[quote]malonetd wrote:
I would be Edward Norton just so I could bang Salma Hayek.[/quote]
from the title of this thread i would imagine some of these guys wanna be Salma Hayek just so they could bang–oh nevermind…
[quote]sjf wrote:
wufwugy wrote:
i wanna be as ripped as robert deniro in taxi driver.
who’s with me!
How bout Deniro in Cape Fear!![/quote]
yeah, i was just lying. in actuallity, my goal physique is to look like a certain someone who’s name begins with a “K”, ends with an “S”, and has “ate mos” in the middle.
For those that admire Pitt in Troy, apparently he had to use a body double 'cause he has chicken legs.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I have taken several body fat percentages and I have not noticed that much a difference between specific body types. You are right that some people gain fat in different places, however, that doesn’t mean that the guy who I responded to who wrote that he is around 20% body fat with 15" arms is still going to have 15" arms at 6% body fat. Different body types do not account for changes that drastic in body fat percentage. You are basically claiming that someone could look to be 6% body fat as long as they kept their tank top on…but take it off and “Honey, run for cover…this is a whopper.”
I call bullshit and would like for you to show me pictures of people with 20% body fat who look close to contest condition in the shoulders and chest.
[/quote]
Sorry to let you down but I really don’t do that kind of photography. 
I never actually made reference to those numbers, and when you mentioned them the first time I said that was taking it a little far.
However, you mention a person looking 6% with a tank top on, but having people run for cover when he takes it off. Well, the giant bulge would give him away. And, in fact, I do recall this guy that was on the chess team with me who had quite the gut (not an alcoholic, either) and his arms looked fine. Certainly not vascular, though, but the difference between his gut and arms was staggering, especially compared to someone who would have a more “grizzly bear” look if he gained fat. He had a small, thin-shouldered bone structure as well. Sorry, didn’t take a picture of him.
Anyway, Alphuris, if you want my advice, get the fat off first. It will make for a better fat-to-muscle ratio once you start to build again. Although in the meantime you’ll have to deal with ProfX’s disappointment while you “get even smaller”. heh heh heh
[quote]a_train wrote:
hfrogs00 wrote:
a_train wrote:
I don’t know his exact measurements, but that was a pretty great transformation. Why would he let himself go like he did in fight club?! He looked like a little bitch in that movie, which was only like 6 months apart. Great movie…no Great movies by the way.
Because that is what the role called for. Who is more believable in that role? American History X Norton, or “skinny little bitch” Norton who needs a change from his miserable life and develops a split personality. I say the skinny bitch Norton.
True, but who the fuck would want to look like that?! It must suck to take a role in a movie where they say…" Start drinking Soy milk and eat only 500 calories a day, and what ever you do, don’t lift anything heavier than a pencil" I don’t care who you are, Edward Norton or not, you would get a lot more respect walking around looking like Derek Vinyard than you would looking like Tyler Durden…or what ever the fuck Nortons name was in Fight Club…just my $.02.[/quote]
Thats true. I dont want to look like either one of them. But the answer to your question, “who the fuck does want to look like that?” Norton wants to look like that for millions of dollars. As far as Norton and Pitt, they may be bigger in some movies but they are still skinny. It’s not that hard to look ripped at their bodyweight. Its primarily diet. And I have seen the workouts of some actors and they are definitely not anything special.
[quote]NateN wrote:
Although in the meantime you’ll have to deal with ProfX’s disappointment while you “get even smaller”. heh heh heh[/quote]
My “disappointment” doesn’t lie with him. It lies much more with the overwhelming number of posts claiming to desire to look like overhyped pop-stars who, outside of professional photography, lighting, makeup, air brushing and positioning, wouldn’t pass for someone who lifts weights on the street. It shows that there are many on this site who have goals that are reachable for the majority of the people in this country if they simply put the time in. It is almost like making “graduating from high school” your one goal in life. Nearly everyone can do it if they simply go to class everyday.
It is a plain enough goal that it would allow most to feel no obligation towards putting their all into the effort. In essence, it is just enough to get by. Yes, I find it amazing that getting arms that measure around 15" is actually a goal on a board that used to be much more “hardcore” than this. It is as if Men’s Health were advertising links to this site. Between this one and the other about not getting too big as if anyone just wakes up one day huge for no damn reason, I can see that standing out from the crowd is now looked down upon. The majority only desire to fit in.
Amen Prof. X
I mean you guys WERE on the right track when you were talking about that Andrew Brynarski guy, but then all of a sudden you are talking about wanting to look like Edward Norton or Chridtian Bale? WTF? I thought we were on T-nation here? Why don’t you guys want to look like a Dave Tate or a Thibudeau or a Waterbury? I respect that Norton put on some muscle, but really, to analyse it, he probably hardly ever touched a wieght seriously until he had to for a movie. Add some quality calories and presto - a newbie 20 lbs (or whatever).
Soryy for the rant, and I understand people have different goals and such, but man, if Christian Bale is your ideal…I don’t know, man.
Anvil
SInce Rocky III was mentioned, how about Mr. T in Rocky III! He was JACKED!
http://images.t-nation.com/forum_images/./1/.1106820294716.dave_thomas.jpg
I want to look like Dave Thomas.
Seriously, sometimes it is hard to determine a person’s arm size just by looking, and you do lose size when you diet, but your arms can look bigger.
My brother in law has no fat on his arms, or anywhere else for that matter, and when he flexes, you can see every fiber. It makes him look bigger then he actually is, but my forearm measures bigger then his upper arm. (Actually an inch bigger.) And my arms are unfortunately a weak part for me. (Elbow injury does not help either, but I also have some imbalances to work out.)
I doubt Norton’s arms are over 15". But then again why do I care?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
NateN wrote:
Although in the meantime you’ll have to deal with ProfX’s disappointment while you “get even smaller”. heh heh heh
My “disappointment” doesn’t lie with him. It lies much more with the overwhelming number of posts claiming to desire to look like overhyped pop-stars who, outside of professional photography, lighting, makeup, air brushing and positioning, wouldn’t pass for someone who lifts weights on the street. It shows that there are many on this site who have goals that are reachable for the majority of the people in this country if they simply put the time in. It is almost like making “graduating from high school” your one goal in life. Nearly everyone can do it if they simply go to class everyday.
It is a plain enough goal that it would allow most to feel no obligation towards putting their all into the effort. In essence, it is just enough to get by. Yes, I find it amazing that getting arms that measure around 15" is actually a goal on a board that used to be much more “hardcore” than this. It is as if Men’s Health were advertising links to this site. Between this one and the other about not getting too big as if anyone just wakes up one day huge for no damn reason, I can see that standing out from the crowd is now looked down upon. The majority only desire to fit in.[/quote]
I know it’s not directed specifically at me, but I would like to mention 15"s was not my goal for my arms. Truth be told, I’m aiming for 17"+ Once I get there I’m going to evaluate if I want to keep aiming for bigger, or specifically go stronger and decide to accept what size comes with the strength. I never stated that small measurements were my goal. I hate the modern pop cut look, it looks like a spaghetti noodle etched into and then sprayed with water.
Besides, I don’t even do focus work, I do almost entirely compound movements. Looking like Waterbury would be fine in my book, I would like to see his legs because honestly thats the area I like to look for progress the most since it would have the biggest impact on my sport of choice (Ice Hockey).
I think (maybe wishfully) that the people who want that look come upon this site and make a few posts then leave. I’m guessing the material here is too in-depth for them. Which makes sense since you really don’t have to know much to drop twenty pounds of fat and gain ten pounds of muscle.
As far as standing out in the crowd, that’s one of the great things about lifting. You can be “pro” at a lot of things and no one would be able to tell looking at you. But lifting? Get to an advanced stage and EVERYONE will know.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
My “disappointment” doesn’t lie with him. It lies much more with the overwhelming number of posts claiming to desire to look like overhyped pop-stars who, outside of professional photography, lighting, makeup, air brushing and positioning, wouldn’t pass for someone who lifts weights on the street. It shows that there are many on this site who have goals that are reachable for the majority of the people in this country if they simply put the time in. It is almost like making “graduating from high school” your one goal in life. Nearly everyone can do it if they simply go to class everyday.
It is a plain enough goal that it would allow most to feel no obligation towards putting their all into the effort. In essence, it is just enough to get by. Yes, I find it amazing that getting arms that measure around 15" is actually a goal on a board that used to be much more “hardcore” than this. It is as if Men’s Health were advertising links to this site. Between this one and the other about not getting too big as if anyone just wakes up one day huge for no damn reason, I can see that standing out from the crowd is now looked down upon. The majority only desire to fit in.[/quote]
With out this thread I would never be able to set goals or have motivation to lift any weights. Thank you all for turning my attention to hollywood and mildy impressive physiques to serve as my personal motivation!
For years I have had the goal to go in the gym and lift heavier shit then the last time I was there. From the sounds of this thread I should have been trying to mimic some moderatly/small hollywood type who probably doesnt know a dead lift from a concentration curl…
This thread is definatly in the running for “Lamest shit of 2005”
I wanna look like Danny Devito in Twins. Y’know the one with Arnold Schwarzenegger.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
alphuris wrote:
I love how you blame people for having different goals than your own. Especially people like me who after years of not going to the gym, come here, get inspired to work out again(or for the first time), then see you rip each of us just starting to try and add some meat. Have you ever once had the thought that maybe a ounce of encouragement is worth a pound of belittling?
…It’s actually funny to see such a staunch defender of oppression blatantly throw prejudice at someone just because they are different.
That was a beautiful rant. I almost started crying…that is, until I realized that my response to you WAS THE TRUTH. As you diet, many of your measurements will get SMALLER unless you have added muscle in amounts enough to justify the loss. That means someone with 18" arms at 16% body fat will probably have arms a little smaller if they dropped to 6% body fat. That means, though you may have 15" arms now, dropping to 6% body fat will more than likely make them smaller, not keep them the same size. That is why it makes little sense for someone who is already considered fairly small to start trying to lose even more weight unless they are overweight in the first place.
As far as Edward Norton in AHX, I also doubt his arms are much over 15" in that picture. He is simply lean. That means, if he was NOT lean, his arms would probably measure a little larger. JMB’s post about how the camera can make you look larger is also correct, especially if those around you in the same shot are even smaller.[/quote]
Although the remark came across somewhat abrasive, PX makes a good point… Last year I was 6’1" 210lbs @ ~ 16% BF…My arms measured 18 inches unpumped. Now, I’m 5’8" 198 @ ~11%BF and my arms are 17.25…As you can see I’m now 5 inches shorter and my arms lost some size…Okay, kidding, I’m still 6’1"…
gnostic 228-It looks like the cross bridges of your myofibrils have leached the calcium from your bones.Thats unfortunate, but I heard that if you eat nothing but tumms and muscle-schrek for the next three years, you will not only regain your origional height, but will actualy be able to fly!
Keep us posted.
[quote]mindeffer01 wrote:
gnostic 228-It looks like the cross bridges of your myofibrils have leached the calcium from your bones.Thats unfortunate, but I heard that if you eat nothing but tumms and muscle-schrek for the next three years, you will not only regain your origional height, but will actualy be able to fly!
Keep us posted. [/quote]
Yeah, with assistance from my wife, I actually use the Tums suppositories. They are much faster acting and have a high rate of obsortion… I think it’s making me leaner as well. : )