Does anybody remember in the movie Seven when they find the room where the guy is laying in bed amongst all the little Evergreen Tree fresheners hanging from the ceiling?
[quote]t-ha wrote:
Nominal I have a couple of problems with what you’re saying/implying.
1] that he’s 15% BF - he isn’t, he’s lower.
2] that there’s something wrong with being 15% BF - it’s a perfectly reasonable bodyfat to have.
3] that he needs to lose fat - even if you’re right and he is 15% BF at 130lbs, thta means he’s got 19.5lbs of fat on his frame. If he gained to 150lbs that would be 13%BF, and at 180lbs it would be slightly over 10%. On top of that, the simple fact is that he is NOT 15% to begin with. What he needs to do is concentrate entirely on building himself up, not worry about body recomposition.[/quote]
There isn’t anything to add to this…other than that nominal is astonishingly full of shit. Some people should just keep it to themselves.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Skinny-fat: The condition of having very little muscle mass while simultaneously retaining a high bodyfat%
This guy is skinny-fat because he hasn’t even got visible abs. He is a notch below the marathon-runner types who are very small but at least have visible definition. It’s the absolute worst condition for a bodybuilder. He knows it and is being honest with himself. No need for mind altering drugs.
You can’t see his abs because they aren’t developed, not because he has a layer of fat covering them. Are you even looking at these pics?
Most real skinny guys sport some definition, developed abs or not. And I thought the general consensus about abs on this board was, “all you have to do is diet down and you’ll be able to see them”. Well, that doesn’t apply to this guy.
t-ha wrote:
Holy shit!! Usually when Prof X says he’s actually ‘scared’ of the mentality of people who are lean and still want to cut I think ‘yeah yeah he’s right, if a little melodramatic’.
When I saw the title “skinny-fat” and then saw these pics I actually became genuinely scared. I mean the mentality where this guy would describe himeself as skinny-fat is frightening and the fact that anyone agreed with him is ridiculous & scary. Quite simply, if you think this guy needs to lose fat, you should join a pro-ana site.
When did I say he needed to lose fat? I’ll save you the trouble of looking: I didn’t say that. Nevertheless, the fact remains that he IS “skinny-fat”. He is almost a perfect example of that condition.
Skinny-fat is real. It is a recognized condition in the bodybuilding community. Go type in into Google and have a look for yourself.
Skinny guys usually have the benefit of being lean. This guy doesn’t. That’s the difference. That’s what makes “skinny-fat”.
Don’t blow your stack, it’s not an endorsement for him to cut. It’s just a statement of FACT about his present condition. He IS holding a high percentage of BF%. Probably 15 or greater. I came from this same situation and I know how to correct it. He does actually need to lose fat, but he needs to gain muscle as well. Therefore, what he needs is body recomposition. He needs to alter the ratio of LBM and BF in his body in favor of LBM. He can do this by eating a very clean diet and a minor surplus of calories. An “ugly bulk” probably wouldn’t hurt him, but the best results would be achieved through a strict body recomp program, which would allow him to put on lean mass while burning fat at the same time.[/quote]
Skinny-fat or not, how can you suggest a minor surplus of calories to someone at this guys size? Is that really the direction he needs to go? Sometimes we really overthink our methods here, the long and the short of it is that he needs to eat more and lift in order to put on muscle that will make him look defined. Losing fat and gaining muscle would be great and all, but he just cut from 180 to 130, this is some shit advice.
He can do a fast and “dirty” bulk and have an average-looking physique when he gets back up to 180.
Or he can do a clean, prolonged bulk and actually look good when he gets there.
Now, as to which option he should choose, that depends on his psychology and goals. These things vary from person to person. For me, option 2 was the better choice. But unlike this guy, I started scrawny. I didn’t come down from 180 or whatnot.
Please don’t say skinny-fat doesn’t exist. It’s just a condition. You seem to have it fixed in your heads that calling him “skinny-fat” means he has to cut in order to lose fat. I told you, that’s an invalid assumption. I am not telling him to cut, I am telling him to bulk, same as the rest of you. But skinny-fat is not a myth.
Thanks alot for replies, finally got time to read them. I’m def. bulking now gotta get used to eating that much, but actually love it. Ate about 2200 so far, got another meal to go after my workout + 500 cal. Will inc to 3000, gotta fig. out my eating pattern.
This is my routine:
Day 1: chest and triceps (incline, flat, some flies, skull crushers)
Day 2: deads,rows (t bar, bent over and upright), shrugs)
Day 3: shoulder and biceps (barbell military, and barbell curls)
Repeat (although I end up missing a day or in between if I had a long day)
Workouts last about 45-1hr, how is it?
ALso for my diet,what ratio should I follow, 40/40/20, etc.
Some of you said to eat as much as possible (fast food, chips and such), but won’t that add fat real fast, aren’t I better off with clean foods.
Not a big deal in my case you’ll say, i know just a small question.
Thanks alot for all the help.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Skinny-fat: The condition of having very little muscle mass while simultaneously retaining a high bodyfat%
This guy is skinny-fat because he hasn’t even got visible abs. He is a notch below the marathon-runner types who are very small but at least have visible definition. It’s the absolute worst condition for a bodybuilder. He knows it and is being honest with himself. No need for mind altering drugs.
You can’t see his abs because they aren’t developed, not because he has a layer of fat covering them. Are you even looking at these pics?[/quote]
He probably has very poorly developed inner ab muscles. I’m skinny (although not as skinny as him) but you can’t see my abs either. It’s distant concern for me, though; I’m really just trying to bulk up. I’m about his weight but about 7 inches shorter.
Read and following very closely Berrardi’s Scrawny to Brawny book.
Make protein shakes and bring them into work if you have trouble getting meals in at work. Buy a blender. You can find many recipes on this site. I like Milk + 2 or 3 bannanas + carrots + peanut butter + olive oil + ground flax seeds. You could get 2 meals a day (out of your six or so meals) from this type of drink on days when you’re at work and busy.
[quote]bobisnew wrote:
Thanks alot for replies, finally got time to read them. I’m def. bulking now gotta get used to eating that much, but actually love it. Ate about 2200 so far, got another meal to go after my workout + 500 cal. Will inc to 3000, gotta fig. out my eating pattern.
This is my routine:
Day 1: chest and triceps (incline, flat, some flies, skull crushers)
Day 2: deads,rows (t bar, bent over and upright), shrugs)
Day 3: shoulder and biceps (barbell military, and barbell curls)
Repeat (although I end up missing a day or in between if I had a long day)
Workouts last about 45-1hr, how is it?
ALso for my diet,what ratio should I follow, 40/40/20, etc.
Some of you said to eat as much as possible (fast food, chips and such), but won’t that add fat real fast, aren’t I better off with clean foods.
Thanks alot.[/quote]
You’re better off getting A LOT of calories AND eating clean foods. DON’T take “clean foods” to mean avoiding fat. Even some saturated fat is fine. Cave men ate lots of animal meat (i.e., lots of saturated fat) but were very healthy because they had a healthy, active lifestyle. Avoid foods with trans fats, though.
bob you are definetely headed the right way, ignore the numbnuts who are talking rubbish
here is your new routine
monday
deadlift 5x5 +10lbs per workout
bench press 5x5 +5lbs per workout
crunches weighted
weds
bent row 5x5 +7lbs per workout
military press 5x5 +5lbs per workout
hanging leg raise
reverse hyper
fri
deadlift 5x5 +10lbs per workout
bench press 5x5 +5lbs per workout
crunches weighted
NO curls
NO triceps work
NO stuffing around
NO squats due to knee problem
Only measure calories to ensure you exceed 4,000 … and possibly more
in 12 weeks you will be a new man.
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
He can do a fast and “dirty” bulk and have an average-looking physique when he gets back up to 180.
Or he can do a clean, prolonged bulk and actually look good when he gets there.
Now, as to which option he should choose, that depends on his psychology and goals. These things vary from person to person. For me, option 2 was the better choice. But unlike this guy, I started scrawny. I didn’t come down from 180 or whatnot.
Please don’t say skinny-fat doesn’t exist. It’s just a condition. You seem to have it fixed in your heads that calling him “skinny-fat” means he has to cut in order to lose fat. I told you, that’s an invalid assumption. I am not telling him to cut, I am telling him to bulk, same as the rest of you. But skinny-fat is not a myth. [/quote]
he has a distended stomach because he was anorexic. what the hell is skinny fat? is this a real condition. no, its not what he has is a case of rex stomach(also not real). the kid should dirty bulk he weighs 130. he should weigh like 200 pounds. i jsut read that your a personal trainer haha it all makes sense now. what are your stats anyway how do you know a dirty bulk wouldnt work for u. if you were skinny it was probably the better option. i have to do clean bulks only becuase i was a ffb.
[quote]budlight1 wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
He can do a fast and “dirty” bulk and have an average-looking physique when he gets back up to 180.
Or he can do a clean, prolonged bulk and actually look good when he gets there.
Now, as to which option he should choose, that depends on his psychology and goals. These things vary from person to person. For me, option 2 was the better choice. But unlike this guy, I started scrawny. I didn’t come down from 180 or whatnot.
Please don’t say skinny-fat doesn’t exist. It’s just a condition. You seem to have it fixed in your heads that calling him “skinny-fat” means he has to cut in order to lose fat. I told you, that’s an invalid assumption. I am not telling him to cut, I am telling him to bulk, same as the rest of you. But skinny-fat is not a myth.
he has a distended stomach because he was anorexic. what the hell is skinny fat? is this a real condition. no, its not what he has is a case of rex stomach(also not real). the kid should dirty bulk he weighs 130. he should weigh like 200 pounds. i jsut read that your a personal trainer haha it all makes sense now. what are your stats anyway how do you know a dirty bulk wouldnt work for u. if you were skinny it was probably the better option. i have to do clean bulks only becuase i was a ffb.
[/quote]
Naturally-skinny guys do better with the lean, muscular look rather than the beefy look. If a naturally-skinny guy dirty bulks, all that’s going to accomplish is that it will make him look like your average, smooth, 180-200 lb. person who doesn’t weight train seriously. He isn’t going to be able to gain enough mass to impress with that alone (unlike a natural fat boy). And the dirty bulk will kill off what definition he had, so the result will simply be vanilla.
Imagine if Frank Zane tried to be a mass monster. We wouldn’t know his name today. From a bodybuilding perspective, clean, slow bulks are better for people who don’t have much mass to begin with, because they aren’t going to be able to go as far eventually as the big boys. It’s like jumping off a ladder. People who start on taller ladders will have larger jumps (measured from the ground) than those who jump off shorter ladders, even if their jump distances are identical.
Don’t ask me what skinny-fat is. I have already explained it and Google is there for you. It’s really not hard to understand if you have a basic grasp of body tissue composition.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2006-17,GGLG:en&q=skinny-fat
mindandmuscle.net/mindandmuscle/
magpage.php?artID=48&pageNum=1
The second link is an article that explains it in the context of ectomorphic somatotypes.
skinny fat tire racing?
[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Naturally-skinny guys do better with the lean, muscular look rather than the beefy look. If a naturally-skinny guy dirty bulks, all that’s going to accomplish is that it will make him look like your average, smooth, 180-200 lb. person who doesn’t weight train seriously. He isn’t going to be able to gain enough mass to impress with that alone (unlike a natural fat boy). And the dirty bulk will kill off what definition he had, so the result will simply be vanilla.[/quote]
This is bullshit. I know this because I was “naturally skinny”. All you are doing is spreading the myth that larger bodybuilders are only larger because they were bigger than average to begin with. This isn’t true. It also isn’t true that you can predict how someone will look after years of training, regardless of how “clean” they eat. Genetics is something you can’t look at an untrained person and predict. This guy could gain 40-50lbs over the next year and have most of it be muscle even if he doesn’t eat “clean” all of the time if for no other reason than that he was this malnourished to start with.
Good Lord! Who cares if the guy is skinny-fat, fat-skinny, anorexic, bulimic, distended, extended or inverted? He needs to solve his image problems before he can improve his image. I don’t believe some of you bone-heads and your vendettas. Leave it alone and offer up some help if you can. Maybe T-Nation should just open up a special forum so you can spew venom at each other.
Does anyone else think that improving posture might help him? From my experience bad posture can emphasize or exaggerate the size of certain features - his stomach in this case.
Maybe this article would be useful:
http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=990092
Then, he’ll just look like a “normal” skinny guy - which means it’s time to start eating more. Here’s a tip: go out to the buffet with some of your friends. Don’t stop eating until they are looking at you with disgust.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Naturally-skinny guys do better with the lean, muscular look rather than the beefy look. If a naturally-skinny guy dirty bulks, all that’s going to accomplish is that it will make him look like your average, smooth, 180-200 lb. person who doesn’t weight train seriously. He isn’t going to be able to gain enough mass to impress with that alone (unlike a natural fat boy). And the dirty bulk will kill off what definition he had, so the result will simply be vanilla.
This is bullshit. I know this because I was “naturally skinny”. All you are doing is spreading the myth that larger bodybuilders are only larger because they were bigger than average to begin with. This isn’t true. It also isn’t true that you can predict how someone will look after years of training, regardless of how “clean” they eat. Genetics is something you can’t look at an untrained person and predict. This guy could gain 40-50lbs over the next year and have most of it be muscle even if he doesn’t eat “clean” all of the time if for no other reason than that he was this malnourished to start with.
[/quote]
Guy, I don’t see how you can be a natural skinny person. You said yourself few times before that it’s impossible for you to get down to 32 inch waist even if you’re sliced. With such structure I don’t see how you can be a natural skinny person. Anyway back to the subject, we all agree the author needs to gain weight period. And I certainly agree you cannot predict genes accurately until somebody trains and do what they’re suppose to do. But c’mon man, there are different ways of doing things.
I don’t know what the best way is for this guy, but to insist there’s only one way is kind of stubborn. We don’t know what this guy looked like before he dieted down from 180. I’ve seen tons of people diet down from doing just cardio (no lifting at all) and eat like Ethiopians and look muscular. But I’ve also seen many folks doing the same thing and look like flabby piece of shit. And when they gain the wight back, they look even worse.
A straight forward bulking approach works for many but for some it may not be the right thing. I’m not suggesting what approach he should take, but certainly there’s nothing wrong with taking his time at first to try things out and see how his body responds. As another poster wrote, tried not to blow your stack when you read this.
the kids needs to eat calories if he has been eating shit to get down to 130 then its going to be hard for him to eat 3000 more calories at least espeically clean. its hard some dasy for me to eat cleanly alot of calories and i love to eat. it would be alot easier and quicker for him to not worry about eating clean that is what we are saying. anyone that tall at 130 can eat dirty. i think my bones skin and organ weigh 130
[quote]oriensus wrote:
Guy, I don’t see how you can be a natural skinny person. You said yourself few times before that it’s impossible for you to get down to 32 inch waist even if you’re sliced. With such structure I don’t see how you can be a natural skinny person. [/quote]
I weighed 150lbs as a first semester college freshmen at the same height. I am the size I am now because I spent the last decade with size as my main goal in the weight room. Do you think every big guy you see was simply born that way? Most people think like you, however. They see a guy with big muscles and they assume everything EXCEPT that he worked damn hard for years to be that way.
[quote]
Anyway back to the subject, we all agree the author needs to gain weight period. And I certainly agree you cannot predict genes accurately until somebody trains and do what they’re suppose to do. But c’mon man, there are different ways of doing things.
I don’t know what the best way is for this guy, but to insist there’s only one way is kind of stubborn. We don’t know what this guy looked like before he dieted down from 180. I’ve seen tons of people diet down from doing just cardio (no lifting at all) and eat like Ethiopians and look muscular. But I’ve also seen many folks doing the same thing and look like flabby piece of shit. And when they gain the wight back, they look even worse.
A straight forward bulking approach works for many but for some it may not be the right thing. I’m not suggesting what approach he should take, but certainly there’s nothing wrong with taking his time at first to try things out and see how his body responds. As another poster wrote, tried not to blow your stack when you read this.[/quote]
This guy dieted down what weight again? So why would anyone give the advice that he needs to gain weight slowly as if he is at risk of becoming obese if he simply worked on gaining as a priority? This is common sense. If he is gaining too much body fat, then he should cut back on his food intake. Why do so many of you seem to only operate under some perception of extremes? When someone says they are bulking up, what do you think they mean? That they become obese? When someone writes that every meal doesn’t have to be “clean”, do you suddenly get mental images of eating nothing but fried chicken wings for every meal?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
oriensus wrote:
Guy, I don’t see how you can be a natural skinny person. You said yourself few times before that it’s impossible for you to get down to 32 inch waist even if you’re sliced. With such structure I don’t see how you can be a natural skinny person.
I weighed 150lbs as a first semester college freshmen at the same height. I am the size I am now because I spent the last decade with size as my main goal in the weight room. Do you think every big guy you see was simply born that way? Most people think like you, however. They see a guy with big muscles and they assume everything EXCEPT that he worked damn hard for years to be that way.
[/quote]
Most people think like me? I cited what you said about yourself - implying that you have a big man’s frame. I didn’t assume anything, I’m really surprise you would misread that.
[quote]
Anyway back to the subject, we all agree the author needs to gain weight period. And I certainly agree you cannot predict genes accurately until somebody trains and do what they’re suppose to do. But c’mon man, there are different ways of doing things.
I don’t know what the best way is for this guy, but to insist there’s only one way is kind of stubborn. We don’t know what this guy looked like before he dieted down from 180. I’ve seen tons of people diet down from doing just cardio (no lifting at all) and eat like Ethiopians and look muscular. But I’ve also seen many folks doing the same thing and look like flabby piece of shit. And when they gain the wight back, they look even worse.
A straight forward bulking approach works for many but for some it may not be the right thing. I’m not suggesting what approach he should take, but certainly there’s nothing wrong with taking his time at first to try things out and see how his body responds. As another poster wrote, tried not to blow your stack when you read this.
This guy dieted down what weight again? So why would anyone give the advice that he needs to gain weight slowly as if he is at risk of becoming obese if he simply worked on gaining as a priority? This is common sense. If he is gaining too much body fat, then he should cut back on his food intake. Why do so many of you seem to only operate under some perception of extremes? When someone says they are bulking up, what do you think they mean? That they become obese? When someone writes that every meal doesn’t have to be “clean”, do you suddenly get mental images of eating nothing but fried chicken wings for every meal? [/quote]
This is starting to get silly. You’re the one that’s operating under the extreme. Unless somebody say bulk, bulk, bulk then they’re idiots. I do NOT disagree with bulking and I really don’t agree with your interpretation of what I wrote. I’m not going to bother with re-explaining what I wrote - which is pretty clear to begin with. I’m really surprise a man of your education and intelligence would just misread what I’m writing like this. Seems like you’re writing with your emotions than with your wits. You know what? I give up, it’s pointless and I know you have no problem keep posting on and on since you own more than 1% of this entire site’s posting. I don’t want to turn this author’s thread to shit.
The irony of it is, when fat people are fat, they don’t realize it. When they diet down, they don’t realize how skinny they are getting. OP: Keep this in mind. You’re very skinny. If you worry about eating clean, you’ll never get there. I’ve been there. You should never get to the point where you are hungry. If you feel full and it’s been 2-3 hours, eat a double cheeseburger. If you want to make “clean” food yourself, do so, but realize that volume wise, fast food will be two to three times as calorically dense as “clean food.”
My guess is that you got fat by being sedentary and that your diet was an abomination. If your training is half decent, you don’t have to worry about getting to the same state you were in before you put yourself on the Ethopia diet. Just cut out the stupid shit like soda.
In life, there are a lot of things that you can do “almost right” or “almost good enough” and still get the same results. Lifting with aesthetics in mind is not one of them. You either eat 5,000 calories a day and succeed, or go light on a couple of meals a day and fail.