[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]mbdix wrote:
This is 100% false[/quote]
Wow. If you want to believe otherwise, fine.
But there is no one on a pro stage with poor genetics for building muscle. There is no one with gigantic muscles without good genetics for building muscle.
Maybe if you count synthol, that would be the one way around it. Otherwise, let the madness stop now.
Amazed someone would actually argue against that.[/quote]
How do you know someone has great genetics for building muscle?
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
X, would you care to share shirtless photos taken by SOMEONE ELSE as well as videos of you lifting? You’ve taken liberties in judging many of us, in terms of our effort, size, and strength. Can we do the same for you? [/quote]
+1
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
How do you know someone has great genetics for building muscle?
[/quote]
By them building huge muscles.
Are these trick questions?
Genetic potential can be there but someone may never come close to it by not trying. The only way to be aware of good muscle building genetics…IS TO BUILD BIG MUSCLES FROM THE TRAINING YOU DO.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
… severely limits the newbie lifter.
[/quote]
I’m going to ignore all your other nonsense, because as many times as people point obvious, or logical things out, you’re never willing to see, or even concede anything, so I’ll just spare myself the headache thanks.
I will though inquire why you always claim your holy crusade of protecting and saving newbie lifters, and yet whenever anyone suggests you don’t limit yourself to just this site (you aren’t a fan of limits if I recall correctly), you just skip over it.
For someone who seems to honestly believe that he is above many of the posters her in terms of knowledge as well as development, and has left many many accounts of his dissatisfaction with the average TN forum member, what’s the real motivation behind all of this? Yes yes, we all know you “come here to discuss bodybuilding”, yada, yada, yada,… you’ve said it countless times, and yet you very noticeably avoid any site where you just might find people who would fit your proposed bill of a knowledgeable poster. So is it really just some deep seated need to berate and argue with people you don’t view as equals?
(inb4 ‘stick to the topic’, ‘I don’t need you to analyze me’, etc)
S
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
X, would you care to share shirtless photos taken by SOMEONE ELSE as well as videos of you lifting? You’ve taken liberties in judging many of us, in terms of our effort, size, and strength. Can we do the same for you? [/quote]
I’m not judging you. I don’t care anything about you. You are just some guy who follows me around the forum asking lame questions constantly.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
… severely limits the newbie lifter.
[/quote]
I’m going to ignore all your other nonsense[/quote]
Of course you will…because answering what I asked you would eliminate the nonsense.
[quote], because as many times as people point obvious, or logical things out, you’re never willing to see, or even concede anything, so I’ll just spare myself the headache thanks.
I will though inquire why you always claim your holy crusade of protecting and saving newbie lifters, and yet whenever anyone suggests you don’t limit yourself to just this site (you aren’t a fan of limits if I recall correctly), you just skip over it.
For someone who seems to honestly believe that he is above many of the posters her in terms of knowledge as well as development, and has left many many accounts of his dissatisfaction with the average TN forum member, what’s the real motivation behind all of this? Yes yes, we all know you “come here to discuss bodybuilding”, yada, yada, yada,… you’ve said it countless times, and yet you very noticeably avoid any site where you just might find people who would fit your proposed bill of a knowledgeable poster. So is it really just some deep seated need to berate and argue with people you don’t view as equals?
(inb4 ‘stick to the topic’, ‘I don’t need you to analyze me’, etc)
S[/quote]
Once again:
It HAS been said that people here avoid listening to certain lifters based ONLY on size and perceived steroid use.
It has been said that this is a foolish way to see things because it ignores the perception of thousands of lifters who have good advice and severely limits the newbie lifter.
Please explain in detail why you seem to think all of these people you know would disagree with me on that.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[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”?
Good on you! So you do agree with me then that you don’t need steroids to stand out and failing to dick-ride enhanced guys won’t make you miss out on sick gainz.
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.
Lol. Nice ad hominem. Funny how you bring up sexual preferences. Do you want to share sth with the class?
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.
This is the main point I disagree with. If you’re natty, your discipline, your eating habits and your mental toughness (oh yeah and muh genetics) determine whether you reach your full potential, not how many juiced up clowns you spank over.
I explained why I feel this way in my last post.
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”.[/quote]
Again, it’s not how developed the person is but whether their methods and background match yours. FFS I EXPLAINED THIS ALREADY!
Why are you so obsessed with the fact that nobody is dick-riding big black guys? Is there sth you want to share with the group?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
How do you know someone has great genetics for building muscle?
[/quote]
By them building huge muscles.
Are these trick questions?
Genetic potential can be there but someone may never come close to it by not trying. The only way to be aware of good muscle building genetics…IS TO BUILD BIG MUSCLES FROM THE TRAINING YOU DO.[/quote]
Not a trick question, but by your analysis no one has ever overcome sub par genetics and built a really good physique. That doesn’t really seem right. You, yourself have said before that you weighed 150 at 18 which many people would consider drawing the short straw genetically.
Toney Freeman has talked about growing up scrawny and how hard he had to work to overcome his awful genetics taking him 2 years to go from 160 to 200 at 6’2". Frank Zane also was a very slender guy initially. All people with poor genetics for extreme muscle building yet they did it anyway through hard work. Building lots of muscle does not automatically equal great muscle building genetics.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Not a trick question, but by your analysis no one has ever overcome sub par genetics and built a really good physique. That doesn’t really seem right. [/quote]
“Really good physique” does not equal “massive muscles”.
Good genetics for building muscle isn’t about how you were born but moreso how you develop based on what training is thrown at you.
Many top bodybuilders were skinny growing up.
That’s the point…and why anyone saying I had bad genetics just because I was skinny as a kid has it wrong.
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
X, would you care to share shirtless photos taken by SOMEONE ELSE as well as videos of you lifting? You’ve taken liberties in judging many of us, in terms of our effort, size, and strength. Can we do the same for you? [/quote]
+1[/quote]
+2
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
How do you know someone has great genetics for building muscle?
[/quote]
By them building huge muscles.
Are these trick questions?
Genetic potential can be there but someone may never come close to it by not trying. The only way to be aware of good muscle building genetics…IS TO BUILD BIG MUSCLES FROM THE TRAINING YOU DO.[/quote]
Not a trick question, but by your analysis no one has ever overcome sub par genetics and built a really good physique. That doesn’t really seem right. You, yourself have said before that you weighed 150 at 18 which many people would consider drawing the short straw genetically.
Toney Freeman has talked about growing up scrawny and how hard he had to work to overcome his awful genetics taking him 2 years to go from 160 to 200 at 6’2". Frank Zane also was a very slender guy initially. All people with poor genetics for extreme muscle building yet they did it anyway through hard work. Building lots of muscle does not automatically equal great muscle building genetics.
[/quote]
Starting skinny doesn’t mean a person has poor genetics. Inability to build muscle mass despite hard work and all would imply that.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
X, would you care to share shirtless photos taken by SOMEONE ELSE as well as videos of you lifting? You’ve taken liberties in judging many of us, in terms of our effort, size, and strength. Can we do the same for you? [/quote]
I’m not judging you. I don’t care anything about you. You are just some guy who follows me around the forum asking lame questions constantly.[/quote]
HAHA! You’re full of it Professor.
Why do people even give this narcissistic prick the time of day?
[quote]dt79 wrote:
Starting skinny doesn’t mean a person has poor genetics. Inability to build muscle mass despite hard work and all would imply that.[/quote]
I am more interested in how this isn’t common information now.
I am truly hoping no one thinks steroids somehow give you good genetics.
While there may be some people who are very good responders to steroids, no one gets giant muscles without the good muscle building genetics to do so.
Steroids do not change your genetic structure. They enhance what you have already.
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
X, would you care to share shirtless photos taken by SOMEONE ELSE as well as videos of you lifting? You’ve taken liberties in judging many of us, in terms of our effort, size, and strength. Can we do the same for you? [/quote]
+1[/quote]
I’m bigger and leaner now.
Now, stick to the topic or start another thread about your off topic concerns.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
X, would you care to share shirtless photos taken by SOMEONE ELSE as well as videos of you lifting? You’ve taken liberties in judging many of us, in terms of our effort, size, and strength. Can we do the same for you? [/quote]
+1[/quote]
I’m bigger and leaner now.
Now, stick to the topic or start another thread about your off topic concerns.[/quote]
The effort is there. And good arm, trap, and shoulder size.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
… severely limits the newbie lifter.
[/quote]
I’m going to ignore all your other nonsense[/quote]
Of course you will…because answering what I asked you would eliminate the nonsense.
[quote], because as many times as people point obvious, or logical things out, you’re never willing to see, or even concede anything, so I’ll just spare myself the headache thanks.
I will though inquire why you always claim your holy crusade of protecting and saving newbie lifters, and yet whenever anyone suggests you don’t limit yourself to just this site (you aren’t a fan of limits if I recall correctly), you just skip over it.
For someone who seems to honestly believe that he is above many of the posters her in terms of knowledge as well as development, and has left many many accounts of his dissatisfaction with the average TN forum member, what’s the real motivation behind all of this? Yes yes, we all know you “come here to discuss bodybuilding”, yada, yada, yada,… you’ve said it countless times, and yet you very noticeably avoid any site where you just might find people who would fit your proposed bill of a knowledgeable poster. So is it really just some deep seated need to berate and argue with people you don’t view as equals?
(inb4 ‘stick to the topic’, ‘I don’t need you to analyze me’, etc)
S[/quote]
It HAS been said that people here
It has been said that
[/quote]
Said by whom? Quotes? Links?
crickets
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[
I’m bigger and leaner now.
Now, stick to the topic or start another thread about your off topic concerns.[/quote]
That was almost 3 years ago…and you have not posted any recent pics aside from your famous hunched mirror move.
And I am thinking the reason you are all fired up about this topic is you started reading the comments people left on your YouTube videos.
Explains a lot actually.
So anyone who builds a great physique has great genetics. And we can tell they had great genetics for muscle building because they built a lot of muscle. Anyone else seeing the circular reasoning here. I just find it hard to believe that every bodybuilder had spectacular muscle building genetics. As I mentioned before, Freeman has acknowledged that his genetics were horrible and he had an extremely hard time packing on the slightest bit of muscle but went to extreme levels with his diet to do so. And this was to reach the 200 lb mark when he was starting out. That doesn’t seem like great genetics to me. Seems to me like you are dismissing all of those extreme efforts and just chalking his physique up to great genetics, doesn’t it Prof??
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
So anyone who builds a great physique has great genetics. And we can tell they had great genetics for muscle building because they built a lot of muscle. Anyone else seeing the circular reasoning here. I just find it hard to believe that every bodybuilder had spectacular muscle building genetics. As I mentioned before, Freeman has acknowledged that his genetics were horrible and he had an extremely hard time packing on the slightest bit of muscle but went to extreme levels with his diet to do so. And this was to reach the 200 lb mark when he was starting out. That doesn’t seem like great genetics to me. Seems to me like you are dismissing all of those extreme efforts and just chalking his physique up to great genetics, doesn’t it Prof??[/quote]
Professor X has confused correlation for causation.
Quite ironic for a professor.
