# Are deadlifts necessary?



## Pain4Gainz (Apr 6, 2017)

Been going to the gym just over a month now, and haven't performed a single deadlift. Mostly because the deadlift barbell is in a separate area of the gym where all the big guys seem to hang out as that's where all the big ass dumbbells are. Pretty intimidating for me to just stride in and try performing a deadlift with no clue if my forms right or how much weight I should be lifting.

My goal is to bulk up, and reach 160 lbs with as much muscle gain over fat as possible (142 lbs atm) Would you say deadlifts are a must for building body mass?

Thanks!


----------



## G (Mar 11, 2013)

Nope not essential. It's a very good exercise though so you should learn to give it a go and worry less about what others think.

Do you squat? Surely there are spare bars in the gym you could use elsewhere if you feel uncomfortable.


----------



## Charlee Scene (Jul 6, 2010)

Not a must but a very good excersise


----------



## Sasnak (Oct 11, 2016)

Why don't you go up to the big intimidating looking guys and ask for some advice? I can pretty much guarantee that they will be more than happy to help you out !


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

No exercise is essential but deadlifts, and variants like RDLs, are definitely effective. What you really don't want to be doing is deadlifting if you don't know how to do it properly though, as then it's probably the exercise most likely to do you long term damage.

If there are people in the gym who know what they're doing to ask for advice then that's great. The trouble is knowing if they do.

This is a video I wish I'd seen before I first tried deadlifting (when I got it totally wrong but fortunately with such pathetic weights that I didn't injure myself):


----------



## Eddias (Dec 21, 2015)

Compound exercises all the way, spent many years wasting my time avoiding the big lifts, As long as you do it safely the gains are great.


----------



## CROcyclist (Jun 1, 2015)

guys is it okay for a natural lifter do deadlifts 3 times a week?


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

CROcyclist said:


> guys is it okay for a natural lifter do deadlifts 3 times a week?


 For bodybuilding? I wouldn't, although I'm sure a few people have and benefited from it.

(It's a really tough question to answer though. Some would say beginners lifting light weights might be able to but that experienced lifters couldn't possibly recover to do so. Then there is what tends to be called the Norwegian frequency project suggesting very high frequencies for experienced lifters. Volume per session is another big factor, as is interference with the ability to do other lifts, especially squats.)


----------



## Eddias (Dec 21, 2015)

CROcyclist said:


> guys is it okay for a natural lifter do deadlifts 3 times a week?


 As Ultra says tough question, when i was totally natural i only deadlifted once a week, suppose you could do twice depending on how heavy you go and how your body feels, No way my old body could cope with two deadlifts per week.


----------



## Jordan08 (Feb 17, 2014)

Not necessary.


----------



## neil5000 (Jan 20, 2017)

My favourite exercise, so I'm definitely bias, but I think unless you have a good reason not to then you should. (Watch some videos on form first though and start light, SI pain sucks).

Apparently Benni Magnusson deadlifted 3 times a week as a beginner and look where that got him! Although I find 1 good session a week works well for me.

Biggest piece of advice is don't be intimidated by anyone or anything in the gym, they might turn out to be some of the nicest people in there! (In my experience!)


----------



## JohhnyC (Mar 16, 2015)

no exercise is ultimately necessary as long as your are hitting the major muscle groups adequately. You like doing them and find them productive, fire away but check form, easy to cock the lower back up in that exercise.

I haven't done a dead-lift in about 20 years due to a lower back injury back then, I do like adding in back extensions to strengthen the lower back that area on a legs day


----------



## monkeybiker (Jul 21, 2010)

Pain4Gainz said:


> Pretty intimidating for me to just stride in and try performing a deadlift with no clue if my forms right or how much weight I should be lifting.


 Lots of video's on youtube. See Mark Bells page https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLPy6BEgH1fD3DOgwX-x_Hg

As for how heavy it's the same with all exercises, you start light and gradually get heavier.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Grow some balls and go and Deadlift. If all the big guys are doing it there is a reason for that...........


----------



## FuqOutDaWhey (Apr 29, 2015)

Quackerz said:


> Grow some balls and go and Deadlift. If all the big guys are doing it there is a reason for that...........


 And stare the cu**s out so they know you mean business OP


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

FuqOutDaWhey said:


> And stare the cu**s out so they know you mean business OP


 Probably the most overlooked part of lifting IMO....


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

Having some sort of variation in there for overall back thickness is a good idea. As for full deadlifts though, totally non-essential for bodybuilding purposes. Squats work the same leg muscles, and rack pulls focus all the work on the back. SLDLs also work the back and the posterior chain. If you train the whole body every workout and can get more bang for your buck with deadlifts by training the lower body and back all in one exercise, but most splits it's often better just to use variations IMO.



Quackerz said:


> Grow some balls and go and Deadlift. If all the big guys are doing it there is a reason for that...........


 FWIW, Dorian Yates only ever did Romanian deadlifts and Serge Nubret never did any deadlift variations at all. Both of them had insane width and thickness, especially Dorian having arguably the greatest back development of all time.


----------



## JohhnyC (Mar 16, 2015)

I'mNotAPervert! said:


> Having some sort of variation in there for overall back thickness is a good idea. As for full deadlifts though, totally non-essential for bodybuilding purposes. Squats work the same leg muscles, and rack pulls focus all the work on the back. SLDLs also work the back and the posterior chain. If you train the whole body every workout and can get more bang for your buck with deadlifts by training the lower body and back all in one exercise, but most splits it's often better just to use variations IMO.
> 
> FWIW, Dorian Yates only ever did *Romanian deadlifts *and Serge Nubret never did any deadlift variations at all. Both of them had insane width and thickness, especially Dorian having arguably the greatest back development of all time.


 that's got to a lot of stress on the lower back, guess some people can get away with it


----------



## monkeybiker (Jul 21, 2010)

JohhnyC said:


> that's got to a lot of stress on the lower back, guess some people can get away with it


 You need to do them properly. Best to start from the top using a normal deadlift to get into position. Only go as low down as your own flexibility allows.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

FWIW the only deadlift variation I currently do are RDLs. I do this to make the leg component of the movement more hamstring dominent. The very start of a full deadlift is where most of the quad work is and I rely on squats to train these instead.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

I'mNotAPervert! said:


> Having some sort of variation in there for overall back thickness is a good idea. As for full deadlifts though, totally non-essential for bodybuilding purposes. Squats work the same leg muscles, and rack pulls focus all the work on the back. SLDLs also work the back and the posterior chain. If you train the whole body every workout and can get more bang for your buck with deadlifts by training the lower body and back all in one exercise, but most splits it's often better just to use variations IMO.
> 
> FWIW, Dorian Yates only ever did Romanian deadlifts and Serge Nubret never did any deadlift variations at all. Both of them had insane width and thickness, especially Dorian having arguably the greatest back development of all time.


 That's two examples out of how many BB's? Not saying they are n necessary but they are an amazing exercise, hence the reason they are so popular. It's good for a beginner to build up a base of strength also before switching to partial ROM variations IMO. I don't believe for a second that's Dorian and Serge NEVER deadlifted either.


----------



## ILLBehaviour (Dec 20, 2014)

Pain4Gainz said:


> Been going to the gym just over a month now, and *haven't performed a single deadlift. Mostly because the deadlift barbell is in a separate area of the gym where all the big guys seem to hang out *as that's where all the big ass dumbbells are. Pretty intimidating for me to just stride in and try performing a deadlift with no clue if my forms right or how much weight I should be lifting.
> 
> My goal is to bulk up, and reach 160 lbs with as much muscle gain over fat as possible (142 lbs atm) Would you say deadlifts are a must for building body mass?
> 
> Thanks!


 how'd you think those big guys got so big ?


----------



## monkeybiker (Jul 21, 2010)

ILLBehaviour said:


> how'd you think those big guys got so big ?


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> That's two examples out of how many BB's? Not saying they are n necessary but they are an amazing exercise, hence the reason they are so popular. It's good for a beginner to build up a base of strength also before switching to partial ROM variations IMO. I don't believe for a second that's Dorian and Serge NEVER deadlifted either.


 It was just two stand-out examples, obviously I'm not going to list every bodybuilder who never did deadlifts. You'll notice that, even the ones who did them early on, a lot of them dropped them from their routines after the beginner stage.

I just don't see why they're so amazing. Think about it for a second. The lower part of the exercise is similar to firing out of a squat, and trains the same muscles as squats. So if you already do squats, you don't need deadlifts for your legs. The top part of the lift focuses all the tension on the back. Rack pulls or RDLs also do exactly that with the exact same movement pattern, even more so in fact because no energy is expended pulling it off the floor with your legs beforehand.

So, in short, for reasons that should be obvious, rack pulls or RDLs are superior for back development, and I don't like the huge overlap in muscles worked unless you're training legs and back in the same session.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

I'mNotAPervert! said:


> I just don't see why they're so amazing. Think about it for a second. The lower part of the exercise is similar to firing out of a squat, and trains the same muscles as squats. So if you already do squats, you don't need deadlifts for your legs. The top part of the lift focuses all the tension on the back. Rack pulls or RDLs also do exactly that with the exact same movement pattern, even more so in fact because no energy is expended pulling it off the floor with your legs beforehand.
> 
> So, in short, for reasons that should be obvious, rack pulls or RDLs are superior for back development, and I don't like the huge overlap in muscles worked unless you're training legs and back in the same session.


 I agree with you with regards to squats for quads but rack pulls and RDLs are significantly different exercises, due to the slower eccentric during which the hamstrings are stretched under load with RDLs. Even if rack pulls are done with a slower than normal eccentric you won't get the same hamstring stretch at the bottom.

Which might be better for back development is a different question of course. People tend to rack pull heavier weights so my guess is they'd be better for upper traps I supppse.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

I'mNotAPervert! said:


> It was just two stand-out examples, obviously I'm not going to list every bodybuilder who never did deadlifts. You'll notice that, even the ones who did them early on, a lot of them dropped them from their routines after the beginner stage.
> 
> I just don't see why they're so amazing. Think about it for a second. The lower part of the exercise is similar to firing out of a squat, and trains the same muscles as squats. So if you already do squats, you don't need deadlifts for your legs. The top part of the lift focuses all the tension on the back. Rack pulls or RDLs also do exactly that with the exact same movement pattern, even more so in fact because no energy is expended pulling it off the floor with your legs beforehand.
> 
> So, in short, for reasons that should be obvious, rack pulls or RDLs are superior for back development, and I don't like the huge overlap in muscles worked unless you're training legs and back in the same session.


 If you look at in a sense of overall mass then the deadlift is superior IMO.


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

Ultrasonic said:


> I agree with you with regards to squats for quads but rack pulls and RDLs are significantly different exercises, due to the slower eccentric during which the hamstrings are stretched under load with RDLs. Even if rack pulls are done with a slower than normal eccentric you won't get the same hamstring stretch at the bottom.
> 
> Which might be better for back development is a different question of course. People tend to rack pull heavier weights so my guess is they'd be better for upper traps I supppse.


 Oh yeah, not saying they're the same exercise, I was just pointing out that they're both likely better than full deadlifts from a back development perspective. Rack pulls are of course just the top half of the deadlift i.e. the back-training portion of the lift which of course would be better for back training, and it's a testament to RDLs that they're efficient back builders since it was a favourite of Dorian Yates.


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> If you look at in a sense of overall mass then the deadlift is superior IMO.


 When you break it down though, as I did in the previous post, you see that actually, it's not.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

I'mNotAPervert! said:


> When you break it down though, as I did in the previous post, you see that actually, it's not.


 But if you are doing that you would then have to take into account the decreased ROM and as a result the decrease in TUT the rack pull vs the deadlift, the poundages may be higher but that does not make it a 'better' exercise simply because of this. Then you have the RDL, higher TUT, lower total poundages lifted throughout a session, it again has it's drawbacks like any exercise. Just because you watch a video of a guy with great back genetics saying that he never deadlifted to grow his back it is not to say it is a redundant exercise in comparison to others. I'm not sure how much research is done on comparing the exercises and the EMG outputs of each but I can say there has to be a reason the deadlift is a staple in the vast majority of top level strength and conditioning programs also, I would not think that they would be included if simply performing RDL's and rack pulls was going to do a better job, just a thought anyway.


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> But if you are doing that you would then have to take into account the decreased ROM and as a result the decrease in TUT the rack pull vs the deadlift, the poundages may be higher but that does not make it a 'better' exercise simply because of this. Then you have the RDL, higher TUT, lower total poundages lifted throughout a session, it again has it's drawbacks like any exercise. Just because you watch a video of a guy with great back genetics saying that he never deadlifted to grow his back it is not to say it is a redundant exercise in comparison to others. I'm not sure how much research is done on comparing the exercises and the EMG outputs of each but I can say there has to be a reason the deadlift is a staple in the vast majority of top level strength and conditioning programs also, I would not think that they would be included if simply performing RDL's and rack pulls was going to do a better job, just a thought anyway.


 The bottom part of the deadlift, if done correctly though, is mostly quad and glute drive. As I said in the other post as well, you're inevitably not getting as effective a back workout from it when you're expending so much energy at the start of the rep driving it up from the floor with your lower body. Same reason that combination-movements generally aren't used much in bodybuilding.

Strength and conditioning is a completely different ballgame to bodybuilding. Those guys train for functionality, bodybuilding training is centred around increasing muscularity of course.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

I'mNotAPervert! said:


> The bottom part of the deadlift, if done correctly though, is mostly quad and glute drive. As I said in the other post as well, you're inevitably not getting as effective a back workout from it when you're expending so much energy at the start of the rep driving it up from the floor with your lower body. Same reason that combination-movements generally aren't used much in bodybuilding.


 From the bottom to the very top, all the way back down again you are contacting your entire back isometrically just as you would in either an RDL or a rack pull, in all three the back works in exactly the same way, I'm not entirely sure what your point is?


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> From the bottom to the very top, all the way back down again you are contacting your entire back isometrically just as you would in either an RDL or a rack pull, in all three the back works in exactly the same way, I'm not entirely sure what your point is?


 The bottom part of the movement is mostly driven by leverage from the lower body though. Same reason it's frowned upon to use momentum on most other exercises - okay, the muscle is working, but it's getting a lot of assistance and therefore there's less tension on it and more energy is being expelled getting those other bodyparts moving which gives you less energy to take the target muscle to its maximum capacity.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

I'mNotAPervert! said:


> The bottom part of the movement is mostly driven by leverage from the lower body though. Same reason it's frowned upon to use momentum on most other exercises - okay, the muscle is working, but it's getting a lot of assistance and therefore there's less tension on it and more energy is being expelled getting those other bodyparts moving which gives you less energy to take the target muscle to its maximum capacity.


 In all three exercises the back works isometrically and the glutes and hamstrings are the prime movers, they are the ones that are moving the weight from point A to point B, the hip is always the fulcrum, this never changes. I really am stumped to see the point you are actually trying to make. By your logic static holds with the bar would top all three movements, it's simply not the case.


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

Quackerz said:


> In all three exercises the back works isometrically and the glutes and hamstrings are the prime movers, they are the ones that are moving the weight from point A to point B, the hip is always the fulcrum, this never changes. I really am stumped to see the point you are actually trying to make. By your logic static holds with the bar would top all three movements, it's simply not the case.


 No, I'mNotAPervert is right about the quads being dominent at the start of a deadlift. I can dig out a link if you really want.

One reason I do RDLs is because I do them after squats. Tired quads would adversely affect conventional deadlifts far more.


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Ultrasonic said:


> No, I'mNotAPervert is right about the quads being dominent at the start of a deadlift. I can dig out a link if you really want.
> 
> One reason I do RDLs is because I do them after squats. Tired quads would adversely affect conventional deadlifts far more.


 I said the glutes and hamstrings were the prime mover in all three, the quads are not in all three, just the deadlift really, I am also fully aware of the place the quads have in the START of the deadlift, the glutes and hamstrings will still be the more dominant muscles involved though due to the posterior loading of the exercise. Going back to my point though none of this is really relevant to back hypertrophy anyway, at the end of the day no matter how much you use your quads it does not change how much work the back musculature is producing to stabilize the load. It's arbitrary to say the least.

Working RDL's after squats is a good move IMO, it still does not render the deadlift redundant as an exercise though.


----------



## gregstm (Dec 2, 2012)

Imo deadlift one of the best exercises shame Im after foot surgery so no DL and squats for couple months...

Any ideahow to replace DL somehow?? Without DL I never felt like I had a good back workout


----------



## Ultrasonic (Jul 13, 2004)

Quackerz said:


> I said the glutes and hamstrings were the prime mover in all three, the quads are not in all three, just the deadlift really, I am also fully aware of the place the quads have in the START of the deadlift, the glutes and hamstrings will still be the more dominant muscles involved though due to the posterior loading of the exercise. Going back to my point though none of this is really relevant to back hypertrophy anyway, at the end of the day no matter how much you use your quads it does not change how much work the back musculature is producing to stabilize the load. It's arbitrary to say the least.
> 
> Working RDL's after squats is a good move IMO, it still does not render the deadlift redundant as an exercise though.


 To clarify, I'm not saying the conventional deadlift is redundant. I suspect quads do actually do more total work in a conventional deadlift than hamstrings but it's a fairly moot point.

The back hypertrophy argument is complicated. The action of the lats isn't purely isometric - they're longer at the bottom of the movement than the top. People can deadlift more than RDL but the latter will have greater TUT per rep, and a slower eccentric. To me I struggle to say they're either obviously equivalent or that one is clearly better by logic alone.

As I mentioned earlier a very significant factor is how an exercise fits into a programme as a whole. If you want the extra quad (and possibly glute) work then conventional deadlifts have an advantage. On the flip side there is probably a greater CNS fatigue factor from deadlifts which may interfere with other training more.


----------



## nWo (Mar 25, 2014)

Quackerz said:


> In all three exercises the back works isometrically and the glutes and hamstrings are the prime movers, they are the ones that are moving the weight from point A to point B, the hip is always the fulcrum, this never changes. I really am stumped to see the point you are actually trying to make. By your logic static holds with the bar would top all three movements, it's simply not the case.


 We'll just have to agree to disagree I think, too many crossed wires here now. No worries :thumbup1:


----------



## G (Mar 11, 2013)

gregstm said:


> Imo deadlift one of the best exercises shame Im after foot surgery so no DL and squats for couple months...
> 
> Any ideahow to replace DL somehow?? Without DL I never felt like I had a good back workout


 what can you do?

that's not being funny but rdl's on leg day with bor/pulldown variations on back day would have you covered.


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

I haven't done deads for a few years now, back thickness definitely isn't what it was.


----------



## gregstm (Dec 2, 2012)

G said:


> what can you do?
> 
> that's not being funny but rdl's on leg day with bor/pulldown variations on back day would have you covered.


 Anything without puting to much pressure on foot for atleast 3 months so not much weight while staying.



Smitch said:


> I haven't done deads for a few years now, back thickness definitely isn't what it was.


 Been DL's for 8 years regularly so hopefully can get away with that for a while but tbh I should give it up for atleast 2 years before I fix my other foot


----------



## G (Mar 11, 2013)

Without knowing the exact issue you could maybe try some weighted hypers or cable pull throughs.


----------



## gregstm (Dec 2, 2012)

I can do all machines, chin ups, cables, dumbell rowing


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

Smitch said:


> I haven't done deads for a few years now, back thickness definitely isn't what it was.


 Is that omitting all variations or just conventional deads?


----------



## Smitch (Dec 29, 2008)

Quackerz said:


> Is that omitting all variations or just conventional deads?


 All variations, haven't squatted for years either.

Keep meaning to start again though.


----------



## swole troll (Apr 15, 2015)

There is no reason to be alive if you can't do deadlift


----------



## Quackerz (Dec 19, 2015)

swole troll said:


> There is no reason to be alive if you can't do deadlift


 I'll probably quote you on that at some point in my life. :lol:


----------



## swole troll (Apr 15, 2015)

Quackerz said:


> I'll probably quote you on that at some point in my life. :lol:


 youd be quoting jon pall sigmarsson if you do but by all means quote away, that's what we do with facts, quote them and it *IS *a fact


----------



## Jakemaguire (Feb 17, 2016)

Iv got massive quads and im s**t at deadlift wtf I must be doing them wrong


----------

