I think the kid has a genuine interest here.
What is your ideal weight?
Do you think there is a point of "too much muscle?
It’s a valid question.
[quote]Jeff Shek wrote:
Afterall, it only boils down to why do we truly train? In my mind, at hundred eighty is the point when someone steals a nearby purse from a friendly T-Vixen is when I?m confident I can catch up to such a thief and bring him to his place. Some may argue that at 200+ pounds this is also possible. Yet, can at that weight the speed be maintained? Is it likely 200+ lber run for 400M on a strong confident pace?
[/quote]
I reckon that a true T-vixen would be able to chase the guy down and beat him up herself…
[quote]Jeff Shek wrote:
David Boston is 6’2 and 228 lbs. Weight / Height = 3.08, I guess I should have stated I want to be 5’7-5’8 @ 180. Basically it comes out to about 2.72. Hence it’s about a 10% difference. Obviously he’s a big guy. Maybe using a random formula of weight/height doesn’t solve to make much sense, but yet it does bring a comparison of what I believe is ideal and what he is. But I appear to be digressing here.[/quote]
No, you appear to be speaking in bullshit-ese. David Boston is 6’2" and listed by NFL.com as being 240lbs. I am not sure why you assumed otherwise. That makes your whole spiel nonsensical and it makes my point even stronger. He is a big guy and very athletic…more athletic than you probably are…yet you think being 200lbs at your height of 5’8" is somehow unrelated? You add, on average, about 5-10lbs for every inch in height which means weighing around 200lbs would make you very relative to where he is in terms of size. As you can see, you really have no point. Your “concerns” have been talked about and disproven regularly in professional sports. I am also not sure why you think everyone in the NFL is 6’5" and above. Someone lied to you and you CHOOSE to see having a large frame as a negative. If you didn’t, this wouldn’t be a concern to you.
I’m a big guy because I trained hard to be. I am challenged very rarely in my everyday life. In fact, the last fight I was in was as a college freshmen when I weighed about 160lbs. Your purse snatcher scenario would be much less likely to even occur for someone who was actually carrying enough size to intimidate. Not to mention the simple fact that strength would allow you to actually defend yourself should the occasion arise instead of simply run away really fast. I am now missing the point of your thread. Unless you follow this with some reason as to why many NFL and college level players are bigger than 200lbs and still very fast, athletic and functional and how this has NO relation to bodybuilding, you ahve no point. Please go eat, lift some heavy weights, and quit worrying about what your skinny ass might have to face should you ever actually appear big to someone. It makes little sense…really.
Professor X,
I don’t get why your choosing to be vindictive, but whatever.
NFL Players | Past & Current NFL Players | NFL.com he is listed at 228 pounds. What I mentioned was volume was similar to what I hoped in a 5’7 180lber.
Obviously by being a NFL athlete, he is certainly more athletic than I am. He?s more athletic than probably anyone here. But this isn’t the point I’m trying to state.
I did not say everyone in the NFL was 6’5 and above. However, I said on average 6’5 and above. Maybe I’m wrong, perhaps they’re slightly shorter, but I did give a fair ballpark.
The whole adding 5-10lbs per inch is great and all, but I fail to see how it correlates.
I don’t agree in debating arguments based on insulting the person, so what I’m saying I’m not insulting you, but I merely asked what some agreed was an ideal weight. You decided that I’m out to insult those that weigh over hundred eighty and which I’m not.
The problem is this is indeed a scenario. Is it likely to happen? Probably not.
In your post, you’re repeatedly using the basic idea that I should eat more. May I asked how does this relate to what I asked?
Since you think I’m being a troll, how about the answer to the initial question?
Professor X, what is your height and what weight would you be content at?
I think the question is a valid one, though, like many who have replied here, I don’t think it was put across in the right way.
Obviously you need to eat to gain muscle, but of course there will always be morons who take that idea to an extreme and turn from a skinny bastard to a fat bastard without gaining much muscle at all. But even those who do eat clean find that they’ll inevitably gain some fat when bulking. At what point do you stop, if there is one?
But I do agree that dissatisfaction is the basis of progress. OK, so you reach your “ideal weight.” Then what? And why not be big AND functional? I’d like to be fast, but I wouldn’t mind adding some more muscle and be just as fast (or even faster)!
Taking bulking and cutting to extremes is definitely a bad thing. But I don’t like the idea of thinking about an “ideal weight.”
There are those of us who don’t really care about how fast they run and just want to build muscle. And there are those of us who are more focused on function than structure. Both approaches are perfectly fine. You can only focus on so much at one time; trying to do everything at once won’t lead to optimal results. Focus on your own goals, and when you accomplish those, keep setting new ones.
Whew, that was a long post, especially considering how little I’ve posted here. But I figured I’d put in my two cents, since I do think that this is an interesting topic.
[quote]Jeff Shek wrote:
Professor X,
I don’t get why your choosing to be vindictive, but whatever.
NFL Players | Past & Current NFL Players | NFL.com he is listed at 228 pounds. What I mentioned was volume was similar to what I hoped in a 5’7 180lber. [/quote]
I’m not being vindictive. I am being realistic. And this web site: Fanball
lists him as 260lbs which simply means his weight may fluctuate. If he is down to 228lbs, that is a very recent occurance. It doesn’t erase him having played the same position as heavy as 260lbs.
[quote]
Obviously by being a NFL athlete, he is certainly more athletic than I am. He?s more athletic than probably anyone here. But this isn’t the point I’m trying to state.[/quote]
Actually, that would be the point. If you think being muscular is somehow going to decrease performance or being functional, what better place to look than at pro sports to be proven wrong about this?
[quote]
The whole adding 5-10lbs per inch is great and all, but I fail to see how it correlates. [/quote]
If you can’t see by now how this correlates, I am guessing this conversation needs to end quickly because there is no point in continuing.
I didn’t say you were a troll. I said you are writing bullshit logic. There is a difference.
I am 5’11". My overall goal at this point is to carry enough muscle to possibly be able to diet down (as if in contest condition) at around 230lbs. I follow NPC contests and would rather look like one of the guys who compete there than the pro’s on stage today in bodybuilding. The average bodybuilder who I have known who competes in NPC contests loses up to 40lbs getting ready for a contest…and we are talking about people who are relatively lean to begin with. That means, naturally, I would expect to be heavier than that when not dieting. As you can see from this site, we all have different goals and not one person bashes someone for simply having a different goal. You have argued against pro football having anything to do with being large and functional. I find that hard to understand. Your entire question is answered by simply looking at pro sports. You apparently refuse to do so…even after I give you the stats of a player and a site on where you can verify his heaviest weight. You CHOOSE to only accept his lightest weight and make assumptions based on it. That can only mean one thing…that you want to find a negative in spite of the positive being shown to you. Well then, keep looking because unless you can prove that David Boston was never 260lbs or never played pro football or was never functional, you don’t have much of a point against what was stated.
The truth is, very few people even have the genetics to get exceptionally muscular. That makes worrying about it when you only weigh 140lbs a little ridiculous. Chances are great that you couldn’t reach much over 200lbs (leaned out) even if you put your all into it…so why start bodybuilding with a FIXED minimal goal in mind?
[quote]Jeff Shek wrote:
StevenF,
Although I hope perhaps you found this part of my post directed at you quicker, can you say at 195lbs your strength/ratio has improved more and more? If so, then I cannot argue. I can only argue against the point at strength/ratio begins to drop, with the buildup of fat in an attempt to gain more muscle at the same time.
[/quote]
sorry if I don’t make much sense I just woke up at 5:30 to play some hockey at 6:30. But were you trying to say that the more I weigh the stronger I get? Well yeah, I’m hovering at 190-195 right now just focusing on strength. I’ve been able to see my abs the whole way since 155, although they are not as clearly defined that whole time they are still visible. There’s a right way and a wrong way to build muscle, and some people’s body types just generally makes it easier for them to put on fat than others. But yeah sorry if I’m rambling only half awake still. If you’re worried about losing your abs then I don’t know what to tell you. Fat gain is inevitable and also necessary to build muscle, its that simple. Besides, what are you gonna do when you catch the purse snatcher, lift up your shirt and show him your 6 pack and knock him out when he’s staring in awe at your rock hard bod?
You sound like you might be sorta young, I’d bet once you got to 180 you will start thinking about putting on some more weight. Maybe not right away but I’m sure you will. I forget how tall you said you were, but when I hear someone is like 5’8 180lbs, I think eh average. But if I heard 5’8 200lbs I’d think “man he must be stacked!”
I hope some of this made sense, I’m gonna go play some hockey now.
Jeff, I’m going to try hard not to shout loudly in your metrosexual face, that you are being a silly-billy.
You are 60lbs off 200. How do you know what it is like?
I can agree that at some point, further muscle gain MAY slow you down…BUT 200lbs, or even 220lbs is NOT that point. And also, slow you down from what? Being a purse snatcher catcher?
You cant see out of your slimline mental box can you? Jesus. Get over yourself. A “friendly” T-Vixen would offer you 50 bucks to join a freakin gym if you ran down a purse snatcher.
You have to realise that even if you reach your peak of 180lbs, most big guys could pratically shrug you off. Anything under that and most men could run with you hanging around their neck.
Let me say this once and for all…at 140lbs you have no idea what it is like to weigh 200lbs. You weigh 63 kilos stifled laughter. Just fuck off and lift will ya?
Disclaimer The nicer side of me apologises for the rough edges of my post…but PUH-lease…lift some fuckin weights and stop starting threads about how “I’m gonna stop after I put on another 40-50lbs of mass”. Just when do you think that particular day will come my pint sized friend?
Disclaimer, sorry I couldnt apologise. Nothing against personally man, just please lift
"Yet, can at that weight the speed be maintained? Is it likely 200+ lber run for 400M on a strong confident pace? "
Dude, you need to run a purse snatcher down a bit quicker than that.
I guess I would panic if some 140lber is prepared to do a frickin half marathon to catch me.
Thats the difference between you, and a T-Man. A T-man would catch the scum inside of 200m, take the purse, accidentally push the thief under a bus and then use the 200m jog back to the vixen to think of come-on involving a hilarious “snatch” pun.
You’d sip a lucozade and then pace yourself over 5 miles to catch him.
[quote]sasquatch wrote:
Oh boy
At 275, maybe I’m unable to relate, but let me try.
Functional muscle? What does that mean?
I work, play with my kids, fish, golf, and even play rec league basketball. Quite well I might add. Seeing as you’re 60 lbs away from seeing 200, you are not qualified to decide at that weight you become ‘less’ functional.
Yes, you may be able to run faster for a longer stretch of time. But, when I steal your best girls’ purse, and you chase me down, I’ll simply eat you as a snack and be on my way.
Listen, we all have different body typesand we all have different goals. There is no perfect body. There is no gold standard weight. Our only goal is the next one we make for ourselves. If your goal is to blow away when a stiff wind blows by, well God bless you.
What was the real purpose of this post? were you hoping to unite the Al Shades of T-Nation? Did you just want to see how outrageous the comments would be? Were you hoping to give Prof X the big one?
If you want to be 180 then be 180. At a frogs hair over 5’, that ain’t such a bad place to be. Those of us that aspire to bigger really don’t hate those that are smaller. Now, the attitude that accompianies that frame sometimes is a real pisser, but really, it’s your choice and your life.
Enjoy Men’s Health. It was written just for you. [/quote]
Sasquatch, you’re killin me!
“and even if you did catch me, I’d just eat you as a snack and be on my way…”
Shit, stuff came out of my nose I was laughing so hard.
And you’d need a snack, after that sudden workout, wouldn’t you?
As for a 200 pounder running 400meters, why don’t you go tell that shit to Thibs?
The thing is, you probably thinkl that at your current 140, another 60 pounds of lean mass would make you look like ROnnie COleman. DOn’t limit your targets, aim for the sky. If you finally reach 200 pounds years from now, I’ll pretty much guarantee you won’t think that your at the limit of size.
[quote]jaimeo wrote:
"Yet, can at that weight the speed be maintained? Is it likely 200+ lber run for 400M on a strong confident pace? "
Dude, you need to run a purse snatcher down a bit quicker than that.
I guess I would panic if some 140lber is prepared to do a frickin half marathon to catch me.
Thats the difference between you, and a T-Man. A T-man would catch the scum inside of 200m, take the purse, accidentally push the thief under a bus and then use the 200m jog back to the vixen to think of come-on involving a hilarious “snatch” pun.
You’d sip a lucozade and then pace yourself over 5 miles to catch him.
[/quote]
now that’s funny shit!
[quote]TriGWU wrote:
I think the kid has a genuine interest here.
What is your ideal weight?
Do you think there is a point of "too much muscle?
It’s a valid question.[/quote]
Tri
I know you are trying to be the nice guy here, but come on, this was a set up from the beginning. I’ve taken the time to re-read all of the posts and have come to that conclusion.
The question of to much muscle could be a good one. Phrased like his, it was not. Hell, in his second and third post, he decided to go head to head with the Prof. A beginner with a legit question, I think not.
But, you are a good man for trying to keep it civil.
To the ‘possible’ original question:
I do believe that at some point you can have to much muscle and it can be non-functional. Look at synthol arms dude. Definately not very functional.
But I can’t think of anyone who weighs 180 - 200 with more functional muscle than they could use.
Hope that is civil enough.
Joe, sorry if you lost part of your breakfast. Eat another .5 banana and drink 1/8 scoop more grow.
All love T-Nation
[quote]jaimeo wrote:
The nicer side of me apologises for the rough edges of my post…but PUH-lease…lift some fuckin weights and stop starting threads about how “I’m gonna stop after I put on another 40-50lbs of mass”. Just when do you think that particular day will come my pint sized friend?
[/quote]
That was a good point. You would think from his post that he will somehow easily run up to 180lbs over the next few months. Anyone with the mentality of, “I don’t want to get too big” before they ever make any significant progress will have a hard time making much progress at all. I am still waiting to run into the person who was really skinny and accidentally fell into a gym one day and got huge by mistake.
Interesting discussion - I’m siding with the “Men’s Health” cover model look. At 6-2 I’ve been 250+/30+BF most of my adult life and I’m liking the 190/12BF look at this time. My real point - why are so many pro-athletes getting their “ice” snatched from them outside clubs by little punks?
I think the answer here is simple… If you want to be 140 pounds thats cool… but dont post on a bodybuilding site… It’s no different than any other forum…
go on a vegetarian site and talk about how you love pork chops… go on an AA forum and talk about your favorite drink… go on a star wars forum and call them all nerds… go on a bodybuilders forum and talk about how you want to be small… ummmmmm…
the results will be the same…
And David Boston, well he’s unsigned and hasnt played a game in over a year… someone please talk about TO… 6’3 226 according to ESPN.com… pretty damn functional.
[quote]jaimeo wrote:
"Yet, can at that weight the speed be maintained? Is it likely 200+ lber run for 400M on a strong confident pace? "
Dude, you need to run a purse snatcher down a bit quicker than that.
I guess I would panic if some 140lber is prepared to do a frickin half marathon to catch me.
Thats the difference between you, and a T-Man. A T-man would catch the scum inside of 200m, take the purse, accidentally push the thief under a bus and then use the 200m jog back to the vixen to think of come-on involving a hilarious “snatch” pun.
You’d sip a lucozade and then pace yourself over 5 miles to catch him.
[/quote]
This is at the point of where I’m trolling and having to defend myself. In reality, I could probably sprint faster than the “mugger” and be on par with him. Evidently, 165-180lbs is an ideal sprinter weight. Of course, no one cares since this is after all T-Nation. I’m not going to stab facts into my mouth, and then have others mock them without answering the orginal question.
At 180 pounds, perhaps a big guy could shrug me off. However, I’m assuming big guy at 220lbs. Speed there is not a relative issue anymore.
Although Professor X, I don’t think either side will yield on this, I’m not going to continue the fight. When this becomes, name calling to metro sexual, and just random comments of “nice one there!” its going to become a flame war.
First thing I did was Google “David Boston” and that is the first link that came up. I wasn’t out to cheat and find a lighter weight of him.
I agree with the genetics aspect, but I’m digressing here. No one is willing to describe what they consider an ideal mass / height but rather deciding an easy way to mass up points is to belittle me. If you enjoy that, then continue.
I am young. I have not tried to deny that. I’ve gone from 95lbs to 140lbs from 8th grade to 11th. I’ve been humble. Repeatedly. I’m if not fastest, 2nd or 3rd fastest in my high school. In every single race in track up to the mile.
To those that gave constructive advice thank you. I read it and reread it. I’ve said it already, I’m at 140lbs. I’m a bit content at it, but am still looking to increase.
sasquatch, I’m not going into the endless antic of I’m not a troll or, Al Shades. I brought up a point. Perhaps if I had just made “What is your ideal weight/height” it would have been better. But I am verbose. However, relook the post. I never instigated anything. I asked a valid question.
I don’t want to be the quitter in this thread, but I’m a sprinter. The points in which I argue appear to be flawed in the mentality of bodybuilding competitions and even football.
To those that brought up points about this, thanks. I greatly enjoyed reading it. I’m going to choose not to debate having to constantly defend my size when it wasn’t the initial question.
How much weight is too much? Thats a pretty ridiculous question its like asking people who climb mountains when they are going to not try to climb a higher mountain, or a runner not go faster or farther. I look at it as an atheletic endeavor with the goal not being a certain time or distance or score but a certain amount type of muscularity.
People ask “Why do you need to bench that much?” cause I want to is ultimately the best answer. All the others like it will get me chicks or it will keep people from messing with me all kinda fall apart under scrutiny.
On another thread Prof X metnioned how Ronnie Coleman carries his 300 lbs. very well and Kovacks doesnt he seems to lumber ect…If your weight is giving you problems then I think you need to re-evaluate what your doing. If not then you will weigh enough when YOU feel you weigh enough, for some it will be 155 for others 275 lbs.
Some one once asked John D. Rockerfeller, John you have so much, how much is enough? he responded. Just a little bit more!
[quote]Terumo wrote:
I’m glad you made this post, because it introduces a subject that has been on my mind at times.
I have had a fairly large range of sizes, mainly thanks to hyper-conditioning, over-training college coaches, a few obscure illnesses, and intermittent periods of bulking. Since graduating high school, I have weighed anywhere from 155 to 220. I am currently sitting at about 195 (reminds me, I need to update my profile), which is 25 pounds less than I weighed at my largest. So why?
I had no problem running sprints, doing 20-rep breathing squats, or even going for a run with my marathoning friends. Hell, I’m pretty sure that I could have run down most any purse-snatching thug. I did, however, have one problem–my lifestyle. I work and attend school at a gigantic university/hospital, which I usually cover quite thoroughly in a day’s time. I probably log well over 10 miles per day, 6 or 7 days/week, in foot traffic. I usually only get the luxury of sitting down in the classroom. It is a lot of work for my rather small frame to be carrying that much weight, no matter how lean and well-conditioned.
In case you are wondering, yes, the load of my job played a big role in dropping those 25 pounds. It is not easy to stay that much above your “natural” weight without a sedentary job. My point is that the drop in weight was not exactly what I wanted, but consequently, it wasn’t entirely unwelcomed. I find my job to be much easier now, and I’m not quite screaming for a jacuzzi and epsom salts after an 18 hour shift.
Just a small observation and personal testament…
~Terumo[/quote]
Good post by Terumo. It takes significant amount of mass to become ‘non-functional’. As Prof. X said, it’s not really something most people could accomplish even if they wanted to. Of course there are enormous power lifters with compromised speed and agility. But I see no reason why this would come into play for your average jacked dude in the low to mid 200s. It’s different if your sport or lifestyle places particular demands on your body. Like for Terumo, it seems that he naturally lost mass based on the daily requirements of his lifestyle. Endurance athletes will similarly settle into the weight that suits their sport. But aside from specific athletic endeavors and sports where a lot of mass would be a detriment, I see no reason why there’d be an arbitrary threshold at which speed and athletic ability would be compromised.
[quote]Jeff Shek wrote:
Although Professor X, I don’t think either side will yield on this, I’m not going to continue the fight. When this becomes, name calling to metro sexual, and just random comments of “nice one there!” its going to become a flame war.
…
I agree with the genetics aspect, but I’m digressing here. No one is willing to describe what they consider an ideal mass / height but rather deciding an easy way to mass up points is to belittle me. If you enjoy that, then continue. [/quote]
This makes little sense. You asked what my goal is right now and I answered. Ideal weight means nothing. According to past ideal weights, for my height, I should be about 185lbs. Needless to say, that is pretty skinny and most don’t go by that. My goals are also subject to change, however, I know what my limits are. You were answered very directly in this thread. I think, more than anything, you are simply upset that the discussion didn’t go the way you wanted (ie. everybody logging in and talking about how weighing 200lbs is a bad thing…it isn’t).
[quote]
I am young. I have not tried to deny that. I’ve gone from 95lbs to 140lbs from 8th grade to 11th. I’ve been humble. Repeatedly. I’m if not fastest, 2nd or 3rd fastest in my high school. In every single race in track up to the mile. [/quote]
You sound like you have very little life experience…even for a kid. I weighed about 85lbs in the 8th grade. What sense would it make for me to act like I gained 65lbs by high school graduation…as if GROWING had nothing to do with it. That entire statement was retarded.
[quote]
To those that gave constructive advice thank you. I read it and reread it. I’ve said it already, I’m at 140lbs. I’m a bit content at it, but am still looking to increase.[/quote]
What grade are you in? If you are content with being 140lbs, then why claim your goal is to be 180lbs? You obviously aren’t even lifting weights regularly and have no real goals in that direction…so why are you on this site?