But brick, stop making this thread about you. No one is talking about obesity, which 15% certainly isnt. And originally you said anyone over 12 is a fatass. Which is funny because many coaches (since you like coaches) will claim the body is MOST anabolic in between 12-15. So which is it, first you said 12 was the cutoff, now your talking about 15…your just acting like an idiot because you got disagreed with.
I’d also like to see some pictures of you since you never dare go over 12% since thats being a fatass.
No one on this thread is talking about walking around with a huge gut and man-tits. And like the prof said, the bigger you are, higher your BF can be with you still looking good.
I just have a quick question. Do cold showers really boost testosterone levels and have other benefits?
Thanks,
Patrick[/quote]
EVEN if they did; do you think the reward of a minuscule improvement in test levels would be worth the fact that you’re taking an ice cold shower? Cold showers are for after a heavy petting session with your best gal, not for bodybuilding.
In fact I’ll ask someone.
Hey, Prof X, did cold showers turn you into the walking house o’ bricks you are today?
Prof X: Don’t be a fucking retard, Kelleyb.
There you have it! Straight from the horses mouth.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
My muscles tell me how much to eat, not my body fat.
When they’re doing what I want that’s how much I have to eat and that’s how much fat I have to put up with.
When they don’t I eat more and same as above.
If I found myself getting fatter without a corresponding response from my muscles I’d eat less.
All I need now is 2000 studies and a million armchair experts to help me make that more complicated.[/quote]
Exactly. By even making body fat the most important factor, they have complicated this a thousand fold more than it has to be. My goal is big muscles. Yes, in the end the goal is also that plus a lower body fat percentage, however, my progress is not dictated by how much fat I am carrying. It is dictated by how much muscle I am able to build and hold onto.
This has recently been perverted into meaning we are all trying to become obese.
I am not impressed by someone who managed to maintain an 8% body fat reading if they haven’t even gained 20lbs of muscle mass in 5 years.
I would be way more impressed by the guy who may have allowed his body fat percentage to slide past 16-18% if he gained 80lbs of lean body mass in the process.
The goal here is significant progress, not the ability to brag about how lean you are without having made any.
If you just happen to be one of the select few who can make that type of progress while maintaining a single digit body fat reading, more power to you. No one here is telling anyone to gain body fat for no reason…regardless of how many try to make that seem like it is the message.
Well my aim is to get bigger obviously the muscle the better but if fat wants to come on for a while so be it
I even get this training less than a year !
Hello all. I am back again. It was just hard to type for a few hours because I had to peel the tar and feathers off of my body that I rightfully deserved. I think lynching would be more appropriate over hissy fits though, folks.
Prof, points taken. You explained your points well and actually opened up my views a bit. Unlike you, I can simply take what someone says for what its worth without being a confrontational know it all dickhead while assuming folks like me are 170 lb gym do nothings, something I am clearly not at a weight of 220 at 5’10" and natural and not sloppy.
And to the genius Get Swole, I am the guy who is constantly stating that he dislikes most coaches. You clearly read my posts in full, twit!
Prof, respond if you are not totally afraid of me!
In your experience, what do people with a shorter upperbody, wide clavicals, low-er inserting lats need to do to develope an asthetically pleasing physique? I mean people with tight and relatively small clavicals tend to emphasize shoulder width, so logically, shoulder width should be minimized with someone with wideclavicals and a relatively wide waste? I cannot seem to pinpoint a certain aspect of training I should be geared towards for a balance physique. How important is trap development for someone with said bodytype? (wide clavicals, short in general, wide-er waist)
Brick, seriously Prof X is contrary to what you think NOT your enemy/nemesis/arch villian etc. etc.
Why do you feel the need to constantly require his attention LOTS of other people to talk too… plus the fact that along with me OTHERS might like his help on stuff and you tying him up on useless and reference lacking posts kind of hinders our progress.
So for the good of the community LET IT GO and move on.
In your experience, what do people with a shorter upperbody, wide clavicals, low-er inserting lats need to do to develope an asthetically pleasing physique? I mean people with tight and relatively small clavicals tend to emphasize shoulder width, so logically, shoulder width should be minimized with someone with wideclavicals and a relatively wide waste? I cannot seem to pinpoint a certain aspect of training I should be geared towards for a balance physique. How important is trap development for someone with said bodytype? (wide clavicals, short in general, wide-er waist)
Thanks so much for thoughts![/quote]
People like Prisoner22 would be good to ask about this as well since he has actually competed. I haven’t. I simply hang around some people who have and have had the pleasure of observing many of the people now seen in some magazine ads train in front of me.
As far as answering you specifically, shoulder width would NOT be minimized. If anything, you would keep building shoulder width as I have yet to see someone with shoulders that were “too wide”. You would have to be cartoonish to make that happen. You would minimize waist size as much as possible, which in my opinion, involves the avoidance of any weight bearing oblique training. Leg width (or ‘quad sweep’) should be maximized as well. That is the only way to make up for genetics that give the appearance of a wider waist (which I have).
Someone built like that had better have HUGE shoulders, HUGE legs, wide lats and as small a waist as can be achieved.
That means no hours spent on the oblique machine like I see from most overweight people in the gym when they think they are reducing their waists.
In your experience, what do people with a shorter upperbody, wide clavicals, low-er inserting lats need to do to develope an asthetically pleasing physique? I mean people with tight and relatively small clavicals tend to emphasize shoulder width, so logically, shoulder width should be minimized with someone with wideclavicals and a relatively wide waste? I cannot seem to pinpoint a certain aspect of training I should be geared towards for a balance physique. How important is trap development for someone with said bodytype? (wide clavicals, short in general, wide-er waist)
Thanks so much for thoughts![/quote]
IMO if you have a short midsection with lower inserting lats and wide clavicles you have the potential to build a decent physique (Franco Columbu) as it is. If you have a wide waist, however, that will totally destroy all you have going for you.
Francisco Bautista is one of those guys with all the “wrong” genetics and made it to the pro ranks.
IMO you should focus on trap development as needed. Too much trap work can give somebody a sort of clothes hangar look and take away from the vtaper.
My idea for a bodybuilders physique is small waist and wide as possible shoulders giving the v-taper. If you have wide clavicles and lower inserting lats you probably look like our current MR. O Jay Cutler.
In the end I guess I’d be more concerned with your waist than your traps. Hitting the vastus lateralus (outer quad) can help give the illusion of a smaller waist if genetics has dealt you that hand. :S
[quote]rainjack wrote:
anonym wrote:
rainjack wrote:
If I may add just one more rant this morning. It must be the change in barometric pressure, or something - shit is just irritating me for no apparent reason.
So what, pray tell, is your rant?
Just kidding, man. Had to quote this (because I found it funny). The people who have read this thread within the past few hours will know why.
My rant WAS that a certain diet championed by a certain author sucks ass, and no one who trains for body building should be allowed to utter the name of the diet in this thread.
[/quote]
My favourite part is that a fair amount of the criticism use to be included in the articles about the diet as warning.
[quote]will to power wrote:
rainjack wrote:
anonym wrote:
rainjack wrote:
If I may add just one more rant this morning. It must be the change in barometric pressure, or something - shit is just irritating me for no apparent reason.
So what, pray tell, is your rant?
Just kidding, man. Had to quote this (because I found it funny). The people who have read this thread within the past few hours will know why.
My rant WAS that a certain diet championed by a certain author sucks ass, and no one who trains for body building should be allowed to utter the name of the diet in this thread.
Evidently, either the author or the mods are chicken shit cowards and do not allow anyone to speak against the glory that is the unmentionable diet.
My favourite part is that a fair amount of the criticism use to be included in the articles about the diet as warning.[/quote]
That was before the onslaught of lard ass noobs looking for a quick fix.
As for the sleep issue, I say more is better. Not too much, though. Any more than 10 hours a day (including naps) tends to make me feel lethargic and sluggish. 8-9 is a perfect amount for me, with maybe a nap or too scattered throughout the day.
