I started my senior year in high school at 6’00 135. Yes… 135lbs.
When I started lifting back in my junior year I too would inform people that I wasn’t trying to get “too big”
Little did I know…
It was at that point that our football coach took me into training. The guy was old school… didn’t know the latest techniques or the proper dieting but he did know one thing. He knew that if you lifted heavy and ate like hell you’d put on weight. I added countless numbers of PB+J throughout the day and then a shake beforebed (as I have posted before). By the end of high school I hit 165. Sure, 165 isn’t anything to soil yourself over but it was a size I thought I would be satisfied at; I wasn’t. Needless to say, my goals changed to tri which is the only reason I have stopped at 170. I think you will come to find, as many people have said here, as you increase size you’ll want to get bigger. I went from a measly 135 to a puney 165 increasing while my 40 yard dash (yeah, told you he was a football coach).
The body is an amazing thing… it is very possible that we will see heavier and heavier people competing in events once thought to be for us manorexics. Unfortnately, we have yet to discover the proper way to train a 200 lb marathoner.
I don’t believe there is an ‘ideal’ height and weight combo. You want to try and be serious here we go.
Most sprinters are NOT 140 lbs. Look at michael johnson. Look at Ben Johnson. Look at Maurice Green. Not only are they bigger than 140, virtually ALL high level sprinters are ‘enhanced.’ And I’ll stand by that remark.
You may be fast right now, though I believe you must go to a small school/small school district. Sprinters in my class were bigger than 140. That is not a knock, simply an observation.
Your present frame is built more for cross country or 10,000 meters or more.
Did you look at my last post. I did address ‘functional’ muscle. Certainly there can be a level where it begins to be less functional–depending on your definition there of. My reference being the synthol armed dude.
I’ll discuss muscle with you all day long. But please, do a little research first, and understand a little about the question you are about to pose.
Noone, NOBODY, at 200lbs has more muscle than they can functionally use. You will not suddenly gain so much muscle that you can not be a sprinter.
The Men’s Health was a small jab, but, not completely. I gained benefit from this mag when I first started. But it is geared mored towards fitness than Testosterone was and now T-Nation. You will gain muscle on a lot of their info–especially as a newcomer. You do NOT have to worry about popping out of your clothes and not being able to scratch your own back or comb your own hair.
[quote]Jeff Shek wrote:
So I ask this question for you T-Nation readers, at what point do you think you?ll stop training to add pounds to your bodyweight? We all realize that each of us have different goals, some train for speed, strength, explosiveness, looks, and/or downright intimidation.
[/quote]
It is remarkable how nearly every thread related to weight turns into some sort of Armageddon pitting the “small guys” against the “big guys”.
Anyway, regarding the initial question (which seems legitimate in my opinion), YES, I can imagine cases where one would prefer not to exceed a certain weight. This would primarily hold true for athletes who compete in a specific weight class.
Personally, I prefer not to obsess with numbers. As for maintaining athletic ability, I gained over 20 pounds in the last 8 months while continuously performing some sort of energy-system work (CT’s running man, even 8000m running once a week). With the right focus on nutrition and recovery, it is possible to keep or even boost one’s endurance while building mass.
Anyway, thanks for the interesting thread.
PS: The thief-catching argument is ludicrous. I bet, in the end, the brave, gallant, < or > 200 pound cavalier gets a big, hearty kiss from the poor T-Vixen in distress. And they live happily ever after.
After the “not athletes” comment I wanted to light you on fire and put you out with a golf club, but then I remembered that this should remain civil.
Then some knitwit pulls the old strength to weight ratio- heres a ratio for ya- 160 lbs. bodyweight. bench 295(and climbing)
dead-350(and climbing)
squat-365(and climbing)
How is that for un athletic?
How is that for strength to weight ratio?
The fact of the matter is that even though I am a guy and I try my ass off, when it comes to powerlifting I am prety strong (for a girl).
Where in the hell does that put you?
Now that I think about it, maybe the lighter fluid and golfclub trick is exactly what you need.
This forum appears to be the reason behind Shug’s “Shut Up” article.
Taking the middle route yet again:
Believe it or not… there are 200lb+ guys that have completed ironman distance races. Their times were nothing to shake a stick at either; you can check out the “top 25 200+ triathletes” via Google and there are quite a few. With that said… you won’t see any of these 200 pounders winning yet , but I sure as hell consider completing a 140mi. race… functional.
Now, with that said, you can look at Shug’s article “(Shut Up”), I believe, and see that there were great physiques in body building that weighed 180 lbs. I can’t name the guy(s) off the top of my head but check out the article.
So right there we have a successful 200lb ironmon triathlete and a successful 180lb bodybuilder. I could be wrong, but, those are two examples that refute the arguements on both sides.
Also, I think its a bit unfair for both candidates to use the NFL as an example. Not every guy with those measurements can compete in the NFL… thats why its the NFL… On the other hand, you can’t deny the athletic ability of those athletes. HOWEVER, look at someone like Roscoe Parrish, UMiami WR, 5’9" 170. May get his ass kicked in the NFL, but I wouldn’t want to snatch his purse either.
The moral of this story:
We all can find examples to refute the other side. Don’t judge a book by its cover. Give 180 a test drive and see for yourself.
"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."
What the fuck is that all supposed to mean? Noone can really tell you their ideal height and weight as goals evolve.
Bottom line…180lbs might be ok for you but dont puff up because you can run faster than other people. Once you have caught up to these mythical muggers- then what?
As for gaining through puberty, I would think that by your late teens you would have frickin grown.
Why are you being such a dick about this? You dont know about being big, you are on the slippery slope (well, actually you are somewhere near the bottom) of rationalising every underachievement you’ll ever experience.
One last thing, a few times you have used example weights e.g. 165-180. Or saying that relative to height you would weigh 10% less than whichever NFL athlete
you were on about. I’m sorry but this grates! 165-180…WTF? 15lbs of variance. Just like the 10% thing. If a guy weighs 200, then obviously 10% less would be 180, 10% more would be 220.
As 140 (listen up now) you HAVE NO CLUE how far 200 is from 180, ditto 220 from 200 in terms of iron shifted. 10% either way is not a small amount.
[quote]TriGWU wrote:
Now, with that said, you can look at Shug’s article “(Shut Up”), I believe, and see that there were great physiques in body building that weighed 180 lbs. I can’t name the guy(s) off the top of my head but check out the article.
[/quote]
I am not sure which bodybuilder you speak of, but even if he was 180lbs, that was in CONTEST condition after the use of diuretics in effort to approach the most minimal fat levels and force definition. That same bodybuilder probably weighed 200lbs 2 weeks later. It is unrealistic to only look at the body weights of bodybuilders when in contest shape. That is a very temporary point in time that no athlete competing in sports would duplicate.
…and it was responded to. I feel the rest can be dealt with in this thread. I understand being that age and thinking you know a lot. Your response to me of “I know what it takes to get there” is a fallacy. No kid knows what it takes to reach a goal like that until they have done it. Going from 140lbs to 180lbs is not a small accomplishment once you stop growing in height. At your age, you are still growing, by the way. The average male (as discovered after World War II) grows until around the age of 21. That means you will probably grow another inch or so before you stop completely…maybe. Even if you didn’t, gaining 40lbs of solid muscle is no small feat. Unless you never picked up a weight before, chances ar,e that is an attempt that will take years of hard work and is not something that just happens. You seemed to assume otherwise. Eating a lot for the past few weeks is not the same as understanding the work involved. You sell yourself short with the “I’m not trying to get too big” mentality". You set up road blocks before you even get in the car.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
TriGWU wrote:
Now, with that said, you can look at Shug’s article “(Shut Up”), I believe, and see that there were great physiques in body building that weighed 180 lbs. I can’t name the guy(s) off the top of my head but check out the article.
I am not sure which bodybuilder you speak of, but even he was 180lbs, that was CONTEST condition after the use of diretics in effort to approach the most minimal fat levels and force definition. That same bodybuilder probably weighed 200lbs 2 weeks later. It is unrealistic to only look at the body weights of bodybuilders when in contest shape. That is a very temporary point in time that no athlete competing in sports would duplicate.[/quote]
Agreed.
Admittedly, I had to “hear what I wanted to hear” to find the examples I was looking for.
Still tryin to walk the middle ground here and toss out some numbers.
Eitherway, the 200lb+ ironmen still stand true… Maybe not T-Nation badass but still badass.
As long as it is quality mass I don’t really care what the scale says. If I still look good naked that is all that matters. I am 6-5 and normally around 250. I am at 225 right now since I have a show 3 weeks from today and am cutting up for it. I would be kidding myself if I thought I could carry 280 pounds with 4-5% bodyfat without anabolic help, but guess what? I am going to try my ass off for the rest of my life to do it natural. In my opinion there is no such thing as too much muscle.
[quote]Jeff Shek wrote:
But I am sincere in my thoughts that perhaps at two hundred pounds, the adding of muscle becomes more and more nonfunctional for daily life.[/quote]
200 vs 170… what activities in daily life (remember, high school is not the real world) are hindered by another 30lb muscle? Besides the X-Box skills you won’t develop cause you’ll be eating instead.
Is this you?
To be better than the average guy on the street, whether in terms of looks or performance. Since you don’t say anything about running in college, and with more and more people lifting weights, your goals look pretty average…something pretty much opposite of the goals of this website
This is a qualitative opinion of the body you don’t currently have which is VERY different from the current model, in a hypothetical situation which probably ends up with you getting in the girl’s pants too, right?
As for the knight-in-shining-armor fantasy…
you’re not the 3rd fastest guy in your own high school at this distance, running after someone with a head-start, who’s risking incarceration if he gets caught
people, mailboxes, and, uh, cars, will be in your way as you run down the street
you don’t have a very imposing figure, so you’re gonna have to fight
muggers carry knives
OK, I’ll quote someone then…
“How about gaining weight? How about lifting heavier? No one wants to talk about that because, as Jim says, that’s hard work. It’s a lot easier to strap on a pair of rollerblades and do military presses with a double sided vibrator.”
Jeff Shek, you mentioned that the football player had a weight/height ratio of 3.08. To achieve this you would need to be 204 pounds at 5’8.
Sure, most sprinters are around 180, and if you want to be a sprinter you should shoot for that weight. But all limiting yourself to that weight is going to do is make you more functional as a sprinter, for a lot of other sports and functions the extra muscle would come in handy.
I plan to keep adding muscle until I’m completely satisfied with the way I look. I don’t think there is a best bodyweight for anyone except what they want to be at.
[quote]StevenF wrote:
Well, for one, I started at 155 and now I’m at 190-195. You’ll find that as you get bigger, you’re just not big enough. I still feel skinny. [/quote]
I second that. I started at 135 last August and I am 160 now. Everyone around me say I am big enough and tell me to stop gaining weight. I don’t know what’s wrong with their head. 160 is nowhere near where I want to be. And I WILL ALWAYS SEE MYSELF AS A SKINNY BASTARD. Maybe I am sick, but that’s how I am going to get big! (hey, that rhymes )
I think 140 is too huge. I hope i never break 100. I mean I’m much more athletic than some 150lb mass monster. Plus, having 11" thighs makes my wang look huge.
You know what the ideal sprinter weight is? The fasest you can run while being the heaviest you can. You are a blazing 140, yet I’ve known lineman in college who could probably smoke you in a 40 or 100. As far as the 400m arguement,…I’ve known plenty of 230-250lb LBs who could run them…fast…and maintain speed…and would seperate your head from your body. Own up to the fact that you are a skinny X-country d-bag.
[quote]BorisTheSpider wrote:
Jeff Shek, you mentioned that the football player had a weight/height ratio of 3.08. To achieve this you would need to be 204 pounds at 5’8.
Sure, most sprinters are around 180, and if you want to be a sprinter you should shoot for that weight. But all limiting yourself to that weight is going to do is make you more functional as a sprinter, for a lot of other sports and functions the extra muscle would come in handy.
[/quote]
If particular athletic goals are what you’re striving for, you shouldn’t shoot for any particular weight, high or low. Rather, you should train as hard as possible in the way best designed to meet your goals. As a sprinter, this means a well-designed and comprehensive weight-training program needs to be part of your training. All of the sprinters on teams I ran on (as a distance runner) were pretty jacked, though not really huge.
Weights were an important part of their training for performance reasons and the way they looked was the byproduct. If mass is something you should add for performance reasons, you and your coach will determine this based on your performance and particular strengths and weaknesses. You’ll adjust your training accordingly, on and off season. Particularly off-season. You’re gonna have to accept the body that comes with the training, whatever size at it ends up being. As a middle distance runner, I certainly would’ve liked to have more mass. But it would not have necessarily helped me compete. We did lift weights but more for strength and to prevent injury than anything else. Lifting to add mass did not mesh with the philosophy of my coaches, nor was there really room for it in our training.
No longer competing, I can choose to add as much mass as I want till I’m satisfied. When no longer competing at your chosen sport, you can choose how big or small you want to be. Until then, it’s a moot point and silly to think up some arbitrary limit. Just train hard, eat right for your sport, and everything else will work itself out.
Professor X
Who is more likely to do some damage to that purse snatcher, the 140lbs guy who stayed near 140lbs because he was afraid of being “nonfunctional”, or the jacked 220lbs guy who can bench twice the attacker’s weight?
well i think the 140lbs can do more damage then the 220lbs pound person
)