Maybe our definitions of ripped are different. Seeing some abs flexing isn’t really what I would define as ripped…
Maybe you guys can post pics of being 225lbs ripped and needing more mass… If you are very ripped and over 200lbs you are probably pretty freaky looking… CT posted a bber before that was under 180lbs and looked better than probably 99% of the people here.[/quote]
Being in contest condition at 180lbs means they weigh OVER 200LBS IN THE OFF SEASON.
As far as the pics you posted, we just had this discussion in another thread. If you believe those weights quoted by many sports sites for different athletes (including ESPN), chances are you are being lied to. Jerome Bettis is not only 255lbs and chances are, most of the guys whose pics you posted are over 190lbs, especially now.
I will also add, that when you are small (as in under 170lbs at average height) EVERYBODY bigger than you looks big. Does that mean 170lbs or 180lbs is impressive? Maybe in contest condition, but most people understand that regardless of how ripped you are initially, you will still have to drop weight to get in CONTEST CONDITION. That means some guy you see who weighs 175-180 in contest shape is about 20-30lbs heavier just weeks before his contest. that is why pointing at 180lbs competitors and saying you want to weigh 180lbs makes little sense. To look like that in contest shape, you would have to be HEAVIER than that normally on a daily basis.
This is basic info. Apparently there are some who weren’t aware of it.
If you want to be ripped at 172lbs, by all means do it! I was already there, I grew up and settled for mansize proportions.
Hey man…what are you saying here? Shit…I should have gone with my 135 skinny-fat-ripped body since I probably won’t break 200.
I think you’re getting a little fired up over nothing.
[/quote]
You’re right rock. but you are the exception I was talking about. A shorter guy at 5’7" might be pretty manly looking at 180-190, That for me is close to toolbag. I’m 6 feet. I was about 5’11" 130 as a senior. I know where all these skinny bastards come from, because I came from the same place. I know how they think, I know the exercise. What they don’t realize is the guys that have been there like “X” are actually their best advice. He figured out how to get to 270 from 150… and he alot of muscle, alot!. Sure X could diet down and cut himself up, but there will be a ton of muscle left over there. Well over 200 lbs.
That’s why I don’t like numbers, I siad about 200+ for the average height was something I look for a benchmark not to go under. Its different for everyone and opinions vary. Its funny how the 163lb guy wants to try to see from my perspective and he’s never spent a day over 200lbs. I was in the 225, 160, 190, 250lb shoes. My range is a little broader. I would like to see some of the guys that actually have made it past 200lbs to comment here. And maybe some of the shorter guys that are pretty big for their size.
[quote]Go heavy fool wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
Go heavy fool wrote:
If you want to be ripped at 172lbs, by all means do it! I was already there, I grew up and settled for mansize proportions.
Hey man…what are you saying here? Shit…I should have gone with my 135 skinny-fat-ripped body since I probably won’t break 200.
I think you’re getting a little fired up over nothing.
You’re right rock. but you are the exception I was talking about. A shorter guy at 5’7" might be pretty manly looking at 180-190, That for me is close to toolbag. I’m 6 feet. I was about 5’11" 130 as a senior. I know where all these skinny bastards come from, because I came from the same place. I know how they think, I know the exercise. What they don’t realize is the guys that have been there like “X” are actually their best advice. He figured out how to get to 270 from 150… and he alot of muscle, alot!. Sure X could diet down and cut himself up, but there will be a ton of muscle left over there. Well over 200 lbs.
That’s why I don’t like numbers, I siad about 200+ for the average height was something I look for a benchmark not to go under. Its different for everyone and opinions vary. Its funny how the 163lb guy wants to try to see from my perspective and he’s never spent a day over 200lbs. I was in the 225, 160, 190, 250lb shoes. My range is a little broader. I would like to see some of the guys that actually have made it past 200lbs to comment here. And maybe some of the shorter guys that are pretty big for their size. [/quote]
If you were 5’11" and 130, then HOLY SHIT…I was bulky at 5’7" and 130 compared to you! HAHAHAH.
Good job in getting bigger and better. Just realize your view will not be met by a lot of kids. It’s all perception.
1900 calories is eating HUGE for some of these guys. It’s peception.
Training intensity is probably the biggest. I don’t see that many others with the same or better intensity in the gym. Usually there are groups of guys…BS’ing and lifing after 5-8 minutes rest between sets.
Training intensity is probably the biggest. I don’t see that many others with the same or better intensity in the gym. Usually there are groups of guys…BS’ing and lifing after 5-8 minutes rest between sets.
You can lead a Horse to water…
[/quote]
Yeah! I’ll agree to that. I like the guys that run to the water fountain after every set just to walk by all the girls on the treadmills in my gym. There are 2 rooms in my gym… sure enough the bigger guys are in the room with the power rack and the the little dudes never seem to venture in there except to use the squat rack to do curls. There’s a couch in the other room, and I saw a guy on it a few days ago reading a magazine article for about a half hour. He would do a set of chest presses on the machine, then read for 5 or 10 minutes. Took him about a half hour until he finished probably 4 sets of 10 reps; which 20 reps was probably how many times he could have maxed the weight. some intensity on these guys. he was the typical 170lb guy about my height and makes no progress. I’ve seen him there for about 2 years… he’s still the same size.
There are others that lift at a normal intensity for a gym, but if you want the best, you gotta give it your best. Most of those people like yourself and others have mentioned, never come near the intensity level that is needed to make serious increases in size and or strength.
Most of those weights are not off at all. Charlie Francis stated many many times himself that Ben Johnson was 173 in Seoul and never over 180lbs even in the off-season when he was hurt and not running. I have seen some of these athletes in person and they are not over 200lbs, even though you say that. See them in person before you make such stupid comments and conjecture.
I already stated I am not a bodybuilder (no need to get huge), but I am interested in seeing the physiques here if you guys honestly believe you are a ripped 225lbs. Look at CT’s latest article–there is a guy under 200lbs there that I am willing to bet has a better build than any of the posters here.
I laugh at the people here who try to be over macho as-if that makes one more of a man. If that is the only way you can define yourself as a man, you are rather sad. No, being 130lbs isn’t cool and probably a bit feminine, but being a fatass or getting big for the sake of it isn’t that cool either. If you think these athletes that are 170-190lbs are feminine or less macho than yourself, that’s rather funny since I am willing to bet they’re better athletes (faster, stronger, better endurance, etc.) in every aspect of the term, but that is another matter…
About what women like: I again never said I workout for other people, not sure why that was brought up, but I don’t–I don’t even train specifically to look good! The point is that studies have shown time and time again that most women do not prefer massive physiques (over 230lbs), but not feminine ones either.
Also, it is apparent again that our definitions of ripped are different. If you think those sprinters are in “contest shape”, then that is rather laughable. You probably think 10-12% is ripped. Lean, yeah, but it is not what we are talking about. Since you are quite obviously ripping on many of the newbies here, why don’t you post a pic of yourself to prove to everyone how much better you look than say the guy CT posted that is ripped under 200lbs. Won’t happen, but it is a try anyway.
[quote]davan wrote:
Also, it is apparent again that our definitions of ripped are different. If you think those sprinters are in “contest shape”, then that is rather laughable. You probably think 10-12% is ripped. Lean, yeah, but it is not what we are talking about. Since you are quite obviously ripping on many of the newbies here, why don’t you post a pic of yourself to prove to everyone how much better you look than say the guy CT posted that is ripped under 200lbs. Won’t happen, but it is a try anyway.[/quote]
[quote]davan wrote:
Also, it is apparent again that our definitions of ripped are different. If you think those sprinters are in “contest shape”, then that is rather laughable. You probably think 10-12% is ripped. Lean, yeah, but it is not what we are talking about. Since you are quite obviously ripping on many of the newbies here, why don’t you post a pic of yourself to prove to everyone how much better you look than say the guy CT posted that is ripped under 200lbs. Won’t happen, but it is a try anyway.[/quote]
That guy is 5’8’’ and in contest condition. He is 230+ in the offseason.
I’m 5’8’’ and 190 and not anywhere near comparable.
I laugh at the people here who try to be over macho as-if that makes one more of a man. If that is the only way you can define yourself as a man, you are rather sad. No, being 130lbs isn’t cool and probably a bit feminine, but being a fatass or getting big for the sake of it isn’t that cool either. If you think these athletes that are 170-190lbs are feminine or less macho than yourself, that’s rather funny since I am willing to bet they’re better athletes (faster, stronger, better endurance, etc.) in every aspect of the term, but that is another matter…
[/quote]
How macho can you be at 125 lbs? This is a picure of an athlete on his high school wrestling team. He looks alot better at 225lbs than whatever weight and bodyfat percentage you consider ripped.
[quote]davan wrote:
Also, it is apparent again that our definitions of ripped are different. If you think those sprinters are in “contest shape”, then that is rather laughable. You probably think 10-12% is ripped. Lean, yeah, but it is not what we are talking about. Since you are quite obviously ripping on many of the newbies here, why don’t you post a pic of yourself to prove to everyone how much better you look than say the guy CT posted that is ripped under 200lbs. Won’t happen, but it is a try anyway.[/quote]
My pic has been posted on this board several times. how is it I get called out as soon as I stop allowing everyone into my profile? Is there one of you waiting to pop every week?
YOU POST A PIC FIRST BEFORE YOU CALL SOMEONE ELSE OUT. Anyone on this board longer than a month has seen what I look like.
[quote]ExNole wrote:
davan wrote:
Also, it is apparent again that our definitions of ripped are different. If you think those sprinters are in “contest shape”, then that is rather laughable. You probably think 10-12% is ripped. Lean, yeah, but it is not what we are talking about. Since you are quite obviously ripping on many of the newbies here, why don’t you post a pic of yourself to prove to everyone how much better you look than say the guy CT posted that is ripped under 200lbs. Won’t happen, but it is a try anyway.
That guy is 5’8’’ and in contest condition. He is 230+ in the offseason.
I’m 5’8’’ and 190 and not anywhere near comparable.[/quote]
He is bigger than 230lbs now because he said he was bulking up this year.
I can’t believe how many people obviously took that article the wrong way…as predicted.
Again people here prove they are the meathead portrayed everywhere else and cannot read…
To the person who posted the 125lb guy, read my comments before you embarass yourself.
About my pics… my physique is nothing special, I don’t even train to improve it. I am also not the person trying to degrade people who don’t want to look like fat slobs. Again, the guy in CT’s article was 215 before he got cut. A far cry from 230 and he doesn’t look too ripped at that 215. Continue to “bulk” for the rest of your lives–that is your choice and I respect that! Just don’t think it is any more macho than having a smaller, more ripped physique. Yes, maybe if athletes who are 170-180 ripped went up to the lard %s you are, they would be over 200lbs, but that is not the point! The point is you can still look good and not look anorexic at a bodyweight under 200lbs.
If you are 5’8" 190 and you look like crap, then that is your fault! I doubt you are below 10%. I have never met somebody under 10% bodyfat at that weight that looked like crap.
www.atletismoweb.com/fotoscurios/Jon%20Drummond.jpg
Under 180lb (actually, under 170 according to most sources, but I’ll say under 180 for sake of the thread) @ 5’9"
Monster or bodybuilder? No.
Good physique? Yep.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
ExNole wrote:
davan wrote:
Also, it is apparent again that our definitions of ripped are different. If you think those sprinters are in “contest shape”, then that is rather laughable. You probably think 10-12% is ripped. Lean, yeah, but it is not what we are talking about. Since you are quite obviously ripping on many of the newbies here, why don’t you post a pic of yourself to prove to everyone how much better you look than say the guy CT posted that is ripped under 200lbs. Won’t happen, but it is a try anyway.
That guy is 5’8’’ and in contest condition. He is 230+ in the offseason.
I’m 5’8’’ and 190 and not anywhere near comparable.
He is bigger than 230lbs now because he said he was bulking up this year.
I can’t believe how many people obviously took that article the wrong way…as predicted.[/quote]
How much weight do these guys usually lose the day(s)before the comp from water? It’s 10+ pounds right?
I also think every article is misread by a ton of people. I wouldn’t be surprised if on a weekly basis there’s people jumping from westside to fullbody to bodybuilding splits.
