[quote]ranengin wrote:
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
[quote]ranengin wrote:
Few (if any) top level sprinters are what I’d consider muscular.
[/quote]
You don’t have to be hyooge in order to qualify the term muscular[/quote]
Top level sprinters look more like A&E models.
[/quote]
you are a retard.
[quote]SamMcLoughin wrote:
[/quote]
#BURN
[quote]apocolypse wrote:
Out of the 8 pics you posted FIVE are of the same person (Harry Aikines-Aryeety) and I think the last guy is a football player.
lol GTFO.[/quote]
Firstly, I was saying there were jacked sprinters, not “here’s eight different jacked sprinters” and secondly the last guy is Michael Ray Garvin, he briefly played in the NFL and then the UFL, but prior to his football career:
“Garvin was also a seven-time All American sprinter and a member of the winning 4x100 relay team in the 2007 NCAA Outdoors. Garvin also nearly qualified for the Olympics placing in the semifinals of the Olympic Trials.”
So your whole point is based on nothing really.
[quote]apocolypse wrote:
[quote]ranengin wrote:
[quote]spar4tee wrote:
[quote]ranengin wrote:
Few (if any) top level sprinters are what I’d consider muscular.
[/quote]
You don’t have to be hyooge in order to qualify the term muscular[/quote]
Top level sprinters look more like A&E models.
[/quote]
you are a retard.[/quote]
And so is the idea that top level (olympic qualifying) sprinters are muscular.
Perhaps my idea of what qualifies as muscular is much higher than most peoples.
[quote]SamMcLoughin wrote:
[quote]apocolypse wrote:
Out of the 8 pics you posted FIVE are of the same person (Harry Aikines-Aryeety) and I think the last guy is a football player.
lol GTFO.[/quote]
Firstly, I was saying there were jacked sprinters, not “here’s eight different jacked sprinters” and secondly the last guy is Michael Ray Garvin, he briefly played in the NFL and then the UFL, but prior to his football career:
“Garvin was also a seven-time All American sprinter and a member of the winning 4x100 relay team in the 2007 NCAA Outdoors. Garvin also nearly qualified for the Olympics placing in the semifinals of the Olympic Trials.”
[/quote]
Sorry but your post sucked stop trying to justify it.
The point you were trying to make is correct though, there are/have been many muscular sprinters, it is completely moronic to argue against this fact.
[quote]ranengin wrote:
Perhaps my idea of what qualifies as muscular is much higher than most peoples.
[/quote]
Please post a pic of what your definition of muscular is.
[quote]apocolypse wrote:
[quote]ranengin wrote:
Perhaps my idea of what qualifies as muscular is much higher than most peoples.
[/quote]
Please post a pic of what your definition of muscular is.[/quote]
Please post a pic of a top level olympic qualifying sprinter (not some guy that doesn’t have a prayer of making it into the 100 meter finals) that you consider to be muscular.
Please either post your definition or stop embarrassing yourself and admit you are wrong. No doubt you will post a pic of Phil Heath or something based on your posts so far to prove how hardcore you are. Anyone less than the Mr O is a pencil neck wimp right?
[quote]apocolypse wrote:
Please either post your definition or stop embarrassing yourself and admit you are wrong. No doubt you will post a pic of Phil Heath or something based on your posts so far to prove how hardcore you are. Anyone less than the Mr O is a pencil neck wimp right?[/quote]
You consider Usain Bolt muscular? If so, I believe your standards are low.
C.T. (author/trainer/coach) associated with this site is a good example of someone I’d consider to be muscular (in his present condition).
Our ideas of what qualities as muscular are clearly different.
[quote]ranengin wrote:
Our ideas of what qualities as muscular are clearly different.
[/quote]
Guess so Mr Hardcore. Your idea is wrong and mine is correct. Before you say “it’s just my opinion so I can’t be wrong” yes you can and yes you are.
1992 100m champ
1996 100m champ
2000 100m champ
.
[quote]apocolypse wrote:
[quote]ranengin wrote:
Our ideas of what qualities as muscular are clearly different.
[/quote]
Guess so Mr Hardcore. Your idea is wrong and mine is correct. Before you say “it’s just my opinion so I can’t be wrong” yes you can and yes you are.
1992 100m champ
[/quote]
Guess what Mr Condescending Prick. My belief that few top level, Olympic qualifying, sprinters are what I’d consider muscular is correct.
There seem to be far more A&E looking top level sprinters (Usain Bolt is a perfect example).
[quote]apocolypse wrote:
2000 100m champ
[/quote]
Every pic you’ve posted so far could be for a male underwear advertisement.
A&E all the way.
[quote]ranengin wrote:
There seem to be far more A&E looking top level sprinters (Usain Bolt is a perfect example).[/quote]
Mr Hardcore - please enlighten me as to what the fuck “A&E looking” means? It’s not necessary to make terms up when you already do not understand what the term “muscular” means.
I have posted the best sprinters of the last 20 years and all of them are muscular, there is no more conclusive proof then that. Intentionally skewing the definition of “muscular” does nothing.
By your logic I could say anyone who is not an IFBB pro is not muscular. You are wrong, take your wrist wraps off and put your protein shake down and just admit it. Don’t want your cortisol rising it might impact on your gainz brah.
[quote]ranengin wrote:
Every pic you’ve posted so far could be for a male underwear advertisement.
A&E all the way. [/quote]
yeah cos this guy is not muscular either right?
.
[quote]apocolypse wrote:
[quote]ranengin wrote:
Every pic you’ve posted so far could be for a male underwear advertisement.
A&E all the way. [/quote]
yeah cos this guy is not muscular either right?[/quote]
Sorry Mr Condescending Prick, I don’t consider a 5’11 175 lbs lean guy muscular.
Try not to shit your tight panties over the matter.
