My shoulder hurts when I bench..why?
- Thread starter realworksuks
- Start date
Lats have a slip past the inferior angle of the scapula, which draws them inferiorly (downwards). Not only does this improve the GH joint positioning and therefore mechanical advantage of the humeral adductors, but if you're benching with a powerlifter technique and decent back arch, this draws the bar up by motion of the gh joint inferiorly, which is what G was referring to.
Oh, and +rep to goergen for some nuggets of knowledge
The lats do not assist in scapular depression because it slips by the inferior angle of the scapula. While the lats are not a prime mover, scapular downward rotation and depression are assisted by the lats by the adductive and extensor forces at the GH joint.
Last edited:
This is not the case: while some people may not have significant fiber attachment at the inferior angle due to genetic variation, it's widely accepted that the lat does in fact attach either directly or through fascial attachment to the inferior angle, therefore being capable of causing motion at the scapula directly.
From Wheeless' Textbook of Orthopaedics (one of many possible sources of this information):
Latissimus Dorsi
- origin: broad aponeurosis that originates on the spinous processes
of the lower 6 thoracic and all lumbar vertebrae; posterior crest
of ilium, posterior surface of sacrum, lower 3 or 4 ribs, and an
attachment of the tip of the scapula;
- insertion: flat tendon that twists upon itself to insert into the
intertubercular groove of the humerus, just anterior to and
parallel with the tendon of pectoralis major;
- nerve supply: thoracodorsal from brachial plexus, C6, C7, C8;
- action: extends, adducts and medially rotates the humerus at the
shoulder; draws the inferior angle of the scapula inferior and
medial; (draws shoulder downward and backward);
- synergists: rhomboids, pectoralis major, teres major;
You make a very broad assumption here about the majority of individuals having that attachment. There are plenty of resources that do not show muscle origin at the inferior angle. All the same, a muscle is very seldom a prime mover at an originating location, generally only a stabilizer, or secondary mover at most.
L
Leigh P
Guest
Since the key word is "often" (meaning more than not) making a general assumption would in fact be the correct way to go.
Sources of two major colleges that popped up instantly on a google search..
Lats have a slip past the inferior angle of the scapula, which draws them inferiorly (downwards). Not only does this improve the GH joint positioning and therefore mechanical advantage of the humeral adductors, but if you're benching with a powerlifter technique and decent back arch, this draws the bar up by motion of the gh joint inferiorly, which is what G was referring to.
Oh, and +rep to goergen for some nuggets of knowledge
This was a bit technical
I do put my scaps downwards. Does the actual movement of drawing the scaps downward lift the bar? I kinda thought about this as I was trying the movement without the bar. However, when I tried it seemed that when I tilted the scapulae upwards (like you do when you try to show off your lats), the arms kinda started moving "by themselves"
subscribe for later reading
A broad assumption? Do you have literature to support the claim that the majority of people, contrary to classic texts such as Kendall's "Muscles: Testing and Function" as well as the medical schools that Leah listed, for instance, do not take lat attachment at the inferior angle?
Also, your statement of the muscle's origin/insertion itself is simplistic: a muscle contracts longitudinally, and whichever end is more stable by means of physics (weight, leverage, etc) will act as the stabilizer, while the other attachment(s) will move...this has nothing to do with what we classify as "origin" or "insertion." Further, if we look at the mechanics of lat contraction, it is clear to see that without co-contraction of the upper traps, levator scap and rhomboids, the lats will easily produce scapular depression along with general glenohumeral depression.
Last edited:
How do you do that?
You dont have subscriptions on? For instance when I posted that, then you replied, and when I logged in I clicked user cp and it showed there were new posts in this thread. If you are not using subscriptions go to user cp/edit options and use no email notification.
I always laugh when I see debates like this. Well that book is erroneous, no your book is incorrect....
This was not a jab at you Matt.
I seeee
But it wasnt a debate just a conscious raiser - Beware, not everything you read is true.
Just because something may be in more books, older or newer doesnt prove it to be true.
No doubt the Lat does move the scapula. That doesnt mean it actually has a formal insertion to it. The semitendinouses doesnt attach to the femur but it moves it for example.
I new the Lat effected the scapula but i have to admit its the first time ive heard of this attachment to the inferior angle. I sent an email to one of my past lecturers who happens to be one of the best anatomists in the business. Interesting to see what he says..hoping he replies of course
But it wasnt a debate just a conscious raiser - Beware, not everything you read is true.
Just because something may be in more books, older or newer doesnt prove it to be true.
No doubt the Lat does move the scapula. That doesnt mean it actually has a formal insertion to it. The semitendinouses doesnt attach to the femur but it moves it for example.
I new the Lat effected the scapula but i have to admit its the first time ive heard of this attachment to the inferior angle. I sent an email to one of my past lecturers who happens to be one of the best anatomists in the business. Interesting to see what he says..hoping he replies of course
Matt, I understand what you're saying, but I think that you're focusing on a tangential point: it's not whether an author decides to include the inferior angle as an origin point or not (this would rely on the amount of fiber attachment and, of course, the definitions of "origin" and "insertion" itself, which again would appear to be outdated in many opinions, considering the large role of fascial and fibrous or tendonous connections throughout a muscle); I simply asked if he could provide literature claiming that there is, in fact, no direct contact, either by fiber or fascia, to the inferior angle in the majority of people (or all of them), since this was the basis of what was being argued.
Within my own education, my professors (anatomy, kinesiology and orthopedics) and the multiple texts that were used discussed this attachment point; if I recall, I experienced it first hand in cadaver lab as well, although one example is hardly statistically relevant.
Hey, this is what i suspected -
"That is only a small bundle of fibres attaching to the inferior angle of the
scapula as the upper border of the muscle passes by the scapula. I didnt
mention it because it is a fine detail of not much consequence to the
function of the Lat dorsi"
The reason why it varies between text to text is that it is of little or no significance. Just depends on what the author decides he/she wants to do.
"That is only a small bundle of fibres attaching to the inferior angle of the
scapula as the upper border of the muscle passes by the scapula. I didnt
mention it because it is a fine detail of not much consequence to the
function of the Lat dorsi"
The reason why it varies between text to text is that it is of little or no significance. Just depends on what the author decides he/she wants to do.
while this is true anatomically, this is also an issue of biomechanics, in which case I believe that this misses an important point: Muscles do not just act on joints by means of their attachments via tendons...there are significant reactions through fascial connections as well that cause motion and interactions between muscles, too, that cause changes in relative pull and even the ability to contract. While there are relatively few fiber connections to the scapula when compared to, say, it's connections at the spine, there is a great deal of fascial connection that causes motion to occur at the scapula...when I spoke of the connection, I wasn't really considering the direct connection but rather the indirect connection due to that fascial sheath. And while the primary scap depressor is the inferior trapezius, the lats will play an important role not only in glenohumeral depression due to direct attachment to the proximal humerus, but by direct and indirect attachment to the scap as well.
Your shoulders are weak
Real WS,
What do you overhead press? What are you trying to bench? How many reps. Get off the bench and get your shoulders healthy and strong. They are not keeping up with your bench. Get yourself some dumbell hangers. They work better and faster. Benching is vanity.
IF IT HURTS STOP.
I don't know if this will help you but take a wood bar and moving it from the front of my waist to the small of my back in one big arch reducing my grip as I became more flexible. Don't bend your elbows.
Also try "empty cans" get a couple super light dumbells turn your hands in the position you would have them if you emptying a can of soda move you arms out to a flying cross. Position thumbs still pointing down and go from your waist upwards to parallel.
Another winner is bend your elbows to a 90 so your hands are facing each other. Now lie on your side in that position. The arm that you are not lying on move the back of your hand towards the ceiling till your lower arm is perpendicular to the floor or fingers pointing at the ceiling, then back down. Get the motion before picking up light weigh. High reps on these and low weight.
Drugs mask pain. Solve the problem don't treat the symptoms.
Stay healthy.
Dude.
Real WS,
What do you overhead press? What are you trying to bench? How many reps. Get off the bench and get your shoulders healthy and strong. They are not keeping up with your bench. Get yourself some dumbell hangers. They work better and faster. Benching is vanity.
IF IT HURTS STOP.
I don't know if this will help you but take a wood bar and moving it from the front of my waist to the small of my back in one big arch reducing my grip as I became more flexible. Don't bend your elbows.
Also try "empty cans" get a couple super light dumbells turn your hands in the position you would have them if you emptying a can of soda move you arms out to a flying cross. Position thumbs still pointing down and go from your waist upwards to parallel.
Another winner is bend your elbows to a 90 so your hands are facing each other. Now lie on your side in that position. The arm that you are not lying on move the back of your hand towards the ceiling till your lower arm is perpendicular to the floor or fingers pointing at the ceiling, then back down. Get the motion before picking up light weigh. High reps on these and low weight.
Drugs mask pain. Solve the problem don't treat the symptoms.
Stay healthy.
Dude.
All muscles are covered by fascia, right, thats simple. I wouldnt call these indirect attachments as significant. Your right that the lattisimus Dorsi does depress the scapula but this is only indirectly via the downpull of the glenohumeral joint. You can have a look at diagrams to see that any significant pull on the scapula by the LD would be more horizontally guided therefore be a retractor, but obviously this is not the case. So yes, the LD does depress the scapula indirectly, but in my opinion any direct attachments on the scapula are insignificant - otherwise it would clearly be atrributed in all anatomy books.