'Full House' ???

Training
1081

[quote]Gmoore17 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Dear Lord.

Kids, I am not obese. If you see someone who looks like I did in that pic, calling them obese will make you look dumb.

Please don’t be stupid, kids.[/quote]

[quote] Professor X wrote:

That is your perspective…which is wrong. No one was talked down to.

[/quote]

Please explain how calling them kids repeatedly is not talking down to them. Especially as during that first quote, you were talking to Brick, who has a Masters in Nutrition and is a Registered Dietition, making him probably the person with the greatest educational background on this topic. Heavytriple also, as a Graduate student, looks at pictures of people and sees their Dexa scans/Bod pod measurements, meaning he probably has the most “real-world experience” seeing pictures of people’s bodies and seeing their real BF%, as we know calipers and other ways are not nearly as accurate. And Stronghold has experience with Dexa scans as well, and plenty of experience measuring bodyfat by calipers, the way you’ve been measured. And, as you keep bringing up CT, he has more recently, since saying the 16% thing, said you looked to be in the ‘dead zone’ that is anywhere from 16-22%, and then said that since you carry fat very favorably, it could be higher than it looks.

FWIW, during my Kinesiology degree, I did look at dozens of examples of pictures of people, along with their Dexa scans that had their bodyfat percentage. Without fail, the more muscular guys looked leaner at higher bodyfat percentages. You will have ‘some semblance of abs’ at a higher BF when you’re carrying a ton of muscle so you have more abs to show. Nobody is saying you aren’t carrying a lot of muscle, or that you don’t have an impressive physique. Nobody is saying you’re just a fat guy, at all. But, based on the picture you posted, and the pictures I’ve seen of people along with their actual BF%, based on DEXA scans (ie actually accurate), I would be surprised if you were under 20% BF. I’m not saying you are 25+ or not, because obviously we’re all just guessing here, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous to think so, and I would probably put you at low-20’s. I’ve seen pictures of guys that were 25+ that didn’t look ‘obese’ the way most people think of it.

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK Don’t take this to mean I’m saying your physique is not impressive. You’re a huge dude, you’ve built a ton of muscle, I’m sure you turn a lot of heads and most people would be impressed. But I do think your estimation of your own bodyfat is low, and I think it’s just because of the stigma behind the word ‘obese’ itself, when we are not just trying to call you a fat guy, we are simply making an estimate of your bodyfat.[/quote]

Awesome post

1082

[quote]Gmoore17 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Dear Lord.

Kids, I am not obese. If you see someone who looks like I did in that pic, calling them obese will make you look dumb.

Please don’t be stupid, kids.[/quote]

[quote] Professor X wrote:

That is your perspective…which is wrong. No one was talked down to.

[/quote]

Please explain how calling them kids repeatedly is not talking down to them. Especially as during that first quote, you were talking to Brick, who has a Masters in Nutrition and is a Registered Dietition, making him probably the person with the greatest educational background on this topic. Heavytriple also, as a Graduate student, looks at pictures of people and sees their Dexa scans/Bod pod measurements, meaning he probably has the most “real-world experience” seeing pictures of people’s bodies and seeing their real BF%, as we know calipers and other ways are not nearly as accurate. And Stronghold has experience with Dexa scans as well, and plenty of experience measuring bodyfat by calipers, the way you’ve been measured. And, as you keep bringing up CT, he has more recently, since saying the 16% thing, said you looked to be in the ‘dead zone’ that is anywhere from 16-22%, and then said that since you carry fat very favorably, it could be higher than it looks.

FWIW, during my Kinesiology degree, I did look at dozens of examples of pictures of people, along with their Dexa scans that had their bodyfat percentage. Without fail, the more muscular guys looked leaner at higher bodyfat percentages. You will have ‘some semblance of abs’ at a higher BF when you’re carrying a ton of muscle so you have more abs to show. Nobody is saying you aren’t carrying a lot of muscle, or that you don’t have an impressive physique. Nobody is saying you’re just a fat guy, at all. But, based on the picture you posted, and the pictures I’ve seen of people along with their actual BF%, based on DEXA scans (ie actually accurate), I would be surprised if you were under 20% BF. I’m not saying you are 25+ or not, because obviously we’re all just guessing here, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous to think so, and I would probably put you at low-20’s. I’ve seen pictures of guys that were 25+ that didn’t look ‘obese’ the way most people think of it.

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK Don’t take this to mean I’m saying your physique is not impressive. You’re a huge dude, you’ve built a ton of muscle, I’m sure you turn a lot of heads and most people would be impressed. But I do think your estimation of your own bodyfat is low, and I think it’s just because of the stigma behind the word ‘obese’ itself, when we are not just trying to call you a fat guy, we are simply making an estimate of your bodyfat.[/quote]

Not gonna do it.

Nope, not giving in.

Shut up Steely dammit!!

Nope.

Fuck.

I have to.

BEST POST BITCHES.

1083

I guess if you don’t have the nutritional knowledge to effectively explain to a newb how to eat meat, starch, and veggies several times daily, then I guess your approach would be better than just confusing them with the basics.

I’m done with this discussion since you’ve now got it to the point where it’s going in circles.

1084

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

Best post.[/quote]

Donny Most[/quote]

West Coast[/quote]

Next Host[/quote]

Best Roast[/quote]

Bless’d Host

BAM!
[/quote]

West Boast

I could do dis all DAY…
[/quote]

Space Ghost
[/quote]
Coast to coast.

1085

[quote]Gmoore17 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Dear Lord.

Kids, I am not obese. If you see someone who looks like I did in that pic, calling them obese will make you look dumb.

Please don’t be stupid, kids.[/quote]

[quote] Professor X wrote:

That is your perspective…which is wrong. No one was talked down to.

[/quote]

Please explain how calling them kids repeatedly is not talking down to them. Especially as during that first quote, you were talking to Brick, who has a Masters in Nutrition and is a Registered Dietition, making him probably the person with the greatest educational background on this topic. Heavytriple also, as a Graduate student, looks at pictures of people and sees their Dexa scans/Bod pod measurements, meaning he probably has the most “real-world experience” seeing pictures of people’s bodies and seeing their real BF%, as we know calipers and other ways are not nearly as accurate. And Stronghold has experience with Dexa scans as well, and plenty of experience measuring bodyfat by calipers, the way you’ve been measured. And, as you keep bringing up CT, he has more recently, since saying the 16% thing, said you looked to be in the ‘dead zone’ that is anywhere from 16-22%, and then said that since you carry fat very favorably, it could be higher than it looks.

FWIW, during my Kinesiology degree, I did look at dozens of examples of pictures of people, along with their Dexa scans that had their bodyfat percentage. Without fail, the more muscular guys looked leaner at higher bodyfat percentages. You will have ‘some semblance of abs’ at a higher BF when you’re carrying a ton of muscle so you have more abs to show. Nobody is saying you aren’t carrying a lot of muscle, or that you don’t have an impressive physique. Nobody is saying you’re just a fat guy, at all. But, based on the picture you posted, and the pictures I’ve seen of people along with their actual BF%, based on DEXA scans (ie actually accurate), I would be surprised if you were under 20% BF. I’m not saying you are 25+ or not, because obviously we’re all just guessing here, but I don’t think it’s ridiculous to think so, and I would probably put you at low-20’s. I’ve seen pictures of guys that were 25+ that didn’t look ‘obese’ the way most people think of it.

THIS IS NOT AN ATTACK Don’t take this to mean I’m saying your physique is not impressive. You’re a huge dude, you’ve built a ton of muscle, I’m sure you turn a lot of heads and most people would be impressed. But I do think your estimation of your own bodyfat is low, and I think it’s just because of the stigma behind the word ‘obese’ itself, when we are not just trying to call you a fat guy, we are simply making an estimate of your bodyfat.[/quote]

Thanks for the compliment.

1086

[quote]Gmoore17 wrote:
Here’s a picture of a guy who was DEXA scanned at 25.5% bodyfat.[/quote]

/thread. This guy’s got a fair bit of definition across his delts/chest/traps, but he’s 25% BF. From the pic that X put up, he’s EASILY as soft as this guy.

@X: Don’t cry/whine about it if your permabulking ways have yielded a muscular, albeit fat physique. If you want to yell your way around the forum about how “I got big” / “built big muscles” then post up pictures DEMONSTRATING, PROVING this; you know, photos where we can actually SEE all of your physique (Front/rear dbl biceps, lat spread, shots of legs). Not these bullshit, blurry phone camera shots with bad lighting only showing half of your physique. But everybody here already knows you won’t do this.

1087

[quote]COMEONDIESEL wrote:

[quote]Gmoore17 wrote:
Here’s a picture of a guy who was DEXA scanned at 25.5% bodyfat.[/quote]

/thread. This guy’s got a fair bit of definition across his delts/chest/traps, but he’s 25% BF. From the pic that X put up, he’s EASILY as soft as this guy.

@X: Don’t cry/whine about it if your permabulking ways have yielded a muscular, albeit fat physique. If you want to yell your way around the forum about how “I got big” / “built big muscles” then post up pictures DEMONSTRATING, PROVING this; you know, photos where we can actually SEE all of your physique (Front/rear dbl biceps, lat spread, shots of legs). Not these bullshit, blurry phone camera shots with bad lighting only showing half of your physique. But everybody here already knows you won’t do this.[/quote]

Just give him time dude

1088

BUMP.

1089

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]HeavyTriple wrote:

[quote]Iron_Made wrote:
Are we agreed that 25%+ is obese?
Are we agreed that PX has a faint outline of abs in that pic?
Are we agreed that obese people do not have faint outlines of fucking anything?
Can we agree PX is not 25%+ in that pic?[/quote]

We can agree he’s closer to 20% in that pic, but then again he’s a hiding a substantial portion of his lower abdomen. People only do that when they want to fool you into thinking they’re leaner than they are.[/quote]

? My entire upper body can be seen in that pic. How am I hiding my lower abdomen? Blatantly lying also makes you lose credibility.

I was told I am OVER 25% in that pic. Anyone even half way supporting that needs to stop letting us know what they think about estimates.

[/quote]

No you can’t. Are you 70 years old? Because that’s the only reason I can think of that you’ve hiked your shorts up to your belly button.

1090

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Simply put, that pic is NOT of an obese person…so anyone saying it is would probably be a biased individual.[/quote]

Would a scientist, geneticist, or even exercise physiologist say that without actually measuring the BF in question? Of course not. So you can stop trying to pretend you are any of those things, and you can certainly stop trying sound smart by talking about science when it suits you.

1091

Catching up on this thread made me laugh ever the more so.

1092

We can make it to 50 pages. I believe in us.

1093

[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
I guess I don’t understand what the fascination is with the “full house” look. Would you rather be big, muscular and lean… or big, muscular and fat? I will choose the former every time. It’s one thing to say getting big, muscular and fat is beneficial to help you acheive the big and lean physique one day, but to look at “full house” as an end goal, in a bbing forum, I just dont get.

Please help me. [/quote]

I don’t see very many very lean, natural trainers that look big in clothing. Sure, you could wear extra medium t shirts and look big, but I wear a button down to work everyday. While I opt for the slim fit and I look like I’m in pretty good shape, I looked a hell of a lot bigger (and better) when I was “full house”, albeit I was too fat for my liking (without a shirt).

My point is that I’m wearing clothes 98% of the time, and being full house makes me look bigger in clothes which is a nice benefit.

That being said, I’m never getting that heavy again. But health and general feeling well aside, I dd prefer my overall “look” in clothing when I was a lot heavier.

1094

What I tell my kids when they are overly concerned with other kids:

“You just worry about you”

1095

Lanky, what did you get up to and where are you now?

1096

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Lanky, what did you get up to and where are you now?[/quote]

Up to about 285, down now to about 235-240ish.

1097

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Lanky, what did you get up to and where are you now?[/quote]

Up to about 285, down now to about 235-240ish. [/quote]

Damn, that’s very big. How tall are you?

1098

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Lanky, what did you get up to and where are you now?[/quote]

Up to about 285, down now to about 235-240ish. [/quote]

Damn, that’s very big. How tall are you?[/quote]

6’5"…I’m not real impressive, haha.

1099

I believe that since why are bodybuilders, at one point or another, one should diet down to “stage weight”. I mean really fucking ripped. At that point he will now how he actually looks like. Fat takes up a lot of space. My buddy had 48-49cm arms. Once he dieted to a 6 pack, his arms went to 41cm. His strength remianed the same, but he was a lot smaller.

1100

[quote]niksamaras wrote:
I believe that since why are bodybuilders, at one point or another, one should diet down to “stage weight”. I mean really fucking ripped. At that point he will now how he actually looks like. Fat takes up a lot of space. My buddy had 48-49cm arms. Once he dieted to a 6 pack, his arms went to 41cm. His strength remianed the same, but he was a lot smaller.[/quote]

It’s actually a good idea, but requires a lot of sacrifice.