Speaking of 19 or 20 inch arms before.
This is what a LEAN 19 inch arm looks like on natural WNBF pro Phil Swing. His guns measure 20 inches in the offseason.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
2-3lbs of muscle in a year after several years of training is now “negligible” progress?
Question…if he didn’t spend much time dieting, do you understand he could have gained more?
Brick’s post:[quote]
Most natties with adequate and consistent nutrition and training are tapped out for growth in 5 years or so. SOME gains can be made after that, but they are negligible and come at a snail’s pace.[/quote]
My gains did not tap out after 5 years. I did NOT only make “negligible” progress after that time.
Gaining 3lbs of muscle AFTER DIETING and AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF TRAINING is not 'NEGLIGIBLE" progress coming at a snail’s pace…and anyone who thinks that the same person couldn’t gain more if they didn’t spend time dieting for a show is strange.
To think no one has even better genetics for growth than that is even stranger and doesn’t match any biological model.
People who really think like that probably won’t be training too hard after a decade…
The picture above is Chris Darby who also train at MetroFlex…just trying to give an idea of what I see when I train.[/quote]
X, just what kind of gains can be made in a 4 month time span after 15 years of training?
[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
I should add that when Dave Tate was on his mystical 10,000+ calorie/a day bulk, he was also almost certainly using AAS. It doesn’t matter to me, and I think if you want to be competitive as a powerlifter at that caliber, you are definitely going to be doing so. But obviously, eating that much as a natural is really not going to get you anywhere good, unless you are purely concerned with scale weight. I originally brought it up just as a humerous anecdote about extreme diets.[/quote]
Almost certainly? 
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
and secondly to keep your insulin spiked constantly through out the day. Apparently, the man with this secret was J M Blakely. [/quote]
…Key point…that actually worked apparently.
You just don’t get lean that way.
The rest of what gets left out is how hard he was training WHILE doing that.[/quote]
It’s NOT left out. Seriously, who is leaving it out?! The man squatted 900 and perhaps 1,000 if I remember correctly what lifts he’s done (not in the mood to look at YT or Google stuff about him now). No one arrives at that lift while taking it easy! He also trained six times per week, sometimes more, and trained with a serious bunch of people. You speak as if some here have never PERSONALLY MET or TRAINED WITH people who trained at Westside or with the Metal Militia or the Long Island “Jesus Crew” or whatever hardcore outfit there is. I’m not saying I’m some highly accomplished lifter myself but you speak as if everyone or most here haven’t been highly involved, read a great deal, or gone to some PL gyms or went to a PL meet just as a fan.
[quote]StateOfPsychosis wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]StateOfPsychosis wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:
You can only achieve so much growth as a natty over a given time - even if you accept the notion that you can continually gain for decades (I don’t), you will still only be putting on a relatively small amount of muscle in a given week/month/year. I[/quote]
Most natties with adequate and consistent nutrition and training are tapped out for growth in 5 years or so. SOME gains can be made after that, but they are negligible and come at a snail’s pace. [/quote]
Yea but we are talking about EXTREME gains in growth, not those that stem from adequacy. This makes a world of difference when looking at how long someone can grow.[/quote]
Extreme growth requires training which is adequate for extreme growth. What is your point?[/quote]
No point, just a poor attempt at being humorous. [/quote]
Oh god, my bad. I missed that. Looking back on it, I get it now, and it’s pretty funny.
[quote]howie424 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Holy crap.
If you guys believe all significant progress ends after only 5 years, what the hell are most of you still training for?
Why even hit the gym 6 days a week to stay stagnant?[/quote]
I’m with X on this one. I don’t believe at all that progress ends after 5 years. There are so many ways to progress. [/quote]
Please report back after five years of consistent training and adequate nutrition and the proper lifestyle.
And when you do experience the gains, tell us just how much of a Spartan lifestyle it will take to gain those extra grams or ounces of muscle per month or YEAR after the fifth year.
I REALLY am not trying to be a dick, because, after all, if someone thinks they can do it, have at it! Show people you or someone else can do it. Provide an example of yourself or someone else. No one is stopping anyone, and if I’m full of shit, then I guess that’s exactly how I should be perceived–just a quack who pulled this estimation out of his ass with no rhyme or reason.
We are talking about progression in muscle gained. What are the other ways to progress regarding this lifestyle/sport/hobby besides strength?
There are not many ways to progress.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
and if I’m full of shit, then I guess that’s exactly how I should be perceived–just a quack who pulled this estimation out of his ass with no rhyme or reason. [/quote]
I agree.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]howie424 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Holy crap.
If you guys believe all significant progress ends after only 5 years, what the hell are most of you still training for?
Why even hit the gym 6 days a week to stay stagnant?[/quote]
I’m with X on this one. I don’t believe at all that progress ends after 5 years. There are so many ways to progress. [/quote]
Please report back after five years of consistent training and adequate nutrition and the proper lifestyle.
And when you do experience the gains, tell us just how much of a Spartan lifestyle it will take to gain those extra grams or ounces of muscle per month or YEAR after the fifth year.
I REALLY am not trying to be a dick, because, after all, if someone thinks they can do it, have at it! Show people you or someone else can do it. Provide an example of yourself or someone else. No one is stopping anyone, and if I’m full of shit, then I guess that’s exactly how I should be perceived–just a quack who pulled this estimation out of his ass with no rhyme or reason.
We are talking about progression in muscle gained. What are the other ways to progress regarding this lifestyle/sport/hobby besides strength?
There are not many ways to progress. [/quote]
I don’t think you’re being a dick at all. This is just a simple disagreement.
I think that progression means a lot of things. Becoming bigger, leaner, stronger, more explosive, rep PR’s, weight PR’s, etc. Hell, I would consider X losing 50 pounds progression.
I know that progression isn’t linear and you can’t constantly progress in everything, otherwise everybody would be 300 pounds, lean, benching half a ton. But I think that there are enough ways to become “better” to last you more than 5 years.
[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
lmfao! bro science? try actual science… https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bodyrecomposition.com%2Fmuscle-gain%2Fwhats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html&ei=vYVPUtDQCKSRigf5xIHQCg&usg=AFQjCNG5pbGMiygvVmI0hdIhjKNfNR8aDQ
these charts are based off real data taken from elite level natural bodybuilders.[/quote]
…and they are using it to apply to all mankind…which is not real science. It is a freaking calculator based off of someone else’s guesses. That’s it.
There is no study associated with that link you posted. This is not some peer reviewed study and you should learn the difference between that and listing bodybuilder measurements in the past and saying that based on that, here’s a calculator.
Read a textbook and less online calculators.
[quote]howie424 wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]howie424 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Holy crap.
If you guys believe all significant progress ends after only 5 years, what the hell are most of you still training for?
Why even hit the gym 6 days a week to stay stagnant?[/quote]
I’m with X on this one. I don’t believe at all that progress ends after 5 years. There are so many ways to progress. [/quote]
Please report back after five years of consistent training and adequate nutrition and the proper lifestyle.
And when you do experience the gains, tell us just how much of a Spartan lifestyle it will take to gain those extra grams or ounces of muscle per month or YEAR after the fifth year.
I REALLY am not trying to be a dick, because, after all, if someone thinks they can do it, have at it! Show people you or someone else can do it. Provide an example of yourself or someone else. No one is stopping anyone, and if I’m full of shit, then I guess that’s exactly how I should be perceived–just a quack who pulled this estimation out of his ass with no rhyme or reason.
We are talking about progression in muscle gained. What are the other ways to progress regarding this lifestyle/sport/hobby besides strength?
There are not many ways to progress. [/quote]
I don’t think you’re being a dick at all. This is just a simple disagreement.
I think that progression means a lot of things. Becoming bigger, leaner, stronger, more explosive, rep PR’s, weight PR’s, etc. Hell, I would consider X losing 50 pounds progression.
I know that progression isn’t linear and you can’t constantly progress in everything, otherwise everybody would be 300 pounds, lean, benching half a ton. But I think that there are enough ways to become “better” to last you more than 5 years. [/quote]
OK, this makes sense!
But some people’s biggest gripe with me concerns mass gains, not speed or strength or fat loss.
Shelby Starnes and John Meadows discuss limitations towards the end of this MP3. Check out the latest episode of Blue Collar muscle.
METROFLEX DALLAS
[quote]howie424 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I’m actually not, Chris. Many people in this thread were making that claim…that they literally “ate whenever they felt like” and that this was just as good as having a regular schedule because the discipline didn’t make any difference.[/quote]
You can still get very big and very strong eating whenever you feel like it. Eating whenever you feel like it doesn’t mean eating less. You can still easily get 3-6 meals in while eating whenever you feel like it or whenever you’re hungry.
Some people NEED discipline in their lives, some people DON’T.[/quote]
Discipline is what makes the difference between someone being average and someone being well above average.
It is what keeps you in this when circumstances happen to you that could throw you off course.
That is what we have been discussing.
The ones who reach that level of development are the ones WHO LAST through all of that.
The guy who “eats whenever he feels like” from the very start as a newb has a way worse chance of holding on later because just a a heads up…life can be rough no matter how well you plan ahead.
There is a reason most of the larger guys did things a certain way…and that is what I am trying to discuss here.
If you disagree, fine.
You prove everyone wrong by reaching an extreme degree of development with lacking focus and discipline.
Good luck.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
2-3lbs of muscle in a year after several years of training is now “negligible” progress?
Question…if he didn’t spend much time dieting, do you understand he could have gained more?
Brick’s post:[quote]
Most natties with adequate and consistent nutrition and training are tapped out for growth in 5 years or so. SOME gains can be made after that, but they are negligible and come at a snail’s pace.[/quote]
My gains did not tap out after 5 years. I did NOT only make “negligible” progress after that time.
Gaining 3lbs of muscle AFTER DIETING and AFTER SEVERAL YEARS OF TRAINING is not 'NEGLIGIBLE" progress coming at a snail’s pace…and anyone who thinks that the same person couldn’t gain more if they didn’t spend time dieting for a show is strange.
To think no one has even better genetics for growth than that is even stranger and doesn’t match any biological model.
People who really think like that probably won’t be training too hard after a decade…
The picture above is Chris Darby who also train at MetroFlex…just trying to give an idea of what I see when I train.[/quote]
X, just what kind of gains can be made in a 4 month time span after 15 years of training?
[/quote]
That depends on the person.
Telling someone anything else other than that is opinion and bias, nothing more.
Stop the Bro Science.
Yeah, there comes a time when things need to be put to numbers. Even if not super-precise, there’s a pretty accurate ballpark of what naturals are capable of. If nothing else, then just by observing yourself and others. And this notion that if you don’t have a burger in your face all day, you’ll miss the growth spurt and don’t grow to your “REAL” potential is ridiculous. It’s the definition of bro science.
Personally, I prefer to hear about the way things actually are, instead of white lies to get me motivated. And I suspect most people are that way as well. Newbies don’t have smaller brains than anyone of us who’s been at it for decades. They can be motivated just fine without being told that it’s an all out quest to devour food and tip the scales. Building muscle is not some kind of fat hibernation for until you’re 40. It’s about building up a base of strength and size by training hard and eating above maintenance, seeing how your body responds and then refining it.
Even Dave Tate (whatever he used and whatever 10000kcal face shoving that the Prof lied about not wholeheartedly endorsing) did real bodybuilding early on - as a kid. He had a trainer, got cut and stepped on stage. He got there in a few years. This merry-go-round of denial is really funny.
[quote]Majin wrote:
And this notion that if you don’t have a burger in your face all day, you’ll miss the growth spurt and don’t grow to your “REAL” potential is ridiculous. It’s the definition of bro science. [/quote]
Yeah, it would be if anyone was telling people they needed to “have burgers in their face all day long”.
It seems like you would have far less to argue against if you stuck to quoting what was actually written…instead of the hyperbole you added for effect.
I feel like I’ve seen this same argument before…
It always goes the same exact way. Like clockwork.
[quote]gregron wrote:
I feel like I’ve seen this same argument before…
It always goes the same exact way. Like clockwork.[/quote]
What argument?
Chris Colluci and me seem to be in agreement for the most part and I am discussing how to last in this long term to even reach more extreme gains in development.
The thread has enough information in it to be useful…and it was a good read for over 30 pages.
People didn’t read the thread over 30,000 times for jokes and the same nonsense.
Please stay on topic. If you have nothing to add, please don’t respond. No one is insulting you or degrading you.
