Genetics- Most Important Factor?

Training Bodybuilding
41

[quote]Airtruth wrote:
This has to be the thread on how to have the ultimate loser mentality.

I’d say 99.9999999999999% of all the people I’ve seen saying they don’t have the genetics to do whatever they wanted to do didn’t have the work ethic, fortitude, knowledge, or desire to accomplish what they blame on their genetics anyway. People need to be honest with themselves.

You do 5 cluster/drop sets of squats with leg extensions for 1 year because CT said so don’t blame your genetics blame your dumb ass for not seeing that something didn’t work. Hey maybe all you needed was one set of a negative.

It’s going to take more than well he looked like that at 17 to convince me that someone else is a failure because they don’t have the genetic code to build muscle.

[/quote]

This wasn’t meant as a give up if you don’t have it. I’m still going to eat seven times today. I’m still going to kill myself on front squats and other lifts today.

Bodybuilding(or whatever we choose to call it) is something I have a great passion for and won’t give up unless forced to through injury or illness or family problems etc. What I’m not going to do is fool myself into thinking that I could be a pro bodybuilder ever.

I don’t want this thread to steer in a new direction towards drugs even though I mentioned it in the first post… But what scares me about this sport is the people who can’t accept their genetics and will do anything, abusive use of steroids peptides or anything they can get their hands on to, for what? A trophy at your state show if that?

Some people have gifts, the vast majority still have to bust their ass to get to the top, but it’s the people who aren’t gifted as much who try to “make up” for it with drugs that give this sport a bad name in my mind.

Not counting diuretics use which I think is a bad idea overall, you aren’t hearing about the top level guys, Coleman Cutler Martinez and the others who will be top 6 at the Olympia having major health issues or needing open heart surgery. It’s the bottom rung guys that are doing the crazy things because they just “know” that’s the difference between them and Ronnie right?

Those are the people on the message boards(not really this one since it doesn’t have much of a bodybuilding focus) who preach so and so MUST be loaded to the gills and if they took x amout of this compound they’d be up there too because their ego is shattered and that’s how they rationalize it. It’s a very sad and disturbing side about this sport that I don’t like at all.

The topic of genetics could cover many different topics, can we peak our biceps, are we stuck with the roundness of muscles and a dozen other side topics. My point I guess with this thread was to take some of the Donny Downers about pros and have them get a little reality in their lives and cut the conspiracy theories.

42

[quote]Airtruth wrote:
This has to be the thread on how to have the ultimate loser mentality.

I’d say 99.9999999999999% of all the people I’ve seen saying they don’t have the genetics to do whatever they wanted to do didn’t have the work ethic, fortitude, knowledge, or desire to accomplish what they blame on their genetics anyway. People need to be honest with themselves.

You do 5 cluster/drop sets of squats with leg extensions for 1 year because CT said so don’t blame your genetics blame your dumb ass for not seeing that something didn’t work. Hey maybe all you needed was one set of a negative.

It’s going to take more than well he looked like that at 17 to convince me that someone else is a failure because they don’t have the genetic code to build muscle.

[/quote]

Agreed.

Do you know what I think is the most important factor?

PERSERVERENCE

I trained for three years and made next to no gains. I thought it was genetics and a list of a 100 more excuses. I was one of those 170lbs guys with 15" arms leaned out who just couldn’t find a way to get bigger. What I was doing wrong was simply…not eating enough and suffering from severe fat phobia. It took me three years to realize that, conquer it and ever since then I have been sky rocketing in progress gaining muscle weight faster than thought naturally acceptable.

What Joe Blow next to me does and his results are obsolete in my equation of success because he has nothing to do with me. Once you form an understanding of yourself and your own characteristics you can begin to train and eat optimally for YOU.

I know I train best full body and big movements, I know I can’t train more than three weeks straight really hard and not get sick and I know I respond best to sets in the 3-8 rep range. I know I lose all my gains if I do not have a month block after gaining muscle where I maintain.

I know I lose too much muscle and burn out if I do more than two HIIT sessions a week while stripping off fat and the list goes on.

The point is the only way I could know all of this is by failing over and over.

Perserverence, DO NOT give up and DO NOT set limits.

Many here seem to be plagued with a defeatist mind set.

43

[quote]scottiscool wrote:
Airtruth wrote:
This has to be the thread on how to have the ultimate loser mentality.

I’d say 99.9999999999999% of all the people I’ve seen saying they don’t have the genetics to do whatever they wanted to do didn’t have the work ethic, fortitude, knowledge, or desire to accomplish what they blame on their genetics anyway. People need to be honest with themselves.

You do 5 cluster/drop sets of squats with leg extensions for 1 year because CT said so don’t blame your genetics blame your dumb ass for not seeing that something didn’t work. Hey maybe all you needed was one set of a negative.

It’s going to take more than well he looked like that at 17 to convince me that someone else is a failure because they don’t have the genetic code to build muscle.

This wasn’t meant as a give up if you don’t have it. I’m still going to eat seven times today. I’m still going to kill myself on front squats and other lifts today.

Bodybuilding(or whatever we choose to call it) is something I have a great passion for and won’t give up unless forced to through injury or illness or family problems etc. What I’m not going to do is fool myself into thinking that I could be a pro bodybuilder ever.

I don’t want this thread to steer in a new direction towards drugs even though I mentioned it in the first post… But what scares me about this sport is the people who can’t accept their genetics and will do anything, abusive use of steroids peptides or anything they can get their hands on to, for what? A trophy at your state show if that?

Some people have gifts, the vast majority still have to bust their ass to get to the top, but it’s the people who aren’t gifted as much who try to “make up” for it with drugs that give this sport a bad name in my mind.

Not counting diuretics use which I think is a bad idea overall, you aren’t hearing about the top level guys, Coleman Cutler Martinez and the others who will be top 6 at the Olympia having major health issues or needing open heart surgery. It’s the bottom rung guys that are doing the crazy things because they just “know” that’s the difference between them and Ronnie right?

Those are the people on the message boards(not really this one since it doesn’t have much of a bodybuilding focus) who preach so and so MUST be loaded to the gills and if they took x amout of this compound they’d be up there too because their ego is shattered and that’s how they rationalize it. It’s a very sad and disturbing side about this sport that I don’t like at all.

The topic of genetics could cover many different topics, can we peak our biceps, are we stuck with the roundness of muscles and a dozen other side topics. My point I guess with this thread was to take some of the Donny Downers about pros and have them get a little reality in their lives and cut the conspiracy theories. [/quote]

I agree, genetics are a real factor in our physical make-up but it’s so so very easy for someone to use them as an excuse and to place limits on themselves.

A way you could look at this is, we all have a natural set point where at a certain body fat it is going to be very difficult to gain more muscle mass until you raise your body fat as well.

I personally think very very few people ever reach this point.

44

I wrote up another long rambling post but bottom line is this. If you aren’t maximizing everything in your favor then bad genetics should never even come out of your mouth.

45

Ironsyde good post(the first one I’m referring to) most people give up before they ever figure out what it takes to start getting results.

46

[quote]scottiscool wrote:
<<< Bodybuilding(or whatever we choose to call it) is something I have a great passion for and won’t give up unless forced to through injury or illness or family problems etc. What I’m not going to do is fool myself into thinking that I could be a pro bodybuilder ever. >>>[/quote]

I also am this way.

I didn’t take you as crying. I took this thread as just a general discussion on the role of genetics in physique pursuits.

Most people with the best training and most intelligently applied pharmaceutical schedule will never place in a pro contest either. On the other hand, barring truly pathological limitations, ANY FRICKIN BODY can vastly improve themselves and most can be much bigger and more impressive than they think they can.

It is rank mindless foolishness to believe one can be an IFBB contender if it doesn’t become fairly obvious fairly quick that you’ve “got it” when you start training.

My constant bitch here has nothing to do with pro bodybuilding. It’s that people seem to have become convinced of the idea that there are two kinds of trainees. Genetically superior chemically enhanced monstrosities and Ryan Reynolds. [quote]If I don’t have the genetics or drugs to be an Olympia contender then I’m constrained by cosmic law to being an underwear model.[/quote]

I submit that many more people would pursue much higher goals with purpose if they truly believed they had a prayer of reaching them. The first time I started training in my late twenties I was 6,2 and under 160 lbs and soft to boot. A skeleton with nipples.

Today I’m in the mid 230’s and not fat (I guess depending on who you ask) I can pinch an inch off my abs. I do not look very awe inspiring by most standards, but I have gained at least 50 lean lbs since I started and I’m sure it would’ve been a chunk more without a 13 year self destructive layoff.

The bottom line of this somewhat loquacious post is that nobody can overcome their genetic potential, but most people have much more of it than they think. I guess I could’ve just said that in the first place, but I like to hear myself speak =]

47

A worthy thread to raise.

Genetics describe various important factors for your ability to grow & retain muscle and ‘look good’, so ive listed a few.

However as summary i think we can recognise that most folks have the potential to be very strong and look very athletic given enough time, training, food and rest and that we dont hit our genetic ceiling ever in reality hence it is never a valid excuse.

To a non exhaustive list:

Foremost is skeleton - cant grow muscle off bone that isnt there, i.e. youre not going to get a taller or broader bone structure by training (possible young rib cage expansion excepted)

Muscle length & cells - despite some slight possibilities of generating new muscle cells through training you basically work with what youve got. Lucky that muscle cells can grow amazingly, but in combination with skeletal structure you dont get Arnold arms without Arnold bones and muscle (but you do get great arms)

Digestion - you can do so much to enhance your ability to digest (i.e. actually use) food you eat by making the right choices but there are variations - this is probably the easiest thing to manage in many ways

Metabolism - also manageable to a large extent.

Endocrine - you can affect this too, but again some folks simply produce more T naturally or have more receptors etc.

Anyway, if you ignore the minorites of extremely easy and hard gainers at either end of a population and take a thousand average guys through trainig for 5 years i’d bet the main factors in their condition, strength and health at the end with be genetically neutral - i.e. they will relate to determination, commitment and consistency.

(ofcourse those things are likely to be influenced genetically too, but are by far the most adaptive - the brain)

48

Tiribulus,

Good post as usual. I feel like some people are misinterpreting what I’m saying and using genetics as a crutch.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

I guess I could’ve just said that in the first place, but I like to hear myself speak =][/quote]

And after rereading my posts I’m thinking the same thing, "Geeze man just get to the point! Oh wait this is my post… "

49

[quote]OctoberGirl wrote:

I should have used ethnicities for clarity.
[/quote]

Not to be too much of a nitpicker but ethnicities (things like Khmer, Apache, Ashkenazi, Welsh, etc) aren’t predicated on genetics but rather are also socially constructed.

Generally they are tied together by some combination of distinct language, distinct cultural practices and beliefs (possibly religious), and belief in a shared origin.

Some ethnicities are endogamous (tend due to social rules or isolation to only reproduce with other members of their ethnicity and may not consider children between one of their members and an outsider a member of the group) and thus can over time take on something of a general genetic profile but even this is very limited. I doubt there is any ethnicity that is genetically better or worse predisposed than any others toward strength.

50

Okay genetics is a factor but I still think people are too quick to apply genetics. Instead of looking for ways around it. Now 7 meals a day might be great for you that might not be your limiting factor but lets use that as an example.

You might have Hershel Walker Genetics where you should only eat once a day. 7 meals a day may not kill you, may even do some good for a while but if your genetic code is optimal under 1 meal a day, when you never reach your peak will you say genetics was your limiting factor?

51

[quote]Airtruth wrote:
Okay genetics is a factor but I still think people are too quick to apply genetics. Instead of looking for ways around it. Now 7 meals a day might be great for you that might not be your limiting factor but lets use that as an example.

You might have Hershel Walker Genetics where you should only eat once a day. 7 meals a day may not kill you, may even do some good for a while but if your genetic code is optimal under 1 meal a day, when you never reach your peak will you say genetics was your limiting factor?[/quote]

Agreed.

Less genetic gifts equals must train smarter/watch the little things.

I doubt a bunch of people are reaching their genetic limits…

haven’t met one person.

52

I don’t think anyone “optimally” grows off one meal a day for a second though. Can some gifted people attain muscular physiques like that, absolutely as your example shows. Could they have gotten there faster, or farther with more food? I think so.

53

[quote]Defiant1 wrote:

Less genetic gifts equals must train smarter/watch the little things.

[/quote]

I’ve said this at least a few times on this thread. Are only a few of you really reading my posts?

54

[quote]scottiscool wrote:
What seperated Flex Wheeler from Dorian Yates in peoples opinions?

This is a not a loaded question and I want to get people’s opinions on this(I have mine).

[/quote]

Genes. Look at dorian as a teen. He looks like hammered shit. Now look at king Kamali and Lee Preiest and Flex in there teen years. They look Great. Of these 4…who won an olympia???

Its NOT just about genes.

I’ll admit Dorian busted his ass AND probaby had to do about 20 g’s worthe of drugs a year BUT he didn’t look like anything special at first.

55

Another quick thought on genes is that while we all have some limiting factors we also have gifts.

Example. My training partner struggles to put on SIZE but he gets STRONGER by the month and is ripped 365 days a year.

I can pack it on like no one i Know when i have the time to train the way I want to but i have to diet for 12 weeks streght to see any abs.

were all a little uniqe.

56

[quote]irongutted wrote:
You people talk about “genetics” like the genes have a fixed behavior from birth, which is far from the truth.

The genetic material responds to the environment, responds to sinalization of itself and to n factors, so many that everyday some paper points out a new way that genes express themselves under different stimuli.

I agree that you wont be changing your insertion points, but the scientific community didnt totally elucidated the molecular and genetic bases of muscular hupertrophy, so we really cant tell how much the genes matter besides determining the insertion points, and even that may be far off… only time can tell.

For now what is really decisive for those who dont grow off simply looking at weights, is what scottiscool and others typed. To eat, train hard and rest.[/quote]

Best post!

Epigenetics…

merlin

57

[quote]bealedozer wrote:
scottiscool wrote:
What seperated Flex Wheeler from Dorian Yates in peoples opinions?

This is a not a loaded question and I want to get people’s opinions on this(I have mine).

Genes. Look at dorian as a teen. He looks like hammered shit. Now look at king Kamali and Lee Preiest and Flex in there teen years. They look Great. Of these 4…who won an olympia???

Its NOT just about genes.

I’ll admit Dorian busted his ass AND probaby had to do about 20 g’s worthe of drugs a year BUT he didn’t look like anything special at first.[/quote]

I wonder how indicative a person’s early untrained state is of genetic potential. Not necessarily concluding anything, but just wondering. Maybe what you’re built like before you start training doesn’t tell the whole story. Maybe none of it. Everybody always just assumes that a naturally muscular guy ipso facto possesses greater potential than the smaller or even smallest guy. Maybe this whole line of reasoning, while intuitive, is not so.

What if it’s entirely independent of somebody’s untrained state and there’s no way to know until after the fact. Maybe some naturally built guys have less overall potential for growth than some naturally smaller guys, especially in percentage of starting weight assuming similar body fat levels.

Maybe not, but what if? I don’t think it’s crystal clear that some guys I’ve known who look fantastic without ever touching a piece of training equipment are necessarily more predisposed to additional growth than a smaller guy.

58

[quote]bealedozer wrote:
Another quick thought on genes is that while we all have some limiting factors we also have gifts.

Example. My training partner struggles to put on SIZE but he gets STRONGER by the month and is ripped 365 days a year.

I can pack it on like no one i Know when i have the time to train the way I want to but i have to diet for 12 weeks streght to see any abs.

were all a little uniqe.

[/quote]

A splendid point and there is no doubt a whole range with everybody being a bit different.

59

[quote]bealedozer wrote:
Genes. Look at dorian as a teen. He looks like hammered shit. Now look at king Kamali and Lee Preiest and Flex in there teen years. They look Great. Of these 4…who won an olympia???

Its NOT just about genes.

I’ll admit Dorian busted his ass AND probaby had to do about 20 g’s worthe of drugs a year BUT he didn’t look like anything special at first.[/quote]

You are the type of person that I wish wouldn’t read this thread because you can’t put your facts together. King Lee and Flex looked great when they were teenagers right? Did it occur to you that maybe they were training then and Dorian didn’t start till much later? Did that even cross your mind?

Everyone has seen that black and white photo of a very skinny Dorian sitting down. But how many people have taken the time(before they shot their mouth off on a message board) to find out what he looked like after he started training just a short time?

The guy had potential written all over him because he was beating the top amatuers in his whole country within a few short years and if I remember correctly got top 10 in an international competition shortly after that. That’s against guys who were likely in the game for 10+ years he just blew past.

Are you kidding me? That’s incredible bodybuilding genetics(using it in general terms) going on their combined WITH MOVING KEY EXERCISES FOR HIM UP TO THEIR STRENGTH LIMITS AND EATING HIS WAY UP TO NEW SIZES YEAR AFTER YEAR.

I want to put that in bold because people are losing sight of the fact that only a very select few(Dillet Wheeler… uh that’s all I’ve got right now) can get to that level without doing those things in my opinion. Did Dorian have some secret compound he brewed up in his basement or know the exact reps and sets to gain the most size? Hm… I’m thinking it’s something else.

My only point with bringing up Dorian and Flex was(as I posted which you decided to skip) was that I felt one pushed it hard with what he controlled which is what I hope people are doing, and the other didn’t and never met his full potential.

And about King or Priest or Flex not winning an Olympia. Well guess what they can’t all be winners can they? There are what 25 guys going into this weekends Olympia? How many of them have a remote shot of ever winning it in their career besides Ronnie and Jay who’ve already won? Someone like Mark Dugdale is a hell of a bodybuilder but unfortunately he’s not a guy that can win the Olympia in this day and age.

King shows up out of shape in every show and his waist has gotten out of control, Lee unfortunately is very short and it’s hard for him to stand next to Ronnie and others and get a far shot despite being extremely well built, not to mention he isn’t in the IFBB right now… kind of hard to win the Olympia when you are always getting suspended.

Flex I already spoke on, he was getting destroyed in terms of sheer muscle size standing next to the big boys and that’s what the Olympia has beeen about the past 15 or so years whether we like it or not.

Does it make people mad when they see Dorian now and he’s hovering around 230 looking hard as a rock still and it shatters their hopes he’d look just like them after he comes off? Any more conspiracy theories or is he just down to 10 grand a year in drugs? What a joke

Am I getting my point across to some of the more thickheaded people around here yet? I’m not saying genes determine the winner of the Olympia, but if you take two guys with identical bodybuilding genes and one trains like a cub scout(Flex)and eats like a child and the other trains like he’s trying to get a job lifting houses(Dorian) and eats like a bear coming out of hibernation you are going to see a dramatically different sized beast.

If you take guys with unequal genetics, say Dugdale and Phil Heath, you can put them on the same diet and training and drug program and Phil is always going to come out looking better.

God that was long ha

60

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

I wonder how many guys become preoccupied with being lean because it seems so much more obtainable than being big.[/quote]

Well, don’t forget that not everyone who trains, trains to get hee-yooge. A lot of people absolutely hate the big, muscular look (I’m not gonna delve into the reasons why, they just do). I personally want to look good, whether or not I am “big” doesn’t matter. But what is “good” is truly defined by me, not anyone else (I just know that I haven’t reached that point, yet; I’m still too fat).

I think there are far too many people trying to be huge because they’re really quite insecure. Plus, don’t forget muscle dysmorphia. Get huge, but damn, be healthy in both mind and body.

Better to just be the best that you can be, to the limit of your genetic potential. If someone wants to enhance that with steroids, whatever. So, sure, genetics play a big part in muscular development, but if you don’t even have the desire to train, you’ll never get anywhere, despite your so-called gift.