T Nation

80lb Lean Weight Gains?

[quote]LoRez wrote:
Is there actually any value to estimating one’s potential?[/quote]
No. All it does is set the bar low and create a built in excuse for failure.

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]blue9steel wrote:
Wait, so you’re suggesting a guy could start at 135lbs and become 300lbs while staying at 20% bf naturally? You realize that at that size he’d be bigger than someone like Jay Cutler right?[/quote]

I’m not suggesting anything. I’m asking, why aren’t these scenarios possible. That’s the most outlandish one. I have no idea if that would make him larger than Cutler or not. [/quote]

yes you are suggesting these things you moron.

who in the fuck is 135lbs and 20% bf???

how tall is this person???

no they could not go from 135lbs 20% bf to 210lbs at 10%. your other examples are equally ignorant.

i REALLY dont want to get involved in a back and forth with you again, but 1. you are just such an idiot 2. you wont stop stalking my posts so it makes it difficult :([/quote]

You’ve gotta be one of the biggest cunts on the planet.

I wasn’t suggesting anything. I used this thing called a question mark. A question mark annotates a question.

Plenty of people are 135 @ 20%. None of the options are ignorant you’re just a closed minded little shit. No one is stalking your posts. I’ve direct posts at you in three threads. Get over yourself. [/quote]

no one is going from 135 @20% to 210 @10%

this is as bad as your comments on ronda rousey

the fact that in your complete ignorance and idiocy you are so rude and aggressive just makes me shake my head

keep thinking you have a clue buddy
[/quote]

You don’t even know the definition of lean mass according to the authors who gave you the idea of an arbitrary limit in the first place.

What’s best is the fact that you perceive yourself being in a position to qualify the muscular gains of someone with a 700lb deadlift in his early twenties as if you’re both on the same genetic level.

I really don’t care for how true these limits are but the arrogance of some of you fuckers is seriously astounding.[/quote]

I’ve been posting on here for 7+ years and no one has come across as a bigger asshat than this guy with the exception of you know who.

[quote]blue9steel wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]blue9steel wrote:

[quote]This scenario seems plenty reasonable:
135 @ 20% = 27
225 @ 10% = 23
[/quote]

What are the starting height, ankle and wrist measurements for this hypothetical person?[/quote]

Why?[/quote]

Because without knowing the person’s frame size we can’t accurately estimate their potential growth. In general the taller you are and the bigger your frame then the bigger you can end up. Additionally, we need to know if the initial numbers make any sense. If we’re suggesting the guy is starting out at 135lbs, it makes a difference if he’s 5’3" or 6’8".

For example, Peter Dinklage (Tyrion Lannister from Game of Thrones), cool as he is, will never be 225lbs at 10% BF. His 4’5" height just won’t support that level of muscle mass. Using a single variable estimator based on past Mr. Olympias he would be about 125.8lbs in competition shape after about ten years of training, eating right and a small ocean of drugs. (assuming he also had excellent bodybuilding genetics) As a natural trainee, he’d be smaller than that. [/quote]

I understand the height part, but why the other measurements?

I don’t understand why you’re using past Mr. O’s as you estimator? Is that how you’re estimating potential growth?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]blue9steel wrote:
Wait, so you’re suggesting a guy could start at 135lbs and become 300lbs while staying at 20% bf naturally? You realize that at that size he’d be bigger than someone like Jay Cutler right?[/quote]

I’m not suggesting anything. I’m asking, why aren’t these scenarios possible. That’s the most outlandish one. I have no idea if that would make him larger than Cutler or not. [/quote]

yes you are suggesting these things you moron.

who in the fuck is 135lbs and 20% bf???

how tall is this person???

no they could not go from 135lbs 20% bf to 210lbs at 10%. your other examples are equally ignorant.

i REALLY dont want to get involved in a back and forth with you again, but 1. you are just such an idiot 2. you wont stop stalking my posts so it makes it difficult :([/quote]

You’ve gotta be one of the biggest cunts on the planet.

I wasn’t suggesting anything. I used this thing called a question mark. A question mark annotates a question.

Plenty of people are 135 @ 20%. None of the options are ignorant you’re just a closed minded little shit. No one is stalking your posts. I’ve direct posts at you in three threads. Get over yourself. [/quote]

no one is going from 135 @20% to 210 @10%

this is as bad as your comments on ronda rousey

the fact that in your complete ignorance and idiocy you are so rude and aggressive just makes me shake my head

keep thinking you have a clue buddy
[/quote]

You don’t even know the definition of lean mass according to the authors who gave you the idea of an arbitrary limit in the first place.

What’s best is the fact that you perceive yourself being in a position to qualify the muscular gains of someone with a 700lb deadlift in his early twenties as if you’re both on the same genetic level.

I really don’t care for how true these limits are but the arrogance of some of you fuckers is seriously astounding.[/quote]

I’ve been posting on here for 7+ years and no one has come across as a bigger asshat than this guy with the exception of you know who. [/quote]

omfg

  1. unless cparker is a genetic marvel the likes of which humanity has never before seen he has not gone from 200 to 275 as a natural with those 75 being “lean gains” neither is he now “decently lean” at 275 as a natural (by any reasonable definition).

honestly, again, how can this even be argued???

  1. no one is going from a starting point of adult male of average height as a natural starting from 135 at 20% bf to 210 at 10%.

people disagreeing with points 1 or 2 are either trolling or genuinely ignorant as to what these numbers mean in real life as opposed to some ridiculous theoretical online bs argument.

i train with a guy 5’10 210 10% who is a fucking tank and immensely strong (520 bench, 650 squat, 680 dead).

he has exceptional genetics for muscle. do you think such a person is REALLY (in the real world not in some ridiculous online scenario) going to be 135 at 20% bf prior to training as an adult??? no he’s naturally going to be quite built and pretty lean before even starting any training at all.

an actual 210 10% physique is fucking immense! jesus you are acting like it is no big deal at all.

seriously, rather than argue for the sake of it, think through what you are saying first.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]blue9steel wrote:
Wait, so you’re suggesting a guy could start at 135lbs and become 300lbs while staying at 20% bf naturally? You realize that at that size he’d be bigger than someone like Jay Cutler right?[/quote]

I’m not suggesting anything. I’m asking, why aren’t these scenarios possible. That’s the most outlandish one. I have no idea if that would make him larger than Cutler or not. [/quote]

yes you are suggesting these things you moron.

who in the fuck is 135lbs and 20% bf???

how tall is this person???

no they could not go from 135lbs 20% bf to 210lbs at 10%. your other examples are equally ignorant.

i REALLY dont want to get involved in a back and forth with you again, but 1. you are just such an idiot 2. you wont stop stalking my posts so it makes it difficult :([/quote]

You’ve gotta be one of the biggest cunts on the planet.

I wasn’t suggesting anything. I used this thing called a question mark. A question mark annotates a question.

Plenty of people are 135 @ 20%. None of the options are ignorant you’re just a closed minded little shit. No one is stalking your posts. I’ve direct posts at you in three threads. Get over yourself. [/quote]

no one is going from 135 @20% to 210 @10%

this is as bad as your comments on ronda rousey

the fact that in your complete ignorance and idiocy you are so rude and aggressive just makes me shake my head

keep thinking you have a clue buddy
[/quote]

You don’t even know the definition of lean mass according to the authors who gave you the idea of an arbitrary limit in the first place.

What’s best is the fact that you perceive yourself being in a position to qualify the muscular gains of someone with a 700lb deadlift in his early twenties as if you’re both on the same genetic level.

I really don’t care for how true these limits are but the arrogance of some of you fuckers is seriously astounding.[/quote]

I’ve been posting on here for 7+ years and no one has come across as a bigger asshat than this guy with the exception of you know who. [/quote]

Lol. We have a difference in opinion regarding “you know who”.

But this guy was probably one of those idiots who did nothing but constantly troll him under a different account at that time.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]blue9steel wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]blue9steel wrote:

[quote]This scenario seems plenty reasonable:
135 @ 20% = 27
225 @ 10% = 23
[/quote]

What are the starting height, ankle and wrist measurements for this hypothetical person?[/quote]

Why?[/quote]

Because without knowing the person’s frame size we can’t accurately estimate their potential growth. In general the taller you are and the bigger your frame then the bigger you can end up. Additionally, we need to know if the initial numbers make any sense. If we’re suggesting the guy is starting out at 135lbs, it makes a difference if he’s 5’3" or 6’8".

For example, Peter Dinklage (Tyrion Lannister from Game of Thrones), cool as he is, will never be 225lbs at 10% BF. His 4’5" height just won’t support that level of muscle mass. Using a single variable estimator based on past Mr. Olympias he would be about 125.8lbs in competition shape after about ten years of training, eating right and a small ocean of drugs. (assuming he also had excellent bodybuilding genetics) As a natural trainee, he’d be smaller than that. [/quote]

I understand the height part, but why the other measurements?

I don’t understand why you’re using past Mr. O’s as you estimator? Is that how you’re estimating potential growth?[/quote]

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]blue9steel wrote:
Wait, so you’re suggesting a guy could start at 135lbs and become 300lbs while staying at 20% bf naturally? You realize that at that size he’d be bigger than someone like Jay Cutler right?[/quote]

I’m not suggesting anything. I’m asking, why aren’t these scenarios possible. That’s the most outlandish one. I have no idea if that would make him larger than Cutler or not. [/quote]

yes you are suggesting these things you moron.

who in the fuck is 135lbs and 20% bf???

how tall is this person???

no they could not go from 135lbs 20% bf to 210lbs at 10%. your other examples are equally ignorant.

i REALLY dont want to get involved in a back and forth with you again, but 1. you are just such an idiot 2. you wont stop stalking my posts so it makes it difficult :([/quote]

You’ve gotta be one of the biggest cunts on the planet.

I wasn’t suggesting anything. I used this thing called a question mark. A question mark annotates a question.

Plenty of people are 135 @ 20%. None of the options are ignorant you’re just a closed minded little shit. No one is stalking your posts. I’ve direct posts at you in three threads. Get over yourself. [/quote]

no one is going from 135 @20% to 210 @10%

this is as bad as your comments on ronda rousey

the fact that in your complete ignorance and idiocy you are so rude and aggressive just makes me shake my head

keep thinking you have a clue buddy
[/quote]

You don’t even know the definition of lean mass according to the authors who gave you the idea of an arbitrary limit in the first place.

What’s best is the fact that you perceive yourself being in a position to qualify the muscular gains of someone with a 700lb deadlift in his early twenties as if you’re both on the same genetic level.

I really don’t care for how true these limits are but the arrogance of some of you fuckers is seriously astounding.[/quote]

I’ve been posting on here for 7+ years and no one has come across as a bigger asshat than this guy with the exception of you know who. [/quote]

Lol. We have a difference in opinion regarding “you know who”.

But this guy was probably one of those idiots who did nothing but constantly troll him under a different account at that time.[/quote]

Ah he was fine in my book. I never had an issue with him.

Thanks for the link.

[quote]TheCB wrote:

i train with a guy 5’10 210 10% who is a fucking tank and immensely strong (520 bench, 650 squat, 680 dead).

[/quote]
Who’s the exaggerator now? There are only 1 person in the country in the 220’s that have put up over 520 in competition in the last 12 months. And no 198’er has done 520 in the last 12 months. But you say your friend is putting up that. I call BS to you, not Cparker. I can see that he is relatively lean, and I assume he is not lying about being 275.


Im not sure why I keep responding probably cause I dont want to do home work, but I never really saw my results as outstanding or anything, I just saw them as my results. I’ve always had a pretty large frame, I have big wrists, ankles and my quads have always been developed even as a skinny teenager. Both of my older brothers are very large and strong individuals, my middle brother started powerlifting at 14 and by 15 pulled 512 in competition at 220-242 cant remember.

Also I stand by my decently lean statement as you can see here, 270 in this picture taken last fall. and im 6’1"

[quote]Ecchastang wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

i train with a guy 5’10 210 10% who is a fucking tank and immensely strong (520 bench, 650 squat, 680 dead).

[/quote]
Who’s the exaggerator now? There are only 1 person in the country in the 220’s that have put up over 520 in competition in the last 12 months. And no 198’er has done 520 in the last 12 months. But you say your friend is putting up that. I call BS to you, not Cparker. I can see that he is relatively lean, and I assume he is not lying about being 275. [/quote]

Lol, is that what he wrote? I just put him on ignore. He’s a joke.

“I know a guy…” lmfao. Well, case closed then.

[quote]cparker wrote:
Im not sure why I keep responding probably cause I dont want to do home work, but I never really saw my results as outstanding or anything, I just saw them as my results. I’ve always had a pretty large frame, I have big wrists, ankles and my quads have always been developed even as a skinny teenager. Both of my older brothers are very large and strong individuals, my middle brother started powerlifting at 14 and by 15 pulled 512 in competition at 220-242 cant remember.

Also I stand by my decently lean statement as you can see here, 270 in this picture taken last fall. and im 6’1"[/quote]

Decently lean is an apt enough description. You’re certainly not fat.

That cparker’s a big dude

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]blue9steel wrote:
Wait, so you’re suggesting a guy could start at 135lbs and become 300lbs while staying at 20% bf naturally? You realize that at that size he’d be bigger than someone like Jay Cutler right?[/quote]

I’m not suggesting anything. I’m asking, why aren’t these scenarios possible. That’s the most outlandish one. I have no idea if that would make him larger than Cutler or not. [/quote]

yes you are suggesting these things you moron.

who in the fuck is 135lbs and 20% bf???

how tall is this person???

no they could not go from 135lbs 20% bf to 210lbs at 10%. your other examples are equally ignorant.

i REALLY dont want to get involved in a back and forth with you again, but 1. you are just such an idiot 2. you wont stop stalking my posts so it makes it difficult :([/quote]

You’ve gotta be one of the biggest cunts on the planet.

I wasn’t suggesting anything. I used this thing called a question mark. A question mark annotates a question.

Plenty of people are 135 @ 20%. None of the options are ignorant you’re just a closed minded little shit. No one is stalking your posts. I’ve direct posts at you in three threads. Get over yourself. [/quote]

no one is going from 135 @20% to 210 @10%

this is as bad as your comments on ronda rousey

the fact that in your complete ignorance and idiocy you are so rude and aggressive just makes me shake my head

keep thinking you have a clue buddy
[/quote]

You don’t even know the definition of lean mass according to the authors who gave you the idea of an arbitrary limit in the first place.

What’s best is the fact that you perceive yourself being in a position to qualify the muscular gains of someone with a 700lb deadlift in his early twenties as if you’re both on the same genetic level.

I really don’t care for how true these limits are but the arrogance of some of you fuckers is seriously astounding.[/quote]

I’ve been posting on here for 7+ years and no one has come across as a bigger asshat than this guy with the exception of you know who. [/quote]

omfg

  1. unless cparker is a genetic marvel the likes of which humanity has never before seen he has not gone from 200 to 275 as a natural with those 75 being “lean gains” neither is he now “decently lean” at 275 as a natural (by any reasonable definition).

honestly, again, how can this even be argued???

  1. no one is going from a starting point of adult male of average height as a natural starting from 135 at 20% bf to 210 at 10%.

people disagreeing with points 1 or 2 are either trolling or genuinely ignorant as to what these numbers mean in real life as opposed to some ridiculous theoretical online bs argument.

i train with a guy 5’10 210 10% who is a fucking tank and immensely strong (520 bench, 650 squat, 680 dead).

he has exceptional genetics for muscle. do you think such a person is REALLY (in the real world not in some ridiculous online scenario) going to be 135 at 20% bf prior to training as an adult??? no he’s naturally going to be quite built and pretty lean before even starting any training at all.

an actual 210 10% physique is fucking immense! jesus you are acting like it is no big deal at all.

seriously, rather than argue for the sake of it, think through what you are saying first.
[/quote]

You just don’t get it, you dumb cunt.

It’s not about whether some questionable limit can or cannot be broken. It’s the fact that people like you can display such sheer arrogance by seeking to relegate the extent of human potential to a single formula.

This is how losers think. Losers who can’t stand the idea of someone exceling beyond a level they cannot possibly fathom.

[quote]dt79 wrote:
You just don’t get it, you dumb cunt.

It’s not about whether some questionable limit can or cannot be broken. It’s the fact that people like you can display such sheer arrogance by seeking to relegate the extent of human potential to a single formula.

This is how losers think. Losers who can’t stand the idea of someone exceling beyond a level they cannot possibly fathom.[/quote]

actually the conversation IS about whether some questionable limit (80lbs) can or cannot be broken.

“relegate the extent of human potential” lmfao get over yourself you pretentious ass hole.

why are you taking this personally do you have a cparker poster on your bedroom wall or something.

i have nothing against the kid he is very strong and well built kudos.

and save me your “this is how losers think” schtick ok son.

as far as me training with someone who is 210 and can bench 520 why on earth would i lie lmao?

i can post up one of his dozens of vids from ig one taken less than a week ago of 485 x2 but wtf is the point all il get is more fucking idiotic bullshit.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Oh God, please no. [/quote]

I legit lol’d at that.

[quote]TheCB wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
You just don’t get it, you dumb cunt.

It’s not about whether some questionable limit can or cannot be broken. It’s the fact that people like you can display such sheer arrogance by seeking to relegate the extent of human potential to a single formula.

This is how losers think. Losers who can’t stand the idea of someone exceling beyond a level they cannot possibly fathom.[/quote]

actually the conversation IS about whether some questionable limit (80lbs) can or cannot be broken.

“relegate the extent of human potential” lmfao get over yourself you pretentious ass hole.

why are you taking this personally do you have a cparker poster on your bedroom wall or something.

i have nothing against the kid he is very strong and well built kudos.

and save me your “this is how losers think” schtick ok son.

as far as me training with someone who is 210 and can bench 520 why on earth would i lie lmao?

i can post up one of his dozens of vids from ig one taken less than a week ago of 485 x2 but wtf is the point all il get is more fucking idiotic bullshit.[/quote]

I guess the shoe fits.

[quote]TheCB wrote:

as far as me training with someone who is 210 and can bench 520 why on earth would i lie lmao?

i can post up one of his dozens of vids from ig one taken less than a week ago of 485 x2 but wtf is the point all il get is more fucking idiotic bullshit.[/quote]
You would lie because it would attempt to validate your point. Lets see the vid.

[quote]Ecchastang wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

as far as me training with someone who is 210 and can bench 520 why on earth would i lie lmao?

i can post up one of his dozens of vids from ig one taken less than a week ago of 485 x2 but wtf is the point all il get is more fucking idiotic bullshit.[/quote]
You would lie because it would attempt to validate your point. Lets see the vid.[/quote]

lolololololololololol.

Don’t hold your breath Ecchastang.

So have we figured out the natural limit yet?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Ecchastang wrote:

[quote]TheCB wrote:

as far as me training with someone who is 210 and can bench 520 why on earth would i lie lmao?

i can post up one of his dozens of vids from ig one taken less than a week ago of 485 x2 but wtf is the point all il get is more fucking idiotic bullshit.[/quote]
You would lie because it would attempt to validate your point. Lets see the vid.[/quote]

lolololololololololol.

Don’t hold your breath Ecchastang. [/quote]

please put me on ignore i dont want you stalking and trolling all of my posts and im bored of arguing with you.

thanks.