Also that skews it drastically in favor of those guys that filled out late. Those guys numbers looked incredible compared to the guy that was a beast in highschool because he the majority of his filling out early.
I mean someone could really make themselves feel good if they compared their LBM gains to their self at 12. Its one of those things where you have to try to find a similar starting point for comparison sake that mitigates the ability of late bloomers to claim colossal gains that a lot of other people made much earlier just from growing.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
Also that skews it drastically in favor of those guys that filled out late. Those guys numbers look incredible compared to the guy that was a beast in highschool because he the majority of his filling out early.[/quote]
That doesn’t matter. I was a skinny kid who took after my mom all of the way through school. I had to force meals down because I had no appetite…but once I licked that, I gained quickly and looked more like my dad’s side of the family.
That is GENETICS…and still means they gained that weight. Taking away from the lean body mass gained makes no sense. It doesn’t matter if they filled out late. You are the ones saying no one can do it…and then if people can, you take away from the lean body mass gained as you see fit.
That is odd.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
I mean someone could really make themselves feel good if they compared their LBM gains to their self at 12. Its one of those things where you have to try to find a similar starting point for comparison sake that mitigates the ability of late bloomers to claim colossal gains that a lot of other people made much earlier just from growing.[/quote]
No one is doing that for 12…at least I’m not. I was IN COLLEGE.
I know that you know that I didn’t mean people should literally start at 12. I choose to have more faith in you than that.
So by your definition of good genetics, you have better genetics that the 215 6’0" Linebacker at my old highschool because he made a lot of his size gains at 16. So those two years of LBM gains shouldn’t be counted because his “bad” genetics caused him to grow too soon and minimize his LBM gains after the age of 18?
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
So by your definition of good genetics, you have better genetics that the 215 6’0" Linebacker at my old highschool because he made a lot of his size gains at 16. So those two years of LBM gains shouldn’t be counted because his “bad” genetics caused him to grow to soon and minimize his LBM gains after the age of 18?[/quote]
WTf? I am not the one discounting gains. YOU ARE. I have been the one saying that most guys start training before full maturity so these number ranges make no sense.
Why would I discount the gains someone made?
Why are you?
So why did you start counting yours at 18? Why not start at 16?
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
So why did you start counting yours at 18? Why not start at 16? [/quote]
Because I was showing that I gained to that IMPOSSBLE MARK after the age of full maturity…because I was told that only the gains after full maturity mattered.
You are coming in on the end of a discussion. I simply supported that I did meet that mark…so OBVIOUSLY other people can with better genetics and have.
18 is far far away from the age of full maturity.
So you think that you gained nothing in bone breadth (not density) after the age of 18?
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
18 is far far away from the age of full maturity. [/quote]
Full maturity is about the age of 21.
I had stopped growing in height which is the main issue.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
So you think that you gained nothing in bone breadth (not density) after the age of 18?[/quote]
?
I didn’t say that. You can’t determine that until DEATH which is why we go by lean body mass.
What really matters is that caliper body fat readings are notoriously unreliable especially on bigger guys.
So if you are off by 5-10% on the BF reading, it throws everything off.
The average age for bone breadth to stop increasing is about age 25. By increasing the size of the bones you are increasing LBM. And everyone is different. People grow at different ages and start training at different times which skews the data that you are using for your total EARNED LBM gains. That is why the most accurate “Apples to Apples” comparison is either to base it off total % of Maximum LBM gained or in a less accurate estimate, excess in LBM over an untrained individual of similar body structure. You cant say you disproved Bricks numbers if you are using a different starting point than Bricks estimate is using. That’s like saying you beat Usain Bolt in the 100m but you started at the 80m mark.
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
What really matters is that caliper body fat readings are notoriously unreliable especially on bigger guys.
So if you are off by 5-10% on the BF reading, it throws everything off.[/quote]
I am not aware of a caliper reading that is off by 10%. The usual difference is about 3-5 based on skill level.
That is also why focusing on a specific “number” rto reach in regards to body fat percenytage is a wasted goal.
This is a game about LOOKS…not calculus.
But if someone is trying to get an idea of what they gained overall, looking at lean body mass is how you do it.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
The average age for bone breadth to stop increasing is about age 25. By increasing the size of the bones you are increasing LBM. And everyone is different. People grow at different ages and start training at different times which skews the data that you are using for your total EARNED LBM gains. That is why the most accurate “Apples to Apples” comparison is either to base it off total % of Maximum LBM gained or in a less accurate estimate, excess in LBM over an untrained individual of similar body structure. You cant say you disproved Bricks numbers if you are using a different starting point than Bricks estimate is using. That’s like saying you beat Usain Bolt in the 100m but you started at the 80m mark.[/quote]
You don’t seem to understand this.
The best way is to calculate your own lean body mass gained. Looking at “averages” will not give you a more specific calculation. It will make it more variable.
It makes no scientific sense to look at someone else’s average if you have the body fat percentage from the same person at start and finish. The goal is to DECREASE variables, not add more.
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
What really matters is that caliper body fat readings are notoriously unreliable especially on bigger guys.
So if you are off by 5-10% on the BF reading, it throws everything off.[/quote]
I remember when I was at my heavier weight and the calipers would give me an artificially low body fat reading because of how my fat pinched at that weight.
I understand that the body is 70% water professor but what I was getting, as has been used as an example several times is the gallon of water thing.
Example:
You are 250 pounds with 15% bodyfat correct?
Subtract the fat weight of roughly 38 pounds and you are left with a very respectable amount of 212 pounds LBM.
Go chug a gallon of water really quick.
Viola!
You now have 220 pounds of LBM.
See how water weight drastically skews LBM?
But by considering your own when compared to someone elses or Bricks 80lb estimate, you have far more variables than just basing it off an average. But basing it off % of your potential gained would have the least variables.
The variables to consider when comparing to Bricks based off the way you are trying to do it are in no ways measurable. You are choosing to ignore them because they are immeasurable which makes your argument flawed. Those variables include, increase in bone mass, whether height or breadth, and the additional changes that go along with that, untrained increases in muscle mass, and tendon and ligament increases. Those things cannot be separated from gains made do to training if the person is training while they are going still maturing. That is why just picking an age and starting from their is a terribly inaccurate comparison when comparing oneself to others and to Bricks estimate.
Just a thought here but who really cares how much LBM anyone has gained?
I could care less if the number is 30, 80 of 200.
I am after a look, a feel and a performance level.
The number is irrelevant.
Just like bodyfat percentages.