A couple of questions regarding the stiff legged deadlift:
Is a stiff leg deadlift a better isolation exercise for the hamstrings than a RDL? When you perform a stiff leg deadlift, are you supposed to bring the weight to the ground?
dunno about how it compares to the romanian dl,but yes you bring it to about your ankles/ground.I suggest having your arms wide to help ensure you dont round your back…if you do…ouch
BUMP
[quote]jmwintenn wrote:
dunno about how it compares to the romanian dl,but yes you bring it to about your ankles/ground.I suggest having your arms wide to help ensure you dont round your back…if you do…ouch[/quote]
I would preface that statment with the caution that one should never push the range of motion beyond where your back rounds. If your back rounds before your ankles then dont go lower.
-Fireplug
Most would agree with fireplug…I see these idiots doing SLDL’s bringing the bar as far down as they can and i cringe every time their back rounds.
Which one is better for isolating hamstrings: RDL, or Stiff leg dl?
well,i wouldnt think anyone who cherished their body would try to break it by doing a exercise in such a way that it causes one pain.
Why not just do both?I can guarantee you’ll have them hammies worked.Personally I feel it a little more when i do stiffs,though I dont do them often
I’d recommend the Stiff-Dicked Backlift for maximum results.
[quote]bruinsdmb wrote:
Most would agree with fireplug…I see these idiots doing SLDL’s bringing the bar as far down as they can and i cringe every time their back rounds. [/quote]
It all depends on how you learn. I still remember pics from BB mags, with Lee Haney doing SLDLs standing atop a bench, with the bar going all the way down to the tops of his feet. Needless to say, his back was as round as a circle.
I myself did 'em that way for years. I had sore and stiff back, but luckily no injuries. As I get older, I’m trying to be a bit safer though.
I need an exercise historian to correct me if I’m wrong here. I thought Romanian DLs were developed as the biomechanically-correct way to perform SLDLs — with the back flat or even slightly arched. Does anyone else remember it ths way?
[quote]simon-hecubus wrote:
bruinsdmb wrote:
Most would agree with fireplug…I see these idiots doing SLDL’s bringing the bar as far down as they can and i cringe every time their back rounds.
It all depends on how you learn. I still remember pics from BB mags, with Lee Haney doing SLDLs standing atop a bench, with the bar going all the way down to the tops of his feet. Needless to say, his back was as round as a circle.
I myself did 'em that way for years. I had sore and stiff back, but luckily no injuries. As I get older, I’m trying to be a bit safer though.
I need an exercise historian to correct me if I’m wrong here. I thought Romanian DLs were developed as the biomechanically-correct way to perform SLDLs — with the back flat or even slightly arched. Does anyone else remember it ths way?[/quote]
Yeah you’re correct…that’s why they are better.
[quote]simon-hecubus wrote:
I thought Romanian DLs were developed as the biomechanically-correct way to perform SLDLs — with the back flat or even slightly arched. Does anyone else remember it ths way?[/quote]
I believe the difference is that RDLs are done with “softer” knees. In other words, you can allow a little bit of flexing of the knees as you descend, whereas SLDL, you try to keep the knees as close to locked as possible (i.e. “stiff”) throughout the movement.
DB
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
I believe the difference is that RDLs are done with “softer” knees. In other words, you can allow a little bit of flexing of the knees as you descend, whereas SLDL, you try to keep the knees as close to locked as possible (i.e. “stiff”) throughout the movement.
DB[/quote]
Sure, that’s an important point however you perform SLDLs. The knees must NOT be hyperextended, but slightly bent throughout.
I always thought the knees should be slightly “cocked” in the same position throughout. Your description is the first I heard of flexing them more as you descend. I might have to try that some time.
Scott
But not locked all the way.
Stiffs are the shit for hammies. I use the smith or DB’s to do them and put 5 lb plate weights under my toes. The biggest mistake I see is that people dont fire their hammies to bring the weight back up. They use their back primarily to move the weight. If you do them right and focus on the hammies moving the weight, most people would have to take off a plate or two.
“Big quads without big hamstrings is like steak without potatoes”
A
[quote]dollarbill44 wrote:
simon-hecubus wrote:
I thought Romanian DLs were developed as the biomechanically-correct way to perform SLDLs — with the back flat or even slightly arched. Does anyone else remember it ths way?
I believe the difference is that RDLs are done with “softer” knees. In other words, you can allow a little bit of flexing of the knees as you descend, whereas SLDL, you try to keep the knees as close to locked as possible (i.e. “stiff”) throughout the movement.
DB[/quote]
[quote]Amsterdam Animal wrote:
But not locked all the way.
Stiffs are the shit for hammies. I use the smith or DB’s to do them and put 5 lb plate weights under my toes. The biggest mistake I see is that people dont fire their hammies to bring the weight back up. They use their back primarily to move the weight. If you do them right and focus on the hammies moving the weight, most people would have to take off a plate or two.
“Big quads without big hamstrings is like steak without potatoes”
A
dollarbill44 wrote:
simon-hecubus wrote:
I thought Romanian DLs were developed as the biomechanically-correct way to perform SLDLs — with the back flat or even slightly arched. Does anyone else remember it ths way?
I believe the difference is that RDLs are done with “softer” knees. In other words, you can allow a little bit of flexing of the knees as you descend, whereas SLDL, you try to keep the knees as close to locked as possible (i.e. “stiff”) throughout the movement.
DB
[/quote]
So therefore the RDL is superior to the SLDL because the back is arched, meaning most of the stress is on the hamstrings.
[quote]bruinsdmb wrote:
Amsterdam Animal wrote:
But not locked all the way.
Stiffs are the shit for hammies. I use the smith or DB’s to do them and put 5 lb plate weights under my toes. The biggest mistake I see is that people dont fire their hammies to bring the weight back up. They use their back primarily to move the weight. If you do them right and focus on the hammies moving the weight, most people would have to take off a plate or two.
“Big quads without big hamstrings is like steak without potatoes”
A
dollarbill44 wrote:
simon-hecubus wrote:
I thought Romanian DLs were developed as the biomechanically-correct way to perform SLDLs — with the back flat or even slightly arched. Does anyone else remember it ths way?
I believe the difference is that RDLs are done with “softer” knees. In other words, you can allow a little bit of flexing of the knees as you descend, whereas SLDL, you try to keep the knees as close to locked as possible (i.e. “stiff”) throughout the movement.
DB
So therefore the RDL is superior to the SLDL because the back is arched, meaning most of the stress is on the hamstrings. [/quote]
I don’t know, I’d say try them both on different days and see which ones hit your hammies harder. I personally like RDLs because I can load up the weights on them more so than SLDL.
DB