DB rows vs BB rows

[shizz702]

We both know both are great, proven back builders.

Logic would say that overall the barbell row would be better overall cause theoretically you can use more weight with it. But, this says otherwise:

OPENING ARGUMENTS

Defense Barbell exercises are the best for overall muscle growth, because they allow more weight to be used.

Prosecutions One-arm dumbbell rows allow each arm to pull more weight.

EVIDENCE

* Studies confirm that one-arm exercises allow you to lift more than half of the weight that each arm would lift during a two-arm barbell exercise. Therefore, the combined weight of the dumbbells equals more than that lifted on a barbell.

* Research we performed at the Weider Research Group to test this theory found that trained bodybuilders were able to perform one-arm dumbbell rows for 10 reps using an average weight of 110 pounds, a total of 220 pounds for both arms.

* Those same subjects could only perform barbell rows with an average weight of 190 pounds.

* The bodybuilders in the Weider research study were able to total 30 pounds more (about 15% more) using one-arm dumbbell rows than barbell rows.

VERDICT: ONE-ARM DUMBBELL ROWS

It appears that most people are stronger on one-arm dumbbell rows than on barbell rows. One-arm dumbbell rows allow you to place greater overload on the lats and that can lead to greater mass gains.

Source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_2_27/ai_n31421566/

Very interesting cause now that I think about it I can row more than half of my barbell weight per arm with db's.

Obviously the bb row is still a great mass builder, and the article even says you should still do it, but this just goes to show the one arm db row is a great exercise and you should definitely include it on your back day. Personally, it has been the best lat builder for me.

[LegendKillerJosh]

* Studies confirm that one-arm exercises allow you to lift more than half of the weight that each arm would lift during a two-arm barbell exercise. Therefore, the combined weight of the dumbbells equals more than that lifted on a barbell.

.

I disagree with this. I can bench 350 with a barbell but can't do 175lb dumbells.

[Pizzalamp]

I disagree with this. I can bench 350 with a barbell but can't do 175lb dumbells.

lol im the opposite
i can row 175lb dumbells
but cant bench 350

[Fury317]

I guess Im weird. I can row upwards of 275, maybe 315 on a good day. But I stick with about 100-110lb DBs. I just prefer BB, it feels more natural.

[LegendKillerJosh]

lol im the opposite
i can row 175lb dumbells
but cant bench 350

oh I meant bench press 175lb dumbells, i could ROW them.

[charlievanriper]

This is a good study but I still will push using both. I feel and have learned in my workouts and client workouts that Dumbbells used with moderate weight controlled are great mass builders for thickness, but your limited to how wide you can pull with DB's, so by doing heavy Barbell row's with a good wide grip you are getting the type of exhaustive muscle strain needed to stimulate growth. Use the DB's as a secondary to burn them, I just cannot agree that it is better to use Db's as a primary mass builder. Those that have the ability to use 175 lb DB's did not get that strength in the beginnig by using DB's.

As an example I can pull 225 with Barbell rows and workout with 90 lbs on DB's but I have tried to pull 120's and cannot control the DB, this is not productive to growth stimulus.

[charlievanriper]

I guess Im weird. I can row upwards of 275, maybe 315 on a good day. But I stick with about 100-110lb DBs. I just prefer BB, it feels more natural.

Exactly bro

You should read my back series ( well part 1 is done and posted part 2 and 3 are coming)

[loligagger]

I disagree with this. I can bench 350 with a barbell but can't do 175lb dumbells.


this article is just for pulling, not for pushing. i can row more db than i can bb. but i can bench press more barbell.

Just clearing it up for everyone

correct me if im wrong shizz

[t_mh]

Yeah it's about rowing. Pressing is irrelevant.

When I saw the title of this thread my first thought was that I prefer DB rowing because I can go heavier. That's always my position when I compare the two. I feel like my BB rows are bad form once I get to around 225, but can DB row 140+ (I actually don't know how high I can DB row because that was when I was taping plates onto dumbbells one day and got in trouble) comfortably for more reps. I feel it much more the next day in my bi's and back when I use the DBs too.

[charlievanriper]

well definately but use them both as what they are tools. Personally I just dont like the feel when I go to heavy on DB's if I use them together I can pull some serious poundage and the next day holy tits my lats are pumped like eagles wings.

[Littlefry]

I like to switch it up every couple of months, both are good in my books.

[Firefist]

its all about switching it up for me. i was doing bb rows for the longest time as a staple in my back routine, but then i stopped feeling it, no pump, no growth, no soreness, no nothing. so i switched to db row off the bench, that helped for the next 6 months, then i started doing them off a rack. first day off the rack, it was coincidentally the first day of class again, and probably one of my best workouts ever.

the key is variety.

[prowrestler]

this is why

barbell row is a much stricter exercises, a db row is way easyer to cheat VIA the chainsaw motion. you can lean to aside where in the bb row u can not lean over and yank.

another note, the whole concept of "more weight means more muscle" is bullshit.

i know many people who leg press a shit ton of plates yet have very unimpressive thighs, where the bodybuilder in the squat rack performing concentrated and intense work cant find a pair of shorts to fit into.

its about stimulateing the muscle fibers. you have to take into consideration LEVERAGE. increase in leverage will increase pounds lifted but wont do shit for muscle growth.

for example, the leg press increases leverage...alotta grade 10-11 math will tell you what your muscles actualyy feel. or the guy whos bench stroke is 10 inchs benchs more then the guy who has a 24inch stroke....leverage.

i really dont believe in this "mass building" and "shapeing" exercise bullshit. any exercise that allows you to dial into the muscle with alot of attention and intensity and progresss with a solid diet is what will cause growth. properly recruiting the muscle fibers matters alot more then lifting more weight but lookin like a jack ass in the process.

[Shamus11B]

First let me say Shizz is always posting up great articles and really contributing to these forums in a great way. Second I think both these exercises I have a place in your back days arsenal. They both will develope, like anything, different parts of the back. One thing I like about DB's is you can really hammer out the reps and I feel like I can really do great burnout sets and get a great pump. Now what I like about BB is you can alter your grip and hit completely different areas of the back easily and effectively. My personal favorite....Yates Rows, thanks for this exercise again shizz.

[charlievanriper]

ya buddy reverse grip bb rows unbelievable I love them.

Prowrestler I agree to a point strict control in any exercise is the key if you cant control 225 on bb rows you should not be doing that much weight, but if you can and you can pause with that weight thier is nothing that will build mass like that movement. The same goes for DB rows if you can lift it you need to be lifting it since thats the key to building your back it takes exhausting work to tire out the large muscles in the back, thats why I am a strong beleiver in using both.

[live2lift]

I may have to disagree with this article as well. I can row upwards of 275 but if I did one arm rows I would probably max around 120. I say probably cuz my gym only has the 120s as their heaviest so I am not sure. Regardless, I still prefer BB rows for mass...besides DLs and rack DLs I feel there is nothing better. My 2 cents.

Peace

[fenix237]

a couple obvious differences with these two great exercises- one is the neutral grip of a DB row, where a BB row is either pronated or supinated. another big difference is the fact that you can get a better contraction (more range) with a DB (just like flat pressing with DB's or BB's)

so it seems they each have their own advantages and they both deserve their place in any solid routine. on a side note, for those that have big guts (like me!), the ROM on BB rows is compromised- therefore i rend to do more DB work while losing the spare tire lol!

[shizz702]

One of the key advantages I've found with db rows is they take the stress off the lower back. Personally I've found barbell rows to be stressful on my lower back unless I do them more upright Yate's style.

As pro said, in order to do bb rows effectively you have to do them strict. And actual textbook form for them is to do each rep at a dead stop from the ground, torso parrallel to the floor. Not a lot of weight can be moved strictly in that manner.

Db rows are easier to cheat, but if done right you can get an excellent lat contraction with them.

As said, I think we can all agree you should do both, and the article said that not everyone can do more weight with the dbs, but most can, and that is what I thought was interesting, seemingly as one would think you can almost always do more with a barbell, I never thought about how I could do more than half my barbell weight per arm with the dbs.

[Angst]

I feel barbell rows help to add thickness to the back and one arm DB rows can really stretch out the lats. It's kinda like barbell curls and DB curls, maybe one is better than the other, but people need to do both for maximum development.

[charlievanriper]

Thats what I'm saying here and in my back article, its not about which is better its they are both valuable to properly train the back.