Question About Trap Bar Deadlift

[OZ-USF-UFGator]

If strength is a general adaptation, then why is the trap, bar not a good substitute for squats (used on low handle to get thighs parallel) or for deadlift on high bar.

If I had to guess, the squat would be a good substitute except that the direct spinal compressive forces are missing and the back is not worked as much and the deadlift substitute wouldn't be as good because somehow the center of gravity is shifted to align with the body's (minimizing the fulcrum).

However, if one were to accept that strength is a general adaptation, wouldn't the trap bar be a very good choice to make the body stronger, as long that person isn't a power lifter?

[Mark E. Hurling]

OK, heresy is about to ensue. Some of you have been warned.

In my own opinion, the TBDL is fine as a general adaptation exercise. It hits all the big muscle groups of the quads, hamstrings, glutes, erectors, along with the traps, lats, rhomboids, grip, etc. Just not in the same way and perhaps not as effectively as squats and/or deadlifts do seperately. What's more, it also loads the heel to pelvis "axis" of the skeleton which maintains and promotes bone strength and density, another important factor as you get older. I'd say they can trigger the same kind of hormonal growth response too. Maybe not as effectively as squats and/or deadlifts do seperately, but I can't fathom how the same muscles being engaged with a slightly altered "bar" placement aligned vertically with the lower leg rather than the midfoot could make a huge amount of difference.

I've done them, and liked them quite a bit when I hadn't gotten my squat and deadlift form fixed by SS. They loaded the shit out of me with no hazard to my lower back which my shitty form was always causing problems with.

[OBoile]

If there was some reason why you couldn't squat, I think the trap bar deadlift would be a fine substitute.
Both exercises will work, squats are just a bit more effective in general.

[ud2o]

I'm a fellow heretic. TBDLs allow you to load a lot of weight and train a lot of muscles.

Admittedly, it's probably not as effective as heavy squatting and deadlifting for strength- and muscle-building but neither is it as taxing. A nice change of pace-type exercise, I think.

[OBoile]

OK, heresy is about to ensue. Some of you have been warned.

In my own opinion, the TBDL is fine as a general adaptation exercise. It hits all the big muscle groups of the quads, hamstrings, glutes, erectors, along with the traps, lats, rhomboids, grip, etc. Just not in the same way and perhaps not as effectively as squats and/or deadlifts do seperately. What's more, it also loads the heel to pelvis "axis" of the skeleton which maintains and promotes bone strength and density, another important factor as you get older. I'd say they can trigger the same kind of hormonal growth response too. Maybe not as effectively as squats and/or deadlifts do seperately, but I can't fathom how the same muscles being engaged with a slightly altered "bar" placement aligned vertically with the lower leg rather than the midfoot could make a huge amount of difference.

I've done them, and liked them quite a bit when I hadn't gotten my squat and deadlift form fixed by SS. They loaded the shit out of me with no hazard to my lower back which my shitty form was always causing problems with.

Good post. Obviously I agree. I'd go so far as to say the main things needed in any effective strength program are:
1. Pick large compound exercises
2. Pick a selection of exercises that work the entire body
3. Go hard and consistenly work to improve

Beyond that, the differences are relatively minor. Yes some exercises are better than others (and that is why they're recommended) but they aren't truely necessary.

[Larry T]

I'm with Mark on this too. If I couldn't squat, TBDL would be my alternate.

[John Hanley]

"General Adaptation" is awfully vague. Let's define some shit so we can clean up our thinking.

Straight from Zatsiorsky:

"result gain" = gain of performance/standard deviation of performance

So, for a group, result gain = (posttaining mean - pretraining mean)/(pretraining standard deviation)

"Transfer" is [Result gain in nontrained exercise] /[result gain in trained exercise]

So, a good "general exercise" will have lots of transfer throughout the stages of an athlete's career.

Now, most of us who actually train peeps don't work in sports science labs, so we only have crude experiential wisdom and rough data...but we have a very good sense of transfer. Trap Bar deadlifts don't transfer as well (or for as long) as full-squats & deadlifts. Do your own tests using the above formulas as rough guidelines to find out if you must.

Couple of other nit-picky things on trapbar:

- easy to hyperextend the lumbar at the top of the movement.
- they don't work the upper back nearly as well as barbell pulls from the floor
- there's less 'tactile feedback' to ensure bar stays over center of balance...so, with near maximal loads you tend to get this horrifying pendulum movement from front to back with a touch of 'windmilly' torsion. Gnarly.

All that said, they're useful when a client can't squat or deadlift with a barbell for some reason.

[OZ-USF-UFGator]

[QUOTE=hsilman;1121667]I don't think they are as good as either of the lifts you want to replace them with. That's mostly why I would just do those lifts.

I think the main reason it is avoided is because it requires a piece of specialty equipment, and we try and keep recommendations as general as possible.QUOTE]

I'm not looking to replace, this question stems strictly from intellectual curiousity. I have never done a TBDL and don't have access to one.

[idlehands]

T-Nation did an article on this. its pretty good

How to Correctly Use a Trap Bar for Optimum Muscle Hypertrophy

[Savs]

If strength is a general adaptation, then why is the trap, bar not a good substitute for squats (used on low handle to get thighs parallel) or for deadlift on high bar.

I agree with points made by Silman, Hanley, and Gilcrest. Here's how I would analyze (open to correction) the TBDL. The movement is very similar to a hypothetical squat where the bar is placed between the bar positions for a front squat and a high-bar squat. The bar hangs directly down from the shoulders, so the bar's COM is effectively (ignoring the tension in the arms and torque about the shoulder if the bar starts swinging) at the shoulder joint when viewed from the side. That bar position changes the ankle, knee, hip, and back angles (see Fig 2-8 in SSBBT3), since the bar COM must be over midfoot (and therefore the lifter's COM must also be over midfoot). Because the angles have changed, the work done by the various muscles during the movement is distributed differently compared to the distribution during the LBBS and the deadlift.

So, in my opinion, you're asking, Can a "mid-neck-bar" squat replace the LBBS and the deadlift? No. A front squat can not replace the LBBS and DL. A high-bar squat can not replace the LBBS and DL. So, how can an average of the front- and high-bar squats replace the LBBS and DL?

Gripping the upper handles simply reduces the ROM used when gripping the lower handles. The hands, and thus the shoulder, must stay over midfoot throughout the ROM. Using the lower handles, once the weight is raised to the height where the hands are now at the position of the upper handles with the weight still on the floor, the remainder of the motion is identical to using the upper handles.

If I had to guess, the squat would be a good substitute except that the direct spinal compressive forces are missing

There are compressive forces in the spine during the TBDL.

and the back is not worked as much

Yes, the back is more vertical during the lift (see Fig 2-8 again).

and the deadlift substitute wouldn't be as good because somehow the center of gravity is shifted to align with the body's (minimizing the fulcrum).

?? The center of gravity of the weight? My understanding is for the press, DL, and squat the bar/weight COM (similar to center of gravity here) and the lifter's COM should be over midfoot to eliminate unnecessary torque (moment - for the mechanical engineers). If the bar COM is forward of midfoot, the the lifter's COM has to be behind midfoot, and vice versa, for balance. (The distances forward and behind depend on the weight and the lifter's weight.) However, putting one in front and the other behind creates additional moment arms, and therefore addition force by the muscles to overcome the gravitational torques.

ETA: The body's center of mass is not a fixed point somewhere in the torso. The COM location depends on the shape of the body. For example, lie on the floor and arrange your body in a U shape. Your COM is now outside of your body.

However, if one were to accept that strength is a general adaptation, wouldn't the trap bar be a very good choice to make the body stronger, as long that person isn't a power lifter?

Sure, so are dips, chins, curlz, LTEs, rows (except the close-grip, high-pulled upright variety), SLDLs (thanks for that, Hanley,), flyes, and quite a few others. Unfortunately, I know fuck all / jack shit about programming, so I can't give an answer, correct or otherwise, to this last question.