LIMITS x2- Bring it on Mofo's!

Training
21

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]bcingu wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Mtag666 wrote:

Please just let this die…[/quote]

[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

22

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
Ever seen someone at 5 10, 200lb and 8% who never lifted a weight in their life?
[/quote]

I haven’t. Of course I haven’t seen any guys at 5’10, 220 lbs and 6% either. If only someone had a way of proving that indeed such a person existed, perhaps a photograph of their friend who maintains to possess such stats year round with no PED assistance… but no, that’s asking too much. Besides, it would easily prove that it is indeed possible, putting an end to all this silly bickering back and forth over multiple threads.

Also, I’ve heard that cameras are like really crazy high tech these days, and stupidly expensive as well. So there’s no way we could possibly ask such an inconvenience of someone we only know on an online forum. I guess it’s only in those zany science fiction books where humans have constant access to cameras on their phones, and can snap an image in an instant.

(This sarcasm can apply to a lot of folks on this site who either claim “I’ll take a good shot later”, or just keep showing the same few pics over the course of years. Yes, I’m joking here, but think about it for a moment.)

S

23

Is anyone else completely sick of these examples of men with SERIOUS, HARDCORE bodybuilder physiques… WHO DON’T LIFT!

Seriously, I live in a city of 8 million people and I’ve yet to fucking see any of these people!

And where are all these jacked doctors? I’ve been working in healthcare for a decade and I’ve yet to see more than two jacked doctors out of the hundreds I’ve seen or worked with!

24

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Is anyone else completely sick of these examples of men with SERIOUS, HARDCORE bodybuilder physiques… WHO DON’T LIFT!

Seriously, I live in a city of 8 million people and I’ve yet to fucking see any of these people!

And where are all these jacked doctors? I’ve been working in healthcare for a decade and I’ve yet to see more than two jacked doctors out of the hundreds I’ve seen or worked with![/quote]

Just go to a tire yard. Not everyone ends up in the weight room doing goblet squats and snatch grip deads. Fuck I knew people at school who were massive and didn’t lift.

City of 8 million? Great sample size and demographic. Accurate logical reasoning is your forte I see.

25

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Is anyone else completely sick of these examples of men with SERIOUS, HARDCORE bodybuilder physiques… WHO DON’T LIFT!

Seriously, I live in a city of 8 million people and I’ve yet to fucking see any of these people!

And where are all these jacked doctors? I’ve been working in healthcare for a decade and I’ve yet to see more than two jacked doctors out of the hundreds I’ve seen or worked with![/quote]

In the last thread I mentioned a few genetic conditions which could lead to insane muscle gain with some pretty low levels of body fat (and I totally omitted all the health risks associated with them…). However even I think the BB physique sans lifting is a bit ridiculous. Even a genetic condition would require some stimulus.

It’s like taking steroids and sitting around doing nothing expecting a significant body recomp.

26

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Is anyone else completely sick of these examples of men with SERIOUS, HARDCORE bodybuilder physiques… WHO DON’T LIFT!

Seriously, I live in a city of 8 million people and I’ve yet to fucking see any of these people!

And where are all these jacked doctors? I’ve been working in healthcare for a decade and I’ve yet to see more than two jacked doctors out of the hundreds I’ve seen or worked with![/quote]

For the record, you are misreprenting my postion completely.

You seem to equate SERIOUS, HARDCORE bodybuilder physiques, with physiques of people naturally 40 lbs lighter who aren’t on diuretics or other drugs.

27

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]bcingu wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Mtag666 wrote:
Please just let this die…[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

Cop out. No contribution to the debate other than a few digs at prof X, and you say he contributes nothing to the forums?

28

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]bcingu wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Mtag666 wrote:
Please just let this die…[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

Cop out. No contribution to the debate other than a few digs at prof X, and you say he contributes nothing to the forums?
[/quote]

It’s not a cop out. Both sides have argued their point to death.

BTW, my side won so I don’t know why you continue to argue. :wink:

29

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]bcingu wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Mtag666 wrote:
Please just let this die…[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

Cop out. No contribution to the debate other than a few digs at prof X, and you say he contributes nothing to the forums?
[/quote]

Your point has been refuted by 7 different people, and you just wave your hands at the computer and ignore it.

Have you noticed that literally NOBODY agrees with you. At all?

Post some pics of your imaginary friend or some of these phantom outliers or GTFO.

30

I just dont think some people really understand what a sort guy, lean(single digits) close to or at 190 looks like, and I am talking about with drugs. You guys rememeber that dude onemorerep, dont remember really how he spelled his name, but guy was like 5’6-5’7 and 160, just looked like a monster.

31

[quote]Waittz wrote:
I just dont think some people really understand what a sort guy, lean(single digits) close to or at 190 looks like, and I am talking about with drugs. You guys rememeber that dude onemorerep, dont remember really how he spelled his name, but guy was like 5’6-5’7 and 160, just looked like a monster. [/quote]

VERY TRUE.

Which is why a natty at 225 and 6% should be on a pro stage…winning, easily.

32

This argument is really about statistics. I know, right? That shit is for nerds.

But seriously, that’s all this boils down to. MG, have you ever heard of means (averages) and standard deviations? Like for instance, the typical male of all races who has trained for 2-5 years may be (made up, so don’t ask me where I got the #s) 185lbs at 14% BF.

Then there would be a standard deviation of say 10lbs and 1% BF (again, made up just to illustrate my point), and for every standard deviation you move in either direction you will find less and less people in the population to the point where we are literally talking about one person in the entire fucking universe. It doesn’t matter what the real numbers are because the bell curve will drop off eventually regardless.

This is what people are driving at. No one is saying 50lbs is the magic number, or that 6% is as low as you can go at a certain height and weight or whatever. What we’re saying is based on real world observations, and all the information we’ve read over the years, we do not believe there exists a man who is natty and 5’7’’ at 225 at 6%.

We just don’t. Not because it is literally impossible, but that because, based on the above, this man would be such a fucking outlier that he would be a modern marvel - a genetic freak waiting to tear up all natural bodybuilding competitions across the world.

Can’t you understand that? Can’t you understand why no one believes you without a picture and documented info? If this is not a troll, then you are a silly dude. And I’m even sillier for trying to reason with you.

33

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
This argument is really about statistics. I know, right? That shit is for nerds.

But seriously, that’s all this boils down to. MG, have you ever heard of means (averages) and standard deviations? Like for instance, the typical male of all races who has trained for 2-5 years may be (made up, so don’t ask me where I got the #s) 185lbs at 14% BF.

Then there would be a standard deviation of say 10lbs and 1% BF (again, made up just to illustrate my point), and for every standard deviation you move in either direction you will find less and less people in the population to the point where we are literally talking about one person in the entire fucking universe. It doesn’t matter what the real numbers are because the bell curve will drop off eventually regardless.

This is what people are driving at. No one is saying 50lbs is the magic number, or that 6% is as low as you can go at a certain height and weight or whatever. What we’re saying is based on real world observations, and all the information we’ve read over the years, we do not believe there exists a man who is natty and 5’7’’ at 225 at 6%.

We just don’t. Not because it is literally impossible, but that because, based on the above, this man would be such a fucking outlier that he would be a modern marvel - a genetic freak waiting to tear up all natural bodybuilding competitions across the world.

Can’t you understand that? Can’t you understand why no one believes you without a picture and documented info? If this is not a troll, then you are a silly dude. And I’m even sillier for trying to reason with you.

[/quote]

34

[quote]IFlashBack wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
This argument is really about statistics. I know, right? That shit is for nerds.

But seriously, that’s all this boils down to. MG, have you ever heard of means (averages) and standard deviations? Like for instance, the typical male of all races who has trained for 2-5 years may be (made up, so don’t ask me where I got the #s) 185lbs at 14% BF.

Then there would be a standard deviation of say 10lbs and 1% BF (again, made up just to illustrate my point), and for every standard deviation you move in either direction you will find less and less people in the population to the point where we are literally talking about one person in the entire fucking universe. It doesn’t matter what the real numbers are because the bell curve will drop off eventually regardless.

This is what people are driving at. No one is saying 50lbs is the magic number, or that 6% is as low as you can go at a certain height and weight or whatever. What we’re saying is based on real world observations, and all the information we’ve read over the years, we do not believe there exists a man who is natty and 5’7’’ at 225 at 6%.

We just don’t. Not because it is literally impossible, but that because, based on the above, this man would be such a fucking outlier that he would be a modern marvel - a genetic freak waiting to tear up all natural bodybuilding competitions across the world.

Can’t you understand that? Can’t you understand why no one believes you without a picture and documented info? If this is not a troll, then you are a silly dude. And I’m even sillier for trying to reason with you.

[/quote]

[/quote]

35

610×705 92.6 KB

MassiveGuns(you never said if you in fact posses massive guns or not?),
Your original point that is in question is that your “friend” is either 1. Lying to you or B. you are mistaken about his stats.
This photo is a relatively accurate portrayal of body fat percentages. Although everyone carries their fat differently, this picture should not be too far off.
Your “friend” is not 6% body fat (se photo above) as a 5’7-5’8 Natural trainee weighing 225 pounds. That is just not a realistic combination of stats.
I personally am not calling you a liar. I think either you have been deceived or are misinformed.

36

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]bcingu wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Mtag666 wrote:
Please just let this die…[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

Cop out. No contribution to the debate other than a few digs at prof X, and you say he contributes nothing to the forums?
[/quote]

Your point has been refuted by 7 different people, and you just wave your hands at the computer and ignore it.

Have you noticed that literally NOBODY agrees with you. At all?

Post some pics of your imaginary friend or some of these phantom outliers or GTFO.[/quote]

I posted arthur saxon, who was 220 at 5 10 before steroids even EXISTED. Everybody seems to just gloss over the old time strongmen like they never existed.

37

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]bcingu wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Mtag666 wrote:
Please just let this die…[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

Cop out. No contribution to the debate other than a few digs at prof X, and you say he contributes nothing to the forums?
[/quote]

Your point has been refuted by 7 different people, and you just wave your hands at the computer and ignore it.

Have you noticed that literally NOBODY agrees with you. At all?

Post some pics of your imaginary friend or some of these phantom outliers or GTFO.[/quote]

I posted arthur saxon, who was 220 at 5 10 before steroids even EXISTED. Everybody seems to just gloss over the old time strongmen like they never existed.
[/quote]

Not at contest condition. Not even close, so it’s not comparable to your friend.

38

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
This argument is really about statistics. I know, right? That shit is for nerds.

But seriously, that’s all this boils down to. MG, have you ever heard of means (averages) and standard deviations? Like for instance, the typical male of all races who has trained for 2-5 years may be (made up, so don’t ask me where I got the #s) 185lbs at 14% BF.

Then there would be a standard deviation of say 10lbs and 1% BF (again, made up just to illustrate my point), and for every standard deviation you move in either direction you will find less and less people in the population to the point where we are literally talking about one person in the entire fucking universe. It doesn’t matter what the real numbers are because the bell curve will drop off eventually regardless.

This is what people are driving at. No one is saying 50lbs is the magic number, or that 6% is as low as you can go at a certain height and weight or whatever. What we’re saying is based on real world observations, and all the information we’ve read over the years, we do not believe there exists a man who is natty and 5’7’’ at 225 at 6%.

We just don’t. Not because it is literally impossible, but that because, based on the above, this man would be such a fucking outlier that he would be a modern marvel - a genetic freak waiting to tear up all natural bodybuilding competitions across the world.

Can’t you understand that? Can’t you understand why no one believes you without a picture and documented info? If this is not a troll, then you are a silly dude. And I’m even sillier for trying to reason with you.

[/quote]

I love the fact that you post such an eloquent argument for using statistics to prove a point. Then just assume a set of data that fits YOUR belief system about what is possible as an outlier. Wheres the real data that proves your point?

39

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

I love the fact that you post such an eloquent argument for using statistics to prove a point. Then just assume a set of data that fits YOUR belief system about what is possible as an outlier. Wheres the real data that proves your point?
[/quote]

I don’t think there is any. I asked for how many old school bodybuilders started lifting after the age of maturity and no one answered. I just got more name dropping.

40

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]bcingu wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Mtag666 wrote:
Please just let this die…[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

Cop out. No contribution to the debate other than a few digs at prof X, and you say he contributes nothing to the forums?
[/quote]

Your point has been refuted by 7 different people, and you just wave your hands at the computer and ignore it.

Have you noticed that literally NOBODY agrees with you. At all?

Post some pics of your imaginary friend or some of these phantom outliers or GTFO.[/quote]

I posted arthur saxon, who was 220 at 5 10 before steroids even EXISTED. Everybody seems to just gloss over the old time strongmen like they never existed.
[/quote]

It is not the fact that as 5’7" person can weigh 220 that people have a problem with. The part of your story that makes those stats ridiculous is the claimed 6% body fat year around. He simply cannot as a natural get down to 6% bodyfat at 5’7" and weigh 220. If he can he is a natural Flex Wheeler. That picture you posted of Saxon is a 20%+ bodyfat.

How can a whole forum get a couple points with the exception of two people.