'Full House' ???

Training
561

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

Why do you keep ignoring the topic at hand? Of course it worked for him. [/quote]

First point taken, BULKING UP DID WORK FOR LEE PRIEST.

Thank you.

[quote]

That’s not being argued. Once again, the topic is which look is more impressive.[/quote]

You can’t use his pics since his pics were faked for that shoot to start with.

Maybe if you quit relying on an photo shoot that we all knew was faked to start with, your point would be better understood.

The point again is that in the general public, sheer muscular size is most impressive…so using a pic where he didn’t gain any muscle at all when he usually did is doing what?:

562

Dodging skill too good.

563

Contest condition is held for a few weeks.

I said generally guys that women swoon for are lean.

564

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

Why do you keep ignoring the topic at hand? Of course it worked for him. [/quote]

First point taken, BULKING UP DID WORK FOR LEE PRIEST.

Thank you.

[quote]

That’s not being argued. Once again, the topic is which look is more impressive.[/quote]

You can’t use his pics since his pics were faked for that shoot to start with.

Maybe if you quit relying on an photo shoot that we all knew was faked to start with, your point would be better understood.

The point again is that in the general public, sheer muscular size is most impressive…so using a pic where he didn’t gain any muscle at all when he usually did is doing what?:[/quote]

Lee himself said he was fat in the off season. But maybe he was lying too. If people are looking at a bodybuilder in the off season and then that same bodybuilder at a lower weight and lower BF % (note I didn’t say contest condition since you keep getting hung up on that) then most will say he looks more impressive in the leaner state even though he is lighter.

If you don’t like using Lee Priest, you can pick any bodybuilder you want for the sake of comparison.

565

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[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]

It’s amazing to me because you provide quality entertainment.

How delusional you are is hilarious. It never gets old. That’s why it’s hilarious. I don’t/won’t even bother arguing with you anymore. I rather laugh at you.

566

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Contest condition is held for a few weeks.

I said generally guys that women swoon for are lean. [/quote]

LOL…how lean?

I get attention at this condition now and my abs are just coming in. Are you saying I am imagining this?

567

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[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]

No one retains contest condition long term, and I doubt many women prefer it. On the other hand, the number of attractive women who prefer the appearance of someone in the 10-18% bf range very very very likely outnumber those who like the 19-30% range.

568

[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Obviously full house Priest is more impressive than leaner Priest because he is heavier.

[/quote]
Wow Priests shoulders look much bigger when the fat is off quite impressive

569

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The point again is that in the general public, sheer muscular size is most impressive[/quote]

so does that mean you prefer the full house look because it gives you a bit more sheer muscular size? Seems fair enough

570

[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]

LOL

I wasn’t sure if serious because people are normally passive aggressive here rather than straight up aggressive.

I mean I agree with solarFLARE, usually people who are just gym rats (that is the whole point of this sub-forum right?) that are smooth as oppose to being leaner, are so because they don’t watch every calorie like someone who is more competitive with their physique.

571

[quote]detazathoth wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[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]

It’s amazing to me because you provide quality entertainment.

How delusional you are is hilarious. It never gets old. That’s why it’s hilarious. I don’t/won’t even bother arguing with you anymore. I rather laugh at you.

[/quote]

LOL. Delusional about what exactly?

572

[quote]Blaze_108 wrote:

No one retains contest condition long term, and I doubt many women prefer it. On the other hand, the number of attractive women who prefer the appearance of someone in the 10-18% bf range very very very likely outnumber those who like the 19-30% range.[/quote]

I would agree with this.

I doubt anyone here enjoys being over 20% body fat so I am not sure why you mentioned this.

I would say I am in the 10-18% range and people are arguing like women don’t like that.

573

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The point again is that in the general public, sheer muscular size is most impressive[/quote]

so does that mean you prefer the full house look because it gives you a bit more sheer muscular size? Seems fair enough

[/quote]
? I am not even carrying that much fat now so if I qualify as “full house” now, I like it because most it is impressive and I am making more progress.

574

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Someone 5’9" weighing 260lbs with only 20% body fat would look like a fucking freak who was a little smooth. [/quote]

He sure would look like a freak but being that I don’t use emotion when using terms like obese and fat and chubby, I’d still say he’s overweight based the fact that I go by the textbook definition of 25%+ being obese.

I met Mike Jenkins last year weighing 380 pounds! I felt like I was 5 years old shaking his hand and standing next to him. Was he sporting a shit ton of muscle? YES! He is a freak! But he’s still carrying enough fat to be considered fat, regardless of how he carries it. You label people as overweight or obese based on how they look. I base it on an objective definition.

25% on a 300 pound guy is 25%. Twenty five percent on a 220# guy is 25%. Percentage is the same, so the definition stays the same.

It’s obvious you don’t like this unemotional line of thought.

[quote]

I personally would see that as “holy shit”…which is something many seem to ignore. [/quote]

Yeah, that’s what I thought when I met Jenkins and other behemoths and on many occasions going to the East Coast Mecca.

[quote]

The bigger you are, the more impressive you look at higher body fat percentages. [/quote]

Right, this is true. But 25+% is 25+%, which indicates obesity. So by definition, someone who is 25+% is obese.

Fair point.

575

[quote]detazathoth wrote:

[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]

LOL

I wasn’t sure if serious because people are normally passive aggressive here rather than straight up aggressive.

I mean I agree with solarFLARE, usually people who are just gym rats (that is the whole point of this sub-forum right?) that are smooth as oppose to being leaner, are so because they don’t watch every calorie like someone who is more competitive with their physique.[/quote]

I would disagree with this because no one gets that damn biog without being conscious of what they are eating.

There are few guys here the size of Steely or even me so why act like it is a “control|” issue?

I do what works…and it did…so why find a problem with it?

576

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Contest condition is held for a few weeks.

I said generally guys that women swoon for are lean. [/quote]

LOL…how lean?

I get attention at this condition now and my abs are just coming in. Are you saying I am imagining this?[/quote]

Where did I say the attention you get is imagined? Where did I say some full housers aren’t getting some attention or aren’t married or don’t have a woman.

I’m talking about men who have to fight women off with a stick, not guys who get some attention from women.

577

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]detazathoth wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[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]

It’s amazing to me because you provide quality entertainment.

How delusional you are is hilarious. It never gets old. That’s why it’s hilarious. I don’t/won’t even bother arguing with you anymore. I rather laugh at you.

[/quote]

LOL. Delusional about what exactly?[/quote]

“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.” - Brofessor X

Even without mentioning that a size comparison between you two really is a subjective one and it “can be argued.”

It’s funny that you think you’re on CT’s level in any sense. If you two were walking down the street, I know I, and many others would comment more on CT than you because of the combination of his size and yes, level of leaness.

I look at you and maybe see a former athlete look if I ever saw you in real life.

But hey, what the fuck do I know?

578

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]rds63799 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The point again is that in the general public, sheer muscular size is most impressive[/quote]

so does that mean you prefer the full house look because it gives you a bit more sheer muscular size? Seems fair enough

[/quote]
? I am not even carrying that much fat now so if I qualify as “full house” now, I like it because most it is impressive and I am making more progress.[/quote]

that’s cool, I wasn’t trying to say you were full house or not, just wondering what your preferred aesthetic was is all. I think of “full house” mode as being like the picture of JM Blakely posted earlier, and you’re definitely leaner than that.

I wonder if I were really big if I’d prefer to be full house because I’d have maximum size. Perspective definitely changes the bigger you get. I used to watch that movie Memento and think “wow I’d love a physique like that,” now I think “boy needs to eat a cheeseburger.”

579

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]detazathoth wrote:

[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]

LOL

I wasn’t sure if serious because people are normally passive aggressive here rather than straight up aggressive.

I mean I agree with solarFLARE, usually people who are just gym rats (that is the whole point of this sub-forum right?) that are smooth as oppose to being leaner, are so because they don’t watch every calorie like someone who is more competitive with their physique.[/quote]

I would disagree with this because no one gets that damn biog without being conscious of what they are eating.

There are few guys here the size of Steely or even me so why act like it is a “control|” issue?

I do what works…and it did…so why find a problem with it?[/quote]

Is that your thought process when you go through whatever food joints you go to for burgers?

580

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

He sure would look like a freak but being that I don’t use emotion when using terms like obese and fat and chubby, I’d still say he’s overweight based the fact that I go by the textbook definition of 25%+ being obese.

I met Mike Jenkins last year weighing 380 pounds! I felt like I was 5 years old shaking his hand and standing next to him. Was he sporting a shit ton of muscle? YES! He is a freak! But he’s still carrying enough fat to be considered fat, regardless of how he carries it. You label people as overweight or obese based on how they look. I base it on an objective definition.

25% on a 300 pound guy is 25%. Twenty five percent on a 220# guy is 25%. Percentage is the same, so the definition stays the same.

It’s obvious you don’t like this unemotional line of thought.

[/quote]

You keep bringing up “25%”. Why? The guy we were speaking of was 260lbs at 20%, not 25%. Few people outside of serious bodybuilders would look at someone like that and do anything but be impressed by it. That is the only point made.

No one is going to see a guy like that as fat because 20% at 260lbs at that height means so much muscle that this is what people focus on.

Someone like that will be more impressive that someone way leaner who weighed 200lbs.