Meathead Camaraderie

Training
261

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

Based on an analysis of some 300 class and overall title winning drug-free bodybuilders and strength athletes from 1947 to 2010 the following equation, predicting the maximum lean body mass someone of a given height and bone-structure can achieve without the use of anabolic drugs, was derived. It describes a “normal” state of nutrition and fluid retention in the trainee. (There is a link at the end of this article to an online calculator based on all of the formulae presented here).

where,
H = Height in inches
A = Ankle circumference at the smallest point
W = Wrist circumference measured on the hand side of the styloid process.
(The styloid process is the bony lump on the outside of your wrist.)
%bf = The body fat percentage at which you want to predict your maximum lean body mass

The above equation, as it was derived from collected data, applies most accurately to individuals of approximately average, balanced bone structures for their heights and average muscle belly lengths. Very thin ectomorphic men can expect to achieve roughly 95% of the lean body mass that the equation predicts. Likewise, very endo-mesomorphic men, men who have disproportionately wide hips, thick shoulder structures and torsos, high natural testosterone levels, exceptionally long muscle bellies or uncharacteristically small joints for their frame size may be able to exceed the prediction by up to roughly 5% in extreme cases (WNBF World Champion and Mr. Universe Rob Hope comes to mind).

As the above equation is intended for bodybuilders in a steady, maintainable state, special adjustments should be made for “bulking” off-season bodybuilders who, due to heavy food and liquid intake, often carry additional pounds of “lean body mass” in the form of fluid retention, labile proteins and contents in the digestive tract. In these cases, a bodybuilder may carry up to 4% additional body weight due to these factors - the predicted body weight must be multiplied by a maximum factor of 1.04 to account for this.

Comparing these body weights to population averages shows that these champions carry 24-26% more lean body mass than the average person of their height and bone structure. A large man such as Reg Park would carry 38-41 pounds more muscle than his average, non-weight training counterpart. A smaller structured man, such as 2006 WNBF World Champion Jon Harris, would carry about 31-34 pounds more muscle than an average, non-weight training man of his height and structure. It is also interesting to note that the absolute level of muscle mass carried by modern drug-tested bodybuilders is not statistically greater than that carried by bodybuilders from the pre-drug era - though modern bodybuilders compete at much lower body fat levels.

This was written in a paper by Casey Butts and was referenced by this

7.Kouri E.M., Pope H.G. Jr., Katz D.L., Oliva P., “Fat-free mass index in users and nonusers of anabolic-androgenic steroids”, Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 223-8, 1995[/quote]

But, Casey Butt also wrote that his numbers may be off when it comes to those of African descent.

Not to mention if most winners were of one ethnic background in majority, then it definitely does not represent what all people can do.

262

Funny that only one guy is complaining about the loss of camaraderie around here. The BB forum has been great. The mentoring threads in this forum have camaraderie oozing out the wazoo.

I think one person is mad about not getting the respect he so desperately craves.

263

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Everyone shouldn’t feel welcome
[/quote]

Thank you for finally answering a question. [/quote]

Oh, I see you accidentally missed the rest.

Here, let me add that for you. Must have been a mistake.

Everyone shouldn’t feel welcome to speak on the same level if they do not even train regularly…which does happen here often. We have seen it before where some don’t even train at all but love posting what they read as if they do.
[/quote]

I did not miss the rest. You feel that less developed (pure size of only a few muscles right? :wink: :wink: should not be allowed to speak about bodybuilding and should not feel welcome here
Which = not everyone should feel welcome here.
It is quite simple.[/quote]

Let’s play.

If you were focused in the gym…how much time would you waste talking to the guy who isn’t even dressed to train but comes in everyday to sit on the leg extension machine and drink coffee?

Would he feel “welcome” speaking to you while you trained?

I don’t know about you, but my guess is, someone like that would not feel “welcome” around me while I was focused on the gym.

It would be different if simply walking past someone on the street.[/quote]

I have no interest in playing with you Professor.
I have never seen anyone come into the gym with a cup of coffe and drink it while leg pressing the entire time.
In general I do not talk with anyone at the gym.
I am not there to socialize and my time is precious. I get in, lift and get on with my real life.
I have been approached in the gym by serious lifters bigger than you or I, the old guy who drys his balls with the hair dryer and many a young scrawny noob who does curls in front of the mirror and cable cross overs only.
I treat them all the same and show the same respect.
I am kind, courteous and answer any questions or help in any way I can.
We are all in the gym to better ourselves and whether their goal is to step onstage at the O, get a biceps pump to impress the girls at school or burn out their quads while enjoying a cup of joe.
I am just glad that more people are getting up off the sofa and throwing some weight around.
Everyone is welcome in my book.
But again, that I just the opinion is someone who probably doesn’t belong in your opinion.

264

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

Based on an analysis of some 300 class and overall title winning drug-free bodybuilders and strength athletes from 1947 to 2010 the following equation, predicting the maximum lean body mass someone of a given height and bone-structure can achieve without the use of anabolic drugs, was derived. It describes a “normal” state of nutrition and fluid retention in the trainee. (There is a link at the end of this article to an online calculator based on all of the formulae presented here).

where,
H = Height in inches
A = Ankle circumference at the smallest point
W = Wrist circumference measured on the hand side of the styloid process.
(The styloid process is the bony lump on the outside of your wrist.)
%bf = The body fat percentage at which you want to predict your maximum lean body mass

The above equation, as it was derived from collected data, applies most accurately to individuals of approximately average, balanced bone structures for their heights and average muscle belly lengths. Very thin ectomorphic men can expect to achieve roughly 95% of the lean body mass that the equation predicts. Likewise, very endo-mesomorphic men, men who have disproportionately wide hips, thick shoulder structures and torsos, high natural testosterone levels, exceptionally long muscle bellies or uncharacteristically small joints for their frame size may be able to exceed the prediction by up to roughly 5% in extreme cases (WNBF World Champion and Mr. Universe Rob Hope comes to mind).

As the above equation is intended for bodybuilders in a steady, maintainable state, special adjustments should be made for “bulking” off-season bodybuilders who, due to heavy food and liquid intake, often carry additional pounds of “lean body mass” in the form of fluid retention, labile proteins and contents in the digestive tract. In these cases, a bodybuilder may carry up to 4% additional body weight due to these factors - the predicted body weight must be multiplied by a maximum factor of 1.04 to account for this.

Comparing these body weights to population averages shows that these champions carry 24-26% more lean body mass than the average person of their height and bone structure. A large man such as Reg Park would carry 38-41 pounds more muscle than his average, non-weight training counterpart. A smaller structured man, such as 2006 WNBF World Champion Jon Harris, would carry about 31-34 pounds more muscle than an average, non-weight training man of his height and structure. It is also interesting to note that the absolute level of muscle mass carried by modern drug-tested bodybuilders is not statistically greater than that carried by bodybuilders from the pre-drug era - though modern bodybuilders compete at much lower body fat levels.

This was written in a paper by Casey Butts and was referenced by this

7.Kouri E.M., Pope H.G. Jr., Katz D.L., Oliva P., “Fat-free mass index in users and nonusers of anabolic-androgenic steroids”, Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 223-8, 1995[/quote]

But, Casey Butt also wrote that his numbers may be off when it comes to those of African descent.

Not to mention if most winners were of one ethnic background in majority, then it definitely does not represent what all people can do.[/quote]

Yup, he did say that, and I believe that some people, Africans included, might surpass these stats, but NOT BY MUCH. I highly doubt some black guy is capable of gaining upwards of more than 60 pounds of muscle naturally.

265

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Everyone shouldn’t feel welcome
[/quote]

Thank you for finally answering a question. [/quote]

Oh, I see you accidentally missed the rest.

Here, let me add that for you. Must have been a mistake.

Everyone shouldn’t feel welcome to speak on the same level if they do not even train regularly…which does happen here often. We have seen it before where some don’t even train at all but love posting what they read as if they do.
[/quote]

I did not miss the rest. You feel that less developed (pure size of only a few muscles right? :wink: :wink: should not be allowed to speak about bodybuilding and should not feel welcome here
Which = not everyone should feel welcome here.
It is quite simple.[/quote]

Let’s play.

If you were focused in the gym…how much time would you waste talking to the guy who isn’t even dressed to train but comes in everyday to sit on the leg extension machine and drink coffee?

Would he feel “welcome” speaking to you while you trained?

I don’t know about you, but my guess is, someone like that would not feel “welcome” around me while I was focused on the gym.

It would be different if simply walking past someone on the street.[/quote]

I have no interest in playing with you Professor.
I have never seen anyone come into the gym with a cup of coffe and drink it while leg pressing the entire time.
In general I do not talk with anyone at the gym.
I am not there to socialize and my time is precious. I get in, lift and get on with my real life.
I have been approached in the gym by serious lifters bigger than you or I, the old guy who drys his balls with the hair dryer and many a young scrawny noob who does curls in front of the mirror and cable cross overs only.
I treat them all the same and show the same respect.
I am kind, courteous and answer any questions or help in any way I can.
We are all in the gym to better ourselves and whether their goal is to step onstage at the O, get a biceps pump to impress the girls at school or burn out their quads while enjoying a cup of joe.
I am just glad that more people are getting up off the sofa and throwing some weight around.
Everyone is welcome in my book.
But again, that I just the opinion is someone who probably doesn’t belong in your opinion.[/quote]

Hence the assessment that this thread was really about the “small people” online that don’t get along with the residence “big guy”.

266

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Yup, he did say that, and I believe that some people, Africans included, might surpass these stats, but NOT BY MUCH. I highly doubt some black guy is capable of gaining upwards of more than 60 pounds of muscle naturally. [/quote]

Dude, the bottom line is, I questioned your numbers and said that I know I do NOT have the best genetics and came damn close to that number or passed it.

That then started several pages of people attacking any statements made.

Yes, those numbers are lacking and the man who put them together even had to admit that because the source data is blatantly racially disproportionate.

That doesn’t mean that most natural bodybuilders who won don’t look good or are not developed.

It means that LEAN BODY MASS gains are not decided by only looking at a group of 300 white guys who competed in a fringe activity like bodybuilding.

Maybe people should question what they believe and the data they get it from more than they follow me around to attack me for questioning it.

267

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

Based on an analysis of some 300 class and overall title winning drug-free bodybuilders and strength athletes from 1947 to 2010 the following equation, predicting the maximum lean body mass someone of a given height and bone-structure can achieve without the use of anabolic drugs, was derived. It describes a “normal” state of nutrition and fluid retention in the trainee. (There is a link at the end of this article to an online calculator based on all of the formulae presented here).

where,
H = Height in inches
A = Ankle circumference at the smallest point
W = Wrist circumference measured on the hand side of the styloid process.
(The styloid process is the bony lump on the outside of your wrist.)
%bf = The body fat percentage at which you want to predict your maximum lean body mass

The above equation, as it was derived from collected data, applies most accurately to individuals of approximately average, balanced bone structures for their heights and average muscle belly lengths. Very thin ectomorphic men can expect to achieve roughly 95% of the lean body mass that the equation predicts. Likewise, very endo-mesomorphic men, men who have disproportionately wide hips, thick shoulder structures and torsos, high natural testosterone levels, exceptionally long muscle bellies or uncharacteristically small joints for their frame size may be able to exceed the prediction by up to roughly 5% in extreme cases (WNBF World Champion and Mr. Universe Rob Hope comes to mind).

As the above equation is intended for bodybuilders in a steady, maintainable state, special adjustments should be made for “bulking” off-season bodybuilders who, due to heavy food and liquid intake, often carry additional pounds of “lean body mass” in the form of fluid retention, labile proteins and contents in the digestive tract. In these cases, a bodybuilder may carry up to 4% additional body weight due to these factors - the predicted body weight must be multiplied by a maximum factor of 1.04 to account for this.

Comparing these body weights to population averages shows that these champions carry 24-26% more lean body mass than the average person of their height and bone structure. A large man such as Reg Park would carry 38-41 pounds more muscle than his average, non-weight training counterpart. A smaller structured man, such as 2006 WNBF World Champion Jon Harris, would carry about 31-34 pounds more muscle than an average, non-weight training man of his height and structure. It is also interesting to note that the absolute level of muscle mass carried by modern drug-tested bodybuilders is not statistically greater than that carried by bodybuilders from the pre-drug era - though modern bodybuilders compete at much lower body fat levels.

This was written in a paper by Casey Butts and was referenced by this

7.Kouri E.M., Pope H.G. Jr., Katz D.L., Oliva P., “Fat-free mass index in users and nonusers of anabolic-androgenic steroids”, Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 223-8, 1995[/quote]

But, Casey Butt also wrote that his numbers may be off when it comes to those of African descent.

Not to mention if most winners were of one ethnic background in majority, then it definitely does not represent what all people can do.[/quote]

You are correct but considering how genetically gifted the men that were measured in the study were naturally the formula will undoubtedly be within a few percentage points. And if Reg Park is only carrying 40 more lbs of LBM than the average person of his same build I think it is a fair assumption that someone more genetically gifted than him or some of the others mentioned (Grimek or Reeves) would not be able to exceed the 80-100 lbs more than the average untrained person of their frame, regardless of ethnicity.

268

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

You are correct but considering how genetically gifted the men that were measured in the study were naturally the formula will undoubtedly be within a few percentage points.[/quote]

Why?

This is a huge assumption and has way too many holes in it.

I have listed why many times before but it gets lost in between people here to cry for more attention clogging up threads.

LEAN BODY MASS does not mean someone wins a bodybuilding contest. If someone has wide hips, they will do poorly behind someone with way more v-taper…even if they have more lean body mass.

That is why only looking at winner will not tell you how much MUSCLE can be gained in the population.

??? This statement doesn’t make sense.

It was said that someone can NOT build more than 80lbs of lean body mass naturally…which is flat out wrong.

No one ever said “80lbs more than the average person”.

269

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Yup, he did say that, and I believe that some people, Africans included, might surpass these stats, but NOT BY MUCH. I highly doubt some black guy is capable of gaining upwards of more than 60 pounds of muscle naturally. [/quote]

Dude, the bottom line is, I questioned your numbers and said that I know I do NOT have the best genetics and came damn close to that number or passed it.

That then started several pages of people attacking any statements made.

Yes, those numbers are lacking and the man who put them together even had to admit that because the source data is blatantly racially disproportionate.

That doesn’t mean that most natural bodybuilders who won don’t look good or are not developed.

It means that LEAN BODY MASS gains are not decided by only looking at a group of 300 white guys who competed in a fringe activity like bodybuilding.

Maybe people should question what they believe and the data they get it from more than they follow me around to attack me for questioning it.[/quote]

Maybe you should quit following Brick around and attacking him for the same thing over and over and over again.

270

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Yup, he did say that, and I believe that some people, Africans included, might surpass these stats, but NOT BY MUCH. I highly doubt some black guy is capable of gaining upwards of more than 60 pounds of muscle naturally. [/quote]

Dude, the bottom line is, I questioned your numbers and said that I know I do NOT have the best genetics and came damn close to that number or passed it.

That then started several pages of people attacking any statements made.

Yes, those numbers are lacking and the man who put them together even had to admit that because the source data is blatantly racially disproportionate.

That doesn’t mean that most natural bodybuilders who won don’t look good or are not developed.

It means that LEAN BODY MASS gains are not decided by only looking at a group of 300 white guys who competed in a fringe activity like bodybuilding.

Maybe people should question what they believe and the data they get it from more than they follow me around to attack me for questioning it.[/quote]

You would have gained a great deal of LBM from a 150lb 18 year old whether you trained or not if you now have the frame to support 270lbs at 20%. Brick and I both are contesting (at least I think he is) that minus those gains made that would have been regardless of training, you did not put on 80 lbs of LBM through training. You put on some and the rest was unearned because your genetics did that for you. (Couldn’t really figure out how to word that last part clearly, hope it makes sense.)

271

I am also still waiting to hear from Brick what that “40-50lbs” number stands for and how he would be able to measure beyond lean body mass to get it.

272

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Dude, the bottom line is, I questioned your numbers and said that I know I do NOT have the best genetics and came damn close to that number or passed it. [/quote]

Highly doubtable you surpassed those stats considering your lower body (NOT an insult, just an assessment.

Again, as I said before, you’d probably have to get down to low 200’s to get lean (and I don’t mean contest lean).

I believe people tend to “attack” when they see things that are blatantly ridiculous or false. There are indeed better ways of discussing things.

[quote]
Yes, those numbers are lacking and the man who put them together even had to admit that because the source data is blatantly racially disproportionate. [/quote]

Right, it is racially disproportionate, but it’s highly doubtable that one race is going to surpass those numbers by so much (personal belief).

[quote]

That doesn’t mean that most natural bodybuilders who won don’t look good or are not developed. [/quote]

Yup.

[quote]

It means that LEAN BODY MASS gains are not decided by only looking at a group of 300 white guys who competed in a fringe activity like bodybuilding. [/quote]

SIx decades of competitive bodybuilding amongst thousands of white guys tells us something.

[quote]

Maybe people should question what they believe and the data they get it from more than they follow me around to attack me for questioning it.[/quote]

Fair point.

273

Why does every thread need to be brought back to that beat to death 80-100 pound myse gain topic? This has got to be the 6 or 7th thread who’s discussion was switched all around to go backs I that same topic that some here seem to love to discuss?
Do you guys not see what is happening here?
This forum was started to basically foster this S Storm threads and keep them out of the bodybuilding section.

As soon as the 80-100 pounds thread maxed out the LIMITS thread was started just to continue the S Storm.
As soon as the LIMITS thread was maxed out the LIMITS 2 thread was started to continue the S Storm.
Then they was the PX: an Offer thread which turned into a S Storm.
As soon as the PX: an Offer thread was locked by the mods the Comraderie thread was started to continue the S Storm from all those other threads.

Does anyone else not see this? These new S Storm threads were created THE VERY SAME DAY that the other thread was locked or maxed out with the sole purpose of continuing this same tired debate.
Please just let it die.

274

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

Based on an analysis of some 300 class and overall title winning drug-free bodybuilders and strength athletes from 1947 to 2010 the following equation, predicting the maximum lean body mass someone of a given height and bone-structure can achieve without the use of anabolic drugs, was derived. It describes a “normal” state of nutrition and fluid retention in the trainee. (There is a link at the end of this article to an online calculator based on all of the formulae presented here).

where,
H = Height in inches
A = Ankle circumference at the smallest point
W = Wrist circumference measured on the hand side of the styloid process.
(The styloid process is the bony lump on the outside of your wrist.)
%bf = The body fat percentage at which you want to predict your maximum lean body mass

The above equation, as it was derived from collected data, applies most accurately to individuals of approximately average, balanced bone structures for their heights and average muscle belly lengths. Very thin ectomorphic men can expect to achieve roughly 95% of the lean body mass that the equation predicts. Likewise, very endo-mesomorphic men, men who have disproportionately wide hips, thick shoulder structures and torsos, high natural testosterone levels, exceptionally long muscle bellies or uncharacteristically small joints for their frame size may be able to exceed the prediction by up to roughly 5% in extreme cases (WNBF World Champion and Mr. Universe Rob Hope comes to mind).

As the above equation is intended for bodybuilders in a steady, maintainable state, special adjustments should be made for “bulking” off-season bodybuilders who, due to heavy food and liquid intake, often carry additional pounds of “lean body mass” in the form of fluid retention, labile proteins and contents in the digestive tract. In these cases, a bodybuilder may carry up to 4% additional body weight due to these factors - the predicted body weight must be multiplied by a maximum factor of 1.04 to account for this.

Comparing these body weights to population averages shows that these champions carry 24-26% more lean body mass than the average person of their height and bone structure. A large man such as Reg Park would carry 38-41 pounds more muscle than his average, non-weight training counterpart. A smaller structured man, such as 2006 WNBF World Champion Jon Harris, would carry about 31-34 pounds more muscle than an average, non-weight training man of his height and structure. It is also interesting to note that the absolute level of muscle mass carried by modern drug-tested bodybuilders is not statistically greater than that carried by bodybuilders from the pre-drug era - though modern bodybuilders compete at much lower body fat levels.

This was written in a paper by Casey Butts and was referenced by this

7.Kouri E.M., Pope H.G. Jr., Katz D.L., Oliva P., “Fat-free mass index in users and nonusers of anabolic-androgenic steroids”, Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 223-8, 1995[/quote]

But, Casey Butt also wrote that his numbers may be off when it comes to those of African descent.

Not to mention if most winners were of one ethnic background in majority, then it definitely does not represent what all people can do.[/quote]

You are correct but considering how genetically gifted the men that were measured in the study were naturally the formula will undoubtedly be within a few percentage points. And if Reg Park is only carrying 40 more lbs of LBM than the average person of his same build I think it is a fair assumption that someone more genetically gifted than him or some of the others mentioned (Grimek or Reeves) would not be able to exceed the 80-100 lbs more than the average untrained person of their frame, regardless of ethnicity.[/quote]

Exactly. When someone tells me that the examples aren’t good enough, they really are disregarding enormous, barrel chested men such as Reg Park and John Grimek.

275

Jesus christ, guys.

I’m not reading this shit.

276

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

You would have gained a great deal of LBM from a 150lb 18 year old whether you trained or not if you now have the frame to support 270lbs at 20%.[/quote]

That frame grows as you do.

[quote]
Brick and I both are contesting (at least I think he is) that minus those gains made that would have been regardless of training, you did not put on 80 lbs of LBM through training. You put on some and the rest was unearned because your genetics did that for you. (Couldn’t really figure out how to word that last part clearly, hope it makes sense.)[/quote]

This makes no sense. What does this mean if I didn’t grow in height at all? You are basically just making this up.

I was 18 and already in college. I wasn’t still growing. Not to mention unless these “300 guys” looked at all started after they all stopped growing, then you have even less basis for what you are saying.

277

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]bpick86 wrote:

You are correct but considering how genetically gifted the men that were measured in the study were naturally the formula will undoubtedly be within a few percentage points.[/quote]

Why?

This is a huge assumption and has way too many holes in it.

I have listed why many times before but it gets lost in between people here to cry for more attention clogging up threads.

LEAN BODY MASS does not mean someone wins a bodybuilding contest. If someone has wide hips, they will do poorly behind someone with way more v-taper…even if they have more lean body mass.

That is why only looking at winner will not tell you how much MUSCLE can be gained in the population.

??? This statement doesn’t make sense.

It was said that someone can NOT build more than 80lbs of lean body mass naturally…which is flat out wrong.

No one ever said “80lbs more than the average person”.[/quote]

You are confusing building LBM with just growing and increasing LBM. The average person of similar frame was put in there as a point of reference from where the amount of LBM he BUILT would be starting. The average untrained person didn’t build any LBM. So Reg Park built 40 lbs more than the average. The average untrained person has a fair amount of LBM himself but none of it was built. I am discussing what someone can build, not how much they can mature.

278

Must admit even if this has moved away from the original topic and onto the oft discussed natty limit I have always been on the fence on this matter. But listening intentently to the arguments from both sides I feel most drawn to Bricks conclusion given that it is based more on what HAS beeen achieved over that which we all WISH is achievable

279

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Jesus christ, guys.

I’m not reading this shit. [/quote]

You don’t need to.
Here are the cliffnotes:
This thread was created as a ruse in order to keep the same crap going from the pre exhaust thread to the 80-100 pounds thread to the limits thread to the limits 2 thread to the PX an offer thread.
Now we are here with the same old busted argument going round and round and round like a dog chasing its tail.
Oh yeah and science!

280

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I am also still waiting to hear from Brick what that “40-50lbs” number stands for and how he would be able to measure beyond lean body mass to get it.[/quote]

You do know how to measure anthropometrics, right?