Natural Muscle Building Potential

Training
61

[quote]csulli wrote:

I’m not even being facetious. This has convinced me that for a 5’9", truly natty dude, you only have a snowball’s chance in hell of being lean and over 200lbs at the same time.[/quote]

A lot of people don’t really have a realistic concept of what a lean 180 lbs looks like on someone of average height. I’m certainly not one to go on about my amazing genetics (because they’re really not compared to some other guys), but I’ve got a few photos of myself in the mid 180s, and you’d be surprised at how huge I look next to normal folks. I wouldn’t focus so much on scale #s.

Take guys like Cordova, competing in the 160’s, when he’s not in contest shape (and even when he is!), it would blow your mind at how imposing a physique he has. This is why so many people who have been around competitors (and I only mentioned competitors because they tend to stay leaner which gives a better idea of how much muscle they’re carrying) are so quick to call BS on some of the more staggering claimed internet stats.

Also, in terms of genetics; You never know what you’re capable of until you actually get there. While it’s foolish to ignore the plethora of examples of lifters who have yet to exceed certain dimensions, it’s never a reason to abandon ship.

S

62

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

I’m not even being facetious. This has convinced me that for a 5’9", truly natty dude, you only have a snowball’s chance in hell of being lean and over 200lbs at the same time.[/quote]

A lot of people don’t really have a realistic concept of what a lean 180 lbs looks like on someone of average height. I’m certainly not one to go on about my amazing genetics (because they’re really not compared to some other guys), but I’ve got a few photos of myself in the mid 180s, and you’d be surprised at how huge I look next to normal folks. I wouldn’t focus so much on scale #s.

Take guys like Cordova, competing in the 160’s, when he’s not in contest shape (and even when he is!), it would blow your mind at how imposing a physique he has. This is why so many people who have been around competitors (and I only mentioned competitors because they tend to stay leaner which gives a better idea of how much muscle they’re carrying) are so quick to call BS on some of the more staggering claimed internet stats.

Also, in terms of genetics; You never know what you’re capable of until you actually get there. While it’s foolish to ignore the plethora of examples of lifters who have yet to exceed certain dimensions, it’s never a reason to abandon ship.

S[/quote]
Yea you’re right… I just really like seeing that 2 on the scale…

63

This article is one of the best compilations of information I have ever read. Thanks for posting. I do find it interesting that even with the “advanced” supplements we have today, there does not seem to be evidence supporting the notion that anyone has surpassed the natural threshold for muscle. Maybe supplements are not as necessary as we have been led to believe, heh?

64

For a natural lifter, little to none IMHO, other than probably helping you maintain a bit more mass dieting down. Your initial mass/base building base will give you a decent idea how “big” and “generally strong” you’re ever going to be.

From my experience and observations I feel that gear (yes even PHs) used during that period can make a significant difference to your size/muscle density long term even after you come off, meaning if you were on the gear at some point, it has pushed you over a certain “peak” already and hopefully established a new valley.

After that base-building phase for an unassisted lifter, your strength gains are due more to specialization in certain lifts/activities (at the cost of others) and size gains are little more than inflammation, increased tonus due to better MMC, glycogen and water.

[quote]The Greek wrote:
Maybe supplements are not as necessary as we have been led to believe, heh? [/quote]

65

[quote]csulli wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]csulli wrote:

I’m not even being facetious. This has convinced me that for a 5’9", truly natty dude, you only have a snowball’s chance in hell of being lean and over 200lbs at the same time.[/quote]

A lot of people don’t really have a realistic concept of what a lean 180 lbs looks like on someone of average height. I’m certainly not one to go on about my amazing genetics (because they’re really not compared to some other guys), but I’ve got a few photos of myself in the mid 180s, and you’d be surprised at how huge I look next to normal folks. I wouldn’t focus so much on scale #s.

Take guys like Cordova, competing in the 160’s, when he’s not in contest shape (and even when he is!), it would blow your mind at how imposing a physique he has. This is why so many people who have been around competitors (and I only mentioned competitors because they tend to stay leaner which gives a better idea of how much muscle they’re carrying) are so quick to call BS on some of the more staggering claimed internet stats.

Also, in terms of genetics; You never know what you’re capable of until you actually get there. While it’s foolish to ignore the plethora of examples of lifters who have yet to exceed certain dimensions, it’s never a reason to abandon ship.

S[/quote]
Yea you’re right… I just really like seeing that 2 on the scale…[/quote]

I always wanted to see 3 digits on the dam scale but never in the morning :(. The most I saw was 99kg morning weight :frowning:

Koing

66

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Aopocetx wrote:

[quote]VTPower wrote:
Building muscle is certainly a big part of it; retaining muscle at a low bodyfat % is another big part. [/quote]

Yeah exactly. I forgot to mention that part.[/quote]

Preface, where I’m saying do and don’t I’m speaking only of my personal experience, I don’t mean to be setting out absolute laws.

I think this is where the “lean body mass” versus “muscle” gets confusing. Unless you are going to extremes and not being very careful, I don’t think you really loose much muscle cutting.

There are some things that confuse the issue though.

First, you certainly can lose strength (and even muscle volume) in later stages, but largely due to energy/caloric restriction/low glycogen not muscle loss. I find that when you again up calories, lost strength returns long before there is a drastic impact on bodyweight. You canâ??t judge your comparative strength and fullness in a depleted state, it isn’t a fair comparison.

Second, and more confusingly, you will many times lose lean body mass, but a decrease in LBM doesn’t mean you lose muscle. For example, blood is LBM and if you drop fat while maintaining every ounce of muscle, your body will still naturally reduce total blood volume to maintain the blood pressure it wants (or you’d die). And there is the real rub. You really shouldn’t care about blood volume lost in this way, but if you are focusing on LBM numbers, you are. You could as easily (temporarily) add LBM by blood doping like cyclists do, or eating a shit ton of salt and bloating yourself with fluid, but why the hell would you? But again, you are doing the same thing adding a bunch of fat to get your LBM number up. I think that if you start cutting (in a educated manner) and you end up smaller than your initial LBM would indicate, you really just had less muscle than you thought you did.[/quote]

I think you hit the nail on the head here my man. LBM is more than just muscle. It’s basically everything else besides fat, and even some fat can’t be measured through calipers (i.e. fat around organs, etc.)

All of those measurements and shit are just tools to measure progress, but I don’t think it’s ever a fair comparison for me to make measurements and compare them against someone else. It’s really not comparable given the individualistic nature of humans.

67

Great post Stu. I guess that means for me at 6’1", 230lbs. and 7.5 inch wrists I’m probably closer to 20% LBM and not 15% . Even though I have some abdominal definition without flexing. So basically if I want to get to 10%, I 'd need to drop 23 pounds of fat… Thing is even if I were to take it slow (losing 1 pound a weak) I would probably have to sacrifice some additional muscle weight to get to that level, being my total required weight loss down in even further. Sobering info , but definitely needed since I have no intentions of juicing and would like a realistic goal to shoot for.

68

Hmm, according to the calculator, at 8% BF:

Height: 73 in
Wrist: 7.5 in
Ankle: 11 in

Your estimated maximum muscular bodyweight at ~8% bodyfat is: 221.7 lbs
Your estimated maximum bulked bodyweight at ~8% bodyfat is: 230.6 lbs
Your estimated maximum muscular measurements (@ ~8%-10% bodyfat) are:

Chest: 51.9 in
Biceps: 18 in
Forearms: 14.4 in
Neck: 17.6 in
Thighs: 28.4 in
Calves: 19.1 in

Looks like I got some work to do.

69

[quote]DonDooley wrote:
Hmm, according to the calculator, at 8% BF:

Height: 73 in
Wrist: 7.5 in
Ankle: 11 in

Your estimated maximum muscular bodyweight at ~8% bodyfat is: 221.7 lbs
Your estimated maximum bulked bodyweight at ~8% bodyfat is: 230.6 lbs
Your estimated maximum muscular measurements (@ ~8%-10% bodyfat) are:

Chest: 51.9 in
Biceps: 18 in
Forearms: 14.4 in
Neck: 17.6 in
Thighs: 28.4 in
Calves: 19.1 in

Looks like I got some work to do.[/quote]

Did you ever play football?

70

If by football you mean soccer, I did when I was five. If you mean American football, I did until I was in 8th grade.

Then I spent high-school being skinny-fat, after which I went to college, dropped out, joined the military, and finally found powerlifting.

Unfortunately, these are my current measurements:

Height: 73 in
Weight: 212
Chest: 43.5 in
Biceps: 16 in
Forearms: 13.5 in
Neck: 17 in
Thighs: 27 in
Calves: 16 in

71

[quote]DonDooley wrote:
If by football you mean soccer, I did when I was five. If you mean American football, I did until I was in 8th grade.

Then I spent high-school being skinny-fat, after which I went to college, dropped out, joined the military, and finally found powerlifting.

Unfortunately, these are my current measurements:

Height: 73 in
Weight: 212
Chest: 43.5 in
Biceps: 16 in
Forearms: 13.5 in
Neck: 17 in
Thighs: 27 in
Calves: 16 in [/quote]

I asked because of your ankle size. Was thinking lineman. 27" thighs are impressive especially if defined. You have an unique ankle to wrist size, I think.

72

I played right guard and center. Legs have always been big. I’m not cut though; if I were, my legs would be probably an inch, inch and a half smaller. I have a 33" waist, and have hard time finding pants that fit lol. Gotta cocoa-butter them babies up to mitigate stretch marks… they grow so easily, it’s stupid.

Interesting that you guessed that based on ankle size though.

73

[quote]DonDooley wrote:
I played right guard and center. Legs have always been big. I’m not cut though; if I were, my legs would be probably an inch, inch and a half smaller. I have a 33" waist, and have hard time finding pants that fit lol. Gotta cocoa-butter them babies up to mitigate stretch marks… they grow so easily, it’s stupid.

Interesting that you guessed that based on ankle size though.[/quote]

I knew it would be unlikely to play a speed position with that size of ankles compared to wrist size. Actually any wrist size with that size ankle. That’s a small enough waste. So you carry a vast majority of any bodyfat in your legs? I would imagine you were pretty comfortable in power lifting. High squat and deadlift, bench press the weaker of the three?

74

You got it. Been focusing on powerlifting for a couple years now. 475 deadlift, 405 squat, 260 lb. bench. Nothing super impressive, but I’ve got a lot of years of training to go, and I’m staying raw and drug-free (not that I have a problem with geared lifters in either sense of the word). I plan on hitting a 500 lb. plus DL, a 425 lb. plus squat, and a 275 lb. bench in a comp next April… should be attainable, even exceed-able, goals. I’ve been hitting a 500 lb. DL off of three inch blocks for a while now, but I’m taking a break from DL to focus on squat mechanics.

I would love to be 230+ at single digit bodyfat, but my priorities would have to change for that. I will lift in the 198 lb. class, and I’m 14 lbs. down from my all-time high of 226. It’s crazy to imagine that 230-something is my genetic limit at 10% or lower BF though. 130 of it would probably be in my legs and ass haha.

75

[quote]DonDooley wrote:
You got it. Been focusing on powerlifting for a couple years now. 475 deadlift, 405 squat, 260 lb. bench. Nothing super impressive, but I’ve got a lot of years of training to go, and I’m staying raw and drug-free (not that I have a problem with geared lifters in either sense of the word). I plan on hitting a 500 lb. plus DL, a 425 lb. plus squat, and a 275 lb. bench in a comp next April… should be attainable, even exceed-able, goals. I’ve been hitting a 500 lb. DL off of three inch blocks for a while now, but I’m taking a break from DL to focus on squat mechanics.

I would love to be 230+ at single digit bodyfat, but my priorities would have to change for that. I will lift in the 198 lb. class, and I’m 14 lbs. down from my all-time high of 226. It’s crazy to imagine that 230-something is my genetic limit at 10% or lower BF though. 130 of it would probably be in my legs and ass haha.[/quote]

Well bud, you got some good goals in front of you in powerlifting, and I’m sure you’ll reach 'em. You know even though that might be your genetic limit at 10%, fuck it! If you change priorities in the future try and crush those limits…

76

What I find interesting with my natural muscle limit calculation is it puts me just slightly above my measurement goals of reaching the ‘golden ratio physique’.

77

960×639 135 KB

Natural muscle building at its finest?

78

[quote]gregron wrote:
Natural muscle building at its finest?[/quote]
my god those guys are amazing

this is where its at for bodybuilding IMO. the top WNBF physiques are the best physiques in the fitness world (in my subjective opinion) although i may not have these guys genetics, i truely think i can some day get close to that level, which gives me a life long, healthy goal to work towards!

79

[quote]GrindOverMatter wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
Natural muscle building at its finest?[/quote]
my god those guys are amazing

this is where its at for bodybuilding IMO. the top WNBF physiques are the best physiques in the fitness world (in my subjective opinion) although i may not have these guys genetics, i truely think i can some day get close to that level, which gives me a life long, healthy goal to work towards! [/quote]
I agree, those physiques are incredible.

The guy on the left has a perfect build IMO.

80

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]GrindOverMatter wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
Natural muscle building at its finest?[/quote]
my god those guys are amazing

this is where its at for bodybuilding IMO. the top WNBF physiques are the best physiques in the fitness world (in my subjective opinion) although i may not have these guys genetics, i truely think i can some day get close to that level, which gives me a life long, healthy goal to work towards! [/quote]
I agree, those physiques are incredible.

The guy on the left has a perfect build IMO.[/quote]
That’s exactly what I was thinking. Except I can’t tell if he’s got cell tech traps or not…