Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

This morning tried pull ups again..

13

10

9

7

Welcome to the inconsistent world of pull-ups lol. Being body weight, your numbers will fluctuate with what you eat that day :thumbsup:

  • 1 month later...

Awesome thread, can't believe I didn't see it earlier!

I noticed earlier in the thread there were some chin-up numbers thrown in too, so I'll include those as well as my pull-up numbers. With my current training program, I only have 1 working set, which is further broken down in to 3 "rest pause" sets. Google Doggcrapp training for a better explanation. Cliff notes..... You do your first working set. Go to absolute failure, drop down, 10 - 15 deep breaths. Failure again, more deep breaths. Failure again, then you're done.

So.. at a height of about 175cm, and a body weight of 92kg @ around 13%bf...

Pull ups:

15

12

9

Chin ups:

22

17

13

To give a bit of insight... I was doing these same numbers at 85kg (about 2 months ago), so I'm quite happy with my strength progress. Will try 'normal' sets soon, with a bit of time in between each set, instead of my current 15 seconds or so.

Edited by Dajae

Not impossible but very unlikely...more plausible that by 200 in a row he means 200 in succession. Ala what many people I know claim similarly with push-ups, when they really mean sets...

I've seen those videos of those ripped Russian kids who do nothing but pull-ups all day and weigh <60kg, they usually top out below 100. But you do tend to find towards the end that they sit in a dead hang as a rest between reps.

He said they are proper, arm straight full length pull ups. I kept saying are you sure? He said yes. Said he trains 4 to 5 hours a day. 2 hours is boxing specific training the rest is hitt cardio and upper body training he said he does mainly cable work too.

Agreed. Possible, but very unlikely. To have numbers like that would put him into that "elite" bracket. How much does he weigh do you think? Anyone training 4 - 5 hours a day, is either blessed with amazing superb genetics, not training hard enough, or on steroids.

But hey.. tell him to make a video. That'll put a sock in our mouths eh?

Would actually love to see a video of it, not just to prove a point on the internet, but would be pretty amazing just to see it. Talk about a blood pump...

Speaking of pull-ups, in my current state I'm pulling

20

15

10

This is after being sick and taking a month off. So I've lost strength, but have also lost a few kg to balance that out...thus similar numbers to pre-sickness. It's quite a strange feeling actually, the difference in the motion compared across two different body weights.

Indeed! It would be quite the accomplishment... Especially if he actually weighs a fair bit. I mean, rock climbers that weigh <60kgs have no issue doing 30 - 50, but a big boxer doing 200? Damn.

Nice numbers man! With the pronated grip, I like going wide to hit more upper back and rhomboid action.. As a result, my elbows tend to get a little sore.

Do you get the same as this? Or are your pull ups done with only a slightly wider than shoulder width grip? If I bring my pronated grip in somewhat, I can manage a few more reps (18), but I feel it less in the upper back, and more in my forearms.

Anyone here like neutral grip pull ups? I find these to be the best of both worlds.

My pull-ups are neutral grip. I used to do wide pronated, but after (a likely unrelated) shoulder injury, I started back on pull-ups with a neutral grip for less strain on the injury. Can probably do a couple more reps this way than wide, but it does still feel like a complete motion. I feel like you can get a slight rowing benefit too, without kipping the legs up, as you can easily change the angle of your body using longitudinal hand grip (if you have the strength) and leg position to hold that angle in place. It definitely hits the abs/core hard.

Between those and deadlifts I don't feel the need to do much else, except maybe something for rear delts.

Ah ok, nice work. You're definitely right in regards to shoulder friendly benefits.. much kinder than wide pronated.

For all my pull ups/chins, I keep my legs out straight in front of me, at an angle. I find it helps keep more tightness throughout the motion, and yes, very good stimulus in the core region.

I wish I could just get away with deads and squats for "frontal core" strength.... eg abs... However my physio advised me to include some form of weighted 'crunch' movement (back friendly variety) as my lower back tends to be much stronger than the opposite muscles..

Face pulls are great for rear delts and shoulder health. Ever had much experience doing them?

In terms of that crunch movement, assuming I know what you're talking about, three recommendations for exercises I've enjoyed on the front side:

1. Captains chair leg raises, as many of these "machines" keep the lower back static with pads and, provided you have no hip issues, shouldn't give you any injuries beyond a stretched hamstring from raising too high. I usually do it after deadlifts to finish off abs, but coincidentally it's a good stretch for the hamstrings after getting them tightened on deads.

2. I have a nautilus type crunch machine that is basically a seated crunch. You can keep adding weight to it and I felt my abdominal wall develop some real thickness to it using this. Didn't take me long to max out the weight stack for 20 reps but the problem is that, like all machines, if your body isn't proportionate to it (even though it's adjustable), you can cause yourself some damage at high weights because of the rigid motion...which sounds more ironic than it is. My lower back got a bit twitchy after prolonged use of this one, though maybe I was too focused on doing more weight and lost my technique in trying to leverage it.

3. Kneeling crunches on the tricep pushdown (for lack of the proper term for this exercise), where you kneel on the ground, hold a pushdown rope behind your head and do crunches towards the ground.

I've given face pulls a go and they felt very awkward and it did mess with the joints a bit - could have been a bad angle. I must try again since my shoulder has advanced a bit. It would probably help to have someone watch and advise if I'm doing them properly, too, as all well and good to think you are doing it but it can look very different!

In terms of that crunch movement, assuming I know what you're talking about, three recommendations for exercises I've enjoyed on the front side:

1. Captains chair leg raises, as many of these "machines" keep the lower back static with pads and, provided you have no hip issues, shouldn't give you any injuries beyond a stretched hamstring from raising too high. I usually do it after deadlifts to finish off abs, but coincidentally it's a good stretch for the hamstrings after getting them tightened on deads.

2. I have a nautilus type crunch machine that is basically a seated crunch. You can keep adding weight to it and I felt my abdominal wall develop some real thickness to it using this. Didn't take me long to max out the weight stack for 20 reps but the problem is that, like all machines, if your body isn't proportionate to it (even though it's adjustable), you can cause yourself some damage at high weights because of the rigid motion...which sounds more ironic than it is. My lower back got a bit twitchy after prolonged use of this one, though maybe I was too focused on doing more weight and lost my technique in trying to leverage it.

3. Kneeling crunches on the tricep pushdown (for lack of the proper term for this exercise), where you kneel on the ground, hold a pushdown rope behind your head and do crunches towards the ground.

I've given face pulls a go and they felt very awkward and it did mess with the joints a bit - could have been a bad angle. I must try again since my shoulder has advanced a bit. It would probably help to have someone watch and advise if I'm doing them properly, too, as all well and good to think you are doing it but it can look very different!

For the leg raises, I could never seem to feel it adequately enough in my abdominal muscles.. My hips always felt like they were doing more of the work. I tried a variation where I would hold a light dumbbell between my ankles, and with a bend at my knees, I would raise my upper legs up, and then try to "tuck up" my pelvis to my chest.. Seemed to work a little better for me.. However when a few friends tried, it had the opposite effect! Strange how everyone reacts so differently at times.

Yeah nice.. I have something similar, a weight plate loaded hammer strength crunch machine. Really like this machine.. The machines upper and lower portions are required to move, rather than just the upper/lower without the other. Definitely noticed some more "popping out" action with these!

Ahhh yes.. I love cable crunches. Such a good exercise if the form is good, ie, no swinging motion. The fact that it can be weight resisted is also a big win for me. I always believed that if you're training the rest of your body against a resistance (usually increasing weight), then the same should be done for the core. Planks with a 20kg plate resting on my glutes is also good for some isometric strength.

Face pulls can be tricky that's for sure! Found out I was doing them wrong for quite some time. Here is a video I found which helped me...


(couldn't get the linking feature thing to work :/ but if you go on youtube and search "face pull technique", the video by scott herman fitness is the one )

I'll watch you

:ninja:

Lol'd so hard. That emoticon is so good.

Edited by Dajae
  • Like 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...