A friend of mine does bent over rows to the waist, then to the neck.
He does 10 reps per set, (5 to the waist 5 to the neck) i.e. one to the waist then to the neck then to the neck then to waist till all 10 reps are done. He does 5 sets, and says it’s like doing 5 sets of 5 for the upper and mid part of the back.
Is this a good way of working the upper back as I’ve never seen anyone else use this technique?
Somewhre in there is actually a little logic. It is true that pulling to your waist and pulling to your chest affect different muscles in the back. I would never pull to my neck as the strength isn’t there, the base is not there and injury is to easy.
I am also not a proponent of inter-mixing reps like that. I would prefer to do 5 sets of 5 one way and then do the next way seperate. You probably will be stronger one way than the other, so you are underworking one set and possib;ly overworking the other.
I prefer this lift done to the chest keeping the elbows high. Ocassionally I will do underhand grip to the lower area.
it’s sounds neat but is actually dumb. the arms will get more work than the back because each rep alters back emphasis to a degree, but not arms. also, neck rows and waist rows shouldn’t neccesarily be the same weight/strength.
it’s a movement that somebody made up that is actually worse than using both the movements separately.
rows to the neck are good for the “yoke”…
I sometimes mix up the reps on the bent over row, but pulling to the neck is dumb.
I think he would be better off doing rows to the waist, rows to the chest, but then doing face pulls instead of doing rows to the neck. B using face pulls, he should be able to use more weight and place less stress on the lower back.