Thread: Post your "back" routine

Hammer pull downs or pull ups 3 sets
Hammer high pulls 3 sets
BB or T-bar rows 3 sets

This is my current routine and everything is to failure.

Horizontal Push/Pull Day:

Rack Pulls or heavy bent over DB Rows - 5 sets of 4-6
Bent over BB Rows - 3-4 sets of 6-8
Unilateral Hammer Strength Rows - 3 sets of around 12

Vertical Push/Pull Day:

Pull Ups (Overhand grip) - 5 sets to failure (usually get in around 50 total) going to get a weighted belt and start doing them with more weight less reps

Pull Ups (Neutral, palms facing eachother grip) - 3-4 sets to failure until i get my weighted belt

Plus deadlifts on leg day 1 and romanian deadlifts on leg day 2

my vertical pulling is:
CG or WG pullups
uni-lateral lat pulldowns

horizontal pulling is:
T-bar rows
DB rows
supine rows
cable rows

I don't do all of those, but I normally go with 3-4 of those movements.

Originally Posted by Scarface30

uni-lateral lat pulldowns

gonna add these to my next program i think

wide grip pull downs
pull ups
bent over bb rows
seated cable rows

There is no such thing as a back routine worth posting.

Originally Posted by Witchblade

There is no such thing as a back routine worth posting.

rationale?

wide grip pull ups
deadlifts
bent over row

Skib, try doing five second negatives. You can try holding a dumbbell between your legs, too.

My Pull Day:

- Weighted Chins 5x real heavy
- Barbell Rows 5x real heavy
- HS Single Rows 4x 4-8 range
- Pulldowns 4x 4-8 range
- Shrugs 5x 5-10 range
- Barbell Curls 5x 2-8 range
- Hammer Curls 3x 4-12 range

I do substitute execises here and there and sometimes do less heavy sets, adding in some higher rep stuff focusing on the squeeze.

god, I can't wait til tomorrow...

Originally Posted by FishOrCutBait

rationale?

The fact a routine still is divided into body parts instead of movement patterns is... typical.

Originally Posted by Witchblade

The fact a routine still is divided into body parts instead of movement patterns is... typical.

but there are still movement patterns and variations of the same movement pattern that are going to target the muscles of the back and I believe that's all the OP is asking... what movements do you incorporate into your program to target the muscles of the back?

i think it's a useful thread... it's inspired me to try some new exercises...

Originally Posted by Skib

but there are still movement patterns and variations of the same movement pattern that are going to target the muscles of the back and I believe that's all the OP is asking... what movements do you incorporate into your program to target the muscles of the back?

i think it's a useful thread... it's inspired me to try some new exercises...

exactly.

Originally Posted by Witchblade

The fact a routine still is divided into body parts instead of movement patterns is... typical.

Well it typically worked for me doing it this way.

Nothing wrong with splits.

Originally Posted by camarosuper6

Well it typically worked for me doing it this way.

Nothing wrong with splits.

No offense, but I think your injury is a result of your training style. Splits work for bodybuilding purposes, but they are not functional, i.e. they do not adhere to your body's natural movement patterns and thus result in postural deviations that make you susceptible to injury.

Originally Posted by Skib

but there are still movement patterns and variations of the same movement pattern that are going to target the muscles of the back and I believe that's all the OP is asking... what movements do you incorporate into your program to target the muscles of the back?

i think it's a useful thread... it's inspired me to try some new exercises...

You don't grasp the concept of movement patterns. There is a significant difference between training your back and training vertical pulling movements. It is not as plain as saying that vertical pulling movements equal training your lats.

Firstly, your nervous system does not know body parts. It knows movements. Your nervous system does not know you're doing a curl to train your biceps. Your brain recognises you're practising elbow flexion and sends signals to your biceps to flex. It's the difference between top-down and bottom-up perspectives.

Secondly, the biceps is not the only muscle firing. It is in fact physiologically impossible to completely isolate a muscle. The brachialis and brachioradialis may also be recruited. Ergo, thinking in body parts, like old-school bodybuilders, is not the same as thinking in movement patterns, like contemporary leading personal trainers and therapists.

To return to the original topic, 'back training' does not take into account your body's requisite for optimal health and function to balance, for example, internal and external rotation; scapular elevation and depression; scapular protraction and adduction. These are still basic examples, but most individuals without coaching will not include many more functions regardless.

A good example of what the simplistic and archaic dogmatic paradigm of body part training led to was the incorporation of crunches and sit-ups to train your abs, resulting in countless low back injuries due to overly tight and strong primary hip flexor muscles (primary as in, most people still have underdeveloped iliacus and psoas muscles).

1.Weighted pull ups using dip belt (switching grips every 3-4 weeks)- 6x6 (5 second tempo)
2. Lat. Pull downs using a different bar/grip every 3 weeks- 4x8
3. Seated rows (using the rope used for tricep pull downs or the triangle bar)
5x5/4x8 depending on week/workout

4. Single arm bent over rows (dumbbell)- 4x8
5. T-bar rows- 5x5
6. Single arm shruggs- love them as well 4x8 heavy weight.

I mix and match a variety of these exercises. I incorporate at least two in a workout, with my weighted pull ups being my all-time favorite exercise for back.

I fallow an A & B System I do Routine A one week than routine B the next and repeat.

Back Routine A
----------------
1. Wide grip lat pull down 3x10

2. Close Grip Cable Rows 3x10

3. Barbell rows 3x10

4. Low Row 3x10


Back Routine B
---------------
1. Close grip lat pull down 3x10

2. Wide Grip Cable Rows 3x10

3. Deadlift 3x10

4. Dumbell Rows 3x10

Originally Posted by Witchblade

No offense, but I think your injury is a result of your training style. Splits work for bodybuilding purposes, but they are not functional, i.e. they do not adhere to your body's natural movement patterns and thus result in postural deviations that make you susceptible to injury.


You don't grasp the concept of movement patterns. There is a significant difference between training your back and training vertical pulling movements. It is not as plain as saying that vertical pulling movements equal training your lats.

Firstly, your nervous system does not know body parts. It knows movements. Your nervous system does not know you're doing a curl to train your biceps. Your brain recognises you're practising elbow flexion and sends signals to your biceps to flex. It's the difference between top-down and bottom-up perspectives.

Secondly, the biceps is not the only muscle firing. It is in fact physiologically impossible to completely isolate a muscle. The brachialis and brachioradialis may also be recruited. Ergo, thinking in body parts, like old-school bodybuilders, is not the same as thinking in movement patterns, like contemporary leading personal trainers and therapists.

To return to the original topic, 'back training' does not take into account your body's requisite for optimal health and function to balance, for example, internal and external rotation; scapular elevation and depression; scapular protraction and adduction. These are still basic examples, but most individuals without coaching will not include many more functions regardless.

A good example of what the simplistic and archaic dogmatic paradigm of body part training led to was the incorporation of crunches and sit-ups to train your abs, resulting in countless low back injuries due to overly tight and strong primary hip flexor muscles (primary as in, most people still have underdeveloped iliacus and psoas muscles).

You seem fairly knowledgable... care to give any personal recommendations? what motions do you go through to train the posterior aspect of your body? the concept of training movement patterns vs. body parts is still fairly new to me... i've always trained based on a body part split and have just recently incorporated the concept of training movement patterns... hence why i now train using an upper body horizontal push/pull day, an upper body vertical push/pull day and 2 leg days... it's a program that i'm really enjoying and feel will be relatively effective.... inspired by some readings written by Built : )

I can't give you more than a cookie cutter program without having assessed you in person, but there are some tried and true guidelines that help you functionally develop your upper body posterior chain.

1. Make sure your push : pull = 1 : 1 at least. Most people can't go wrong with doing more rowing variations.

2. The split you're on is good. It's my personal favourite in fact. Built knows her stuff.

3. Standing or (half-)kneeling externally rotating rope face-pulls. A very underrated exercise. It trains your core, scapular retraction and external rotation while causing minimal friction to your wrists and shoulders.

4. Your upper body pulling routine depends on your upper body pushing routine. You need movements that balance each other. The easy way to do this is to simply do all movements in reverse. For example, do supine rows with the same grip you do your push-ups, dumbbell bench presses with the same grip you do your dumbbell rows and include a set of reverse flies for every set of regular flies. Doing this will get you a long way.

5. Read up in my FAQ (still in my sig I think... I should finish it sometime) about internally rotated humeri and protracted shoulder girdles. These are extremely common body builder pitfalls.

first of all i do bi's on back day.with that said this has been my back routine for a while :

bent over rows- 4 sets of 6-10
cable rows-4 sets of 6-10
front pull downs-3 sets of 8-12
close grip reverse pulldowns-3 sets 0f 8-12

sometimes, every other workout i'll start off with some deadlifts 4 sets of 6- 8

Originally Posted by Witchblade

No offense, but I think your injury is a result of your training style. Splits work for bodybuilding purposes, but they are not functional, i.e. they do not adhere to your body's natural movement patterns and thus result in postural deviations that make you susceptible to injury.

Are you suggesting that increasing the force output potential of a muscle (through your so called "bodybuilding" techniques) is not going to translate to a functional improvement? With my apologies, such is utterly not true. Even in so called "isolation" exercises, the nervous system is coordinating multiple muscle systems to perform the work. If said training increases the strength of the muscle, there is an improvement in functionality.

You're being vague, too. What is a natural movement pattern, for example? Is standing and curling a barbell "unnatural"? If so, by what standard? Weight training in any sense is relatively "unnatural"; training to muscular failure is virtually impossible in the context of everyday life. To dismiss "splits" as being "not functional" contradict common sense (and the data available on the topic).

If a leg press or a squat increasing functional lower body strength by 60 percent, combined alongside specific skills (like sprinting) result in a functional improvement regarding that skill (sprinting). It is a synergistic benefit when combined with the functional advancing of muscle contraction strength.

How do you know that Camaro isn't performing his actions with good posture, operating inside his range of motion? If you don't see his technique, recommending "training style" as the cause of injury is a weak assumption. Having worked out with him for the better part of half a decade I can attest to his immaculate technique.

He is freakishly powerful and sized, but also an athlete. He is not doing silly tendon snapping pliometrics in the gym, yet his functionality is elite. Between myself and him, our injuries equal twice in 6 years. I'll hold that success rate against any typical gym-rat or athlete.

Injuries are typically a result of bad technique, high impact or jerking force. Sprinting in good form without compromising decent bio mechanics can result in injury. Still, it's a natural movement. Pliometrics, which supposedly mimic "sport-specific" movement patterns are far more dangerous than "bodybuilding" exercise in terms of injury.

Originally Posted by Skib

but there are still movement patterns and variations of the same movement pattern that are going to target the muscles of the back and I believe that's all the OP is asking... what movements do you incorporate into your program to target the muscles of the back?

i think it's a useful thread... it's inspired me to try some new exercises...

Originally Posted by Witchblade

You don't grasp the concept of movement patterns. There is a significant difference between training your back and training vertical pulling movements. It is not as plain as saying that vertical pulling movements equal training your lats.

Firstly, your nervous system does not know body parts. It knows movements. Your nervous system does not know you're doing a curl to train your biceps. Your brain recognises you're practising elbow flexion and sends signals to your biceps to flex. It's the difference between top-down and bottom-up perspectives.

Secondly, the biceps is not the only muscle firing. It is in fact physiologically impossible to completely isolate a muscle. The brachialis and brachioradialis may also be recruited. Ergo, thinking in body parts, like old-school bodybuilders, is not the same as thinking in movement patterns, like contemporary leading personal trainers and therapists.

To return to the original topic, 'back training' does not take into account your body's requisite for optimal health and function to balance, for example, internal and external rotation; scapular elevation and depression; scapular protraction and adduction. These are still basic examples, but most individuals without coaching will not include many more functions regardless.

A good example of what the simplistic and archaic dogmatic paradigm of body part training led to was the incorporation of crunches and sit-ups to train your abs, resulting in countless low back injuries due to overly tight and strong primary hip flexor muscles (primary as in, most people still have underdeveloped iliacus and psoas muscles).

Witchblade, you clearly know what you're talking about and the injury-prevention aspect is something I continue to learn - one painfully long rehab at a time. <Rubs injured shoulder, neck, brachialis, acetabular labrum, and grade-1 L5-S1 anterolisthesis pensively...>

That being said, if I take the tinfoil hat off and attempt to channel Skib, I *think* what he's getting at is the fact that in the process of working a vertical pull, your lats ARE getting stimulated for growth. Performing weighted chins and calling it "lat day" doesn't change what the movement is.

That's how I took it, anyway.

Originally Posted by Duncans Donuts

Are you suggesting that increasing the force output potential of a muscle (through your so called "bodybuilding" techniques) is not going to translate to a functional improvement? With my apologies, such is utterly not true. Even in so called "isolation" exercises, the nervous system is coordinating multiple muscle systems to perform the work. If said training increases the strength of the muscle, there is an improvement in functionality.

You're being vague, too. What is a natural movement pattern, for example? Is standing and curling a barbell "unnatural"? If so, by what standard? Weight training in any sense is relatively "unnatural"; training to muscular failure is virtually impossible in the context of everyday life. To dismiss "splits" as being "not functional" contradict common sense (and the data available on the topic).

If a leg press or a squat increasing functional lower body strength by 60 percent, combined alongside specific skills (like sprinting) result in a functional improvement regarding that skill (sprinting). It is a synergistic benefit when combined with the functional advancing of muscle contraction strength.

How do you know that Camaro isn't performing his actions with good posture, operating inside his range of motion? If you don't see his technique, recommending "training style" as the cause of injury is a weak assumption. Having worked out with him for the better part of half a decade I can attest to his immaculate technique.

He is freakishly powerful and sized, but also an athlete. He is not doing silly tendon snapping pliometrics in the gym, yet his functionality is elite. Between myself and him, our injuries equal twice in 6 years. I'll hold that success rate against any typical gym-rat or athlete.

Injuries are typically a result of bad technique, high impact or jerking force. Sprinting in good form without compromising decent bio mechanics can result in injury. Still, it's a natural movement. Pliometrics, which supposedly mimic "sport-specific" movement patterns are far more dangerous than "bodybuilding" exercise in terms of injury.

One of the most interesting threads there has been in a long time, nice work guys...and gal.

It is!

Another "lat" exercise (Witchblade, don't hate...)

Ninos

My last pull session, in relation to their (roughly) pushing session counterparts.

4x6 (90-115sec RI)
Pullups / Dips
Bent Over Rows / Dumbell Bench
Single Arm DB Rows / Unilateral Overhead Press

Dropsets (4 Levels, No RI)
Unilateral Seated Machine Row / Unilateral Seated Machine Chest Press
Lat Pulldowns / Tricep Press

2x16 (60sec RI)
Standing BB Curls / Standing Overhead Tricep Extensions

Not exact, but near as dammit.

Originally Posted by Duncans Donuts

Are you suggesting that increasing the force output potential of a muscle (through your so called "bodybuilding" techniques) is not going to translate to a functional improvement?

First, let me clarify my usage of the term 'functional training', as it has been (ab)used in many different contexts the past century. As I stated, functional training does not merely encompass strength and size. Traditional bodybuilding splits will benefit both. Functional training - in the Mike Boyle sense of the word -, conversely, also includes safety and carry-over to 'everyday' movements.

You're being vague, too. What is a natural movement pattern, for example? Is standing and curling a barbell "unnatural"? If so, by what standard? Weight training in any sense is relatively "unnatural"; training to muscular failure is virtually impossible in the context of everyday life. To dismiss "splits" as being "not functional" contradict common sense (and the data available on the topic).

Natural refers to the manner of standard operation of the body. Naturalism is a so called fuzzy concept and, correspondingly, there degrees of naturalism. It is not a binary concept where you can state a movement is either 100% or 0% natural. That said, there are guidelines that provide insight into an exercise's degree of naturalism. Standing barbell curls are moderately-highly natural, as you are standing and the resistance is composed of a 'free weight'. An EZ bar would be more natural, as it takes into account the preferred position of your wrists. Dumbbells would be even more natural, as they are 100% free weights, like most everyday objects (a book, a tennis ball, etc.).

Stating weight training is unnatural is a semantic fallacy, as you are using a different definition of the word natural. Regarding functionality, it means 'proper to the circumstances of the case' or 'consonant with the nature of the body'. You are using the definition of 'in conformity with the ordinary course of nature; not unusual or exceptional'. Simply because weight training does not occur in nature (i.e. monkeys do not lift weights), does not mean that we cannot adhere to the body's natural mechanisms of force exertion.

If a leg press or a squat increasing functional lower body strength by 60 percent, combined alongside specific skills (like sprinting) result in a functional improvement regarding that skill (sprinting). It is a synergistic benefit when combined with the functional advancing of muscle contraction strength.

Again, functionality is not binary. I am stating that choosing the leg press instead of the squat is more functional.

How do you know that Camaro isn't performing his actions with good posture, operating inside his range of motion? If you don't see his technique, recommending "training style" as the cause of injury is a weak assumption. Having worked out with him for the better part of half a decade I can attest to his immaculate technique.
He is freakishly powerful and sized, but also an athlete. He is not doing silly tendon snapping pliometrics in the gym, yet his functionality is elite. Between myself and him, our injuries equal twice in 6 years. I'll hold that success rate against any typical gym-rat or athlete.

The fact you're both incredibly strong and big is irrelevant in this context. n = 2. Perhaps you would have had 0 injuries had you trained differently.

Injuries are typically a result of bad technique, high impact or jerking force. Sprinting in good form without compromising decent bio mechanics can result in injury. Still, it's a natural movement. Pliometrics, which supposedly mimic "sport-specific" movement patterns are far more dangerous than "bodybuilding" exercise in terms of injury.

Actually, current research (e.g. Stuart McGill's work on back disorders) shows that the vast majority of injuries is a result of chronic postural deviations and not of events. Utilising machines transfers a considerably higher percentage of force to your joints instead of your muscles. Furthermore, your stabiliser muscle are undertrained and your nervous system is taught improper bio-mechanics. This results in improper form when performing, say, sprints and then sprints can in fact result in injury. The cause, however, was not performing sprints, but flawed program design. Relation does not equal causality.

In conclusion, traditional bodybuilding splits can be used to enhance strength and size. However, they are inherently less safe and less functional than movement-based training programs. The simple fact is that old-school bodybuilders did not have access to all the knowledge in the field of physical therapy we have today.

Originally Posted by Built

I *think* what he's getting at is the fact that in the process of working a vertical pull, your lats ARE getting stimulated for growth. Performing weighted chins and calling it "lat day" doesn't change what the movement is.

It does not change what muscles are being recruited; however, it implies a different program design.