[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns 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]
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]
Jigga, what? Yeah, average prolly like 225 at 5’7 at 7% so your buddy just had to do some extra HIIT.
Your name should be “Massive Lulz.”[/quote]
The only reason you think that stat is a modern marvel, is because you think flex wheeler is naturally 225 pounds. Hes 280 but you think after drugs that would kill most people you can compare that fairly to a natural trainee?
You didn’t provide any data. Pseudo scientific logic I’m afraid.
[/quote]
I find it difficult to follow what you are saying. That’s not meant as an insult, I simply cannot understand the message you are trying to convey here.
I don’t want to compare your buddy to a documented steroid user. The whole point of this argument is that you vehemently claim your friend is natural.
If your point is, “Look, Flex on roids gets up to 280 on dat der cell tech and then cuts down to 225 stage weight, so my buddy getting all the way up 225 on his own isn’t too crazy,” this would be a decent point if the entire argument was about sheer size, but it isn’t. You are also claiming that your buddy was 6% nearly year round. This adds an entirely new dimension to the argument. You don’t seem to realize how difficult holding on to that much LBM at that size and BF% is without the use of PEDs.
In fact, your comment cuts against your point. You argue that a man with great genetics and an excellent work ethic (Flex) is able to cut down to 225 at stage weight at 5’9 with the use of steroids. How does this help your argument that your natty friend has the same stats but is shorter? It doesn’t. It cuts right against your argument. It shows how wrong you must be.
I cannot lay my hands on the actual mean and standard deviation, but even an educated guess will land you somewhere near where I was. Step out of the boybuilding world for a second and realize that most, well-conditioned athletes are near 8-10%. The average gym rat will almost assuredly be higher, and you know that. Also, the concept of standard deviations is not debatable. No matter what the real # is, I guarun-fucking-tee your buddy is still and incredible outlier.
[/quote]
A few points…
He could be as high as 5 9, my given height was an estimate based on the fact he is shorter than me.
You missed the point about drugs. Diuretics are used along with other water techniques. These significantly affect the numbers. I’ll repost my points from before…
Flex wheeler
Off season he walks around at apprx 270-280. Lets say he is 12% bf off season max which based on how he looks most of the time i think is a fair judgement. That gives the following…
247lb of LBM, 33lbs of bodyfat.
When he diets down to 6% bodyfat, he loses 15lbs of fat. He obv uses anabolics so will not lose muscle.
""That takes him to 247lb of LBM, and aprx 15lbs of bodyfat. Now how does he weigh in at 225? Does he lose muscle? Fuck no, you want to keep all that muscle and just squeeze it down so it looks nice and dry and dense and freaking awesome on stage, so what you do is drink a ton of deionised water, then cut your water intake and hop on the lasix. Not quite there yet? Hop in the sauna. You can lose up to 15% of water before you risk death, and tolerance varies from person to person.
15% removed from 247 lb + 15 lb equals 223lbs. Is this any coincidence? He’s at the maximum level of development which he can squeeze into his weight class.
Now some retards on here think they can compared him to someone who with no drugs at all is walking around at 225. If he dehydrated and used diuretics he could hit a stage at 191 MAX since he may weight less in the morning.“”