Can someone explain the difference or why one would be superior to the other. I understand they are 2 different exercises, but how much so?
[quote]btm62 wrote:
Can someone explain the difference or why one would be superior to the other. I understand they are 2 different exercises, but how much so?[/quote]
They’re both equal in regard to building muscle. The t-bar row is said to thicken the back, while the bent-over is said to widen it.
Try t-bar rows for 3 weeks, then change to bent-over for 3.
[quote]btm62 wrote:
Can someone explain the difference or why one would be superior to the other. I understand they are 2 different exercises, but how much so?[/quote]
Personal preference. I do T-Bar Rows. I have done bent over rows in the past but don’t see a point in doing them now just to say I did. Then again, I do at least two different rowing movements and think the greatest invention was that high row Hammer Strength machine.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
btm62 wrote:
Can someone explain the difference or why one would be superior to the other. I understand they are 2 different exercises, but how much so?
Personal preference. I do T-Bar Rows. I have done bent over rows in the past but don’t see a point in doing them now just to say I did. Then again, I do at least two different rowing movements and think the greatest invention was that high row Hammer Strength machine.[/quote]
I don’t know that I’ve seen a high row Hammer Strength machine. I just don’t seem to care for the Bent Over Rows. I can’t get in a comfortable groove with the. I know things worthwhile arent’ easy, but for me mechanically, just not a great exercise. Thanks for the input. I was hoping there wouldn’t be too much difference as far as being a great exercise. I’ll add some DB Bent overs and pulldowns I imagine here after my Russian cycle.
Rock on.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
btm62 wrote:
Can someone explain the difference or why one would be superior to the other. I understand they are 2 different exercises, but how much so?
Personal preference. I do T-Bar Rows. I have done bent over rows in the past but don’t see a point in doing them now just to say I did. Then again, I do at least two different rowing movements and think the greatest invention was that high row Hammer Strength machine.[/quote]
That is a great machine. Plus, the leverage is such that you can move tons of weight on it.
The diference betwen T-bar and bb rows, for me, is range of motion. If you have a long torso and stubby litle legs (like me) then the range of motion is limited by your crotch.
And one thing you don’t want your crotch to do is limit your range of motion.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
btm62 wrote:
Can someone explain the difference or why one would be superior to the other. I understand they are 2 different exercises, but how much so?
Personal preference. I do T-Bar Rows. I have done bent over rows in the past but don’t see a point in doing them now just to say I did. Then again, I do at least two different rowing movements and think the greatest invention was that high row Hammer Strength machine.
That is a great machine. Plus, the leverage is such that you can move tons of weight on it.
The diference betwen T-bar and bb rows, for me, is range of motion. If you have a long torso and stubby litle legs (like me) then the range of motion is limited by your crotch.
And one thing you don’t want your crotch to do is limit your range of motion.[/quote]
I don’t like the angled T-bar rowing benches much due to my short stature. I prefer to pull the “bar” to the bottom of my chest or towards the abdomen; the current T-Bar rowing benches have handles too high for me.
The original T-Bar platforms though (like the kind back in Arnold’s heyday) is pretty good though (for short folks like myself).
I’m more of a Barbell Rowing guy anyways; somehow I just get more out of it than other forms of rowing.
if you’re really hammering your lower back throughout the training week, T-bars are a nice way to get in your upper back work without incurring extra fatigue in the low back area.
For me, T-bars have always been like a cross between the stretch of a chinup and the thickness building qualities of bentover rows. Franco Columbu and Robbie Robinson were huge proponents of T-bar rowing and it’s hard to argue with their results. Easier on the lower back also.
[quote]TornadoTommy wrote:
For me, T-bars have always been like a cross between the stretch of a chinup and the thickness building qualities of bentover rows. Franco Columbu and Robbie Robinson were huge proponents of T-bar rowing and it’s hard to argue with their results. Easier on the lower back also.[/quote]
Lee Haney also. He is probably the main reason I stuck with them and fully believed they would work for me even when I was smaller. They did.
The picture above is the Hammer Strength high row pull down…the greatest machine ever created…next to the rest of their shit.
If you can get to 5 plates a side on that for more than 5 reps and your back still isn’t big, just give up bodybuilding.
For me bent over rows by a long shot, for the following reasons. You can (should) be able to use more weight with the bent over row, it is free weights and not a machine (always a plus), the weight is not crushing your chest making you kind of hold your breath, and with the bent over row you (often) have more variations with grip than the T-bar row (all of the T-bar’s I seem to encounter are basically wide grip and that’s it). I have yet to find a good T-bar row to do supinated. Personally I like both versions of bent over rows (45 degree and 90 degree) but 45 is definitely my favorite.
Benefits of the T-bar row are the lower back is removed from the exercise (a benefit for some, a negative for others) and it may be more comfortable/easier to learn for some people.
Actually for T-bar rows I like what I call the Old School T-bar row where you stick the bar in the corner and put the plates on one side and then lift it up, often using a V-grip.
For mass building I like the Hammer Strength Lat Pulldown (Prof X’s machine), Hammer Strength Row, and Bent Over Row, for strength I like Bent Over Row, DB Row, and Pull-ups.
Professor, I realize Hammer Strength is already an established company, but I still think it is about time they made you a company spokesperson…perhaps offering perks like your very own home-gym furnished will all their equipment that strikes your fancy. Maybe even a basic ad campaign with you urging lifters to simply train hard and eat more. Or better yet, maybe you could just stand next to one of their machines(the one pictured, possibly) with a pack of lovely ladies.
[quote]nptitim wrote:
For me bent over rows by a long shot, for the following reasons. You can (should) be able to use more weight with the bent over row, it is free weights and not a machine (always a plus), the weight is not crushing your chest making you kind of hold your breath, and with the bent over row you (often) have more variations with grip than the T-bar row (all of the T-bar’s I seem to encounter are basically wide grip and that’s it). I have yet to find a good T-bar row to do supinated. Personally I like both versions of bent over rows (45 degree and 90 degree) but 45 is definitely my favorite.
Benefits of the T-bar row are the lower back is removed from the exercise (a benefit for some, a negative for others) and it may be more comfortable/easier to learn for some people.
Actually for T-bar rows I like what I call the Old School T-bar row where you stick the bar in the corner and put the plates on one side and then lift it up, often using a V-grip.
For mass building I like the Hammer Strength Lat Pulldown (Prof X’s machine), Hammer Strength Row, and Bent Over Row, for strength I like Bent Over Row, DB Row, and Pull-ups.[/quote]
You are seriously confusing a real T-bar row with the kind made with the pad you lean on. I doubt most here are talking about that one meaning your comments about the lower back being removed from the equation don’t hold up. There have been many times I have simply placed the end of one olympic bar in a corner, put weights on the other end, and used the seated row bar as the handle beneath that end. That solves every issue you just raised. That is what T-bar rows were initially.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
You are seriously confusing a real T-bar row with the kind made with the pad you lean on. I doubt most here are talking about that one meaning your comments about the lower back being removed from the equation don’t hold up. There have been many times I have simply placed the end of one olympic bar in a corner, put weights on the other end, and used the seated row bar as the handle beneath that end. That solves every issue you just raised. That is what T-bar rows were initially.[/quote]
I see what you are saying, as I mentioned in the post I call those Old School T-bar rows. I understand now that you were talking about those kind of T-bar rows, which I do like, however I wonder if the OP meant a T-bar Row with free weights or a machine? Somebody else previously mentioned a machine and everybody went with it. As always it gets confusing when people use different names for the same exercises.
So to summarize:
T-bar row machine = so-so
T-bar row with fee weights = good
Bent Over Row = best in my opinion, due to weight used, 3 dimensional control, and ROM
[quote]Professor X wrote:
TornadoTommy wrote:
For me, T-bars have always been like a cross between the stretch of a chinup and the thickness building qualities of bentover rows. Franco Columbu and Robbie Robinson were huge proponents of T-bar rowing and it’s hard to argue with their results. Easier on the lower back also.
Lee Haney also. He is probably the main reason I stuck with them and fully believed they would work for me even when I was smaller. They did.
The picture above is the Hammer Strength high row pull down…the greatest machine ever created…next to the rest of their shit.
If you can get to 5 plates a side on that for more than 5 reps and your back still isn’t big, just give up bodybuilding.[/quote]
I do believe there is something similar to this in my gym, now that I look at it. I’m not a big fan of machines, but I believe on the advice of those wiser than I, I will give it a try. Thanks.
Oh and Harris, I agree with you on not wanting my crotch to limit my range of motion. lol.
[quote]nptitim wrote:
Professor X wrote:
You are seriously confusing a real T-bar row with the kind made with the pad you lean on. I doubt most here are talking about that one meaning your comments about the lower back being removed from the equation don’t hold up. There have been many times I have simply placed the end of one olympic bar in a corner, put weights on the other end, and used the seated row bar as the handle beneath that end. That solves every issue you just raised. That is what T-bar rows were initially.
I see what you are saying, as I mentioned in the post I call those Old School T-bar rows. I understand now that you were talking about those kind of T-bar rows, which I do like, however I wonder if the OP meant a T-bar Row with free weights or a machine? Somebody else previously mentioned a machine and everybody went with it. As always it gets confusing when people use different names for the same exercises.
So to summarize:
T-bar row machine = so-so
T-bar row with fee weights = good
Bent Over Row = best in my opinion, due to weight used, 3 dimensional control, and ROM[/quote]
OP here. Machine. Basically a vertical bench. (angled) You lie on it chest to bench and reach down. The handle is such that you can vary your grip. I understand where everyone is coming from. I was pleased to hear that tbars are every bit as good an exercise as the bent over. The bent over is just a mechanically uncomfortable exercise for me. Not the same kind of discomfort as squats and deadlifts. I’m not against working hard, but its hard to explain. Personal preference I guess.
[quote]btm62 wrote:
OP here. Machine. Basically a vertical bench. (angled) You lie on it chest to bench and reach down. The handle is such that you can vary your grip. I understand where everyone is coming from. I was pleased to hear that tbars are every bit as good an exercise as the bent over. The bent over is just a mechanically uncomfortable exercise for me. Not the same kind of discomfort as squats and deadlifts. I’m not against working hard, but its hard to explain. Personal preference I guess. [/quote]
So originally, were you talking about the chest-supported t-bar row?
I’ve seen the T-bar row that is a machine, but with no chest support, just a bar w/ handles and a screw at one end, and feet platforms. Still a machine, and you’re still following a fixed path, but no chest support so you’re still using stabilizing muscles in your lower back and abs.
There is also the T-bar row that is used with a regular barbell, that acts the same way, only you don’t have the handles so you have to hold onto the barbell between your legs.
Then there is the Chest-supported T-bar rows where you lay on a pad.
And finally, there is also the barbell row, which I don’t think anybody’s getting confused with, but it’s holding a barbell with a similar grip as a bench press and rowing it to your chest; no fixed path.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
And one thing you don’t want your crotch to do is limit your range of motion.[/quote]
I keep having a problem with this doing straddle bar deadlifts.
It’s like getting punched in the taint.
[quote]btm62 wrote:
OP here. Machine. Basically a vertical bench. (angled) You lie on it chest to bench and reach down. The handle is such that you can vary your grip. I understand where everyone is coming from. I was pleased to hear that tbars are every bit as good an exercise as the bent over. The bent over is just a mechanically uncomfortable exercise for me. Not the same kind of discomfort as squats and deadlifts. I’m not against working hard, but its hard to explain. Personal preference I guess. [/quote]
Thanks for clarifying, the chest supported T-bar row is what I thought you were talking about. You mentioned that from the response T-bars seem to be every bit as good as a bent over row. Again I have to disagree. Just my opinion but think about it this way. If you were good at one exercise (T-bar or bent over row), never trained with the other one, and then went and did it how good would you be at it? Imagine if you have someone that can do bent over rows with 275x8 let’s say and they go to a T-bar row I am willing to bet that on their first try they are good at it, say they can do 180x8 which is decent. However, that person who can do 180x8 on the T-bar row and goes to do bent over rows will probably not be as good, it will take them much longer to learn and the strength they developed on the machine probably will not transfer over to the T-bar row. It will be quite some time before they can do 275x8. To me that scenario is strong evidence for the superiority of the bent over row. You can use that little “test” for any two exercises to see how they transfer over to each other.
Regarding your dislike of bent over row first are you doing the 45 degree bent over row? This is much easier to learn, feels more natural for most people, and has little lower back emphasis. I would recommend you do that. Some people call them Yates rows because he was a big fan of them. They are on his video Blood and Guts. Also Ronnie does them on his video. I think if you spent some time learning that lift you might find you like it.
Good luck with it
[quote]nptitim wrote:
btm62 wrote:
OP here. Machine. Basically a vertical bench. (angled) You lie on it chest to bench and reach down. The handle is such that you can vary your grip. I understand where everyone is coming from. I was pleased to hear that tbars are every bit as good an exercise as the bent over. The bent over is just a mechanically uncomfortable exercise for me. Not the same kind of discomfort as squats and deadlifts. I’m not against working hard, but its hard to explain. Personal preference I guess.
Thanks for clarifying, the chest supported T-bar row is what I thought you were talking about. You mentioned that from the response T-bars seem to be every bit as good as a bent over row. Again I have to disagree. Just my opinion but think about it this way. If you were good at one exercise (T-bar or bent over row), never trained with the other one, and then went and did it how good would you be at it? Imagine if you have someone that can do bent over rows with 275x8 let’s say and they go to a T-bar row I am willing to bet that on their first try they are good at it, say they can do 180x8 which is decent. However, that person who can do 180x8 on the T-bar row and goes to do bent over rows will probably not be as good, it will take them much longer to learn and the strength they developed on the machine probably will not transfer over to the T-bar row. It will be quite some time before they can do 275x8. To me that scenario is strong evidence for the superiority of the bent over row. You can use that little “test” for any two exercises to see how they transfer over to each other.
Regarding your dislike of bent over row first are you doing the 45 degree bent over row? This is much easier to learn, feels more natural for most people, and has little lower back emphasis. I would recommend you do that. Some people call them Yates rows because he was a big fan of them. They are on his video Blood and Guts. Also Ronnie does them on his video. I think if you spent some time learning that lift you might find you like it.
Good luck with it[/quote]
I do hate the idea of leaving such a great exercise out of my arsenal but they hit my hands funny and they go numb or I have pain, not a good pain either. Let me rephrase the question and see if the answers modify. I powerlift, I am a big believer in balance. You know working the back to increase my bench type thing. So knowing that, how does that change your response(s) if at all?
I also do many deadlift variations as well as power shrugs and these do not cause this sensation in my hands. So I wonder sometimes if its “referred” from some other area of my body.
Pondering out loud.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
TornadoTommy wrote:
For me, T-bars have always been like a cross between the stretch of a chinup and the thickness building qualities of bentover rows. Franco Columbu and Robbie Robinson were huge proponents of T-bar rowing and it’s hard to argue with their results. Easier on the lower back also.
Lee Haney also. He is probably the main reason I stuck with them and fully believed they would work for me even when I was smaller. They did.
The picture above is the Hammer Strength high row pull down…the greatest machine ever created…next to the rest of their shit.
If you can get to 5 plates a side on that for more than 5 reps and your back still isn’t big, just give up bodybuilding.[/quote]
I’m not a big machine guy, the only one I ever use is the chest supported row, but that machine really looks awesome. It looks exactly like something I’ve pictured in my head that I thought would be a great machine. It looks like it would have you bring the weight in a kind of circular movement from vertical and high to horizontal and low, a very full ROM for the intended musculature.
I want one.