CT & Professor X's Discussion

Bigger Stronger Leaner Competitive Bodybuilding
1

Please note I did not say CT VERSUS Professor X before that gets started. I almost did this anyway as it’s worth pursuing in my view:

There’s a flip side to this whole exchange between Professor X and CT that has been buggin me for months. There was an interview several months back with Justin Harris who is a very smart and VERRRY large guy with unmistakable expertise in all areas of bodybuilding. He’s also a heck of a gentleman and overall nice guy. He PM’d me and we had a short exchange.

The thing that got me though was during the interview he was asked questions obviously designed to muffle the ideas of people who believed in the merit of gaining significant muscle before worrying too much about being lean. It even got as specific as “what do you say to someone who thinks that once they have a lot more muscle it will enable them to more easily lose the fat” to paraphrase, something like that.

Using himself as an example his answers were clearly designed to leave the impression that this whole way of thinking was flawed as he was able to make gains without much fat gain and even while losing fat on occasion.

In the debate that followed I pointed out, respectfully, that what can be accomplished by an unmistakably enhanced, advanced lifter has no bearing on the less gifted naturals that this controversy was swirling around on this site. In fact it wouldn’t make any difference who was being interviewed, enhanced or not. The existence of individual specimens with exceptional abilities will not help the average kid who wants to be as big as he can, however big that ends up being.

I’ve accepted the fact that T-Nation is actively welcoming a broader audience. I even practically said that I would do the same thing in their shoes and made a conscious attempt to go easier on the “wretched newbies”, but is it so outrageous to hope that the few guys who still have ultimate personal size as their goal not be led to believe that they’ll get there with a set of calipers in one hand and a fork full of closely trimmed chicken breast in the other?

1 Like
2

I have been wondering an interesting point. I think I already know CT’s thoughts on it, so I am wondering Prof. X’s.

What would you say to former fat boys who lost the weight and are now skinny? Clearly for them losing fat is hard, so I would imagine that even if they wanted to become mass monsters, it would not be possible for them.

I think this pretty much goes to the idea that you have to play the game your genetics gave you. There is no one correct way, so for some the calipers and chicken may be the way to go while for others it’s off to the races with pizza and soda.

It almost seems like a useless battle to debate bulking. It’s highly individualized in my mind and thus no one can say they know the only correct way.

I think CT’s views are perfect for people that aren’t genetically blessed in building muscle or are prone to retaining fat. If a FFB goes on an all out bulk, he will have to diet down for so long he will likely lose the majority of muscle he had gained during the time, thus offsetting any point in bulking. His ideas are also more ideal for those concerned with their health.

Prof. X’s views match well for those with better genetics such as those who can lose fat easier. The all out bulks are also perfect for the potential mass monsters or someone looking to gain mass quickly for powerlifting or to make the football team as a lineman or something similar.

Everyone likes to debate from their own perspective so I think that’s where all this disconnect is coming from.

Lol I have a feeling this is going to be seen as trying to appease both sides and I’ll end up getting torn to shreds by the two opposing view points but meh!

3

ok, by the CT/Professor X debate, are you talking about the thread about whether or not you can gain muscle while losing fat? the one where 300-400lb obese americans are mentioned?

or is it a different thread? because i read the one that i just referenced above, and didnt see a single comment from CT, although his bulking “method” (or rather the article he wrote about a year ago) were alluded to.

anyway, please clarify, because if CT and Prof X have actually debated recently, id like to read it.

4

I don’t think their views are that disparate.

People are missing the point if they think Prof X has condoned large amounts of fat gain. Prof X was merely pointing out that under 90% of the cases, people need a caloric surplus to gain and that the concern over minutia and avoiding “junk food” at all costs was narrow-minded. This unfortunately was perverted to “all out bulk”.

Similarly, people are missing the point if they think CT is saying muscle gain should only come with virtually no fat gain. He was merely pointing out that for 90% of the cases, it’s best not to go overboard on the overfeeding and “junk food” so much that one would put on an appreciable amount of fat and throw health caution to the wind.

People suck. Why don’t they get this?

5

[quote]dez6485 wrote:
ok, by the CT/Professor X debate, are you talking about the thread about whether or not you can gain muscle while losing fat? the one where 300-400lb obese americans are mentioned?

or is it a different thread? because i read the one that i just referenced above, and didnt see a single comment from CT, although his bulking “method” (or rather the article he wrote about a year ago) were alluded to.

anyway, please clarify, because if CT and Prof X have actually debated recently, id like to read it. [/quote]

http://www.T-Nation.com/tmagnum/readTopic.do?id=866980

6

After reading the thread, this is not so much a debate, or a fight, as it is dancing around what I think the main issue is: natural versus enhanced.

I think the bulk and cut principles are just as valid whether natural or if you are on gear. the difference is the tolerances at the extremes.

Talking about a 70 pound weight gain for a natural BBer would be silly. Talking about a 15 pound weight gain for someone on gear would be a waste of good AAS.

Just my opinion. And I was a little disappointed when reading the exchanges between CT and the Prof. I wanted to see CT typing out cusswords in French.

Oh well.

How do you think one could apply the Velocity diet to this discussion?

7

To me it’s all about “looking back I’d have done it different” mentality.
Problem is no one knows if the “done it differently” would provide the same results.

8

No one, including Scott, Prof X, or Tiribulus have stated that one needs to bulk up to 20% body fat in order to make significant gains. Yet, this is what some assume they are saying. The point being made is that trying to staying extremely lean in the single digits will not be very conducive to maximizing growth.

That is not to say that you can not ease up on the pedal if you see the fat piling on fat too fast. Just don’t throw your goals of building mass out the window if you notice yourself getting a little softer. Trying to control your body fat and staying at around 12-15% is entirely different from attempting to diet down to 8% every time you notice a striation disappearing.

As far as the FFB thing goes, I think people use that as a copout. You were a FFB because you had a big appetite, probably played no sports and just ate like shit. That doesn’t make you genetically more prone to pile on a mess of fat if you extend a mass-gaining phase that exceeds 4 weeks.

9

Sloh, are you by chance naturally lean ?

10

No, I was obese 2 yrs ago.

11

[quote]sloh wrote:

As far as the FFB thing goes, I think people use that as a copout. You were a FFB because you had a big appetite, probably played no sports and just ate like shit. That doesn’t make you genetically more prone to pile on a mess of fat if you extend a mass-gaining phase that exceeds 4 weeks. [/quote]

I’m going to step out and say this is the dumbest thing said on this thread.

I don’t give a shit about identifying with a group so I don’t really use the term FFB. However, losing 80lbs no doubt qualifies me.

I’m not getting defensive of being fat and living fat just because I used to be fat. However, your very biased opinion is nothing short of stupid and thoughtless.

12

And how obese were you, what was your body fat. People use the term FFB very loosely. And how’d you get to that bodyfat?

13

Also, with your self stated limited training experience (I read your profile), I highly doubt you have run into enough training individuals to make a assumption as broad as you did.

14

The first picture in my profile is how fat I used to be. And I got there with a very sedentary lifestyle combined with poor eating habits.

If you truly are one of the few who is actually a FFB, then I am sorry for offending you.

15

It’s not so much that I’m offended.

And I guess I am I don’t really know what the cut-off.

It’s just that I disagree that not all fat kids are non-athletic, sedentary glutons.

While their, eating habits, and yes this applies to me, certainly does not help, there are still people who are genetically predisposed to easier weight gain. Just as there are genetically gifted people as far as muscle building. This is where body types come into play.

I’m not saying all fat people couldn’t help getting fat, I just think the symptoms you suggested compound their problems.

I for one was very active and did quite well in competitive sports including football, basketball, soccer, and once upon a time, swim team.

However, I was always overweight nonetheless and by the time I was in high school and throughout high school I was downright fat adn got fatter and fatter.

Did I have poor eating habits? Yes, comparatively to now. Was a sedentary, lazy, video game enthusiast…not hardly.

I just think its poor to suggest that all fat people are lazy glutonous assholes.

Equally it would be poor to suggest that all “hardgainers” are anorexic, and non intense in their weightlifting.

Broad assumptions just shouldn’t usually be made.

16

I think it comes down to this.

To say all people get fact just because they lack self control would be like suggesting that all people who aren’t fat have tremendous self control.

It’s just simply not true.

I see just as many skinny kids eating ice cream and cake and going to Mcdonalds and pigging out at pizza buffets as I do fat people. The difference is they just don’t gain weight all that easily.

Thats my point, thin people don’t just have amazing self control. So you cant just tell a fat person to learn self control.

17

I guess I should have clarified that “most” previously overweight people lived sedentary lifestyles with poor eating habits.

But I assumed that people were aware that the number of people who truly are genetically predisposed to get fat easily is as common as those who put on muscle just by looking at weights…which is quite rare.

18

obviously everyone is going to be coming from a different background, so everyone is going to have to do different things to get there…if you were big as a kid, chances are you can eat very clean and still gain muscle well… theres no sense fighting what your given with, you just have to work with it…

-and on average, skinny people that look good (aka no tire or anything) do have self control, or they would look skinny fat, even if they require less self control than bigger people…

now if we’re talking about building muscle, i would rather constantly diet than constantly eat until it hurts, and yes i have done both for extended periods, and i still think that the latter is harder (for me, -for others, they may feel different… but thats where you just have to work on your weaknesses regardless of what they are)

19

[quote]sloh wrote:
But I assumed that people were aware that the number of people who truly are genetically predisposed to get fat easily is as common as those who put on muscle just by looking at weights…which is quite rare.[/quote]

This is not true. We were designed to put on fat to survive winters. It has only been in the last 40 years that things have changed so that fat is not the necessity for survival it once was. Many many more people are predisposed to putting on fat than the opposite.

20

we were also designed to work long hard hours, and not eat all this shit we do now…it evens out + much much more if you look at history and the size of everyone (speaking of the majority (see working class) in north america)