[quote]AccipiterQ wrote:
yeah…You sure you’re 192 lbs.??? I give you credit for having a more developed lower body than upper…but You look closer to 175 to me…[/quote]
what are you talking about? everyone is whatever weight they say they are on RMP, remember?
good progress on your legs. work on your upper body now while you maintain the size of your legs. 4/15 is a lot…but thats just me. if its working for you stick to it. Keep it up
[quote]LiveFromThe781 wrote:
AccipiterQ wrote:
yeah…You sure you’re 192 lbs.??? I give you credit for having a more developed lower body than upper…but You look closer to 175 to me…
what are you talking about? everyone is whatever weight they say they are on RMP, remember?[/quote]
I have no reason to lie about my weight. Primarily because I am posting for feedback, and insight, not to prove anything. I would rather weigh 175 than 194.6, or as of this morning 193.2.
Your lower body is far more developed than your upper body, but you already know that.
As for weight, most people cannot judge how much a person weighs if they have good lower body development since that is lacking in so many trainees… I myself am hovering around 195 lbs and look like I can’t be above 180 lbs because my lower body just weighs so damn much.
Why is it that some parts are more developed than others? I work my chest and arms just as hard as legs, but still do not see the same type growth. Genetics or something like that?
[quote]slash4221 wrote:
Why is it that some parts are more developed than others? I work my chest and arms just as hard as legs, but still do not see the same type growth. Genetics or something like that?[/quote]
yeah, pretty much. certain muscle groups respond different types of stimulus better than others anyway. also like you mentioned, some people just have better genes for certain parts anyway. it can also be affected by how your bone structure is set up and how your neural efficiency is as well. like if you were 10 and did tons of curls you would have an easier time building biceps when you were 20.
some things just happen n you dont know why, like comparatively my back is my best feature, i dont know why but my traps just grow easily. i also never train my forearms but they got big anyway, for months they were the same size if not bigger than my bicep and tricep combined. the longer you life though the more your imbalances start to smooth out.
I attribute my dominant lower body to the fact that the moment I started training I was not neglecting my lower body. Most people who train tend to train their upper body for a period of time before ever hitting their lower body so maybe that’s why your legs seem to overshadow your physique. Obviously genetics also play a role but these issues don’t really matter-just lift hard, eat a ton, and sleep shitloads and you’ll be on your way.
hey, thanks a lot guys.
[quote]uahc wrote:
I attribute my dominant lower body to the fact that the moment I started training I was not neglecting my lower body. Most people who train tend to train their upper body for a period of time before ever hitting their lower body so maybe that’s why your legs seem to overshadow your physique. Obviously genetics also play a role but these issues don’t really matter-just lift hard, eat a ton, and sleep shitloads and you’ll be on your way. [/quote]
nah, i always trained my legs too and they still suck.
[quote]slash4221 wrote:
Why is it that some parts are more developed than others? I work my chest and arms just as hard as legs, but still do not see the same type growth. Genetics or something like that?[/quote]
Could have something to do with your strength levels as well, how does your bench compare to your squat? How many strict pull-ups can you do? I know that’s why my upper body is lagging.
Your training may also be responsible, it sounds like you’re doing a split, but if you had been, for example, doing Starting Strength and started out with shitty bench numbers and an aversion to the barbell bench press, that particular program may not have provided enough work (both volume and technique practice) for the upper body.
Well when I was lifting heavy with my squat I was squatting 375 for sets of 5. Now I am squatting in sets of 15 and am using 275, although I am progressively adding 10 pounds each week. I currently bench 235 for sets of 6 and RDL 305 for sets of 10, ive gone as heavy as 365 for sets of 5 here as well. I do pullups sets of 8 with good form, the last set it starts to go. I was doing EDT for a while, I felt when I stopped it though I lost some strength?
[quote]slash4221 wrote:
Well when I was lifting heavy with my squat I was squatting 375 for sets of 5. Now I am squatting in sets of 15 and am using 275, although I am progressively adding 10 pounds each week. I currently bench 235 for sets of 6 and RDL 305 for sets of 10, ive gone as heavy as 365 for sets of 5 here as well. I do pullups sets of 8 with good form, the last set it starts to go. I was doing EDT for a while, I felt when I stopped it though I lost some strength?[/quote]
you really don’t look 19 at all man. and your upper body really doesn’t look like it can bench 235 raw for sets of 6.
Well once again, I have no reason to lie or fudge the numbers as I would not be fooling anybody but myself. And if I were to lie I would give myself ATLEAST a 255 lb bench press in order to sound more impressive. As for not looking 19, I dont know if maybe theres a picture in your mind of what a 19 year old is supposed to look like, but I know plenty of kids my age, which IS 19, who look younger than me.
I believe you. You don’t have great definition up top but the picture was taken from far away. I think you have pretty reasonable bulk size in your shoulders/arms from the back pic … or at least enough such that I believe your numbers. I still agree that your upper body needs work.
Don’t waste your time arguing with people who do not believe your weight, and if you really want to prove it, take a picture of yourself on the scale. Good luck and keep up the good work!
[quote]slash4221 wrote:
Well once again, I have no reason to lie or fudge the numbers as I would not be fooling anybody but myself. And if I were to lie I would give myself ATLEAST a 255 lb bench press in order to sound more impressive. As for not looking 19, I dont know if maybe theres a picture in your mind of what a 19 year old is supposed to look like, but I know plenty of kids my age, which IS 19, who look younger than me.[/quote]
the point is that people shouldn’t need to “believe” your numbers. people should be able to judge your physique and accurately assume your numbers. i think that your lack of upper body size is the main factor which instigates the skepticism that you’ve encountered here.
the discrepancy between your upper and lower body makes your overall physique look awkward, and that awkwardness reminded me of someone entering the middle of adolescence rather than exiting it. i’m your age, and it just surprised me that you weren’t 5 years younger than me. good luck in your endeavors.
would the differences in my photos have to do with one being taken upon waking up and another one being taken mid day?