EPTCellphone got flooded with messages at like 1am haha.
Thanks everyone
. going for a good lift today TL Health and Fitness Initiative 2012 - Page 285
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
funkie
Venezuela9376 Posts
Cellphone got flooded with messages at like 1am haha. Thanks everyone . going for a good lift today | ||
Daigomi
South Africa4316 Posts
On July 26 2012 21:42 Sinep wrote: I feel there's a lot of hate here on people who try to achieve leanness for any reason, and it's completely unfounded. Yes, dieting means you aren't bulking and aren't putting up higher and higher numbers. Time and time again I see some of you telling people "they are too small to diet", judging from bodyweight and height. No one bothers to ask what bodyfat % the person might be at, or a picture to see what the person should actually focus on. In many cases the people posting here are skinny-fat (low muscle mass, higher bodyfat%) and in line with what they actually post, they would be best suited on a proper diet to cut bodyfat before bulking up leanly again. I feel a lot of bad advice is given on this principal, just because you have 0 focus on achieving leanness, does not mean that everybody shares your goals. I actually feel depressed if I am above 11-12% bodyfat. Not only that, I'm getting much more into bodyweight exercises in which case any kg of bodyweight you carry that isn't muscle is a large disadvantage. I think having abs and being lean is an admirable goal, and not one to be shat on. An individual is generally healther overall at leaner bodyweights as well (within reason). That being said, a person with little muscle mass does not look good lean like you guys have said, but he does not look good fat either. I wish you guys were a little more open minded about other individual's goals I'm not sure if I fully agree with you. There are definitely times when people are too small to be dieting, regardless of bodyfat or anything else. A person that's 180cm weighing less than 70kg might have a reasonably high bf% but that doesn't mean he should be dieting, it means he should be building muscle (assuming his goal is aesthetics, which is generally a safe assumption unless the person states otherwise). I also don't think most people here don't care about being lean. In fact, I think almost everybody here thinks it's a good idea to be lean. At the same time, almost everyone here also thinks there's a point where you are too lean (i.e. 65kg for a 180cm guy). The only thing that differs is where that point is. For me, I think 75kg on 1.8m is where you are starting to get too lean. For Malinor, it's clearly a bit higher, perhaps 85kg for 1.8m. So the main disagreement wasn't so much about whether it's good or bad to be lean, but whether he was getting too lean. The one thing I do agree with is that exercising for aesthetics is definitely looked down upon slightly (not seriously, just slightly). It makes sense, since aesthetics are obviously more shallow and than lifting for lifting's sake. Even so, I think it's a basic human impulse to want to be more attractive, so most people are at least partly motivated by it and pretending otherwise is bullshit. EDIT: Happy Bday funkie! Just so that you know, you're my target with squats so I'm doing everything I can to catch-up with you :D | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
188 cm, 68kg. And the last thing I'd do is diet to lower my bf%. Now granted, I'm in decent shape for being as scrawny as I am (could also probably be in better, but I'm semi paranoid about a high intensity weight lifting routine with my crohn's). That said, looking cut for my size is about all I've got, so I can see where my self-image would want to suffer, but fuck it, I'd rather be bigger if I could choose. | ||
|
ModernAgeShaman
Norway484 Posts
On July 26 2012 22:16 Daigomi wrote: I'm not sure if I fully agree with you. There are definitely times when people are too small to be dieting, regardless of bodyfat or anything else. A person that's 180cm weighing less than 70kg might have a reasonably high bf% but that doesn't mean he should be dieting, it means he should be building muscle (assuming his goal is aesthetics, which is generally a safe assumption unless the person states otherwise). I also don't think most people here don't care about being lean. In fact, I think almost everybody here thinks it's a good idea to be lean. At the same time, almost everyone here also thinks there's a point where you are too lean (i.e. 65kg for a 180cm guy). The only thing that differs is where that point is. For me, I think 75kg on 1.8m is where you are starting to get too lean. For Malinor, it's clearly a bit higher, perhaps 85kg for 1.8m. So the main disagreement wasn't so much about whether it's good or bad to be lean, but whether he was getting too lean. The one thing I do agree with is that exercising for aesthetics is definitely looked down upon slightly (not seriously, just slightly). It makes sense, since aesthetics are obviously more shallow and than lifting for lifting's sake. Even so, I think it's a basic human impulse to want to be more attractive, so most people are at least partly motivated by it and pretending otherwise is bullshit. This is where we disagree. I don't think there is ever a "too small" to diet, it's all relative to the amount of bodyfat on a person. But I do think we have different understandings of what it is to diet. A skinnyfat 70kg 180cm guy needs to build muscle to look better - but he also needs to lose fat. In all likelyhood, he's very untrained and weak and could accomplish both on a light/moderate kcal deficit. If done correctly he'll increase his bodyweight and strength, while lowering his bodyfat %. He should for sure not do an improper diet where he ends up losing 50/50 fat muscle. Two people at 1.8meters weighing 75kg can have completely different body compositions - which is why I say you should ask for pictures before giving advice about dieting or bulking. Bodies are very individual and weights and heights are not always a good indicator of such. This is why I believe you can't throw out sentences like "75kg at 1.8m is where you are starting to get too lean". I think if a lot of people were to answer honestly, they would say aesthetics are a large part of why they lift. Everyone wants to see their legs explode from squat gains or achieve a nice V shape. Some posters here are very narrowminded when it comes to goals that are not chugging whole milk to be as heavy and squat as muscle as possible | ||
|
JingleHell
United States11308 Posts
On July 26 2012 22:43 Sinep wrote:+ Show Spoiler + On July 26 2012 22:16 Daigomi wrote: I'm not sure if I fully agree with you. There are definitely times when people are too small to be dieting, regardless of bodyfat or anything else. A person that's 180cm weighing less than 70kg might have a reasonably high bf% but that doesn't mean he should be dieting, it means he should be building muscle (assuming his goal is aesthetics, which is generally a safe assumption unless the person states otherwise). I also don't think most people here don't care about being lean. In fact, I think almost everybody here thinks it's a good idea to be lean. At the same time, almost everyone here also thinks there's a point where you are too lean (i.e. 65kg for a 180cm guy). The only thing that differs is where that point is. For me, I think 75kg on 1.8m is where you are starting to get too lean. For Malinor, it's clearly a bit higher, perhaps 85kg for 1.8m. So the main disagreement wasn't so much about whether it's good or bad to be lean, but whether he was getting too lean. The one thing I do agree with is that exercising for aesthetics is definitely looked down upon slightly (not seriously, just slightly). It makes sense, since aesthetics are obviously more shallow and than lifting for lifting's sake. Even so, I think it's a basic human impulse to want to be more attractive, so most people are at least partly motivated by it and pretending otherwise is bullshit. This is where we disagree. I don't think there is ever a "too small" to diet, it's all relative to the amount of bodyfat on a person. But I do think we have different understandings of what it is to diet. A skinnyfat 70kg 180cm guy needs to build muscle to look better - but he also needs to lose fat. In all likelyhood, he's very untrained and weak and could accomplish both on a light/moderate kcal deficit. If done correctly he'll increase his bodyweight and strength, while lowering his bodyfat %. He should for sure not do an improper diet where he ends up losing 50/50 fat muscle. Two people at 1.8meters weighing 75kg can have completely different body compositions - which is why I say you should ask for pictures before giving advice about dieting or bulking. Bodies are very individual and weights and heights are not always a good indicator of such. This is why I believe you can't throw out sentences like "75kg at 1.8m is where you are starting to get too lean". I think if a lot of people were to answer honestly, they would say aesthetics are a large part of why they lift. Everyone wants to see their legs explode from squat gains or achieve a nice V shape. Some posters here are very narrowminded when it comes to goals that are not chugging whole milk to be as heavy and squat as muscle as possible And in my personal experience, they're not narrow minded at all. If, instead of coming in asking for generic advice and then complaining about the generic advice you get, you show up and ask specific questions tailored to your circumstances, they aren't going to talk shit, or tell you to do something you've already explained you don't want to do. Now they may have some preferred methods for certain goals, but everyone does. That's just natural. But these guys are pretty good about tailoring advice to be as specific as the question allows. | ||
|
Daigomi
South Africa4316 Posts
On July 26 2012 22:43 Sinep wrote: This is where we disagree. I don't think there is ever a "too small" to diet, it's all relative to the amount of bodyfat on a person. But I do think we have different understandings of what it is to diet. A skinnyfat 70kg 180cm guy needs to build muscle to look better - but he also needs to lose fat. In all likelyhood, he's very untrained and weak and could accomplish both on a light/moderate kcal deficit. If done correctly he'll increase his bodyweight and strength, while lowering his bodyfat %. He should for sure not do an improper diet where he ends up losing 50/50 fat muscle. Two people at 1.8meters weighing 75kg can have completely different body compositions - which is why I say you should ask for pictures before giving advice about dieting or bulking. Bodies are very individual and weights and heights are not always a good indicator of such. This is why I believe you can't throw out sentences like "75kg at 1.8m is where you are starting to get too lean". I think if a lot of people were to answer honestly, they would say aesthetics are a large part of why they lift. Everyone wants to see their legs explode from squat gains or achieve a nice V shape. Some posters here are very narrowminded when it comes to goals that are not chugging whole milk to be as heavy and squat as muscle as possible The fact is, if you're weigh 68kg at 1.8m, the aesthetic improvement from gaining muscle will be much, much more significant than the aesthetic improvement from losing weight, even if you're skinny fat. As such, you should optimise your program for muscle gain, not for weight loss, and probably not for a 50/50 split betwee the two. For example, let's assume a guy weighs 68kg at 1.8m at 15% bf%. If he goes pure strength for 3 months, his squat will go from 40kg to 100kg and his bench will go from 30kg to 70kg. If he goes pure weight loss, his strength will drop slightly but his weight will go down to 63kg. If he goes 50-50, his squat will go to 70kg, his bench to 50kg and his weight to 65.5kg. I'm willing to bet money that the guy who went pure strength will look better and more rounded than either of the other two. It's simply about diminishing returns. If you're already 68kg the returns from losing more weight are very low while the gains from building muscle is massive, so strength should be emphasized and dieet should not. This would be true for almost every person and, as such, it's valid advice to suggest that the person doesn't diet but focus on strength instead. (Obvious disclaimer, these numbers are made up and it won't work out exactly like this, it's just an example). Like I said, 75kg is where it starts to get too lean, so anybody there would be borderline. I'm not saying that people can't look good at 75kg or that the person should necessarily focus on strength there, but to me personally, the average person who posts on these board and weighs 75kg at 180cm should probably focus on building muscle rather than on losing weight. | ||
|
Osmoses
Sweden5302 Posts
And that's fine. Nothing wrong with wanting to look pretty, nothing wrong with wanting to lift heavier shit, nothing wrong with wanting both. Either way, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are plenty of curlbros at the gym that haven't spent a single minute on their legs, and alot of (in fact, probably most) women think that's fine. In fact, just the other day I bumped into this friend of mine at the gym who was there with his girlfriend. They had just come to run on the treadmills. They asked what I was doing and I told them I was squatting and the girl said I shouldn't, and that men shouldn't have big legs. I disagreed and that was the end of it. To each his, or her, own. | ||
|
funkie
Venezuela9376 Posts
On July 26 2012 22:59 Osmoses wrote: Obviously most people want to be attractive, that doesn't mean they lift exclusively for that purpose. I don't think it's very common for anyone to lift solely for the sake of lifting either. And that's fine. Nothing wrong with wanting to look pretty, nothing wrong with wanting to lift heavier shit, nothing wrong with wanting both. Either way, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are plenty of curlbros at the gym that haven't spent a single minute on their legs, and alot of (in fact, probably most) women think that's fine. In fact, just the other day I bumped into this friend of mine at the gym who was there with his girlfriend. They had just come to run on the treadmills. They asked what I was doing and I told them I was squatting and the girl said I shouldn't, and that men shouldn't have big legs. I disagreed and that was the end of it. To each his, or her, own. with all due respect, one of the dumbest responses I've heard anyone give. (the girl). lol.. | ||
|
Luxae
Israel232 Posts
My workout today: Squat 1x5 77.5, 97.5, 112.5, 1x3 132.5, 152.5kg - Work set was hard, pretty sure the last rep was high as well. BP 1x5 47.5, 57.5, 67.5, 77.5, 2x2 92.5, 1x3 92.5kg - first two work sets weren't very hard so I decided to go for a triple as well. Chin ups 1x4 30, 32.5, 35kg Dips 3x4 32.5kg - different grip width than what I usually work with, definitely felt my chest working ALOT more. L pull ups 3x5 | ||
|
GoTuNk!
Chile4591 Posts
On July 26 2012 22:59 Osmoses wrote: Obviously most people want to be attractive, that doesn't mean they lift exclusively for that purpose. I don't think it's very common for anyone to lift solely for the sake of lifting either. And that's fine. Nothing wrong with wanting to look pretty, nothing wrong with wanting to lift heavier shit, nothing wrong with wanting both. Either way, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are plenty of curlbros at the gym that haven't spent a single minute on their legs, and alot of (in fact, probably most) women think that's fine. In fact, just the other day I bumped into this friend of mine at the gym who was there with his girlfriend. They had just come to run on the treadmills. They asked what I was doing and I told them I was squatting and the girl said I shouldn't, and that men shouldn't have big legs. I disagreed and that was the end of it. To each his, or her, own. Ya, even as I'm obsessed with getting stronger I wouldn't like to get fat to a point where I get more tired walking to the rack than actually squatting (i.e donnie thompson). When I squat 650 pounds raw at 184 I wanna do it fucking ripped (10 more years :p) The reason the generic advice given is to strength training is cause its the foundation to everything. Whatever ur goal is, if you want to look really good or excel at any sport, you need to get fucking strong first. Not to mention the best looking guys (no homo) are guys like dymas, stoitsov or klokov (or many chinese weightlifters, but I cant remember their names). All great bodybuilders, save a few, were fucking strong aswell; arnold and ronnie coleman for starters. | ||
|
Zafrumi
Switzerland1272 Posts
On July 26 2012 20:03 Malinor wrote: Well, to each their own obsession I guess, I know I am guilty of those things too. I'd just rather stay at a higher weight and get strong enough until I have that look that way, and would even be allowed to eat more. Decaf is always hovering a few kg around a sixpack, and he is 95-96kg@184cm. So it surely is possible at 83kg. But I understand that weighing less is the faster solution, and then there could also be unfortunate genetics, so you never know. As long as we have specific goals, it should hopefully create the necessary drive to achieve them. I agree that you can look good with 83kg@177cm. but I dont have the necessary muscle mass yet. I mean I dont look bad or fat or anything I just have a belly, love handles and huge legs you mentioned decaf having a six pack at 95kg. but he also has a lot more muscle mass than me. and since growing muscle mass is fucking hard and takes a very long time (once youre past the novice level) I'm giving this faster solution a shot! I'm not entering any competitions so its not a big deal if I lose some strength. for reference my bf% is about 16-17% I guess. On July 26 2012 21:27 HeavOnEarth wrote: so i recently dropped what little fat i have revealing that i do indeed have a pathetically small set of muscles. sigh. so depressing lol bulking is so hard to do , esp with how im trying to eat healthy as fuck. its not so much that i cant eat its i literally run out of food to eat or time to prepare it lol, provided i have shit to do that day gonna buy some protein powder whey today or w.e its called and just chug that shit senseless and not to mention the last 2 times i've drank(a lot) completely fucked over my whole process. fuck never drinking again until im done bulking and just want to maintain sweet jesus its so bad for reference im probably 6"1' around 165(?) haven't checked in a while the plus side is most of that weight is muscle +water since i can visibly see my veins on the underside of my biceps, chest legs etc i dunno why other ppl dont like leg workouts (?) leg press and such are probably my favorite. i can do 2.5x my bench with press lol hmm also i was wondering what u guys know about muscle atrophy or whatever. i had a friend teach me to do 2 groups of different muscle sets back to back with no rest, for example do some bench then right after without rest switch to leg press, then boom back to da chest after a short rest(~1min) i find i can generally lift heavier however using longer rests in between sets (2min + ) so ive just been switching it up. I'm not a big fan of super-setting exercises (which is what your friend described to you). if you take very short breaks, you wont be able to lift as much weight (as you have already noticed yourself) which also means that you wont get as strong as you would with longer breaks. more weight on the bar = bigger stimulus for your muscles = more muscle mass will grow. thats roughly how it works. so if you want to gain mass, eat a shit ton (maybe even consider doing GOMAD, gallon of (whole) milk a day if your stomach can take it) and lift HEAVY weights! thats my recommendation at least | ||
|
Daigomi
South Africa4316 Posts
Hahahahaha. | ||
|
HeavOnEarth
United States7087 Posts
On July 27 2012 02:10 Zafrumi wrote: I agree that you can look good with 83kg@177cm. but I dont have the necessary muscle mass yet. I mean I dont look bad or fat or anything I just have a belly, love handles and huge legs you mentioned decaf having a six pack at 95kg. but he also has a lot more muscle mass than me. and since growing muscle mass is fucking hard and takes a very long time (once youre past the novice level) I'm giving this faster solution a shot! I'm not entering any competitions so its not a big deal if I lose some strength. for reference my bf% is about 16-17% I guess. I'm not a big fan of super-setting exercises (which is what your friend described to you). if you take very short breaks, you wont be able to lift as much weight (as you have already noticed yourself) which also means that you wont get as strong as you would with longer breaks. more weight on the bar = bigger stimulus for your muscles = more muscle mass will grow. thats roughly how it works. so if you want to gain mass, eat a shit ton (maybe even consider doing GOMAD, gallon of (whole) milk a day if your stomach can take it) and lift HEAVY weights! thats my recommendation at least Sadly my lactose intolerant genes would make that experience very painful for me D: | ||
|
Catch
United States616 Posts
Somebody get me the hell home lol | ||
|
mordek
United States12705 Posts
On July 27 2012 02:10 Zafrumi wrote: I agree that you can look good with 83kg@177cm. but I dont have the necessary muscle mass yet. I mean I dont look bad or fat or anything I just have a belly, love handles and huge legs you mentioned decaf having a six pack at 95kg. but he also has a lot more muscle mass than me. and since growing muscle mass is fucking hard and takes a very long time (once youre past the novice level) I'm giving this faster solution a shot! I'm not entering any competitions so its not a big deal if I lose some strength. for reference my bf% is about 16-17% I guess. I'm not a big fan of super-setting exercises (which is what your friend described to you). if you take very short breaks, you wont be able to lift as much weight (as you have already noticed yourself) which also means that you wont get as strong as you would with longer breaks. more weight on the bar = bigger stimulus for your muscles = more muscle mass will grow. thats roughly how it works. so if you want to gain mass, eat a shit ton (maybe even consider doing GOMAD, gallon of (whole) milk a day if your stomach can take it) and lift HEAVY weights! thats my recommendation at least For the longest time I never knew what super-sets meant and never bothered to look it up. Apparently that's what I do almost every time so I get my workout done faster XD | ||
|
lyAsakura
United States1414 Posts
hehe Also, why you use hook grip: | ||
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
Idk how people use hook grip though... kills my thumbs at very low weights every time I try it | ||
|
Vitruvian
United States168 Posts
| ||
|
funkie
Venezuela9376 Posts
Workout today: Back Squat: 60kg, 100kg, 110kg, 120kg, 130kg, 140kg, 150kg, 160kg 125kg, 130kg, 135kg, 140kg, 150kg x 3 (PR) 100kg x 2 x 5 Clean and Jerk: 40kg x 2, 60kg x 4, 70kg x 2, 75kg x 1, 80kg x 1 (PR), 85kg x 1 (PR). I broke 3 PR's, first being 150kg Squat x 3, and 80kg and 85kg on Clean and Jerk. Today was my birthday and I was the FUCKING BOSS. Birthday pic yo. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://distilleryimage3.s3.amazonaws.com/7ed72cc0d78911e1a23c22000a1c9e05_7.jpg) | ||
|
Ludrik
Australia523 Posts
I can't wait to goto japan in december so I might pick myself up one of these. I'm sure it develops some strong hip drive! Onto more serious business. I've decided to commit myself to some smolov pain for the next few months. My current squat max is 120kg (did 125kg about 1 month ago, but have gone backwards since) and my goal for the end of the base mesocycle is 140kg (3 plates wooo!). I'm just wondering if anyone who's done smolov has any good pointers? In particular I'm wondering what kind of routine to combine with it. I'm looking to do a 5x5 routine 2-3 times per week to bring my bench up (which is currently abysmall). I'm actually toying with the idea of doing this tues and thurs, while squatting Mon, Wed, Fri, Sat. Any thoughts on this, or should I just dedicate those days to pure recovery? My main reason for wanting to do that is mostly due to time constraints (I'm able to do frequent sessions, but they can only be about an hour max). | ||
| ||
