shredded
swole
jacked
I heard the more you squat, the bigger your nutsack is.
I put 10 grams of creatine in each sock which enabled me to perform 5 more reps in the pull-up which lowered my bodyfat by 3 percent(ile) which means I gained 1.5 pounds of lean muscle since my bodyweight remained constant.
SWEET!
I wonder how many pull-ups it will take to finally achieve my lifelong goal of a NEGATIVE bodyfat percentage???
[quote]rcsermas wrote:
Give the guy a break. In an article not that long ago, didn’t one of the authors note a correlation between the number of pullups an athelete could do and how low his/her 100m time is? [/quote]
Are you trying to compare these really?
Pullups and sprinting = both are physical activities moving bodyweight through space
Pullups and bodyfat percentage= …
You know what’s funny about this whole thing to me really though… The guy keeps reaching the same off season weight, and the same contest weight, and the same strength limit on an exercise over and over again.
I would NOT be getting any advice from this guy in terms of bodybuilding. It has to be 2 offseasons/per contests at least… so let’s be generous and say 6-12 months of time this person hasn’t gotten any bigger or stronger, likely much longer if he has noticed this pullup situation several times now. Anyone else seeing this issue? lol
[quote]Scott M wrote:
rcsermas wrote:
Give the guy a break. In an article not that long ago, didn’t one of the authors note a correlation between the number of pullups an athelete could do and how low his/her 100m time is?
Are you trying to compare these really?
Pullups and sprinting = both are physical activities moving bodyweight through space
[/quote]
…using completely different parts of your body.
It makes perfect sense that as you lean out, your pullup numbers are going to go up. However, I do agree that trying to generalize it and say “If you can do 20 pullups you are around 10% bf” is rather silly.
couldn’t pull-ups though be a good gauge as to gaining muscle vs bodyfat? Like if you are gaining weight, and increasing your pull-ups at the same time, then that is probably a good sign you are putting on more muscle than fat, right?
I’ve gained over 20 pounds since I started lifting seriously and when I first started I was a twig but couldn’t do any pull-ups. Now I can do 20. I’ve put on some fat, but (it’s impossible not to gain ANY), but isn’t this a good sign I gained more muscle than fat?
[quote]k8thegr8 wrote:
couldn’t pull-ups though be a good gauge as to gaining muscle vs bodyfat? Like if you are gaining weight, and increasing your pull-ups at the same time, then that is probably a good sign you are putting on more muscle than fat, right?
I’ve gained over 20 pounds since I started lifting seriously and when I first started I was a twig but couldn’t do any pull-ups. Now I can do 20. I’ve put on some fat, but (it’s impossible not to gain ANY), but isn’t this a good sign I gained more muscle than fat?[/quote]
Progression in all exercises as well as the mirror will tell you this. Of course it’s good that you’ve made gains, but there is no magic about pull-ups in this regard. Why not dips? The idea is to get stronger overall, why does one single exercise define that more than others?
The bottom line here is that the existence of this thread demonstrates that the inordinate modern obsession with non extreme levels of body fat has found yet another way to manifest itself.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
k8thegr8 wrote:
couldn’t pull-ups though be a good gauge as to gaining muscle vs bodyfat? Like if you are gaining weight, and increasing your pull-ups at the same time, then that is probably a good sign you are putting on more muscle than fat, right?
I’ve gained over 20 pounds since I started lifting seriously and when I first started I was a twig but couldn’t do any pull-ups. Now I can do 20. I’ve put on some fat, but (it’s impossible not to gain ANY), but isn’t this a good sign I gained more muscle than fat?
Progression in all exercises as well as the mirror will tell you this. Of course it’s good that you’ve made gains, but there is no magic about pull-ups in this regard. Why not dips? The idea is to get stronger overall, why does one single exercise define that more than others?
The bottom line here is that the existence of this thread demonstrates that the inordinate modern obsession with non extreme levels of body fat has found yet another way to manifest itself.[/quote]
Good post. You are right. Bodyfat is such an obsession in our society. I’d take strength over low bodyfat any day though.
[quote]steel_12 wrote:
A friend of mine is a bodybuilder and he uses pullups(palms facing away) as an indicator of bodyfat.
He told me if a person can do 20 proper pullups from deadhang,chin clearing the bar, then he is in the 10-12 percentile of bodyfat, if he can do 30 he is in the 5-10 percentile, and 40 is what he always goes for come competition time.
he is 5’10 and competes at 175 pounds.
I think pullups are a good indicator of bodyfat(think about it when you do 30 pullups in a row, youll look good!), but i think some other factors come into play, like strength endurance and type of muscle fibres.
discuss[/quote]
I haven’t read it or anything like that before.
In my personal and professional opinion,it sounds like bad science to me.
I don’t see the correlation between strength,endurance and bodyfat in this respect at least.
I don’t see myself ever doing 30 or 40 pullups and would struggle to do 20.
Currently I I have the strength to do,say,5 or 6 sets of 8-10 reps or 8+ sets of 5-6 reps,but lack the muscular endurance to do more than 10 with good form.
I weigh 90kg (198lbs.) at 6’2" -my bodyfat is currently 11-12%,(I am in a bulking phase,so this is subject to change,previously was at 9-10%)
I believe several factors come into play here when measuring how many pullups one can do-
-Upper Body Strength-(no brainer)
-Muscular Endurance (As dicussed)
-Arm Length-I have long arms and am tall.I have to pull myself up further through a larger range of motion than average.
-Bodyweight (as opposed to bodyfat) I believe the numbers would be relative to bodyweight,as it often is for many exercises involving bodyweight (chinups,pushups,etc.)
[quote]esk221 wrote:
I heard the more you squat, the bigger your nutsack is. [/quote]
I started that rumour.
You see,unless you’re 'roiding,to be real strong you must have a big nutsack to produce all that testosterone.
therefore,the scientific formula is-
heavy squat=big nutsack.
Did I mention I can squat 500lbs.?
On a bad day.
With no belt.
Or any spotters.
Or a squat rack.
[quote]randman wrote:
This is one of THE stupidest things I’ve read on this site.[/quote]
agreed.
[quote]g star 24 7 wrote:
esk221 wrote:
I heard the more you squat, the bigger your nutsack is.
I started that rumour.
You see,unless you’re 'roiding,to be real strong you must have a big nutsack to produce all that testosterone.
therefore,the scientific formula is-
heavy squat=big nutsack.
Did I mention I can squat 500lbs.?
On a bad day.
With no belt.
Or any spotters.
Or a squat rack.
[/quote]
Bah. You’ll know you’ve accomplished something when you can bodyweight squat 500 lbs just due to the weight of your nutsack.
[quote]rcsermas wrote:
…using completely different parts of your body.
It makes perfect sense that as you lean out, your pullup numbers are going to go up. However, I do agree that trying to generalize it and say “If you can do 20 pullups you are around 10% bf” is rather silly.
[/quote]
My point was that at least that person was comparing physical abilities in the same ball park. I could say I notice a correlation among powerlifters that as their squat goes up their bench does as well. They aren’t related and different muscle groups used to perform them but someone who gets better at the squat probably is going to get better at another activity they train for as well.