Kanada, do you follow tennis? The top 500 players all train equally hard and while some have better coaches than others, the quality of the training doesn’t have that big of a difference, however, some players are vastly superior than others.
Genes have nothing to do with this?
I believe in hard work, but I also believe that genes mark where you start and where you end. Hard work will decide how close you are to your limits.
[quote]Jayk wrote:
I wish you were right, but here is an article to help explain.
Poorly designed experiment that did not account for mental confidence. Bret Contreras has very useful articles however, I just don’t believe anything he says is dogma. He is worthwhile to keep around because he makes his data public so you can surmise, on your own, what these results mean.
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
i hate this forum these days. Cya later. [/quote]
awwww boo hoo
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]Cuban32 wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
Dorian, by my reckoning, had as much desire as Michael jordan, an appealing frame that he was lucky enough to take advantage of. Some fat kid at summer camp in a few weeks could, with the right mental fortitude, do the same. Then suddenl we’d all say he had “superior” genetics. What a bunch of fucktards who are unable to think about something. Marzouk, you have 0 credibility in this forum and pretend you do. I have 0 credibility and make it very obvious I don’t.
If it were so hard to be a bodybuilder, it wouldn’t be a sport that so many of us love. I don’t care who you are, steroids ruined every pro sport. There is an invisible line you must cross and forever lie about. Hard work is a must, but the ideals of competition, a fair playing field where men and women test themselves against each other with their only benefits being the mechanisms within their body, those days are destroyed. Bodybuilding, I think more than anything, suffers.[/quote]
How about pubertal gyno I had to have removed? Did that have anything to do with my genetic predispositions or if I had the HARDWORK, DESIRE, and FORTITUDE to have a good chest it would have just gone away on its own, or I could have willed my pectoralis major and minor to start growing over the mammary gland? There also a lot of other things on my body that if I had different genetics would probably look different, or can i will myself into better vascularity, forget that i used to be a 275lb blimp with no muscle i can will my skin to get less stretched out and look tighter, I am just not working hard enough. HOLY SHIT! I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT!
[/quote]
I think the OP is incredibly wrong on this topic but you are arguing into his point here. You weren’t genetically predisposed to be a 275lb blimp with no muscle, and your skin not shrinking wouldn’t be an issue if you weren’t the aforementioned. This isn’t an attack on you, you’ve clearly got shit in order now, but that’s exactly the point he is making.
Really the best arguments are the easiest and most obvious. “You can’t teach tall.”[/quote]
Tall has 0 to do with muscular development. Nor does tall equal basketball success, ask mugsy boggs, damien stoudamiere, Patrick kane (a small and talented hockey player) so once again, genes only give you a body of work to work with.[/quote]
Do you really want to do this? We can make it a fun game; you name all of the players under 5’10 to make it to the Hall of Fame in the NBA and I’ll name all of the ones above it.
The fun part here is I know the only name you can throw out, but I’d have to go look up every other hall of famer ever to compile my list…
Clearly Calvin Murphy is the only short kid to ever work hard at playing ball though right? Height has nothing to do with it. Nor arm length, genetic factors in vertical height(muscle fiber makeup, achilles tendon length, calf insertion point) etc.
Your quip about muscle development is also fun considering your OP simply says ‘We have the same gene code. Face it, you are an elite specimen, and any failures you face can be attributed to either a lack of hard work or plain unluckiness in life.’ You may have referenced bodybuilding after, but a person without 20/20 vision not being able to be a fighter pilot disproves your point just fine.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
I know what I am, lean and muscular.[/quote]
That depends on your definition of those terms.
My lean weight is almost 190 at a total weight of 220. I could take two or three months and diet down to 190-195 and easily dwarf you.
And I’m nowhere near the biggest man on this site.
Numbers are relevant to everything. You can’t toss numbers out the window just because you don’t like yours
I understand that you’re proud of what you’ve achieved, but the truth is that you haven’t achieved anything great enough to make this assertion. Almost anyone can reach 165lbs at 10% bf. I myself am gunning for 220 @ 10% within two more years.
You cannot judge anyone’s genetics by what they looked like when they were untrained, or when they were a teen. You judge genetics by how good they look at the top of their game. When you hit that final plateau where you just can’t push it any farther no matter what you try, that’s your genetic limit. There are clues along the way, but you just won’t know until you get there.
[/quote]
My lean weight is 160 at a weight of 160. Also, a certain amount of intelligent guidance, whether internal or eternal, has an impact on success. You should read the biography of jack dempsey if you want an example of dedication and perseverance. Or Seabiscuit, a knock kneed horse who captured the hearts of many.
[quote]Edevus wrote:
Kanada, do you follow tennis? The top 500 players all train equally hard and while some have better coaches than others, the quality of the training doesn’t have that big of a difference, however, some players are vastly superior than others.
Genes have nothing to do with this?
I believe in hard work, but I also believe that genes mark where you start and where you end. Hard work will decide how close you are to your limits.
[/quote]
They all train equally hard, eh? Right.
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
I know what I am, lean and muscular.[/quote]
That depends on your definition of those terms.
My lean weight is almost 190 at a total weight of 220. I could take two or three months and diet down to 190-195 and easily dwarf you.
And I’m nowhere near the biggest man on this site.
Numbers are relevant to everything. You can’t toss numbers out the window just because you don’t like yours
I understand that you’re proud of what you’ve achieved, but the truth is that you haven’t achieved anything great enough to make this assertion. Almost anyone can reach 165lbs at 10% bf. I myself am gunning for 220 @ 10% within two more years.
You cannot judge anyone’s genetics by what they looked like when they were untrained, or when they were a teen. You judge genetics by how good they look at the top of their game. When you hit that final plateau where you just can’t push it any farther no matter what you try, that’s your genetic limit. There are clues along the way, but you just won’t know until you get there.
[/quote]
My lean weight is 160 at a weight of 160. Also, a certain amount of intelligent guidance, whether internal or eternal, has an impact on success. You should read the biography of jack dempsey if you want an example of dedication and perseverance. Or Seabiscuit, a knock kneed horse who captured the hearts of many.
[/quote]
That would mean you have 0% bodyfat, which would mean your brain has ceased to function.
Wait, that’s entirely believable, carry on.
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]Cuban32 wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
Dorian, by my reckoning, had as much desire as Michael jordan, an appealing frame that he was lucky enough to take advantage of. Some fat kid at summer camp in a few weeks could, with the right mental fortitude, do the same. Then suddenl we’d all say he had “superior” genetics. What a bunch of fucktards who are unable to think about something. Marzouk, you have 0 credibility in this forum and pretend you do. I have 0 credibility and make it very obvious I don’t.
If it were so hard to be a bodybuilder, it wouldn’t be a sport that so many of us love. I don’t care who you are, steroids ruined every pro sport. There is an invisible line you must cross and forever lie about. Hard work is a must, but the ideals of competition, a fair playing field where men and women test themselves against each other with their only benefits being the mechanisms within their body, those days are destroyed. Bodybuilding, I think more than anything, suffers.[/quote]
How about pubertal gyno I had to have removed? Did that have anything to do with my genetic predispositions or if I had the HARDWORK, DESIRE, and FORTITUDE to have a good chest it would have just gone away on its own, or I could have willed my pectoralis major and minor to start growing over the mammary gland? There also a lot of other things on my body that if I had different genetics would probably look different, or can i will myself into better vascularity, forget that i used to be a 275lb blimp with no muscle i can will my skin to get less stretched out and look tighter, I am just not working hard enough. HOLY SHIT! I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT!
[/quote]
I think the OP is incredibly wrong on this topic but you are arguing into his point here. You weren’t genetically predisposed to be a 275lb blimp with no muscle, and your skin not shrinking wouldn’t be an issue if you weren’t the aforementioned. This isn’t an attack on you, you’ve clearly got shit in order now, but that’s exactly the point he is making.
Really the best arguments are the easiest and most obvious. “You can’t teach tall.”[/quote]
Tall has 0 to do with muscular development. Nor does tall equal basketball success, ask mugsy boggs, damien stoudamiere, Patrick kane (a small and talented hockey player) so once again, genes only give you a body of work to work with.[/quote]
Do you really want to do this? We can make it a fun game; you name all of the players under 5’10 to make it to the Hall of Fame in the NBA and I’ll name all of the ones above it.
The fun part here is I know the only name you can throw out, but I’d have to go look up every other hall of famer ever to compile my list…
Clearly Calvin Murphy is the only short kid to ever work hard at playing ball though right? Height has nothing to do with it. Nor arm length, genetic factors in vertical height(muscle fiber makeup, achilles tendon length, calf insertion point) etc.
Your quip about muscle development is also fun considering your OP simply says ‘We have the same gene code. Face it, you are an elite specimen, and any failures you face can be attributed to either a lack of hard work or plain unluckiness in life.’ You may have referenced bodybuilding after, but a person without 20/20 vision not being able to be a fighter pilot disproves your point just fine.[/quote]
Luck of the draw, you need reflexes and nerves of steel too. I lost my vision to a genetic abnormality, I know I’m arguing semantics. Yet could one not say that your example is only a result of preferential selection of height in prospects, not a lack of talent or ability displayed by those prospects? Who would give a short guy a chance anyways?
If you take all babies and spend all their life teaching them the nuances of athletics, the deciding factors will be things those babies can choose, like whether to practice more, endure more pain, sacrifice more, or believe in themself more.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]Marzouk wrote:
i hate this forum these days. Cya later. [/quote]
awwww boo hoo
[/quote]
Tell me I don’t deserve some credit for that one.
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]Edevus wrote:
Kanada, do you follow tennis? The top 500 players all train equally hard and while some have better coaches than others, the quality of the training doesn’t have that big of a difference, however, some players are vastly superior than others.
Genes have nothing to do with this?
I believe in hard work, but I also believe that genes mark where you start and where you end. Hard work will decide how close you are to your limits.
[/quote]
They all train equally hard, eh? Right.
[/quote]
I take it you don’t follow tennis then. Rafael Nadal, Federer and Djokovic are at the top because they train very hard, but they have this extra thing (talent, magic) that comes with the genes.
[quote]Edevus wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]Edevus wrote:
Kanada, do you follow tennis? The top 500 players all train equally hard and while some have better coaches than others, the quality of the training doesn’t have that big of a difference, however, some players are vastly superior than others.
Genes have nothing to do with this?
I believe in hard work, but I also believe that genes mark where you start and where you end. Hard work will decide how close you are to your limits.
[/quote]
They all train equally hard, eh? Right.
[/quote]
I take it you don’t follow tennis then. Rafael Nadal, Federer and Djokovic are at the top because they train very hard, but they have this extra thing (talent, magic) that comes with the genes.
[/quote]
All three have crossed every obstacle with their given gifts. You call that genes I call that perseverance
[quote]Kanada wrote:
My lean weight is 160 at a weight of 160. Also, a certain amount of intelligent guidance, whether internal or eternal, has an impact on success. You should read the biography of jack dempsey if you want an example of dedication and perseverance. Or Seabiscuit, a knock kneed horse who captured the hearts of many.
[/quote]
If you have 10% body fat then your lean body mass is 144lbs. Congratulations you have the same amount of muscle as the average high school senior.
[quote]Kanada wrote:
I lost my vision to a genetic abnormality[/quote]
I totally forgot your blind, and while this may make me an asshole: LO FUCKING L… so you lost your vision to a genetic abnormality, yet, genetics ‘don’t exist.’
Anyhow, given your post above where you essentially state your willingness to address any genetic predisposition as ‘luck of environmental influence,’ it has become clear the argument can go nowhere. Pzpz
FWIW, I would prefer to take all the flaming we reserve for uniformed kids, who unlike me don’t understand the intricacies of lifting, and allow people to be small but proud of their progress. I believe it saves lives and makes the world better. Nobody likes to feel ugly, and it takes balls to admit you look like shit and ask someone who “seems” like they have always had superior genetics to critique them.
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]Cuban32 wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
Dorian, by my reckoning, had as much desire as Michael jordan, an appealing frame that he was lucky enough to take advantage of. Some fat kid at summer camp in a few weeks could, with the right mental fortitude, do the same. Then suddenl we’d all say he had “superior” genetics. What a bunch of fucktards who are unable to think about something. Marzouk, you have 0 credibility in this forum and pretend you do. I have 0 credibility and make it very obvious I don’t.
If it were so hard to be a bodybuilder, it wouldn’t be a sport that so many of us love. I don’t care who you are, steroids ruined every pro sport. There is an invisible line you must cross and forever lie about. Hard work is a must, but the ideals of competition, a fair playing field where men and women test themselves against each other with their only benefits being the mechanisms within their body, those days are destroyed. Bodybuilding, I think more than anything, suffers.[/quote]
How about pubertal gyno I had to have removed? Did that have anything to do with my genetic predispositions or if I had the HARDWORK, DESIRE, and FORTITUDE to have a good chest it would have just gone away on its own, or I could have willed my pectoralis major and minor to start growing over the mammary gland? There also a lot of other things on my body that if I had different genetics would probably look different, or can i will myself into better vascularity, forget that i used to be a 275lb blimp with no muscle i can will my skin to get less stretched out and look tighter, I am just not working hard enough. HOLY SHIT! I HAVE SEEN THE LIGHT!
[/quote]
I think the OP is incredibly wrong on this topic but you are arguing into his point here. You weren’t genetically predisposed to be a 275lb blimp with no muscle, and your skin not shrinking wouldn’t be an issue if you weren’t the aforementioned. This isn’t an attack on you, you’ve clearly got shit in order now, but that’s exactly the point he is making.
Really the best arguments are the easiest and most obvious. “You can’t teach tall.”[/quote]
Tall has 0 to do with muscular development. Nor does tall equal basketball success, ask mugsy boggs, damien stoudamiere, Patrick kane (a small and talented hockey player) so once again, genes only give you a body of work to work with.[/quote]
Do you really want to do this? We can make it a fun game; you name all of the players under 5’10 to make it to the Hall of Fame in the NBA and I’ll name all of the ones above it.
The fun part here is I know the only name you can throw out, but I’d have to go look up every other hall of famer ever to compile my list…
Clearly Calvin Murphy is the only short kid to ever work hard at playing ball though right? Height has nothing to do with it. Nor arm length, genetic factors in vertical height(muscle fiber makeup, achilles tendon length, calf insertion point) etc.
Your quip about muscle development is also fun considering your OP simply says ‘We have the same gene code. Face it, you are an elite specimen, and any failures you face can be attributed to either a lack of hard work or plain unluckiness in life.’ You may have referenced bodybuilding after, but a person without 20/20 vision not being able to be a fighter pilot disproves your point just fine.[/quote]
Luck of the draw, you need reflexes and nerves of steel too. I lost my vision to a genetic abnormality, I know I’m arguing semantics. Yet could one not say that your example is only a result of preferential selection of height in prospects, not a lack of talent or ability displayed by those prospects? Who would give a short guy a chance anyways?
If you take all babies and spend all their life teaching them the nuances of athletics, the deciding factors will be things those babies can choose, like whether to practice more, endure more pain, sacrifice more, or believe in themself more.
[/quote]
i thought you said you dont beleive in genetics.
[quote]Edevus wrote:
[quote]red04 wrote:
So, what did I do wrong in my childhood to not end up 6’8 with great bone structure? I would like to be able to tell my future son how to become Lebron James if you don’t mind.[/quote]
You’re on your way to be like Lebron James. You already have same amount as NBA rings as he has…[/quote]
Also throw in a skewed sense of loyalty.
Alright, Canada. What’s your excuse? You give us Justine Beiber and now this guy…
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]Edevus wrote:
[quote]Kanada wrote:
[quote]Edevus wrote:
Kanada, do you follow tennis? The top 500 players all train equally hard and while some have better coaches than others, the quality of the training doesn’t have that big of a difference, however, some players are vastly superior than others.
Genes have nothing to do with this?
I believe in hard work, but I also believe that genes mark where you start and where you end. Hard work will decide how close you are to your limits.
[/quote]
They all train equally hard, eh? Right.
[/quote]
I take it you don’t follow tennis then. Rafael Nadal, Federer and Djokovic are at the top because they train very hard, but they have this extra thing (talent, magic) that comes with the genes.
[/quote]
All three have crossed every obstacle with their given gifts. You call that genes I call that perseverance
[/quote]
Some others are also very perseverant, but they will never be number #1. They may or not reach their limit, but they won’t be at the top.
Same with football players. Does Messi train harder than anyone else? I doubt it. His body shows otherwise, but he’s one of the most talented players of all history…maybe the most.
[quote]postholedigger wrote:
[quote]Edevus wrote:
[quote]red04 wrote:
So, what did I do wrong in my childhood to not end up 6’8 with great bone structure? I would like to be able to tell my future son how to become Lebron James if you don’t mind.[/quote]
You’re on your way to be like Lebron James. You already have same amount as NBA rings as he has…[/quote]
Also throw in a skewed sense of loyalty.[/quote]
So you’re insinuating that I have a skewed sense of loyalty from… ?
[quote]red04 wrote:
[quote]postholedigger wrote:
[quote]Edevus wrote:
[quote]red04 wrote:
So, what did I do wrong in my childhood to not end up 6’8 with great bone structure? I would like to be able to tell my future son how to become Lebron James if you don’t mind.[/quote]
You’re on your way to be like Lebron James. You already have same amount as NBA rings as he has…[/quote]
Also throw in a skewed sense of loyalty.[/quote]
So you’re insinuating that I have a skewed sense of loyalty from… ?[/quote]
No, throw in a skewed sense of loyalty to teach your son to become Lebron James. GOSH, you ruin the joke when you have to explain it…