Meathead Camaraderie

Training
561

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
If you are at same bf level I see no reson why all of a sudden we would jump 5 lbs per inch of extra body height. Again as long as they are of similar bf %
[/quote]

Then you’re not comprehending what I’m writing.

A non trained person weighs 3 pounds more with an extra inch of height due to the size difference in frames alone. Would the taller person not, in addition to the extra 3 pounds they already carry, have to add a few extra pounds of muscle to look comparable to the shorter lifter?

[/quote]

Think about 1 inch on a ruler and 2 pounds of steak.
Not exactly proportionate.
2 pounds of muscle per extra inch is not realistic.[/quote]

1 extra inch may be 2 or 3 extra pounds of muscle over an entire body. For X, that’s 70 inches not to mention the depth of his body (no homo on that one). We’re not talking about a 1 inch, 2D figure with 2 pounds of muscle squished into a little bit of space.

[quote]Look at those average untrained weights vs Professor X’s weight.
Untrained 5’10 was 161 correct?
That is an untrained weight of 2.3 pounds per inch
Professor X is 5’10 and 250.
That is a trained weight of 3.57 pounds per inch.
Professor X has added roughly 90 pounds of body weight over the average weight for an untrained individual and tha had only added 1.3 pounds per inch. Now all of the sudden we add that 1.3 + 2 to 7 MORE pounds for some reason?
The extra weight for frame and muscle is already there when multiplying by 3.57
Where does the extra 1.5-6.5 pounds per inch come from?
Make sense?[/quote]

This is all a discussion of 1 lifter at the same height. I’m discussing how to compare the heights and weights of 2 different lifters to have comparable physiques. [/quote]

Aren’t we trying to guesstimate how much Professor X would weigh if he was taller?
If X is 5’10 250pounds how much would he weigh if he was Utah Lamas height of 6’1.
That is what we were talking about.
I said 261ish
X said 280-290
What do you think?

Using X’s numbers that means if UL was X’s height he would be 185-195[/quote]

I think UL would be around 205ish (which he would still look great at given his new short height) and I think X would be around 285ish at 6’1", same BF levels he’s at now. I’m giving X more pounds per inch added as compared to what I subtracted for UL because X is carrying more fat and it would take both muscle and fat to stay at the same bodyfat levels.

It’s really all speculation, but my main point was that if you’re comparing what people would weigh at different heights with the same “look” to their physique, it’s got to be more than a 3 lbs per inch difference.
[/quote]

With that said…as was stated before, I don’t see many people here that size. If they are here, where are they?

That doesn’t mean other people don’t look “impressive”.

562

I get what you are saying Lanky.
You added a lot more body weight for X than you subtracted from Lama because X is carrying a lot more fat.
I just don’t agree with your numbers and that is ok.
You have your opinion and I have mine.
It’s all good.

563

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
I get what you are saying Lanky.
You added a lot more body weight for X than you subtracted from Lama because X is carrying a lot more fat.
I just don’t agree with your numbers and that is ok.
You have your opinion and I have mine.
It’s all good.[/quote]

But…his “opinion” is common knowledge and supported by people like CT and other real meatheads who understand this topic.

It is great if you don’t agree…just don’t act like everyone agrees with you.

In general I have heard it is “5-10lbs for every inch in height”.

The whole point of that was simply that if one guy is several inches taller, you would subtract that relative weight if trying to discuss how much he would weigh at a smaller height.

If I was as tall as 6’1", it would put me close tpo 290lbs in the same condition.

It is simply a general way to discuss how much someone might weigh if compared to someone of a different height in bodybuilding.

564

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
I get what you are saying Lanky.
You added a lot more body weight for X than you subtracted from Lama because X is carrying a lot more fat.
I just don’t agree with your numbers and that is ok.
You have your opinion and I have mine.
It’s all good.[/quote]

But…his “opinion” is common knowledge and supported by people like CT and other real meatheads who understand this topic.

It is great if you don’t agree…just don’t act like everyone agrees with you.

In general I have heard it is “5-10lbs for every inch in height”.

The whole point of that was simply that if one guy is several inches taller, you would subtract that relative weight if trying to discuss how much he would weigh at a smaller height.

If I was as tall as 6’1", it would put me close tpo 290lbs in the same condition.[/quote]
It’s great that you don’t agree with me… Just don’t act like everyone agrees with you.
Gee, see how that works both ways?
That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.
I just don’t agree.

565

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
I get what you are saying Lanky.
You added a lot more body weight for X than you subtracted from Lama because X is carrying a lot more fat.
I just don’t agree with your numbers and that is ok.
You have your opinion and I have mine.
It’s all good.[/quote]

But…his “opinion” is common knowledge and supported by people like CT and other real meatheads who understand this topic.

It is great if you don’t agree…just don’t act like everyone agrees with you.

In general I have heard it is “5-10lbs for every inch in height”.

The whole point of that was simply that if one guy is several inches taller, you would subtract that relative weight if trying to discuss how much he would weigh at a smaller height.

If I was as tall as 6’1", it would put me close tpo 290lbs in the same condition.[/quote]
It’s great that you don’t agree with me… Just don’t act like everyone agrees with you.
Gee, see how that works both ways?
That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.
I just don’t agree.[/quote]

OK.

Can the rest of us finish discussing what most of us believe to be common knowledge or do we need to spend another page trying to convince you for no reason?

566

[quote]knee-gro wrote:

[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
Again, why even bother to say that the accident would have taken most people out of the gym completely, if not just to portray yourself as more formidable, stronger, better, etc.?[/quote]

Best rethorical question.
[/quote]

Serious question?

Because I know I am stronger because of it and am proud of it.

Sorry if that offends you.

I know what I have been through in my life and I know how I measure up. The military alone tends to teach you that.

I really don’t care if you hate that I ever say so.

I personally enjoy hearing how people overcame obstacles.

Crabs in a bucket are way different.

567

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
I get what you are saying Lanky.
You added a lot more body weight for X than you subtracted from Lama because X is carrying a lot more fat.
I just don’t agree with your numbers and that is ok.
You have your opinion and I have mine.
It’s all good.[/quote]

But…his “opinion” is common knowledge and supported by people like CT and other real meatheads who understand this topic.

It is great if you don’t agree…just don’t act like everyone agrees with you.

In general I have heard it is “5-10lbs for every inch in height”.

The whole point of that was simply that if one guy is several inches taller, you would subtract that relative weight if trying to discuss how much he would weigh at a smaller height.

If I was as tall as 6’1", it would put me close tpo 290lbs in the same condition.[/quote]
It’s great that you don’t agree with me… Just don’t act like everyone agrees with you.
Gee, see how that works both ways?
That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it.
I just don’t agree.[/quote]

OK.

Can the rest of us finish discussing what most of us believe to be common knowledge or do we need to spend another page trying to convince you for no reason?[/quote]
Good discussion, sort of, but I am done posting back and forth with you X.
It was a productive conversation between Ryan, Lanky and I until you started posting this morning
Not every thread is a debate. You don’t discuss, you try to debate and “win” everything.
I know your M.O. and when I posted it you didn’t even deny it.
I won’t waste any more of my time and hopefully others will stop wasting theirs as well.

I will discuss ideas and topics with those here who are genuinely interested in tossing ideas back and forth.
Clearly you are not part of that group.
I won’t be replying to you again so you can save your reply for someone who you might actually sucker into your debates.

568

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

Good discussion, sort of, but I am done posting back and forth with you X.
It was a productive conversation between Ryan, Lanky and I until you started posting this morning
Not every thread is a debate. You don’t discuss, you try to debate and “win” everything.
I know your M.O. and when I posted it you didn’t even deny it.
I won’t waste any more of my time and hopefully others will stop wasting theirs as well.

I will discuss ideas and topics with those here who are genuinely interested in tossing ideas back and forth.
Clearly you are not part of that group.
I won’t be replying to you again so you can save your reply for someone who you might actually sucker into your debates.[/quote]

Uh huh.

Your original post:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
10 pounds per inch?
El oh el
Are you adding 10 pounds per inch (PPI)to I -account for 3.5PPI of LBM and the other 6.5 to be fat?
Is that where you’re 10 pounds came from?
[/quote]

Uh, yeah…I can see your desire to hold a pleasant conversation in the way you laughed at what I wrote before.

There is bullshit…and then there is the crap that has been happening on this board lately…a bunch of guys trying to attack what I write yet having little of substance when it comes to staying on topic for once.

569

[quote]knee-gro wrote:

[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
Again, why even bother to say that the accident would have taken most people out of the gym completely, if not just to portray yourself as more formidable, stronger, better, etc.?[/quote]

Best rethorical question.
[/quote]

Because he IS better than everyone else. Have you learned nothing from his 50,000 posts? He’s smarter than you, has more education, has more expertise in anything relevant to bodybuilding, and he’s bigger than you.

A variation of this theme is played out in every thread he’s in.

570

[quote]Professor X wrote:
But…his “opinion” is common knowledge and supported by people like CT and other real meatheads who understand this topic.
[/quote]

Didn’t Brick get static because his support for thinking that there’s a limit to how much lbm someone can put on unassisted was that it was a commonly shared opinion by many well known and respected people in the field who had spent years studying and understanding the topic?

(for the record, I’m not even following this current topic, just finding it funny that this is the rationalization given after someone tries to politely agree to disagree).

S

571

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
(for the record, I’m not even following this current topic, just finding it funny that this is the rationalization given after someone tries to politely agree to disagree).

S[/quote]
There is no agree to disagree, only one “winner” and one “loser”

572

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]knee-gro wrote:

[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
Again, why even bother to say that the accident would have taken most people out of the gym completely, if not just to portray yourself as more formidable, stronger, better, etc.?[/quote]

Best rethorical question.
[/quote]

Because he IS better than everyone else. Have you learned nothing from his 50,000 posts? He’s smarter than you, has more education, has more expertise in anything relevant to bodybuilding, and he’s bigger than you.

A variation of this theme is played out in every thread he’s in.[/quote]

Maybe this is just his cocoon and once he hits 50,000 posts he will emerge shredded, passive and friendly.

573

Lanky,
At what height level would you add 3, 5 or 10+ pounds?
For you is it based off of a height or a build or something else?

edited:
Do you see where I find it difficult to accept 10+ pounds per inch?
Think about a lifter who is 5’11 and a lifter who is 6 feet.
The height difference is almost negligible but a 10+ pound increase is VERY noticeable.
5’10 250 is big but 6’1 290 is freakin HUGE!
The height difference wouldn’t be that significant but the added 30-40 would be in no way proportionate to the height gain IMO

574

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
But…his “opinion” is common knowledge and supported by people like CT and other real meatheads who understand this topic.
[/quote]

Didn’t Brick get static because his support for thinking that there’s a limit to how much lbm someone can put on unassisted was that it was a commonly shared opinion by many well known and respected people in the field who had spent years studying and understanding the topic?

(for the record, I’m not even following this current topic, just finding it funny that this is the rationalization given after someone tries to politely agree to disagree).

S[/quote]

No. Brick got static by saying IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE for a natural trainer to pass up a certain number. He later backed down from his IMPOSSIBLE stance when questioned over and over.

One is common knowledge comparing a RHETORICAL situation where bodybuilder A gains o loses x inches of height.

The other is telling people they can’t do what people right here are saying they did.

I can see the difference between the two.

575

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
(for the record, I’m not even following this current topic, just finding it funny that this is the rationalization given after someone tries to politely agree to disagree).

S[/quote]
There is no agree to disagree, only one “winner” and one “loser”[/quote]

576

[quote]Professor X wrote:

With that said…as was stated before, I don’t see many people here that size. If they are here, where are they?

That doesn’t mean other people don’t look “impressive”.
[/quote]

What I find funny is that X honestly believes he is the only “big” guy on this site. Well, not according to Bauber over in RMP. The guy is 5’11" and 315. Best part, he’s only 25. I added his lifts and measurements (his claims), just to give perspective. FWIW.

Deadlift 585 - 9 reps (Failed on 10)
Bench 405 - 10 reps
Squat 465 - 10 reps

Neck - 21 inches
Chest - 59 inches
Biceps - 22.5 inches
Quads - 34 inches
Forearms - 17.5
Calves - 18.5

577

[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:

What I find funny is that X honestly believes he is the only “big” guy on this site. [/quote]

I have never said this and don’t think this at all. You seem to have missed what was being discussed…that there are few people that size and bigger who DID NOT BULK UP EVER.

Get it right. Making up things and then saying this is what I think is lame as shit. Most of you complaining about what I write seem to miss nearly everything I write to make shit up.

578

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
And I can only imagine, back in the old school days of bodybuilding, that grown ass men acted and sounded like a bunch of cackling women at the mall.

When a fellow T-Nation member entered a physique transformation contest at my gym, no one punked him the way I see on this thread, but instead he went on to win 1st place and absolutely kill it. When he asked me for honest feedback on his progress, I gave him my opinion with both the delivery and intent of helping him move in the right direction.

This fuckery between the T-brothers I see is not constructive criticism, but senseless dick waving.

Use each other to make yourselves better.

[/quote]

579

^Fair enough. However, Bauber still stands as an example due to the fact that he himself admits that he tracks his macros and eats clean YEAR ROUND. He says he doesn’t like to “bulk up” as you put it, because it just gets him fat. So, yeah, there’s that.

580

[quote]knee-gro wrote:

[quote]steven alex wrote:

To be fair I dont even think X ever entertains the thought that judged against those you mention he would ever place higher in a BB Contest but that isnt his aim. He said in the past his goal is to be huge and is not concerned if a big proportion of that is fat.[/quote]

Professor X should write an article for T-Nation, I bet it would get a record number of hits. I can already imagine the title:

“Combining the body of a powerlifter with the strenght of a bodybuilder”.

The livespill would be epic.[/quote]

LOL