I will have to agree with X on this one. I am going off memory but I actually thought there was a pic floating around here where his upper legs were (to me) very impressive. I actually attribute his legs for a lot of his weight because with his upper body he wouldn’t scrape 250 at 5’10" without some nice wheels.
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
I will have to agree with X on this one. I am going off memory but I actually thought there was a pic floating around here where his upper legs were (to me) very impressive. I actually attribute his legs for a lot of his weight because with his upper body he wouldn’t scrape 250 at 5’10" without some nice wheels. [/quote]
Thank you. I work my legs hard despite past injuries. My calves are 18" because I train them almost everyday.
That took a lot of work seeing as they were about 14" when I started.
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
Dude, my calves aren’t far from yours and my upper body is much smaller. That is saying something. Not to mention, my legs have recently been measured at around 30", so there’s that. Like I said, your lower body is lagging.[/quote]
30" thighs are pretty impressive, depending on where they are measured.
I think there is a whole thread full of photos Brick posted of 30" thighs floating around here somewhere:
What do your stats look like Mr Prufrock?
Good job on the wheels BTW
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
Dude, my calves aren’t far from yours and my upper body is much smaller. That is saying something. Not to mention, my legs have recently been measured at around 30", so there’s that. Like I said, your lower body is lagging.[/quote]
30" thighs are pretty impressive, depending on where they are measured.
I think there is a whole thread full of photos Brick posted of 30" thighs floating around here somewhere:
What do your stats look like Mr Prufrock?
Good job on the wheels BTW[/quote]
Plz remeber leanness when talking measurements as well. 18 inch lean arm will look 3x as big as 21 inch fat ceps. Same with anything. Just saying
@bpick-Yeah, I agree that his legs are pretty impressive. What I said, or was trying to say, is that I feel like his legs could be bigger given how big his upper body is. That’s all. I didn’t say his legs weren’t “impressive”, just that, in my opinion, they’re lagging.
@X-Yes, I understand. You were in some accidents. I don’t understand why you need to keep saying that. 18" calves are nothing to sneeze at. I apologize. I guess they just look small compared to the rest of you. Also, I find it odd that you made a thread about not setting limits, but constantly write of any of your physical shortcomings as limited by genetics or past accidents.
@Smashing-Yeah, when I measured my thighs, I feel like I measured pretty high, which would obviously change things. I read that one was supposed to measure a ways up on the thigh, but I realize that would skew measurements. Yes, those photos Brick posted were intense, to say the least. Anyways, I just measured my thigh again, around the midpoint, and it came out much lower. 
I’m really much closer to 26.5-27". Plus, I’m probably carrying some fat on my legs. So, not too impressive. In no way was I trying to act like my legs were as big as the Profs. I was just stating that I felt like he needed to bring his lower body up.
As for my stats:
6’1"
243lbs
body fat %-Not too sure. I’d guess mid to high teens.
arms-16.5-16.75"
legs-26.5-27"
waist-36"
chest-How should I measure this? Just across, or all the way around my back?
calves-16.5"
forearms-12.75-13"
I’m definitely not breaking any records, ha. I am painfully aware of the fact that I have a long way to go. I’m still a youngster. When I started lifting with a purpose, I only weighed about 170-180. I have been focusing on strength for the majority of my time lifting. I did SS and have now moved on to 5/3/1. So, I’m not really training for size or anything.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
Dude, my calves aren’t far from yours and my upper body is much smaller. That is saying something. Not to mention, my legs have recently been measured at around 30", so there’s that. Like I said, your lower body is lagging.[/quote]
30" thighs are pretty impressive, depending on where they are measured.
I think there is a whole thread full of photos Brick posted of 30" thighs floating around here somewhere:
What do your stats look like Mr Prufrock?
Good job on the wheels BTW[/quote]
Plz remeber leanness when talking measurements as well. 18 inch lean arm will look 3x as big as 21 inch fat ceps. Same with anything. Just saying [/quote]
Of course.
I just assumed, based on his apparent stance in this thread, that he wasn’t a tubby “big” guy.
@ryan-Oh, I know. I’m definitely carrying more fat than I’d like. However, putting on about 60lbs in a year and a half or so isn’t too bad.
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
@bpick-Yeah, I agree that his legs are pretty impressive. What I said, or was trying to say, is that I feel like his legs could be bigger given how big his upper body is. That’s all. I didn’t say his legs weren’t “impressive”, just that, in my opinion, they’re lagging.
@X-Yes, I understand. You were in some accidents. I don’t understand why you need to keep saying that. 18" calves are nothing to sneeze at. I apologize. I guess they just look small compared to the rest of you. Also, I find it odd that you made a thread about not setting limits, but constantly write of any of your physical shortcomings as limited by genetics or past accidents.
@Smashing-Yeah, when I measured my thighs, I feel like I measured pretty high, which would obviously change things. I read that one was supposed to measure a ways up on the thigh, but I realize that would skew measurements. Yes, those photos Brick posted were intense, to say the least. Anyways, I just measured my thigh again, around the midpoint, and it came out much lower. I’m really much closer to 26.5-27". Plus, I’m probably carrying some fat on my legs. So, not too impressive. In no way was I trying to act like my legs were as big as the Profs. I was just stating that I felt like he needed to bring his lower body up.
As for my stats:
6’1"
243lbs
body fat %-Not too sure. I’d guess mid to high teens.
arms-16.5-16.75"
legs-26.5-27"
waist-36"
chest-How should I measure this? Just across, or all the way around my back?
calves-16.5"
forearms-12.75-13"
I’m definitely not breaking any records, ha. I am painfully aware of the fact that I have a long way to go. I’m still a youngster. When I started lifting with a purpose, I only weighed about 170-180. I have been focusing on strength for the majority of my time lifting. I did SS and have now moved on to 5/3/1. So, I’m not really training for size or anything.
[/quote]
Thanks for sharing.
Virtually all of us are a work in progress so keep on working
Usually chest is measured all the way around.
I have always been under the impression that quad measurements were to be taken 4-6 inches above the knee.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
@bpick-Yeah, I agree that his legs are pretty impressive. What I said, or was trying to say, is that I feel like his legs could be bigger given how big his upper body is. That’s all. I didn’t say his legs weren’t “impressive”, just that, in my opinion, they’re lagging.
@X-Yes, I understand. You were in some accidents. I don’t understand why you need to keep saying that. 18" calves are nothing to sneeze at. I apologize. I guess they just look small compared to the rest of you. Also, I find it odd that you made a thread about not setting limits, but constantly write of any of your physical shortcomings as limited by genetics or past accidents.
@Smashing-Yeah, when I measured my thighs, I feel like I measured pretty high, which would obviously change things. I read that one was supposed to measure a ways up on the thigh, but I realize that would skew measurements. Yes, those photos Brick posted were intense, to say the least. Anyways, I just measured my thigh again, around the midpoint, and it came out much lower. I’m really much closer to 26.5-27". Plus, I’m probably carrying some fat on my legs. So, not too impressive. In no way was I trying to act like my legs were as big as the Profs. I was just stating that I felt like he needed to bring his lower body up.
As for my stats:
6’1"
243lbs
body fat %-Not too sure. I’d guess mid to high teens.
arms-16.5-16.75"
legs-26.5-27"
waist-36"
chest-How should I measure this? Just across, or all the way around my back?
calves-16.5"
forearms-12.75-13"
I’m definitely not breaking any records, ha. I am painfully aware of the fact that I have a long way to go. I’m still a youngster. When I started lifting with a purpose, I only weighed about 170-180. I have been focusing on strength for the majority of my time lifting. I did SS and have now moved on to 5/3/1. So, I’m not really training for size or anything.
[/quote]
Thanks for sharing.
Virtually all of us are a work in progress so keep on working
Usually chest is measured all the way around.
I have always been under the impression that quad measurements were to be taken 4-6 inches above the knee.[/quote]
I always thought in was the fullest part of the thigh in a semi lunged position.
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
@ryan-Oh, I know. I’m definitely carrying more fat than I’d like. However, putting on about 60lbs in a year and a half or so isn’t too bad.[/quote]
Shit I see where you thought that at you that was more a general statment also aimed at X and his measurements. And just to everyone in general. Sorry man didn’t mean to call you out in such a way
Chest is at the nips normally and not flared lats just relaxed. And legs 4-6 inch above knee
[quote]bpick86 wrote:
I always thought in was the fullest part of the thigh in a semi lunged position.[/quote]
Semi lunged?
Never heard that.
Seems like an awkward position lol
Are you serious “Goose?”?
Okay, thanks a bunch, guys. I’ll take my thigh and chest measurements again. I appreciate the input.
28 inch, lean thighs
Another pic of 28 inch, lean thighs.
Fouad Abiad, 290, offseason
@Brick-Yeah, those pics are intense. For the record, I didn’t say I have 28" thighs, just to clarify. Plus, I’m pretty tall, so my 26.5" or so thighs won’t look as big a a shorter guy’s.
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
@Brick-Yeah, those pics are intense. For the record, I didn’t say I have 28" thighs, just to clarify. Plus, I’m pretty tall, so my 26.5" or so thighs won’t look as big a a shorter guy’s.[/quote]
It’s alright I was addressing someone else.
Okay, cool. Nice physique, by the way. Also, I’m a fan of your stance on realistic muscle gains.
[quote]J. Prufrock wrote:
Okay, cool. Nice physique, by the way. Also, I’m a fan of your stance on realistic muscle gains.[/quote]
Thanks! I like your posts a lot! You’re intelligent, reasonable, and well written.