Think You Are Big But Just Fat

This has been a really eye opening topic

At the age of 19, right out of USMC boot camp, I weighed in at a whopping 128 lbs at 5’8" and felt I was fairly muscular for my size. Over the years I have gotten my weight up to a seemingly strong but soft 230lbs. I am currently sitting at about 200lbs and would love to say I have the same BF levels as when I was 19 (39 now); however I would say I was fairly skinny then and really have no idea of body fat levels at either age. The thing is I never really thought about limits and kind of figured I had gained mostly muscle. After reading through this thread I look back and I see that even if I had comparable bf %'s, there is a whole host of other areas that added to the weight gain outside of just muscle.

So I appreciate the discussion and even though there seems to be a lot of back and forth silliness going on, I do want to thank you for the good information this thread provided

[quote]FattyFat wrote:
This thread is ridiculous.

If you’ve dieted down at least once, you’ll know what to look for and how to gauge your progress and your lbm-to-bf ratio best.

If you haven’t, you should get a DEXA scan.

If you’re big and think you’re not fat, the best way is to let average non-lifting people decide. They usually don’t care all that much for tree-trunk legs, boulder shoulders, big guns, bulging pecs, shapely glutes and a thick wide back: they just take a look at you and instantly decide if you’re fat or not. Of course, proportions and clothing can play a big role in making one look better or worse.

So, I sez, the best way to gauge your progress is to go swimming, mebbe prance a bit around (in a cool way, of course) and see how people react to your body. Are the boyz envious? Are the gals like “Wowsers! I bet he can break me in half and screw me six ways from sunday!” swoon

If you’ve got a lot of muscle mass and fat, you’re fat, no matter how athletic, muscular and strong you are (been there, done that).

I didn’t want to weigh in on the whole Professor X debate, but HeavyTriple was out of line guesstimating Professor X’s (do you have some other name, dude? You’re no professor, you’re a dentist.) bodyfat to be closer to 30 % than to 20 %. That’s kinda ridiculous: didn’t he recently provide a frontal body shot (not seriously flexed, afaik) where you could see some of his abs, rather little pec fat, semi-conditioned arms and delts? Came across as a whimpy sucker punch.

If I were Professor X and went to the trouble of actually providing photos to shut the naysayers up regarding the body fat allegations, I’d provide body shots in boxers in good lighting: frontal, back and side poses to get an appreciation of his body fat distribution and muscle mass.

If it were me, though, I’d trim down (I’m sure that body’d look much more impressive with less bodyfat) and not provide photos at all. Why try and convince strangers how big my dick is? People will always try to tell you you’ve got a shlort, now matter how gargantuan and sleek of a shlong you actually sport. And if you’re going out of your way to actually meet and show them your meat, they’ll cry “rape, rape”.

Here’s a few tiaras for all of you. And thanks for carrying this thread, all of you: it’s really entertaining.

  • FF, a hetero hunk in e-love with all of you.

  • I’m also way cooler than all of you combined (yes, I know that CT posted in here: his Quebecois accent takes away from his many cool points, but being a European and fluent in French, I might be a tad biased)

[/quote]

I realize this post was 5 days ago, but I’ll respond anyway. Only a fool would suggest that it’s ridiculous to guess the bodyfat of a person who stoutly refuses to ever have it measured accurately, especially when you consider that I actually have experience measuring these sorts of things.

Now if you want to look at a grainy phone picture as proof that he is less than 20% bodyfat, you might be that fool. The guy has started multiple “geek shit” threads for fuck’s sake and yet somehow can’t take a picture with a camera. How someone like you can continue to give this guy the benefit of the doubt is beyond me. Do you believe his claim that he’s somehow gained 10 pounds since his avatar while getting leaner? If so, I think we’ve answered the fool question.

Want to get a good guess at his bodyfat? Go watch the boot camp videos. HD cameras are much better for assessing bodyfat than phone pics.

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]gregron wrote:
Double post[/quote]

Look at this crap. Seriously…[/quote]

LOL at X’s alt account…just signed up eh?

Hmmmmmmm

And X is answering posts for you…hmmmmmmmmm

[/quote]

So anyone who agrees with me is alternate account? Are you guys serious? You make this forum look like a children’s day care center.

If you are making several posts all day long just because you don’t like a poster on this site, you need to get a real life.

Seriously. You guys look pretty pathetic with this now. Most of you in this thread refuse to discuss the topic but would rather spend 40 pages arguing my body fat percentage.

I think enough people have posted that it is this attitude that is bringing the forum down, not me because I dared to post at all.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

This is what it comes down to…this is all some of these guys are here for…and at this point, all it is doing is stopping any real discussion from happening.

Guys acting like I am obese in these discussions make themselves looks silly when one well known trainer here worked with me in person and disagrees with all of this negative crap.

Honestly, if this is all some of you want these forums to be, keep cheering this on.[/quote]

On multiple levels this a riot of a post. The “well known trainer” told you you were in the bodyfat deadzone and went on to define it as zone where you can’t tell if someone is 16 or 22% BF. It’s right there in the definition he gave that any number between 16-22 is just as likely as the next.

Furthermore, the Well Known Trainer has apparently not measured anyone’s bodyfat with the most accurate tool available. To anyone with half a brain this should raise some red flags. And yet, the guy (you) who constantly complains about people quoting gurus can’t help but do it here.

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
for the record I took 300 and 400 level genetics in undergrad, as well as did epidemiological research, which is much more relevant to the topic than the bench work you did in genetics. Regardless, for the scope of this topic no one needs anything beyond a cursory knowledge of genetics and population data.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Just to make this point clear, in science and medicine, when discussing topics like this, especially as it refers to large populations, you come up with a RANGE of observable data. I would be very skeptical of the political or emotional motives of any “scientist” who literally comes out with an exact number that somehow relates to all people unless it is a very extreme number and we are talking about absolutes.

Simply put, this “80lbs limit” is unsupported and contested…so why keep retelling it?
[/quote]
lol, well before they come up with a range, there are rounds of research and educated guessing that leads to a hypothesis. I really do value guys like brick, maiden, stu, etc weighing in on this as they have already, and I’ve already qualified why this guessing of a “natural limit” of sorts is important to all of us as well and is central to the topic at hand. You’ve already noted that this isn’t a worthwhile question to ask, so please you and your trolls bow out.[/quote]
respond to this[/quote]
pls respond
[/quote]

Respond to this:

http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/blog_sports_training_performance_bodybuilding_iron/tribunal_for_browndisaster

[/quote]

He talks a lot of crap to a lot of people. He and supersayian are good at getting X riled up, which has seriously f-ed the BBing boards up (see, e.g., much of this thread). Boards were a lot more productive. Also, he’s ‘breaking PRs every week’ because he’s still in the low 300s in everything.

Just sayin’.

[quote]The3Commandments wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
for the record I took 300 and 400 level genetics in undergrad, as well as did epidemiological research, which is much more relevant to the topic than the bench work you did in genetics. Regardless, for the scope of this topic no one needs anything beyond a cursory knowledge of genetics and population data.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Just to make this point clear, in science and medicine, when discussing topics like this, especially as it refers to large populations, you come up with a RANGE of observable data. I would be very skeptical of the political or emotional motives of any “scientist” who literally comes out with an exact number that somehow relates to all people unless it is a very extreme number and we are talking about absolutes.

Simply put, this “80lbs limit” is unsupported and contested…so why keep retelling it?
[/quote]
lol, well before they come up with a range, there are rounds of research and educated guessing that leads to a hypothesis. I really do value guys like brick, maiden, stu, etc weighing in on this as they have already, and I’ve already qualified why this guessing of a “natural limit” of sorts is important to all of us as well and is central to the topic at hand. You’ve already noted that this isn’t a worthwhile question to ask, so please you and your trolls bow out.[/quote]
respond to this[/quote]
pls respond
[/quote]

Respond to this:

http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/blog_sports_training_performance_bodybuilding_iron/tribunal_for_browndisaster

[/quote]

He talks a lot of crap to a lot of people. He and supersayian are good at getting X riled up, which has seriously f-ed the BBing boards up (see, e.g., much of this thread). Boards were a lot more productive. Also, he’s ‘breaking PRs every week’ because he’s still in the low 300s in everything.

Just sayin’.[/quote]

This…which is why I ignore that guy’s posts. he talks more shit than most here but doesn’t have the muscle or the experience to back it up.

I am not here to keep going back and forth with these retards. Seriously. I already made my points clear in this thread.

If guys want to argue my body fat percentage, do it between yourselves in private messages because holy shit, 40 pages of the same crap is getting real fucking boring.

Who gives a shit about another posters BF% seriously. This IS getting old. Worry about yourselves.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The3Commandments wrote:

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]browndisaster wrote:
for the record I took 300 and 400 level genetics in undergrad, as well as did epidemiological research, which is much more relevant to the topic than the bench work you did in genetics. Regardless, for the scope of this topic no one needs anything beyond a cursory knowledge of genetics and population data.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Just to make this point clear, in science and medicine, when discussing topics like this, especially as it refers to large populations, you come up with a RANGE of observable data. I would be very skeptical of the political or emotional motives of any “scientist” who literally comes out with an exact number that somehow relates to all people unless it is a very extreme number and we are talking about absolutes.

Simply put, this “80lbs limit” is unsupported and contested…so why keep retelling it?
[/quote]
lol, well before they come up with a range, there are rounds of research and educated guessing that leads to a hypothesis. I really do value guys like brick, maiden, stu, etc weighing in on this as they have already, and I’ve already qualified why this guessing of a “natural limit” of sorts is important to all of us as well and is central to the topic at hand. You’ve already noted that this isn’t a worthwhile question to ask, so please you and your trolls bow out.[/quote]
respond to this[/quote]
pls respond
[/quote]

Respond to this:

http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/blog_sports_training_performance_bodybuilding_iron/tribunal_for_browndisaster

[/quote]

He talks a lot of crap to a lot of people. He and supersayian are good at getting X riled up, which has seriously f-ed the BBing boards up (see, e.g., much of this thread). Boards were a lot more productive. Also, he’s ‘breaking PRs every week’ because he’s still in the low 300s in everything.

Just sayin’.[/quote]

This…which is why I ignore that guy’s posts. he talks more shit than most here but doesn’t have the muscle or the experience to back it up.

I am not here to keep going back and forth with these retards. Seriously. I already made my points clear in this thread.

If guys want to argue my body fat percentage, do it between yourselves in private messages because holy shit, 40 pages of the same crap is getting real fucking boring.
[/quote]

So did you guys vote him out or what?

If you don’t vote, you don’t matter!

lol, my posts in this thread were serious and related to the topic at hand, yet got ignore by all but brick - while you guys kept up with the drama. Prof X fell down after deadlifting in the low 300s, so it’s funny that some of you defend him.

Regardless, I’ll keep my head down and keep making progress, as there hasn’t been any useful info in the bodybuilding subforum, besides walkaway’s thread and the contest prep logs.

i hit the first “real” weights on a "real exercise earlier this morning after work since my neck surgery in december.

after squatting, i hit 200kg plus 200lbs chain for 5 x 3 in the conventional deadlift, dropped the chain, did an EASY 220kg x 3, then added the chain back to the 220kg and did a moderate hard single.

color me happy.

and boy were my legs (yes LEGS) pumped. I have always been perplexed at people who consider deadlifts a back exercise, i have always considered them a low body exercise, and now these days i do them wearing Olympic weightlifting shoes ( i know, heresy! you can only deadlift in chucks or barfoot!!!) my quads are always blown up after deads.

lets see if this post^^^^^^ disappears…

seems some of the ones critical of the x guy disappear or never show up…hmmmm

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
I have always been perplexed at people who consider deadlifts a back exercise, i have always considered them a low body exercise, and now these days i do them wearing Olympic weightlifting shoes ( i know, heresy! you can only deadlift in chucks or barfoot!!!) my quads are always blown up after deads. [/quote]
Everyone’s anatomy is different, boss. As you know it’s a posterior chain movement and everyone will feel it in different places in different degrees. For me, they’re 80% glutes, 20% back and no quads.

Hey why are we discussing something sensible…back to the madness we go!! lol!

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
lets see if this post^^^^^^ disappears…

seems some of the ones critical of the x guy disappear or never show up…hmmmm[/quote]

LOL. I haven;t deleted one post from this thread and rarely do at all anyway.

LOL. Now it is “conspiracy theories”.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
lets see if this post^^^^^^ disappears…

seems some of the ones critical of the x guy disappear or never show up…hmmmm[/quote]

LOL. I haven;t deleted one post from this thread and rarely do at all anyway.

LOL. Now it is “conspiracy theories”.[/quote]

I think he meant some of the posts were just missing, not implying people were deleting them anyway. Some of mine were showing and than disappeared (but are back again!)

On a side note, I wanted to ask everyone what full house looks like. I always liked the sound of that word haha. I picture either bodybuilders in their off season, or that powerlifter / strongman look with top abs roughly.

[quote]KcThrows wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
lets see if this post^^^^^^ disappears…

seems some of the ones critical of the x guy disappear or never show up…hmmmm[/quote]

LOL. I haven;t deleted one post from this thread and rarely do at all anyway.

LOL. Now it is “conspiracy theories”.[/quote]

I think he meant some of the posts were just missing, not implying people were deleting them anyway. Some of mine were showing and than disappeared (but are back again!)

On a side note, I wanted to ask everyone what full house looks like. I always liked the sound of that word haha. I picture either bodybuilders in their off season, or that powerlifter / strongman look with top abs roughly. [/quote]

It is usually a really built guy who is around or close to 20% body fat…but usually not above that by much.

the bigger you get, the less fat you look at higher body fat percentages. It is an “off season” look.

[quote]heavythrower wrote:
i hit the first “real” weights on a "real exercise earlier this morning after work since my neck surgery in december.

after squatting, i hit 200kg plus 200lbs chain for 5 x 3 in the conventional deadlift, dropped the chain, did an EASY 220kg x 3, then added the chain back to the 220kg and did a moderate hard single.

color me happy.

and boy were my legs (yes LEGS) pumped. I have always been perplexed at people who consider deadlifts a back exercise, i have always considered them a low body exercise, and now these days i do them wearing Olympic weightlifting shoes ( i know, heresy! you can only deadlift in chucks or barfoot!!!) my quads are always blown up after deads. [/quote]

Congrats man, that’s extremely strong lifting!

Tangent: would love to hear some thoughts about the role of chains in bodybuilding. I know that they’re frequently used by, e.g., Shelby and JM, but I guess I don’t fully understand how they’re that useful for hypertrophy, outside of eliminating sticking points on lifts themselves.

This, in my opinion is “full house” He’s built. No one on the planet is going to walk up this guy and call him “fat” unless literally comparing him to a bodybuilder in contest shape…and everyone can tell he lifts heavy by looking at him…


Ryan Kennely, classic full house.

This dude is the very definition of it. He’s built but clearly isn’t afraid to eat.

Ryan Kennely heavier:

Ryan Kennely leaner: