Are bent over barbell rows sufficient for rear delt development?

There is a reason why it is pretty much set in stone with bodybuilder lore that rows are for back thickness and pulldowns/pullups/chins are for back width. Yes, rows activate the lats and if you read studies you will see higher emg activity on the lats during rows than during pulldowns but as we all know, emg means just about nothing.
 
Thanks for the video, it emphasizes my point. Please see the explanation of middle trap role starting from 1:20. See its limited range of motion? You could in theory target the middle trap by holding your arms straight as if ready to pull the barbell in bent over rows, but instead of pulling it with lats+biceps while bending your arms, you keep your arms straight and pull your shoulders back, 3-4" ROM now we are talking full middle trapezius involvement. That's all traps do: pull your shoulders, up as in upper traps or back, as in middle traps. You can keep your middle traps flexed (i.e. pulled back) the entire exercise (as I like doing them), and extend + contract your lats (and biceps/brachii) only, clearly showing that it's not the traps doing the movement.
 
Totentanz said:
There is a reason why it is pretty much set in stone with bodybuilder lore that rows are for back thickness and pulldowns/pullups/chins are for back width. Yes, rows activate the lats and if you read studies you will see higher emg activity on the lats during rows than during pulldowns but as we all know, emg means just about nothing.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree. No doubt that rows can grow lats and traps both, but if I am going for big, thick traps, I'm going to row. If I am going for lats, I have to agree that Pulldowns are far superior to rows. I have seen the Emg study you mentioned, but I also saw a superior Emg study that showed Pulldown/pull-up movements to be the best for latissimus dorsi, which makes far more sense kinesiologically. As you mentioned, Emg studies are easily flawed.

Here is the one I like, still has flaws, but the best one I have seen so far: http://suppversity.blogspot.com/2011/07/suppversity-emg-series-latissimus.html?m=1
 
On another tangent, I find deadlifts to be just as effective, if not more so, at working the entire trapezius. ROM is not the main factor Rihad, if that were true, then deadlifts wouldn't grow erectors and traps since that only work the muscles isometrically.
 
Last edited:
Sci, it's not really the issue of isometric (static) vs. concentric vs. eccentric, it's more the issue of progressive overload. Flexed isometric loading can be described as fighting the resistance, so same rules apply as in eccentric movements, whereas loads aren't as heavy. Extending on what you pointed out, folks doing DL don't have a need to do any direct trap work for the simple reason that merely holding the heavy ass loads elicits enough growth for the traps.
 
Last edited:
Rihad, Every exercise performed with enough load to elicit a PS response in the major muscles involved in the movement carries some degree of risk of injury. However, it's really the long-term effects of certain movements (often performed badly) that are potentially more damaging. One person's bent-over row form is often not the same as another person's. (You only need to check out a few vids on YouTube to confirm that.) My personal experience with B-O rows has been very positive. My entire back gets worked hard with this movement. It feels very natural and it's hard as heck. There's a great carry-over to lifting stuff in everyday life and to real rowing. The danger is to want to cheat to use more load than you can really handle. Don't do that and you should find B-O rows are a really useful addition to your back exercise repertoire. :)

========

When I posted this it was in response to an older post. For some reason I didn't see the most recent posts. So my comment is out-of-sync. :-/
 
Last edited:
HST_Rihad said:
This guy pretty much shows the correct form, although it's hard to see if his traps are pulled back or not. Suffice it to say they seem to not be moving.
Same plane of motion as seated rows. There's no way to isolate lats or traps with rows, it's a compound movement. It's just that lats are primarily lifting the weight. An analogue would be bench press: pecs (primary movers, bringing your arms towards the body), triceps+delts (secondary synergists). I'm not saying traps aren't needed to perform the lift, it's just not one of the movements they're used primarily for (think shrugs).
Click to expand...

His form is not correct. Far from it. I'd be interested to see him doing the exercise with a load that's 75-95% of his 1RM. Anyone can throw 70kg about FFS. And he still has some pretty significant form flaws IMO.

Tangent - bench press is arguably the best exercise for anterior deltoid hypertrophy.

Totentanz said:
You apparently are confusing traps with upper traps.
Click to expand...

This.

HST_Rihad said:
Thanks for the video, it emphasizes my point. Please see the explanation of middle trap role starting from 1:20. See its limited range of motion? You could in theory target the middle trap by holding your arms straight as if ready to pull the barbell in bent over rows, but instead of pulling it with lats+biceps while bending your arms, you keep your arms straight and pull your shoulders back, 3-4" ROM now we are talking full middle trapezius involvement. That's all traps do: pull your shoulders, up as in upper traps or back, as in middle traps. You can keep your middle traps flexed (i.e. pulled back) the entire exercise (as I like doing them), and extend + contract your lats (and biceps/brachii) only, clearly showing that it's not the traps doing the movement.
Click to expand...

You're confusing a short ROM with 'limited ROM', and you're also over-emphasising the significance of ROM vs ROM relative to the muscle. Traps are being exposed to essentially their maximum ROM here.

Traps also connect the lats to the skeleton, bio-mechanically speaking. When you do an exercise with your arms perpendicular to your spine, any load being borne by your lats is carried through your traps.

And "keeping your traps flexed, as I like doing them" seems like a nice way to put yourself into a hospital or therapy program. Let your muscles work the way they're designed to work. You don't have a better grasp than 4M yrs of evolution.

Sci said:
On another tangent, I find deadlifts to be just as effective, if not more so, at working the entire trapezius. ROM is not the main factor Rihad, if that were true, then deadlifts wouldn't grow erectors and traps since that only work the muscles isometrically.
Click to expand...

Deadlifts are fantastic. Have to go do them in about 30 :p

HST_Rihad said:
Sci, it's not really the issue of isometric (static) vs. concentric vs. eccentric, it's more the issue of progressive overload. Flexed isometric loading can be described as fighting the resistance, so same rules apply as in eccentric movements, whereas loads aren't as heavy. Extending on what you pointed out, folks doing DL don't have a need to do any direct trap work for the simple reason that merely holding the heavy ass loads elicits enough growth for the traps.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you've reversed your perspective on this :). You can add 'stupidly big biceps & forearms' to traps there.

Lol said:
Rihad, Every exercise performed with enough load to elicit a PS response in the major muscles involved in the movement carries some degree of risk of injury. However, it's really the long-term effects of certain movements (often performed badly) that are potentially more damaging. One person's bent-over row form is often not the same as another person's. (You only need to check out a few vids on YouTube to confirm that.) My personal experience with B-O rows has been very positive. My entire back gets worked hard with this movement. It feels very natural and it's hard as heck. There's a great carry-over to lifting stuff in everyday life and to real rowing. The danger is to want to cheat to use more load than you can really handle. Don't do that and you should find B-O rows are a really useful addition to your back exercise repertoire. :)

========

When I posted this it was in response to an older post. For some reason I didn't see the most recent posts. So my comment is out-of-sync. :-/
Click to expand...

Thank Christ for you, Lol
 
AlexAustralia said:
I'm glad you've reversed your perspective on this :).
Click to expand...
I never did. The point wasn't traps' naturally short ROM, but that it's not traps doing the bent-over BB rows movement. Asserting that lats do the pull via traps makes no sense to me (considering the natural role of middle traps to pull the shoulder girdle back), unless I can see some detailed info into this. I could loosen my shoulders by lowering them and pull the barbell while flexing them minimally, almost totally excluding them, although such technique would be dubious on decent loads. The point is: as long as shoulders move back on the way up, or are constantly being flexed backwards (both natural components of the proper movement), the traps get the loading. But it's not them pulling the load, or at least they aren't the prime movers, I believe lats are (or whatever minor muscles the group consists of).
 
As I wrote above, you can make this a trap exercise easily, simply don't bend your arms while lifting the load with your shoulders up and down @3-4" Full ROM - the maximum you can get (which is really shoulders moving back and forth, given the bent over posture).
 
No, you have. You've expressed previously that you thought tension wasn't enough (had to have concentric + eccentric).

My comment isn't in reference to BB Rows.

Just go and study physics. You'll understand why the lats aren't moving things by their lonesome, nor are they bearing the majority of the weight. You understand that the ends of the muscle are 'pulling' (by connection) to *something*, yes? Skeleton, other muscles, whichever.


This is obviously (another) discussion in which you're on one perspective, most of the rest here are on the other, and there's little to be gained continuing the circles.
 
Rihad, no insult intended, but when you look like Totz or LOL, then we might listen to you. Until then, talk less and lift more. You keep complaining that you do not make progress but all you do is switch the actual point of the question to some obscure point you seem to want to make. Enough buddy. Lift compounds more, eat correctly and make gains. Or do your isolations and live with it. Jeez!
 
AlexAustralia said:
No, you have. You've expressed previously that you thought tension wasn't enough (had to have concentric + eccentric).
Click to expand...
No way, static loading is a loading, that's why folks doing deads or other heavy rowing stuff seldom need to do any direct traps work, or folks doing squats - train their abs.
You're probably referring to this:
HST_Rihad said:
Last I heard it was a predominantly lat exercise, with static trap and lower back load.
Click to expand...

Which I have a hard time seeing how it's any different to what I just said.
Lats are pulling the load, but that doesn't prevent you from pulling the shoulders back and flexing them - which is a natural part of the movement - same as abs doing work while you're squatting.

Just go and study physics. You'll understand why the lats aren't moving things by their lonesome, nor are they bearing the majority of the weight. You understand that the ends of the muscle are 'pulling' (by connection) to *something*, yes? Skeleton, other muscles, whichever.
Click to expand...
I have a hard time seeing how lats can pull the load through the traps given their naturally limited ROM. In the end, lats are prime movers. You can't basically start saying that seated rows are primarily a middle trap exercise, they're for lats.
 
Last edited:
O&G, why don't you go copy Ron Coleman's training regime.

p.s.: I did make progress in size, I just got overly fat in doing so.
 
Last edited:
HST_Rihad said:
O&G, why don't you go copy Ron Coleman's training regime.

p.s.: I did make progress in size, I just got overly fat in doing so.
Click to expand...

You put on too much because you didn't manage your eating correctly. Re-read O&G's post. It's in there.
 
Right, I'll start eating enough the moment mirror, calipers & waist measurements start telling me I'm lean enough.
 
I wasn't saying traps don't experience any strain, they do when you pull your shoulders back, but it's not them pulling the load all the way up, it's the lats. Traps can lift the load by as much as you can pull your shoulders back, approx. 3-4 inches.

To all suggesting to "shut up and lift" all I can once again say is to go grab one of Ronnie Coleman's workout routines, why bother analyzing stuff? He's big, you should listen to him.
 
Last edited:
Yes, the lats are the prime mover of the humerus in a row. The traps are the prime mover of the scapula in a row. Rowing involves heavy scapular retraction, when done correctly, hence the trapezius gets the most loading and exercise than any other part of the back.
Seated cable rows target the trapezius and rhomboids even harder than the lats also. Most rowing is this way. Dumbell rows tend to hit the lats harder than most rows, and I suspect underhanded "Yates" barbell rows are a pretty hard on the lats also.

I think much of the confusion here arises out of the fact that the latissimus amd the trapezius are both the prime synergists of the rowing motion. Both are needed, because both the humerus and the scapula have to retract.
 
Sci, agreed, both are needed (even one's head is). You can roughly estimate work done by each of trap & lat work by looking at the distance moved: 3-4" for traps, 15-20" for lats. Enough score to call lats the prime mover.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top