I've noticed something today in powerlifters and their programming. You have two sides really:
A. American based powerlifting that involves working the lats constantly. The reason being is although not a primary mover, it is important to all lifts. I think we all know the reasons so I won't go into them. Makes sense.
B. programs based over seas where the thought is back work is of little importance. The best way to get good at squat/bench/dead is to squat/bench/dead, and often. Specificity is king. If you want to be good at a sport do sport specific movements. Makes sense.
I was wondering if any of AM posters have noticed this, how they feel about it, how they program the upper back, and why do they think it is such a variance? Also, both sides are very successful, so I won't say one is wrong, but is one given the edge other the other in any of your opinions.
No right or wrong answers, just curious if anyone here has any thoughts on this as I find it interesting.
A. American based powerlifting that involves working the lats constantly. The reason being is although not a primary mover, it is important to all lifts. I think we all know the reasons so I won't go into them. Makes sense.
B. programs based over seas where the thought is back work is of little importance. The best way to get good at squat/bench/dead is to squat/bench/dead, and often. Specificity is king. If you want to be good at a sport do sport specific movements. Makes sense.
I was wondering if any of AM posters have noticed this, how they feel about it, how they program the upper back, and why do they think it is such a variance? Also, both sides are very successful, so I won't say one is wrong, but is one given the edge other the other in any of your opinions.
No right or wrong answers, just curious if anyone here has any thoughts on this as I find it interesting.