What Naturals are Truly Capable of...

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]TheDon12 wrote:
And yeah most guys dont want to be contest shape ready(3-5 percent) but dont get it twisted. Most guys who get into lifting do want to have that beach body look of 10-12 percent bodyfat.

[/quote]

This is also subjective. Depends on how they store fat. Some people can have visable abs at 12, same cant until less than 9. I think the average gym goer doesnt shoot for a set percentage number, rather a degree of confidence and lack of insecurity with their shirt off.

[/quote]

Thats why i didnt give a specific bodyfat level. What im trying to get at most people want to be relatively lean.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

This is individual.

No matter what, it still usually would take less time than the years it takes to really get very muscular.

[/quote]

I agree with that statement on it’s own. The context I am refering to is the combination of size and leaness. To get lean isnt that impressive or hard without the pressense of developed muscle underneath which usually takes significant time to build. Just needs to be held in respect that every pound of fat gained during that phase is a week or more less away from end product goal(if being lean is your goal).

Yup. Muscle needs calories to exist we all know this. So 7 lbs of more muscle is one extra poptart a day

[quote]

But that’s the point
to get the respectable size for most will likely cause many to not remain super lean to pull it off.

No one I saying fat loss is EASY. It is said it takes way less time than gaining an extreme build.[/quote]

Agree with the first statement, the second I have a harder time with. I think you can litterally have your cake and eat it too if you stay leaner when gaining. Dieting is fast than gaining but still takes a long time, time away from gaining. If ones goal is to look good and continually look better in the quest for the end product i feel the time it takes to lose fat cant be overlooked. If one simply wants to use ‘the ends justifies the means’ approach then you are correct.

I personally would like to always look good 90% of the time than look ‘better’ than that version only 10% of the time in my life.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

This response is illogical.

[/quote]

Sorry, PX, this response is a sci-fi faux pas. Smashingweights has already set the precedence that this forum is “Star Wars” referenced, not Star Trek.

Tsk, tsk.

Please try again. May I recommend trying to respond with ‘calculating odds’ or using the phrase ‘Dispense with the 
’

Pew! Pew!

Thanks and farewell, Padawan.

Steely D Kenobi[/quote]
These are not the arguments you are looking for.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

Can we stop ripping on the group of guys who chose to gain in a different way than you or I does?
[/quote]

I think the question was posed
who has gained more muscle.

If the guys who bulked up gained more muscle, how is this “ripping on guys who chose to gain different”?[/quote]
I’m not going to argue with you.
Everyone on this site knows your stance and your MO.
I offered an olive branch[/quote]

This response is illogical.

[/quote]
The reading comprehension isn’t strong with this one.

One more

And like the dreaded Death Stair Master, this thread is done.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
By this point, we all know what X’s approach to training was and we all know his opinion on matters such as how well the top competitive natural bodybuilders have done and it’s lack of relevance to everyone else.[/quote]

How do you know its relevance to everyone else? You seem to think you speak for the majority.

Simply put, most people don’t give a flying piss in the wind about ever competing
so even using that as the only standard is where you lose relevance.[/quote]

Wow, all I typed was that you’ve already made known your opinion of competitive bodybuilding and it’s “lack of relevance to everyone” and you still manage to start arguing that -lol. Seriously, I couldn’t make up this stuff.

[quote]

Wow. If that is the case, you blame those people doing that. I post on this site in my spare time. If that has literally changed this forum and threatened so many
should I be ashamed or proud? I personally think it is crazy if anyone is supporting those who act like that
like you seem to be.[/quote]

I’m not quite sure what your reply here actually means. I don’t think I’m taking a malicious stance in pointing out that most of your replies in any thread all seem to move in the same direction (as of my present typing, I just finished reading someone else pointing out how you’ve gotten your threads confused,
 funny that). Nor, is it some indication that people here are “threatened” by you (you like throwing that around a lot,
 threatened, jealous, want you shut you up
) because I’ve seen the site referenced elsewhere in less than flattering terms due to your very obvious polarizing presence.

As to whether you should be ashamed or proud of that is entirely your call, but I have a sneaky suspicion I know how it’ll go.

S

I think the natural limit for the average healthy man is much higher than a lot of people believe.

I emphasise healthy, because most people are exposed to so much cr*p in their environment & food, that compared to pre history, we are unhealthy from a young age. Look at how endemic low testosterone is nowadays - in fact I’ve been prescribed TRT for 3 years now.

From thousands of years ago a hard physical life from birth, without the aid of many labour saving tools, is thought to have made the average person stronger than today’s elite athletes.

If you add in military training & the heavy weapons that were used, great strength & physiques were average.

I say “great strength & physiques” but really they weren’t “great” - it is simply that today most people are weak from a sedentary/easy lifestyle from birth. I emphasise that includes me too haha!!

If you don’t believe me, compare your grip strength to that of a 50 year old scaffold worker who’s never been in a gym :smiley:

I used to think the Greek statues were exaggerations of real people, but now believe they are simply representations of quite common athletes/military men.

I’m going to put this belief to the test quite soon by starting construction labouring & seeing what it does for my strength & physique.

The thread on “600lb deadlift possible for everyone” has some great comments in, in particular one about men working as Longshoremen routinely pulling 500lbs the first time they’re in a gym.

Have a read of this article on bone density scans of ancient women & how strong they likely were:

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/relay.nationalgeographic.com/proxy/distribution/public/amp/2017/11/prehistoric-women-manual-labor-stronger-athletes-science

Come for the 5 year thread bump, stay for the remnants of Professor X attempting to impose his idea of what “bodybuilding” is in everyone, including actual competitive bodybuilders.

2 Likes

This thread should be retitled:

“How Much Whining Naturals are Truly Capable of”.

6 Likes

Would genuinely love to see where PX is at physique wise now

If you actually read the thread for the first hundred or so replies, it was a really good topic with some good insights for a brief while.

S

1 Like

It seems like a lot of threads back then turned into:

  • PX arguing with people

  • PX insisting some guys were so genetically gifted they looked like Sergio Olivia just from playing basketball and eating chicken

Well one cannot say he was not opinionated
lol

1 Like

It’s just as painful to read the third, fourth, fifth time as it was to live it.

btw, did we every determine whether you pre-exhaust the prime movers so that the stabilizers get more or a work out or vice-versa?

3 Likes

both.

/thread

1 Like