When it comes to building a strong, muscular back and well-developed biceps, two compound exercises frequently enter the debate: weighted pull-ups and rows. Both exercises are staples in bodybuilding, calisthenics, and strength training routines. However, determining which is more effective for hypertrophy and strength in the biceps and back requires a nuanced understanding of biomechanics, muscle activation, and training variables.
Understanding the Muscles Involved
Pull-Ups: Primary Muscles Activated
Weighted pull-ups primarily target the latissimus dorsi, the large muscles running down the sides of the back. They also heavily engage the biceps brachii, brachialis, brachioradialis, and teres major, along with stabilizing muscles like the rhomboids and lower trapezius. EMG studies have shown high activation levels in the lats and biceps during pull-ups (Youdas et al., 2010).
Rows: Primary Muscles Activated
Rowing movements, depending on the variation (barbell, dumbbell, cable, or machine), target the mid and upper back more directly. This includes the rhomboids, middle and lower trapezius, posterior deltoids, and to a slightly lesser extent, the lats. Biceps involvement is still significant but often less than in pull-ups due to elbow positioning and wrist orientation (Schoenfeld et al., 2014).
Comparing Muscle Activation
EMG Evidence
A study by Lehman et al. (2004) found that pull-ups elicited greater lat activation than rows, while rows favored mid-trapezius and rhomboid activity. Similarly, Signorile et al. (2002) showed that biceps brachii activation was significantly higher during underhand grip pull-ups compared to barbell rows.
For biceps hypertrophy, pull-ups, especially with a supinated (underhand) grip, may offer superior stimulus. This is because the biceps serve as a primary mover during vertical pulling motions, whereas in rows, they often function more as synergists.
Load and Progression
Weighted pull-ups allow for linear progression by adding resistance as strength increases. While rows can be loaded heavily, the nature of the body positioning often limits progressive overload, particularly in bent-over variations where lower back fatigue can be a limiting factor (Comfort et al., 2011).
Biomechanics and Range of Motion
Vertical vs Horizontal Pulling
Weighted pull-ups involve vertical pulling, which emphasizes elongation and shortening of the lats through a greater range of motion. This movement mimics the natural function of the lats and maximizes their stretch and contraction.
Rows, as a horizontal pulling motion, shorten the lats in a different way and more directly recruit the scapular retractors. This can be beneficial for posture and upper back development but may provide less mechanical tension across the full length of the lats.
Arm Path and Elbow Flexion
The angle of elbow flexion is more acute in pull-ups, especially close-grip variations, which puts the biceps under greater load throughout the movement. Rows, depending on the variant, may reduce this angle, shifting more tension to the posterior deltoid and scapular stabilizers (Gentil et al., 2015).
Strength and Hypertrophy Outcomes
Strength Gains
For maximal strength development, both exercises have merit. Pull-ups can be overloaded with weight and progress over time. Rows, especially with a barbell, can be loaded very heavily and are often used in powerlifting accessory training. However, the specificity of neural adaptations may favor pull-ups for vertical pulling strength and rows for horizontal pulling strength.
Hypertrophy Evidence
A systematic review by Schoenfeld et al. (2017) concluded that hypertrophy is primarily driven by mechanical tension, muscle damage, and metabolic stress. Pull-ups offer high mechanical tension through a large range of motion and direct biceps involvement. Rows contribute to upper back mass and thickness but may not load the biceps as effectively due to biomechanical positioning.
Practical Considerations
Equipment and Accessibility
Weighted pull-ups require minimal equipment: a sturdy bar and a dip belt or vest. Rows, particularly barbell or machine rows, require access to weights and gym equipment. For athletes training at home or in minimalist environments, pull-ups offer more flexibility.
Injury Risk and Joint Stress
Pull-ups, especially weighted ones, place stress on the shoulder and elbow joints. Proper scapular control and shoulder mobility are essential to prevent impingement. Rows, while also requiring form precision, can often be adjusted (e.g., supported rows or machines) to reduce joint stress.
Fatigue and Recovery
Bent-over rows tax the lower back significantly, especially when performed with heavy weights. This can be problematic when combined with other compound lifts like deadlifts or squats. Pull-ups, while demanding, generally cause less systemic fatigue unless performed at high volume or with significant external load.
Application for Specific Goals
For Biceps Development
If the primary goal is biceps hypertrophy, underhand weighted pull-ups are arguably superior. They allow for heavy loading and place the biceps under constant tension through a full range of motion. Rows, while beneficial, may not isolate the biceps as effectively due to their shared involvement with the upper back.
For Back Development
For complete back development, combining both movements is ideal. Pull-ups build width and target the lats effectively. Rows add thickness and strengthen the scapular retractors. A well-rounded program should include both vertical and horizontal pulling to maximize muscle symmetry and functional strength (Kikuchi & Nakazato, 2017).
For Functional and Athletic Training
Pull-ups often carry more functional transfer to sports involving climbing, grappling, or any overhead pulling. Rows are beneficial for posture correction and injury prevention due to their emphasis on the mid and upper back. Including both ensures balanced development.
Conclusion
Weighted pull-ups and rows are both highly effective exercises for developing the biceps and back. Pull-ups offer superior biceps activation and lat engagement, particularly when weighted and performed with a supinated grip. Rows contribute more to upper back development and thickness, with less direct biceps loading. The choice between them depends on individual goals, equipment availability, and training context. For optimal results, integrating both into a structured program yields the most comprehensive development.
Key Takeaways
References
Comfort, P., Pearson, S.J. and Mather, D. (2011). An electromyographical comparison of trunk muscle activity during isometric trunk and dynamic strengthening exercises. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 25(1), pp.172–177.
Gentil, P., Soares, S., Pereira, M.C., Cunha, R.R., Martorelli, A.S. and Bottaro, M. (2015). Effect of adding single-joint exercises to a multi-joint resistance training program on strength and hypertrophy in untrained subjects. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 40(8), pp.822–826.
Kikuchi, N. and Nakazato, K. (2017). Low-load bench press and push-up induce similar muscle hypertrophy and strength gain. Journal of Exercise Science & Fitness, 15(1), pp.37–42.
Lehman, G.J., Buchan, D.D., Lundy, A., Myers, N. and Nalborczyk, A. (2004). Variations in muscle activation levels during traditional latissimus dorsi weight training exercises: an experimental study. Dynamic Medicine, 3(1), pp.1–7.
Schoenfeld, B.J., Contreras, B., Krieger, J., Grgic, J., Delcastillo, K., Belliard, R. and Alto, A. (2017). Resistance training volume enhances muscle hypertrophy but not strength in trained men. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 49(10), pp.2102–2110.
Schoenfeld, B.J., Ogborn, D. and Krieger, J.W. (2014). Effect of resistance training frequency on muscular adaptations in well-trained populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 30(11), pp.3119–3126.
Signorile, J.F., Zink, A.J. and Szwed, S. (2002). A comparative electromyographical investigation of muscle utilization patterns using various hand positions during the lat pull-down. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 16(4), pp.539–546.
Youdas, J.W., Amundson, C.L., Cicero, K.S., Hahn, J.J., Harezlak, D.T. and Hollman, J.H. (2010). Surface electromyographic analysis of the latissimus dorsi, teres major, and pectoralis major muscles during three pull-up techniques. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24(11), pp.3124–3130.
