The Body Weight Factor

Training
541

stretching interstitial space? maybe that’s why you’re so full of hot air. Deep fascia is the limiting factor, your muscles move and grow and are not restricted by other connective tissue. As a theory it doesn’t even make sense, hence you won’t find anyone but yourself talking about it.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
-Biceps
Warm up either going really light on the HS curl machine or real light with dumbbells (like 25lbs)
HS curl machine (3-4 sets going up to 4 plates)
Preacher curls (starting with a 45lbs dumbbell and moving up to around 85lbs lately even though I have done more in the past…I am trying to concentrate more on form lately)
Cybex curl machine (last exercise, usually just to get more blood pumped and not for going extremely heavy)
[/quote]
liar

542

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
Well according to you, unracking that seated military press all by yourself in itself proves that you’re strong. But of course you could do strict preacher curls with an 85 lb db. Did you use two hands?

regarding this topic, in one of the threads you talked about fat gain’s involvement in a.) better leverages and b.) fascial stretching

I agree with the first point, but the latter is completely wrong. Fat gain does stretch fascia, but it stretches superficial fascia, which will revert to its original shape once you lose the fat. Deep fascia, which surrounds muscles only and not fat, will be unaffected.[/quote]

Dude, let it go. There’s over a decade of empirical evidence suggesting that PX is incapable of admitting he’s wrong or owning up to his bullshit/delusions. Despite a couple of people offering direct quotes of his, he literally just claimed people are making up and twisting things he said. I’m also surprised more people didn’t address his claim that the average person thinks he looks more impressive than CT. The guy clearly lives in his own world comprised of monumental insecurities and extreme delusions of grandeur.[/quote]

he is FUCKING with you all, he may try to sound mad and indignant with his posts, but I guarantee he is smiling and laughing and enjoying all this attention.

[/quote]

Yep, there is no other possible explanation.

543

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

but i have heard you talk about repping out 5 plates in a hammer machine, and when challenged that is not a real impressive feat of strength, you have stated to the effect that nobody who is weak or does not have a comparable amount of muscle (such as yourself) could move that much weight on a hammer press.

i know i am very weak right now in upper body pressing movements due to chronic injuries, and i can move quite a few plates on a hammer machine.

wow yourself. [/quote]

This is about building muscle…so at no point in time am I mentioning a weight I can simply put in the air.

If I am doing a movement like that now, I am using a very controlled form focusing on my chest doing most of the work.

That is the point being made, not some exclamation that “because I do x weight on hs machines I am strong”.

I was strong before ever using HS machines so why do you see things this way?

That was before my motorcycle accident. You can bet 5 plates a side for more than 8 reps with control is NOT something you do as a weak person.

544

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
stretching interstitial space? maybe that’s why you’re so full of hot air. Deep fascia is the limiting factor, your muscles move and grow and are not restricted by other connective tissue. As a theory it doesn’t even make sense, hence you won’t find anyone but yourself talking about it.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
-Biceps
Warm up either going really light on the HS curl machine or real light with dumbbells (like 25lbs)
HS curl machine (3-4 sets going up to 4 plates)
Preacher curls (starting with a 45lbs dumbbell and moving up to around 85lbs lately even though I have done more in the past…I am trying to concentrate more on form lately)
Cybex curl machine (last exercise, usually just to get more blood pumped and not for going extremely heavy)
[/quote]
liar[/quote]

Lie about what? I am not even doing alternate curls in that list of exercises so it must have been written after 2003. What am I lying about? That I could do more weight back in 2003? I could do more weight then than now because of injuries. Right now I am lucky if I get 80lbs for alternates.

Fat gain is INTERSTITIAL as well which means including deeper fibers.

545

Please read it again, you said you db preacher curled 85 lbs, but could do more.

Again, the deep fascia I’m talking about is the sheet covering every single muscle in our bodies. That’s what is being discussed. That is the limiting factor.

Actually, has anyone here had success doing stuff like DC stretching? I’ll give that a try this week. At the very least it’ll help my mobility.

546

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
Please read it again, you said you db preacher curled 85 lbs, but could do more.

Again, the deep fascia I’m talking about is the sheet covering every single muscle in our bodies. That’s what is being discussed. That is the limiting factor.

Actually, has anyone here had success doing stuff like DC stretching? I’ll give that a try this week. At the very least it’ll help my mobility.[/quote]

That “sheet” is the sarcoplasmic sheath covering muscle tissue…which is NOT limited to ONLY deep tissue stretching. It covers the entire muscle belly.

Also, with regards to your inquiry, yeah, I could do more weight likely when that post was written.

I have done enough for arms to get a crowd watching in the past. Like I said, I was doing 90lbs alternate dumbbell curls but you think I cold never curl 80lbs on a preacher bench?

547

So hilarious.

Pure comedy gold - at this point, you just have to shake your head and laugh.

548

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

but i have heard you talk about repping out 5 plates in a hammer machine, and when challenged that is not a real impressive feat of strength, you have stated to the effect that nobody who is weak or does not have a comparable amount of muscle (such as yourself) could move that much weight on a hammer press.

i know i am very weak right now in upper body pressing movements due to chronic injuries, and i can move quite a few plates on a hammer machine.

wow yourself. [/quote]

This is about building muscle…so at no point in time am I mentioning a weight I can simply put in the air.

If I am doing a movement like that now, I am using a very controlled form focusing on my chest doing most of the work.

That is the point being made, not some exclamation that “because I do x weight on hs machines I am strong”.

I was strong before ever using HS machines so why do you see things this way?

That was before my motorcycle accident. You can bet 5 plates a side for more than 8 reps with control is NOT something you do as a weak person.
[/quote]

well, i cannot do 5 plates x 8 on any hammer machine, but i have done 4 plates plus 2 10’s each side on a hammer overhead press, and i was NOT doing the bullshit ROM that i see many do on this machine, ie setting the seat so the bottom of the lift is at or above there forhead, AND not hitting a full lockout.

the way i do 4 plates plus on that machine is full lockout, and i set the seat to where the handles drift under my chin at the lowest point.

despite that, i am WEAK. i can only hit 185 for a few reps in a strict standing overhead press with a straight bar, and i can do 200-210 for 4-6 reps strict standing overhead press with the swiss bar.

549

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Anyway, I have one more burning, nagging inquiry, and I think perhaps you can take part in this sort of discussion because it doesn’t involve fictional noobs. It involves you.

You’ve said you’ve sported “not fat” 30 inch thighs and weighing “not fat” 285# and have gained 80 pounds of mostly muscle. When people hear or read about such stats and accomplishment, who comes to their minds are the freakiest, drug loaded, genetically gifted bodybuilders, Powerlifters, and Strongmen ever. We’re talking Nasser El Sonbaty, Jeanne Pierre Fuchs, Jay Cutler, Ronnie Coleman, Dorian Yates, Michael Francois, and so on.

Are you saying at one point you looked like these guys? [/quote]

Nope. All of my pictures are already posted over the years. I don’t have to look like those guys to gain 80lbs of muscle. That is what YOU are claiming.

Please explain why you feel that no one can gain 50-80lbs of muscle without lookiing like Dorian Yates.

[/quote]

Of course that’s what I’m claiming, because these are the guys who sported 28 to 30 inch “not fat” thighs. Therefore I asked if you looked like those guys when you sported 30 inch lean thighs.

These are also the sort of guys who were lean or “not fat” 285 pounds or heavier in their offseasons. So it’s reasonable to ask if you looked like them. How is this unreasonable–asking if you looked like an IFBB or all stars or even an NPC monster like Dave Palumbo when you said you had their stats?

Here’s how no one can look like someone like Dorian Yates with an 80+ pound muscle gain NATURALLY: it takes drugs to gain 80 pounds of training-induced muscle (not puberty induced). Dorian is someone who likely had that sort of gain and by his own account used ONE GRAM of testosterone per week with added deca and dianabol. The top naturals of the past 50 to 60 years haven’t gained more than 40 to 50 pounds of muscle or so. Therefore naturals don’t and won’t look like Dorian.

550

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
Please read it again, you said you db preacher curled 85 lbs, but could do more.

Again, the deep fascia I’m talking about is the sheet covering every single muscle in our bodies. That’s what is being discussed. That is the limiting factor.

Actually, has anyone here had success doing stuff like DC stretching? I’ll give that a try this week. At the very least it’ll help my mobility.[/quote]

That “sheet” is the sarcoplasmic sheath covering muscle tissue…which is NOT limited to ONLY deep tissue stretching. It covers the entire muscle belly.

Also, with regards to your inquiry, yeah, I could do more weight likely when that post was written.

I have done enough for arms to get a crowd watching in the past. Like I said, I was doing 90lbs alternate dumbbell curls but you think I cold never curl 80lbs on a preacher bench?[/quote]

This implies you were capable of barbell curling 200 pounds for reps. Could you curl 225 with the bar during those times?

551

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

well, i cannot do 5 plates x 8 on any hammer machine, but i have done 4 plates plus 2 10’s each side on a hammer overhead press, and i was NOT doing the bullshit ROM that i see many do on this machine, ie setting the seat so the bottom of the lift is at or above there forhead, AND not hitting a full lockout.

the way i do 4 plates plus on that machine is full lockout, and i set the seat to where the handles drift under my chin at the lowest point.

despite that, i am WEAK. i can only hit 185 for a few reps in a strict standing overhead press with a straight bar, and i can do 200-210 for 4-6 reps strict standing overhead press with the swiss bar.

[/quote]

Dude, good for you.

No one was EVER saying that because I do X weight on hs machines that this makes me strong. I started using more machines after an injury. Before that most of my work was on free weights which is why I even mentioned the 405lbs barbell press.

After a car accident, I then go to CO and people here think that is all I can lift?

The joke is anyone believing that…and then seeing CT do nearly the same and NOT call him weak.

It gets annoying to read this many attempts at people lying about what I write and flipping it.

Simply put, yeah, I was able to move more weight in the past and use lighter weight now.

Yes, I could curl 90lbs for alternate curls and have curled as much as 80lbs on a preacher before. I am NOT doing that right now and am working back up after a triceps tear and a shoulder injury now.

When you EVER see me write about a weight used, it is NOT the same as in powerlifting where the goal is to simply get the weight in the air./

It is about control and making the target muscle do most of the work.

552

If someone reaches a weight of 280 and is consistent in their training and a natural but has no intention of dieting down is it beyond doubt that they couldnt have amassed eighty pounds? The argument is about eighty pounds of gained muscle AFTER dieting isnt it?

553

[quote]steven alex wrote:
If someone reaches a weight of 280 and is consistent in their training and a natural but has no intention of dieting down is it beyond doubt that they couldnt have amassed eighty pounds? The argument is about eighty pounds of gained muscle AFTER dieting isnt it?[/quote]

Dieting or no dieting. No natural has gained that.

554

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Of course that’s what I’m claiming, because these are the guys who sported 28 to 30 inch “not fat” thighs. Therefore I asked if you looked like those guys when you sported 30 inch lean thighs. [/quote]

I have posted pics of my legs at 30" so what are you really asking? No, I did not have a body fat of contest condition at that size.

[quote]

These are also the sort of guys who were lean or “not fat” 285 pounds or heavier in their offseasons. So it’s reasonable to ask if you looked like them. How is this unreasonable–asking if you looked like an IFBB or all stars or even an NPC monster like Dave Palumbo when you said you had their stats?[/quote]

why would you need to ask when I have pictures of me at that size?

Uh, yeah, this would be false. That is why some have a problem with what you write about this.

My pics are already here. Hopefully all of your questions have been answered.

555

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
Please read it again, you said you db preacher curled 85 lbs, but could do more.

Again, the deep fascia I’m talking about is the sheet covering every single muscle in our bodies. That’s what is being discussed. That is the limiting factor.

Actually, has anyone here had success doing stuff like DC stretching? I’ll give that a try this week. At the very least it’ll help my mobility.[/quote]

That “sheet” is the sarcoplasmic sheath covering muscle tissue…which is NOT limited to ONLY deep tissue stretching. It covers the entire muscle belly.

Also, with regards to your inquiry, yeah, I could do more weight likely when that post was written.

I have done enough for arms to get a crowd watching in the past. Like I said, I was doing 90lbs alternate dumbbell curls but you think I cold never curl 80lbs on a preacher bench?[/quote]

This implies you were capable of barbell curling 200 pounds for reps. Could you curl 225 with the bar during those times?
[/quote]

It doesn’t imply that at all. All it implies is a 90lbs alternate dumbbell curl.

How is it you “assume” so much baseless info?

556

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
Please read it again, you said you db preacher curled 85 lbs, but could do more.

Again, the deep fascia I’m talking about is the sheet covering every single muscle in our bodies. That’s what is being discussed. That is the limiting factor.

Actually, has anyone here had success doing stuff like DC stretching? I’ll give that a try this week. At the very least it’ll help my mobility.[/quote]

That “sheet” is the sarcoplasmic sheath covering muscle tissue…which is NOT limited to ONLY deep tissue stretching. It covers the entire muscle belly.

Also, with regards to your inquiry, yeah, I could do more weight likely when that post was written.

I have done enough for arms to get a crowd watching in the past. Like I said, I was doing 90lbs alternate dumbbell curls but you think I cold never curl 80lbs on a preacher bench?[/quote]

I thought your gym was littered with monsters that people outside of Houston (or other big cities) are not used to seeing. Why would curling the 90s draw a crowd?

557

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

well, i cannot do 5 plates x 8 on any hammer machine, but i have done 4 plates plus 2 10’s each side on a hammer overhead press, and i was NOT doing the bullshit ROM that i see many do on this machine, ie setting the seat so the bottom of the lift is at or above there forhead, AND not hitting a full lockout.

the way i do 4 plates plus on that machine is full lockout, and i set the seat to where the handles drift under my chin at the lowest point.

despite that, i am WEAK. i can only hit 185 for a few reps in a strict standing overhead press with a straight bar, and i can do 200-210 for 4-6 reps strict standing overhead press with the swiss bar.

[/quote]

Dude, good for you.

No one was EVER saying that because I do X weight on hs machines that this makes me strong. I started using more machines after an injury. Before that most of my work was on free weights which is why I even mentioned the 405lbs barbell press.

After a car accident, I then go to CO and people here think that is all I can lift?

The joke is anyone believing that…and then seeing CT do nearly the same and NOT call him weak.

It gets annoying to read this many attempts at people lying about what I write and flipping it.

Simply put, yeah, I was able to move more weight in the past and use lighter weight now.

Yes, I could curl 90lbs for alternate curls and have curled as much as 80lbs on a preacher before. I am NOT doing that right now and am working back up after a triceps tear and a shoulder injury now.

When you EVER see me write about a weight used, it is NOT the same as in powerlifting where the goal is to simply get the weight in the air./

It is about control and making the target muscle do most of the work.[/quote]

cool. hammer machines are a good tool for building muscle, but BULLSHIT as far as real strength goes. if that is what you are saying i agree.

question though…do you think i am stressing my body more by banging out reps with 200lbs on a strict military barbell press, or 400lbs on a seated hammer machine?

which one do you thing puts a harder workload on the body?

558

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]steven alex wrote:
If someone reaches a weight of 280 and is consistent in their training and a natural but has no intention of dieting down is it beyond doubt that they couldnt have amassed eighty pounds? The argument is about eighty pounds of gained muscle AFTER dieting isnt it?[/quote]

Dieting or no dieting. No natural has gained that. [/quote]

??/ Wait a second, how is this even allowed to be written without being laughed at?

No natural person on planet Earth has ever gained 80lbs of muscle?

Are you serious?

559

Van Damme and co. watching PX do DB curls.

560

[quote]heavythrower wrote:

cool. hammer machines are a good tool for building muscle, but BULLSHIT as far as real strength goes. if that is what you are saying i agree.

question though…do you think i am stressing my body more by banging out reps with 200lbs on a strict military barbell press, or 400lbs on a seated hammer machine?

which one do you thing puts a harder workload on the body?
[/quote]

Um, they are NOT bullshit for “real strength”. It isn’t like you gain “fake strength” from HS machines.

They just don’t translate well to free weight movements. That is all.