Layne’s usually about 230 at 5’10, which is pretty good for a natural who competes at about 200 (which is very impressive for a natty!)
S
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Layne’s usually about 230 at 5’10, which is pretty good for a natural who competes at about 200 (which is very impressive for a natty!)
S
[/quote]
But it doesn’t constitute HUGE so even though he’s an awesome bodybuilder, that sort of mindset has no business here. You MUST be willing to have 20% of your body’s mass consist of fat to have any credibility (note that really lean, well-conditioned guys never recommend this).
[quote]tw0scoops2 wrote:
I’m pretty sure Layne never got to his size by doing small bulks/cuts all his life.[/quote]
Exactly.
People will ask what some guy is doing RIGHT NOW…while ignoring what got them to where they are.
yeah, I may be doing higher reps now and holding my contractions more…but that isn’t what I did for 13 years before that when I gained most of the size in the first place.
I’ll just wait to see how huge guys get by going up and down in weight that often.
I will say that if anyone thinks it is a good idea to start yo-yo dieting that often and then keeping that up for decades is the healthier approach, I think they are fooling themselves.
Gaining and dieting every two weeks will have the majority of trainers running in circles for the long haul and it reduces the time the body has to get used to substantially higher body weights. Your body does NOT want to be extremely muscular. It will fight against it because huge amounts of muscle are not economically frugal in terms of energy expenditure. That means guys weighing all of 150lbs following that advice and expecting to end up a ripped 230+lbs as a result will be waiting a very long time.
Yea - cause Layne has never bulked any other way. Lol…
Go do some research to see that he did in fact get up to 240 or 250 (may have been even higher at some point)…
[quote]trextacy wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Layne’s usually about 230 at 5’10, which is pretty good for a natural who competes at about 200 (which is very impressive for a natty!)
S
[/quote]
But it doesn’t constitute HUGE so even though he’s an awesome bodybuilder, that sort of mindset has no business here. You MUST be willing to have 20% of your body’s mass consist of fat to have any credibility (note that really lean, well-conditioned guys never recommend this).
[/quote]
LOL. You are a riot! You know, in a not funny and pathetic sort of way.
[quote]trextacy wrote:
But it doesn’t constitute HUGE so even though he’s an awesome bodybuilder, that sort of mindset has no business here. You MUST be willing to have 20% of your body’s mass consist of fat to have any credibility (note that really lean, well-conditioned guys never recommend this).
[/quote]
You need 20% BF to be credible for muscle gain?
Now my head hurts from confusion.
[quote]silverhydra wrote:
[quote]trextacy wrote:
But it doesn’t constitute HUGE so even though he’s an awesome bodybuilder, that sort of mindset has no business here. You MUST be willing to have 20% of your body’s mass consist of fat to have any credibility (note that really lean, well-conditioned guys never recommend this).
[/quote]
You need 20% BF to be credible for muscle gain?
Now my head hurts from confusion.
[/quote]
I heard it was 21.03% BF.
[quote]bonerjams98 wrote:
[quote]silverhydra wrote:
[quote]trextacy wrote:
But it doesn’t constitute HUGE so even though he’s an awesome bodybuilder, that sort of mindset has no business here. You MUST be willing to have 20% of your body’s mass consist of fat to have any credibility (note that really lean, well-conditioned guys never recommend this).
[/quote]
You need 20% BF to be credible for muscle gain?
Now my head hurts from confusion.
[/quote]
I heard it was 21.03% BF.
[/quote]
If a shoe is being held then it may be 19.012055.