Dumbbell vs. barbell

>not doing both

Why do so many lifters think they have to limit themselves to a single particular training method?

>>38417094
Personal preference. For flat/decline bench, I like barbells. For incline bench and OHP I like dumbbells.

>>38417094
you can load barbells much heavier than dumbells and they don't require spotters for heavier loads. Good luck goblet squatting 300 pounds for example

>>38417122
Well if there were an advantage in using only one method, then I'd just like to know

>>38417132
How the hell would you even squat using dumbbells? Just hold them up?

>>38417135
You building a home gym? If not, don't worry about it. Unless you're speaking hypothetically, of course

>>38417165
I was speaking hypothetically actually.
I just always wondered

>>38417211
In that case, barbells. You can load them heavier and do just about every exercise that you can with dumbbells.

>>38417449
what if you're a dyel faggot who's orm is less that the heaviest dumbells?

You can ALWAYS move more weight with a barbell. More weight = more gains, so as a generalization, barbells are better.

But there are specific uses for the dumbbell as well. A dumbbell bench for example hits the pecs better at the bottom of the movement. There's an increase in ROM with dumbbells, so your pecs do more work getting the weight moving.

Dumbbell overhead press is one of the most difficult lifts there is. If you've never done them before, you'll be surprised how awkward the lift is at heavy weight. It is an absolute killer on stabilizers and your core.

I also prefer dumbbell rows but I honestly don't have a reason why, I just do.

Dumbbells & barbells train the stabilizers differently.

Most any lower body compound is easier w/ a barbell. Some upper body stuff is only possible with a dumbbell. The only one where I have a hard opinion is rows. Fuck barbell rows, I'm all for one armed DB rows. Barbell rows kill my back

While you're at it, if you're thinking of a homegym situation, setup for cable, bodyweight, and bands as well.

>>38417604
>Barbell rows kill my back

Have you tried them chest supported or seal barbell rows? I'm just curious

>>38417612

Chest supported is OK, but the main problems with them are you lose ROM w/o a cambered bar (don't have) and it's harder to breath

Never heard of the seal one, but everything they're touting is something I already get out of DB rows. Dead stop them, use minimal or no hip (like a good barbell curl), and keep the motion smooth. The downside is sooner or later if you homegym like me that you'll have to build a pipe handle DB or resort to a olympic DB with shaft collars

>>38417122
progression doesn't translate well into their linear programming

>>38417813
Interesting, I've never done chest supported because my home gym makes it impossible. I do dumbbell as well because barbell kills my lower back as well.

>>38417094
Dumbells are superior in every way for bodybuilding. They allow you to have a more natural path to move the weight and allow for complete ROM. They also make it so no one side can do more work than the other and lead to imbalances. You aren't going to squat or deadlift dumbells, use a barbell for those and only those.

>>38417912

You can munge together a chest supported setup quite easily for a homegym, even without welding.

A good rack/squat stand setup + hardware and you're golden

Moved from barbell to dumbbell for my incline and flat bench press. I could never get my form right on barbell and would always put too much tension on my shoulders.

My left shoulder being previously injured as a kid, I couldn't keep my lifts proportional so I moved to dumbbells. They're pretty great for flat bench since I can flare my elbows like a motherfucker and move tension away from my shoulders. Also never got the same chest pump using barbell. Personal preferences I guess.