[quote]Professor X wrote:
Guardian58 wrote:
Not really. What is the percentage of guys from high school that make it into the NFL? It’s what, less than 1% I believe.
Most of the guys in bodybuilding got into weights from sports. After 20 years of this shit I’ve read enough interviews to know. Just because a guy has the genes to look great doesn’t mean he’s a great athlete. One has nothing to do with the other.
What? If guys who are truly genetically elite are more likely to go into sports as their career choice, then avoiding looking at those sports for stats to determine some muscular limit for all humans makes ZERO FUCKING SENSE.[/quote]
Being bodybuilding genetically elite has SHIT to do with being genetically elite for football or basketball or whatever. Lots of guys in the NFL look like shit. Eric Weddle looks like he’s never lifted a weight in his life but he’s a starting safety for the Chargers. Yet Vernon Gholston looks every bit like a bust. Lots of guys LOOK the part but it doesn’t make them great athletes.
One has nothing to do with the other. A great bodybuilder might not be able to walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Yet some guy are unreal athletes that aren’t much to look at. One has shit to do with the other.
Second, since we’re talking about BODYBUILDING why the F would you look at professional athletes??? That’s pathetically stupid to a degree that’s hard to describe. “Hey I need to know what the limit for pole vaulters is so let me see what triple jump guys can do.”
Dumb. But I’m sure all NFL and MLB players are natural too right? heh. You guys are retarded.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
BruceLeeFan wrote:
@Prof X:
If you want to spend your time being the Pollyanna on the board, have at it.
[/quote]
I giggled.
[quote]Guardian58 wrote:
I just wanted to see who beat the challenge. Answer? No one. [/quote]
Maybe no one beat the challenge because no one gives a shit.
[quote]shibalnom wrote:
Guardian58 wrote:
I just wanted to see who beat the challenge. Answer? No one.
Maybe no one beat the challenge because no one gives a shit.[/quote]
More than likely it’s because they can’t.
[quote]Guardian58 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Guardian58 wrote:
Not really. What is the percentage of guys from high school that make it into the NFL? It’s what, less than 1% I believe.
Most of the guys in bodybuilding got into weights from sports. After 20 years of this shit I’ve read enough interviews to know. Just because a guy has the genes to look great doesn’t mean he’s a great athlete. One has nothing to do with the other.
What? If guys who are truly genetically elite are more likely to go into sports as their career choice, then avoiding looking at those sports for stats to determine some muscular limit for all humans makes ZERO FUCKING SENSE.
Being bodybuilding genetically elite has SHIT to do with being genetically elite for football or basketball or whatever. Lots of guys in the NFL look like shit. Eric Weddle looks like he’s never lifted a weight in his life but he’s a starting safety for the Chargers. Yet Vernon Gholston looks every bit like a bust. Lots of guys LOOK the part but it doesn’t make them great athletes.
One has nothing to do with the other. A great bodybuilder might not be able to walk and chew bubble gum at the same time. Yet some guy are unreal athletes that aren’t much to look at. One has shit to do with the other.
Second, since we’re talking about BODYBUILDING why the F would you look at professional athletes??? That’s pathetically stupid to a degree that’s hard to describe. “Hey I need to know what the limit for pole vaulters is so let me see what triple jump guys can do.”
Dumb. But I’m sure all NFL and MLB players are natural too right? heh. You guys are retarded. [/quote]
Gee, genius, if most guys who are genetically elite shoot for money, fame and fortune first, then bodybuilding will not be first on their minds even if some athletes do go on to be bodybuilders later. That is why you don’t ignore pro sports.
Your rant about proportions is irrelevant as well unless you truly think most people on the planet have the small waist and full muscle bellies to look like top past pro bodybuilders even if they can get bigger than them.
Fools are so certain of themselves, always thinking in absolutes.
OMG this was already explained and you still don’t get it.
You’re comparing BODYBUILDERS. No one gives a shit what some professional football or rugby player does. Far as I know, there aren’t any pro football or baseball or basketball players posting on here are there? No. But you do have competing natural bodybuilders. So taking guys who MIGHT have gone into a particular area had more money been involved is galactically stupid. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.
[quote]Guardian58 wrote:
OMG this was already explained and you still don’t get it.
You’re comparing BODYBUILDERS. No one gives a shit what some professional football or rugby player does. Far as I know, there aren’t any pro football or baseball or basketball players posting on here are there? No. But you do have competing natural bodybuilders. So taking guys who MIGHT have gone into a particular area had more money been involved is galactically stupid. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas. [/quote]
The fact that you don’t get this proves how little you actually understand. Yes, there have been pro football players who later go into bodybuilding. Why? Because they had the genetics to build muscle and lose fat at a greater rate than average. Do you really believe that someone can make some limit FOR ALL HUMAN FUCKING BEINGS as far as muscle growth while ignoring the gigantic and strong people who have become pro football players over the last 60 years or more?
Are you really this slow about this?
[quote]evo2008 wrote:
Hi Guys.
I’ve been having a debate elsewhere (ok an argument) about natural and ‘pharmaceutical’ bodybuilding. This guy (who claims to be an ex pro) says it’s impossible for a genetically average guy standing 5ft 10 (@180cm) to weight over 200 lbs at 8% body fat. Would appreciate your thoughts on what he says…[/quote]
How tall are you? If you’re 5’10 why don’t you show him you can do it.
Instead of using words to argue that point just show him yourself. If all else fails show him CT.
Given how passionate some clearly get over these calculations and conclusions, this leads me to suspect that the appeal “Butt’s Ceiling” clearly has for many is not from dispassionate scientific analysis, but from satisfying some emotional need.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Given how passionate some clearly get over these calculations and conclusions, this leads me to suspect that the appeal “Butt’s Ceiling” clearly has for many is not from dispassionate scientific analysis, but from satisfying some emotional need.[/quote]
Hey Bill. After reading your thoughts on the differences in bf% calculations wouldn’t it be ok to assume that there could be a few holes to punch in this “max limit calculator” thing?
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Given how passionate some clearly get over these calculations and conclusions, this leads me to suspect that the appeal “Butt’s Ceiling” clearly has for many is not from dispassionate scientific analysis, but from satisfying some emotional need.[/quote]
Precisely. These people clearly don’t have any real scientific background. They just get off on supporting something that tells them their lack of progress is “natural”.
If anyone is looking at Mr. Butt’s rantings and saying anything other than, “Gee, some nice little guy has put together a list of measurements of past bodybuilders’ ankles and wrists. How fleetingly interesting.” then they deserve whatever delusion they live under.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Given how passionate some clearly get over these calculations and conclusions, this leads me to suspect that the appeal “Butt’s Ceiling” clearly has for many is not from dispassionate scientific analysis, but from satisfying some emotional need.
Hey Bill. After reading your thoughts on the differences in bf% calculations wouldn’t it be ok to assume that there could be a few holes to punch in this “max limit calculator” thing? [/quote]
There are holes before you even get to the calculations. First, his exclusion of every activity aside from bodybuilding (and only in a limited time period based on more assumptions of natural) shows a lack of understanding of human nature. Are those with the greatest genetics who reach the highest levels the fastest more or less prone to even worry about remaining “natural”? Those types of questions make the attempt at nailing down some absolute limit for all based on 1950’s bodybuilders a joke.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Given how passionate some clearly get over these calculations and conclusions, this leads me to suspect that the appeal “Butt’s Ceiling” clearly has for many is not from dispassionate scientific analysis, but from satisfying some emotional need.
Precisely. These people clearly don’t have any real scientific background. They just get off on supporting something that tells them their lack of progress is “natural”.
If anyone is looking at Mr. Butt’s rantings and saying anything other than, “Gee, some nice little guy has put together a list of measurements of past bodybuilders’ ankles and wrists. How fleetingly interesting.” then they deserve whatever delusion they live under.[/quote]
Then put up something concrete to dispute other than your nonsensical ranting fatass.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Guardian58 wrote:
OMG this was already explained and you still don’t get it.
You’re comparing BODYBUILDERS. No one gives a shit what some professional football or rugby player does. Far as I know, there aren’t any pro football or baseball or basketball players posting on here are there? No. But you do have competing natural bodybuilders. So taking guys who MIGHT have gone into a particular area had more money been involved is galactically stupid. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.
The fact that you don’t get this proves how little you actually understand. Yes, there have been pro football players who later go into bodybuilding. Why? Because they had the genetics to build muscle and lose fat at a greater rate than average. Do you really believe that someone can make some limit FOR ALL HUMAN FUCKING BEINGS as far as muscle growth while ignoring the gigantic and strong people who have become pro football players over the last 60 years or more?
Are you really this slow about this?[/quote]
You are mutantly retarded.
Tell me what natural guy that has exceeded all of the numbers that were discussed for natural bodybuilders here, that came from another sport? 1 fucking example.
[quote]Guardian58 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Given how passionate some clearly get over these calculations and conclusions, this leads me to suspect that the appeal “Butt’s Ceiling” clearly has for many is not from dispassionate scientific analysis, but from satisfying some emotional need.
Precisely. These people clearly don’t have any real scientific background. They just get off on supporting something that tells them their lack of progress is “natural”.
If anyone is looking at Mr. Butt’s rantings and saying anything other than, “Gee, some nice little guy has put together a list of measurements of past bodybuilders’ ankles and wrists. How fleetingly interesting.” then they deserve whatever delusion they live under.
Then put up something concrete to dispute other than your nonsensical ranting fatass. [/quote]
Why? You offer nothing of yourself here but insist on people proving things to you? Why do you think you matter so much?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Guardian58 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Given how passionate some clearly get over these calculations and conclusions, this leads me to suspect that the appeal “Butt’s Ceiling” clearly has for many is not from dispassionate scientific analysis, but from satisfying some emotional need.
Precisely. These people clearly don’t have any real scientific background. They just get off on supporting something that tells them their lack of progress is “natural”.
If anyone is looking at Mr. Butt’s rantings and saying anything other than, “Gee, some nice little guy has put together a list of measurements of past bodybuilders’ ankles and wrists. How fleetingly interesting.” then they deserve whatever delusion they live under.
Then put up something concrete to dispute other than your nonsensical ranting fatass.
Why? You offer nothing of yourself here but insist on people proving things to you? Why do you think you matter so much?[/quote]
Translation - “I can’t put anything up to refute. I just don’t like it.”
Got it.
[quote]Guardian58 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Guardian58 wrote:
OMG this was already explained and you still don’t get it.
You’re comparing BODYBUILDERS. No one gives a shit what some professional football or rugby player does. Far as I know, there aren’t any pro football or baseball or basketball players posting on here are there? No. But you do have competing natural bodybuilders. So taking guys who MIGHT have gone into a particular area had more money been involved is galactically stupid. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.
The fact that you don’t get this proves how little you actually understand. Yes, there have been pro football players who later go into bodybuilding. Why? Because they had the genetics to build muscle and lose fat at a greater rate than average. Do you really believe that someone can make some limit FOR ALL HUMAN FUCKING BEINGS as far as muscle growth while ignoring the gigantic and strong people who have become pro football players over the last 60 years or more?
Are you really this slow about this?
You are mutantly retarded.
Tell me what natural guy that has exceeded all of the numbers that were discussed for natural bodybuilders here, that came from another sport? 1 fucking example. [/quote]
How would you or anyone else know who has ever used any type of anabolic? Even drug tests don’t prove whether someone has EVER used anything…making some attempt to prove something to you a waste of time. It doesn’t matter…except to those who want to believe they have no choice but to make minimal progress.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Guardian58 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Guardian58 wrote:
OMG this was already explained and you still don’t get it.
You’re comparing BODYBUILDERS. No one gives a shit what some professional football or rugby player does. Far as I know, there aren’t any pro football or baseball or basketball players posting on here are there? No. But you do have competing natural bodybuilders. So taking guys who MIGHT have gone into a particular area had more money been involved is galactically stupid. If ifs and buts were candy and nuts we’d all have a merry Christmas.
The fact that you don’t get this proves how little you actually understand. Yes, there have been pro football players who later go into bodybuilding. Why? Because they had the genetics to build muscle and lose fat at a greater rate than average. Do you really believe that someone can make some limit FOR ALL HUMAN FUCKING BEINGS as far as muscle growth while ignoring the gigantic and strong people who have become pro football players over the last 60 years or more?
Are you really this slow about this?
You are mutantly retarded.
Tell me what natural guy that has exceeded all of the numbers that were discussed for natural bodybuilders here, that came from another sport? 1 fucking example.
How would you or anyone else know who has ever used any type of anabolic? Even drug tests don’t prove whether someone has EVER used anything…making some attempt to prove something to you a waste of time. It doesn’t matter…except to those who want to believe they have no choice but to make minimal progress.[/quote]
Which is why you use drug tested guys of today and then you look at the guys who were competing before drugs and you see that they numbers are virtually the same. If you don’t know if a guy used or not you throw him out.
Second, if someone here can surpass Reg Park then PROVE IT. Because I am reading bullshit like what you wrote here but I don’t see anything of substance. More talk, no proof.
“I’m going to be huge bro! 250 ripped naturally. No one can tell me it aint possible.”
“Your’e right bro. Don’t let those calculators tell you what you can or can’t do bro. Get swole.”
:::::rolls eyes::::::
[quote]Professor X wrote:
BONEZ217 wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
Given how passionate some clearly get over these calculations and conclusions, this leads me to suspect that the appeal “Butt’s Ceiling” clearly has for many is not from dispassionate scientific analysis, but from satisfying some emotional need.
Hey Bill. After reading your thoughts on the differences in bf% calculations wouldn’t it be ok to assume that there could be a few holes to punch in this “max limit calculator” thing?
There are holes before you even get to the calculations. First, his exclusion of every activity aside from bodybuilding (and only in a limited time period based on more assumptions of natural) shows a lack of understanding of human nature. Are those with the greatest genetics who reach the highest levels the fastest more or less prone to even worry about remaining “natural”? Those types of questions make the attempt at nailing down some absolute limit for all based on 1950’s bodybuilders a joke.[/quote]
Yes, but some people here are too dense to realize that.
Who the fuck knows what kind of bf% calculations were done on all of these people over 60 years?? At this point it’s possible to argue that a bf% calculation is only good to measure the change in the bodyfat % of an individual.