# For my home gym



## Tough Old Man (Feb 11, 2006)

These things any good to use for rows? Thinking of buying one today for my home gym.




Thanks tough


----------



## GFR (Feb 11, 2006)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> *These things any good to use for rows?* Thinking of buying one today for my home gym.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## P-funk (Feb 11, 2006)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

>


----------



## Dale Mabry (Feb 11, 2006)




----------



## GFR (Feb 11, 2006)




----------



## Tough Old Man (Feb 11, 2006)

Sorry had a hard time getting the picture in


----------



## GFR (Feb 11, 2006)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> Sorry had a hard time getting the picture in


I like the T-bar row that takes the stress off your back.....just make sure you can breath on that thing.


----------



## P-funk (Feb 11, 2006)

I don't mind the support row at all.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 11, 2006)

Just make sure it's sturdy Tough, we have one at my gym and it's great but not all are built the same. I used one that wasn't very sturdy and it defeated the purpose.


----------



## GFR (Feb 11, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> Just make sure it's sturdy Tough, we have one at my gym and it's great but not all are built the same. I used one that wasn't very sturdy and it defeated the purpose.


You might think about a diet then....I'm 254 and it never broke when I was using it...


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 11, 2006)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

> You might think about a diet then....I'm 254 and it never broke when I was using it...


 
You may be wiegh 254 but lifting with just 2 tens won't make it break. 


They make cheap ones.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 11, 2006)

I'm  not fat....


----------



## GFR (Feb 11, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> I'm  not fat....


----------



## LexusGS (Feb 11, 2006)

Tough, I have one of those in my gym in school. Work alright, but they don't go shit on real bent rows imo.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 11, 2006)

ForemanRules said:
			
		

>


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 11, 2006)

LexusGS said:
			
		

> Tough, I have one of those in my gym in school. Work alright, but they don't go shit on real bent rows imo.


\

I have to admit I do prefer the bentover over these but if you have a bad back they are pretty good.


----------



## GFR (Feb 11, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> \
> 
> I have to admit* I do prefer the bentover* over these but if you have a bad back they are pretty good.


true story


----------



## Tough Old Man (Feb 11, 2006)

P-funk said:
			
		

> I don't mind the support row at all.


Patrick here's my thinking and please respond to this. As I'm getting into higher weight on bent over rows, I find myself standing more upright then Iwant to in order to keep so much pressure off the lower back and then feel like it's not as effective of an exercise. 


Tough


----------



## P-funk (Feb 11, 2006)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> Patrick here's my thinking and please respond to this. As I'm getting into higher weight on bent over rows, I find myself standing more upright then Iwant to in order to keep so much pressure off the lower back and then feel like it's not as effective of an exercise.
> 
> 
> Tough




I agree.  I do my bent over rows as parallel to the floor as I can get.  The ROM is so short when you are upright I don't see the point.  IMO the yates row is more like a modified shrug then a back exercise.  I like the support row.  it keeps you locked into a neutral position.


----------



## Tough Old Man (Feb 11, 2006)

P-funk said:
			
		

> I agree. I do my bent over rows as parallel to the floor as I can get. The ROM is so short when you are upright I don't see the point. IMO the yates row is more like a modified shrug then a back exercise. I like the support row. it keeps you locked into a neutral position.


Thanks Patrick


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 11, 2006)

P-funk said:
			
		

> I agree. I do my bent over rows as parallel to the floor as I can get. The ROM is so short when you are upright I don't see the point. *IMO the yates row is more like a modified shrug then a back exercise*. I like the support row. it keeps you locked into a neutral position.


 
You have a point there, lately I have been doing them and I do notice the traps getting bigger along with my upper back.
Aren't they considered part of backs


----------



## P-funk (Feb 11, 2006)

min0 lee said:
			
		

> You have a point there, lately I have been doing them and I do notice the traps getting bigger along with my upper back.
> Aren't they considered part of backs




yes, the traps do make up your back.  But, usually when people talk about "back" training I always think off Lats.  Working traps is an important thing.


----------



## CowPimp (Feb 11, 2006)

P-funk said:
			
		

> I agree.  I do my bent over rows as parallel to the floor as I can get.  The ROM is so short when you are upright I don't see the point.  IMO the yates row is more like a modified shrug then a back exercise.  I like the support row.  it keeps you locked into a neutral position.



I feel you there.  That's why I don't do Yates' rows in a really upright position.  I just use a supinated grip, but try to stay pretty low.  However, I am a bit above parallel for sure, but not 45 degrees or anything.


----------



## Tough Old Man (Feb 12, 2006)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I feel you there. That's why I don't do Yates' rows in a really upright position. I just use a supinated grip, but try to stay pretty low. However, I am a bit above parallel for sure, but not 45 degrees or anything.


I was the same way, but when the weight started going over 300 lbs, I found myself getting more upright to the point that i figured sooner or later I'd be just about in the position of doing shrugs. This is what I want to avoid. So here comes the machine.


----------



## CowPimp (Feb 12, 2006)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> I was the same way, but when the weight started going over 300 lbs, I found myself getting more upright to the point that i figured sooner or later I'd be just about in the position of doing shrugs. This is what I want to avoid. So here comes the machine.



I think chest supported rows are a good exercise.  I'm not really arguing against that.  I just threw in that comment for whatever reason.  I think seated cable rows are great too.  I think machines are more useful for rowing variations that a lot of other upper body movements simply because it is easy to cheat on them.


----------



## Tough Old Man (Feb 12, 2006)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> I think chest supported rows are a good exercise. I'm not really arguing against that. I just threw in that comment for whatever reason. I think seated cable rows are great too. I think machines are more useful for rowing variations that a lot of other upper body movements simply because it is easy to cheat on them.


I like seated cable rows. My problem is my machine is only rated for 300 lbs and I'm past that weight. I was using them and alternating Bent over rows. So for now until my new machine shows up, I'll do B/O/R and alternate them with deadlifts for the back thickness. 

Tough


----------



## CowPimp (Feb 12, 2006)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> I like seated cable rows. My problem is my machine is only rated for 300 lbs and I'm past that weight. I was using them and alternating Bent over rows. So for now until my new machine shows up, I'll do B/O/R and alternate them with deadlifts for the back thickness.
> 
> Tough



Wow, you have a strong ass back.  You can get rubber weights that add 5-10 pounds a pop to add on the cable stack though if you like that movement.


----------



## Mudge (Feb 12, 2006)

I bend at the knees and I have no real back issues, on my last couple reps I actually bend over more (probably out of lower back tiredness) but I dont go 100% lately so its not a problem for me.

I like to throw in support rows but as a mainstay I dont think they work as well as the freeweight row.


----------



## Tough Old Man (Feb 12, 2006)

CowPimp said:
			
		

> Wow, you have a strong ass back. You can get rubber weights that add 5-10 pounds a pop to add on the cable stack though if you like that movement.


No that's not it as it is a free weight machine, but only rated at 300 lbs. I could put more on it, but not sure where the rating is. Whether it's the cable or pulleys not sure.


----------



## CowPimp (Feb 12, 2006)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> No that's not it as it is a free weight machine, but only rated at 300 lbs. I could put more on it, but not sure where the rating is. Whether it's the cable or pulleys not sure.



Oh, I gotcha.


----------



## Carl Nevins (Feb 12, 2006)

"Head supported bent over rows" takes the pressure off the lower back.  Also you might want to place a folded towel or sweat shirt on the elevated portion of the bench to keep your forehead alttle more comfortable.  Also this exercise allows the trainee to be darn near parallel to the floor.


----------



## Caesar (Feb 12, 2006)

I've used one of those before. I liked it alot, but the ergonomics of it were a bit off for me. I'm tall (6'3") and had to adjust myself in an awkward position for it to work right. I liked it for burnout sets because i could use a spotter to give me a little extra help when i needed it, but if it''s for your home gym you probably wouldn't have that. I'd recommend it though.


----------



## min0 lee (Feb 12, 2006)

Carl Nevins said:
			
		

> "Head supported bent over rows"


 
Wouldn't that put unnecessary strain on the neck? I can't imagine going real heavy and risk snapping my neck.


----------



## rangers97 (Feb 13, 2006)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> These things any good to use for rows? Thinking of buying one today for my home gym.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I have that exact machine.  Bought it from Dick's Sporting Goods online for like $130, and so far so good.  I've had it for about 2 months now, of course, I have only gotten up to about 165 pounds on it, but it has held up.  It is a bit flimsy, but for $130, you get what you pay for.  But I think it should hold AT LEAST 200 pounds of plates with no problems and of course hopefully more.


----------



## Tough Old Man (Feb 14, 2006)

rangers97 said:
			
		

> I have that exact machine. Bought it from Dick's Sporting Goods online for like $130, and so far so good. I've had it for about 2 months now, of course, I have only gotten up to about 165 pounds on it, but it has held up. It is a bit flimsy, but for $130, you get what you pay for. But I think it should hold AT LEAST 200 pounds of plates with no problems and of course hopefully more.


Oh fuck i hope it holds a hell of a lot more then that or I'll be doing some welding. 200 lbs isn't shit for me on rows. I can lay on my bench and do endless reps with my 100 lb DB's in each hand. I need heavier DB's. Shit they are a fortune at .59 lb plus tax.


----------



## CowPimp (Feb 14, 2006)

Tough Old Man said:
			
		

> Oh fuck i hope it holds a hell of a lot more then that or I'll be doing some welding. 200 lbs isn't shit for me on rows. I can lay on my bench and do endless reps with my 100 lb DB's in each hand. I need heavier DB's. Shit they are a fortune at .59 lb plus tax.



I used to have dumbbells that you could plate load with olympic plates.  They could fit 3 x 25s on each side, so you could get them up to 150+ (The DBs were 8 pounds each I believe).  You could use 45s or 35s too, but it's kind of akward at that point, although I think I did do that for shrugs once.


----------



## Lee Delroy (Feb 16, 2006)

I know what he needs for his home gym--synthol!


----------

