There’s a caveat to those calculations, and one that’s somewhat important for complete beginners.
Both my wrist size and ankle size increased between 1/4" and 1/2" since I started lifting in my late 20s. Could be due to increased bone width or thicker tendons. It’s definitely not because I was “still growing”.
This suggests that one’s “genetic potential” can change over time. It also reiterates the point that it doesn’t make much sense to artificially limit yourself.
Well, they’re all estimates certainly. Personally I like to know because it lets me know how far I still have to go. I have yet to use one of those estimators that came back and said “stop training you’re already there”, generally the message is more like “you’re still not big enough work harder will you?” Of course the people who ask are usually the ones who just need to eat more and want an excuse for not doing that.
[quote]blue9steel wrote:
Casey Butt lists a variety of ways to estimate your potential on his website, I happen to like this one, which is based on the stats of natural bodybuilders past and present:
Max LBM = H^1.5 * (sqrt(W)/22.6670 + sqrt(A)/17.0104) * (%BF/224 + 1)
Ectomorphs subtract 5%, endomorphs add 5%
H = Height in inches
A = Ankle circumference at the smallest point
W = Wrist circumference measured on the hand side of the styloid process.
(The styloid process is the bony lump on the outside of your wrist.)
%bf = The body fat percentage at which you want to predict your maximum lean body mass
Add 4% during a bulking phase
If you manage to get that big then you’re as large as any natural champ so it’s pretty likely you’ll be smaller than that even at max. That’s still pretty big and definitely bigger than you are now.[/quote]
This is a weird formula, and doesn’t line up with the competition measurements of the pre-1954 Mr. America winners.
At 20%, John Grimek should only be 191. He was 195, and leaner, when he won in 1941.
At 20%, Steve Reeves should only be 209. He was 213, and leaner, when he won in 1947.
At 20%, Bill Pearl should only be 190. He was 201, and leaner, when he won in 1953.
IMO the formula above does a good job ALTHOUGH I highly doubt that a guy stays an ecto for all his life
Many things happen later on that can make gains come back from nowhere. Metabolism slowing a bit, more consistency at the gym, less binge drinking…
I for instance gained all my weight during my first 15 months. Right now Stress and lack of sleep due to PHD equals big mass stall and joints problems but at least strength always goes up thanks to the good programs here*. I can’t wait to have the possibility to finish those studies and stop worrying about cash (well until I have kids&wife I guess)
So you should not worry about your limits before a solid 10-year experience.
Warmup shoulder work with elastics, hanging leg raise, 2 series of complex Thruster+overhead squat (“cardio”)
Day 1 : 5/3/1 Press / 3x30" Pullups,Ring dips
Day 2 : Deadlift / 3x30" Carry,russian plank
Day 3 : Bench / 3x30" Ring row,Ring pushup
Day 4 : Squat / 3x30" Pistol,russian plank
Stretching
Super simple since its 5/3/1, but sickest pumps in over a year thanks Thibaudeau’s thoughts
went from about 200ish to 275 from 2011 to now. Maintained a decent amount of leanness I suppose even though thats not a concern of mine. And I got 20" arms for all my haters, naturally.
Although I like a calculation as much as the next guy; there’s no need to over-complicate things. 3lbs. per inch of height with “all abs in” is the rule of thumb I was taught thirty years ago and has held up really well over time.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
Although I like a calculation as much as the next guy; there’s no need to over-complicate things. 3lbs. per inch of height with “all abs in” is the rule of thumb I was taught thirty years ago and has held up really well over time. [/quote]
If I hit that number, I would be one jacked Mofo! Sounds reasonable though.
[quote]Ecchastang wrote:
[quote]craze9 wrote:
It seems you were very underweight when you started so a big number like 75 lbs LBM might be doable. 200 at 10% bf natural, though, is very ambitious and would take a long time, if possible at all.
[/quote]
I would say it is doable at 5’10" but will not come easy and you will probably have to get up decently above 200 at about 15% or so, then do a slow methodical cut. [/quote]
this. I am 5’11 and sitting between 210-215lbs and am not even considering cutting until I get to 220 or above. I don’t have a whole lot of fat but the abs are starting to disappear. The goal is to be 10% or below at 200lbs.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
This is a weird formula, and doesn’t line up with the competition measurements of the pre-1954 Mr. America winners.
At 20%, John Grimek should only be 191. He was 195, and leaner, when he won in 1941.
At 20%, Steve Reeves should only be 209. He was 213, and leaner, when he won in 1947.
At 20%, Bill Pearl should only be 190. He was 201, and leaner, when he won in 1953.[/quote]
Why are you calculating at 20% when they were leaner than that, you realize it will throw off the numbers right?
shrug It’s just an estimate. Pretty much any of the estimators is going to tell the original poster that he hasn’t yet reached his max size which is the point we were trying to convey.
Yes there is a limit, but it’s pretty high.
No, you won’t be as big as a Mr. Olympia winner without taking drugs.
Whatever size you are, you’re probably not as big as previous natural champions at a comparable BF%.
I fail to see why people get wrapped up in the whole “no limits” thing when they haven’t even reached the predicted limits yet. Even without use of drugs a natural trainee with proper training and eating can get pretty damn big.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
Why is your goal weight 200 pounds?
Why not 203? 198? 300? 400?
The average silverback gorilla in the wild is between 5’7 and 5’11, and weighs between 298 and 397 pounds (according to wikipedia). Why not shoot for that?[/quote]
The gorilla part is probably the greatest thing that I’ve ever heard and I now have completely different goals due to this.
[quote]cparker wrote:
went from about 200ish to 275 from 2011 to now. Maintained a decent amount of leanness I suppose even though thats not a concern of mine. And I got 20" arms for all my haters, naturally.[/quote]
i doubt you are anywhere near to sub 20% BF if you are 275 and natural, which not many would consider a “decent amount of leanness” tbh.
[quote]TheCB wrote:
[quote]cparker wrote:
went from about 200ish to 275 from 2011 to now. Maintained a decent amount of leanness I suppose even though thats not a concern of mine. And I got 20" arms for all my haters, naturally.[/quote]
i doubt you are anywhere near to sub 20% BF if you are 275 and natural, which not many would consider a “decent amount of leanness” tbh.[/quote]
thanks for the 0.02, check my log if you want. Im probably like 45% bf and everyone thinks im fat as hell.
[quote]cparker wrote:
[quote]TheCB wrote:
[quote]cparker wrote:
went from about 200ish to 275 from 2011 to now. Maintained a decent amount of leanness I suppose even though thats not a concern of mine. And I got 20" arms for all my haters, naturally.[/quote]
i doubt you are anywhere near to sub 20% BF if you are 275 and natural, which not many would consider a “decent amount of leanness” tbh.[/quote]
thanks for the 0.02, check my log if you want. Im probably like 45% bf and everyone thinks im fat as hell. [/quote]
if you’re 275 and natural you are miles away from being lean (lets say 10% BF).
do your 20 inch arms have any definition whatsoever?
if you “dont care” then that’s fine.
i just dont see the point of your post tbh.
[quote]cparker wrote:
[quote]TheCB wrote:
[quote]cparker wrote:
went from about 200ish to 275 from 2011 to now. Maintained a decent amount of leanness I suppose even though thats not a concern of mine. And I got 20" arms for all my haters, naturally.[/quote]
i doubt you are anywhere near to sub 20% BF if you are 275 and natural, which not many would consider a “decent amount of leanness” tbh.[/quote]
thanks for the 0.02, check my log if you want. Im probably like 45% bf and everyone thinks im fat as hell. [/quote]
I would say 20% looks about right. Percentage doesn’t really matter though, as you obviously have a helluva lot of lean mass in that frame.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Oh God, please no. [/quote]
LMAO - I feel like I just stepped into a time machine… Where did the specific number 80 come from?
S[/quote]
Oh yeah?
OP: Here’s some TN nostalgia for you.
[quote]kd13 wrote:
Has any one here managed to add around the 80lb mark in lean gains? Lots of debates surrounding natural potential and mass gaining recently.[/quote]
Recently?
As a natural, you won’t, nor will anyone, nor has it been done.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Oh God, please no. [/quote]
LMAO - I feel like I just stepped into a time machine… Where did the specific number 80 come from?
S[/quote]
Oh yeah?
OP: Here’s some TN nostalgia for you.
Ahhh, they were the best of times, they were the worst of times…
S
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]kd13 wrote:
Has any one here managed to add around the 80lb mark in lean gains? Lots of debates surrounding natural potential and mass gaining recently.[/quote]
Recently?
As a natural, you won’t, nor will anyone, nor has it been done.
[/quote]
Sounds like a challenge to me. Although looking back at that old thread, even if I do work my ball’s off for the next 10 years and reach 200 the goal posts would have moved to discredit my gains.
[quote]TheCB wrote:
[quote]cparker wrote:
[quote]TheCB wrote:
[quote]cparker wrote:
went from about 200ish to 275 from 2011 to now. Maintained a decent amount of leanness I suppose even though thats not a concern of mine. And I got 20" arms for all my haters, naturally.[/quote]
i doubt you are anywhere near to sub 20% BF if you are 275 and natural, which not many would consider a “decent amount of leanness” tbh.[/quote]
thanks for the 0.02, check my log if you want. Im probably like 45% bf and everyone thinks im fat as hell. [/quote]
if you’re 275 and natural you are miles away from being lean (lets say 10% BF).
do your 20 inch arms have any definition whatsoever?
if you “dont care” then that’s fine.
i just dont see the point of your post tbh.[/quote]
Ok based on your arbitrary standard? I didnt say I was cut or 10% 20% whatever, I said I have a decent amount of leanness. You can see for yourself. And no I particularly do not care, but as you can see the title of the thread is 80lb lean weight gains.
[quote]cparker wrote:
[quote]TheCB wrote:
[quote]cparker wrote:
[quote]TheCB wrote:
[quote]cparker wrote:
went from about 200ish to 275 from 2011 to now. Maintained a decent amount of leanness I suppose even though thats not a concern of mine. And I got 20" arms for all my haters, naturally.[/quote]
i doubt you are anywhere near to sub 20% BF if you are 275 and natural, which not many would consider a “decent amount of leanness” tbh.[/quote]
thanks for the 0.02, check my log if you want. Im probably like 45% bf and everyone thinks im fat as hell. [/quote]
if you’re 275 and natural you are miles away from being lean (lets say 10% BF).
do your 20 inch arms have any definition whatsoever?
if you “dont care” then that’s fine.
i just dont see the point of your post tbh.[/quote]
Ok based on your arbitrary standard? I didnt say I was cut or 10% 20% whatever, I said I have a decent amount of leanness. You can see for yourself. And no I particularly do not care, but as you can see the title of the thread is 80lb lean weight gains.
[/quote]
you are the one being arbitrary wtf is a “decent amount of leanness”
decent by what standard?
if you think you have made 75lbs of “lean gains” from 200 - 275 as a natural you are deluded.
i dont have an axe to grind with you im only pointing this out as your stats in no way “prove” that it is possible to gain approx 80lbs of lean mass.
you likely gained 10-15lbs of muscle (being very generous, that is a huge amount), an additional 40lbs of fat and about 20lbs of water. to think different is just ignorant.
to answer the OP, no you will not gain 80lbs of lean mass over the course of your training career as a natural.
dont worry about it just try your best.