Thanks for the kind words, guys.
I really feel my calves need the most work. They really suck bigtime. Not only does it look like I’ve never trained my calves, it looks like I’ve never even walked or jumped in my life.
My back and thighs also need work, but they’re not that bad.
lookin solid man, jealous.
back is not very good. the rest is pretty good, but i’d think after 7 years you could have about 20 or so more pounds of muscle on you.
[quote]Evil Dude625 wrote:
back is not very good. the rest is pretty good, but i’d think after 7 years you could have about 20 or so more pounds of muscle on you.[/quote]
Yeah, after 7 years of natural training I really should be 205lbs with 6-8% bf. I’m joking.
I think I’ve done pretty good. My legs and back are not good enough, but that’s genetics for you. I think a lot of people have profoundly unrealistic expectations of what your average natural bodybuilder can realistically achieve. Most people in gyms don’t even look like they work out for god’s sake. Maybe I could have had a few more punds of lean mass if I did everything perfectly for the duration of these seven years, but even if that’s true I still think my results are good. In no way do I think my physique is complete or “finished”, and I’m trying to improve evry time I go into the gym. Still, I don’t think getting to 200-210lbs @ 6% bodyfat is to be expected after seven years of training. Maybe I’ll get there in 10-15 years, and if I do, I’ll be very happy.
I mean, if I gain 20lbs of lean mass naturally, which I don’t think I will in the foreseeable future, I’d look much better than pretty much every natural trainee I’ve ever met. That’s the point when a lot of T-Nation members will say “Your results are pretty good”. Had I juiced up like crazy in the last year, gained 20lbs of muscle and brought my legs and back up, I’m sure everyone in here would be extatic. “Natural bodybuilders with skinny legs however…those we don’t like.” I just don’t like that mentality.
After 2.5 years of natural training, I’m at 205 pounds. Am I 6-8% bodyfat? No. But in four years, there is no way that being less than a lean 205 could be considered success…genetics? Dude…you’ve got some decent development, which looks more impressive because you’re lean, but your legs and your back are not “genetics” or all that a “natural bodybuilder” is capable of. 15 years to get to 210?? Since we’re talking about “natural,” and “genetics,” and all that blah blah blah, why not look at the perfect example in Professor X. Natural. Started as a skinny guy. I’m not sure how long he’s been training, but last time I checked I don’t think he was shooting to get to 205 pounds in the next 5-10 years.
When we’re talking about genetics, I’m sure you’re aware of genetic variation within a species. That’s why I said “average”.
Sure, I can improve my legs and back, but it’s a lot harder than building my biceps and chest. I’m not even sure my calves can ever be a set of what one would call ‘impressive calves’. I’m not that weak either.
I’ve done deep squats with 315lbs for reps, I use 405lbs for BB shrugs, I do chins with bodyweight plus 70 lbs for ten reps. Still, my legs and back are not good. Go figure. I know these are not fantastic numbers, but they’re not bad either.
ProfX has great genetics for building muscle. So what? I’ve never said that no-one is capable of getting big and lean naturally in a relatively short amount of time. I also think it should be mentioned that black people dominate pretty much every sport they participate in. Maybe it’s because they’re just more dedicated or something, but my money is on genetics.
There are two black people at a gym I train at once in a while, and they make the 1500 white people who are also members at the gym look silly. The two black guys are strong, huge and ripped. There’s just no comparison. Can you say genetics? I know we all have our genetic heritage from Africa, but those of us who left the continent later rather than sooner, do seem to have been left with something of a relative genetic jackpot as far as bodybuilding is concerned.
My point is, we’re different. There is, however, something called an ‘average’. My claim is that average trainees won’t get huge and ripped, even if they train their ass off and eat sensibly.
Unless you’re prepared to say that an average natural trainee should get to 210lbs @ 6-8% bf within 7 years of training, then I don’t even see what your point is.
Also: Dude, I’ve been 225lbs. About three years ago. I didn’t think I was fat, but it turned out I needed to lose about 40lbs to get to 7% bodyfat. My point is that pretty much everyone is a lot freakin’ fatter than they think they are. I was no different. I bet the same is true for you.
I train with naturals who bench 440lbs, squat 500lbs and deadlift 600lbs. Pretty good numbers. All natural, no powerlifting gear. Scandinavian genes, wich means they’re tall with long arms and legs. The most gifted guy competed at 197lbs. He looked amzing. In no way is he genetically average. You shouldn’t forget that quite a large percentage of Mr. Olympia contestants in the 80s weighed under 200lbs. Samir Bannout, Frank Zane, Mohammad Makkawy etc.
Most people don’t have a chance in hell of ever looking as good as those guys, yet we all think we should be heavier than they were. That extra weight is going to be fat in the majority of cases. Not all, but most.
[quote]eeu743 wrote:
After 2.5 years of natural training, I’m at 205 pounds. Am I 6-8% bodyfat? No. But in four years, there is no way that being less than a lean 205 could be considered success…genetics? Dude…you’ve got some decent development, which looks more impressive because you’re lean, but your legs and your back are not “genetics” or all that a “natural bodybuilder” is capable of. 15 years to get to 210?? Since we’re talking about “natural,” and “genetics,” and all that blah blah blah, why not look at the perfect example in Professor X. Natural. Started as a skinny guy. I’m not sure how long he’s been training, but last time I checked I don’t think he was shooting to get to 205 pounds in the next 5-10 years.[/quote]
[quote]whoami wrote:
…
ProfX has great genetics for building muscle. So what? I’ve never said that no-one is capable of getting big and lean naturally in a relatively short amount of time. I also think it should be mentioned that black people dominate pretty much every sport they participate in. Maybe it’s because they’re just more dedicated or something, but my money is on genetics.
…
[/quote]
OP, don’t you think this comment could be considered slightly offensive to Prof X? Just because he’s carrying more muscle than a lot of people hardly implies that he has ‘great genetics for building muscle’. You saying that he has ‘great genetics’ discounts the hard work and dedication he has (obviously) put into his body.
Secondly, how exactly do you know his genetics are better? He’s made a decision to accept a higher level of body fat in order to build more muscle. This decision has left him a very muscular person, albeit with more fat gain that many would be willing to accept. Judging from this thread, you’re not willing to do that – not that there is anything wrong with that. It just seems like you’re comparing apples to oranges.
I’m not trying to argue with you, it just seems that people are always throwing out the genetics card when compared against someone else that is more developed.
I see your point. However, saying that ProfX does NOT have great genetics would then be like saying that everyone who does not have his level of development are just less dedicated and are not working as hard. I’m sure ProfX is training and eating his ass off though, so I’m not implying that he’s getting big just sitting around doing nothing.
As far as you point about higher body fat goes, I’ve been 230lbs (103 kg), and I didn’t gain any extra lean mass from eating large amounts of food. I got strong and fat, but not any bigger. Go figure.
I know the genetics card is used too much, but one certainly can not say that genetics do not play a part in bodybuilding. Maybe more than any other “sport”, genetics is a huge factor in bodybuilding. Almost everybody knows someone who trains less than they do, eat like shit, goes out drinking two or more nights/week, gets little sleep, yet they still get huge, strong and ripped. I know a guy who was eating dinner at his mom’s place (not really diet food) and getting drunk every weekend, all through contest preparations. I couldn’t do that. Maybe my metabolism is just less dedicated than his.
[quote]frankjl wrote:
whoami wrote:
…
ProfX has great genetics for building muscle. So what? I’ve never said that no-one is capable of getting big and lean naturally in a relatively short amount of time. I also think it should be mentioned that black people dominate pretty much every sport they participate in. Maybe it’s because they’re just more dedicated or something, but my money is on genetics.
…
OP, don’t you think this comment could be considered slightly offensive to Prof X? Just because he’s carrying more muscle than a lot of people hardly implies that he has ‘great genetics for building muscle’. You saying that he has ‘great genetics’ discounts the hard work and dedication he has (obviously) put into his body.
Secondly, how exactly do you know his genetics are better? He’s made a decision to accept a higher level of body fat in order to build more muscle. This decision has left him a very muscular person, albeit with more fat gain that many would be willing to accept. Judging from this thread, you’re not willing to do that – not that there is anything wrong with that. It just seems like you’re comparing apples to oranges.
I’m not trying to argue with you, it just seems that people are always throwing out the genetics card when compared against someone else that is more developed.[/quote]
[quote]whoami wrote:
My point is, we’re different. There is, however, something called an ‘average’. My claim is that average trainees won’t get huge and ripped, even if they train their ass off and eat sensibly.
Unless you’re prepared to say that an average natural trainee should get to 210lbs @ 6-8% bf within 7 years of training, then I don’t even see what your point is.
[/quote]
Yeah. I am. If someone starts out at a skinny 150 pounds, which seems to be the “average” starting point for most people, then that’s less than 10 pounds a year, less than 1 pound per month. That’s not at all unreasonable.
[quote]whoami wrote:
My point is, we’re different. There is, however, something called an ‘average’. My claim is that average trainees won’t get huge and ripped, even if they train their ass off and eat sensibly.
Unless you’re prepared to say that an average natural trainee should get to 210lbs @ 6-8% bf within 7 years of training, then I don’t even see what your point is.
[/quote]
Yeah it’s totally impossible to go from 150lbs to 210lbs lean in under 7 years…
(All natural by the way)
Have you considered trying a different approach to developing your legs specifically? If what you’ve been doing hasn’t been working, instead of continuing on down that path, try something new. Have you experimented with the different strategies that work for some people with legs that are their weak group? Working calves everyday? Going heavy with low volume? Going lighter with high volume? Stretching the ever loving shit out of them? Doing only single leg at a time? Working standing and seated calf raises on seperate days? Going extremely slow? etc Just curious.
[quote]mr popular wrote:
whoami wrote:
My point is, we’re different. There is, however, something called an ‘average’. My claim is that average trainees won’t get huge and ripped, even if they train their ass off and eat sensibly.
Unless you’re prepared to say that an average natural trainee should get to 210lbs @ 6-8% bf within 7 years of training, then I don’t even see what your point is.
Yeah it’s totally impossible to go from 150lbs to 210lbs lean in under 7 years…
(All natural by the way)[/quote]
checked your profile- no pics of course to back up all your lecturing and claims of authority.
i can handle that, and you may be big and lean. i don’t really care. the reason i’m posting is LOL THAT YOU THINK DYLAN IS NATURAL. i mean, come on man.
you guys think that if you stuff your faces and “keep adding weight to the bar” you are going to be huge and lean. well, unless you are a genetic anomaly, OR USE GEAR, you aren’t.
whoami is typing some much needed truth into this forum. yeah, he may need to stop worrying about his bodyfat so much and focus on legs/back, but the FACT is that drugs are a huge contributor in guys’ looking as impressive as people like you (who hang around on message boards and have been desensitized to what an impressive physique really is) expect them to be.
genetics and drugs are the biggest factors in why pro bodybuilders look the way they do… most natty guys in the 5’7-6’2 range aren’t going to get above 210 or so lean, and most would look GREAT at around 180. that’s not the cool “hardcore” no limits attitude that the keyboard warriors around here like to accept, but it’s reality.
ETA: Dylan is “Zackla” on bb.com, has discussed AAS over there and admitted to using. Here is one example:
Bodybuilding.com Forums
Again, don’t be stupid or naive.
[quote]eeu743 wrote:
whoami wrote:
My point is, we’re different. There is, however, something called an ‘average’. My claim is that average trainees won’t get huge and ripped, even if they train their ass off and eat sensibly.
Unless you’re prepared to say that an average natural trainee should get to 210lbs @ 6-8% bf within 7 years of training, then I don’t even see what your point is.
Yeah. I am. If someone starts out at a skinny 150 pounds, which seems to be the “average” starting point for most people, then that’s less than 10 pounds a year, less than 1 pound per month. That’s not at all unreasonable.
[/quote]
For fucks sake, man. Yes, and if you continue like that, you’ll be a lean 270lbs in another 7 years. Just think, with 21 years of training the average trainee will be 330lbs and ripped. You know better than this. I gained almost everything within the first two years of training. After that, progress has been slow, but pretty steady.
[quote]mr popular wrote:
whoami wrote:
My point is, we’re different. There is, however, something called an ‘average’. My claim is that average trainees won’t get huge and ripped, even if they train their ass off and eat sensibly.
Unless you’re prepared to say that an average natural trainee should get to 210lbs @ 6-8% bf within 7 years of training, then I don’t even see what your point is.
Yeah it’s totally impossible to go from 150lbs to 210lbs lean in under 7 years…
(All natural by the way)[/quote]
I’d like you to show me where I’ve stated that that kind of progress would be impossible. Please, dude. Show me.
Also, it seems your “all natural” example, who I think is a good guy by the way, isn’t natural after all. Kinda changes the playing field a little bit, don’t you think?
[quote]Davinci.v2 wrote:
Have you considered trying a different approach to developing your legs specifically? If what you’ve been doing hasn’t been working, instead of continuing on down that path, try something new. Have you experimented with the different strategies that work for some people with legs that are their weak group? Working calves everyday? Going heavy with low volume? Going lighter with high volume? Stretching the ever loving shit out of them? Doing only single leg at a time? Working standing and seated calf raises on seperate days? Going extremely slow? etc Just curious.[/quote]
Yeah, I’ve tried pretty much everything. When I started doing 45-rep calf raises with 360lbs I got maybe 2/10 inch new growth after a few months.
Thanks for the feedback though 
Damn, you’re an idiot. How the hell am I a racist?
[quote]mr popular wrote:
If you put as much time into eating big and squatting more than 315lbs as you do making excuses for why other peoples’ genetics are better than yours (and being a racist prick), then you would have a lot more to show for it after 8 years of “training”.
And your back and legs aren’t just less genetically gifted than your other muscles, because if you’re vain enough to feel the need to stay at single digit bodyfat all the time, then you’re vain enough to put more effort into your mirror muscles like the chest and biceps than you are the rest of your body.
Keep making excuses, maybe someone will believe you in 8 more years when you look the same as you do now, and all the other natural guys are blowing by you in terms of development. Yes, even the white guys.[/quote]
[quote]trextacy wrote:
mr popular wrote:
whoami wrote:
My point is, we’re different. There is, however, something called an ‘average’. My claim is that average trainees won’t get huge and ripped, even if they train their ass off and eat sensibly.
Unless you’re prepared to say that an average natural trainee should get to 210lbs @ 6-8% bf within 7 years of training, then I don’t even see what your point is.
Yeah it’s totally impossible to go from 150lbs to 210lbs lean in under 7 years…
(All natural by the way)
checked your profile- no pics of course to back up all your lecturing and claims of authority.
i can handle that, and you may be big and lean. i don’t really care. the reason i’m posting is LOL THAT YOU THINK DYLAN IS NATURAL. i mean, come on man.
you guys think that if you stuff your faces and “keep adding weight to the bar” you are going to be huge and lean. well, unless you are a genetic anomaly, OR USE GEAR, you aren’t.
whoami is typing some much needed truth into this forum. yeah, he may need to stop worrying about his bodyfat so much and focus on legs/back, but the FACT is that drugs are a huge contributor in guys’ looking as impressive as people like you (who hang around on message boards and have been desensitized to what an impressive physique really is) expect them to be.
genetics and drugs are the biggest factors in why pro bodybuilders look the way they do… most natty guys in the 5’7-6’2 range aren’t going to get above 210 or so lean, and most would look GREAT at around 180. that’s not the cool “hardcore” no limits attitude that the keyboard warriors around here like to accept, but it’s reality.
ETA: Dylan is “Zackla” on bb.com, has discussed AAS over there and admitted to using. Here is one example:
Bodybuilding.com Forums
Again, don’t be stupid or naive.[/quote]
From the same thread that you linked above:
“If you’re referring to me, I benched over 420 and had a 625lb deadlift before I first hit gear. Can you say the same?”
So he achieved those stats, and a 230-240lb physique, THEN decided to use steroids. I don’t see the point you’re trying to make here?
He still got bigger than the OP, a hell of a lot quicker - naturally - which was the whole point of those three links which were honestly just the first ones off the top of my head.
[quote]mr popular wrote:
trextacy wrote:
mr popular wrote:
whoami wrote:
My point is, we’re different. There is, however, something called an ‘average’. My claim is that average trainees won’t get huge and ripped, even if they train their ass off and eat sensibly.
Unless you’re prepared to say that an average natural trainee should get to 210lbs @ 6-8% bf within 7 years of training, then I don’t even see what your point is.
Yeah it’s totally impossible to go from 150lbs to 210lbs lean in under 7 years…
(All natural by the way)
checked your profile- no pics of course to back up all your lecturing and claims of authority.
i can handle that, and you may be big and lean. i don’t really care. the reason i’m posting is LOL THAT YOU THINK DYLAN IS NATURAL. i mean, come on man.
you guys think that if you stuff your faces and “keep adding weight to the bar” you are going to be huge and lean. well, unless you are a genetic anomaly, OR USE GEAR, you aren’t.
whoami is typing some much needed truth into this forum. yeah, he may need to stop worrying about his bodyfat so much and focus on legs/back, but the FACT is that drugs are a huge contributor in guys’ looking as impressive as people like you (who hang around on message boards and have been desensitized to what an impressive physique really is) expect them to be.
genetics and drugs are the biggest factors in why pro bodybuilders look the way they do… most natty guys in the 5’7-6’2 range aren’t going to get above 210 or so lean, and most would look GREAT at around 180. that’s not the cool “hardcore” no limits attitude that the keyboard warriors around here like to accept, but it’s reality.
ETA: Dylan is “Zackla” on bb.com, has discussed AAS over there and admitted to using. Here is one example:
Bodybuilding.com Forums
Again, don’t be stupid or naive.
From the same thread that you linked above:
“If you’re referring to me, I benched over 420 and had a 625lb deadlift before I first hit gear. Can you say the same?”
So he achieved those stats, and a 230-240lb physique, THEN decided to use steroids. I don’t see the point you’re trying to make here?
He still got bigger than the OP, a hell of a lot quicker - naturally - which was the whole point of those three links which were honestly just the first ones off the top of my head.[/quote]
First off, I give you credit for not being an asshole because I probably deserved it based on the tone of my post. So, kudos to you.
Now, as for zackla/dylan claiming to not touch gear before a certain point — No, he’s a liar and has been banned over there and has other posts talking about his cycles, etc. Like most (ab)users of AAS, there is a certain amount of deception, both to himself (personal) and to others. Even if he were telling the truth (he isn’t), the point still stands that genetics (the other side of the coin to drugs when it comes to the physiques you seem to admire) would be the primary factor.
Again, if you really believe he got to a lean 230 before touching gear, time to reevaluate your perspective. Do you ever consider for a second that you perception may be a bit skewed and that the board elite’s denial that this whole bodybuiding thing is largely fueled by drugs and genetics? It is- that shit makes things MUCH easier…otherwise, people wouldn’t do it! It’s like sticking a sock in your underwear and acting like you have a big cock.
Whoami’s posts have been spot on and refreshing. The guy is clearly dedicated and has spent time under the bar and moved lots of weight- however, he doesn’t have the pure size that we are accustomed to seeing–and not all muscles grow equally so some bodyparts are ahead of others.
what are your measurements?
That was directed at “whoami”