Ripped to Shreds in One Month

Bigger Stronger Leaner
21

[quote]jppage wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
^ I fuckin’ love this guy. He’s like Interpol, he’s got a dossier on everyone.[/quote]

X2.You cant hide from CC haha I love it.[/quote]
Ha, thanks, I guess. But it’s not quite as creepy as that sounds.

As a trainer, one of the first things you do with a new client is get their health and training history so you know what you’re dealing with.

To me, if I’m going to try answering a question, it just makes sense to click Hub and check age, height, weight, and bodyfat (understanding that those are all self-reported and may not be accurate, including age) and click Post History to see if they’ve mentioned anything remotely relevant in the past.

I just want to check the bigger picture before diving into a question. It doesn’t take that long to skim a post history and get an idea of what’s what. If the poster’s name is familiar and we’ve interacted before, even easier.

22

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
^ I fuckin’ love this guy. He’s like Interpol, he’s got a dossier on everyone.[/quote]

I’ll take that challenge… Chris see if you can do me next!

Though good call on the research. He’s like the Sherlock Holmes of T-Nation.[/quote]
Trick question.

In your 800+ posts over the last two and a half months, I didn’t see you ask any training or diet questions. At least, not in a new thread you’d started. So carry on, Watson, and keep doing whatever you’re doing. :wink:

23

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:

[quote]jppage wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
^ I fuckin’ love this guy. He’s like Interpol, he’s got a dossier on everyone.[/quote]

X2.You cant hide from CC haha I love it.[/quote]
Ha, thanks, I guess. But it’s not quite as creepy as that sounds.

As a trainer, one of the first things you do with a new client is get their health and training history so you know what you’re dealing with. To me, if I’m going to try answering a question, it just makes sense to click Hub and check age, height, weight, and bodyfat (understanding that those are all self-reported and may not be accurate, including age) and click Post History to see if they’ve mentioned anything remotely relevant in the past.

I just want to check the bigger picture before diving into a question. It doesn’t take that long to skim a post history and get an idea of what’s what. If the poster’s name is familiar and we’ve interacted before, even easier.[/quote]

I’m glad you touched on this, because I feel like that’s a huge problem with a lot of these advice threads; no consideration of the individual. It usually ends up turning into a strange philosophical question taken at face value, and inevitably, you’ll get posts supporting both sides.

24

[quote]Death Dealer wrote:
If your goal is to perform better why are you planning a strict diet? Wouldn’t it more efficient to improve your conditioning?[/quote]

THIS!!

25

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
Aim for no more than 2lbs per week[/quote]
But what if your body is primed to lose 5-10 pounds that week? Using blanket statements like this doesn’t take GENETICS into account.

As if all the leanest guys out there all subscribed to this “no more than 2 pounds” rule/limit. I guess they got that lean on accident. This isn’t even science.

I must be doing it wrong.[/quote]

Lol (damn chicken all over my computer screen at work)

S

26

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
Aim for no more than 2lbs per week[/quote]
But what if your body is primed to lose 5-10 pounds that week? Using blanket statements like this doesn’t take GENETICS into account.

As if all the leanest guys out there all subscribed to this “no more than 2 pounds” rule/limit. I guess they got that lean on accident. This isn’t even science.

I must be doing it wrong.[/quote]

Literally laughing out loud, well played Greg!

27

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:

[quote]jppage wrote:

[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
^ I fuckin’ love this guy. He’s like Interpol, he’s got a dossier on everyone.[/quote]

X2.You cant hide from CC haha I love it.[/quote]
Ha, thanks, I guess. But it’s not quite as creepy as that sounds.

As a trainer, one of the first things you do with a new client is get their health and training history so you know what you’re dealing with. To me, if I’m going to try answering a question, it just makes sense to click Hub and check age, height, weight, and bodyfat (understanding that those are all self-reported and may not be accurate, including age) and click Post History to see if they’ve mentioned anything remotely relevant in the past.

I just want to check the bigger picture before diving into a question. It doesn’t take that long to skim a post history and get an idea of what’s what. If the poster’s name is familiar and we’ve interacted before, even easier.[/quote]

I’m glad you touched on this, because I feel like that’s a huge problem with a lot of these advice threads; no consideration of the individual. It usually ends up turning into a strange philosophical question taken at face value, and inevitably, you’ll get posts supporting both sides.[/quote]

Most of the times the OP’s of these advice threads have massive inconsistencies in multiple advice related threads, probably some do to false posturing so an accurate assessment is next to impossible for them. Also, I think a lot of them have these bizarre preconceived notions about what will work and post simply to get vindication for it. When they get “No that’s dumb, don’t do that” advice they get all defensive and pretty well show their true intentions. Chris does a great job calling guys out on this, I think a lot because he spends a lot of time in the beginners section really helping guys out. Seems like he kind of gets a feel for some of these guys over there (I cyber-stalk him a little in that forum because he gives good advice with an occasional call-out thread.)

28

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
Aim for no more than 2lbs per week[/quote]
But what if your body is primed to lose 5-10 pounds that week? Using blanket statements like this doesn’t take GENETICS into account.

As if all the leanest guys out there all subscribed to this “no more than 2 pounds” rule/limit. I guess they got that lean on accident. This isn’t even science.

I must be doing it wrong.[/quote]

Good to be back, eh?

29

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:

I’m glad you touched on this, because I feel like that’s a huge problem with a lot of these advice threads; no consideration of the individual. It usually ends up turning into a strange philosophical question taken at face value, and inevitably, you’ll get posts supporting both sides.[/quote]

I think in a forum situation, you end up with one of two types of ‘advice’ threads.

The first one is pretty much people spitballing ideas. They offer up options that they themselves may have used to address what may be similar preceived problems, in hopes that the OP will find soemthing they haven’t thought of and apply it to their own training in an intelligent and logical manner (not always the case though).

The second one, is where the OP actually gives a whole lot of background info, and is lucky enough to have one of the more experienced folks on here dissect what the problem may indeed be. Chris is great at this, because he cares enough to really push for the tiny details (he’s really the ‘hero’ of the beginners section IMO).

Still, even if you do get posts supporting ‘both sides’ of an approach, you kinda hope that the information being provided is enough to help those inquiring to formulate their own opinions. The old “it worked for me” proof only stands up so far as how much you’re actually impressed by the poster offering said advice.

S

30

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:

I’m glad you touched on this, because I feel like that’s a huge problem with a lot of these advice threads; no consideration of the individual. It usually ends up turning into a strange philosophical question taken at face value, and inevitably, you’ll get posts supporting both sides.[/quote]

I think in a forum situation, you end up with one of two types of ‘advice’ threads.

The first one is pretty much people spitballing ideas. They offer up options that they themselves may have used to address what may be similar preceived problems, in hopes that the OP will find soemthing they haven’t thought of and apply it to their own training in an intelligent and logical manner (not always the case though).

The second one, is where the OP actually gives a whole lot of background info, and is lucky enough to have one of the more experienced folks on here dissect what the problem may indeed be. Chris is great at this, because he cares enough to really push for the tiny details (he’s really the ‘hero’ of the beginners section IMO).

Still, even if you do get posts supporting ‘both sides’ of an approach, you kinda hope that the information being provided is enough to help those inquiring to formulate their own opinions. The old “it worked for me” proof only stands up so far as how much you’re actually impressed by the poster offering said advice.

S[/quote]

Yeah, I’d agree. Also, I didn’t mean for it to sound like there isn’t good advice to be found here, because that’s the exact opposite of my position. A lot of you guys give great advice, for free no less. I just mean, like you stated above, that many of the people asking questions don’t give enough information for anyone to give an informed opinion.

Obviously, if you or Chris (or any other seasoned poster/trainer) gives advice, the OP ought to take it under consideration regardless of the circumstances. It just kind of baffles me when people ask questions like, “can I run Smolov concurrently with WS4SB while on a 1000kCal daily defecit?”

Sure enough, there will always be somebody who responds, “yeah, buddy. Enjoy your gainz.” But like you said, it goes back to the credibility of the advice-giver. I just wonder if a newb asking questions on the forum can make those distinctions at this point.

31

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]Mad Martigan wrote:

I’m glad you touched on this, because I feel like that’s a huge problem with a lot of these advice threads; no consideration of the individual. It usually ends up turning into a strange philosophical question taken at face value, and inevitably, you’ll get posts supporting both sides.[/quote]

I think in a forum situation, you end up with one of two types of ‘advice’ threads.

The first one is pretty much people spitballing ideas. They offer up options that they themselves may have used to address what may be similar preceived problems, in hopes that the OP will find soemthing they haven’t thought of and apply it to their own training in an intelligent and logical manner (not always the case though).

The second one, is where the OP actually gives a whole lot of background info, and is lucky enough to have one of the more experienced folks on here dissect what the problem may indeed be. Chris is great at this, because he cares enough to really push for the tiny details (he’s really the ‘hero’ of the beginners section IMO).

Still, even if you do get posts supporting ‘both sides’ of an approach, you kinda hope that the information being provided is enough to help those inquiring to formulate their own opinions. The old “it worked for me” proof only stands up so far as how much you’re actually impressed by the poster offering said advice.

S[/quote]

Yeah, I’d agree. Also, I didn’t mean for it to sound like there isn’t good advice to be found here, because that’s the exact opposite of my position. A lot of you guys give great advice, for free no less. I just mean, like you stated above, that many of the people asking questions don’t give enough information for anyone to give an informed opinion.

Obviously, if you or Chris (or any other seasoned poster/trainer) gives advice, the OP ought to take it under consideration regardless of the circumstances. It just kind of baffles me when people ask questions like, “can I run Smolov concurrently with WS4SB while on a 1000kCal daily defecit?”

Sure enough, there will always be somebody who responds, “yeah, buddy. Enjoy your gainz.” But like you said, it goes back to the credibility of the advice-giver. I just wonder if a newb asking questions on the forum can make those distinctions at this point.

[/quote]
The best thread are the ones that ask “can I run Smolov concurrently with WS4SB while on a 1000kCal daily defecit?”. Chris or someone else says, “No, that’s stupid. Do this instead.”

OP then proceeds to inform Chris why the plan he proposed will not work for him because he is a special flower and this dude his first cousins sister knows read in a magazine about an online workout guru that said Smolov with WS4SB assistance and 1000kCal deficit is the ideal way to get ripped and gorilla strong in a month.

32

Many thanks for the nods, guys. I do get that my “style” of background checking isn’t for everyone. Whatever leads to useful advice, and ideally minimal confusion, for any given OP is really the bottomline.

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I think in a forum situation, you end up with one of two types of ‘advice’ threads.

The first one is pretty much people spitballing ideas. They offer up options that they themselves may have used to address what may be similar preceived problems, in hopes that the OP will find soemthing they haven’t thought of and apply it to their own training in an intelligent and logical manner (not always the case though).

The second one, is where the OP actually gives a whole lot of background info, and is lucky enough to have one of the more experienced folks on here dissect what the problem may indeed be.[/quote]
I’ve also seen a variation of the second where someone will start a thread, get a few replies, and then start an identical thread a few days later (sometimes in a different forum, BSL vs Beginners, for example) hoping to get different answers. Only when their history gets checked will this pop up.

I tend to find this borderline-offensive, like the people who commented in the first thread totally wasted their time. Not to get off on a tangent within a tangent, but this dude was one of the worst examples of that… 9 threads in 5 months, each one of them asking for a good routine:
http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/sports_body_bigger_stronger_leaner/please_help_me_out_

Times like that, I’m more prone to either call troll or just chalk the guy off as a legit case of helpless ignorance. But, back to the original idea, sometimes a question has an “easy fix” (like how’s this program, how do I cut, etc.), but sometimes it’s more involved and having more info would’ve changed the advice given (like in this thread: turns out the dude is pretty young, on steroids, with muscle imbalances, and is either lying about his bodyfat or has pisspoor nutrition.)

Super-agreed. Which is also why I believe more members should participate in the Check-In threads to un-anonymous-ify themselves if they choose to offer advice. It’s obviously not mandatory, but those threads are happening often enough where I have to think it’s a conscious decision for some people to just avoid them and stick with their random avatar/lack of profile info while still dishing out advice like gospel.

I think I just ranted. Sorry.

33

I saw that last check in but it had been bumped from like 3 weeks prior. I will be in on the October one.

…how’s that for off topic?

34

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
Aim for no more than 2lbs per week[/quote]
But what if your body is primed to lose 5-10 pounds that week? Using blanket statements like this doesn’t take GENETICS into account.

As if all the leanest guys out there all subscribed to this “no more than 2 pounds” rule/limit. I guess they got that lean on accident. This isn’t even science.

I must be doing it wrong.[/quote]

Lol (damn chicken all over my computer screen at work)

S[/quote]
My condolences for your screen

[quote]pwolves17 wrote:
Literally laughing out loud, well played Greg!
[/quote]
I’m happy to contribute

[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Good to be back, eh?[/quote]
Yep :slight_smile: