MB Madaera
Lost 31.7 lbs fat
Built 11.7 lbs muscle


Chris Madaera
Built 9 lbs muscle


Keelan Parham
Lost 30 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle


Bob Marchesello
Lost 23.55 lbs fat
Built 8.55 lbs muscle


Jeff Turner
Lost 25.5 lbs fat


Jeanenne Darden
Lost 26 lbs fat
Built 3 lbs muscle


Ted Tucker
Lost 41 lbs fat
Built 4 lbs muscle

 
 

Determine the Length of Your Workouts

Evaluate Your Progress

Keep Warm-Up in Perspective


ARCHIVES >>

"Doing more exercise with less intensity,"
Arthur Jones believes, "has all but
destroyed the actual great value
of weight training. Something
must be done . . . and quickly."
The New Bodybuilding for
Old-School Results supplies
MUCH of that "something."

 

This is one of 93 photos of Andy McCutcheon that are used in The New High-Intensity Training to illustrate the recommended exercises.

To find out more about McCutcheon and his training, click here.

 

Mission Statement

H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy

Privacy Policy

Credits

LOG IN FORUM MAIN REGISTER SEARCH
The Best Lats in Bodybuilding History
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Author
Rating
Options

anab0lic

Were built using the nautilus pullover...

https://www.youtube.com/...h?v=JK5Bm1TAcCw
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

And pulldowns and undergrip rows. Did Coleman do any machine pullovers? 99% of Columbu's training did not, and he was the epitome of the cobra hood... and then you have Robbie Robinson. I bet Yates took more drugs than the others (minus Coleman), and so you can't say "he used the pullover, is known for his lats, therefore the pullover is king of the lat exercises." Incorrect logic.
Open User Options Menu

farhad

Massachusetts, USA

if you even can call that "logic"; just a claim lacking NO context.
Open User Options Menu

anab0lic

Brian Johnston wrote:
And pulldowns and undergrip rows. Did Coleman do any machine pullovers? 99% of Columbu's training did not, and he was the epitome of the cobra hood... and then you have Robbie Robinson. I bet Yates took more drugs than the others (minus Coleman), and so you can't say "he used the pullover, is known for his lats, therefore the pullover is king of the lat exercises." Incorrect logic.


AFAIK Colemon didnt do any pullover machines and imo had worse lats than Dorian despite having BETTER genetics. Actually as far as genetics go i believe Dorian beat many guys who had superior genetics to him because he trained smarter and harder (HIT.)

Arnold used the nautilus pullover and said the first few times he did he experienced growth in his lats that he couldnt achieve from anything else and after his brief stay with Arthur had machines shipped to where he usually trained.. and said it was the best machine in the gym. Since Columbu and Arnold often trained together its entirely possible columbo used the machine too?

Dorians lats were not always a strong point for him, he actually lost one of his first bodybuilding shows to a guy who had a better developed back (this was before he was using the pullover) so went back to the drawing board started getting brutally strong on the pullover w/ beyond failure training and turned a bodypart that was lacking for him into what made him stand out from the competition and win 6x mr olympias in a row.

Of course barbell rows and the hammer strength pulldown contributed too, but he considered it 'priceless' in the quest for building great lats.


And regarding Yates drug intake its actually much lower than what a lot of other pros have been known to use...and what many speculated him to be using..much much lower...to the point where nobody believed him when he openly talked about what he took. And if you know how yates is, hes a straight talking no bullshit guy. (you can find the videos on youtube where he talks about it all)

More proof that HIT training produces superior growth vs conventional training methods when applied correctly.

Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

OK, is it HIT methods, or the use of the pullover machine... make up your mind. A person can do high volume on a pullover machine. Interesting that naturals on this board cannot achieve much from a pullover machine when compared to just chins or pulldowns.

I have a pullover machine... rarely use it... does next to nothing except give me a bit of lat burn. But whatever... if you think that the pullover is THE stimulus for big lats, and that it's more the pullover than any other exercise, including chins or pulldowns, then that's OK.
Open User Options Menu

anab0lic

Brian Johnston wrote:
OK, is it HIT methods, or the use of the pullover machine... make up your mind. A person can do high volume on a pullover machine. Interesting that naturals on this board cannot achieve much from a pullover machine when compared to just chins or pulldowns.

I have a pullover machine... rarely use it... does next to nothing except give me a bit of lat burn. But whatever... if you think that the pullover is THE stimulus for big lats, and that it's more the pullover than any other exercise, including chins or pulldowns, then that's OK.


It's both. Maximizing muscle growth = isolating the target muscle (which the pullover does) as best you can through its full range of motion worked at a high intensity..which is exactly what he did. After positive failure he had his training partner assist him with forced reps, negatives, rest pause etc.

Chins and pulldowns dont work as well since the arms tend to fail while the lats can still do more...also the line of pull is up and down when it needs to be in an arc like motion to work all the lat fibres fully from top to bottom.

Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

You may be regurgitating what Arthur suggested (about the 'weak points' of chins and dips), but reality that's not the case. If pullovers worked so well, Yates should have AVOIDED any chin or pulldown work... why bother?
Open User Options Menu

Michael Petrella

Ontario, CAN

Metroflex Arlington has a 1st gen pullover. So it is very possible coleman used it. I've seen video of him on a double shoulder and first gen leg extension toying with the stack.

The original golds had a plate loader which I have seen a picture of Franco on. Again Im sure Robbie did a few sets on it.

Now I certainly don't contribute there lat development to only that machine but all of the top guys had access to one during the peak of their careers.

Michael
Open User Options Menu

anab0lic

Brian Johnston wrote:
You may be regurgitating what Arthur suggested (about the 'weak points' of chins and dips), but reality that's not the case. If pullovers worked so well, Yates should have AVOIDED any chin or pulldown work... why bother?


It is the case though...an easy way to test this: see how much someone can do on a shoulder width grip pulldown normally, with straps if needed so their grip strength doesnt fail... then have that same person do the same movement with ab straps attached to the cable and looping their elbows though the straps so they are now pulling though their elbows like a pullover machine and see how much more weight they can now handle.. you are overloading the target area with significantly more weight which will result in more growth.

And Yates didnt do chins or cable pulldowns... i believe he did early on in his career, but said he stopped because a) it's only hitting the upper portion of his lats, which is true, there is literally only a few inches of movement with a chin up and cable pulldown where the lats are being properly taxed due to the line of pull being straight up and down and not an arc and b) arm flexors failing while lats can still do more work.

So instead he chose the hammer strength front pulldown, which sort of mimics the second half of a rep on the natilus pullover... the way it comes down at an arc, its sort of a pulldown/row hybrid. Perhaps he felt like the strength curve/cam of the pullover didnt allow him to work that second potion of the rep area as hard as hed like while still being able to get each rep moveing from the start..i dont know.

Have you ever used that specific machine? It REALLY hits the mid lats in a way that i havent experienced doing anything else...I used to have one at an old gym i trained at...i sure do miss it. I'm not a fan of most of the HS machines but they really hit it out the park with that one.

The only other thing he really did for his lats was the barbell row... which he did as it allows you to pull your elbows back all the way at the angle he did them at and really build thickness into the lower portion of the lats.
Open User Options Menu

AShortt

Ontario, CAN

I think the advantage of a pullover machine in a HIT workout is the volume effect. That is you can get a little more localized fatigue. When doing HIT usually there is less time spent isolating and working the angles to get localized fatigue. The pullover is for the back what a fly movement is for chest. No one claims huge chest gains from flys but it does allow targetting anfd build up of fatigue.

Regards,
Andrew
Open User Options Menu

HDLou

In one of Dr Dardens books it was stated that Jones stated at some point there would be a bodybuilder who's lat width development would be wider than his shoulders. Yates achieved that level of development and by using Jones'own pullover machine as a big part of it by his own admission.
Open User Options Menu

anab0lic

Michael Petrella wrote:
Metroflex Arlington has a 1st gen pullover. So it is very possible coleman used it. I've seen video of him on a double shoulder and first gen leg extension toying with the stack.

The original golds had a plate loader which I have seen a picture of Franco on. Again Im sure Robbie did a few sets on it.

Now I certainly don't contribute there lat development to only that machine but all of the top guys had access to one during the peak of their careers.

Michael


Yeah, i think in one of his training videos you can see it in the background...wonder if he ever used it..

Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

HDLou wrote:
In one of Dr Dardens books it was stated that Jones stated at some point there would be a bodybuilder who's lat width development would be wider than his shoulders. Yates achieved that level of development and by using Jones'own pullover machine as a big part of it by his own admission.


It didn't happen to Coe, Mentzer, Viator, or Olivia.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Why bring up a machine that mimics PART of the ROM of the pullover, and who cares about using lat straps or whatever to make any type of comparison in regard to ROM? Your claim was very specific... that optimizing lat width can only be achieved by way of the Nautilus pullover (or some type of pullover machine).

Let's get rid of all the steroid using goliath's out there who may or may not have had access or have used such a machine for part or all of their careers, and let's focus on the average person trying to optimize lat development.

Now, those who feel they have optimized lat width by way of the pullover, and was only able to do so by way of the pullover (that without the pullover it was IMPOSSIBLE and relative to what you achieved at one point or at this point in your lifting careers), please raise your hand!

I bought one... I WISHED it would have done what I wanted it to do, but it did not. Whatever short-fallings you may think chins (more so than pulldowns) may have, they have proven far more effective for me and my clients. This is not to say that pullovers do not affect the lats or cannot contribute to lat development, but what I'm stating is that I do not believe such a machine is necessary to optimize lat development.

A person may like the machine and may use it, but there's a difference between that and making a claim that optimization is impossible without it. I don't count Yate's comments since he was a heavy drug user at the time, and he has the natural ability to develop a huge back. His arms, on the other hand, were less than his torso, and yet machine curls and extensions did not produce anything beyond what other equipment could have done.

And so, why not look at the freakiest arms and see how those were built, or how about the freakiest pecs (I bet not much machine work there). Or the freakiest thighs... the result of a Nautilus leg press?
Open User Options Menu

anab0lic

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
HDLou wrote:
In one of Dr Dardens books it was stated that Jones stated at some point there would be a bodybuilder who's lat width development would be wider than his shoulders. Yates achieved that level of development and by using Jones'own pullover machine as a big part of it by his own admission.

It didn't happen to Coe, Mentzer, Viator, or Olivia.


Oliva's lats were pretty damn wide.. and has said himself he was at his biggest and best when he trained with Arthur using the machines.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Oliva was on a shit-load of drugs at the time as well. What other 'best body parts in the world' are the result of a Nautilus machine, or is the pullover a freak of nature that just happens to be in its own league for optimizing a body part (apparently in steroid-using bodybuilders only)?
Open User Options Menu

backtrack

What does bring the lats out then?

I quizzed a trainer in a gym once and he gave the typical wide-grip chins pulldowns approach.

But also of interest he also said the lat spread is more apparent on body fat. Bruce Lee had an amazing lat spread to me one of the best I've ever seen.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

Arm adduction... but it does not have to be limited to the pullover machine. There is no evidence that Yate's back is the result of the pullover (in fact, he credits a lot of his thickness AND lower lat width to undergrip rows)... that without it, he would be narrower. There is no evidence that without the pullover that the rest of us would not realize our fullest lat potential.

That is my point. I am not saying that the pullover does not add value to a program (remember, I like variation) or that it is not a tool in one's arsenal. I never said anything of the sort.
Open User Options Menu

HeavyHitter32

Brian, on a side note, what are your thoughts on the barbell row grip of overhand vs underhand? Is one more superior in your mind?
Open User Options Menu

backtrack

I like Straight arm pull downs. I've only ever used one version of a pullover machine and it wasn't nautilus. I enjoyed the feel but I used a whole stack with ease.

From my experience and observations a lot of folks benefit from indirect effect.
Open User Options Menu

Brian Johnston

Ontario, CAN

HeavyHitter32 wrote:
Brian, on a side note, what are your thoughts on the barbell row grip of overhand vs underhand? Is one more superior in your mind?


That which you are NOT USED TO is superior. In any case, and some may think this BS, before Yates tore his biceps I knew it was going to happen. It wasn't only his jerking form with a huge load, but the nature of the biceps contraction under that heavy load.

The biceps' fully contracted position occurs with the elbows pointing up (as though you are scratching the back of the right shoulder with the right arm). Jones had a biceps machine that was designed in this fashion... not sure if the position is clear visually. With the under-grip row, the arm is in the OPPOSITE position... which means the biceps are attempting to contract against the load, but while being put into a state of stretch at the same time. It's the same position as with an incline dumbbell curl exercise, although the tension at the contracted position is not all that great or injurious.

Nothing wrong with that rowing position per se, but add in 400 pounds of load and jerking it back hard and...
Open User Options Menu

kurtvf

Michael Petrella wrote:
Metroflex Arlington has a 1st gen pullover. So it is very possible coleman used it. I've seen video of him on a double shoulder and first gen leg extension toying with the stack.

The original golds had a plate loader which I have seen a picture of Franco on. Again Im sure Robbie did a few sets on it.

Now I certainly don't contribute there lat development to only that machine but all of the top guys had access to one during the peak of their careers.

Michael


The original Gold's had a Nautilus plate load pullover and a plate load biceps/triceps. I read somewhere Ken Sprague stating that Franco bought the arm machine and brought it to the gym in lieu of paying membership fees.

Open User Options Menu

dipsrule

Pennsylvania, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:
Oliva was on a shit-load of drugs at the time as well. What other 'best body parts in the world' are the result of a Nautilus machine, or is the pullover a freak of nature that just happens to be in its own league for optimizing a body part (apparently in steroid-using bodybuilders only)?


Hi Brian

A bit off topic

Speaking of Nautilus and Oliva. I remember seeing a picture of Olive outside stuffed in a pullover. I think he had flip flops on and his feet were planted on the ground.

I thought its a cool picture and maybe that picture helped sell some of those machines.

I think that picture was in the Arthur Jones Collection books that you did.

Btw if your a Jones fan its a must have.
Open User Options Menu

NewYorker

New York, USA

It's a shame that most gyms do not carry pullover machines or for that matter rowing torso, behind neck and pecdec machines.

It is not possible to achieve the same development for pectoral and upper back and the upper body in general using other equipment.

The lack of these proper tools in gyms today is largely due to the spread of misinformation. Those who spread their nonsense are ruining it for the rest of us.

I achieved outstanding results using these machines as have hundreds of thousands of old-timers. It's a crime.

Open User Options Menu

entsminger

Virginia, USA

Brian Johnston wrote:
Why bring up a machine that mimics PART of the ROM of the pullover, and who cares about using lat straps or whatever to make any type of comparison in regard to ROM? Your claim was very specific... that optimizing lat width can only be achieved by way of the Nautilus pullover (or some type of pullover machine).

Let's get rid of all the steroid using goliath's out there who may or may not have had access or have used such a machine for part or all of their careers, and let's focus on the average person trying to optimize lat development.

Now, those who feel they have optimized lat width by way of the pullover, and was only able to do so by way of the pullover (that without the pullover it was IMPOSSIBLE and relative to what you achieved at one point or at this point in your lifting careers), please raise your hand!

I bought one... I WISHED it would have done what I wanted it to do, but it did not. Whatever short-fallings you may think chins (more so than pulldowns) may have, they have proven far more effective for me and my clients. This is not to say that pullovers do not affect the lats or cannot contribute to lat development, but what I'm stating is that I do not believe such a machine is necessary to optimize lat development.

A person may like the machine and may use it, but there's a difference between that and making a claim that optimization is impossible without it. I don't count Yate's comments since he was a heavy drug user at the time, and he has the natural ability to develop a huge back. His arms, on the other hand, were less than his torso, and yet machine curls and extensions did not produce anything beyond what other equipment could have done.

And so, why not look at the freakiest arms and see how those were built, or how about the freakiest pecs (I bet not much machine work there). Or the freakiest thighs... the result of a Nautilus leg press?


==Scott==
I have always had a hard time building lats. I'd do pulldowns and rows etc with very little effect to my lats. I always dreamed of owning some Nautilus machines like the pullover and behind the neck thinking that when I got those machines my lats would take off. Well now I have all those Nautilus machines in triplicate and my lats have not taken off any more than with the other methods.

Now I will say I do enjoy using my Nautilus machines for lats or any other body part way more than rows or pulldowns or chins but to be honest the Nautilus machines didn't make one fig of difference in my development compared to other methods. Now as I'm getting to be an old fart I much prefer the safety and ease of using a Nautilus machine. I don't have to worry about hurting my lower back again by bending over with rows and the like.

The machines do allow me to focus on the intended muscle very well in a safe manner and I love them but I could get just as good a workout with a pair of dumbells if I chose to.
Open User Options Menu
1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last
Administrators Online: Mod Phoenix
H.I.T. Acceptable Use Policy