Mental Perception vs Ability

Training
81

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]ishinator wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]ishinator wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Waittz wrote:

Why do you feel the only way to stand out or be impressive is to weigh alot? Some of the most impressive guys I have ever seen are closer to 180 then 280. See that is the thing, “impressive” is a subjective term. Everyone else seems to be able to agree on that aside from you.

[/quote]

My mistake. I figured it was understood the issue was gaining a lot of muscle mass and not simply genetic shape.

Weight alone is not the issue.[/quote]

I guess what I am trying to say is it is all subjective and relative. Nobody is right or wrong because we are dealing with a subject where the result is opinion based with no standard. [/quote]

Well in a perfect world this would end the thread right here.

Me thinks that will not happen however.[/quote]

If everybody wrote “/thread” after every decent post, these threads could not reach their true potential because they will not strive for an even better “/thread” post.

Stop imposing limits on threads. I’m worried that some of these new threads that aren’t even that big yet will get discouraged and quit growing. I still believe there is a new thread out there, somewhere in the world, that can make it past 46 pages.[/quote]

Bullshit…there is no damn way any thread has the genetics to get past 46 pages.

That is just a bunch of hooey and tomfoolery. [/quote]

Let’s look at some examples of 46-page threads. Some people just don’t realize how big that is.

http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/sports_body_bigger_stronger_leaner/the_body_weight_factor?id=5589682&pageNo=45[/quote]

Does that mean that there cannot be a thread somewhere in this world bigger? What does that link have to do with anything?
[/quote]

Chill out. I am simply using forum data known to us over the last several years. Yes, I realize that not every thread aspires to be a thread on T-Nation because there is not much monetary incentive, but it’s the best data we have to work with.[/quote]

??

Some of you forget that there are those with the genetic potential to surpass 46 pages.

I am wondering why UtahLama can go by stating this limit with no one to call him out?

Yet when I say something I get the whole BOI horde on me.
[/quote]

Now I have some friends who create very large threads, and I respect the hell out of 'em, but even they agree that if they were to cut the threads down, the amount of useful info would be the same or possibly even less as my 3 page threads. My issue is with the claim that a bigger thread equals more content. When you’ve been posting for as long as I have, you realize that these threads don’t add new info that fast after the first few pages. With all the multiquoted posts, you’re adding 20 sentences (and that’s on a good page!) per page after the first 5 or so. Different folks have different posting styles - some like to get to their points in more wordy or roundabout fashions. Again I respect the hell out of 'em, but you can’t make that generalization about a better or worse poster.

-BD[/quote]

This is a post that should stand out to many. I have 50,000 posts. I don’t see many here with post counts that big.[/quote]

But how much of that has to do with other factors(quoting, gifs. etc.)?

I just looked at your post history, and it looks like you have a 25% Bad post content.

If you were to diet down to contest level (5% bad post content), how many posts would you have?
[/quote]

My GOAL is an EXTREME post count. I’ve got it. Yet many here act like somehow I got it by accident. Having a higher bad post count is a means to an end.[/quote]
SS gets it. The rest of you should seek help

The point is that you can have MORE quality posts in a thread if you are willing to accept a larger thread. THE POINT WAS NEVER TO HAVE A LARGER THREAD. A LARGE THREAD WAS SIMPLY A MEANS TO GET TO A QUALITY POST WHERE SOMEONE AGREED WITH ME.[/quote]

BESSSSSSSST POSSSSSSSST

82

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Question, do you think that your perception of what is possible has any affect at all on what you can achieve?[/quote]

Of course. But in some cases, no perception will outdo Mother Nature.

If someone is told they’re dumb, s/he can study regardless of the statement and improve their qualification for a certain position, PROVIDED Mother Nature endowed him/her with the appropriate intellectual capacity.

You can be anything you want… within your limitations!

And you can’t turn shit into steel!

83

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I mean, is it really because people fear someone trying too hard? I mean seriously? Because of all of the overachievers?
[/quote]

What can I say man? I’m a hater.

Like when I was at the Adidas Grand Prix three summers ago, I had third row seats at the homestretch. Alls I would do during every running and sprinting event was, “Slow down! You might win or break a record!” I tried to yell at the shot putter and javelin throwers, “Don’t throw so hard! Take it easy!” I’m known for this stuff. Like even with my bodybuilding buddy, I tried so hard for him to eat a pizza during prep and almost got caught putting a hole in his tire so he would miss gym sessions. My bro was once studying for a test and I tried convincing him to pull an all nighter the night before.

I guess I try these things because of my deep fear people will do well. Same for the rest of us, I guess. A shame.

84

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I agree with you that most people in the gym will never come anywhere near pushing hard enough…which is one reason I don’t understand the desire to spread word of a specific limit. If so few people will ever push hard enough to reach it, why even worry about telling them a “limit”?

[/quote]

I don’t impose limits on other people. Mother Nature and too many other factors do that, of which, like Mother Nature, I have no control.

However, there are quite a few people who’ve asked the question, “How much can I gain naturally?” and it’s not unreasonable to say, “About 40 to 50 pounds of muscle, naturally, based on what we’ve seen so far amongst the best and most dedicated.”

85

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]coyotegal wrote:
Mentally is everything! In all aspects of life![/quote]

I believe the same…but this idea was literally laughed at here recently.[/quote]
Ummm… I’ve been reading these threads, no one EVER said that. See Utah Lama’s post.

86

[quote]coyotegal wrote:
Mentally is everything! In all aspects of life![/quote]

It’s not a bad thing to say. However, the impression I get from some here is that one can do things with mentality alone, all the while ignoring nature’s limits.

87

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I mean, is it really because people fear someone trying too hard? I mean seriously? Because of all of the overachievers?
[/quote]

What can I say man? I’m a hater.

Like when I was at the Adidas Grand Prix three summers ago, I had third row seats at the homestretch. Alls I would do during every running and sprinting event was, “Slow down! You might win or break a record!” I tried to yell at the shot putter and javelin throwers, “Don’t throw so hard! Take it easy!” I’m known for this stuff. Like even with my bodybuilding buddy, I tried so hard for him to eat a pizza during prep and almost got caught putting a hole in his tire so he would miss gym sessions. My bro was once studying for a test and I tried convincing him to pull an all nighter the night before.

I guess I try these things because of my deep fear people will do well. Same for the rest of us, I guess. A shame. [/quote]

L O L

88

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]ac33ro wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sonnyp wrote:
In my opinion it matters more than anything else.[/quote]

That is what I believe also…which is one reason I take such an issue with literally defining exactly what someone can or can not do and telling them that this limit is the truth based on what has been done before.

mankind has made new steps into places before seen as only fantasy because we stopped believing that what had been done before is all there is. Am I right or wrong?[/quote]

I agree that self confidence is a significant factor in success, but what of the other end of the spectrum? While defeatist thinking is poison to achievement, what about someone who has a wholly unrealistic, over-inflated sense of self and accomplishment? Does that have a negative impact as well? i.e. If you lack a realistic perspective on what you have and will achieve; cling to self delusion and entitlement what will you wind up doing?

Check out “Waiting for Superman” for an indication of this–Rosenthal’s studies are interesting–but when contrasted to the current state of affairs, what is more interesting would be the fact that American students today rank 25th and 21st in math and science scores respectively. American students however rank 1st in confidence in abilities…

Confidence is one thing, unearned and unwarranted delusional thinking is another altogether. When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great. I wonder how that relates to getting Bigger, Stronger, and Leaner? [/quote]

Best Post[/quote]

I never post in here and threads like this are why, but I couldn’t let this pass without saying this is spot on.

89

[quote]burt128 wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]ac33ro wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sonnyp wrote:
In my opinion it matters more than anything else.[/quote]

That is what I believe also…which is one reason I take such an issue with literally defining exactly what someone can or can not do and telling them that this limit is the truth based on what has been done before.

mankind has made new steps into places before seen as only fantasy because we stopped believing that what had been done before is all there is. Am I right or wrong?[/quote]

I agree that self confidence is a significant factor in success, but what of the other end of the spectrum? While defeatist thinking is poison to achievement, what about someone who has a wholly unrealistic, over-inflated sense of self and accomplishment? Does that have a negative impact as well? i.e. If you lack a realistic perspective on what you have and will achieve; cling to self delusion and entitlement what will you wind up doing?

Check out “Waiting for Superman” for an indication of this–Rosenthal’s studies are interesting–but when contrasted to the current state of affairs, what is more interesting would be the fact that American students today rank 25th and 21st in math and science scores respectively. American students however rank 1st in confidence in abilities…

Confidence is one thing, unearned and unwarranted delusional thinking is another altogether. When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great. I wonder how that relates to getting Bigger, Stronger, and Leaner? [/quote]

Best Post[/quote]

I never post in here and threads like this are why, but I couldn’t let this pass without saying this is spot on.
[/quote]

and ronnie coleman size would be delusional and unrealistic in the past

trying to surpass #1 isn’t delusional, people are already there

I don’t see how students are related to this. They are confident, but weren’t aware of how dumb they were, because they weren’t tested. With a bodybuilder, they know their weight, LBM, and know their target weight. They know their standing at all times.

“When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great”. It sounds like you are describing the people who post about limits… not the “delusional” people who have set high goals.

90

[quote]marshaldteach wrote:

[quote]burt128 wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]ac33ro wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sonnyp wrote:
In my opinion it matters more than anything else.[/quote]

That is what I believe also…which is one reason I take such an issue with literally defining exactly what someone can or can not do and telling them that this limit is the truth based on what has been done before.

mankind has made new steps into places before seen as only fantasy because we stopped believing that what had been done before is all there is. Am I right or wrong?[/quote]

I agree that self confidence is a significant factor in success, but what of the other end of the spectrum? While defeatist thinking is poison to achievement, what about someone who has a wholly unrealistic, over-inflated sense of self and accomplishment? Does that have a negative impact as well? i.e. If you lack a realistic perspective on what you have and will achieve; cling to self delusion and entitlement what will you wind up doing?

Check out “Waiting for Superman” for an indication of this–Rosenthal’s studies are interesting–but when contrasted to the current state of affairs, what is more interesting would be the fact that American students today rank 25th and 21st in math and science scores respectively. American students however rank 1st in confidence in abilities…

Confidence is one thing, unearned and unwarranted delusional thinking is another altogether. When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great. I wonder how that relates to getting Bigger, Stronger, and Leaner? [/quote]

Best Post[/quote]

I never post in here and threads like this are why, but I couldn’t let this pass without saying this is spot on.
[/quote]

and ronnie coleman size would be delusional and unrealistic in the past

trying to surpass #1 isn’t delusional, people are already there

I don’t see how students are related to this. They are confident, but weren’t aware of how dumb they were, because they weren’t tested. With a bodybuilder, they know their weight, LBM, and know their target weight. They know their standing at all times.

“When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great”. It sounds like you are describing the people who post about limits… not the “delusional” people who have set high goals.
[/quote]

This can work both ways though can’t it? I mean, one of the prime reasons this debate started on this specific forum(and I’m sure others) was because of people unrealistically thinking that assisted physiques were worthwhile goals to aspire to, as natural lifters, or they just generally thought their gains were shit because they had no idea of what a great natural physique was. Is young John Smith hitting the gym right now comparing himself to say, that model from the Bigger Faster Stronger documentary(the one who said it’s the viewers responsibility to know his physique isn’t attainable with just the products he’s endorsing, but only with AAS as well), and falling well short despite doing everything right, not receiving essentially the ‘you’re stupid’ feedback?

I expect responses to be along the lines of ‘sucks to be him he obviously wasn’t cut out for this if he let his failure to achieve an assisted physique derail his achievement.’ But why is that a fair argument but the opposite isn’t? If limits are allowed to ‘hinder,’ then the lack of limits can certainly lead to faulty goal setting and bad expectations, which will create negative feedback that as discussed is clinically proven to possibly affect ones actual abilities.

91

[quote]ac33ro wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sonnyp wrote:
In my opinion it matters more than anything else.[/quote]

That is what I believe also…which is one reason I take such an issue with literally defining exactly what someone can or can not do and telling them that this limit is the truth based on what has been done before.

mankind has made new steps into places before seen as only fantasy because we stopped believing that what had been done before is all there is. Am I right or wrong?[/quote]

I agree that self confidence is a significant factor in success, but what of the other end of the spectrum? While defeatist thinking is poison to achievement, what about someone who has a wholly unrealistic, over-inflated sense of self and accomplishment? Does that have a negative impact as well? i.e. If you lack a realistic perspective on what you have and will achieve; cling to self delusion and entitlement what will you wind up doing?

Check out “Waiting for Superman” for an indication of this–Rosenthal’s studies are interesting–but when contrasted to the current state of affairs, what is more interesting would be the fact that American students today rank 25th and 21st in math and science scores respectively. American students however rank 1st in confidence in abilities…

Confidence is one thing, unearned and unwarranted delusional thinking is another altogether. When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great. I wonder how that relates to getting Bigger, Stronger, and Leaner? [/quote]

ac33ro you deserve the Best Poster of the month Award ! ! !
CLAP CLAP CLAP

92

[quote]red04 wrote:

[quote]marshaldteach wrote:

[quote]burt128 wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]ac33ro wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sonnyp wrote:
In my opinion it matters more than anything else.[/quote]

That is what I believe also…which is one reason I take such an issue with literally defining exactly what someone can or can not do and telling them that this limit is the truth based on what has been done before.

mankind has made new steps into places before seen as only fantasy because we stopped believing that what had been done before is all there is. Am I right or wrong?[/quote]

I agree that self confidence is a significant factor in success, but what of the other end of the spectrum? While defeatist thinking is poison to achievement, what about someone who has a wholly unrealistic, over-inflated sense of self and accomplishment? Does that have a negative impact as well? i.e. If you lack a realistic perspective on what you have and will achieve; cling to self delusion and entitlement what will you wind up doing?

Check out “Waiting for Superman” for an indication of this–Rosenthal’s studies are interesting–but when contrasted to the current state of affairs, what is more interesting would be the fact that American students today rank 25th and 21st in math and science scores respectively. American students however rank 1st in confidence in abilities…

Confidence is one thing, unearned and unwarranted delusional thinking is another altogether. When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great. I wonder how that relates to getting Bigger, Stronger, and Leaner? [/quote]

Best Post[/quote]

I never post in here and threads like this are why, but I couldn’t let this pass without saying this is spot on.
[/quote]

and ronnie coleman size would be delusional and unrealistic in the past

trying to surpass #1 isn’t delusional, people are already there

I don’t see how students are related to this. They are confident, but weren’t aware of how dumb they were, because they weren’t tested. With a bodybuilder, they know their weight, LBM, and know their target weight. They know their standing at all times.

“When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great”. It sounds like you are describing the people who post about limits… not the “delusional” people who have set high goals.
[/quote]

This can work both ways though can’t it? I mean, one of the prime reasons this debate started on this specific forum(and I’m sure others) was because of people unrealistically thinking that assisted physiques were worthwhile goals to aspire to, as natural lifters, or they just generally thought their gains were shit because they had no idea of what a great natural physique was. Is young John Smith hitting the gym right now comparing himself to say, that model from the Bigger Faster Stronger documentary(the one who said it’s the viewers responsibility to know his physique isn’t attainable with just the products he’s endorsing, but only with AAS as well), and falling well short despite doing everything right, not receiving essentially the ‘you’re stupid’ feedback?

I expect responses to be along the lines of ‘sucks to be him he obviously wasn’t cut out for this if he let his failure to achieve an assisted physique derail his achievement.’ But why is that a fair argument but the opposite isn’t? If limits are allowed to ‘hinder,’ then the lack of limits can certainly lead to faulty goal setting and bad expectations, which will create negative feedback that as discussed is clinically proven to possibly affect ones actual abilities.[/quote]

Who here thinks that prof x could make it into the pro bodybuilder ranks? After all, if he’s never done steroids before then a proper cycle is going to make him explode. He could be the next ronnie Coleman?!

93

[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:

[quote]red04 wrote:

[quote]marshaldteach wrote:

[quote]burt128 wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]ac33ro wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sonnyp wrote:
In my opinion it matters more than anything else.[/quote]

That is what I believe also…which is one reason I take such an issue with literally defining exactly what someone can or can not do and telling them that this limit is the truth based on what has been done before.

mankind has made new steps into places before seen as only fantasy because we stopped believing that what had been done before is all there is. Am I right or wrong?[/quote]

I agree that self confidence is a significant factor in success, but what of the other end of the spectrum? While defeatist thinking is poison to achievement, what about someone who has a wholly unrealistic, over-inflated sense of self and accomplishment? Does that have a negative impact as well? i.e. If you lack a realistic perspective on what you have and will achieve; cling to self delusion and entitlement what will you wind up doing?

Check out “Waiting for Superman” for an indication of this–Rosenthal’s studies are interesting–but when contrasted to the current state of affairs, what is more interesting would be the fact that American students today rank 25th and 21st in math and science scores respectively. American students however rank 1st in confidence in abilities…

Confidence is one thing, unearned and unwarranted delusional thinking is another altogether. When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great. I wonder how that relates to getting Bigger, Stronger, and Leaner? [/quote]

Best Post[/quote]

I never post in here and threads like this are why, but I couldn’t let this pass without saying this is spot on.
[/quote]

and ronnie coleman size would be delusional and unrealistic in the past

trying to surpass #1 isn’t delusional, people are already there

I don’t see how students are related to this. They are confident, but weren’t aware of how dumb they were, because they weren’t tested. With a bodybuilder, they know their weight, LBM, and know their target weight. They know their standing at all times.

“When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great”. It sounds like you are describing the people who post about limits… not the “delusional” people who have set high goals.
[/quote]

This can work both ways though can’t it? I mean, one of the prime reasons this debate started on this specific forum(and I’m sure others) was because of people unrealistically thinking that assisted physiques were worthwhile goals to aspire to, as natural lifters, or they just generally thought their gains were shit because they had no idea of what a great natural physique was. Is young John Smith hitting the gym right now comparing himself to say, that model from the Bigger Faster Stronger documentary(the one who said it’s the viewers responsibility to know his physique isn’t attainable with just the products he’s endorsing, but only with AAS as well), and falling well short despite doing everything right, not receiving essentially the ‘you’re stupid’ feedback?

I expect responses to be along the lines of ‘sucks to be him he obviously wasn’t cut out for this if he let his failure to achieve an assisted physique derail his achievement.’ But why is that a fair argument but the opposite isn’t? If limits are allowed to ‘hinder,’ then the lack of limits can certainly lead to faulty goal setting and bad expectations, which will create negative feedback that as discussed is clinically proven to possibly affect ones actual abilities.[/quote]

Who here thinks that prof x could make it into the pro bodybuilder ranks? After all, if he’s never done steroids before then a proper cycle is going to make him explode. He could be the next ronnie Coleman?!
[/quote]

Maybe you missed his point.
Limiting him to what has been done before is plain unfair and allmost illegal in some states.

He knows NO LIMITS !

94

[quote]marshaldteach wrote:

“When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great”. It sounds like you are describing the people who post about limits… not the “delusional” people who have set high goals.
[/quote]

Indeed. I am just going to address the topic in question.

People need to realize that the bar is different in different levels of society.

If you have grown up in a not so privileged community and chose to aim for a high education, good career, 6 figure income etc, you can smell this attitude a mile away. This will come from your “friends”, the people around you, and even your parents.

They don’t explicitly put you down. They don’t outright tell you “no you can’t make it”. No, it comes in the form of subtle mockery and sarcarsm, or friendly “advice” from a an old timer telling you how he failed by shooting for the stars and you should just accept that you are never going to advance higher than the perceived status quo. When you actually go and do the “impossible”, you will find there are no accolades to be found either. Instead, you will hear things spoken behind your back: “What a show off”, "he must have done something illegal, “he got lucky”, “he has lots of money but probably has no friends and will never be happy”.

While one can easily laugh this off, who do you think are most affected by this? Its the young and impressionable with the potential to surpass even these achievements.

There is a certain perceived reality people live in depending on where they are in life and what they have accomplished, and this reality is based on things they can comphrehend as attainable. Sure, they will cheer you on when you excel in things within bounderies of their comphrehension. They will encourage you on and pat you on the back for succeding. But achieve anything outside of that and they will do anything to rationalize it by downplaying your achievements.

This is simply because although the bar is at a different level at different places, people sure as hell don’t want you to raise it.

95

[quote]red04 wrote:

[quote]marshaldteach wrote:

[quote]burt128 wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]ac33ro wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sonnyp wrote:
In my opinion it matters more than anything else.[/quote]

That is what I believe also…which is one reason I take such an issue with literally defining exactly what someone can or can not do and telling them that this limit is the truth based on what has been done before.

mankind has made new steps into places before seen as only fantasy because we stopped believing that what had been done before is all there is. Am I right or wrong?[/quote]

I agree that self confidence is a significant factor in success, but what of the other end of the spectrum? While defeatist thinking is poison to achievement, what about someone who has a wholly unrealistic, over-inflated sense of self and accomplishment? Does that have a negative impact as well? i.e. If you lack a realistic perspective on what you have and will achieve; cling to self delusion and entitlement what will you wind up doing?

Check out “Waiting for Superman” for an indication of this–Rosenthal’s studies are interesting–but when contrasted to the current state of affairs, what is more interesting would be the fact that American students today rank 25th and 21st in math and science scores respectively. American students however rank 1st in confidence in abilities…

Confidence is one thing, unearned and unwarranted delusional thinking is another altogether. When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great. I wonder how that relates to getting Bigger, Stronger, and Leaner? [/quote]

Best Post[/quote]

I never post in here and threads like this are why, but I couldn’t let this pass without saying this is spot on.
[/quote]

and ronnie coleman size would be delusional and unrealistic in the past

trying to surpass #1 isn’t delusional, people are already there

I don’t see how students are related to this. They are confident, but weren’t aware of how dumb they were, because they weren’t tested. With a bodybuilder, they know their weight, LBM, and know their target weight. They know their standing at all times.

“When one has that skewed and distorted perception improvement is difficult because the belief is there that one is already great”. It sounds like you are describing the people who post about limits… not the “delusional” people who have set high goals.
[/quote]

This can work both ways though can’t it? I mean, one of the prime reasons this debate started on this specific forum(and I’m sure others) was because of people unrealistically thinking that assisted physiques were worthwhile goals to aspire to, as natural lifters, or they just generally thought their gains were shit because they had no idea of what a great natural physique was. Is young John Smith hitting the gym right now comparing himself to say, that model from the Bigger Faster Stronger documentary(the one who said it’s the viewers responsibility to know his physique isn’t attainable with just the products he’s endorsing, but only with AAS as well), and falling well short despite doing everything right, not receiving essentially the ‘you’re stupid’ feedback?

I expect responses to be along the lines of ‘sucks to be him he obviously wasn’t cut out for this if he let his failure to achieve an assisted physique derail his achievement.’ But why is that a fair argument but the opposite isn’t? If limits are allowed to ‘hinder,’ then the lack of limits can certainly lead to faulty goal setting and bad expectations, which will create negative feedback that as discussed is clinically proven to possibly affect ones actual abilities.[/quote]

Its not the actual setting of limits, its the constant discussion of limits that leads to more and more opinions from others who have achieved much less. Notice how the original limit, when challenged, went from 40lbs to 80lbs?

If this went on one sided, it might have actually dropped to 20lbs.

96

[quote]red04 wrote:
If limits are allowed to ‘hinder,’ then the lack of limits can certainly lead to faulty goal setting and bad expectations, which will create negative feedback that as discussed is clinically proven to possibly affect ones actual abilities.[/quote]

Actually, the most overambitious men I know were delusional because their ambitions didn’t match their abilities. That is, they had ambitions of doing things which they clearly don’t have the ability to. And what did they wind up with? FAR LESS than men who understand what they’re made of and had more reasonable ambitions or expectations. Come to think of it, every overambitious guy I know is earning ZERO dollars or far less than his peers and/or has serious problems.

I actually know a 34 year old man who’s been unemployed for two years by his own volition and practically refuses to work who asked me last year if I could see him being a millionaire. He actually refuses job offers that pay less than six figures because he believes he’s worth more, whic he’s not considering his training, education, and experience. So he rather earn NO money than earn SOME money because of his inflated sense of worth. And this is a guy talking about becoming loaded.

97

[quote]dt79 wrote:

Its not the actual setting of limits, its the constant discussion of limits that leads to more and more opinions from others who have achieved much less. Notice how the original limit, when challenged, went from 40lbs to 80lbs?

If this went on one sided, it might have actually dropped to 20lbs.[/quote]

I don’t know who changed the amount a natural could gain. I have stood by my guns the entire time with a reasonable 40 to 50 pound gain for a natural, and my estimation will stay.

When X constantly spoke of 80 pound muscle gains, I said, “No natural has gained 80 pounds of muscle”. Somehow this was misinterpreted as the new limit. He also formed a new limit of his own when I said, "After ten years, if everything is being done properly, gains will have stalled or dried up. This became a new “ten year limit”, when meanwhile I said repeatedly that gains will drastically diminish after the fifth to seventh year mark considering most fumble in the first few years. Then when I asked him how he is going to improve on his body when he’s been training for 15 years, that simple QUESTION to him lead HIM to come up HIS new perceived “15 year limit”.

Oh, I have shown some guys who might have gained 80 pounds LBM. Take a look here.

98

Maybe… just maybe… people can realize what someone who’s gained 80 pounds LBM looks like.

99

Or what a “not fat”, bulked up 275 looks like.

100

And by not fat you are talking about the guy on the left correct?