Heavy Barbell Rows

Training Bodybuilding
41

[quote]nptitim wrote:
pushharder wrote:

I will throw another little tip in here that Marty Gallagher taught me, use straps, but DO NOT wrap your thumbs around the bar—the contraction in the back is incredible and it takes the arms/biceps out of the movement as much as possible. I do 1-2 sets without straps, and then 1-2 with the straps

Keith W.

Generally good quote by pushharder with a lot of detail but one point to mention is that changing your thumb to an open or closed grip will have essentially no effect on bicep involvement, mainly because the bicep and the thumb have no relation to each other.

The same is true with using straps, your biceps do not affect your gripping strength. For the majority of people they will grip significantly less weight with an open grip then with a closed grip (imagine you had $100 bill in your hand and someone was trying to pry it open, would you use an open grip to keep your fingers closed?)
[/quote]

If you try it you can really ‘feel’ the difference in the contraction. Holding a $100 dollar bill with an open grip and holding a barbell with an open group are hardly comparable, because you can’t really hold the $100 bill with the same kind of open group you do a barbell.

42

All good points guys. I just think for the reasons that I listed that barbell rows don’t cut the mustard.

And there is this from Poliquin:

[quote]The reason that I didn’t mention barbell rows is simply because I don’t believe that they’re a great upper back exercise, even when performed correctly. Why? Because there’s too much neural drive expended in firing the muscles involved in maintaining the postural aspect of the exercise. The body and mind are in high neural gear as they’re firing the erector spinae, glutes, and hamstrings at the same time ? so much so that the level of recruitment finally left over for the lats is too minimal to be worth it.

That’s why I’d rather stick to variations of one-armed rowing exercises. I can hear the “functionalist cult” already arguing, “What about function? This a primary movement.” My answer to that is, if you did a good job in the loading parameters for the squat and deadlifting exercises, why overtrain the posterior chain? [/quote]

But even with all that said, I understand those who like the movement. I like plenty of movements that others won’t touch.

It’s all good.

44

[quote]bulletproof_ wrote:
–quoting the c.p. guy–
there’s too much neural drive expended in firing the muscles involved in maintaining the postural aspect of the exercise. The body and mind are in high neural gear as they’re firing the erector spinae, glutes, and hamstrings at the same time ? so much so that the level of recruitment finally left over for the lats is too minimal to be worth it.
[/quote]

Ok. Wow. First of all, who ever stated that BBRows are solely a lat exercise? I think this logic is hilarious. So then what about squats? Are they bad too because they require too much “neural recruitment?” Last time I checked, when I squatted it took more “neural focus” and “neural drive” to perform that exercise than a BBRow.

Neural recruitment? Fucking sham!

Read this about squats, I picked it up from a reputable source in Puss Male Mag, it’s important for us to know:

Never do squats. They are a bad exercise. The neural drive expended in using the shoulders to hoist the weight, hands to grip the bar, back to stabilize yourself, knees need to move at a proper speed to not hurt yourself, and feet/calves stabilizing your body and weight is far too much that your quads and glutes don’t really get much benefit.

I would stick to simple isolation exercises like a seated, one leg extension on a machine to make sure you don’t over-exert yourself, losing neural focus and subsequent gains in the process.

–end of Puss Male Mag clip–

This dude needs to stop thinking so much. BBRows kick ass not just because they work your lats, but because taking a heavy piece of metal and pulling it off the ground and putting it down and pulling it up again over and over is fucking sweet. I love moving iron so I do heavy rows; and my lats, shoulders and biceps are badass because of it.

45

Whenever I hear powerlifters talking about achieving a bigger bench, one thing they advocate is heavy rowing.

46
  1. Keith’s posts kick ass.
  2. Any compound movement which moves heavy weight with good form without a machine kicks ass.
47

Heavy Barbell Rowing is by far my favorite excercise. My back really didn’t take off until I incorporated them into my training.

As some others have stated on this thread, it wasn’t just the back that grew…all the other muscle groups grew as well.

Everyone I know who does heavy barbell rowing are pretty damn huge.

48

Where are all of those 400 pound bent over rowers when you need them to prove a point?

49

[quote]Bauer97 wrote:
Smitty88 wrote:

Barbell rows extends your upper body way out over the ground and leaves your lowerback open for some serious problems, especially if you already perform squats and deadlifts.

Why would your lower back be vulnerable to bent-over-rows if you do squats and deadlifts?

I’d be more likely to say, but still wouldn’t, that somebody who DOESN’T do other movements that strengthen their lower back/posterior chain is more at risk for injury by suddenly bending over with a load suspended in front of them.

I’d say unless you’re being a retard and supersetting deadlifts and bent over rows, thus exposing a fatigued lower back and nervous system to the bent-over-row position, you’ll be fine.

If you do squats and deads, then your lower back should be strong and well conditioned, and therefore perfect for performing bent-over-rows, provided you give it time to recover between the different movements.[/quote]

thankyou for saying this, because i was going to have to. how the hell are 300lb deadlifts worse for your back than 225lb bent rows? i can feel positive correlation with the strength and progression of my deadlift and the ease/comfort/progress of my bent barbell lifts. they’re great

50

fuck yea, all this talk has me pumped to do rows tomorrow

51

[quote]SWR-1240 wrote:
I personally bend at my knees, ankles and hips and kind of rest my torso on my lap a little, and have my lower back slightly arched and tight.[/quote]

This sounds like what I’ve started doing and so far it’s the only way I’ve been able to consistently bb row without my lower back getting niggly.

Butt stuck out, back arched and practically horizontal. I feel a light stretch in my hams and sort of rest my torso in my lap as you say.

This places my shoulders very slightly in front of my knees which centres the weight and minimises any leverage which would have to be countered by the lower back.

When I row I keep the elbows in and pull sort of up and in - the bar just clears my knees and then in to my stomach.

52

[quote]Bauer97 wrote:
Smitty88 wrote:

Barbell rows extends your upper body way out over the ground and leaves your lowerback open for some serious problems, especially if you already perform squats and deadlifts.

Why would your lower back be vulnerable to bent-over-rows if you do squats and deadlifts?

I’d be more likely to say, but still wouldn’t, that somebody who DOESN’T do other movements that strengthen their lower back/posterior chain is more at risk for injury by suddenly bending over with a load suspended in front of them.

I’d say unless you’re being a retard and supersetting deadlifts and bent over rows, thus exposing a fatigued lower back and nervous system to the bent-over-row position, you’ll be fine.

If you do squats and deads, then your lower back should be strong and well conditioned, and therefore perfect for performing bent-over-rows, provided you give it time to recover between the different movements.[/quote]

I would say bo barbell rows approach potential injury when your are rowing near to what you deadlift. Many lifters dont have naturally strong lats compared to their lower back strength so the stress from barbell rows is relatively light compared to the weight they are using on the deadlift. So they never reach a real fatigueing point with there lower backs.

53

[quote]hardcoreukno0359 wrote:
I would say bo barbell rows approach potential injury when your are rowing near to what you deadlift.
[/quote]

If you are rowing what you deadlift, your deadlift sucks…

54

[quote]bulletproof_ wrote:
That’s from a Q&A right here on T-Nation with Charles Poliquin.

I told you…fuckers.[/quote]

Alright!!!

What does he win, Pat?!?

Well, Bob, he wins a year’s supply of vagina cream. Hopefully if he uses enough, it will soak in and help protect his synapses from all the neurological exhaustion he may experience if he choses to do a bent over row.

Seriously, dude. Are you really going to revel in the fact you came up with one guys opinion, based on of all things, neurological demand, to prove bent over rows, “suck complete ass.”

I for one am not convinced, and it appears even Poliquin has published conflicting information.

This is a staple exercise that has stood the test of time. Additionally, most guys with a reasonable amount of time in the gym will progress to the point where the dumbbells and cable stacks in the average gym no longer provide adequate load for rowing. I suppose if you are still stuck on the 50’s, this would be ground breaking information.

This leaves them with chest supported rows which can get pretty boring.

Fuck, contrary to all you “you’ll compromise your lumbar region” pussies we do them from the floor as a warm-up on our deadlift day. I have never hurt my back doing these and would state without hesitation they have greatly contributed to my erector, lat and rhomboid strength. We do them both wide stance with an underhand grip and close stance overhand.

We have a 17 year old girl who trains with us and can row 135 for three sets of 6 from the floor overhand grip pretty easily, and will then rep 250+ in her pulls (3x5) in the same session She is ranked top 5 nationally and has never injured anything, and I would imagine neurlogical taxation has never occured to her.

If you asked her what has contributed the most to her bench and pulls in the last year, I would wager she would state the emphasis she has put on getting to the 45’s for her rows so she could do them from the floor like the rest of us.

Congratulations, dude. The only thing you proved is your own ignorance.

1 Like
55


dont complain…just do the excercise
it rocks…if it taxes your lower back that means you are doing to much weight…

56

i love rows and have just started to get back to doing heavy sets again after an injury (broken thumb).

57

Ok, first of all, I don’t know why you people think myself or Charles Poliquin said ANYTHING about barbell rows being dangerous.

“Too neurologically demanding” has nothing to do with being too dangerous.

58

[quote]david.civil wrote:
dont complain…just do the excercise
it rocks…if it taxes your lower back that means you are doing to much weight…[/quote]

No it doesn’t.

If the amount of weight I can row taxes my lowerback too much, it just means I need to switch to rowing form that doesn’t limit me in that regard. Something like chest supported rows.

It’s stupid to reduce the large load you could be using for your upper back just because you insist on using an exercise that apparently requires excessive stabalization.

That’s like lowering weight on your shrugs because your grip sucks too much to hold the bar (use straps). Bottom line, shrugs shouldn’t be a grip exercise and rows shouldn’t be a lowerback stabalization exercise. If your grip sucks use blockweight, if your lowerback sucks deadlift more.

(And don’t get cute and say that shrugs CAN be a grip exercise. That’s only a secondary.)

59

[quote]bulletproof_ wrote:
david.civil wrote:
dont complain…just do the excercise
it rocks…if it taxes your lower back that means you are doing to much weight…

No it doesn’t.

If the amount of weight I can row taxes my lowerback too much, it just means I need to switch to rowing form that doesn’t limit me in that regard. Something like chest supported rows.

It’s stupid to reduce the large load you could be using for your upper back just because you insist on using an exercise that apparently requires excessive stabalization.

That’s like lowering weight on your shrugs because your grip sucks too much to hold the bar (use straps). Bottom line, shrugs shouldn’t be a grip exercise and rows shouldn’t be a lowerback stabalization exercise. If your grip sucks use blockweight, if your lowerback sucks deadlift more.

(And don’t get cute and say that shrugs CAN be a grip exercise. That’s only a secondary.) [/quote]

dont forget stabilization…you need to develop hand strength…trash the straps…shrugs should be used as a combo trap and grip excercise…loading up to much weight using straps is a good way to get injured…barbell rows is a combo lat and lower back excercise…they go hand in hand…if you dont develop these it will lead to injury…been there done that…

i am not impressed with anyone shrugging any kind of weight…if i look over and see you shrugging 315 barehand for 10 reps and good form… then i am impressed throw straps in the trash ASAP…

60

[quote]bulletproof_ wrote:
The reason nobody does them is because they suck complete ass. Even Charles Poliquin recommends not doing them.

Here’s the reasoning. They are far too neurologically demanding because of the neutral spine positioning you somehow have to maintain while having a huge ass load out in front of you. The simply take too much out of your lowerback to allow you focus on your rowing muscles.

Chest supported rows, dumbell rows, cambered bar rows on the bench…these are way better.[/quote]

I don’t buy that. Exercises are meant to be demanding.