Deads vs. Seated Cable Rows vs. Standing Bent-over Rows

Doberdawn

Still a relative newbie to lifting, and I have a few questions about comparative capacity for these exercises, what the expectation should be and what the goals should be for form and weight.

Just switched this week from SL 5x5 to NROL4W. Not sure yet if that will be a good choice or not…. But that’s not my question (for now, though feel free to comment on it <g>)…

Okay, I seem to be able to do more weight on some exercises than others, though they should be the same and interchangeable? Or the wrong ones I’m doing heavier lifts than the ones that should be heavier? I’m also not sure on set downs vs. continuous lifting. That’s the abridged version, but here’s the details:

In the NROL4W, they have us doing deadlifts 15 reps, 2 sets with 60 second rest between sets on one day. On the alternating day, we can choose to do either seated cable rows or standing bent-over barbell rows, again 15 reps, 2 sets, 60 second rest in between.

1. If seated cable rows and standing bent over rows are supposed to be interchangeable and work the same muscles, shouldn’t I be able to work the same amount of weight in either one? In the seated version, I had no problem working 100 pounds and will have to increase the weight on my next session. But, standing rows, I was last doing only 70 pounds on SL 5x5. Shouldn’t I be able to work the same amount? Or no? I highly doubt that I could do 100 lbs. x 15 x 2 standing, but it’s not even enough work when seated. If they’re not interchangeable, which one should I do and why? Should I alternate them every other workout or every other set?

2. On deadlifts, I am working 95 pounds (as of last night). Why is it relatively easy for me to do 100 lbs. on seated rows, but I’m only doing 95 on deads? Shouldn’t deads be the heaviest amount of weight I’m working? I can do the 95 and if I set down between each rep (not really a rest, I’m continuously moving, but set down, straighten up, immediately bend back down and pick up), I have no trouble doing all 15 reps (I get red flush, and HR gets up well above aerobic – 160 bpm… showing I’m not totally slacking <g>), but am I just not lifting enough?

3. I also tried the second technique I’ve read about where you don’t set down between deadlift reps, but just bend down, lower to almost grazing the floor and then lift back up again. With that method, I could only do 5 reps before I had to do one “set down” rep, then a few more continuously, then one “set down”, etc. Which way is better and why?

Forgive my ignorance and I hope these aren’t stupid questions. But, I’m a newbie, trying to learn and trying to “get it right”. Please share any comments, criticisms (yes, I’m okay with helpful criticism <g>), suggestions, explanations or answers that you have on this. I’ll be sitting here confused and anxiously awaiting your input. <g>

Thanks in advance for all your help!!!!
Dawn

SideSteel

1. If seated cable rows and standing bent over rows are supposed to be interchangeable and work the same muscles, shouldn’t I be able to work the same amount of weight in either one? In the seated version, I had no problem working 100 pounds and will have to increase the weight on my next session. But, standing rows, I was last doing only 70 pounds on SL 5x5. Shouldn’t I be able to work the same amount? Or no? I highly doubt that I could do 100 lbs. x 15 x 2 standing, but it’s not even enough work when seated. If they’re not interchangeable, which one should I do and why? Should I alternate them every other workout or every other set?

Interchangeable would simply indicate that they work similar muscle groups. It does not necessarily mean that you are lifting the exact same load with each. Barbell rows require you to utilize your entire body to a degree, since you have to support the load. A seated row is "basically" a grip and rip type of thing.

2. On deadlifts, I am working 95 pounds (as of last night). Why is it relatively easy for me to do 100 lbs. on seated rows, but I’m only doing 95 on deads? Shouldn’t deads be the heaviest amount of weight I’m working? I can do the 95 and if I set down between each rep (not really a rest, I’m continuously moving, but set down, straighten up, immediately bend back down and pick up), I have no trouble doing all 15 reps (I get red flush, and HR gets up well above aerobic – 160 bpm… showing I’m not totally slacking <g>), but am I just not lifting enough?

Part of the reason is that you are relatively new to deadlifting and it's a very technical lift. Seated rows are not. Your deadlifts will likely go up much, much faster than seated rows and I would expect you to be deadlifting much more than you would do on a seated row, in time.

3. I also tried the second technique I’ve read about where you don’t set down between deadlift reps, but just bend down, lower to almost grazing the floor and then lift back up again. With that method, I could only do 5 reps before I had to do one “set down” rep, then a few more continuously, then one “set down”, etc. Which way is better and why?

I'd prefer to see people setting the bar all the way down, make sure you still have accurate positioning for the lift, take a big breath and pull.

Doberdawn

1. If seated cable rows and standing bent over rows are supposed to be interchangeable and work the same muscles, shouldn’t I be able to work the same amount of weight in either one? In the seated version, I had no problem working 100 pounds and will have to increase the weight on my next session. But, standing rows, I was last doing only 70 pounds on SL 5x5. Shouldn’t I be able to work the same amount? Or no? I highly doubt that I could do 100 lbs. x 15 x 2 standing, but it’s not even enough work when seated. If they’re not interchangeable, which one should I do and why? Should I alternate them every other workout or every other set?

Interchangeable would simply indicate that they work similar muscle groups. It does not necessarily mean that you are lifting the exact same load with each. Barbell rows require you to utilize your entire body to a degree, since you have to support the load. A seated row is "basically" a grip and rip type of thing.

Thank you so much for the prompt response. In brief follow-up on this one.... since standing is "more full body", is that the preferable one for me to be doing? I'm trying to get a balanced and strong body.

SideSteel

1. If seated cable rows and standing bent over rows are supposed to be interchangeable and work the same muscles, shouldn’t I be able to work the same amount of weight in either one? In the seated version, I had no problem working 100 pounds and will have to increase the weight on my next session. But, standing rows, I was last doing only 70 pounds on SL 5x5. Shouldn’t I be able to work the same amount? Or no? I highly doubt that I could do 100 lbs. x 15 x 2 standing, but it’s not even enough work when seated. If they’re not interchangeable, which one should I do and why? Should I alternate them every other workout or every other set?

Interchangeable would simply indicate that they work similar muscle groups. It does not necessarily mean that you are lifting the exact same load with each. Barbell rows require you to utilize your entire body to a degree, since you have to support the load. A seated row is "basically" a grip and rip type of thing.

Thank you so much for the prompt response. In brief follow-up on this one.... since standing is "more full body", is that the preferable one for me to be doing? I'm trying to get a balanced and strong body.

I think barbell rowing is more difficult and will require more practice. I think it's more beneficial in some aspects of the lift but I also think there's merit to doing seated rows (likely easier to isolate the lats).

What does your programming suggest that you do? Choose one arbitrarily? Alternate them?

Doberdawn

I think barbell rowing is more difficult and will require more practice. I think it's more beneficial in some aspects of the lift but I also think there's merit to doing seated rows (likely easier to isolate the lats).

What does your programming suggest that you do? Choose one arbitrarily? Alternate them?

It doesn't, hence why I ended up coming here with the question. It just says do x or y, 15 reps x 2 sets with 60 second rest. No indication of why to do one or the other. No indication of whether to alternate them by sets or days or anything. It just says Do x or y. *shrugs*

I think I'll start doing 1 set seated and 1 set standing each time I'm on the A group of exercises.... or is there a reason not to switch the type you're doing per set? If yes, then I can do 2 sets of one and then next time do 2 sets of the other. Hmmm.

ilovedeadlifts

Just because a lift works similar muscle groups doesn't mean it's going to be the same difficulty as another lift.
I can dead 500+, but my seated cable row is probably in the mid 100's for reps.
People can leg press 1000 pounds but can't squat 405....


As far as what is the most beneficial, I guess it depends on goals.
I'd personally prioritize the bent over barbell rows as long as the low back is recovered. If your lower back is beat up and you don't want to stress it, opt for the seated rows.

Alternating lifts is usually the way to go IMO instead of dropping a few and staying with one all the time.

Sarauk2sf

Tagging to read.

jlapey

I have this book and did this program for several weeks. I don't recall it saying to do either/or. It was my understanding that you are to do the seated row but the other was offered as an alternative if you felt you were more advanced. I am merely posting to tag this thread for later comment after consulting my book which is not currently with me.