[quote]Edgy wrote:
[quote]imhungry wrote:
I’M average. I sure as hell don’t want to see “average” in the articles or magazines that I read.[/quote]
[/quote]
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
If this were an aspiring rock musician forum, wouldn’t it make sense to place rock STARS up there as something to motivate the members?
It’s good to have high goals.[/quote]
poor analogy - it is not the same.
also what does “high goals” mean? in theory you can become a top rock star with talent and practice. it is literally impossible to become a top amateur BB never mind get on the O stage never mind win the O without drugs.
personally i don’t really care but ultimately i do think it is bullshit - no supplement or exercise will ever make you look like kai greene even with the best genetics in history unless you also take loads of drugs.
the truth is that a large percentage particularly younger and/or new trainers do not know this.
steroid use is so rife that people’s perceptions are very skewed as to what’s possible.
[/quote]
SAYETH YOU.
If I wanted to be inspired by average, I’d avoid coming here and instead read Men’s Health.
I know I’ll never look like Kai Green, but the fucker is an incredible image to motivate oneself with.
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Images are generally for inspiration and/or exercise technique reference. Brad PItt is in a commercial for Chanel. Does he really wear the perfume?[/quote]
sorry this analogy makes no sense either.
BB articles are ultimately about appearance.
using pics of guys on PEDs ultimately is misleading cos the exercises and supps listed in the article will NEVER make you look like the pic.
the chanel analogy does not compute at all.
[/quote]
Is this really a surprise to you? Shampoo commercials show people with professionally styled hair. Makeup commercials show models. Fast food commercials never show fat people chowing down on their food. [/quote]
Exactly. I doubt Proctor & Gamble go out of their way to hire models with itchy, flaky scalps. Doesn’t stop people buying Head and Shoulders.
I don’t want to see “average” either, unless it’s an honest before/after; where the before picture was “average”, and the after is definitely “above average”.
But with respect to the articles, I’d rather see more natural lifters as models. Especially if the articles are written with natural lifters in mind. For some articles it doesn’t matter, but for others where it’s presenting a program and addressing volume, intensity, recovery, “overtraining”, I would prefer if it was a little clearer who the intended audience was.
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Images are generally for inspiration and/or exercise technique reference. Brad PItt is in a commercial for Chanel. Does he really wear the perfume?[/quote]
sorry this analogy makes no sense either.
BB articles are ultimately about appearance.
using pics of guys on PEDs ultimately is misleading cos the exercises and supps listed in the article will NEVER make you look like the pic.
the chanel analogy does not compute at all.
[/quote]
Is this really a surprise to you? Shampoo commercials show people with professionally styled hair. Makeup commercials show models. Fast food commercials never show fat people chowing down on their food. [/quote]
no it is not a surprise and as I said in my first post neither do i really care.
i dont really think an appropriate analogy can be made in this instance as there is a major secret ingredient with BB adverts/articles ie drugs
models are not using face cream and secretly injecting something which makes them beautiful
a very large percentage of people think training/ supps can make you look like the rock or whoever
no one believes face cream will make you look like a supermodel
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Images are generally for inspiration and/or exercise technique reference. Brad PItt is in a commercial for Chanel. Does he really wear the perfume?[/quote]
sorry this analogy makes no sense either.
BB articles are ultimately about appearance.
using pics of guys on PEDs ultimately is misleading cos the exercises and supps listed in the article will NEVER make you look like the pic.
the chanel analogy does not compute at all.
[/quote]
Is this really a surprise to you? Shampoo commercials show people with professionally styled hair. Makeup commercials show models. Fast food commercials never show fat people chowing down on their food. [/quote]
Clearly Arnold used Cup 'O Noodles as his primary carb source to get jacked. Right?
Again, I believe it’s ignorant and naive to assume that people pictured in an article are always meant to be a direct representative of that particular training theory/program without it being specifically stated
I find it truly hard to believe that anyone in the 21st century with above-average awareness and more than a smidge of common sense would think otherwise, unless they’re just looking for something to complain about.
[quote]imhungry wrote:
[quote]Edgy wrote:
[quote]imhungry wrote:
I’M average. I sure as hell don’t want to see “average” in the articles or magazines that I read.[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
If I wanted to be inspired by average, I’d avoid coming here and instead read Men’s Health.
I know I’ll never look like Kai Green, but the fucker is an incredible image to motivate oneself with.
[/quote]
this must mean you look better than mens health models?
i understand you are trying to sound “hardcore” but how can kai greene motivate you if it is literally unattainable for you to look REMOTELY like him?
you may as well say i am inspired by the size of the planet jupiter and so train with that in mind when i am bench pressing.
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I’m sorry, but I have to disagree here. The average person thinks anyone much bigger than Urkle is on steroids.[/quote]
I should have been clearer
I was referring to the “average” person on a site like this, not the guy in the street.
A large number of members here openly thought that one other member was natural, showing ignorance is extremely common.
I don’t want to say the member’s name.
That kind of example is common. Yeah Kai Greene etc is clearly on PEDs but people generally are really clueless about other smaller guys thinking ita genetics or hard work or whey protein or all 3. [/quote]
First, these call outs are lame.
The truth is, most of you won’t look like any NATURAL guy with great genetics unless you also have great genetics…which means anyone crying that the guys used to motivate people are too muscular must be speaking from some place of personal insult…because the steroid use of one over another is irrelevant.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Images are generally for inspiration and/or exercise technique reference. Brad PItt is in a commercial for Chanel. Does he really wear the perfume?[/quote]
sorry this analogy makes no sense either.
BB articles are ultimately about appearance.
using pics of guys on PEDs ultimately is misleading cos the exercises and supps listed in the article will NEVER make you look like the pic.
the chanel analogy does not compute at all.
[/quote]
Is this really a surprise to you? Shampoo commercials show people with professionally styled hair. Makeup commercials show models. Fast food commercials never show fat people chowing down on their food. [/quote]
Clearly Arnold used Cup 'O Noodles as his primary carb source to get jacked. Right?
Again, I believe it’s ignorant and naive to assume that people pictured in an article are always meant to be a direct representative of that particular training theory/program without it being specifically stated
I find it truly hard to believe that anyone in the 21st century with above-average awareness and more than a smidge of common sense would think otherwise, unless they’re just looking for something to complain about.[/quote]
there is a member on this very forum who is regularly used to promote supps/ explosive training/ rings etc who discredits everything you are saying LOL
i wont go into further detail than that but you are kidding yourself with some of these statements.
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
If I wanted to be inspired by average, I’d avoid coming here and instead read Men’s Health.
I know I’ll never look like Kai Green, but the fucker is an incredible image to motivate oneself with.
[/quote]
this must mean you look better than mens health models?
i understand you are trying to sound “hardcore” but how can kai greene motivate you if it is literally unattainable for you to look REMOTELY like him?
you may as well say i am inspired by the size of the planet jupiter and so train with that in mind when i am bench pressing. [/quote]
I’m not trying to sound anything!
Artists have been seeking inspiration in museums for centuries. Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel ceiling changed art history the moment it was completed. Thousands of artists have made the pilgrimage to marvel and inspire beneath its glory. But how many of them will ever attain even a fraction of Michelangelo’s power with a brush?
You bore me, Yolo. I’m done with you.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]yolo84 wrote:
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Images are generally for inspiration and/or exercise technique reference. Brad PItt is in a commercial for Chanel. Does he really wear the perfume?[/quote]
sorry this analogy makes no sense either.
BB articles are ultimately about appearance.
using pics of guys on PEDs ultimately is misleading cos the exercises and supps listed in the article will NEVER make you look like the pic.
the chanel analogy does not compute at all.
[/quote]
Is this really a surprise to you? Shampoo commercials show people with professionally styled hair. Makeup commercials show models. Fast food commercials never show fat people chowing down on their food. [/quote]
Again, I believe it’s ignorant and naive to assume that people pictured in an article are always meant to be a direct representative of that particular training theory/program without it being specifically stated
I find it truly hard to believe that anyone in the 21st century with above-average awareness and more than a smidge of common sense would think otherwise, unless they’re just looking for something to complain about.[/quote]
I won’t go so far as to say it’s misleading, but I do find it a bit strange.
It just feels like a heavyhanded strategy to say “we’re more hardcore, because the pictures in our article are more hardcore.” And this approach seems to undercut the actual quality of the content. They seem at cross-purposes.
For example, you have the “programs” from Men’s Health and AskMen and so on, which will never get you looking like the models they have pictured. Then you stuff here which will actually do a much better job getting you to look like a Men’s Health model, but the model pictured is often enhanced.
Granted, TNation has great content overall, and if you actually read the articles, you pretty much gloss over the images anyway.
Just an observation, not a complaint.
If your training, goals, decisions, self-esteem, or pretty much anything are effected by the choice of pictures of people more developed than you in an article, you have larger problems.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If your training, goals, decisions, self-esteem, or pretty much anything are effected by the choice of pictures of people more developed than you in an article, you have larger problems.[/quote]
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Artists have been seeking inspiration in museums for centuries. Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel ceiling changed art history the moment it was completed. Thousands of artists have made the pilgrimage to marvel and inspire beneath its glory. But how many of them will ever attain even a fraction of Michelangelo’s power with a brush?
[/quote]
another one of your profound and intellectual musings hopefully cyruseven shows up soon
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If your training, goals, decisions, self-esteem, or pretty much anything are effected by the choice of pictures of people more developed than you in an article, you have larger problems.[/quote]
[quote]LoRez wrote:
I won’t go so far as to say it’s misleading, but I do find it a bit strange.
It just feels like a heavyhanded strategy to say “we’re more hardcore, because the pictures in our article are more hardcore.” And this approach seems to undercut the actual quality of the content. They seem at cross-purposes.
For example, you have the “programs” from Men’s Health and AskMen and so on, which will never get you looking like the models they have pictured. Then you stuff here which will actually do a much better job getting you to look like a Men’s Health model, but the model pictured is often enhanced.
Granted, TNation has great content overall, and if you actually read the articles, you pretty much gloss over the images anyway.
Just an observation, not a complaint.[/quote]
Let me ask you and anyone sharing the same opinion…given we have seen in the Indigo forum where the “average” lifter here stands, why would someone demand the guys used to inspire are chosen from those types of people?
Simply put, I doubt most of the people here who do follow these articles look in a way that would inspire most other trainers…so why would I want to see them more often on articles?
Most people won’t ever look like lifters with great genetics.
To even demand that they should try only declares mediocrity and claims we should aspire to it.
Here. Maybe this is more the OP’s speed:
NOTE: DON’T EXERT YOURSELF TOO MUCH ON THIS PROGRAM OR YOU MIGHT PUSH YOURSELF RIGHT OUT OF ‘AVERAGE’ INTO ‘SLIGHTLY NOTICEABLY ABOVE AVERAGE MAYBE’…
This is a good argument to have occasionally.
Here’s our thinking:
The pictures are, for one, meant to be inspirational, as some have mentioned. After all, you wouldn’t produce an action figure and have him look like an Abercrombie model. Likewise, you probably wouldn’t manufacture swimsuits and use average 5’4", 150 pound women to model your line.
Secondly, the pictures are meant to suggest a “hard core” or serious nature. We certainly don’t want to be confused for a “general fitness” site when someone clicks on T Nation. Of course, once they read the articles, they’d learn quickly, but often, especially on the Internet, first impressions are everything (as far as whether you’re going to stick around or click on some other link).
Lastly, the pictures in question are bad ass. We like them. And I suspect many readers like them, too.