Biomechanics
Randomized Controlled Trial
2010
Effect of grip width and hand orientation on muscle activity during pull-ups and lat pull-downs
By Leslie E. Lusk and Stuart J. Hale
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(7), pp. 1895-1900
<h2>Abstract</h2>
<p><a href="/terms/grip-width/" class="term-link" data-slug="grip-width" title="Grip width">Grip width</a> and hand orientation are commonly manipulated variables during lat pulldown and pull-up exercises, yet the differential effects of these modifications on specific <a href="/terms/muscle-activation/" class="term-link" data-slug="muscle-activation" title="muscle activation">muscle activation</a> patterns remain incompletely characterized. This study investigated the influence of grip width (wide vs. narrow) and hand orientation (pronated overhand vs. supinated underhand vs. neutral) on <a href="/terms/electromyography/" class="term-link" data-slug="electromyography" title="EMG">EMG</a> activity of the latissimus dorsi, biceps brachii, middle trapezius, and posterior deltoid during the lat pulldown. Twenty resistance-trained participants performed five grip variations, with surface EMG normalized to maximum voluntary <a href="/terms/isometric-contraction/" class="term-link" data-slug="isometric-contraction" title="isometric contraction">isometric contraction</a> values. Wide pronated grip produced the highest upper latissimus dorsi activation, while narrow supinated grip significantly elevated biceps brachii recruitment. Neutral grip yielded the most balanced activation profile across all recorded muscles. No single grip variation maximized activation of all target muscles simultaneously, indicating that grip selection should be guided by specific training objectives. These findings provide evidence-based guidance for coaches and practitioners seeking to optimize back development by strategically varying grip width and orientation across training sessions.</p>
<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The latissimus dorsi is the broadest muscle of the back and a primary contributor to shoulder adduction, extension, and internal rotation [1]. Its well-developed appearance — characterized by a wide, V-shaped torso — is a universal aesthetic goal in bodybuilding and physique sports. The lat pulldown and its bodyweight counterpart, the pull-up, are among the most widely prescribed exercises for latissimus dorsi development. However, these exercises are performed with remarkable variation in <a href="/terms/grip-width/" class="term-link" data-slug="grip-width" title="grip width">grip width</a> and hand orientation across training settings, and the question of which configuration optimally targets the latissimus dorsi or its specific regions has generated considerable debate.</p>
<p>Grip width affects the <a href="/terms/range-of-motion/" class="term-link" data-slug="range-of-motion" title="range of motion">range of motion</a>, the moment arms acting at the shoulder and elbow, and consequently the mechanical advantage of individual muscles throughout the movement. A wide grip limits how far the elbows can travel and reduces elbow flexion, potentially changing the relative contributions of the shoulder adductors versus the elbow flexors [2]. A narrow or neutral grip, by contrast, allows greater elbow flexion range, which may increase biceps brachii involvement. Hand orientation (pronated, supinated, or neutral) further modulates these mechanical relationships. The supinated (underhand) position is widely believed among practitioners to increase biceps recruitment due to placing the elbow flexors in a more favorable length-tension position [3].</p>
<p>From an anatomical standpoint, the latissimus dorsi has been described as having functional regional heterogeneity, with the upper fibers potentially responding differently to grip variations than the lower fibers [4]. <a href="/terms/intermittent-fasting/" class="term-link" data-slug="intermittent-fasting" title="If">If</a> this functional differentiation is confirmed electromyographically, it would support the use of multiple grip widths and orientations across a training program to ensure comprehensive back development.</p>
<p>Despite widespread practical application of grip variation in pulldown exercises, controlled <a href="/terms/electromyography/" class="term-link" data-slug="electromyography" title="EMG">EMG</a> studies directly comparing multiple grip conditions in a single experiment are limited. Prior research has often examined only two conditions, examined pull-ups rather than lat pulldowns, or failed to control for relative loading across conditions. The purpose of this study was therefore to systematically compare five grip variations on <a href="/terms/muscle-activation/" class="term-link" data-slug="muscle-activation" title="muscle activation">muscle activation</a> of the latissimus dorsi, biceps brachii, middle trapezius, and posterior deltoid during standardized lat pulldown performance.</p>
<h2>Methods</h2>
<p><strong>Participants</strong></p>
<p>Twenty recreationally trained adults (12 men, 8 women; mean age 24.7 ± 3.8 years; minimum 1 year resistance training experience) participated in the study. All participants were regular performers of pulldown and rowing exercises. Exclusion criteria included any history of shoulder or elbow injury in the previous 6 months. Institutional review board approval was obtained and all participants provided written informed consent prior to enrollment.</p>
<p><strong>Exercise Conditions</strong></p>
<p>Five grip variations were tested in a counterbalanced order across two sessions:</p>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Condition</th>
<th><a href="/terms/grip-width/" class="term-link" data-slug="grip-width" title="Grip Width">Grip Width</a></th>
<th>Hand Orientation</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Wide Pronated</td>
<td>~1.5x biacromial width</td>
<td>Overhand (pronated)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Narrow Pronated</td>
<td>Shoulder-width</td>
<td>Overhand (pronated)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Wide Supinated</td>
<td>~1.5x biacromial width</td>
<td>Underhand (supinated)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Narrow Supinated</td>
<td>Shoulder-width</td>
<td>Underhand (supinated)</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Neutral Narrow</td>
<td>Shoulder-width</td>
<td>Neutral (palms facing)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>All conditions used the same resistance (70% of the participant's maximum voluntary load on the wide pronated condition), adjusted for each condition via a preliminary load-matching procedure. Participants performed 3 repetitions per condition, with 3 minutes of rest between conditions.</p>
<p><strong><a href="/terms/electromyography/" class="term-link" data-slug="electromyography" title="EMG">EMG</a> Protocol</strong></p>
<p>Surface electrodes were placed according to SENIAM guidelines on: the upper latissimus dorsi (approximately 5 cm below the inferior angle of the scapula, angled to follow fiber direction), biceps brachii (midpoint of the muscle belly on the dominant arm), middle trapezius (midpoint between the medial border of the scapula and the spinous process of T4), and posterior deltoid (posterior aspect of the shoulder, approximately 2 cm below the posterolateral acromion).</p>
<p>Raw EMG was sampled at 2000 Hz, bandpass filtered (20–450 Hz), full-wave rectified, and smoothed with a 50 ms root mean square window. Normalization was to MVIC obtained via maximal isometric contractions in standardized testing positions for each muscle.</p>
<p><strong>Statistical Analysis</strong></p>
<p>One-way repeated-measures ANOVA was used to compare mean EMG across the five conditions for each muscle, followed by Bonferroni-corrected post hoc comparisons. Effect sizes (partial eta-squared, η²p) were calculated. Alpha was set at p 0.05.</p>
<h2>Results and Discussion</h2>
<p><strong>Latissimus Dorsi Activation</strong></p>
<p><a href="/terms/grip-width/" class="term-link" data-slug="grip-width" title="Grip width">Grip width</a> and orientation significantly influenced latissimus dorsi <a href="/terms/electromyography/" class="term-link" data-slug="electromyography" title="EMG">EMG</a> (F(4,76) = 8.34; p 0.001; η²p = 0.31). The wide pronated condition produced the highest latissimus dorsi activation (68.4 ± 11.2% MVIC), which was significantly greater than the narrow supinated condition (54.1 ± 9.8% MVIC; p = 0.007) and the narrow pronated condition (56.3 ± 10.4% MVIC; p = 0.012). The neutral narrow grip produced intermediate latissimus dorsi activation (61.8 ± 10.1% MVIC) that did not differ significantly from the wide pronated condition.</p>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Condition</th>
<th>Latissimus Dorsi (%MVIC)</th>
<th>Biceps Brachii (%MVIC)</th>
<th>Mid Trapezius (%MVIC)</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Wide Pronated</td>
<td>68.4 ± 11.2</td>
<td>42.3 ± 8.7</td>
<td>38.5 ± 7.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Narrow Pronated</td>
<td>56.3 ± 10.4</td>
<td>52.1 ± 9.3</td>
<td>35.2 ± 7.1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Wide Supinated</td>
<td>61.7 ± 10.8</td>
<td>58.4 ± 10.2</td>
<td>32.8 ± 6.8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Narrow Supinated</td>
<td>54.1 ± 9.8</td>
<td>72.6 ± 12.4</td>
<td>30.1 ± 5.9</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Neutral Narrow</td>
<td>61.8 ± 10.1</td>
<td>55.3 ± 9.6</td>
<td>44.2 ± 8.3</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>The superiority of the wide pronated grip for latissimus dorsi activation is mechanically intuitive. A wider grip places the humerus in greater abduction at the start of the movement, which increases the moment arm of the latissimus dorsi relative to the shoulder joint. As the elbows travel down and back, the shoulder adduction component of the movement is dominant and the latissimus dorsi is mechanically well-positioned to generate force [5]. Narrower grips shift the movement pattern toward elbow flexion, reducing the relative demand on the latissimus dorsi.</p>
<p><strong>Biceps Brachii Activation</strong></p>
<p>The supinated grip orientation produced markedly higher biceps brachii activation compared to pronated grips across both widths (p 0.001). The narrow supinated condition yielded peak biceps brachii values of 72.6 ± 12.4% MVIC, compared to 42.3 ± 8.7% MVIC for the wide pronated grip. This finding aligns with established understanding that forearm supination places the biceps brachii at a biomechanically advantageous position by aligning the bicipital tuberosity of the radius optimally for force transmission [6]. The practical implication is clear: practitioners who wish to emphasize biceps development during pulling movements should favor narrow supinated grips.</p>
<p><strong>Middle Trapezius Activation</strong></p>
<p>The neutral grip condition produced the highest middle trapezius activation (44.2 ± 8.3% MVIC), significantly exceeding the supinated conditions (p 0.05). This may reflect the fact that the neutral grip encourages a more retracted scapular position throughout the movement, increasing demand on the scapular retractors. Individuals with scapular dyskinesis or seeking to reinforce mid-back musculature may benefit from the neutral grip for this reason.</p>
<p><strong>Practical Interpretation</strong></p>
<p>These data collectively support the common coaching wisdom that no single grip variation is universally superior. Wide pronated grips maximize latissimus dorsi width development, narrow supinated grips emphasize biceps and lower lat, and neutral grips provide the most balanced stimulus across back musculature. Systematic rotation of grip conditions across training sessions is therefore a rational strategy for comprehensive back development.</p>
<h2>Practical Applications</h2>
<p><strong>Grip Selection Based on Training Goals</strong></p>
<p>The evidence from this study and related literature supports a goal-directed approach to grip selection during lat pulldown and pull-up exercises:</p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Latissimus dorsi width development</strong>: Prioritize wide pronated (overhand) grip. Use a grip approximately 1.5 times shoulder width, with a focus on initiating the movement from the shoulder rather than the elbow.</li>
<li><strong>Biceps emphasis during pulling</strong>: Use narrow supinated (underhand) grip. This also provides a useful mechanical advantage for individuals with limited latissimus dorsi strength who struggle with wide-grip pulldowns.</li>
<li><strong>Balanced back development with scapular retractor involvement</strong>: Neutral grip (palms facing) on a V-bar or <a href="/terms/squat-depth/" class="term-link" data-slug="squat-depth" title="parallel">parallel</a> handle attachment provides mid-trapezius and rhomboid co-activation alongside the latissimus dorsi.</li>
<li><strong>General back <a href="/terms/muscle-hypertrophy/" class="term-link" data-slug="muscle-hypertrophy" title="hypertrophy">hypertrophy</a></strong>: Rotate among all three grip orientations across training weeks to ensure comprehensive stimulus.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>Implementation in Program Design</strong></p>
<p>A practical back training template incorporating grip variation:</p>
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Training Day</th>
<th>Primary Pull</th>
<th>Grip</th>
<th>Secondary Pull</th>
<th>Grip</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>Day 1 (Heavy)</td>
<td>Barbell row</td>
<td>Overhand wide</td>
<td>Lat pulldown</td>
<td>Wide pronated</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Day 2 (Volume)</td>
<td>Cable row</td>
<td>Neutral</td>
<td>Lat pulldown</td>
<td>Narrow supinated</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>Day 3 (Accessory)</td>
<td>Assisted pull-up</td>
<td>Neutral</td>
<td>Face pull</td>
<td>Rope (neutral)</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><strong>Technique Cues for Each Grip</strong></p>
<p>Wide pronated: Initiate by depressing and retracting the scapula before pulling with the arms. Think "elbows to back pockets." The bar should travel to the upper chest.</p>
<p>Narrow supinated: Maintain a vertical forearm throughout <a href="/terms/intermittent-fasting/" class="term-link" data-slug="intermittent-fasting" title="if">if</a> possible. Lean back slightly (approximately 15–20 degrees) to keep the bar path efficient. Squeeze the lats at the bottom of the movement.</p>
<p>Neutral: Focus on squeezing the shoulder blades together as the handle reaches the chest. Avoid shrugging or elevating the shoulders.</p>
<p><strong>Volume and Frequency</strong></p>
<p>Lat pulldown and pull-up variations should constitute the cornerstone of vertical pulling volume. A general recommendation of 10–20 sets per week of vertical pulling, distributed across 2–3 sessions, is consistent with current hypertrophy training guidelines [7]. Within that volume, systematically varying grip conditions provides both stimulus variety and insurance against movement monotony.</p>
<p><strong>Common Errors to Avoid</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Pulling with the arms rather than initiating scapular depression</li>
<li>Using excessive momentum or body sway to complete repetitions</li>
<li>Allowing the shoulders to elevate (shrug) at the top of the movement</li>
<li>Gripping too wide with supinated orientation, which places excessive stress on the distal biceps <a href="/terms/tendon/" class="term-link" data-slug="tendon" title="tendon">tendon</a></li>
</ul>