see why that's true, but then don't the partner assisted pull ups and band pull ups work the same way? And aren't the main movers, the lats, getting enough work done anyways? Is it getting a bad rep just because it's a machine? I don't have a partner or bands, and I didn't find negatives to be so helpful, so I need to work on machines, and when I get up to something like 5-8 reps on a machine with 5 pounds of assistance, I can't see why I wouldn't be able to do at least one real one.

Anyways, if you can suggest a method of doing a real chin without a partner or bands, please do so.

The assisted chin/pull ups machine is good training for real pull ups. There will still be a jump between the machine with minimal weight and a real pullup, but nothing that you cant handle.

[Tyciol]

Especially if someone's worked up to higher reps.

[hamworld05]

I'd still use the machine for negatives. I swear, once I do 5 reps of 30 second negatives I'll finally be strong enough to do a pullup.