Modifications in back section for chin-up and pull-up pages

Ask or answer questions, discuss and express your views

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, ianjay, stuward

Post Reply
User avatar
tyciol
Necromancer
Necromancer
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:00 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Modifications in back section for chin-up and pull-up pages

Post by tyciol » Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:51 pm

Image

I noticed a bunch of updates here, ExRx used to define Chin/Pull in some terms where it seemed to be dependent on the path the body took relative to the arms or something like that.

Now it seems like it's been changed to reflect the "chin = underhand/supine" and "pull = overhand/prone" grip-type definition which has been meme-infecting bodybuilding.com

Am I missing something or did they just make a huge change in stance?

I also noticed that one of the exercises you used to have listed in the lats section does not seem to be linked from there. Was it taken down, or am I overlooking it? The page is currently still up even though it's not on the list anymore. I'm going to take a screenshot to prove that it existed in case the page is removed in response to this thread.
Assisted Wide Grip Chin-upImage

Is ExRx going to try and pretend that they've never called an overhand grip a chin-up? Are they just going to go mainstream and back on everything they stood for? Are they afraid of the controversy?

I found links to how they used to be represented. Looking there I found a bunch of other pages which still list the lats as the target muscle, but which no longer appear on the lats section linked on the top. As of this post, here's another screenshot to prove it exists:
Bodyweight Chin-upImage
also:
Weighted Chin-upImage
Last edited by tyciol on Sat Jul 28, 2012 11:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rik-Blades
Associate Member
Associate Member
Posts: 458
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 1:47 pm
Location: Nottinghamshire U.K.

Re: Modifications in back section for chin-up and pull-up pa

Post by Rik-Blades » Sun Dec 11, 2011 4:44 pm

Tyciol wrote:Is ExRx going to try and pretend that they've never called an overhand grip a chin-up? Are they just going to go mainstream and back on everything they stood for? Are they afraid of the controversy?
Is this your question?

If it is, then your question is redundant. I'm sure you've been told before that the forum has no influence over the main site.

If you seriously want an answer, you need to direct it to the sites owner.
--
...I don't have a signature...

Oscar_Actuary
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Modifications in back section for chin-up and pull-up pa

Post by Oscar_Actuary » Sun Dec 11, 2011 6:09 pm

he's a tool
hence on ignore

commodiusvicus
Novice
Novice
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 5:41 am

Re: Modifications in back section for chin-up and pull-up pa

Post by commodiusvicus » Sun Dec 11, 2011 7:13 pm

Keep fighting the powerlifters-that-be and their flagrant attempts to cover up the chin/pull conspiracy, dude. You're the Bob Woodward of exrx.net and now all you have to do is find your undercover informant, Deep Squat.

User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Re: Modifications in back section for chin-up and pull-up pa

Post by Jungledoc » Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:01 pm

As usual, the detail:information ratio is approaching infinity.

Why are you telling us? You think we can do anything that you can't do? The forum is read by forum members. If you have a problem with the main site, contact James, the site owner. There are "contact" links in several places in the main site.
Our greatest fear should not be of failure, but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter.--Francis Chan

User avatar
tyciol
Necromancer
Necromancer
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:00 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Modifications in back section for chin-up and pull-up pa

Post by tyciol » Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:15 pm

Rik-Blades wrote:Is this your question?
Yup, the rest is context.
Rik-Blades wrote:your question is redundant. I'm sure you've been told before that the forum has no influence over the main site. If you seriously want an answer, you need to direct it to the sites owner.
I figured they might hang out here, and it's probably good to get opinions from forumgoers before making any personal appeals like that.
Oscar_Actuary wrote:he's a tool hence on ignore
The tool of whom?
commodiusvicus wrote:Keep fighting the powerlifters-that-be and their flagrant attempts to cover up the chin/pull conspiracy, dude. You're the Bob Woodward of exrx.net and now all you have to do is find your undercover informant, Deep Squat.
We will do the impossible and beat the invincible. Fight the power!
Jungledoc wrote:Why are you telling us? You think we can do anything that you can't do? The forum is read by forum members. If you have a problem with the main site, contact James, the site owner. There are "contact" links in several places in the main site.
I'm scared of him! And I was wondering about others' opinions on this.

Post Reply