[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Obviously full house Priest is more impressive than leaner Priest because he is heavier.
[/quote]
He doesn’t have any more muscle on the left though he’s just straight up fatter lol.[/quote]
They ignore that part.
Lee Priest was sticking his stomach out in that pic also and he often got way fatter than that in the off season…
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]detazathoth wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]solarFLARE wrote:
This whole thread boils down to the group that has the self control to watch their calories to stay lean, and those who don’t and pretend they like being “bigger” (aka fatter).[/quote]
You’re full of shit. I prefer bigger and less lean to smaller and ripped. Don’t talk about shit like your opinion is a fact. I don’t care if other people do that. It has nothing to do with “self control”. It has to do with your goals.[/quote]
Not sure if serious…[/quote]
Yeah I am serious. What do you disagree with? Sometimes you’re as bad as Quincy with your vagueness![/quote]
Exactly. They seem shocked. It is truly LOL-worthy.
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Obviously full house Priest is more impressive than leaner Priest because he is heavier.
[/quote]
He doesn’t have any more muscle on the left though he’s just straight up fatter lol.[/quote]
So are you saying bulking to the full house look is pointless? If he’s not carrying any more muscle in the off season then why do it?
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Obviously full house Priest is more impressive than leaner Priest because he is heavier.
[/quote]
He doesn’t have any more muscle on the left though he’s just straight up fatter lol.[/quote]
So are you saying bulking to the full house look is pointless? If he’s not carrying any more muscle in the off season then why do it?[/quote]
First, Lee Priest used to go into detail that he often made his best progress bulking up…and I do believe that picture is in reverse…ie, he was in better shape FIRST for the after and then gained weight for the “before”. That was how MuscleFlex did it back then with many competing bodybuilders for the before and after pics.
If I wasn’t gaining any more muscle, I wouldn’t have been gaining more weight.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Obviously full house Priest is more impressive than leaner Priest because he is heavier.
[/quote]
He doesn’t have any more muscle on the left though he’s just straight up fatter lol.[/quote]
So are you saying bulking to the full house look is pointless? If he’s not carrying any more muscle in the off season then why do it?[/quote]
First, Lee Priest used to go into detail that he often made his best progress bulking up…and I do believe that picture is in reverse…ie, he was in better shape FIRST for the after and then gained weight for the “before”. That was how MuscleFlex did it back then with many competing bodybuilders for the before and after pics.
If I wasn’t gaining any more muscle, I wouldn’t have been gaining more weight.[/quote]
So if Priest made his best progress bulking up then he had to have been carrying more muscle in the off season. Yet he still looks more impressive in a leaner condition (NOT contest condition) despite not carrying as much muscle.
Imagine that.
[quote]detazathoth wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Dear Lord, some people DO like being more filled out better.
I have no real desire to get really lean…because no one is calling me fat right now but some of you right here who thinks abs coming in means “25% body fat”.
It’s getting retarded. In the real world, no one is going to look at CT and me together and start nitpicking. If anything, like was stated before, they will either see us as pretty much equal or that I may stand out a little more simply because I am bigger than he is.
Not sure how you can argue that.
Yes, some people would rather be full house most of the time and then diet down for beach weather.
That kind of attitude will likely build more really big people than guys who think you need to be 10% at all times your entire life.[/quote]
I’m just quoting this post for re-affirmation and for posterity’s sake
This is amazing.
[/quote]
Care to explain why this is so “amazing”? Other people right here are saying the same thing.
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
So if Priest made his best progress bulking up then he had to have been carrying more muscle in the off season. Yet he still looks more impressive in a leaner condition (NOT contest condition) despite not carrying as much muscle.
Imagine that.[/quote]
Did you ignore what I just wrote? He gained fat just for that picture shoot. That was way after he had already gotten about as big as he was in contests.
He didn’t exactly get much bigger after that.
The real thing to do would be to see how his approach changed the way he looked from his start.
Lee Priest regularly got to over 270lbs in the off season while competing closer to 200.
By doing that, he managed to build one of the most impressive shorter physiques on the stage ever.
yet you see it as “wrong”. LOL.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[
This again is NOT about what looks better.[/quote]
Actually this thread IS, in part, about what people think look better. If you feel full house trumps lean due to an initial “wow”, that’s great. Your opinion.
Many others here feel differently and are not wrong for thinking so.
And LOL at your long-winded response about not caring about what girls think or discussing it. You were cool with talking about it when girls say EWWW to contest shape. I find it funny you agreed to a statement in response to that with an all caps “TRUTH” when in fact what you were “truthing” completely discredited your point.
ha ha ha
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
So if Priest made his best progress bulking up then he had to have been carrying more muscle in the off season. Yet he still looks more impressive in a leaner condition (NOT contest condition) despite not carrying as much muscle.
Imagine that.[/quote]
Did you ignore what I just wrote? He gained fat just for that picture shoot. That was way after he had already gotten about as big as he was in contests.
He didn’t exactly get much bigger after that.
The real thing to do would be to see how his approach changed the way he looked from his start.
Lee Priest regularly got to over 270lbs in the off season while competing closer to 200.
By doing that, he managed to build one of the most impressive shorter physiques on the stage ever.
yet you see it as “wrong”. LOL.[/quote]
I didn’t say his method is wrong. You’re getting off track. We’re talking about what looks more impressive. Lee Priest at his heaviest in the off season or Lee Priest at lower BF, halfway between full house mode and contest condition.
[quote]cueball wrote:
And LOL at your long-winded response about not caring about what girls th
[/quote]
I sure was because I know I haven’t seen any women act like they really like that look…even women who compete. They understand what the goal is, but I never see women acting like they really want someone who is literally 4-7% body fat.
If you see this, cool. I doubt anyone here has though.
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
I didn’t say his method is wrong. You’re getting off track. We’re talking about what looks more impressive. Lee Priest at his heaviest in the off season or Lee Priest at lower BF, halfway between full house mode and contest condition.[/quote]
First, that is NOT Lee Priest at his heaviest. He got HEAVIER than that. Do you understand this now?
You are using one set of pics that were literally taken in reverse (ie he gained weight for the before ONLY for that shoot) when his entire career shows something different.
He was one of the few that made consistent changes in his physique until he reached a point where much change would not be expected.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Um, the “public” has already chose Brad Pitt, Shia LeBueff, and skinny bitch vampires, so not sure what any of this means anyway.[/quote]
Exactly…and not one of them is in “contest shape”…and no one who simply looks like them is getting the same amount of ass…because women like WHO those guys are, not really so much what they look like alone.[/quote]
I THINK this is where you have it wrong. Non-famous guys I’ve known who women (plural) swooned over were usually very lean guys (and very handsome, which helps too). This is not to say that one has to be lean or handsome to get a woman considering most ordinary guys have women, but it shows who they lust for, from what I’ve PERSONALLY seen.
It’s not so much fame alone either. People like Mel Gibson Brad Pitt, Robert Redford, Simon Baker, and others (in their primes) would attract women ON LOOKS ALONE had they not been famous unless they were socially inept.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
I didn’t say his method is wrong. You’re getting off track. We’re talking about what looks more impressive. Lee Priest at his heaviest in the off season or Lee Priest at lower BF, halfway between full house mode and contest condition.[/quote]
First, that is NOT Lee Priest at his heaviest. He got HEAVIER than that. Do you understand this now?
You are using one set of pics that were literally taken in reverse (ie he gained weight for the before ONLY for that shoot) when his entire career shows something different.
He was one of the few that made consistent changes in his physique until he reached a point where much change would not be expected.[/quote]
Lee himself said he looked like a fat pig in the off season and didn’t care because of the muscle he retained. Again, we’re talking about which look is more impressive. Do you understand this now?
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Um, the “public” has already chose Brad Pitt, Shia LeBueff, and skinny bitch vampires, so not sure what any of this means anyway.[/quote]
Exactly…and not one of them is in “contest shape”…and no one who simply looks like them is getting the same amount of ass…because women like WHO those guys are, not really so much what they look like alone.[/quote]
I THINK this is where you have it wrong. Non-famous guys I’ve known who women (plural) swooned over were usually very lean guys (and very handsome, which helps too). This is not to say that one has to be lean or handsome to get a woman considering most ordinary guys have women, but it shows who they lust for, from what I’ve PERSONALLY seen.
It’s not so much fame alone either. People like Mel Gibson Brad Pitt, Robert Redford, Simon Baker, and others (in their primes) would attract women ON LOOKS ALONE had they not been famous unless they were socially inept. [/quote]
?? Not one of those guys is as lean as many here say is required. They are also not very muscular.
The point was that this is what women SAY they want in public…and they are nowhere near “contest shape”.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]cueball wrote:
And LOL at your long-winded response about not caring about what girls th
[/quote]
I sure was because I know I haven’t seen any women act like they really like that look…even women who compete. They understand what the goal is, but I never see women acting like they really want someone who is literally 4-7% body fat.
If you see this, cool. I doubt anyone here has though.[/quote]
Way to clip and skirt the point, buddy.
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
I didn’t say his method is wrong. You’re getting off track. We’re talking about what looks more impressive. Lee Priest at his heaviest in the off season or Lee Priest at lower BF, halfway between full house mode and contest condition.[/quote]
First, that is NOT Lee Priest at his heaviest. He got HEAVIER than that. Do you understand this now?
You are using one set of pics that were literally taken in reverse (ie he gained weight for the before ONLY for that shoot) when his entire career shows something different.
He was one of the few that made consistent changes in his physique until he reached a point where much change would not be expected.[/quote]
Lee himself said he looked like a fat pig in the off season and didn’t care because of the muscle he retained. Again, we’re talking about which look is more impressive. Do you understand this now?[/quote]
Actually, Lee’s take on it was why worry about staying lean when he enjoyed eating and the goal was to put on as much size as possible. Nasser shared many of the same thoughts back then.
Priest used to say he would never set foot in a gym after he quit competing (he lied). He loved KFC and shit like that and said he wanted to enjoy life when not getting ready for a comp.
It worked for him, didn’t it?
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]csulli wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]E901 wrote:
If you had to pick one to live with for the rest of your life, would it be the full house look (like the pic PX posted earlier) or lean but much smaller- say around 5’10" 175 pounds 8% bodyfat.[/quote]
5’10", 175 pounds, 8% bodyfat. Although it can’t be definite, at least I’d be in good enough shape to reduce the risk of hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and heart disease. I’d also be in better shape to be able to locomote faster than a walk, run, climb, or swim if need be, pick up some games here and there, and be better able to defend myself if need be. [/quote]
You are under several different delusions if you think there aren’t guys in the upper 200’s and higher who can’t “locomote faster than a walk” or who can’t run, climb and swim or play sports or who don’t have very healthy insides. And the biggest delusion of all is thinking you could defend yourself against one of them as a 175 pound twink.[/quote]
The guy posed me a question with two options: Professor X’s image of full house and the other, 175 at 8%. So being I had two choices, I picked ONE. When given a choice between A or B, you pick A or B, and your choice doesn’t have anything to do with your ideal. I love how it’s implied from my choice that I don’t think there are healthy athletes weighing 200 or even 240 plus![/quote]
I couldn’t find a picture posted by X so I guess I don’t know who you had in mind as option A.[/quote]
It’s OK bro. I didn’t mean to come across as confrontational. Sorry if I did.
[quote]cueball wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]cueball wrote:
And LOL at your long-winded response about not caring about what girls th
[/quote]
I sure was because I know I haven’t seen any women act like they really like that look…even women who compete. They understand what the goal is, but I never see women acting like they really want someone who is literally 4-7% body fat.
If you see this, cool. I doubt anyone here has though.[/quote]
Way to clip and skirt the point, buddy. [/quote]
LOL.
Please show all of the women who LOVE contest condition.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]super saiyan wrote:
I didn’t say his method is wrong. You’re getting off track. We’re talking about what looks more impressive. Lee Priest at his heaviest in the off season or Lee Priest at lower BF, halfway between full house mode and contest condition.[/quote]
First, that is NOT Lee Priest at his heaviest. He got HEAVIER than that. Do you understand this now?
You are using one set of pics that were literally taken in reverse (ie he gained weight for the before ONLY for that shoot) when his entire career shows something different.
He was one of the few that made consistent changes in his physique until he reached a point where much change would not be expected.[/quote]
Lee himself said he looked like a fat pig in the off season and didn’t care because of the muscle he retained. Again, we’re talking about which look is more impressive. Do you understand this now?[/quote]
Actually, Lee’s take on it was why worry about staying lean when he enjoyed eating and the goal was to put on as much size as possible. Nasser shared many of the same thoughts back then.
Priest used to say he would never set foot in a gym after he quit competing (he lied). He loved KFC and shit like that and said he wanted to enjoy life when not getting ready for a comp.
It worked for him, didn’t it?
[/quote]
Why do you keep ignoring the topic at hand? Of course it worked for him. That’s not being argued. Once again, the topic is which look is more impressive.