[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
There is. It’s just that I’m not inclined to name drop or share personal stories on here. You can disagree with me though, and that’s fine.
[/quote]
you have got to be joking… this is absolutely comical[/quote]
Not joking.
Thanks.
Take care.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]some_dude wrote:
Using those estimates, I now have a good idea what I can reasonably expect to achieve and how long it will take to achieve it. I’m not going to be surprised when my growth starts to slow down, and I’m not going to continually throw myself against the wall trying to “eat through the plateau” only to diet down to the same size again and again.
I’m not saying I’m going to accept those estimated limits as factual ones… but I will program more intelligently as I approach/surpass them.[/quote]
Sounds like a smart approach. Most people don’t realize how big someone can truly be when they’re honestly carrying a lot of muscle, not simply a lot of ‘size’. It’s not meant to limit anyone by realizing what has been accomplished by others, it’s simply a useful guide. Before I ever stepped onstage, I made a list of guys who I thought looked impressive at similar heights. That gave me a ballpark of stats to measure myself against. It was never limiting, but instead something to strive to be better than.
Also, I’m not saying that everyone must diet down to competition levels of bodyfat in order to ascertain how much muscle they truly have, because it’s really a hell of a lot of work, and most people couldn’t do it. Rather, I am saying that everyone who has indeed toughed it out, and dieted down (slow, intelligently, and avoided the unnecessary loss of muscle that accompanies most poorly performed cuts) comes to a serious realization about how big they really weren’t. Those who are secure in their sense of self will usually admit to this reframing of their perceptions.
S[/quote]
This. All I was trying to do with this thread was show people what Top natty pros have done and what experts believe is possible fir the average…If u put on as much mass as top natty pros your doing something right. But like usual x has to come in and show us who’s got the biggest dick by claiming to have beaten all these top natty pros. Which is irrelevant anyway because he seems to forget the fact he isn’t natural, so he’s stats mean nothing in this thread. More to the point… Why are we discussing steroids in a thread specifically dedicated to nattys?
[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
More to the point… Why are we discussing steroids in a thread specifically dedicated to nattys? [/quote]
that was my fault and I apologize.
[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
More to the point… Why are we discussing steroids in a thread specifically dedicated to nattys? [/quote]
that was my fault and I apologize. [/quote]
Lol no probs.
[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]some_dude wrote:
Using those estimates, I now have a good idea what I can reasonably expect to achieve and how long it will take to achieve it. I’m not going to be surprised when my growth starts to slow down, and I’m not going to continually throw myself against the wall trying to “eat through the plateau” only to diet down to the same size again and again.
I’m not saying I’m going to accept those estimated limits as factual ones… but I will program more intelligently as I approach/surpass them.[/quote]
Sounds like a smart approach. Most people don’t realize how big someone can truly be when they’re honestly carrying a lot of muscle, not simply a lot of ‘size’. It’s not meant to limit anyone by realizing what has been accomplished by others, it’s simply a useful guide. Before I ever stepped onstage, I made a list of guys who I thought looked impressive at similar heights. That gave me a ballpark of stats to measure myself against. It was never limiting, but instead something to strive to be better than.
Also, I’m not saying that everyone must diet down to competition levels of bodyfat in order to ascertain how much muscle they truly have, because it’s really a hell of a lot of work, and most people couldn’t do it. Rather, I am saying that everyone who has indeed toughed it out, and dieted down (slow, intelligently, and avoided the unnecessary loss of muscle that accompanies most poorly performed cuts) comes to a serious realization about how big they really weren’t. Those who are secure in their sense of self will usually admit to this reframing of their perceptions.
S[/quote]
This. All I was trying to do with this thread was show people what Top natty pros have done and what experts believe is possible fir the average…If u put on as much mass as top natty pros your doing something right. But like usual x has to come in and show us who’s got the biggest dick by claiming to have beaten all these top natty pros. Which is irrelevant anyway because he seems to forget the fact he isn’t natural, so he’s stats mean nothing in this thread. More to the point… Why are we discussing steroids in a thread specifically dedicated to nattys? [/quote]
I have mentioned this elsewhere but disqualifying PX on his moderate use of pro hormones many many years ago seems harsh when I believe natty’s who admit to taking PED’s can compete when a certain duration of being clean has elapsed. A time limit incidentally that I think X has eclipsed by a good number of years.
I doubt very much that muscle gained over a very short run of pro hormones early in ones life would reflect on the physique of a competitor who has been clean for years and if that’s not the case then why aren’t nattys who admit even the most casual early use not handed out lifetime bans?
When I was a foolish young lad of thirteen or so I had a few weeks in that Summer of thinking it was cool as fuck to smoke but gave up my three a day habit very quickly. Yet I have never had any misgivings in later life of putting my name to any medical form claiming to be a none smoker and don’t think the residue of the cigarettes is lingering in my system or still doing harm to my lungs.
My point being that I would personally view someone who takes steroids over a very long period of time when lifting as not natural whilst someone who dabbled for a short length of time but was clean for most of his lifting career as a natty.
T-Nation threads make for entertaining reading.
You get a little bit of information on the first page if you’re lucky, after that it’s all shits and giggles.
[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]some_dude wrote:
Using those estimates, I now have a good idea what I can reasonably expect to achieve and how long it will take to achieve it. I’m not going to be surprised when my growth starts to slow down, and I’m not going to continually throw myself against the wall trying to “eat through the plateau” only to diet down to the same size again and again.
I’m not saying I’m going to accept those estimated limits as factual ones… but I will program more intelligently as I approach/surpass them.[/quote]
Sounds like a smart approach. Most people don’t realize how big someone can truly be when they’re honestly carrying a lot of muscle, not simply a lot of ‘size’. It’s not meant to limit anyone by realizing what has been accomplished by others, it’s simply a useful guide. Before I ever stepped onstage, I made a list of guys who I thought looked impressive at similar heights. That gave me a ballpark of stats to measure myself against. It was never limiting, but instead something to strive to be better than.
Also, I’m not saying that everyone must diet down to competition levels of bodyfat in order to ascertain how much muscle they truly have, because it’s really a hell of a lot of work, and most people couldn’t do it. Rather, I am saying that everyone who has indeed toughed it out, and dieted down (slow, intelligently, and avoided the unnecessary loss of muscle that accompanies most poorly performed cuts) comes to a serious realization about how big they really weren’t. Those who are secure in their sense of self will usually admit to this reframing of their perceptions.
S[/quote]
This. All I was trying to do with this thread was show people what Top natty pros have done and what experts believe is possible fir the average…If u put on as much mass as top natty pros your doing something right. But like usual x has to come in and show us who’s got the biggest dick by claiming to have beaten all these top natty pros. Which is irrelevant anyway because he seems to forget the fact he isn’t natural, so he’s stats mean nothing in this thread. More to the point… Why are we discussing steroids in a thread specifically dedicated to nattys? [/quote]
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
I consider myself an expert at drinking alcohol. I have numerous achievements and bro-titles in the natural un-assisted get shitfaced, puke my guts up and drink more and bang fat chicks awards. Me and my bro’s have come up with a table based on our extensive years of experience being douchebags in bars and clubs that scientifically proves how much alcohol you can drink in one night without ending up in bed with a fat chick based on your bodyweight. Many people have challenged our assertions over the years because they said they knew someone that drank 22 jager bombs, who weighed only 150lbs, in fifteen minutes and still didn’t bang a moose. We know because of our table that of course this is bullshit.
Nobody drinks 22 jager bombs in 15 minutes without banging a moose in the anus and throwing up in her face. Even if they use steroids.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Yes animal research doesn’t translate? Wow
And you expected studies of humans being injected with tren and estrogen? Again wow
Sorry I seemed like I was ignoring this post[/quote]
animal research does not translate.
I expected studies of humans being injected with tren and estrogen to Not be done, which is why I said such studies do not exist.
Do not twist my words… it’s painfully obvious that YOU are the one who hasn’t got a clue. [/quote]
Ok[/quote]
Ironic that this pissing contest is in a thread about natties? Not for T-Nation.[/quote]
Ironic he brought it up from a completely different thread and had to start talking about it here. But hey that’s why I love this place [/quote]
I brought it up here because earlier in this thread, you were bagging X for not backing up his claims when you made an outrageous claim about aas in the bodybuilding forum and refused to provide support for it… in other words, I was simply pointing out your hypocrisy.
you then had the audacity to state that I know nothing, when it is YOU who believes that animal studies somehow translate to human kind… it’s a good thing that few people here are versed in pharmacodynamics… or your reputation would have gone out the window with that one
unless you are a troll, I would highly suggest that you stay here at T-Nation and avoid posting on other…more serious boards… if you want your ego to stay intact.[/quote]
How do all drug studies start? Animal models? How many things like male/female endocrinology have no human studies only animal models? Many. Ok your right animal studies don’t translate. You win. [/quote]
Damn thats what I’ve been doing wrong.
I need tren, estrogen, and to start eating a shit load of grass.
Guess it’ll cut the food bill.
Well, this thread took quite a turn.
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
[/quote]
At 15% that would be 174lbs of LBM… which is pretty average among muscular men.
At 20% that’s 175lbs of LBM.
[quote]some_dude wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
[/quote]
At 15% that would be 174lbs of LBM… which is pretty average among muscular men.
[/quote]
maybe at an inch taller
[quote]some_dude wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
[/quote]
At 15% that would be 174lbs of LBM… which is pretty average among muscular men.
At 20% that’s 175lbs of LBM.[/quote]
there you go.
[quote]some_dude wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
[/quote]
At 15% that would be 174lbs of LBM… which is pretty average among muscular men.
At 20% that’s 175lbs of LBM.[/quote]
He is not 15% or even 20% in the photos I’ve seen of him.
Do you think that the fact you added 5% to his bodyfat level at the higher weight say anything about which side you picked before you posted?
[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:
[quote]some_dude wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
[/quote]
At 15% that would be 174lbs of LBM… which is pretty average among muscular men.
At 20% that’s 175lbs of LBM.[/quote]
there you go.[/quote]
Katie Sandwina
5 9 210 and female
Does she have less muscle, more or the same?
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
He is not 15% or even 20% in the photos I’ve seen of him.
Do you think that the fact you added 5% to his bodyfat level at the higher weight say anything about which side you picked before you posted?
[/quote]
I figured if he went up 20lbs he probably put on a bit of fat with it.
I also figured that by saying 15-20% I was being somewhat generous…
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
I consider myself an expert at drinking alcohol. I have numerous achievements and bro-titles in the natural un-assisted get shitfaced, puke my guts up and drink more and bang fat chicks awards. Me and my bro’s have come up with a table based on our extensive years of experience being douchebags in bars and clubs that scientifically proves how much alcohol you can drink in one night without ending up in bed with a fat chick based on your bodyweight. Many people have challenged our assertions over the years because they said they knew someone that drank 22 jager bombs, who weighed only 150lbs, in fifteen minutes and still didn’t bang a moose. We know because of our table that of course this is bullshit.
Nobody drinks 22 jager bombs in 15 minutes without banging a moose in the anus and throwing up in her face. Even if they use steroids.
[/quote]
…what…
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]some_dude wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
[/quote]
At 15% that would be 174lbs of LBM… which is pretty average among muscular men.
At 20% that’s 175lbs of LBM.[/quote]
He is not 15% or even 20% in the photos I’ve seen of him.
Do you think that the fact you added 5% to his bodyfat level at the higher weight say anything about which side you picked before you posted?
[/quote]
You’re an idiot.
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
I consider myself an expert at drinking alcohol. I have numerous achievements and bro-titles in the natural un-assisted get shitfaced, puke my guts up and drink more and bang fat chicks awards. Me and my bro’s have come up with a table based on our extensive years of experience being douchebags in bars and clubs that scientifically proves how much alcohol you can drink in one night without ending up in bed with a fat chick based on your bodyweight. Many people have challenged our assertions over the years because they said they knew someone that drank 22 jager bombs, who weighed only 150lbs, in fifteen minutes and still didn’t bang a moose. We know because of our table that of course this is bullshit.
Nobody drinks 22 jager bombs in 15 minutes without banging a moose in the anus and throwing up in her face. Even if they use steroids.
[/quote]
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]some_dude wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
[/quote]
At 15% that would be 174lbs of LBM… which is pretty average among muscular men.
At 20% that’s 175lbs of LBM.[/quote]
He is not 15% or even 20% in the photos I’ve seen of him.
Do you think that the fact you added 5% to his bodyfat level at the higher weight say anything about which side you picked before you posted?
[/quote]
I dont think Frank Zane was “as big as possible” but “as symmetric and big as possible”.
For example, (I am just throwing this out there - I have no clue about his training) if he wouldve done more squatting I think his hips and waist area would be bigger, same with glutes and probably overall leg mass. I dont think they are as big as possible compared to his big upperbody.
[quote]WhiteFlash wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
[quote]some_dude wrote:
[quote]MassiveGuns wrote:
20lbs outside the table, over 100 years ago, without protein shakes, creatine, steroids, slin or GH.
Apparently these people never existed and can’t possibly now because someone came up with a table.
[/quote]
At 15% that would be 174lbs of LBM… which is pretty average among muscular men.
At 20% that’s 175lbs of LBM.[/quote]
He is not 15% or even 20% in the photos I’ve seen of him.
Do you think that the fact you added 5% to his bodyfat level at the higher weight say anything about which side you picked before you posted?
[/quote]
You’re an idiot.
[/quote]