'Full House' ???

Training
841

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]MattyXL wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]MattyXL wrote:
Damn you guys are making me so self conscience about going to Buffalo Wild Wings tomorrow.

Fuckers ;)[/quote]

I hit the barbecue buffet during my lunch break at work today. “Moderation” can also be defined as equal time spent at both extremes.[/quote]

Phew…now I dont feel so bad, this is the first one they opened in my area I have been craving it for three weeks![/quote]

Dude, all I’m saying is that in your avatar, you look like a goddammed BEAST.[/quote]
I think I look far more beastly in mine[/quote]

You do, but you may be suffering from hypochromic anemia.[/quote]
lol

842

The funny part about this thread is both sides have the same message, just delivered slightly differently.

Side 1 - eat enough to grow, even if it means putting on a bit of fat in the process. Do not gain fat for the sake of gaining fat.

Side 2 - eat enough to grow, but don?t rationalize the fat you?re gaining by assuming it?s necessary to grow.

Side 1 wants to warn people that by not eating enough, they could be losing out on muscle gains. Side 2 wants to warn people that if they eat too much, they may gain unnecessary fat. But at the end of the day, both sides are saying to eat whatever is necessary to grow optimally.

843

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
The funny part about this thread is both sides have the same message, just delivered slightly differently.

Side 1 - eat enough to grow, even if it means putting on a bit of fat in the process. Do not gain fat for the sake of gaining fat.

Side 2 - eat enough to grow, but don?t rationalize the fat you?re gaining by assuming it?s necessary to grow.

Side 1 wants to warn people that by not eating enough, they could be losing out on muscle gains. Side 2 wants to warn people that if they eat too much, they may gain unnecessary fat. But at the end of the day, both sides are saying to eat whatever is necessary to grow optimally.
[/quote]

844

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
The funny part about this thread is both sides have the same message, just delivered slightly differently.

Side 1 - eat enough to grow, even if it means putting on a bit of fat in the process. Do not gain fat for the sake of gaining fat.

Side 2 - eat enough to grow, but don?t rationalize the fat you?re gaining by assuming it?s necessary to grow.

Side 1 wants to warn people that by not eating enough, they could be losing out on muscle gains. Side 2 wants to warn people that if they eat too much, they may gain unnecessary fat. But at the end of the day, both sides are saying to eat whatever is necessary to grow optimally.
[/quote]

Bingo. So obvious. The thread got so heated and long because some posters don’t play nice with each other.

845

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

Hopefully not too many people throw me under an 800lb bar for dick ridin X, but honestly, regardless of how you feel about his attitude, I can’t let this anonymously sized solarFLARE say that this is considered “not really built”. I mean for fucks sake that’s a depressingly high standard for a lot of people trying to build muscle on here.[/quote]

According to Brick, that is “25% body fat”.
[/quote]

I would say that Brick’s assessment is accurate. I looked leaner than that in pictures taken when I DEXA’d at 26% at 217 lbs, and I tend to store the more bodyfat in my central abdominal area, as my coach (Ebomb from these boards) can attest to, so I look worse than most people at a given % bodyfat.[/quote]

lol wtf are you talking about

so you are implying the pic shows someone up to 30% BF then if it looks higher than your 26

and no i am not “nut hugging” as you always always say about anyone who doesnt side with you

just pointing out you are an idiot with this post
[/quote]

Not sure what it is you dont understand.

I looked leaner than X does at a bodyfat that is higher than X estimates himself to be, therefor, X isn’t actually as lean as he thinks he is.

Clear enough?[/quote]

ok so

  1. you were 26% BF
  2. X is noticeably/significantly higher in BF than you were

so what do you estimate his BF to be then? 30%? 35%?

if it’s visually clearly enough for you to say it is higher than you at 26% then it must be 30% minimum I would guess?
[/quote]

bump

stronghold - what is your estimate then?
[/quote]

Greater than 25%[/quote]

Fucking hilarious.

LOl at acting like I am obese in that picture or anywhere near it.

If anyone is taking you seriously with this, they have big problems themselves. I really don’t care what my “number” is and never did, but misrepresenting information isn’t doing anything but giving the wrong message to newbs.

No one else but you or maybe someone else with a very bad propensity for guessing things like this is seeing “over 25%^ body fat” in that picture.

846

Who here didn’t start off skinny or skinny fat?

I went from skinny pre-teen to hormone wrecked obese teen to Full house. Completely different journey.

847

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Marzouk wrote:

[quote]zraw wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]zraw wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
That guy is the exception, not the rule.
If you have genetics like that, getting bigger will not be your problem.
[/quote]

One could argue that by assuming this guy is the exception and telling people that you will need to accept getting soft in order to become very impressive we would be setting limits on the guys with the most potential… :confused:

Im just playing… but still[/quote]

If you have followed my posts you know I have specific guidelines for bulking that do not match what is currently being referred to as the traditional bulk. Some lifters can make great progress while remaining fairly lean, others may have to ‘fade’ their mid-section some before they are in their training sweet-spot. As others have mentioned the conditioning standard is different today than in the past and this must be taken into consideration by lifters with plans to compete. I haven’t spent much time in your threads and don’t know what your stage weight is or how much you add after a contest, but I suspect our approaches have more in comman than differences. [/quote]

Oh i totally agree with you I was just being a dick in reference to the “natty limit” thread lol

Most people shouldnt aim to look like AC while.gaining, i agree

Something im surprised no one mentionned is that a reason why Pros do not get as soft nowadays is cause of the higher number of contest/guest posing appearance

They still manage to grow though

In tje end i think : do whatever the f you like as long as it makes u happy
[/quote]

Don’t the pros ‘mamange’ to grow without getting soft because of 3g of test a week, plus hgh, insulin etc while in the off season?
[/quote]
lol @ 3g[/quote]

4g?

848

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]flch95 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

My muscular size hit its peak after years of slowly, and consciously starting to pay attention to my diet and training, and all after the age of 30.

S[/quote]

key point…most of the advice for any type of extreme bulking has been aimed at people YOUNGER THAN 30. I mentioned that right here as well. Maybe people thought I was older than I was when I first started posting. I always made the point that I wouldn’t be bulking up much over the age of 30-35.

I wouldn’t expect someone over the age of 30 to see the same benefit especially if it took even longer past that to learn to eat right.

By 30 I had much of that worked out from several years of trial and error.[/quote]
So what would you tell someone mid 30s, in the 150-170lb range just starting out with the goal of adding size?[/quote]

Find maintenance calories and add 10 to 15% to that or set calories at 15 calories per pound, see what happens, and make adjustments from there, not “eat big to get big”. These are the same sensible guidelines for gaining for people of any age.
[/quote]

Yeah, the problem with that is, the body you have at 20 IS NOT the body you have at 35.

For instance, your tendons can repair themselves MUCH faster under the age of 35…which means who is going to make more progress and recover faster from truly heavy all out workouts that stress those tendons and require more recovery?

If someone were over the age of 30-35, I would have them be more cautious with their caloric increases because your risks of effecting blood pressure and not having the metabolism to grow optimally become a greater factor.

Anyone trying to move more than 4 plates a side on any movement understands what mean about tendon recovery…which can short change muscle recovery and growth completely…especially as you age.

Bulking up and working on all out size is about understanding these biological differences, not ignoring them or acting like what I am writing is impossible.

Some of you act like the info some of us are writing is nonsense…when the results speak for themselves.

But hey…everyone is just adding body fat if we listen to some of you.

anyone not showing all abs is “over 25% body fat”.

849

[quote]The Hoss wrote:
I believe a ‘fascination’ with the full house look is not such a fascination, but rather just a state of content. It’s a tradeoff. At a certain point, the sacrifices made to lose bodyfat and keep it down will not match the effort put in to do so. I think we can all agree it is easier to drop from 25% to 20% than from 12% to 7%.

If one can achieve a good look, yet be able to enjoy their vices of choice, be it food, alcohol, whatever it may be, or spend less time in the gym and kitchen and more time for leisure/family/work, (within reason) I think for many who do not compete or intend to compete, that will take preference over losing more bodyfact and constantly working to keep it down.

Would they look better at 5% less bodyfat? Probably. But would they be happier at 5% less bodyfat? Not necessarily.[/quote]

Good post…and seriously, who is going to stick with this for life, the guy who truly enjoys his life and his approach…or the guy believing that you have to fit only one mould or else you “aren’t serious enough”?

850

[quote]zraw wrote:
Oh lord…

If you stop gaining at X number of cals and your “setpoint” weight becomes 280lbs… and you stop adding scale weight… wouldnt that mean that afterward you are juste “recomping” very slowly so in reality you are not “setting” any point you are just building muscles… and losing fat…

Hence why its easier to “keep/hold/getback to” that weight afterward…

…

[/quote]

Are you trying to misunderstand this?

It took a hell of a lot of effort for me to get past 200lbs. I am just using that as an example. We are talking about someone’s approach OVER THE COURSE OF YEARS…when the goal would clearly be to get even bigger.

I was a skinny kid with a relatively small frame at the time. I wasn’t some kid who anyone thought would weigh over 200lbs ever.

This is about allowing the body to adapt and become efficient at a certain weight so that it can support that much extra muscular body weight.

You guys are talking to people with over 100lbs of body weight gained after maturity. That doesn’t happen by accident and it doesn’t happen passively.

hell, most people would feel weighed down if they gained over 20lbs in a short time period. This is about allowing the body to NOT feel that way.

Acting like this makes no sense is a little ridiculous.

851

Another scenario for those of you who seem to not be able to grasp that the body changes over time and that YES, you can force more gains at a younger age BECAUSE of that faster recovery assuming you have the genetics for this to start with.

If someone is starting at the age of 18, they will have tendons and a hormone cascade more suitable for growth.

This is the reasoning behind making sure if you have a goal anywhere near an extreme level that you take full advantage of these time periods.

I have been sidetracked from tendon injuries alone that NEVER would have happened when I was only 18.

This info is coming from a biologist. It is coming from someone who has lived in the gym for several years and got really big.

If you really have a problem with this info, discuss it in an intelligent manner…but my guess is, if you can, then you understand exactly what I wrote already.

852

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

stronghold - what is your estimate then?
[/quote]

Greater than 25%[/quote]

Fucking hilarious.

LOl at acting like I am obese in that picture or anywhere near it.

If anyone is taking you seriously with this, they have big problems themselves. I really don’t care what my “number” is and never did, but misrepresenting information isn’t doing anything but giving the wrong message to newbs.

No one else but you or maybe someone else with a very bad propensity for guessing things like this is seeing “over 25%^ body fat” in that picture.
[/quote]

Not trying to pick sides or dick ride but there’s a guy at my current gym that is close to X’s build (black with a short beard and in his mid-30s too LOL) and he commands the utmost respect at the gym. People want to talk training with him all the time and stop to watch him when he’s moving big ass weights.

My point being I think it’s a little ridiculous to shit on X’s physique because I highly doubt it would happen in real life based on my real life experience.

853

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]yolo84 wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

Hopefully not too many people throw me under an 800lb bar for dick ridin X, but honestly, regardless of how you feel about his attitude, I can’t let this anonymously sized solarFLARE say that this is considered “not really built”. I mean for fucks sake that’s a depressingly high standard for a lot of people trying to build muscle on here.[/quote]

According to Brick, that is “25% body fat”.
[/quote]

I would say that Brick’s assessment is accurate. I looked leaner than that in pictures taken when I DEXA’d at 26% at 217 lbs, and I tend to store the more bodyfat in my central abdominal area, as my coach (Ebomb from these boards) can attest to, so I look worse than most people at a given % bodyfat.[/quote]

lol wtf are you talking about

so you are implying the pic shows someone up to 30% BF then if it looks higher than your 26

and no i am not “nut hugging” as you always always say about anyone who doesnt side with you

just pointing out you are an idiot with this post
[/quote]

Not sure what it is you dont understand.

I looked leaner than X does at a bodyfat that is higher than X estimates himself to be, therefor, X isn’t actually as lean as he thinks he is.

Clear enough?[/quote]

ok so

  1. you were 26% BF
  2. X is noticeably/significantly higher in BF than you were

so what do you estimate his BF to be then? 30%? 35%?

if it’s visually clearly enough for you to say it is higher than you at 26% then it must be 30% minimum I would guess?
[/quote]

bump

stronghold - what is your estimate then?
[/quote]

Greater than 25%[/quote]

Fucking hilarious.

LOl at acting like I am obese in that picture or anywhere near it.

If anyone is taking you seriously with this, they have big problems themselves. I really don’t care what my “number” is and never did, but misrepresenting information isn’t doing anything but giving the wrong message to newbs.

No one else but you or maybe someone else with a very bad propensity for guessing things like this is seeing “over 25%^ body fat” in that picture.
[/quote]

There are more people here who think that 25%+ figure is not so ridiculous than there are who do. I guess they’re all just “bad guessers” and you’re right again “because you’re a doctor”, right?

You say you don’t care, but you argue on here constantly that there is no way that you’re over 20% body fat and call everyone who has a clue who disagrees with you “ridiculous” or throw out accusations that we’re all colluding to gang up on you. Methinks the doctor doth protest too much.

If you truly don’t care, then go ask one of the trainers at your local gym to caliper you or to use the BEI gadget. Since both of those methods are notorious for under-estimating bodyfat, you’ll get a number that is more likely to make you happy. If you really “don’t care” what your bodyfat is, then stop arguing with us when we say you look higher than 20% and own that shit.

854

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

There are more people here who think that 25%+ figure is no ridiculous that there are who do. I guess they’re all just “bad guessers” and you’re right again “because you’re a doctor”, right?

You say you don’t care, but you argue on here constantly that there is no way that you’re over 20% body fat and call everyone who has a clue who disagrees with you “ridiculous” or throw out accusations that we’re all colluding to gang up on you. Methinks the doctor doth protest too much.

If you truly don’t care, then go ask one of the trainers at your local gym to caliper you or to use the BEI gadget. Since both of those methods are notorious for under-estimating bodyfat, you’ll get a number that is more likely to make you happy. If you really “don’t care” what your bodyfat is, then stop arguing with us when we say you look higher than 20% and own that shit.[/quote]

Dear Lord. I have been read at 20% before and had a waist to justify it. I know for a fact my waist is at least 3-4" smaller than then, but whatever.

People like you see what they want…because acknowledging that I actually did gain a shit load of muscle way past what most people here ever did makes you feel bad.

I agree with the poster above…I doubt we would ever see this kind of reaction in real life…I also doubt most people would see that picture and think, “that guy is nearly obese or at it already”.

I will be glad when this nonsense stops. It only makes you look a little petty.

855

[quote]Professor X wrote:
This info is coming from a biologist. [/quote]

LOL. Here we go again.

856

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

There are more people here who think that 25%+ figure is not so ridiculous than there are who do. I guess they’re all just “bad guessers” and you’re right again “because you’re a doctor”, right?

You say you don’t care, but you argue on here constantly that there is no way that you’re over 20% body fat and call everyone who has a clue who disagrees with you “ridiculous” or throw out accusations that we’re all colluding to gang up on you. Methinks the doctor doth protest too much.

If you truly don’t care, then go ask one of the trainers at your local gym to caliper you or to use the BEI gadget. Since both of those methods are notorious for under-estimating bodyfat, you’ll get a number that is more likely to make you happy. If you really “don’t care” what your bodyfat is, then stop arguing with us when we say you look higher than 20% and own that shit.[/quote]

Lol, if you think that PX is higher than 25% bodyfat, then you are delusional. You’re probably even more delusional if you think he cares enough to go get it measured.

No one here cares about BF% or any other numbers–it’s the mirror that counts, right?

857

@stronghold

generally speaking i like your posts and am pretty sure i said as much in one of your logs

however, you’ve strongly implied that X is WELL in excess of 25% BF based on the pic a few pages back

if you or anyone else here think in all honesty that shows BF of around 25-30% you are simply losing all credibility

in all seriousness, i can only assume you are trolling? or looking at another picture?

858

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
This info is coming from a biologist. [/quote]

LOL. Here we go again.[/quote]

Why do you have a problem with someone stating that they are educated in the field of exactly what we are talking about?

Stu himself just said he didn’t even start lifting seriously until age 30. Acting like the info I am writing is nonsense makes no sense at all.

If you have a problem with me saying that, I doubt anyone else cares.

I am positive enough are sick of this nonsense happening perpetually as if someone is making you do it.

859

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Stronghold wrote:

There are more people here who think that 25%+ figure is no ridiculous that there are who do. I guess they’re all just “bad guessers” and you’re right again “because you’re a doctor”, right?

You say you don’t care, but you argue on here constantly that there is no way that you’re over 20% body fat and call everyone who has a clue who disagrees with you “ridiculous” or throw out accusations that we’re all colluding to gang up on you. Methinks the doctor doth protest too much.

If you truly don’t care, then go ask one of the trainers at your local gym to caliper you or to use the BEI gadget. Since both of those methods are notorious for under-estimating bodyfat, you’ll get a number that is more likely to make you happy. If you really “don’t care” what your bodyfat is, then stop arguing with us when we say you look higher than 20% and own that shit.[/quote]

Dear Lord. I have been read at 20% before and had a waist to justify it. I know for a fact my waist is at least 3-4" smaller than then, but whatever.

People like you see what they want…because acknowledging that I actually did gain a shit load of muscle way past what most people here ever did makes you feel bad.

I agree with the poster above…I doubt we would ever see this kind of reaction in real life…I also doubt most people would see that picture and think, “that guy is nearly obese or at it already”.

I will be glad when this nonsense stops. It only makes you look a little petty.
[/quote]

First off: Nothing about your life makes me feel bad about myself. Read that again: nothing.

Based off of the picture that was posted earlier in this thread, 25% is an easy assumtion. You’ve got fat folding under your pecs into your armpits, your midsection is concave from your shoulders to your waist from the front, meaning you have a generous amount of fat stored in your midsection/around your waist. Can we please stop referring to fuzzy outlines of upper abdominal muscles through a layer of adipose as “abs showing”.

860

[quote]The3Commandments wrote:

Lol, if you think that PX is higher than 25% bodyfat, then you are delusional. You’re probably even more delusional if you think he cares enough to go get it measured.

No one here cares about BF% or any other numbers–it’s the mirror that counts, right?
[/quote]

Thank you. They are implying that the picture shows someone who is obese or near it.

The attitude here is getting retarded.

You can’t hold a discussion with people who are THAT biased.