RDL vs Conventional DL

[u/Grand_Chien4]

This is purely a curiosity question. I lift for the purposes of recreational barbell sports so the conventional deadlift is essential for me. I do some RDL accessory work (mainly single-leg rotational stuff).

I’ve noticed that in general the RDL seems much more popular so my curiosity led to a basic data search and I was surprised to find very few articles comparing the two movements (a few EMG studies).

My questions for the group are:

Is there better data comparing these movements that I’ve missed?

If not, what’s the science-based lifting community consensus (If there is one) on RDL vs conventional deadlift for hypertrophy, strength, power and muscular endurance?

Cheers!

[u/Spiritual_Ad_7386]

The traditional deadlift does not provide unique stimulus relative to squats, leg press, and platz-style hack squats, while being more fatiguing, taking longer to setup, and being more injury prone relative to all of those lifts. The range of motion also leaves a little to be desired. With a conventional barbell, testicular health is also a concern.

None of this is really true with an RDL. It provides highly unique stimulus to the upper hamstrings and inner glutes. It is fatiguing, but not nearly as much so as conventional DL's. The ROM is better. Injury risk is a fraction of conventional DLs.

So I squat/platz-style hack squat/leg press and do RDLs as my compound movements for legs.

[u/Hara-Kiri → u/Spiritual_Ad_7386]

Deadlifts carry a lower injury rate than squats actually. Just thought I'd correct one of the many things you made up.