Surely words like "wider back" really only mean bigger muscles in that area? From what this guy is saying there is no exercise that can focus and directly change the shape of a muscle, they can only get bigger. So surely the best grip would be the grip that hits that muscle the hardest?
Yeah. You're right wider = bigger. Though what you'll find is (if we assume by back we're reffering to lats) is that certain exercises will recruit more rhomboid and trapezius along with the lats, where as other's wont.
Which is how you can get a wide shallow back as it's not particulary thick because the rhomboids and traps aren't worked properly but the lats are. Likewise you can get a lot of rhomboid and trap development but have lacking lats, which would leave you with a thick narrow back.
Like he said in the chest exercise videos when the question about inner upper pec deffinition/exercises. That the pec is one muscle (if we forget minor/major) and explains it's function and that gaining over all mass is the answer.
I think he explained some basic pysiology that you can work different areas slightly more by changing angles etc but the pec grows as a whole and is impossible for just one part of it to grow, so it grows as a whole.
Imagine just having 1 of the 4 quad muscles really well developed and the rest non existant, it can't happen.
The back video was a good watch. I've got a chest/back session today which I can't wait for. I've never tried pull-overs before but might ditch my 'post exhausting' pull downs today and try and improvise something on the cables to get as big a R.O.M as possible.
His views on decline pressing were interesting too and regular bench.
EDIT: My ideal to make a 'cable barbell pull over' on our courner cable stations is:
To join the pulleys together with the adjoining bar. Slide a bench in and then treat it as if it were a barbell. Because the cables are either side past shoulder width it shouldn't prove a problem and being on cable should keep tension for pritty much 100% of the rep.