[quote]browndisaster wrote:
I guarantee that you’d being uncomfortable posting a shirtless picture today, which really sets off my BS alarm.
[/quote]
Me taken 10 Feb 2013 255lbs.
This is me at probably the “fattest” I plan to get right now.
[/quote]
If you were to actually compete, you’d probably come in around 190 if you wanted to step on stage with halfway decent conditioning. That 255 is really no indication of your true size. Whether a dude came down from 220 or 260 to get to 6% bodyfat at 185, it doesn’t matter…actually, yes it does. The 220 guy is gonna be healthier, superior blood pressure reading, blood glucose levels, etc. throughout most of the cut. Not to mention he can run a “slower” cut and probably has a better chance of preserving most of his hard earned muscle.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I think most of the forum has had enough of these same types of threads where you all turn everything into bullshit.
[/quote]
Do you ever stop to wonder why it always happens to YOU? Why do the same posters give you crap all the time and no one else?
You probably think it’s jealousy; cuz you’re so swole. If that was the case then people like Synergy (i.e, people far more developed than you) would have many more haters. But they don’t; not even one. You’re an asshole and people have had enough of it. You always talk about how the forums have degraded over the years start, but fail to see the role you have played in it.[/quote]
Hey, please show how I have been an “asshole” in this thread.
I’m waiting.[/quote]
Go back and read approximately 45,000 of your 45,968 posts.
Like I said before, when the nice guys like Stu start calling you out on your attitude you can’t simply chalk that up to just another post from one your haters.
[quote]browndisaster wrote:
I guarantee that you’d being uncomfortable posting a shirtless picture today, which really sets off my BS alarm.
[/quote]
Me taken 10 Feb 2013 255lbs.
This is me at probably the “fattest” I plan to get right now.
[/quote]
If you were to actually compete, you’d probably come in around 190 if you wanted to step on stage with halfway decent conditioning. That 255 is really no indication of your true size. Whether a dude came down from 220 or 260 to get to 6% bodyfat at 185, it doesn’t matter…actually, yes it does. The 220 guy is gonna be healthier, superior blood pressure reading, blood glucose levels, etc. throughout most of the cut. Not to mention he can run a “slower” cut and probably has a better chance of preserving most of his hard earned muscle. [/quote]
My blood pressure is fine and has been since day one in the military.
That is why knowing that all humans don’t respond the same is valuable before making comments like you just did.
You are pulling numbers out of your ass. I weigh 255lbs in a condition that no one is going to call “fat” short of comparing me to someone in contest shape. I’m happy with that…and most of the people here will never compete nor do they want to.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I think most of the forum has had enough of these same types of threads where you all turn everything into bullshit.
[/quote]
Do you ever stop to wonder why it always happens to YOU? Why do the same posters give you crap all the time and no one else?
You probably think it’s jealousy; cuz you’re so swole. If that was the case then people like Synergy (i.e, people far more developed than you) would have many more haters. But they don’t; not even one. You’re an asshole and people have had enough of it. You always talk about how the forums have degraded over the years start, but fail to see the role you have played in it.[/quote]
Hey, please show how I have been an “asshole” in this thread.
I’m waiting.[/quote]
Go back and read approximately 45,000 of your 45,968 posts.
Like I said before, when the nice guys like Stu start calling you out on your attitude you can’t simply chalk that up to just another post from one your haters.
The problem is you.[/quote]
No, I asked you where in this thread I was acting like an asshole.
If you have to go to other threads to show this, then why would you turn this thread to shit for no reason?
[quote]browndisaster wrote:
Q: are you going to have kids or will this be your legacy[/quote]
I hope not. He couldn’t even manage to take care of his puppy.[/quote]
This is ridiculous. [/quote]
Agree with that…asinine low blow.
[/quote]
Normally even I would agree but I don’t care anymore. The pre-fatigue thread was the first thread I ever engaged him the way I did. He doesn’t care about how much of a dick he is so now I don’t care either. He’ll get the same treatment from me.
[quote]browndisaster wrote:
Q: are you going to have kids or will this be your legacy[/quote]
I hope not. He couldn’t even manage to take care of his puppy.[/quote]
This is ridiculous. [/quote]
Agree with that…asinine low blow.
[/quote]
Normally even I would agree but I don’t care anymore. The pre-fatigue thread was the first thread I ever engaged him the way I did. He doesn’t care about how much of a dick he is so now I don’t care either. He’ll get the same treatment from me.[/quote]
The only people acting like dicks here are you and browndisaster.
If you can’t show where I am supposedly acting like such an “asshole” in this thread that it warrants attacks, then why bring that to this thread?
There was a decent discussion going on…yet all you did with it was this.
I think every Internet troll should study X’s Internet persona in detail. Why? Because he succeeds where almost all trolls fail - he always, without fail gets responds/attention whenever he posts, despite the fact that he deserves to be ignored by everyone.
Why is that?
From a neutral perspective, X doesn’t offer anything special: he doesn’t know much, he isn’t very bright, he isn’t very funny, he isn’t very helpful, he acts like a immature teenager, etc.
BUT somehow he always succeeds in rubbing some person the wrong way and voila ATTENTION.
If Dante and X believe in a scientific “Set point” then I disagree
[/quote]
I am not sure what this statement means. This would be different for everyone at any specific time. The point is, your body is more comfortable at a certain weight right now. For it to feel comfortable at a much higher weight that now uses more calories and stress to even maintain, it will have to hold that weight for a while.
It is very “scientific”.
I weigh just under 255lbs right now. I am at that stage that if |I miss one meal, I will drop back closer to 250lbs. Why? Because “250lbs” is my body’s “setpoint” right now and it will take more effort for me to hold “255” without dropping weight at the first sign of “famine”.
Things like this are the only reason I mention my education. [/quote]
Exactly the version of “Set point” I disagree with. If you say your 250, then why are we discussing 255? We all know that people go up and down in weight daily, well maybe not I forgot it takes a special education to know things like that. The concept of “set point” refers to the fact that a person who eats 5000 calories a day to maintain 250lbs, will not lose weight if they eat 4500 calories a day for year because their body will adjust their metabolism. If “set point” was true. I disagree with that I say the person will lose weight.
Going back to your example I doubt somebody who stayed at their bulk weight for 5 hours would lose weight if they missed one meal. Shocking I know.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
I’m calling bullshit on the whole ‘lean bulk’ thing, and as much as I regret doing it, I’m calling bullshit on Stu’s replies to this thread. Stu clearly concedes that he built his substrate carring extra bodyweight and lifting heavy. Now; while standing at the top of the stairs he recommends others follow a different path. He would like everyone (himself included)to believe that he would have reached the point he is at without the ‘bulking’ and ‘top-end’ work that litters his past. Poppycock! If Stu had never ran his weight up into the 225 range his stage weight would be 165 not 176. Of course we’ll never know; he did it the traditional way and make any claim he would like at this point. When Stu states that a lifter reaches a point where the extra-body weight interferes with progress, he is correct. The idea that anyone his advocating becoming a fatass is false, but only those in the sweet spot of there maturation cycle(and they would have probably added that LBM without the training) and the genetically blessed are going to add much LBM while in ‘all abs in’ condition. I’ve been training for over twenty five years and every single ‘big’ person I have ever known (male & female alike) got there the same way.
Disclaimer: nothing contained in my post should be interpreted to mean that I am not a fan of Stu. [/quote]
Lol, no offense taken brother, we’re discussing approaches and concepts, and I think everyone on here knows that I try to always remain respectful and am certainly not one to throw my accomplishments in to support my thinking on everything.
I’ve been very open about the fact that I got my bodyweight up fairly high, because I was led to believe by all the “big guys” in the gym that it was the surest way to get big. However, I’m also honest enough to admit that I certainly didn’t sport the musculature that I thought that I would at that weight, and it had nothing to do with bodyfat levels. Also, realize that this was in my late 20’s, bordering 30, so I can’t look for the ‘favorable hormonal environment’ that we always attribute to newbs, or younger trainers.
The majority of my serious gains came probably from around 33-38. During that time, I don’t think I ever let myself get past 210, more likely closer to 205, BUT my composition sure changed a hell of a lot each year as I understood and focused more on aspects of training and especially DIET that I hadn’t before. I didn’t understand that the human body is a hormonal machine, and you can’t force a car to suddenly get used to holding more fuel so that it can go faster by continually forcing it in.
I still love being able to say that I “hit 220”, just as much as I love being able to say that I “used to bench 385”, BUT, I had less muscle at 220 than I did at 205 (think about that!), just as much as my chest became much more developed when I stopped benching so heavy. The point of this, is that I gained a better understanding of making things work for my goals. That includes using food as much as it includes using the weights.
If Dante and X believe in a scientific “Set point” then I disagree
[/quote]
I am not sure what this statement means. This would be different for everyone at any specific time. The point is, your body is more comfortable at a certain weight right now. For it to feel comfortable at a much higher weight that now uses more calories and stress to even maintain, it will have to hold that weight for a while.
It is very “scientific”.
I weigh just under 255lbs right now. I am at that stage that if |I miss one meal, I will drop back closer to 250lbs. Why? Because “250lbs” is my body’s “setpoint” right now and it will take more effort for me to hold “255” without dropping weight at the first sign of “famine”.
Things like this are the only reason I mention my education. [/quote]
Exactly the version of “Set point” I disagree with. If you say your 250, then why are we discussing 255? We all know that people go up and down in weight daily, well maybe not I forgot it takes a special education to know things like that. The concept of “set point” refers to the fact that a person who eats 5000 calories a day to maintain 250lbs, will not lose weight if they eat 4500 calories a day for year because their body will adjust their metabolism. If “set point” was true. I disagree with that I say the person will lose weight.
Going back to your example I doubt somebody who stayed at their bulk weight for 5 hours would lose weight if they missed one meal. Shocking I know.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
While we cannot disprove the whole “set point” thing, I think it is not difficult to find large holes in X’s argumentation.
Sadly, no proper discussion is possible with said individual, hence I will not even begin.
ps: Why do you still bother Stu?[/quote]
Debating with X is not always for X. Right or wrong X brings up many points that lurkers or others have thought of at one point or another.
[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:
I’m calling bullshit on the whole ‘lean bulk’ thing, and as much as I regret doing it, I’m calling bullshit on Stu’s replies to this thread. Stu clearly concedes that he built his substrate carring extra bodyweight and lifting heavy. Now; while standing at the top of the stairs he recommends others follow a different path. He would like everyone (himself included)to believe that he would have reached the point he is at without the ‘bulking’ and ‘top-end’ work that litters his past. Poppycock! If Stu had never ran his weight up into the 225 range his stage weight would be 165 not 176. Of course we’ll never know; he did it the traditional way and make any claim he would like at this point. When Stu states that a lifter reaches a point where the extra-body weight interferes with progress, he is correct. The idea that anyone his advocating becoming a fatass is false, but only those in the sweet spot of there maturation cycle(and they would have probably added that LBM without the training) and the genetically blessed are going to add much LBM while in ‘all abs in’ condition. I’ve been training for over twenty five years and every single ‘big’ person I have ever known (male & female alike) got there the same way.
Disclaimer: nothing contained in my post should be interpreted to mean that I am not a fan of Stu. [/quote]
Please show me the pic of Kai at a bodyfat level of Px.
[quote]browndisaster wrote:
Q: are you going to have kids or will this be your legacy[/quote]
I hope not. He couldn’t even manage to take care of his puppy.[/quote]
This is ridiculous. [/quote]
Agree with that…asinine low blow.
[/quote]
Normally even I would agree but I don’t care anymore. The pre-fatigue thread was the first thread I ever engaged him the way I did. He doesn’t care about how much of a dick he is so now I don’t care either. He’ll get the same treatment from me.[/quote]
The only people acting like dicks here are you and browndisaster.
If you can’t show where I am supposedly acting like such an “asshole” in this thread that it warrants attacks, then why bring that to this thread?
There was a decent discussion going on…yet all you did with it was this.
I am sure many are getting tired of it.
[/quote]
The original comment made in this thread was in reference to the bad attitude you exhibit in general, in thousands of your posts. Either you are in denial, you are a liar, or you just don’t know how to effectively communicate with others.
I believe I mentioned how I’ve had many clients who come to me claiming to weigh a certain amount at the start of a prep, and then magically are down 10 lbs at the end of the week. Surely you can see how absurd the possibility of dropping 10 lbs of fat in a week can be. Possibly up there with losing 5 lbs if you miss a meal. Hence MY term, a “false” weight.
[quote]
Once again, what is “false” about this weight? [/quote]
See above.
I just figured since you were throwing out your gain of 100 lbs, that I’d throw out my own gains.
As any competitor who closely monitors his body can attest, bodyweights can fluctuate quite a bit during the day. My own bounces up and down ~4 lbs throughout the day. However, this is a fact despite my not missing meals. Your situation of losing 5 lbs from missing one meal simply makes me consider your perceived weight along the same lines as many of my ‘big guy’ clients. That first week or two of a serious diet is a harsh blow to the ego, lemme tell ya.
[quote]Dentists follow the same curriculum as the med students through year 3. That means gross anatomy and even neurology and pharmacology. I am not sure how stating this aids my understanding of the human body would offend someone. It is simply the truth.
My medical background is extensive enough for me to claim that it helps in my understanding of many bodybuilding topics.
If me stating as such truly offends you, maybe the problem is you. [/quote]
STORMTHEBEACH seems to have a background that I would think most would consider a lot more relevant to what gets discussed on here, and he’s humble enough to to acknowledge the different between what is covered in early med-related curriculum. I also think that due to the nature of people on this site, the objective view of just how much MDs really know in terms of addressing our goals of hypertrophy and lipolysis, shows that they are not exactly regarded with the same respect as top competitors or coaches who have a proven track record with both. Hell, my brother is a DPT, with an insanely deep understanding of how the human body works, and a lot of times when we discuss BBing related topics, he’s humble enough to admit when something is beyond his scope of expertise.
And while he could very well have people call him Doctor, he doesn’t. He doesn’t need it, he knows how much he truly knows, and demonstrates it every single day. Sure when I go to the Dentist for a cleaning I call him Doc, but to me, it’s just a friendly sign of respect, not an actual indication that I believe for one moment that he’s had the schooling and possesses the knowledge of an MD.
Seriously though, I have much better things to do than bump heads with you. I’ve had many disagreements with things you’ve written in the past, but always felt the better part of valor was just leaving things be, and hoping people reading this site for information would be smart enough to decipher things for themselves. Lately though, I’ve watched several threads that could, no, should have been very simple matters, devolve into god knows what. When I first had a few phone conversations with Tim Patterson way back, I thanked him for his original paper magazine. It exposed a young-ish gym rat to coaches and thinkers who actually had a real understanding, and proven track records reaching the goals that all bodybuilders aspire towards. It really showed me that more often than not, the big-guy in the gym is gonna be a big guy no matter what he does, and that very often, while something may have yielded some results for him, it was very often not because of the reasons that he believed.
What I’ve also learned in my years of going from a fledgling competitor to a 2x Natural Pro and fairly popular coach (if I do say so myself), is the huge difference between being big, and being muscular. Being big is very often the result of genetics, and possibly a few environmental factors. Being muscular on the other hand, is the results of a hell of a lot more applied knowledge and effort.