BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship among pull-up and lat pull exercises and different anthropometric dimensions in trained athletes. METHODS: Twenty-five males were evaluated for maximum number of pull-ups, one-repetition maximum lat pull (1RM Lat Pull), lat pull repetitions at 80% 1RM (Lat Pull at 80% 1RM), lat pull repetitions at a load equivalent to body mass (Lat Pull at BM-load), and different anthropometric variables. Furthermore, the subjects were divided in higher (HPG, N.=12) and lower pull-up performance (LPG, N.=13) to compare the differences in the variables analyzed between both levels. RESULTS: Pull-ups were significantly correlated with Lat Pull at BM-load (r=0.62, P<0.01) but neither with 1RM Lat Pull (r=0.09) nor with Lat Pull at 80% 1RM (r=-0.15). Pull-ups showed a significant (P<0.05) negative relationship with body mass (BM, r=-0.55), lean body mass (LBM, r=-0.51), and fat mass (FM, r=-0.52), while BM and LBM were significantly correlated with 1RM Lat Pull (r=0.55, P<0.05). HPG showed significantly (P<0.05) lower BM (0/3/97%), FM (1/3/97%) and LBM (1/4/95%) than LPG. Furthermore, HPG attained significantly (P<0.05 - 0.001) greater performance in Lat Pull at BM-load (100/0/0%) and 1RM Lat Pull/BM (96/3/2%) than LPG. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that pull-up and lat pull exercises have common elements. Moreover, the anthropometric dimensions seem to influence differently on both exercises, depending on the strength indicator evaluated.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to investigate the relationship among pull-up and lat pull exercises and different anthropometric dimensions in trained athletes. METHODS: Twenty-five males were evaluated for maximum number of pull-ups, one-repetition maximum lat pull (1RM Lat Pull), lat pull repetitions at 80% 1RM (Lat Pull at 80% 1RM), lat pull repetitions at a load equivalent to body mass (Lat Pull at BM-load), and different anthropometric variables. Furthermore, the subjects were divided in higher (HPG, N.=12) and lower pull-up performance (LPG, N.=13) to compare the differences in the variables analyzed between both levels. RESULTS: Pull-ups were significantly correlated with Lat Pull at BM-load (r=0.62, P<0.01) but neither with 1RM Lat Pull (r=0.09) nor with Lat Pull at 80% 1RM (r=-0.15). Pull-ups showed a significant (P<0.05) negative relationship with body mass (BM, r=-0.55), lean body mass (LBM, r=-0.51), and fat mass (FM, r=-0.52), while BM and LBM were significantly correlated with 1RM Lat Pull (r=0.55, P<0.05). HPG showed significantly (P<0.05) lower BM (0/3/97%), FM (1/3/97%) and LBM (1/4/95%) than LPG. Furthermore, HPG attained significantly (P<0.05 - 0.001) greater performance in Lat Pull at BM-load (100/0/0%) and 1RM Lat Pull/BM (96/3/2%) than LPG. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that pull-up and lat pull exercises have common elements. Moreover, the anthropometric dimensions seem to influence differently on both exercises, depending on the strength indicator evaluated.