Eighty to 100 Pound Muscular Gains

Training
121

[quote]SkyNett wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[Why use BMI as a measure though? IMO it’s useless even for untrained individuals.

I was about 135 at 19-20 so couldn’t I theoretically reach this 100lbs limit? [/quote]

Thing is it absolutely is NOT useless when it comes to populations. It’s actually a useful tool…

Anyway, all this shit is pointless, because yes - being very lean does matter - because in that state, you’re carrying the least amount of fat and the most amount of muscle, without numbers being skewed by a variety of variables.

Not to mention, people are talking about a bunch of different things in this thread - some are talking about contest weight of natty bodybuilders over the last 60 years, some are talking about pure bodyweight gains - which is not all muscle obviously. So the only way to know what you’re really carrying is to get very lean and actually see - instead of speculating and extrapolating from various formulas…it just ain’t the same thing, no matter how hard you wish for it to be.

Not to even mention silly nonsense like guessing your BF percentage and extrapolating from that? Seriously? So, someone thinks they’re “about 16%” but are really 22%? That would make a BIG difference in the actual ratio of body composition - yet people are willing to buy that bullshit? As if ANYONE can just look at themselves and know within say 1% of what they actually are? Dumbest shit I’ve ever heard…

But hey, don’t listen to me - listen to the PROFESSIONAL BODYBUILDER who competes in two respected organizations, who commands $1500.00 for a 12 week coaching program, and who has put in the work for 20 years, and doesn’t bullshit himself, or others, about what is attainable. [/quote]

I really don’t see the benefit of posts like this and I think they are a major reason for the amount of bullshit here.

You’ve just written a big bunch of bullshit without saying anything and using a load of made up examples and stuff which no one has said and which doesn’t happen.

Who is guessing BF? Who thinks they are 16% when they are 22%? What are you talking about? You are moaning about things which aren’t happening.

Do you even bother to read what is written or do you just go on auto pilot with these mindless diatribes?

122

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]SkyNett wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[Why use BMI as a measure though? IMO it’s useless even for untrained individuals.

I was about 135 at 19-20 so couldn’t I theoretically reach this 100lbs limit? [/quote]

Thing is it absolutely is NOT useless when it comes to populations. It’s actually a useful tool…

Anyway, all this shit is pointless, because yes - being very lean does matter - because in that state, you’re carrying the least amount of fat and the most amount of muscle, without numbers being skewed by a variety of variables.

Not to mention, people are talking about a bunch of different things in this thread - some are talking about contest weight of natty bodybuilders over the last 60 years, some are talking about pure bodyweight gains - which is not all muscle obviously. So the only way to know what you’re really carrying is to get very lean and actually see - instead of speculating and extrapolating from various formulas…it just ain’t the same thing, no matter how hard you wish for it to be.

Not to even mention silly nonsense like guessing your BF percentage and extrapolating from that? Seriously? So, someone thinks they’re “about 16%” but are really 22%? That would make a BIG difference in the actual ratio of body composition - yet people are willing to buy that bullshit? As if ANYONE can just look at themselves and know within say 1% of what they actually are? Dumbest shit I’ve ever heard…

But hey, don’t listen to me - listen to the PROFESSIONAL BODYBUILDER who competes in two respected organizations, who commands $1500.00 for a 12 week coaching program, and who has put in the work for 20 years, and doesn’t bullshit himself, or others, about what is attainable. [/quote]

I really don’t see the benefit of posts like this and I think they are a major reason for the amount of bullshit here.

You’ve just written a big bunch of bullshit without saying anything and using a load of made up examples and stuff which no one has said and which doesn’t happen.

Who is guessing BF? Who thinks they are 16% when they are 22%? What are you talking about? You are moaning about things which aren’t happening.

Do you even bother to read what is written or do you just go on auto pilot with these mindless diatribes?
[/quote]

This was related to a previous comment that CT assessed PX at 16% in Colorado. CT later said that he never saw X with his shirt off and he in fact could have been 22% or higher because of his favorable fat distribution.

123

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]SkyNett wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[Why use BMI as a measure though? IMO it’s useless even for untrained individuals.

I was about 135 at 19-20 so couldn’t I theoretically reach this 100lbs limit? [/quote]

Thing is it absolutely is NOT useless when it comes to populations. It’s actually a useful tool…

Anyway, all this shit is pointless, because yes - being very lean does matter - because in that state, you’re carrying the least amount of fat and the most amount of muscle, without numbers being skewed by a variety of variables.

Not to mention, people are talking about a bunch of different things in this thread - some are talking about contest weight of natty bodybuilders over the last 60 years, some are talking about pure bodyweight gains - which is not all muscle obviously. So the only way to know what you’re really carrying is to get very lean and actually see - instead of speculating and extrapolating from various formulas…it just ain’t the same thing, no matter how hard you wish for it to be.

Not to even mention silly nonsense like guessing your BF percentage and extrapolating from that? Seriously? So, someone thinks they’re “about 16%” but are really 22%? That would make a BIG difference in the actual ratio of body composition - yet people are willing to buy that bullshit? As if ANYONE can just look at themselves and know within say 1% of what they actually are? Dumbest shit I’ve ever heard…

But hey, don’t listen to me - listen to the PROFESSIONAL BODYBUILDER who competes in two respected organizations, who commands $1500.00 for a 12 week coaching program, and who has put in the work for 20 years, and doesn’t bullshit himself, or others, about what is attainable. [/quote]

I really don’t see the benefit of posts like this and I think they are a major reason for the amount of bullshit here.

You’ve just written a big bunch of bullshit without saying anything and using a load of made up examples and stuff which no one has said and which doesn’t happen.

Who is guessing BF? Who thinks they are 16% when they are 22%? What are you talking about? You are moaning about things which aren’t happening.

Do you even bother to read what is written or do you just go on auto pilot with these mindless diatribes?
[/quote]

This was related to a previous comment that CT assessed PX at 16% in Colorado. CT later said that he never saw X with his shirt off and he in fact could have been 22% or higher because of his favorable fat distribution.[/quote]

Ok but the guy he responded to never mentioned this (afaik) so why did he?

Other posts from SkyNett in this thread seem just as ridiculous “lol no natty is gonna be 250+ at under 5%BF lol” wtf is he talking about?! No one said that! It really is just autopilot response stuff.

Internet: ‘Man lands on Moon’
SkyNett: “yeah but Professor X isn’t a real Doctor lololol”

I am sure SN has a lot more to offer than this stuff.

124

LOL!

125

[quote]SkyNett wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

Why is BMI useful?

[/quote]

Because in an untrained individual, it’s pretty accurate. Obviously not for someone carrying 30 pounds more muscle than he would if he had never trained, but for sedentary populations, it’s a fairly accurate tool. [/quote]

My issue is the measurement is just too broad. You can take two people both weighing 150lbs @ 70" and one can be “skinny fat” and the other pretty dense relative to his weight. Their weight and height are the same yet they observably different physique wise.

That’s my problem with it. There are just too many variables that aren’t considered when using BMI.

126

[quote]Professor X wrote:
LOL![/quote]

BEST POST

127

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
LOL![/quote]

BEST POST[/quote]

another one of your amazing posts

isn’t it about time you put up your jizzed stained “rulez” again

128

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
LOL![/quote]

BEST POST[/quote]

another one of your amazing posts

isn’t it about time you put up your jizzed stained “rulez” again[/quote]

Ahhhh YOLO, it must be hard posting when you are yelling at those kids for crossing over your lawn.

If you did not have X’s back I don’t know what would happen.

129

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
LOL![/quote]

BEST POST[/quote]

another one of your amazing posts

isn’t it about time you put up your jizzed stained “rulez” again[/quote]

Ahhhh YOLO, it must be hard posting when you are yelling at those kids for crossing over your lawn.

If you did not have X’s back I don’t know what would happen.[/quote]

it has nothing to do with having anyone’s back lol

you are a troll and you troll this forum the whole time

the fact you are not a funny troll does not help

130

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]detazathoth wrote:
I mean we can agree to disagree man. I actually enjoyed this discussion with you, hombre.
[/quote]

Cool we have both made our points and you know your own physiology better than anyone.

Out of interest do you think you will ever compete in a 242 class or do you plan on always staying in 220 or you have no plans either way?

Reason I ask is do you want to hit your max total in a specific class or also hit one regardless of class (which you might do at like 230-235lbs or whatever) as I know you have some ambitious PL goals.
[/quote]

I’d be lying if I didn’t know Dan Green’s stats

Clash for Cash: 9/16/2012 in New Orleans
2033 raw total @220 (760/480/790)
All-Time WR total for 220

USPA Nationals: June 30 2012
1952 raw total @220 (705/474/772)
Broke Larry Pacifico’s 42 year old All-Time American record

I’d to be on that level one day. As for 242lbs, it depends if I want to go further beyond 2000lb barrier at 220. That’s too far into the future for me.

131

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
LOL![/quote]

BEST POST[/quote]

another one of your amazing posts

isn’t it about time you put up your jizzed stained “rulez” again[/quote]

Ahhhh YOLO, it must be hard posting when you are yelling at those kids for crossing over your lawn.

If you did not have X’s back I don’t know what would happen.[/quote]

it has nothing to do with having anyone’s back lol

you are a troll and you troll this forum the whole time

the fact you are not a funny troll does not help[/quote]

Awwwww 99% of your posts are either telling people they are stupid, stating your opinion as fact or asking 3rd grade questions. I have made maybe 10 posts on a 900 post thread…you mad?

And in case you did not notice, I cannot be the biggest troll here…because I don’t weigh 255 and ride my bike without losing my wind.

Duh.

132

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Awwwww 99% of your posts are either telling people they are stupid, stating your opinion as fact or asking 3rd grade questions. I have made maybe 10 posts on a 900 post thread…you mad?

And in case you did not notice, I cannot be the biggest troll here…because I don’t weigh 255 and ride my bike without losing my wind.

Duh.[/quote]

99% of my posts are about none of those things.

No one said you were the biggest troll.

You couldn’t help referencing you know who though.

Creepy.

133

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
Awwwww 99% of your posts are either telling people they are stupid, stating your opinion as fact or asking 3rd grade questions. I have made maybe 10 posts on a 900 post thread…you mad?

And in case you did not notice, I cannot be the biggest troll here…because I don’t weigh 255 and ride my bike without losing my wind.

Duh.[/quote]

99% of my posts are about none of those things.

No one said you were the biggest troll.

You couldn’t help referencing you know who though.

Creepy. [/quote]

No… creepy is a faceless/anonymous weirdo, who has been here less than a year…acting as if he/she knows anything about anybody.

Creepy indeed.

134

[quote]detazathoth wrote:
I’d be lying if I didn’t know Dan Green’s stats

Clash for Cash: 9/16/2012 in New Orleans
2033 raw total @220 (760/480/790)
All-Time WR total for 220

USPA Nationals: June 30 2012
1952 raw total @220 (705/474/772)
Broke Larry Pacifico’s 42 year old All-Time American record

I’d to be on that level one day. As for 242lbs, it depends if I want to go further beyond 2000lb barrier at 220. That’s too far into the future for me.[/quote]

At this stage are you setting goals along the lines of 50lbs on your total per year or are you still at the stage of gaining more than that in your opinion?

135

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
No… creepy is a faceless/anonymous weirdo, who has been here less than a year…acting as if he/she knows anything about anybody.

Creepy indeed.[/quote]

why are you getting emotional lol

i am saying you are a troll and a creep

this is based on your behaviour in this forum which has been around for about a month

i don’t need to have been here for a decade or posted my birth certificate to say that

136

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Contest shape is relevant because it’s entirely possible to carry more LBM (which is NOT all muscle) at higher bodyfat levels. If you’re 30% bodyfat, your LBM isn’t reallly relevant unless you’re in the business of being a fat fuck for the sake of knowing you have more LBM under there than anyone else but will never be able to hold onto it when you get lean for it to matter without drugs. This is why that stupid sumo wrestler study is so irritating.

You’re also brushing off a lot of really important factors here. What if he was underweight from runnign 50+ miles/week? Not unimaginable that his “normal” weight would be 15-20 lbs heavier, chopping a good portion of that total weight gain. What if he wasn’t natural and had gained 15-20 lbs from a few cycles? There’s another good chunk of that total weight gain. Suddenly, 80lb number you’re talking about is down to 50lbs, which is pretty reasonable. It’s obvious from your posts that you’re really only interested in looking at facts and arguments that support your preconcieved notions, just like the good Dr.[/quote]

-why are you talking about 30% BF and sumo wrestlers - I am mentioning an example where the person is between around 10%BF at the start and 17%BF currently both of which are perfectly reasonable and normal BF levels.

-the running: you have just added 15-20lbs of weight out of nowhere. Sure what if he wasn’t running and was a fat fuck who started at 250lbs? But he wasn’t, again I am using the actual facts and not making things up. Distance runners at 18 5’8" 125 are not by definition underweight AT ALL - a picture has been posted he looks like a typical skinny young guy, not like he is about to die from malnourishment.

-he has always claimed to be natural, so the next 15-20lbs you have just knocked off is also nonsense. you know him well, if he is not natural fair enough, but that has never been mentioned before (no, I am not saying he is obliged to am just pointing it out).

It is a joke that you say I am only interested in facts that support my argument. You have just made a bunch of shit up to support yourself. I am only going off stuff this guy has said about himself.

Ultimately, I didn’t say that Detaza… was the perfect example to prove this point. But he has CLEARLY come close to this “80lbs LBM” thing which people are saying is IMPOSSIBLE. It has not even been this guy’s aim to do this and i think you would agree it is reasonable to assume he does not have significantly superior genetics to anyone that has ever lived. Which means other can do similar. Which means this specific limit is stupid. [/quote]

This was a well thought out post. I didn’t see a response to it.

137

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]detazathoth wrote:
I’d be lying if I didn’t know Dan Green’s stats

Clash for Cash: 9/16/2012 in New Orleans
2033 raw total @220 (760/480/790)
All-Time WR total for 220

USPA Nationals: June 30 2012
1952 raw total @220 (705/474/772)
Broke Larry Pacifico’s 42 year old All-Time American record

I’d to be on that level one day. As for 242lbs, it depends if I want to go further beyond 2000lb barrier at 220. That’s too far into the future for me.[/quote]

At this stage are you setting goals along the lines of 50lbs on your total per year or are you still at the stage of gaining more than that in your opinion?[/quote]

Right now, my interim goal is break top ten, and that’s going to be a hefty order since I believe that it is Travis Mash’s 1805.

However, for my next meet in October, I’m aiming for a 1760 total. I’d want to get my 3rd attempts on Bench and Deadlift that I missed this pasted March meet and hopefully go up 15lbs on the Squat

138

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Contest shape is relevant because it’s entirely possible to carry more LBM (which is NOT all muscle) at higher bodyfat levels. If you’re 30% bodyfat, your LBM isn’t reallly relevant unless you’re in the business of being a fat fuck for the sake of knowing you have more LBM under there than anyone else but will never be able to hold onto it when you get lean for it to matter without drugs. This is why that stupid sumo wrestler study is so irritating.

You’re also brushing off a lot of really important factors here. What if he was underweight from runnign 50+ miles/week? Not unimaginable that his “normal” weight would be 15-20 lbs heavier, chopping a good portion of that total weight gain. What if he wasn’t natural and had gained 15-20 lbs from a few cycles? There’s another good chunk of that total weight gain. Suddenly, 80lb number you’re talking about is down to 50lbs, which is pretty reasonable. It’s obvious from your posts that you’re really only interested in looking at facts and arguments that support your preconcieved notions, just like the good Dr.[/quote]

-why are you talking about 30% BF and sumo wrestlers - I am mentioning an example where the person is between around 10%BF at the start and 17%BF currently both of which are perfectly reasonable and normal BF levels.

-the running: you have just added 15-20lbs of weight out of nowhere. Sure what if he wasn’t running and was a fat fuck who started at 250lbs? But he wasn’t, again I am using the actual facts and not making things up. Distance runners at 18 5’8" 125 are not by definition underweight AT ALL - a picture has been posted he looks like a typical skinny young guy, not like he is about to die from malnourishment.

-he has always claimed to be natural, so the next 15-20lbs you have just knocked off is also nonsense. you know him well, if he is not natural fair enough, but that has never been mentioned before (no, I am not saying he is obliged to am just pointing it out).

It is a joke that you say I am only interested in facts that support my argument. You have just made a bunch of shit up to support yourself. I am only going off stuff this guy has said about himself.

Ultimately, I didn’t say that Detaza… was the perfect example to prove this point. But he has CLEARLY come close to this “80lbs LBM” thing which people are saying is IMPOSSIBLE. It has not even been this guy’s aim to do this and i think you would agree it is reasonable to assume he does not have significantly superior genetics to anyone that has ever lived. Which means other can do similar. Which means this specific limit is stupid. [/quote]

This was a well thought out post. I didn’t see a response to it.[/quote]

I gave my answer on page 5

139

[quote]detazathoth wrote:

I gave my answer on page 5
[/quote]

Every answer you gave was fine. I am talking about stronghold. It is difficult to have a discussion here because of the points that yolo brought up.

For the record, you have done great in your progress. I am not sure why you choose to troll the forum instead of adding more to it like you have the great potential for.

140

I don’t get the point of all the topics about this. If you eat and train like you don’t have a limit, you’ll eventually reach your limit. If you have some number in mind, you’re going to look at your calculator widget and think “hmm, only 5 pounds off from my genetic potential, what’s the point in pushing it to the next level?”

So I guess the point is just to quibble with PX?