The Fitness New Age

Off Topic
581

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It means there are people turning their noses up at other lifters because they think they are too big to tell them anything.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure that’s the last thing it means, that you shouldn’t listen to someone because they’re “too big.”

S[/quote]

I’m pretty sure I disagree with you…because we can see these guys right here basing steroid use on shoulder and trap size…which means how would that poster know who used steroids and who didn’t unless he was using some criteria to judge this by?

It means he won’t listen to Lee Haney for anything…and the logic there is what?

582

[quote]Pj92x wrote:
Yo people if someone says they are natural they are despite whatever you all say.[/quote]

If there is one thing that gets me above all else, it’s the rampant abuse of steroids by women in the bodybuilding industry.

583

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]GivehertheD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It seems that the latest pop culture act is to follow big guys around and complain/accuse about steroid use.

Viewing videos from CT Fletcher, Kali Muscle or even the Hodge Twins seems to bring with them typical youtube comments that mostly range around call outs, insults and accusations.

20 years ago, gym rats would have looked more for inspiration from guys like this…not just trying to tear them down. There would be more focus on what they did that worked…and not ignoring everything to mention a pop understanding of steroids.

What has changed…and is it really good for the serious weight lifter?[/quote]

The main reason why people focus on the truth rather than dick-riding is that what works for roiders might not work for people training naturally.

That’s why it’s annoying when “gurus” who are obviously on gear give out tips without qualifying that it works best for people on AAS.

Natties should advise other natties and vice versa.
[/quote]

That sounds like a great way to make sure you never stand out yourself.

Could you explain the logic behind ignoring viewpoints from thousands of lifters based only on steroid use.[/quote]

Have you ever used, X?

I know some have scoffed at the efficacy of pro-hormones like MAG-10, but I noticed a big difference in work capacity, recovery, appetite, and general energy levels when using it.

Just considering those, which were said to be pretty mild by most seasoned users standards, I’d have to say there is a big difference between what is possible with some assistance and only probable without.

584

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

Have you ever used, X?

I know some have scoffed at the efficacy of pro-hormones like MAG-10, but I noticed a big difference in work capacity, recovery, appetite, and general energy levels when using it.

Just considering those, which were said to be pretty mild by most seasoned users standards, I’d have to say there is a big difference between what is possible with some assistance and only probable without.
[/quote]

The problem with this entire post is this;

There is a big difference between what is possible based on GENETICS ALONE.

In other words, you are not somebody else, so whether they use or not has nothing to do with you…and what is possible for someone else may not be possible for you.

Unless you also now ignore everyone with better genetics than you, that makes as much sense.

I used MAG-10 also. What does that have to do with anyone ever listening to advice at all?

585

Who here has assumed roid use based on shoulder, trap, and pec development alone? No one.

What was stated is that those muscles have a higher density of androgen receptors.

586

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Who here has assumed roid use based on shoulder, trap, and pec development alone? No one.

[/quote]

The person in this post who you told was alone an identifier for steroid use.

587

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Who here has assumed roid use based on shoulder, trap, and pec development alone? No one.

What was stated is that those muscles have a higher density of androgen receptors.

[/quote]

Details details

Why pay attention to that when you can make up a talking point at repeat it over and over.

588

[quote]Professor X wrote:

The problem with this entire post is this;

There is a big difference between what is possible based on GENETICS ALONE.

In other words, you are not somebody else, so whether they use or not has nothing to do with you…and what is possible for someone else may not be possible for you.
[/quote]
Ah, right. Genetics. The completely unverifiable axiom of all things lifting. As if recovery ability, training age, dietary factors and gravitational pull based on variations in the density of the planet weren’t enough to confound a discussion.

And you’re right, whether or not someone uses has nothing to do with someone else. That is a personal choice. So is taking their advice on loading parameters, frequency, diet, supplementation, and rest.

[quote]
Unless you also now ignore everyone with better genetics than you, that makes as much sense.

I used MAG-10 also. What does that have to do with anyone ever listening to advice at all?[/quote]

I was asking to establish whether or not you have any experience at all in training assisted vs. unassisted.

What that has to do with listening to advice at all is that when considering who’s advice you take based on their results without doing the same things (drugs) as them, you are missing a major factor in what they are doing.

More specifically, it seems that to take the stance which you have is to say that drugs are not a factor at all. Listen to the drug assisted lifter and do what he says because he’s big!

That is ridiculous. I and several people I’ve lifted with have done what are essentially power lifting templates designed for a typical drug assisted lifter, but here’s the catch- None of us were using.

Guess how that turned out?

589

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Who here has assumed roid use based on shoulder, trap, and pec development alone? No one.

What was stated is that those muscles have a higher density of androgen receptors.

[/quote]

I look at the temporalis and masseters. No way to get them bigger without the dopes.

590

Yeah, like on Tom Platz. Before I knew about this stuff, I never understood why his cheeks looked so big.

591

503×800 101 KB

Exactly.

592

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

Who here has assumed roid use based on shoulder, trap, and pec development alone? No one.

[/quote]

The person in this post who you told was alone an identifier for steroid use.[/quote]

You can copy and paste my post if you wish. I never said it alone was an identifier.

593

Found it.

Poster: “Okay. A question: Is the fact that androgen receptor concentration is higher in the delts than in the chest also bro science?”

Me: “It’s not bro-science considering it’s a fact. Hence the disproportionate growth in the upper pecs and delts when someone is on roids.”

We see I used the word “disproportionate”, not the absolute degree of of pec and trap and delt development. Anyway, I was not even speaking of identifying people, only that there is a high concentration of receptors in those muscles and that there’s disportionate growth in users.

594

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Found it.

Poster: “Okay. A question: Is the fact that androgen receptor concentration is higher in the delts than in the chest also bro science?”

Me: “It’s not bro-science considering it’s a fact. Hence the disproportionate growth in the upper pecs and delts when someone is on roids.”

We see I used the word “disproportionate”, not the absolute degree of of pec and trap and delt development. Anyway, I was not even speaking of identifying people, only that there is a high concentration of receptors in those muscles and that there’s disportionate growth in users. [/quote]

Don’t forget that you also said:

[quote]
"I don’t know how anyone can assume roid use from delt, trap, and pec size alone. A good measure is to reasonably assume one with a fat free mass index of 25 or more is using. "[/quote]

So I don’t see where anyone would get the notion that you were pushing being able to tell PED usage from upper torso/yolk size.

S

595

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It means there are people turning their noses up at other lifters because they think they are too big to tell them anything.[/quote]

I’m pretty sure that’s the last thing it means, that you shouldn’t listen to someone because they’re “too big.”

S[/quote]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I’m pretty sure I disagree with you[/quote]
Surprise surprise -lol

I didn’t see that at all, and I think a few other posters have echoed the same sentiment

I’d say that the aforementioned BMI gives SOME idea (not 100% foolproof of course), along with the fairly safe ASSUMPTION that all IFBB PRO BODYBUILDERS are using some form of enhancement. Heck, pop over on any other site and some even discuss what and how much they use/used. It’s really not much of a secret. I can’t understand why you treat it the way you do.

[quote]
It means he won’t listen to Lee Haney for anything…and the logic there is what?[/quote]

No, it doesn’t necessarily mean that, it could simply mean that he takes certain things he advises with a grain of salt. I certainly do, and I’m sure other fans of the TotaLee Awesome One do as well. Surely you don’t need this explained.

S

596

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]GivehertheD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It seems that the latest pop culture act is to follow big guys around and complain/accuse about steroid use.

Viewing videos from CT Fletcher, Kali Muscle or even the Hodge Twins seems to bring with them typical youtube comments that mostly range around call outs, insults and accusations.

20 years ago, gym rats would have looked more for inspiration from guys like this…not just trying to tear them down. There would be more focus on what they did that worked…and not ignoring everything to mention a pop understanding of steroids.

What has changed…and is it really good for the serious weight lifter?[/quote]

The main reason why people focus on the truth rather than dick-riding is that what works for roiders might not work for people training naturally.

That’s why it’s annoying when “gurus” who are obviously on gear give out tips without qualifying that it works best for people on AAS.

Natties should advise other natties and vice versa.
[/quote]

That sounds like a great way to make sure you never stand out yourself.

Could you explain the logic behind ignoring viewpoints from thousands of lifters based only on steroid use.[/quote]

Skyzyk and Stu already answered below but I’ll weigh in, too:

So you’re saying the only way to stand out is to jam a needle in your ass? Or are you saying that one can’t strive to be stronger and bigger than ever unless one is dick-riding juiced up bodybuilders? I lift things up and put them down. I try to lift heavier (or more intense) things up and down every week until one day I will be able to lift even heavier things up and put them down again. It’s a pretty fucking simple concept and you’re telling me I can’t strive for outstanding strength without dick-riding AAS users?
I genuinely don’t understand what you’re getting at.

I do Strongman, the guys I realistically compare myself to are the few natties who are stronger than me and built similarly with similar levers.

That’s my logic for not emulating those who use AAS or are built differently.

I wouldn’t mind kicking it with the likes of Kali Muscle and I’m sure he’d have a lot of interesting workout ideas. Nevertheless, I would never base my long-term goals or training philosophy on something that isn’t attainable for a person choosing to stay natty.
Do you get that?

597

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It means he won’t listen to Lee Haney for anything…and the logic there is what?[/quote]

No, it doesn’t necessarily mean that, it could simply mean that he takes certain things he advises with a grain of salt. I certainly do, and I’m sure other fans of the TotaLee Awesome One do as well. Surely you don’t need this explained.

S
[/quote]

Don’t mistake my intent on the original message. I wasn’t saying that everything Haney says should be taken as the gospel of lifting. Just that despite his AAS use there is still some value to his ideas for a natural lifter. I just don’t think natties only advise natties and users only advise users is really the correct way to look at things.

The more knowledge you can take in from as many experienced sources, the more informed decisions you can make. Haney’s powerbuilding style offseason routine that he followed in the early 80’s is very applicable to a natty lifter for instance.

598

[quote]GivehertheD wrote:

Skyzyk and Stu already answered below but I’ll weigh in, too:

So you’re saying the only way to stand out is to jam a needle in your ass?[/quote]

Your entire post is literally what this type of thread is about.

I stood out just fine when I was only 210lbs and first started posting on this forum. The most I had taken was a protein powder supplement on odd occasions, not even regular use of that. I had people think I was using steroids even back then.

So why do you think this is about “jamming needles on your ass”?

You seem to be riding Stu pretty hard already but this isn’t about your personal sexual preferences. Be who you are and love yourself.

Once again, ignoring thousands of lifters because of perceived steroid use alone is no way to reach your own full potential. That is the statement being made. Quote it directly and respond to it.

Clearly.

This thread was largely about the venom these types of guys seem to bring forth from those hiding behind the internet.

When I started training, if I had seen someone like CT Fletcher training in the same gym I would have been excited to ask for advice…or just to observe him train and try to match intensity.

I couldn’t even imagine seeing someone like that and immediately jumping to “he’s on steroids likely and can’t tell me anything if I’m natural”…which seems to be your viewpoint.

This isn’t about Kali Muscle specifically. My guess is if a guy like you saw anyone anywhere near that size you would assume steroid use and apparently choose to “postpone dick riding until person with less development shows up”.

599

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:
More specifically, it seems that to take the stance which you have is to say that drugs are not a factor at all. Listen to the drug assisted lifter and do what he says because he’s big![/quote]

Actually, my stance is look at the people who have reached your goal and even passed it in order to get there yourself.

You are the one making drug use the deciding factor here.

I just don’t think that way. I saw progress fairly quickly after I first hit the gym. Perhaps I didn’t give myself enough time stagnating to build the same level of hate towards people using steroids.

No one is saying drugs are not a factor at all. I am saying they are damn sure not THE factor as to why you don’t get “oohs and aaaahs” when you walk outside in a tank top. Your parents had way more to do with that.

[quote]That is ridiculous. I and several people I’ve lifted with have done what are essentially power lifting templates designed for a typical drug assisted lifter, but here’s the catch- None of us were using.

Guess how that turned out?[/quote]

Don’t know…because GENETICS has the most to do with it.

My guess is the guys with the best genetics for it are who would progress the most. You don’t come across as one of those people…which is OK.

600

[quote]This thread was largely about the venom these types of guys seem to bring forth from those hiding behind the internet.
[/quote]

What venom? Some people not validating what they’re doing by applying it to their own lifting regiment does not equal venomous animosity.

Nor is it about “He’s on steroids therefore can’t tell me anything”. More like being discerning about what applies and what doesn’t. If you’re an 18-24 year old kid at peak androgen production and an unlimited supply of food- Knock yourself out. That is prime time for making gains that set the stage for a lifetime.

If you’re 40 years old, less than optimal diet, and have multiple stressors- dial it back. Improve what you can, but don’t do what some doped up goofball on youtube says just because he’s huge. Thats a surefire way to accumulate injury and end up further back than where you were.