One Arm T-bar Rows?

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
21

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
I think this is one exercise that needs to be done with very good form to work. [/quote]

I feel like this is true too.

That is why I don’t really expect much from it, other than getting used to holding and moving that much weight.
[/quote]

Don’t expect much from it because it requires better form?
[/quote]

Uh, yep.

The basic mass builders, the ones that provide the most size potential, are usually NOT the ones where your form has to be perfect just to get something from it.

I have great form…NOW…after several years of getting to weights most don’t ever get to and perfecting my form overt time.

If you want to be a monster, good luck getting there while being one of the “everything must be perfect” crowd (not saying that is you, but you get the point).
[/quote]

I totally get the point and couldn’t agree more.

I wouldn’t recommend or use this as a “staple exercise” rather a secondary that can help target lats in a different way. IMO heavy row variations focusing on weight and using looser form ought to be the base to any back training.

22

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
I think this is one exercise that needs to be done with very good form to work. [/quote]

I feel like this is true too.

That is why I don’t really expect much from it, other than getting used to holding and moving that much weight.
[/quote]

Don’t expect much from it because it requires better form?
[/quote]

Yeah, pretty much at this point.

I’m not going to take a ton of time to tighten up my form and find the proper load etc etc etc, when I can achieve what it would achieve by using other rowing lifts. Does that make sense?

Somewhere between 3 and 4 plates it gets too heavy to use strict form… I like one arm TBars and have been using lately, I just don’t find them a staple for me right now. [/quote]

I don’t disagree. I enjoy the 1 arm rows but they tertiary (sp) to other row movements.

23

Seems the general consensus is that a little loose form is ok on heavy back work.

Hmm…

24

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:
Seems the general consensus is that a little loose form is ok on heavy back work.

Hmm…[/quote]

I have never seen a really huge back on someone who acted like form took precedence over really heavy weight.

I am also not talking about what I’m sure most newbs are doing and cheating so much they put themselves at risk. The whole goal is to avoid injury while also stressing the muscle the hardest.

There is such a thing as CONTROLLED CHEATING…and I doubt most newbs know the difference which is why they are specifically taught good form.

At the end of the day, if the guy built a back that makes people say “holy shit” and he didn’t injure himself doing it, then he trained RIGHT no matter how much he cheated.

25

[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:

This is how I do them[/quote]

This is exactly how I’ve done them too.

Lower back issues are the reason I do them as opposed to bilateral T-bar rows.

26

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:
Seems the general consensus is that a little loose form is ok on heavy back work.

Hmm…[/quote]

I have never seen a really huge back on someone who acted like form took precedence over really heavy weight.

I am also not talking about what I’m sure most newbs are doing and cheating so much they put themselves at risk. The whole goal is to avoid injury while also stressing the muscle the hardest.

There is such a thing as CONTROLLED CHEATING…and I doubt most newbs know the difference which is why they are specifically taught good form.

At the end of the day, if the guy built a back that makes people say “holy shit” and he didn’t injure himself doing it, then he trained RIGHT no matter how much he cheated.[/quote]

Thanks for clearing this up Prof. Reason for my original comment was because some form nazis got on my ass for my bent over row form.

27

this is the way i do them, except i dont use the tbar machine, just a bar in the corner. you grab the end of the bar, they are pretty awesome.

28

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:
Seems the general consensus is that a little loose form is ok on heavy back work.

Hmm…[/quote]

I have never seen a really huge back on someone who acted like form took precedence over really heavy weight.

I am also not talking about what I’m sure most newbs are doing and cheating so much they put themselves at risk. The whole goal is to avoid injury while also stressing the muscle the hardest.

There is such a thing as CONTROLLED CHEATING…and I doubt most newbs know the difference which is why they are specifically taught good form.

At the end of the day, if the guy built a back that makes people say “holy shit” and he didn’t injure himself doing it, then he trained RIGHT no matter how much he cheated.[/quote]

That is so true.

My training partner and I were talking about this the other day; he completely sucks at squatting. One of our old training partners kept telling him that he “needed” to squat. Articles told him that he needed to squat. He was convinced he needed to get strong on the squat despite him having tree truck legs (people would comment on them all the time) from leg pressing half a ton. Eventually, after 2-3 years, he gave up (couldn’t get far past 300lbs). I always told him that he leans forward too much, but it’s something he just can’t fix (he wasn’t built for them, and it took long enough to “discover” this). The irony of it all though, is that some would believe that they are superior to him because they squat and he doesn’t (despite having legs half his size).

Likewise, with myself, I always used to leave about 2" above my chest when bb benching - this allowed me to progress really well without the really bad pain in my shoulders (shoulders took over at the bottom quite a bit). Eventually, due to advise, I started touching my chest with the bar again, shoulder problems came back and progress halted again. It seems that by limiting ROM by just 2", I was able to progress 200%+ compared to just 25% with full ROM…which one’s going to give the bigger pecs? lol

It’s common sense - the exercise that allows the most progress with least injury is the winner, but we can all be brainwashed at times and stubborn with so called “got to do” exercises. The ROM police, and the insecure ones (who said that machines are evil or for the weak), the narrow minded ones who’re built for certain movements, were the ones who really held me back.

29

This guys form isnt ‘perfect’ but u cant argue with the results :slight_smile: Those last few reps looked unbelievebly painful lol

starting to find that guys who are weaker than myself seem to find comfort in the fact that they do all their movements with lighter weight because they ‘control’ the movement. The fact ur lifting 2x what they can makes no difference lol. I definaltly control the movement but i dont turn it into a 3 second negative on every fukin rep because that isnt needed for some1 small and weak like me, geting stronger definalty is!

Will try 2 armed variation aswel to see which i prefer but the gym doesnt have a shitload of plates and no machine rows, so deads will be my primary back move along with a row variation and pullups. Always found if my row gets stronger my dead will,…even without training it specifically :open_mouth:

30

[quote]its_just_me wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]solidkhalid wrote:
Seems the general consensus is that a little loose form is ok on heavy back work.

Hmm…[/quote]

I have never seen a really huge back on someone who acted like form took precedence over really heavy weight.

I am also not talking about what I’m sure most newbs are doing and cheating so much they put themselves at risk. The whole goal is to avoid injury while also stressing the muscle the hardest.

There is such a thing as CONTROLLED CHEATING…and I doubt most newbs know the difference which is why they are specifically taught good form.

At the end of the day, if the guy built a back that makes people say “holy shit” and he didn’t injure himself doing it, then he trained RIGHT no matter how much he cheated.[/quote]

That is so true.

My training partner and I were talking about this the other day; he completely sucks at squatting. One of our old training partners kept telling him that he “needed” to squat. Articles told him that he needed to squat. He was convinced he needed to get strong on the squat despite him having tree truck legs (people would comment on them all the time) from leg pressing half a ton. Eventually, after 2-3 years, he gave up (couldn’t get far past 300lbs). I always told him that he leans forward too much, but it’s something he just can’t fix (he wasn’t built for them, and it took long enough to “discover” this). The irony of it all though, is that some would believe that they are superior to him because they squat and he doesn’t (despite having legs half his size).

Likewise, with myself, I always used to leave about 2" above my chest when bb benching - this allowed me to progress really well without the really bad pain in my shoulders (shoulders took over at the bottom quite a bit). Eventually, due to advise, I started touching my chest with the bar again, shoulder problems came back and progress halted again. It seems that by limiting ROM by just 2", I was able to progress 200%+ compared to just 25% with full ROM…which one’s going to give the bigger pecs? lol

It’s common sense - the exercise that allows the most progress with least injury is the winner, but we can all be brainwashed at times and stubborn with so called “got to do” exercises. The ROM police, and the insecure ones (who said that machines are evil or for the weak), the narrow minded ones who’re built for certain movements, were the ones who really held me back.[/quote]

Man, people on this site acted for years like me not doing deadlifts was blasphemous and that my back must be tiny since I don’t.

Getting huge is about finding what works for you and always has been…which is why there aren’t that many big people. Most of these fuckers don’t have the will power.

31

^ If theres anything I could ever take from this site, it is probably this (from its and x). I have been brainwashed by ROM police before. Yesterday during one of my lifts I knew I was cheating a bit, deviating past that feeling of ultimate control but I felt like I got more stimulation than had I just kept by the rules. It probably wasn’t visible to an observer. I guess I’ll find out as I push the bounds how much I can let go of the form to get some more lbs on.

32

^ Just to clarify before anyone takes it the wrong way lol - the whole point of tweaking ROM is so that the target muscle is under better tension for most of the lift, and/or so that progress can be made if you just don’t seem to be built for certain ranges/angles.

There’s got to be a good reason to tweak ROM (other than it looks good hoisting bigger weights than last weak when you did full ROM lol), don’t just do it for the sake of it. Take for example “isolation” exercises like barbell curls. I’ve heard so many newbies bitch and moan about their small biceps (in comparison to everything else that seems to be growing fine). The newb gets asked what weights they’re “shifting”, and it just leads to confusion - if there was a video the reason would be clear within seconds; they’re swinging the bar with their hips/legs, hardly even bending at the elbows (no ROM for the biceps, and not long enough tension for them). In this case, yes, the ROM police may have a case. So instead of making tension and TUT better for the biceps, you’d be taking them out of the movement too much (some momentum and elbow shifting is understandable though)

33

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]plateau wrote:
Why would pendlay’s not be great for mass??!!

Anyway yep, smaller plates are better in my opinion as I get better ROM, and thus a better contraction. [/quote]

Please show back.[/quote]

Please define what is wrong with asking why a back exercise would not be effective and why I cannot prefer a better contraction for myself.

So I am not allowed to offer opinions without back photos. Please point to terms of posting that state this?

Assume by your “logic” you will stay out of any threads to do with contests as you have no contest photos?

34

[quote]plateau wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]plateau wrote:
Why would pendlay’s not be great for mass??!!

Anyway yep, smaller plates are better in my opinion as I get better ROM, and thus a better contraction. [/quote]

Please show back.[/quote]

Please define what is wrong with asking why a back exercise would not be effective and why I cannot prefer a better contraction for myself.

So I am not allowed to offer opinions without back photos. Please point to terms of posting that state this?

Assume by your “logic” you will stay out of any threads to do with contests as you have no contest photos?[/quote]

What the fuck are you talking about? I asked about your back development because you specifically claimed…and I quote…“yep, smaller plates are better in my opinion as I get better ROM, and thus a better contraction.”…which leads readers to believe your back development is worth the comment of how well this works.

Therefore, I asked for a pic of your back development. Why would someone who this worked for be ashamed at all of what they built…if it worked?

You don’t see me commenting much at all about contest prep…so again what are you talking about?

Any comments I make about contest prep are general comments based on what I have seen from being friends with many competitors who have already been on stage, and one of which went pro. I do not go into detail about contest prep at all…so try again.

35

[quote]Professor X wrote:
What the fuck are you talking about? I asked about your back development because you specifically claimed…and I quote…“yep, smaller plates are better in my opinion as I get better ROM, and thus a better contraction.”…which leads readers to believe your back development is worth the comment of how well this works.

Therefore, I asked for a pic of your back development. Why would someone who this worked for be ashamed at all of what they built…if it worked?

You don’t see me commenting much at all about contest prep…so again what are you talking about?

Any comments I make about contest prep are general comments based on what I have seen from being friends with many competitors who have already been on stage, and one of which went pro. I do not go into detail about contest prep at all…so try again.[/quote]

Wow a swear word I am so impressed!

So I am unable to know if my back is better with a different training technique, unless I upload pictures for you to see?

So you won’t comment or you won’t comment “much” about training prep?

So I can make general comment about back training from training with other people, who have competed? By the professor X rules of posting on T-Nation, which again I didn’t see anywhere when I signed up!

So again you won’t make any comments about training prep or you won’t make many comments?! You seem genuninly confused here!

36

You’re not making a whole lot of sense, plateau. But if it’ll convince you to post a picture, I want to see your back too.

37

[quote]Professor X wrote:

At the end of the day, if the guy built a back that makes people say “holy shit” and he didn’t injure himself doing it, then he trained RIGHT no matter how much he cheated.[/quote]

Awesome quote