Let's Define It

Training Bodybuilding
101

[quote]riddle22 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I really think some of this depends on if the question is asked in person or who they are standing next to.

Some of the tall strong man guys like Pfister or Samuelson look like crap in pictures, but they’d probably get a “holy shit” out of me in person.[/quote]

This is a huge factor that makes things hard to judge through pictures alone. Someone who’s 5’5 and comp-level lean at 200lbs or so is going to probably look “huge” in a picture with no frame of reference. A 6’5 guy who’s 250lbs (I’m just pulling these numbers out of my ass, but you should get the idea) at the same level of leanness probably won’t look quite as impressive in a pic with no reference. Get a pic of them standing next to each other and all of a sudden the perspective will change quite a bit.[/quote]

?

That is the difference between newbs posting their opinion and people who have experience here.

I doubt there are many serious lifters who are in the dark about height and weight differences. They can still tell who’s built and who isn’t.

If someone being 5’5" throws you off, you haven’t been doing this long enough to voice an opinion.

102

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
What about enormous not lean powerlifters and off season BBers?[/quote]

Some fit the holy shit part I think (ruggeria at his best, say, the pic where he was doing a front double bi… lats not large enough, but other than that I think he qualifies… Not at the same level as Zack Khan, but still fits the bill), but it’s a little hard to tell sometimes… Like with marius, I think the arms and delts (and in this particular case, back width) need to come up for a “holy shit” physique rating.

[/quote]

What about someone like the big Z? Huge, tons of muscle, but not a great physique.

I really think some of this depends on if the question is asked in person or who they are standing next to.

Some of the tall strong man guys like Pfister or Samuelson look like crap in pictures, but they’d probably get a “holy shit” out of me in person.[/quote]

Pfister is definitely not a holy shit imo… Nowhere close.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/mhp/phil_pfister_dumbbell.jpg
TBH he’s probably smaller than some here.
Height 6 ft 6 in (1.98 m)
Weight 375 pounds (170 kg)

He’s exceedingly tall and weighs a lot, but at his height it just doesn’t look like all that much… If he were leaner at a similar weight though…
Physique wise he likely has a lot more potential in him.

Check the pics of vic richards, esp. the first one posted here… Similar weight I believe at his largest but blows phister out of the water so bad you really can’t put them in the same category.

I’d still go with the “musclemass vs. height” thing as my main way to define this, plus some key areas.

103

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I mean in some pics pfister barely looks like he works out, But he at least would be in the huge category I’d think.[/quote]

No offense, but why discuss him?

The people we are talking about don’t look like they barely workout in ANY picture.[/quote]

Because that’s what makes guys like him interesting. I’m sure he’d be a hell of a lot more impressive in person.

He is kind of the opposite of someone like onemorerep. Huge frame, big joints, bad muscle shapes. he can hold a ton of mass and not look like it.

I’m also not saying he has to be put in huge or “WTF?!” categories. Just thought it would be interesting to discuss where someone like him falls on people’s radars.

What category you you put him or zydrunas in, X?

104

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I mean in some pics pfister barely looks like he works out, But he at least would be in the huge category I’d think.[/quote]

No way to call that huge or holy shit level imo.

It’s no different than a shorter guy of similar proportions to me… He is simply taller and thus weighs more/has larger measurements, but he hasn’t actually achieved any more phyisque-wise… Of course he’ll still look large if you’re 5’10 and step next to him (but if you are really big, it should still be obvious that he isn’t all that developed by comparison.)

Now, his strongman feats are another matter of course.

105

[quote]Professor X wrote:

The people we are talking about don’t look like they barely workout in ANY picture.[/quote]

Good point… If you’re big, huge, or holy-shit level that shows from any angle, clothes, no clothes, whatever. Can’t mistake that imo.

106

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
What about enormous not lean powerlifters and off season BBers?[/quote]

Some fit the holy shit part I think (ruggeria at his best, say, the pic where he was doing a front double bi… lats not large enough, but other than that I think he qualifies… Not at the same level as Zack Khan, but still fits the bill), but it’s a little hard to tell sometimes… Like with marius, I think the arms and delts (and in this particular case, back width) need to come up for a “holy shit” physique rating.

[/quote]

What about someone like the big Z? Huge, tons of muscle, but not a great physique.

I really think some of this depends on if the question is asked in person or who they are standing next to.

Some of the tall strong man guys like Pfister or Samuelson look like crap in pictures, but they’d probably get a “holy shit” out of me in person.[/quote]

Pfister is definitely not a holy shit imo… Nowhere close.

http://www.bodybuilding.com/store/mhp/phil_pfister_dumbbell.jpg
TBH he’s probably smaller than some here.
Height 6 ft 6 in (1.98 m)
Weight 375 pounds (170 kg)

He’s exceedingly tall and weighs a lot, but at his height it just doesn’t look like all that much… If he were leaner at a similar weight though…
Physique wise he likely has a lot more potential in him.

Check the pics of vic richards, esp. the first one posted here… Similar weight I believe at his largest but blows phister out of the water so bad you really can’t put them in the same category.

I’d still go with the “musclemass vs. height” thing as my main way to define this, plus some key areas.

[/quote]

Probably needs to start the roids though.

And I don’t know, 375 and not fat is huge in my opinion even at 6-6.

The other side of that is that 6-6 would make him more impressive in person.

107

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I mean in some pics pfister barely looks like he works out, But he at least would be in the huge category I’d think.[/quote]

No way to call that huge or holy shit level imo.

It’s no different than a shorter guy of similar proportions to me… He is simply taller and thus weighs more/has larger measurements, but he hasn’t actually achieved any more phyisque-wise… Of course he’ll still look large if you’re 5’10 and step next to him (but if you are really big, it should still be obvious that he isn’t all that developed by comparison.)

Now, his strongman feats are another matter of course.

[/quote]

so 6-6 375 only gets you “big” on the C-C scale? =0)

108

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I mean in some pics pfister barely looks like he works out, But he at least would be in the huge category I’d think.[/quote]

No offense, but why discuss him?

The people we are talking about don’t look like they barely workout in ANY picture.[/quote]

Because that’s what makes guys like him interesting. I’m sure he’d be a hell of a lot more impressive in person.

He is kind of the opposite of someone like onemorerep. Huge frame, big joints, bad muscle shapes. he can hold a ton of mass and not look like it.
[/quote] That’s just it, he doesn’t hold a ton of mass for his height… You can’t really equate his 375 lbs to even a 5’10 300 lb guy… More like 5’10 225 or so and somewhat out of shape.

[quote]
I’m also not saying he has to be put in huge or “WTF?!” categories. Just thought it would be interesting to discuss where someone like him falls on people’s radars.

What category you you put him or zydrunas in, X?[/quote]

Are there any better pictures of zydrunas around?
From the one you posted he looks a lot bigger than pfister, muscle-vs-height wise.

Pfister barely makes “big”, zydrunas would probably be huge to me… Hard to say.

109

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I mean in some pics pfister barely looks like he works out, But he at least would be in the huge category I’d think.[/quote]

No offense, but why discuss him?

The people we are talking about don’t look like they barely workout in ANY picture.[/quote]

Because that’s what makes guys like him interesting. I’m sure he’d be a hell of a lot more impressive in person.

He is kind of the opposite of someone like onemorerep. Huge frame, big joints, bad muscle shapes. he can hold a ton of mass and not look like it.
[/quote] That’s just it, he doesn’t hold a ton of mass for his height… You can’t really equate his 375 lbs to even a 5’10 300 lb guy… More like 5’10 225 or so and somewhat out of shape.

Uh, he’s like 6-3 400 something. But, he’s pretty chubby. Google “zydrunas savickas”

110

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Dude, they call me obese. Any guy who isn’t sub-10-12% is apparently on the fast track to a spot on Springer as “the guy who’s so fat he cant get out of bed”.

Most of these newbs can’t tell the difference between “smooth with a shit load of muscle” and “sedentary fat ass”.[/quote]

Lol…no - I understand what you’re saying. Lord knows I’m no stranger to being called fat myself…lol…

But there’s a big contingent out there who view a guy like him (although tremendously muscular) as a fat slob. The chest hair clinches it - it’s like if the guy isn’t tanned, waxed and 6% he can’t possibly have muscle, because we have to look past that yucky hair and bodyfat…lol…

Hey, I sure as hell am a fan of lean, tanned aesthetic physiques, but a practiced eye can see the potential beneath the surface in a situation like that.

111

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I mean in some pics pfister barely looks like he works out, But he at least would be in the huge category I’d think.[/quote]

No way to call that huge or holy shit level imo.

It’s no different than a shorter guy of similar proportions to me… He is simply taller and thus weighs more/has larger measurements, but he hasn’t actually achieved any more phyisque-wise… Of course he’ll still look large if you’re 5’10 and step next to him (but if you are really big, it should still be obvious that he isn’t all that developed by comparison.)

Now, his strongman feats are another matter of course.

[/quote]

so 6-6 375 only gets you “big” on the C-C scale? =0)[/quote]

You know what I mean man. If you’re huge, you look like it.
Just being tall and thus having to be much heavier than a 5’10 guy in order to look the same in relation to your height doesn’t change that…

http://s.chakpak.com/se_images/118374_-1_564_none/tall-woman-wallpaper.jpg

There. One is tall and seemingly huge compared to the other, but she looks no more impressive from a physique standpoint to me…

Lee Priest is/was one of the largest guys for his height. Would you classify pfister as larger than priest in the BB sense just because he is taller?

I’m going by development here… And pfister isn’t at all huge for his height all things considered. And I do think that he can likely get bigger naturally still, unless there is some weird absolute weight lbm limit that works regardless of height…

112

.

113

My classifications:

Skinny

I honestly think most of T-Nation falls in this category.

Still waiting to be proven wrong about that.

114

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I mean in some pics pfister barely looks like he works out, But he at least would be in the huge category I’d think.[/quote]

No way to call that huge or holy shit level imo.

It’s no different than a shorter guy of similar proportions to me… He is simply taller and thus weighs more/has larger measurements, but he hasn’t actually achieved any more phyisque-wise… Of course he’ll still look large if you’re 5’10 and step next to him (but if you are really big, it should still be obvious that he isn’t all that developed by comparison.)

Now, his strongman feats are another matter of course.

[/quote]

so 6-6 375 only gets you “big” on the C-C scale? =0)[/quote]

You know what I mean man. If you’re huge, you look like it.
Just being tall and thus having to be much heavier than a 5’10 guy in order to look the same in relation to your height doesn’t change that…

http://s.chakpak.com/se_images/118374_-1_564_none/tall-woman-wallpaper.jpg

There. One is tall and seemingly huge compared to the other, but she looks no more impressive from a physique standpoint to me…

Lee Priest is/was one of the largest guys for his height. Would you classify pfister as larger than priest in the BB sense just because he is taller?

I’m going by development here… And pfister isn’t at all huge for his height all things considered. And I do think that he can likely get bigger naturally still, unless there is some weird absolute weight lbm limit that works regardless of height…

[/quote]

I was only joking with you. But I still wouldn’t tell pfister he wasn’t huge to his face. You’re scale really sucks for tall guys. I would kinda think it would be harder for some with his genetics to fill out as apposed to a 5-10 guy. I do think “big boned” guys like him should get a little credit for that.

EDIT: And if this ranking is meant in purely bbing context, I apologize. I was thinking of this in more of a seeing guys walking down the street/personal opinion context. If that isn’t what was meant, my posts are way off topic.

115

400×728 58.8 KB

Kinda sorta works out…seems to apply to most Crossfitters.

These guys would not look big in clothes but if they take off their shirt and flex really hard with the light fixed perfectly overhead, you just may see some muscle.

116

Big

Now, everyone knows you workout even if you are standing 50 feet away.

117

Heavyweight

Now you are turning heads simply because your shirt is hugging your arms and now what you eat and why is a major topic of discussion everyday at work.

118

749×990 159 KB

Huge

You are reaching freak status. People stop you randomly in grocery stores…or anywhere just to talk about how big you are.

119

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I mean in some pics pfister barely looks like he works out, But he at least would be in the huge category I’d think.[/quote]

No offense, but why discuss him?

The people we are talking about don’t look like they barely workout in ANY picture.[/quote]

Because that’s what makes guys like him interesting. I’m sure he’d be a hell of a lot more impressive in person.

He is kind of the opposite of someone like onemorerep. Huge frame, big joints, bad muscle shapes. he can hold a ton of mass and not look like it.
[/quote] That’s just it, he doesn’t hold a ton of mass for his height… You can’t really equate his 375 lbs to even a 5’10 300 lb guy… More like 5’10 225 or so and somewhat out of shape.

Uh, he’s like 6-3 400 something. But, he’s pretty chubby. Google “zydrunas savickas”[/quote]
http://www.ironmind.com/ironmind/export/sites/default/ironmind/zydrunasplane_lg.jpg
In that one he might make holy shit, I dunno…

In other pics he looks smaller to me?
http://www.15min.lt/images/photos/616133/big/1243003569irma1736.jpg ← here for example, much less wide and so on.

http://static1.balsas.lt/10/07/zydrunas_savickas_px600.jpg

I guess holy shit at his largest (he def carries a LOT more muscle than pfister vs. height) and huge in most others… Big in his earlier pics.

Not like I really classify people like that all the time lol, I’m more used to “classify” them according to a mix of attributes (strength, size, aesthetics, whatever) depending on their chosen sport or niche and so on, and then just call them beginners, intermediates or advanced :slight_smile: (so he’d be advanced, obviously)

120

Holy fuck shit.