I would have sworn you were 30 going by your pics. That pic on the first page is honestly very inspiring.
You gave me suggestions in a thread I posted a couple of weeks ago and would like to thank you for them.
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
[quote]
Thirdly, I’ve got to believe your wife is ecstatic to have a 50 year old husband in great shape. Is she supportive of the time and energy spent on working out and nutrition?[/quote]
I asked her this question directly. Her response was “The fact that I tolerate your insanity is proof of my supportiveness.”
That about sums it up, I think. [/quote]
I’m going to make my girlfriend something nice for dinner tonight. This thread has reminded me she deserves it.
[quote]Nards wrote:
I would have sworn you were 30 going by your pics. That pic on the first page is honestly very inspiring.
You gave me suggestions in a thread I posted a couple of weeks ago and would like to thank you for them.[/quote]
30 sounds pretty good to me. Thanks, Nards. How’s your training going?
[quote]Yogi wrote:
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
[quote]
Thirdly, I’ve got to believe your wife is ecstatic to have a 50 year old husband in great shape. Is she supportive of the time and energy spent on working out and nutrition?[/quote]
I asked her this question directly. Her response was “The fact that I tolerate your insanity is proof of my supportiveness.”
That about sums it up, I think. [/quote]
I’m going to make my girlfriend something nice for dinner tonight. This thread has reminded me she deserves it.[/quote]
Good for you. Show me someone who trains seriously, and I’ll show you someone who has a SO making sacrifices on their behalf, and who deserves to have something special done for them.
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
I’ve considered taking a run at a Physique comp, but it seems none of the natty shows have senior-citizen divisions. So my choices would be 1) compete in a natty show against 25 yo’s who have natural test levels twice mine, or 2) compete in an open show against 50 yo’s who have exogenous test levels twice mine. (Sorry, I know I’m whining.)
[/quote]
You could enter Open (or Novice) Physique and Masters 50+ Bodybuilding?
(Do it! Do it! Do it!!!)
Seriously, With your musculature, I can easily see you handling some of the younger, less muscled physique competitors who just hop up there because their gym buddies always tell 'em how ripped they are.
Also, that Inc Hammer Sideways Seated Press was Thibs’ innovation. He’s put several people through it in various videos. Tried it myself when I was first figuring out what hurt and what didn’t after my shoulder surgery. If anyone hasn’t tried it, you’ll be very surprised at the isolation and contraction you can get.
S
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
I’ve considered taking a run at a Physique comp, but it seems none of the natty shows have senior-citizen divisions. So my choices would be 1) compete in a natty show against 25 yo’s who have natural test levels twice mine, or 2) compete in an open show against 50 yo’s who have exogenous test levels twice mine. (Sorry, I know I’m whining.)
[/quote]
You could enter Open (or Novice) Physique and Masters 50+ Bodybuilding?
(Do it! Do it! Do it!!!)
[/quote]
If I did a BBing comp, it would have to be in the Ostrich (ie, bird-legs) division.
Here’s a dumb question: What’s the definition of ‘Novice’ in terms of competing in Physique?
[quote]
Also, that Inc Hammer Sideways Seated Press was Thibs’ innovation. He’s put several people through it in various videos. Tried it myself when I was first figuring out what hurt and what didn’t after my shoulder surgery. If anyone hasn’t tried it, you’ll be very surprised at the isolation and contraction you can get.
S[/quote]
Yeah, IIRC the vid I saw was of CT training Prof in that movement. Targets the upper pecs SO well.
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
2) compete in an open show against 50 yo’s who have exogenous test levels twice mine. (Sorry, I know I’m whining.)
[/quote]
I vote for this option.
I’ve been studying tons of photos from physique contests lately, and I think you would hold up well in the master’s division (if not the open, depending on who shows up).
I also had a chance to talk with an NPC head-judge recently, and he mentioned that if physique guys are clearly in the wrong division (should be doing BB instead of physique), he will “mark them down” and tell them to go train legs and go compete in bodybuilding.
So unless you had aspirations to compete at higher levels, I wouldn’t be concerned about competing against geared-up guys in the masters. At least, that’s what I’m telling myself.
And of course, all that said, I decided to go back to work and try to add as much muscle as possible for the next six months or so before I am ready to jump in. Because yeah, some of those guys are pretty big.
[quote]ActivitiesGuy wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Personally id go against subtracting work and add food. Ive alwasy found anecdotally that the body does much better when a high work load and high food load is there. Rather than reducing exercise and trying to eat a surplus.[/quote]
- You’re also, what, 30 years younger than EyeDentist?
(I am, too, just making a point that age may affect this)
- He’s talking about dropping some conditioning from a program that’s much heavier on conditioning than most people on this website are used to. It’d be different if he was cutting his lifting sessions substantially, but for a guy that runs 6 miles a couple times a week, I think it’s quite reasonable to start by scaling back the conditioning to a more modest level rather than trying to gain muscle while running that much (again, talking about a 50-something-year-old body here, not a 27-year-old).[/quote]
Lol ok well sorry you see it that way. But the best way to live a long healthy life is be as active as possible and its not creating issues now. I wouldnt jog as an activity but none the less. Too many ppl think the body is built for little activity when its made to be very active and works better that way. And honestly his program is not that much activity unless he is working manual labor. That is a maximum of 1/12 of a day spent being active. Not much time IMO. High activity was catering to his fatphobia which many do and IMO the best way to gain size and remain lean is keep your body working and feed it.
[quote]Serge A. Storms wrote:
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
2) compete in an open show against 50 yo’s who have exogenous test levels twice mine. (Sorry, I know I’m whining.)
[/quote]
I vote for this option.
I’ve been studying tons of photos from physique contests lately, and I think you would hold up well in the master’s division (if not the open, depending on who shows up).
I also had a chance to talk with an NPC head-judge recently, and he mentioned that if physique guys are clearly in the wrong division (should be doing BB instead of physique), he will “mark them down” and tell them to go train legs and go compete in bodybuilding.
So unless you had aspirations to compete at higher levels, I wouldn’t be concerned about competing against geared-up guys in the masters. At least, that’s what I’m telling myself.
And of course, all that said, I decided to go back to work and try to add as much muscle as possible for the next six months or so before I am ready to jump in. Because yeah, some of those guys are pretty big.
[/quote]
Also agree you will do well I think take a 3-4 month growth focus and then lean out to about where you are with another 1-3lbs of muscle on your upper body and a touch leaner and you will do quite well
(In my humble opinion the SAID principle applies to advice as well…)
Doc, what do you think of the espoused concept that you can only get so big proportionally in one part of the body relative to other parts? (read it in one of Poliquin’s old TNation articles, yeah I know but still) In other words, if you sacrificed some conditioning for more leg size, perhaps it might be easier for you to “bulk” your upper body if your legs gained some size first? …just a thought that crossed my mind when I saw you use the term “bird-legs” above.
[quote]punnyguy wrote:
(In my humble opinion the SAID principle applies to advice as well…)
Doc, what do you think of the espoused concept that you can only get so big proportionally in one part of the body relative to other parts? (read it in one of Poliquin’s old TNation articles, yeah I know but still) In other words, if you sacrificed some conditioning for more leg size, perhaps it might be easier for you to “bulk” your upper body if your legs gained some size first? …just a thought that crossed my mind when I saw you use the term “bird-legs” above.
[/quote]
I’ve heard a variation on this idea…IIRC, it was that intense stimulation of large muscle groups (which includes legs, obviously) promotes higher testosterone levels, and thus indirectly influences the way other muscle groups will respond to training. (I seem to recall Tom Platz espousing this). I have no idea if such an effect is still considered scientifically valid. Is this what Poliquin was referring to?
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
[quote]Nards wrote:
I would have sworn you were 30 going by your pics. That pic on the first page is honestly very inspiring.
You gave me suggestions in a thread I posted a couple of weeks ago and would like to thank you for them.[/quote]
30 sounds pretty good to me. Thanks, Nards. How’s your training going?[/quote]
Pretty good…I’m going to read over your posts mre carefully and start doing most of what you’re doing.
I got the peanut butter part down.
[quote]Nards wrote:
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
[quote]Nards wrote:
I would have sworn you were 30 going by your pics. That pic on the first page is honestly very inspiring.
You gave me suggestions in a thread I posted a couple of weeks ago and would like to thank you for them.[/quote]
30 sounds pretty good to me. Thanks, Nards. How’s your training going?[/quote]
Pretty good…I’m going to read over your posts mre carefully and start doing most of what you’re doing.
I got the peanut butter part down.[/quote]
Cool. Now if you can manage to get skinny legs and rupture a tendon or two, you’ll pretty much have all my fitness secrets mastered.
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
If I did a BBing comp, it would have to be in the Ostrich (ie, bird-legs) division.
Here’s a dumb question: What’s the definition of ‘Novice’ in terms of competing in Physique? [/quote]
Well, in bodybuilding terms, “Novice” categories are open to anyone who hasn’t either won, or placed in a top spot (depending on the promoter) of an Open class. It’s always been common to have Novice bodybuilding classes at shows, but with the greater interest in Physique these days, I would imagine some shows might have the option. Either way, I can’t imagine you not looking like you belong up there.
I’ve seen plenty of instances where a competitor will enter both novice bodybuilding, and physique.
S
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
[quote]punnyguy wrote:
(In my humble opinion the SAID principle applies to advice as well…)
Doc, what do you think of the espoused concept that you can only get so big proportionally in one part of the body relative to other parts? (read it in one of Poliquin’s old TNation articles, yeah I know but still) In other words, if you sacrificed some conditioning for more leg size, perhaps it might be easier for you to “bulk” your upper body if your legs gained some size first? …just a thought that crossed my mind when I saw you use the term “bird-legs” above.
[/quote]
I’ve heard a variation on this idea…IIRC, it was that intense stimulation of large muscle groups (which includes legs, obviously) promotes higher testosterone levels, and thus indirectly influences the way other muscle groups will respond to training. (I seem to recall Tom Platz espousing this). I have no idea if such an effect is still considered scientifically valid. Is this what Poliquin was referring to?
[/quote]
Turns out it was an article about arms -right up your alley lol.
Long version: The Truth About Bodybuilding Arm Measurements
Short! version: http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_article/tips/15_pounds_per_inch_100405&cr=
Thanks punny–will check them out.
Wanted to say I like this thread. A lot. Gives me some food for thought in all areas of fitness, and some approaches I’m planning on implementing at some point in the near future. Thanks for the information EyeDentist.
[quote]staystrong wrote:
Wanted to say I like this thread. A lot. Gives me some food for thought in all areas of fitness, and some approaches I’m planning on implementing at some point in the near future. Thanks for the information EyeDentist.[/quote]
You’re welcome. Hope it pays off for you. Thanks for reaching out.
[quote]Nards wrote:
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
[quote]Nards wrote:
I would have sworn you were 30 going by your pics. That pic on the first page is honestly very inspiring.
You gave me suggestions in a thread I posted a couple of weeks ago and would like to thank you for them.[/quote]
30 sounds pretty good to me. Thanks, Nards. How’s your training going?[/quote]
Pretty good…I’m going to read over your posts mre carefully and start doing most of what you’re doing.
I got the peanut butter part down.[/quote]
Seriously, I got many gems out of this thread that I can use in my own training, but the peanut butter bit is hands down the best one. I like to eat bigger meals at night too, but sometimes get hungry during the day. I’ve tried a can of tuna, a couple of boiled eggs, bulletproof coffee etc but peanut butter seems to do the job much better.
[quote]Mizery wrote:
[quote]Nards wrote:
[quote]EyeDentist wrote:
[quote]Nards wrote:
I would have sworn you were 30 going by your pics. That pic on the first page is honestly very inspiring.
You gave me suggestions in a thread I posted a couple of weeks ago and would like to thank you for them.[/quote]
30 sounds pretty good to me. Thanks, Nards. How’s your training going?[/quote]
Pretty good…I’m going to read over your posts mre carefully and start doing most of what you’re doing.
I got the peanut butter part down.[/quote]
Seriously, I got many gems out of this thread that I can use in my own training, but the peanut butter bit is hands down the best one. I like to eat bigger meals at night too, but sometimes get hungry during the day. I’ve tried a can of tuna, a couple of boiled eggs, bulletproof coffee etc but peanut butter seems to do the job much better.[/quote]
Yeah, IMHO the PB is a triple threat compared to things like eggs and tuna in that it:
- keeps you feeling fuller longer;
- allows insulin levels to remain lower longer; and
- tastes SO much better!
Combined with coffee, it’s been a diet-saver for me.
So long as you watch fat intake later in the day (and when I’m pounding carbs and protein, I don’t miss the fat), the PB won’t blow up your macros.