What Naturals are Truly Capable of...

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If some chart or equation on a website is going to make you give up on your goal of building the best physique you can, you didn’t have what it would take to be your best anyway.[/quote]

Truth. [/quote]

Bullshit. People believe what most people believe…until someone challenges it. If you really think “perceived limits” can’t hold people back, you don’t understand the human condition.

Not only that, but look at the backlash if ANYONE claims they passed this supposed “limit”.

It isn’t like some of you don’t go all out to disprove anyone who says they do it…and clearly this is because you all aren’t holding anyone back.

Crabs in a bucket.[/quote]

Uh, if someone claims to have passed the limit, and isn’t just full of shit, but is telling the truth, than it’s proof they weren’t limited.[/quote]

It is also proof that many of you believe in these limits even beyond what is right in front of you.

…and not only will you believe them, you will fight tooth and nail to make sure they hold if anyone even comes close to it.

It is one thing to hold a belief personal…and quite another to try as hard as some here do to discredit anyone who challenges it.[/quote]

How about challenging it with evidence?
[/quote]

Did that already. I got told that caliper readings are now invalid.[/quote]

I got calipered at 8% at 220. So…[/quote]

Interested by this. I sent you an email.

[quote]iDrDan wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
If some chart or equation on a website is going to make you give up on your goal of building the best physique you can, you didn’t have what it would take to be your best anyway.[/quote]

Truth. [/quote]

Bullshit. People believe what most people believe…until someone challenges it. If you really think “perceived limits” can’t hold people back, you don’t understand the human condition.

Not only that, but look at the backlash if ANYONE claims they passed this supposed “limit”.

It isn’t like some of you don’t go all out to disprove anyone who says they do it…and clearly this is because you all aren’t holding anyone back.

Crabs in a bucket.[/quote]

Uh, if someone claims to have passed the limit, and isn’t just full of shit, but is telling the truth, than it’s proof they weren’t limited.[/quote]

It is also proof that many of you believe in these limits even beyond what is right in front of you.

…and not only will you believe them, you will fight tooth and nail to make sure they hold if anyone even comes close to it.

It is one thing to hold a belief personal…and quite another to try as hard as some here do to discredit anyone who challenges it.[/quote]

How about challenging it with evidence?
[/quote]

Did that already. I got told that caliper readings are now invalid.[/quote]

I got calipered at 8% at 220. So…[/quote]

Interested by this. I sent you an email.[/quote]

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[/quote]

Serious question, doesnt the variance increase/decrease with the person administring the test?

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[/quote]
That’s probably the allowance for mechanical error and not including human error

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[/quote]

Serious question, doesnt the variance increase/decrease with the person administring the test? [/quote]

This is from the book called methods of BF testing…

Skinfold Testing
The most common body fat test uses the skinfold caliper, a device that pinches your skin, pulling your fat away from your muscles and bones. You feel moderate discomfort, like when someone pinches your cheek. Typically the tester pinches three or four different sites on your body, such as your abdomen, arm, and back. The thickness of each pinch is plugged into a formula to determine your subcutaneous body fat level.

Many things can go wrong with a caliper test. The tester may not pinch exactly the right spot, or he may not pull all the fat away from the muscle. Or he may pinch too hard and accidentally yank some of your muscle. The calipers must exert a standard pressure and measure thickness to very small levels. Tests can vary greatly from tester to tester. Also, research shows that certain formulas are more accurate for certain ethnic groups, age ranges, and fitness levels.

Experts give this test a margin of error of four points, meaning your actual body fat percentage could be four points higher or lower than it actually is. Also tests show this test is accurate for about 90% of the population, when using the appropriate formulas. In laymen’s terms, if you are one of the lucky 9 out of 10, and your body fat measures 12% - it could really be anywhere from 8% to 16%. If you are the one in 10 (for example you are very lean or your body fat exceeds 30%) then all bets are off We have seem errors run as high as 10%.

Because of the consistency in results, the high percentage of people that this test is successful for, and the low margin of error, this is generally accepted as the best field test, outside of clinical testing such as hydrostatic, DEXA, and MRI.

For Optimal Results in Skinfold Measuring, the following protocol must be followed:
All technicians must participate at a workshop where they spend considerable time learning the exact sites and technique and then after practice all participants actually do an interclass correlation on a minimum of 15 subjects to determine their test-retest reliability at each of the seven sites. Jackson-Pollack sum of 4 equations. They are also taught that the caliper must be Lange or Harpenden. Jackson found .98 inter-tester correlations, indicating that if I’m good (reliable) and you’re good, then my measurement of an individual will be identical to yours. The workshops back this up by UWW. Depending on technique, obese individuals (>35%) can have skinfold tests done on them successfully. This assumes a two handed technique.
The problem lies in that very, very few technicians go to this extent to perfect their technique.

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[/quote]
That’s probably the allowance for mechanical error and not including human error[/quote]

That is why the only 100% way to prove body fat is autopsy,

Even underwater weighing has a margin for error.

That is also why the number itself is less important than the progress seen between readings if that is the goal.

No one will know exactly where they stand…until they die.

Focus on how you look.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[/quote]
That’s probably the allowance for mechanical error and not including human error[/quote]

That is why the only 100% way to prove body fat is autopsy,

Even underwater weighing has a margin for error.

That is also why the number itself is less important than the progress seen between readings if that is the goal.

No one will know exactly where they stand…until they die.

Focus on how you look.[/quote]
That is true. My appearance is all I really care about where bodyfat is concerned.

What the flying fuck happened?
To all those that were actively involved in this clusterfuck of a shitstorm come back to this thread in 2 weeks and read what you wrote.
Please then make a logical summary of what this fucktardedly long debate was about.
Please then decide if it was the best use of your time to participate in that debate.

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[/quote]
That’s probably the allowance for mechanical error and not including human error[/quote]

That is why the only 100% way to prove body fat is autopsy,

Even underwater weighing has a margin for error.

That is also why the number itself is less important than the progress seen between readings if that is the goal.

No one will know exactly where they stand…until they die.

Focus on how you look.[/quote]
That is true. My appearance is all I really care about where bodyfat is concerned.[/quote]

Agreed I could give less shits what the actual number is. It’s how I look

If I look fat I am fat if I am lean then I am lean. Bf Numbers don’t matter just like the scale doesn’t matter.

[quote]Iron_Made wrote:
What the flying fuck happened?
To all those that were actively involved in this clusterfuck of a shitstorm come back to this thread in 2 weeks and read what you wrote.
Please then make a logical summary of what this fucktardedly long debate was about.
Please then decide if it was the best use of your time to participate in that debate.[/quote]

Lol was it worth your time to read it then post this?

I had a great time during that debate and was doing it winkle watching some tv. No skin off my back

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[/quote]
That’s probably the allowance for mechanical error and not including human error[/quote]

That is why the only 100% way to prove body fat is autopsy,

Even underwater weighing has a margin for error.

That is also why the number itself is less important than the progress seen between readings if that is the goal.

No one will know exactly where they stand…until they die.

Focus on how you look.[/quote]
That is true. My appearance is all I really care about where bodyfat is concerned.[/quote]

Agreed I could give less shits what the actual number is. It’s how I look

If I look fat I am fat if I am lean then I am lean. Bf Numbers don’t matter just like the scale doesn’t matter. [/quote]
To be fair, the scale matters to me but only when I’m going to compete and even then not that much lol

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]Iron_Made wrote:
What the flying fuck happened?
To all those that were actively involved in this clusterfuck of a shitstorm come back to this thread in 2 weeks and read what you wrote.
Please then make a logical summary of what this fucktardedly long debate was about.
Please then decide if it was the best use of your time to participate in that debate.[/quote]

Lol was it worth your time to read it then post this?

I had a great time during that debate and was doing it winkle watching some tv. No skin off my back[/quote]
Yeah it definitely diminished my boredom

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]spar4tee wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

I will have to go look for it I use a diff email mostly now

My point was I don’t believe I am 8%. 10 if I am lucky. Showing calipers are in accurate even when you are lower bf but worse as you get fatter.

Though I am happy been at 220 for a month and waist has slowly been coming down. It’s a bit smaller than last summer when I was 205
[/quote]

Calipers have about a 3% differential for error.

[/quote]
That’s probably the allowance for mechanical error and not including human error[/quote]

That is why the only 100% way to prove body fat is autopsy,

Even underwater weighing has a margin for error.

That is also why the number itself is less important than the progress seen between readings if that is the goal.

No one will know exactly where they stand…until they die.

Focus on how you look.[/quote]
That is true. My appearance is all I really care about where bodyfat is concerned.[/quote]

Agreed I could give less shits what the actual number is. It’s how I look

If I look fat I am fat if I am lean then I am lean. Bf Numbers don’t matter just like the scale doesn’t matter. [/quote]
To be fair, the scale matters to me but only when I’m going to compete and even then not that much lol[/quote]

Damnit forgot to specify unless competeting in a weight class

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
For a newb I would reccomend a strength split and learning how to track food. Get that engrained early. Teach them good choices for food first then slowly transition to iifym if they can handle it. Then basically give them a bunch of templates and tell them to experiment and they like and progress with. [/quote]

what would be an example of this strength split?

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
For a newb I would reccomend a strength split and learning how to track food. Get that engrained early. Teach them good choices for food first then slowly transition to iifym if they can handle it. Then basically give them a bunch of templates and tell them to experiment and they like and progress with. [/quote]

what would be an example of this strength split?[/quote]

Starting strength, 5,3,1 ect so many have been posted. Or make your own but focusing on a couple lifts for strength and a couple accessories.

I would end up,doing very close to what the two free trainers here did. Lots of questions to find preferences and go from there

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
For a newb I would reccomend a strength split and learning how to track food. Get that engrained early. Teach them good choices for food first then slowly transition to iifym if they can handle it. Then basically give them a bunch of templates and tell them to experiment and they like and progress with. [/quote]

what would be an example of this strength split?[/quote]

Starting strength, 5,3,1 ect so many have been posted. Or make your own but focusing on a couple lifts for strength and a couple accessories.

I would end up,doing very close to what the two free trainers here did. Lots of questions to find preferences and go from there [/quote]

just for the example sake.

stats
6’0
160lb
18years old
no previous weight training experience.

how would you go about setting up his first say 1-2 years of lifting?

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
For a newb I would reccomend a strength split and learning how to track food. Get that engrained early. Teach them good choices for food first then slowly transition to iifym if they can handle it. Then basically give them a bunch of templates and tell them to experiment and they like and progress with. [/quote]

what would be an example of this strength split?[/quote]

Starting strength, 5,3,1 ect so many have been posted. Or make your own but focusing on a couple lifts for strength and a couple accessories.

I would end up,doing very close to what the two free trainers here did. Lots of questions to find preferences and go from there [/quote]

just for the example sake.

stats
6’0
160lb
18years old
no previous weight training experience.

how would you go about setting up his first say 1-2 years of lifting?[/quote]

Goals?

Also why are we doing this?

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]ryan.b_96 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
For a newb I would reccomend a strength split and learning how to track food. Get that engrained early. Teach them good choices for food first then slowly transition to iifym if they can handle it. Then basically give them a bunch of templates and tell them to experiment and they like and progress with. [/quote]

what would be an example of this strength split?[/quote]

Starting strength, 5,3,1 ect so many have been posted. Or make your own but focusing on a couple lifts for strength and a couple accessories.

I would end up,doing very close to what the two free trainers here did. Lots of questions to find preferences and go from there [/quote]

just for the example sake.

stats
6’0
160lb
18years old
no previous weight training experience.

how would you go about setting up his first say 1-2 years of lifting?[/quote]
First, learn how to perform the lifts properly. Assuming I wasn’t engaging him in person, I’d point him towards brief video tutorials but nothing too elaborate. I’d encourage him to do a little research on the larger musculature of the body. I’d actually have him perform a bodyweight scheme in conjunction with his lifting that he should be able to do at home. From there, I’ve have him run something similar to Starting Strength with modifications.