PDA

View Full Version : "You don't really need a lot of calories..."



Decker87
08-08-2007, 06:38 AM
So I was at the gym with my girlfriend the other day, and I was explaining what I had eaten, and that it was around 3200 calories so far. She was absolutely apalled. She then went on to say she's had numerous personal trainers tell her that you don't need to eat a lot to gain muscle.

I tried very hard not to get angry. I told her maybe we should come back to the topic when we have studies & facts right in front of us.

So, can you guys help me find the best sources? Perhaps the diet plans of some of the strongest people? I just need some articles, studies and statistics from reputable sources. (Not Mr. Clean, your about.com guide to...)

Paul Stagg
08-08-2007, 06:53 AM
Teach her the law of thermodynamics.

It is the answer to all.

Bikkstah
08-08-2007, 07:07 AM
Yeah, whip out the law of conservation of mass. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_mass

Matter cannot be created or destroyed, it just changes forms. Matter from food into your tummy = bigger you. Muscle don't come outta nowhere.

KingWilder
08-08-2007, 07:38 AM
umm you can't build muscle out of air

that should do it

Decker87
08-08-2007, 07:51 AM
Guys, I need some relatively serious answers here. While big eating may seem like a basic concept to myself and most people here, it is not that obvious to everyone. I'm looking for some great resources as in STATISTICS and STUDIES that show this connection. If we can get some of these things, it would be a good resource for the whole forum.

Unreal
08-08-2007, 08:00 AM
I doubt anyone has done a study showing you have to eat to gain mass. That is like saying you have to breathe to get oxygen. If she can't grasp that I would find a new girlfriend.

Statistics showing big people eat more calories are all over. Hardly a day goes by without a story about america getting fatter and how fast food is making every obese.

RedSpikeyThing
08-08-2007, 08:20 AM
Ask her what you should do if you aren't gaining muscle. If she says "I don't know" then you can explain "eat more".


Guys, I need some relatively serious answers here. While big eating may seem like a basic concept to myself and most people here, it is not that obvious to everyone. I'm looking for some great resources as in STATISTICS and STUDIES that show this connection. If we can get some of these things, it would be a good resource for the whole forum.

the law of thermodynamics IS the answer.

BBB
08-08-2007, 08:44 AM
^ What he said.

Holto
08-08-2007, 12:17 PM
I doubt anyone has done a study showing you have to eat to gain mass.

Precisely.

We conduct studies to find answers we don't have. Explain the concept of maintenance calories, go from there. If you don't have an intimate understanding of how the laws of physics (specifically thermodynamics) govern biological systems then try to get one. Then you can explain it in laymans terms.

mikey4402
08-08-2007, 12:29 PM
I tried very hard not to get angry. I told her maybe we should come back to the topic when we have studies & facts right in front of us.
you guys talk like that?


Anyways simple physics

Holto
08-08-2007, 02:42 PM
you guys talk like that?

Sounds like a nice doge of a runaway train.

Built
08-08-2007, 02:44 PM
So, did this idiot trainer also suggest you don't actually have to DROP calories to lose weight?

<walks away, shakes head, cussing under her breath... >

DoUgL@S
08-08-2007, 02:52 PM
So, did this idiot trainer also suggest you don't actually have to DROP calories to lose weight?

<walks away, shakes head, cussing under her breath... >

lol, don't you guys know that the laws of thermodynamics and the biological dogmas do not work at 24hr or Bally's or wherever. Just look at yourself in the mirror by the dumbells, and poof your recomposing. ;)

Built
08-08-2007, 02:54 PM
Bah. Gyms suck. Mine won't even let me work out with my friends anymore because they said I'm acting as a "trainer" and the "real" trainers were complaining.

No kidding. My friends get RESULTS!

DoUgL@S
08-08-2007, 03:01 PM
To the OP, I know it is difficult to explain these things to the average Joe or Jane, specially if a trainer with a nice shirt with the gym logo is contradicting what you say. When you get results using what you know, and she is spinning her wheels trying to reach her goals (i.e. do not eat, overdo the cardio), she may be more apt to listen.

Maybe I can add on an entertainment room to my house without any cement, lumber, etc. . .sure would be nice.

Decker87
08-08-2007, 04:02 PM
I'm not saying thermodynamics is wrong. It might be how one person understands it, but to the average person it might not apply to the situation.

How would you feel if, when you asked why the sky is blue, your parents said "well son, just look up the heisenburg uncertainty principle" or "its mainly because of the way quarks and anti-quarks work".

I'm not trying to show-up some dick at the gym. There is a person who I truly care about and whom I truly want to see get the results they want. That's why I need real studies and things that she can understand.

Built
08-08-2007, 04:15 PM
Ask her what other way your muscles can gain mass. They have to get it from SOMEWHERE, right?

DeviceX
08-08-2007, 04:41 PM
Bah. Gyms suck. Mine won't even let me work out with my friends anymore because they said I'm acting as a "trainer" and the "real" trainers were complaining.

No kidding. My friends get RESULTS!

That is bush wack... I know if you were my trainer i'd be really happy.

Biggins
08-08-2007, 05:01 PM
I was squatting 325 and a personal trainer working out on hack squat machine with new client kept repeating"you dont have to use ridiculous weights" refering to me as the glances showed.He had 2 plates on each side:)

The next time I saw them I had shorts on and they both couldnt get eyes off my legs.My legs are very strong and look the part.I get a kick out of **** like that:)

DoUgL@S
08-08-2007, 05:03 PM
I'm not saying thermodynamics is wrong. It might be how one person understands it, but to the average person it might not apply to the situation.

How would you feel if, when you asked why the sky is blue, your parents said "well son, just look up the heisenburg uncertainty principle" or "its mainly because of the way quarks and anti-quarks work".

So the sky is blue because its uncertain. Gotcha.

When I explained it to my son, all I had to say is that it was due to our atmosphere acts like a prism it divides light which contains all the different colors. He is eight, but can still understand basic principles.

The point is not that she understand the laws of thermodynamics per say, it is another way to say that you cannot expect to make something out of nothing.

RedSpikeyThing
08-08-2007, 05:08 PM
That's why I need real studies and things that she can understand.

I don't think those exist :)

VikingWarlord
08-08-2007, 05:51 PM
Have her watch the scene in Pumping Iron where they all go to lunch.

smalls
08-08-2007, 07:35 PM
Teach her the law of thermodynamics.

It is the answer to all.

Exactly, there are reasons they are respected as laws, not guidelines or ideas.

Building excess anything takes excess something, you dont need studies or research to back that up.

smalls
08-08-2007, 07:39 PM
But on a side note, she is correct in her point that you dont need ALOT of calories. Whatever that means to each individula, it seems most people think the more you eat, the more muscle you put on, which is also not correct. But you do need to eat more calories than you burn in order to gain weight, period.

ddegroff
08-08-2007, 08:17 PM
Bah. Gyms suck. Mine won't even let me work out with my friends anymore because they said I'm acting as a "trainer" and the "real" trainers were complaining.

No kidding. My friends get RESULTS!

Haha, thats some good stuff. :thumbup:

OP: Have her join here and tell her 95% of trainer's are idiots.

sCaRz*Of*PaiN
08-08-2007, 08:56 PM
Bah. Gyms suck. Mine won't even let me work out with my friends anymore because they said I'm acting as a "trainer" and the "real" trainers were complaining.

No kidding. My friends get RESULTS!:clap:

Decker87
08-08-2007, 09:29 PM
So the sky is blue because its uncertain. Gotcha.
When I explained it to my son, all I had to say is that it was due to our atmosphere acts like a prism it divides light which contains all the different colors. He is eight, but can still understand basic principles.

My point is, such an argument can be traced back as far as you want it to go. Even the idea of a "prism" is based on more fundamental laws, and so on. Essentially you find yourself at the cutting edge of particle physics talking about leptons, muons, quarks and such.

LouPac
08-08-2007, 11:17 PM
Calories are like bricks, the more you pile on, the bigger the structure will be.

I don't know what to tell you, if your girl can't listen to common sense. there's really no help for her.

Decker87
08-09-2007, 06:34 AM
There's no need to get angry or personal about any of this. I am simply trying to find some studies clearly showing the link between caloric intake and muscle growth. I think it is a very valid thing to ask for.

Since no one has posted any studies or articles showing this link, and since I haven't found any good ones, I'll assume there are none. All I could find was "about.com guide to bodybuilding Judy Johnson" or whatever.

ShockBoxer
08-09-2007, 07:37 AM
You're best off not telling her about how many calories you're eating. I know better than to bring that topic up in front of any of my family when we get together for a dinner or something... and I'm only at 2400-2600 calories.

(Of course, in my case perception is everything. They see me clear my plate, half of my fiances, an entire dessert, whatever dessert is left unattended around the table, and assume that's how I eat every day. It's not... it's how I eat once a week. They don't get that their half a bag of potato chips a night is doing more harm than a 3000 calorie meal once in a while.)

Decker87
08-09-2007, 08:40 AM
You're best off not telling her about how many calories you're eating.
I've come to this conclusion too. Most people seem to have this perception that 2000 calories is the "golden number" that makes someone healthy.

RCASEYH
08-09-2007, 08:59 AM
I've come to this conclusion too. Most people seem to have this perception that 2000 calories is the "golden number" that makes someone healthy.

Well, as they say ... "Ignorance is Bliss". :)

Anthony
08-09-2007, 09:03 AM
There's no need to get angry or personal about any of this. I am simply trying to find some studies clearly showing the link between caloric intake and muscle growth. I think it is a very valid thing to ask for.

Since no one has posted any studies or articles showing this link, and since I haven't found any good ones, I'll assume there are none. All I could find was "about.com guide to bodybuilding Judy Johnson" or whatever.

If people are getting angry it's because YOU are not listening. There are tons of studies that talk about energy and energy transfer, hence the law of thermodynamics.

Food = energy.
Muscle = energy.
Body Fat = energy.

Eating = transfer of energy from food to your body. If you consume more energy than your body requires, it will get stored for later use. How you train and how you eat will determine how that energy gets stored (muscle or fat).

It's a little more complicated, but hopefully that's enough to answer the original question.

Decker87
08-09-2007, 11:00 AM
If people are getting angry it's because YOU are not listening. There are tons of studies that talk about energy and energy transfer, hence the law of thermodynamics.
"knowing physics" is not the same as "knowing biology".
Would you trust a leading physicist with no other credentials to be your family doctor?

An agreement can be reached with almost anyone that "By eating more, you will get bigger as a whole."
But beyond that, you might say "I need to eat 1500 calories more than maintenance to meet these goals."
And they might reply "I think you only need to eat about 300 more than maintenance to achieve those goals."

This is where it gets very difficult to use math and physics alone to predict what your body needs to achieve certain goals. What would you say in this conversation?

Anthony
08-09-2007, 11:14 AM
No one is telling you to use math and physics to predict anything - there are way too many variables (activity, body composition, food, genetics, etc). They were reference the law of thermodynamics because that's what explains why the energy from food can be stored as energy in the body - which is what you were originally asking to prove.

Exactly how much YOU need is something YOU need to determine, although 10-15% increase until plateau seems to be the norm for most.

DoUgL@S
08-09-2007, 11:25 AM
"knowing physics" is not the same as "knowing biology".
Would you trust a leading physicist with no other credentials to be your family doctor?

An agreement can be reached with almost anyone that "By eating more, you will get bigger as a whole."
But beyond that, you might say "I need to eat 1500 calories more than maintenance to meet these goals."
And they might reply "I think you only need to eat about 300 more than maintenance to achieve those goals."

This is where it gets very difficult to use math and physics alone to predict what your body needs to achieve certain goals. What would you say in this conversation?

Yes you are right, you cannot predict this, because everyone is different. Everybody's genes express differently, everyones mRNA is degraded at different rates, everyones protein synthesis is not identical, everyones enzymology is different. I am not going to predict how many calories YOU need to gain muscle because even if there was a study that dirrectly addressed this, it would require too large a sample size to be reasonable. Add to this the genetic variables that may hav ecome from environmental adaptation to factors such as nutrient content of the food, weather and physical activity of the individual.

Why don't you just run a control experiment on yourself and show her how much you need to gain muscle. Keep notes, track calories and activities. Report back the results.

Just between me and you though, if you do not gain weight you need to eat more. You do not need a specialized understanding of the nucleus to predict the result of an enzymological assay. You need to conduct enough experiments on the enzyme get enough data points to prove or disprove your theory and look for a pattern. Much like "If you eat more, you gain weight." What kind of weight you gain is based on genetics (how all the pathways in YOUR body carry out their processes) and environmental stresses such as resistance training (and or aerobic training).

Holto
08-09-2007, 11:37 AM
"knowing physics" is not the same as "knowing biology".
Would you trust a leading physicist with no other credentials to be your family doctor?

An agreement can be reached with almost anyone that "By eating more, you will get bigger as a whole."
But beyond that, you might say "I need to eat 1500 calories more than maintenance to meet these goals."
And they might reply "I think you only need to eat about 300 more than maintenance to achieve those goals."

This is where it gets very difficult to use math and physics alone to predict what your body needs to achieve certain goals. What would you say in this conversation?

Perhaps the conundrum is that she is correct. You don't really need alot of ADITTIONAL calories to gain weight. I don't think if she understood the concept of maintenance cals that she would disagree that you need to eat over it.

Ask her to produce a study to prove her point.

What might shed some light on this for her is if you dig up studies like the one on meal frequency where all the participants lost the same amount of weight.

That also shatters a myth parroted by most personal trainers and might shift her perspective some.

mickyjune26
08-09-2007, 12:30 PM
I used to tell people things, but they didn't listen...so I stopped talking. Let them figure it out on their own.

But in case they listen to facts, here's one of the more detailed papers I've cared to read:

http://www.wannabebig.com/article.php?articleid=177

one exception - a friend was trying to lose weight. I sent him a few articles, he upped his calories and started dropping inches on his waist. Now he listens.

mickyjune26
08-09-2007, 12:31 PM
I like the idea mentioned above. Have her produce the research. You have nothing to prove to her. If she doesn't do it, you're right because she can't prove you wrong. If she does do it, she'll learn.

Man, it feels good to be right.

Beno79
08-12-2007, 04:18 AM
Guys, I need some relatively serious answers here. While big eating may seem like a basic concept to myself and most people here, it is not that obvious to everyone. I'm looking for some great resources as in STATISTICS and STUDIES that show this connection. If we can get some of these things, it would be a good resource for the whole forum.

Ive found a great article published in Sports Medicine, a peer reviewed international journal, entitled:

'Macronutrient Considerations for the
Sport of Bodybuilding'

which describes exactly what you are looking for. Check out section 2, Efficacy of a Positive Energy Balance on Resistance Exercise-Induced Gains in Muscle Mass.

Unfortunately the file size is too big to post here, its a PDF at 204kb, and I cant reduce that size to the 100kb limit. Its a really thorough, scientific article explaining everything you need to know about diet and how if affects muscle mass.

I think it would be interesting to post it here, is there any way I get the file up?

In the mean time I could email it to you Decker87?

RhodeHouse
08-12-2007, 07:36 AM
I actually read every post here. That's a first. I happen to be a personal trainer in the plastic surgery capitol of the world - Greenwich ,CT. You don't need papers and studies to prove that you are right. Go up to the biggest guy at your gym and ask him about his eating habits. How much protein, calories, etc... Every question you can think of. Most big guys will love to talk about how big thy are. I know I do. Anyone who's is jacked (300lbs or more) will probably tell you the same thing, more or less. It may go something like this.

You: What do you eat?

Me: Everything.

You: How often do you eat?

Me: All the time.

You: How many calories do you eat?

Me: Huh? Just eat. If you're full, eat more.

My question to your girl and the trainer is this? How big is the trainer? Any man under 200lbs is a woman, remember. And EVERY man that is less than 200lbs should have abs and definition in their muscle. You can't flex bone. Where is the info coming from? If he's a 300lb trainer, you might wanna listen to him. If he shops in the Men's Petite section, he has no F@#$ING clue what he's talking about.

As a side note, you should tell your girl to worry about herself and stop worrying about you and your eating habits. Sounds like she wants you to starve - and that's not cool.

I'm off to eat the Devil's Food - McDonald's mmm, mmm, mmm

Paul Stagg
08-12-2007, 07:50 AM
There's no need to get angry or personal about any of this. I am simply trying to find some studies clearly showing the link between caloric intake and muscle growth. I think it is a very valid thing to ask for.



There is no more reason to do a study proving the laws of thermodynamics than there is to prove the Earth is round.

You sound like you are looking for excuses.

smalls
08-12-2007, 11:47 PM
I actually read every post here. That's a first. I happen to be a personal trainer in the plastic surgery capitol of the world - Greenwich ,CT. You don't need papers and studies to prove that you are right. Go up to the biggest guy at your gym and ask him about his eating habits. How much protein, calories, etc... Every question you can think of. Most big guys will love to talk about how big thy are. I know I do. Anyone who's is jacked (300lbs or more) will probably tell you the same thing, more or less. It may go something like this.

You: What do you eat?

Me: Everything.

You: How often do you eat?

Me: All the time.

You: How many calories do you eat?

Me: Huh? Just eat. If you're full, eat more.

My question to your girl and the trainer is this? How big is the trainer? Any man under 200lbs is a woman, remember. And EVERY man that is less than 200lbs should have abs and definition in their muscle. You can't flex bone. Where is the info coming from? If he's a 300lb trainer, you might wanna listen to him. If he shops in the Men's Petite section, he has no F@#$ING clue what he's talking about.

As a side note, you should tell your girl to worry about herself and stop worrying about you and your eating habits. Sounds like she wants you to starve - and that's not cool.

I'm off to eat the Devil's Food - McDonald's mmm, mmm, mmm



Size=knowledge and lack of size=no knowledge

LOL, You sound like an educated open minded personal trainer.

Twan
08-13-2007, 12:25 AM
Well, the whole PT thing is another topic. I mean, maybe he's too lazy to get big, but he'll train you to do it right if you pay him. Just because he isn't big doesn't mean he doesn't know.

RhodeHouse
08-13-2007, 12:01 PM
Smalls,
Lack of size does not mean no knowledge. I never said that. However, when I was skinny, I sought out BIG people and asked how they got big. When I wanted to get strong, I sought out people that were stronger than me. It's actually a practice in using common sense. Why would I ask a skinny person how to get big? It doesn't make any sense. If you're not as big as I am, then you don't know what it takes to get bigger. You don't know how hard it is, because you haven't gone thru it. That's not an insult. Far from it. But, it's the truth. Who here has seen their doctor about an injury? Most of the time, not all, but most, the Dr. tells you not too lift heavy or don't do that, or something along those lines. Do you listen? No, probably not. So why would you listen to a skinny guy if you want to get big?

Twan,
To some extent, you are right. Because he's not big, he might know. But chances are, he doesn't know what it takes. He can tell you what it takes, and tell you which article to read, and which diet to follow, but IF he's never done it, then he really doesn't KNOW what it takes. It's kinda like the Holiday Inn Express commercials.

"You're a Dr.?

"No. But I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night."

In my humble opinion, I go to the people that look and perform like I want to, and ask their advice. They've been there and done that. Science and theory is all fine and dandy. As my esteemed training partner, Vincent Dizenzo says, "lift weights, not books."

Before I get ripped for my response, the next time you need to get a tooth pulled, go see an orthodondist, rather than a dentist. Doesn't make any sense does it?

Where has all the common sense gone?

the doc
08-13-2007, 12:10 PM
no matter what evidence you present some will always ignore the truth

Cirino83
08-13-2007, 01:15 PM
Anyone who's is jacked (300lbs or more) will probably tell you the same thing, more or less.

300lbs or more is more than likely fat, not jacked. Unless you train with Mr. Olympia and his buddies.

My question to your girl and the trainer is this? How big is the trainer? Any man under 200lbs is a woman, remember. And EVERY man that is less than 200lbs should have abs and definition in their muscle. You can't flex bone. Where is the info coming from? If he's a 300lb trainer, you might wanna listen to him. If he shops in the Men's Petite section, he has no F@#$ING clue what he's talking about.

Dumbest reasoning I've seen in a while. For example, Lyle McDonald is skinny and by no means jacked, but he is one of the most educated people about nutrition that I've come across. Would you not listen to him because he's not 300lbs or more?



Maybe I misunderstood, but it didn't make good sense to me.

Vapour Trails
08-13-2007, 04:36 PM
This is a classic type thread, everyone basically repeats the post before them and everyone feels good about being right.

The crucial part is defining "a lot". IE the trainer said you don't have to eat "a lot".

Well what the hell is a lot? Until you know what "a lot" is, why the hell would you bother arguing about it.

Some day everyone will have to explain there endless desire to preach to the converted.

RhodeHouse
08-13-2007, 05:39 PM
Cirino, you did misunderstand me, to some extent. I do listen to people's advice, regardless of their build. It's more tools to add to the toolbox. My point is, I want info from the horse's mouth. I don't know who Lyle McDonald is, but I love his restaurant chain. The Double Quarter Pounder w/cheese is a favorite of mine. When I want to learn something, I go to the people who I think will know best. For me, if a 165lb PLer squats 700, that's awesome. It's truly amazing. But, he can't tell me what it's like to have 1000 on my back. Only someone that has squatted 1000 knows what that feels like. To me, it's the same thing with diet. I don't want to know what the most educated people know. I don't care about numbers and counting calories and stuff like that. That stuff does have it's place. Like I said before, I wanted to be strong and I sought out the strongest people I could find. Guess what, I'm strong now. I was skinny, now I'm big. Sometimes, the answers are a lot easier to find than most people realize.

A lot of people in the fitness industry talk the talk, but don't practice what they preach. I look for those that practice what they preach. It worked for me.

thor310
08-13-2007, 05:49 PM
Decker,

I did a brief search on pubmed and web of science, but I didn't find any articles that reported muscle gain correlations with caloric intake in healthy individuals.

I found some that talked about protein intake and studies in sick people, neither of which qualify for what you're looking for.

Holto
08-13-2007, 08:17 PM
As my esteemed training partner, Vincent Dizenzo says, "lift weights, not books."

http://www.embroidables.com/Embroidery-Design/LOL-Laughing-Out-Loud-Embroidery-Design-613.jpg


RhodeHouse:

The problem with what you call logic is that it's inductive logic, not deductive logic. Try reading up on it, it will change the way you think.

thor310
08-13-2007, 09:50 PM
In my humble opinion, I go to the people that look and perform like I want to, and ask their advice. They've been there and done that. Science and theory is all fine and dandy.

medicine worked like that, then the FDA stepped in.



As my esteemed training partner, Vincent Dizenzo says, "lift weights, not books."


it's a dirty job, but someone's gotta read and write those books so they can design the supplements and routines for you to take advantage of your body's biochemistry. Maybe the guys you ask read the books? :study:

I've always wondered where the 'meat head' stereo type came from ;)

Beno79
08-14-2007, 02:20 AM
Since no one has posted any studies or articles showing this link, and since I haven't found any good ones, I'll assume there are none. All I could find was "about.com guide to bodybuilding Judy Johnson" or whatever.


You've been asking for proper studies to explain this, and Ive posted that Ive got one a while ago...do you want it?

Songsangnim
08-14-2007, 04:56 AM
I actually read every post here. That's a first. I happen to be a personal trainer in the plastic surgery capitol of the world - Greenwich ,CT. You don't need papers and studies to prove that you are right. Go up to the biggest guy at your gym and ask him about his eating habits. How much protein, calories, etc... Every question you can think of. Most big guys will love to talk about how big thy are. I know I do. Anyone who's is jacked (300lbs or more) will probably tell you the same thing, more or less. It may go something like this.

There are very few people who are jacked at 300 lbs.

You: What do you eat?

Me: Everything.

You: How often do you eat?

Me: All the time.

You: How many calories do you eat?

Me: Huh? Just eat. If you're full, eat more.

My question to your girl and the trainer is this? How big is the trainer? Any man under 200lbs is a woman, remember.

Now this is just silly. What if he is 5 foot 4?

And EVERY man that is less than 200lbs should have abs and definition in their muscle.

Not EVERY man is a bodybuilder or interested in looking like one. Who are you to dictate what men should look like and be?

You can't flex bone. Where is the info coming from? If he's a 300lb trainer, you might wanna listen to him. If he shops in the Men's Petite section, he has no F@#$ING clue what he's talking about.

Size does not indicate knowledge. That 300 lb could have (and if he's jacked it's 99.9% guaranted he DOES) have good genetics and uses steroids. Again the worth of someone's input is not necessarily matched by their size. You could be passing up some very good information that would be more relevant to you than some drug using genetic freak's. Tell me do you think the advice in Flex and Muscle and Fitness is better than the advice...oh say on these forums?



As a side note, you should tell your girl to worry about herself and stop worrying about you and your eating habits. Sounds like she wants you to starve - and that's not cool.

I'm off to eat the Devil's Food - McDonald's mmm, mmm, mmm

Wow... just wow... :bang:

Paul Stagg
08-14-2007, 09:42 AM
I think many of you are missing RhodeHouse's point.

Questor
08-14-2007, 10:14 AM
Teach her the law of thermodynamics.

It is the answer to all.

Didn't this first response answer the thread? Everything after that was unnecessary, IMHO.

RhodeHouse
08-14-2007, 02:16 PM
Paul - thank you for getting it.

Thor310 - the guys I asked didn't read the books. That's what everyone except Paul Stagg seems to be missing.

Songsangnim - Keep reading your books and studies. I've done the work and have the physical proof that I'm right, regardless of what the fancy Dr's write in their books.

Here's some sage-like advice for those of you who are confused. This comes from myself, as well as many accomplished lifters that I know.
1. Work your ass off
2. Any program will work as long as you believe in it with all of your heart
3. Lift weights - not books (more should listen to this one)
4. Look to those who have DONE it for advice. Not those who preach it, but don't look the part

Happy lifting! SFW

Questor
08-14-2007, 02:25 PM
Paul - thank you for getting it.

Thor310 - the guys I asked didn't read the books. That's what everyone except Paul Stagg seems to be missing.

Songsangnim - Keep reading your books and studies. I've done the work and have the physical proof that I'm right, regardless of what the fancy Dr's write in their books.

Here's some sage-like advice for those of you who are confused. This comes from myself, as well as many accomplished lifters that I know.
1. Work your ass off
2. Any program will work as long as you believe in it with all of your heart
3. Lift weights - not books (more should listen to this one)
4. Look to those who have DONE it for advice. Not those who preach it, but don't look the part

Happy lifting! SFW

You forgot:

5. Eat big.

RhodeHouse
08-14-2007, 04:49 PM
Rock on Questor! Sometimes the saturated fat blocks the mental uptake. But, apparently, my approach is "wrong", so maybe I left it out subconsciously.

5. Eat Big (thanks for reminding me)

Songsangnim
08-15-2007, 02:02 AM
Paul - thank you for getting it.

Thor310 - the guys I asked didn't read the books. That's what everyone except Paul Stagg seems to be missing.

Songsangnim - Keep reading your books and studies. I've done the work and have the physical proof that I'm right, regardless of what the fancy Dr's write in their books.

Here's some sage-like advice for those of you who are confused. This comes from myself, as well as many accomplished lifters that I know.
1. Work your ass off
2. Any program will work as long as you believe in it with all of your heart
3. Lift weights - not books (more should listen to this one)
4. Look to those who have DONE it for advice. Not those who preach it, but don't look the part

Happy lifting! SFW

1 Is a given

2. Is somewhat incorrect. Programs designed by the drug using genetically elite will not likely work for the beginner or natural trainee. "Any program that takes into account the individual's situation will work..." would have been better.

3. Both are required. Simply because something feels right or provides results does not necessarily negate that it might not be right or provide better results if read up on.

4. Again see number 2. I'd rather listen to Lyle Macdonald, or Stuart MacRobert, than Ronnie Coleman or Jay Cutler. This is not to say that big guys don't know what they are talking about, it is more to point out the fallacy of thinking that simply because someone is big they know best what works.

Holto
08-15-2007, 11:38 AM
It must just be a crazy coincidence but the folks I know that train like animals AND are smart enough to read up on nutrition and exercise physiology always look better than those that train blind.

People like Built and Anthony would be prime examples.

There are far too many big guys out there who simply train hard and have good genetics and don't have much more than a vauge understanding of how they got there.

I've never met anyone who was big AND had low bodyfat that didn't do a fair bit of reading. I don't consider the lifetime bulkers in the gym big. I consider them bulky.

RhodeHouse
08-15-2007, 01:29 PM
1 Is a given

2. Is somewhat incorrect. Programs designed by the drug using genetically elite will not likely work for the beginner or natural trainee. "Any program that takes into account the individual's situation will work..." would have been better.

3. Both are required. Simply because something feels right or provides results does not necessarily negate that it might not be right or provide better results if read up on.

4. Again see number 2. I'd rather listen to Lyle Macdonald, or Stuart MacRobert, than Ronnie Coleman or Jay Cutler. This is not to say that big guys don't know what they are talking about, it is more to point out the fallacy of thinking that simply because someone is big they know best what works.


You are grossly misinformed about #2. I train with guys who use and don't use drugs. WE TRAIN THE SAME WAY! And, stop with the BS genetics and give some people credit for the hard work they've put in. You, clearly, are not capable of putting in the necessary work, and choose to blame it on genetics. Don't blame Mom and Dad for your short comings. Hell, I have Marfans Syndrome. Talk about genetics getting in the way of success. My problem is, I actually wanted to bust my ass and didn't care what some Dr. told me not to do. Guess what, I succeeded at everything they told me not to do. The only thing you can blame on genetics is your lack of desire and ability to find any and all excuses why you can't achieve your goals.

I agree a little bit with you on #3. I have read a little bit about stuff, but that reading is not the basis of my work. I lift the weights and thru trial and error have made myself what I am today. The best thing that books can be used for are a boards for Board Presses.

And you would rather listen to MacDonald and MacRobert than Ronnie C. and Jay Cutler? I'm sure those guys are very well versed in nutrition and diet. I will never discredit the time they have spent studying and learning about diet and the body, but REALLY? The last guy I'd listen to is the winningest contestant in the Olympia and the current champ. That would just be dumb to listen to those guys. Which contests have the Mac Brother's won?

IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT, YOU REALLY SHOULDN'T TALK LIKE YOU KNOW HOW TO DO IT!

RhodeHouse
08-15-2007, 01:32 PM
I've never met anyone who was big AND had low bodyfat that didn't do a fair bit of reading.

You haven't met me, then.

And you guys are right about the genetics. I'm not fighting it anymore. I am genetically gifted. There is no way you will ever be a gifted as I am. God Bless Genetics!

Holto
08-15-2007, 01:41 PM
Bro, if you honestly think Ronnie Coleman or Jay Cuts know more about nutrition than Lyle McDonald this site is not for you.

If reading isn't necessary, why are you here?

Cirino83
08-15-2007, 02:33 PM
^^ Ronnie and Jay probably don't know dick compared to Lyle. They have their diets mapped out by people who 'preach and read'

RhodeHouse
08-15-2007, 02:34 PM
I have no idea who Lyle is. I don't know anything except his name. In my experience, those who look the part, usually have a good idea about what to do. Not to say that Lyle doesn't know, but if YOU haven't done it, I don't care what you know. That's where the phrase, "been there, done that", comes into play. Ronnie and Jay have "been there, done that." That means more to me than the most educated person out there. No pencil neck has ever taught me anything about training or nutrition. Just my experience.

Holto
08-15-2007, 02:58 PM
I have no idea who Lyle is. I don't know anything except his name. In my experience, those who look the part, usually have a good idea about what to do. Not to say that Lyle doesn't know, but if YOU haven't done it, I don't care what you know. That's where the phrase, "been there, done that", comes into play. Ronnie and Jay have "been there, done that." That means more to me than the most educated person out there. No pencil neck has ever taught me anything about training or nutrition. Just my experience.

Again, just curios. Why are you here?

DoUgL@S
08-15-2007, 03:23 PM
I have no idea who Lyle is. I don't know anything except his name. In my experience, those who look the part, usually have a good idea about what to do. Not to say that Lyle doesn't know, but if YOU haven't done it, I don't care what you know. That's where the phrase, "been there, done that", comes into play. Ronnie and Jay have "been there, done that." That means more to me than the most educated person out there. No pencil neck has ever taught me anything about training or nutrition. Just my experience.

Although I agree with the fact that experience is a good teacher, in the same token a good grasp on how and why your body does what you want it to do (in your case put on lean mass) can do nothing but improve the efficacy with which you get there. One is not greater than the other, they compliment each other. A good grasp on the science helps you build a solid base of knowledge, then you can fine tune your particular training and nutrition to better suit you, that is were experience and trial and error comes in.

I respect the fact that you have overcome via hard work and determination, but if one of those preachy nerds could have got you there in half the time, wouldn't you have listened.

I hope you continue to contribute to this board, and most of us are always willing to take advice and criticism if it means that we can learn something.

sCaRz*Of*PaiN
08-15-2007, 05:16 PM
I have no idea who Lyle is. I don't know anything except his name. In my experience, those who look the part, usually have a good idea about what to do. Not to say that Lyle doesn't know, but if YOU haven't done it, I don't care what you know. That's where the phrase, "been there, done that", comes into play. Ronnie and Jay have "been there, done that." That means more to me than the most educated person out there. No pencil neck has ever taught me anything about training or nutrition. Just my experience.Do you have anything better to do?

smalls
08-15-2007, 05:18 PM
Smalls,
Lack of size does not mean no knowledge. I never said that. However, when I was skinny, I sought out BIG people and asked how they got big. When I wanted to get strong, I sought out people that were stronger than me. It's actually a practice in using common sense. Why would I ask a skinny person how to get big? It doesn't make any sense. If you're not as big as I am, then you don't know what it takes to get bigger. You don't know how hard it is, because you haven't gone thru it. That's not an insult. Far from it. But, it's the truth. Who here has seen their doctor about an injury? Most of the time, not all, but most, the Dr. tells you not too lift heavy or don't do that, or something along those lines. Do you listen? No, probably not. So why would you listen to a skinny guy if you want to get big?

Twan,
To some extent, you are right. Because he's not big, he might know. But chances are, he doesn't know what it takes. He can tell you what it takes, and tell you which article to read, and which diet to follow, but IF he's never done it, then he really doesn't KNOW what it takes. It's kinda like the Holiday Inn Express commercials.

"You're a Dr.?

"No. But I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night."

In my humble opinion, I go to the people that look and perform like I want to, and ask their advice. They've been there and done that. Science and theory is all fine and dandy. As my esteemed training partner, Vincent Dizenzo says, "lift weights, not books."

Before I get ripped for my response, the next time you need to get a tooth pulled, go see an orthodondist, rather than a dentist. Doesn't make any sense does it?

Where has all the common sense gone?


I understand where your coming from, it makes sense obviously. But it's still wrong, getting big isnt rocket science. And it certainly doesnt take first hand experience to understand the simple principles required to induce hypertrophy and continually make progress. So using your logic is just a simple minded view of those who have gone before me obviousy did it right so they can teach me how to do it. I know an indivual who has no idea how many calories he eats. Often only takes in 2 meals a day, and will go weeks without training. He is bigger, leaner and stronger than 95% of the people at any gym. The only time he takes in a significant source of calories is when he gets a frosty and fries at wendys. We all know people who have poor training/ eating habits yet still look better than most people. I certainly wouldnt do what he does, as I take more calories and a lot more consistency to make any type of progress.

Being able to take advice or examples with a grain of salt and use many different sources to gather your own knowledge is far more valuable than going up to the biggest guy in the gym and asked him how he got big. IMO. But whatever works for ya keep doing it.

The main reason I responded to your post is because it was the exact type of advice that his girlfriend got in the first place instead of the research/credible based information the poster was looking for. No bigge.

Songsangnim
08-15-2007, 06:14 PM
You are grossly misinformed about #2. I train with guys who use and don't use drugs. WE TRAIN THE SAME WAY! And, stop with the BS genetics and give some people credit for the hard work they've put in.
(1) You, clearly, are not capable of putting in the necessary work, and choose to blame it on genetics. Don't blame Mom and Dad for your short comings. Hell, I have Marfans Syndrome. Talk about genetics getting in the way of success. My problem is, I actually wanted to bust my ass and didn't care what some Dr. told me not to do. Guess what, I succeeded at everything they told me not to do. (2) The only thing you can blame on genetics is your lack of desire and ability to find any and all excuses why you can't achieve your goals.

I agree a little bit with you on #3. I have read a little bit about stuff, but that reading is not the basis of my work. I lift the weights and thru trial and error have made myself what I am today. (3) The best thing that books can be used for are a boards for Board Presses.

And you would rather listen to MacDonald and MacRobert than Ronnie C. and Jay Cutler? I'm sure those guys are very well versed in nutrition and diet. I will never discredit the time they have spent studying and learning about diet and the body, but REALLY? (4) The last guy I'd listen to is the winningest contestant in the Olympia and the current champ. That would just be dumb to listen to those guys. Which contests have the Mac Brother's won?

(5) IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT, YOU REALLY SHOULDN'T TALK LIKE YOU KNOW HOW TO DO IT!

(numbers are mine)

1. When did I ever say anything about that in this thread? And while we are on the subject I should point out that you don't know me, don't know how I train, and are jumping to conclusions based on extremely faulty logic.

2. So anybody can win the Mr. Olympia then if they have enough desire? Because that is what logically follows from your claim.


3. Right. Just ignore what anybody says and lift... Umm this is a forum for discussing and reading about bodybuilding. One of the first things people tell newbies on here is to read. According to you that's pointless.

4. Both Mr. Coleman and Cutler use gurus. These gurus design their diet and training. Yet these gurus are comparative pencil necks. Why are Coleman and Cutler listening to these people who are MUCH smaller and FAR less muscular than they are? Because their advice works. Coleman and Cutler just follow the program and do as they are told.

Obviously they work hard...that's a given. But if hard work were ALL that it took to win the Olympia, I'd be a top six contender. I've trained so hard in the past that I have injured myself...can't put more effort into it than that. These days I train smarter, not harder...and achieve better results. Not to mention I stay injury free.

5. I agree 100%.

BTW I have a few questions for you.

(a) When you DO read, what exactly do you read? FLEX or Muscle and Fitness perchance?

(b) What training philosophy do you follow (ex: the Weider Principles)?

(c) Do you have any pics on this site?

Songsangnim
08-15-2007, 08:13 PM
I think many of you are missing RhodeHouse's point.


I'm missing the connections from his point to certain conclusions he is drawing from it.

Hopefully his replies to the questions I posed in my last post should fill in the blanks.

RhodeHouse
08-16-2007, 09:25 AM
(numbers are mine)
.

BTW I have a few questions for you.

(a) When you DO read, what exactly do you read? FLEX or Muscle and Fitness perchance?

(b) What training philosophy do you follow (ex: the Weider Principles)?

(c) Do you have any pics on this site?


A. I don't read much about training anymore. And, it was never Muscle and Fiction or FLEX. I read all of Louie Simmons' material. That helped me understand the Westside template. Once I understood the reasons why he had his guys do Dynamic Effort, Max Effort, and Repetion work, I made his basic principles work for me. What I did to learn was to read, obviously. However, the other thing I did, that a lot of people don't do nowadays is, I thought about my training. Trial and error. You have to make mistakes to understand what works for you and what doesn't.

Instead of reading, I talk with people in powerlifting that are elite and or were at the top of the sport. Jim Wendler, Dave Tate, and Marc Bartley of EliteFTS. I train with Vincent Dizenzo (former 275lb world record holder in the bench and current IPA world record holder in the unequipped bench. He at one time, was ranked in the top 5 in two weight classes, and is one of the 1st 10 men or so to bench 800) I also train with another 800lb bencher. I have travelled all over this country to train with people who are better than me. NO BOOK CAN TEACH THAT!

B. I have modified the Westside and Metal Militia template to fit my needs. It's MY training philosophy. I've borrowed the basics of Westside and the Militia. I did read about some of the ideas, but went to the source of the information and learned directly from them.

C. I do not have pictures up. My lack of computer knowledge hinders me. I do have some video that I can post from a different site.

My bench went from 455 to 620 in about a year and a half. My squat went from 788 to 955 in a little over two years. And my deadlift went from 650 to 750 in a year. My bodyweight went from 263, when I started training at Southside, to 307 in about 2 years. Didn't read a book about training the whole time. I listened to those that were bigger and stronger than me. The best way to learn is to train with people who have done it. We had a guy at the gym who had more fancy degrees and initials after his name. I learned nothing from him. Lift weights, not books. Use some common sense. That will get your further than you think.

Anthony
08-16-2007, 09:47 AM
Science constantly plays catch up to what elite coaches and athletes have been doing for 20+ years. Save yourself some time and question the folks who can produce observable, measurable, and repeatable results with their athletes.

Holto
08-16-2007, 10:59 AM
307 in about 2 years

My point exactly. I know some big guys that don't read, but I don't know ANYBODY that is big AND cut that doesn't read.

You sir are nowhere near cut at that bodyweight.

RhodeHouse
08-16-2007, 11:30 AM
Holto - how do you know? What if I use drugs? What if I have tremendous genetics? What if I just know exactly what to do for my body? Your definition of cut may be greatly different than mine.

It's funny how you go right to the bodyweight and skip over the lifting numbers. Convenient.

Herandi
08-16-2007, 12:00 PM
I doubt anyone has done a study showing you have to eat to gain mass. That is like saying you have to breathe to get oxygen. If she can't grasp that I would find a new girlfriend.

Statistics showing big people eat more calories are all over. Hardly a day goes by without a story about america getting fatter and how fast food is making every obese.

lol :withstupi

RhodeHouse
08-16-2007, 12:20 PM
http://asp.elitefts.com/qa/default.asp?qid=57524&tid=
http://asp.elitefts.com/qa/default.asp?qid=57521&tid=53
http://asp.elitefts.com/qa/default.asp?qid=57501&tid=53

If you don't get it -sorry.

Holto
08-16-2007, 01:28 PM
Holto - how do you know?

Oh, I guess following the Olympia for the last 15yrs gives me a pretty good idea.

Do you consider the guys in these videos cut?

I saw some chubby mo-fo's in there. Beer guts and bloated faces. I respect PL's if that is your thing. But don't claim to be cut if you look anything like those guys.

Favorite quote from the videos:

"99% of the fitness community is not lifting weights"

Brilliant!

Thats why I'm not progressing. I forgot to go to the gym and I got caught up in all this learning.

This is type of BS people spew when they don't have the intellectual horsepower to absorb the underlying science. Classic.

If all you want is to be big and strong then sure lifting big and eating big will get you there. If you want to be cut it's a little more complicated and takes more understanding and a lot more discipline.

smalls
08-16-2007, 02:35 PM
I've never met anyone who was big AND had low bodyfat that didn't do a fair bit of reading.

You haven't met me, then.



LOL, When I read this I was going to respond with the fact that your defenition of low bodyfat is obviously grossly different than holto's. But you seem to realize that yourself just a few posts later.



Your definition of cut may be greatly different than mine.


RhodeHouse, Your a big, very very strong human being. But for an adult you are one of the most cocky, closeminded, one-sided, unable to view the world from any perspective but yours, posters I have ever encountered.

How can you fail to see that not everyone wants to look like an overweight, hypertensive, powerlifter. Everyone here can see that perspective, we see what your goals are and why you eat/train the way you do. Most people here very much respect powerlifting and most all endeavours to get big. Yet you cut yourself off from anything that differs from your goals or ideas. Why is that?

SpecialK
08-16-2007, 02:46 PM
First you say this:


And, stop with the BS genetics and give some people credit for the hard work they've put in. You, clearly, are not capable of putting in the necessary work, and choose to blame it on genetics. Don't blame Mom and Dad for your short comings. Hell, I have Marfans Syndrome. Talk about genetics getting in the way of success. My problem is, I actually wanted to bust my ass and didn't care what some Dr. told me not to do. Guess what, I succeeded at everything they told me not to do. The only thing you can blame on genetics is your lack of desire and ability to find any and all excuses why you can't achieve your goals.

Then later you say this:


What if I have tremendous genetics?

So which is it? Do people have genetic advantages or not?:scratch:

So tell me, if someone does the following:

1. trains to near failure using a good routine
2. eats big, drinks enough water, etc.
3. gets adequate rest

and they aren't shaping up to look like an IFBB Pro after several years of this, then what are they doing wrong? Because clearly genetics aren't a factor, so how does one "work harder" in this case? It's such a vague term.

RhodeHouse
08-16-2007, 02:49 PM
Smalls - you misunderstand me. I'm not cocky. I know what I'm talking about. No reason to over-complicate things. i can see what the goals of a bodybuilder are. But getting bigger is the same regardless of your goals.

Holto - Dude, you missed the whole point, as I knew you would. It's not what they looked like, but what they were saying, and you missed it. Good luck in your quest.

Holto
08-16-2007, 03:15 PM
Holto - Dude, you missed the whole point, as I knew you would. It's not what they looked like, but what they were saying, and you missed it. Good luck in your quest.

Well following your logic if I ABSOLUTELY don't want to look like those guys why would I care what they say?

RhodeHouse
08-17-2007, 12:02 AM
Holto - Dave Tate -the guy talking about guru's, was 262 and 6% BF at that seminar. Jim Wendler, the guy with the tatoos, is 242lbs at 11%. Matt K, not the super-jacked guy with the goatee is the Arnold Classic 242 champ. Totally bodybuilder shredded. I hate to be that jacked.

SpecialK - My point about genetics is this. I find it's always the easy way out for people. If they can't achieve their goals they blame it on genetics. The human body is so amazing. If you have the desire and the willingness to do what it takes, nothing can stop you. If you train hard and eat well and rest, like you stated, and don't become an IFBB Pro - START TAKING DRUGS! ALL of those guys are jacked to the gills on drugs.

"If you don't have the genetics, get the generics." Louie Simmons

There's your answer to the genetics question. What are people willing to do to reach their goals? Genetics didn't keep me from benching 620 and squatting 955. But they should have.

As a former college football coach I always heard how so and so's kid was great, but never got the chance. Or the coach's son is QB, so my kid didn't get to play. Bull$hit! Your kid sucked. face it. He didn't have the drive to do everything he needed to do to play. End of story. People that play that card, suck. And will suck at life because they'll have an excuse for everyhthing. So what's stopping you from becoming an IFBB Pro? Only yourself.

sCaRz*Of*PaiN
08-17-2007, 03:04 AM
"If you don't have the genetics, get the generics." Louie Simmons

There's your answer to the genetics question.That's a horrible quote and doesn't answer anything. Genetics does play a role and juicing isn't going to make up for horrible genetics. They can help you reach new levels, but not everyone is going to become the next Ronnie Coleman...even after a decade or more of hard work.



As a former college football coach I always heard how so and so's kid was great, but never got the chance. Or the coach's son is QB, so my kid didn't get to play. Bull$hit! Your kid sucked. face it. He didn't have the drive to do everything he needed to do to play. End of story. People that play that card, suck. And will suck at life because they'll have an excuse for everyhthing. So what's stopping you from becoming an IFBB Pro? Only yourself.Some people try their hardest and still suck at sports. I don't see what you're getting at. Genetics can stop you from becoming an IFBB pro. If you are huge but your physique looks like ass because you have awful symmetry or whatever, you're not going to get very far.


However, I do agree that too many people blame genetics when they really haven't even reached their own potential.

Songsangnim
08-17-2007, 03:45 AM
SpecialK - My point about genetics is this. I find it's always the easy way out for people. If they can't achieve their goals they blame it on genetics. The human body is so amazing. If you have the desire and the willingness to do what it takes, nothing can stop you. "If you don't have the genetics, get the generics." Louie Simmons

So what's stopping you from becoming an IFBB Pro? Only yourself.


Desire and willingness will not make up for the lack of genetics. Period. Yes too many people play the genetics card too early as a way of excuse. Yet at the same time there are MANY MANY people who have great desire and all the willingness in the world who are taking drugs. So why are there only a handful of IFBB's pros? Because genetics isn't just about ability to gain size, it also has to do with symmetry, ability to utilize drugs, ability to tolerate excessive amounts of training, recovery....

Genetics is the NUMBER ONE factor in bodybuilding or powerlifting. All the drugs in the world will not make up for say a terrible structure with fragile joints. There is no way a 120 lbs man (at his adult weight) will ever build enough muscle to oust a competitor with Cutler or Coleman like genetics (all other things being equal)


If you got to your current status then you had good genetics, medical condition notwithstanding.

Your remarks are an insult to every member of these forums who wants to get big. By your logic we just don't want it badly enough. Not only that, they are flat out wrong. Genetics is and will always be the determining factor. Drugs, training, eating, none of that will get you to IFFB pro status if the raw material (genetics) is not there. Period.

And if ever somehow one does, he will not do well. You need symmetry, outstanding musculature, the ability to get 'dry' and 'lean'...all these are factors of genetics (influenced of course by factors such as drugs, diet and training).

But drugs, diet and training will only shore up weak genetic shortcomings. Compared to someone with great genetics (again all other things being equal) your flaws will be easily apparent.

Decker87
08-17-2007, 06:43 AM
Well this has gone off track fast! I don't see how anyone can rightfully deny the role of genetics, but I also don't understand why it's discussed so much. Is anyone really changing anyone's mind?

Alex.V
08-17-2007, 07:08 AM
Without getting drawn in to this... suffice it to say that I have yet to encounter an individual who was simply genetically unable to achieve his goals. Genetics, unless there are underlying genetic anomalies, are not enough to account for the drastic differences in physical size, strength, recovery capabilities, etc., between top level athletes and average joes. Genetics will separate the Lance Armstrongs from the David Millars, but you're talking about the top level of the playing field.

Individual training regimens, recovery capabilities..****, even thermodynamic efficiencies, are all a big black box. I seriously doubt the majority of even elite athletes have discovered their true genetic potential; they've simply gotten very lucky when it comes to finding a routine (and athletic field) that suits them, and have applied themselves incredibly hard to excel.

I agree, there is a genetic component to all this. But it is nowhere NEAR as important as some here seem to believe.

A man who is 120 pounds at his adult weight may never be as massive as Cutler. But he could most likely become a very strong, very muscular 190-200. IFBB pro? Nah, not in the heavyweights. But maybe in the lighter weight classes. A guy with long arms and a narrow chest... world record bencher? Nah. But could still become brutally strong in other lifts. Hell, with the right gear (both kinds) and grip he could end up pushing some impressive weight.

I've simply known too many people who get discouraged because they've hit their "genetic limit", and believe they are cursed and physical unable to go past their current point without massive external help.

Rhodes, even though his tone isn't exactly conciliatory, is dead on in his lack of sympathy for most people. Yes, a lot of guys here bust their asses as have a hard time getting where they need to be. (However, keep in mind, this population here is self-selecting and proactive; they are educating themselves on the subject and doing more than the average person to get results.)

But I ask, have the "hardgainer" types here tried EVERYTHING? Drastic switch in routines? Diet? Recovery? Loading protocol? Exercise selection?

Most likely not. And until you have, I have a very, very hard time accepting any genetic explanation for a lack of results.

Some of you guys are even admitting (Scarz) that people blame genetics when they haven't reached their potential. I put forth that the majority of people have not.

The people who try their hardest, yet still suck at sports, should maybe be trying smarter, not harder, or changing their given sport. I can go out every day and practice with a MLS team, but I will probably never be fantastic at soccer (football, whatever). However, throw me in there as a middle linebacker with all the resources I need to train and practice full time, and I'd probably have the knack for it.

Again, I say genetics is the last 5% of the puzzle. Very, very few people outside the top echelon of any sport (or oiled-up beauty pageant) can fall back on that 5% and use it to explain a lack of success.

However, yes, 5% is often the difference between first place in the Olympics and second place in a regional semifinal.

Take all that for what it's worth.

Holto
08-17-2007, 08:03 AM
Holto - Dave Tate -the guy talking about guru's, was 262 and 6% BF at that seminar. Jim Wendler, the guy with the tatoos, is 242lbs at 11%.

Sorry dude those guys are bloated and it's not just the D-Bol. Post a link that shows any of these guys with their shirts off.

SpecialK
08-17-2007, 08:18 AM
SpecialK - My point about genetics is this. I find it's always the easy way out for people. If they can't achieve their goals they blame it on genetics. The human body is so amazing. If you have the desire and the willingness to do what it takes, nothing can stop you. If you train hard and eat well and rest, like you stated, and don't become an IFBB Pro - START TAKING DRUGS! ALL of those guys are jacked to the gills on drugs.

I agree with you to a point. Most beginners who whine about not seeing results have no one but themselves to blame for their lack of training knowledge, poor diet, etc. and aren't in a position to be blaming genetics for anything.

However, take a look on this site. We have what, a few hundred active members? And how many IFBB pros do we have? Zero. Yet on this site you will find many hard-working people who bust their ass every day in the gym. Just take a look at many of the journals that get updated every day. Are you telling me all of these people are slacking off or something?

This leads to my next point - you keep saying "work harder". What exactly does that even mean? Again, let's say a person does the following:

1. trains to near failure on every working set using a solid routine
2. eats enough food for growth
3. gets adequate rest

What more is there? How does someone "train harder"? Should they do twice the volume? Workout twice per day? Go to failure on EVERY set? What does it mean to "work harder"?

Regarding your comment about drugs - most of the drug users on this site are among those who are the most dedicated, yet how many of them are anywhere close to being card-carrying IFBB pros? Zero. (no offense, many of you have very impressive physiques, but my comment was specifically aimed at becoming an IFBB pro.)



So what's stopping you from becoming an IFBB Pro? Only yourself.

This is just one of those "feel-good" quotes that people like teachers use to get kids to feel good about themselves, right along with "you can do anything if you put your mind to it". Ask a roomful of kindergarten boys what they want to be when they grow up, and a few will inevitably say "pro athlete" or "president of the USA". The teacher will then spout off some BS like "you can do it if you put your mind to it", when the reality is very few have the natural ability to become a pro athlete, no matter how had they practice at it.

Alex.V
08-17-2007, 08:23 AM
Just take a look at many of the journals that get updated every day. Are you telling me all of these people are slacking off or something?

Have you SEEN some of the routines people are doing??

Anthony
08-17-2007, 08:32 AM
when the reality is very few have the natural ability to become a pro athlete, no matter how had they practice at it.

Wah, wah, wah, cry cry cry ..... (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108002/)

You're the guy who tries out, gets cut, and chalks up to whatever excuse feels good at the time. No offense - at least you tried.

Rudy (and every other pro) is the guy who tries out, fails, but gets back up and repeats the process until success is achieved. No matter what.

Do you know what "no matter what" actually means? HUGE SACRIFICE. HUGE COMMITMENT. Most people will NEVER display that attitude about ANYTHING in their life - it has **** all to do with genetics.

For every sport you list with skill/size requirements, I can demonstrate someone who bucks the trend and wins a spot out of sheer determination.

Alex.V
08-17-2007, 08:34 AM
I knew I liked you, you angry little canadian. Come here and give us a hug. Come on, stop being shy.

SpecialK
08-17-2007, 08:40 AM
Without getting drawn in to this... suffice it to say that I have yet to encounter an individual who was simply genetically unable to achieve his goals. Genetics, unless there are underlying genetic anomalies, are not enough to account for the drastic differences in physical size, strength, recovery capabilities, etc., between top level athletes and average joes. Genetics will separate the Lance Armstrongs from the David Millars, but you're talking about the top level of the playing field.

If this is what you believe, then I would like your opinion on something. In high school, I ran track and cross country. I was decent, but never made one of the top spots on the team, yet I worked my ass off every day. The coach would even comment to the team that I was one of the hardest-working people on the them. It's not a brag, I'm just saying that to give some support to my claim that I worked hard.

How is it that you can take a field of relatively untrained guys, put them through the EXACT same training program for several months, training seasons, etc. and see VAST differences in race times as the seasons go by? I trained my ass off during the season, and ran during the off season as well. There was another guy on the team who slacked off all the time - he would fake sickness to avoid the difficult practices, didn't train much in the off season, ate like crap, etc. yet he would still consistently beat me in the races by 2 or more MINUTES each time. How can you explain that other than to say he had superior genetics to mine when it came to running?

We even had a team captain one year who would go out and get wasted every weekend, didn't work hard, etc. yet was the #1 runner on the team for most of his season as captain. How do you explain these things, if not for genetics?




Individual training regimens, recovery capabilities..****, even thermodynamic efficiencies, are all a big black box. I seriously doubt the majority of even elite athletes have discovered their true genetic potential; they've simply gotten very lucky when it comes to finding a routine (and athletic field) that suits them, and have applied themselves incredibly hard to excel.

I agree, there is a genetic component to all this. But it is nowhere NEAR as important as some here seem to believe.


It seems the ones who always say genetics have nothing to do with it are always the ones with the best stats. Of course you'd rather have everyone believe that you didn't have any natural advantages, and that all of your accomplishments are due to nothing but "hard work" (however the heck you quantify that). Tell me, is there anything in life you have tried hard at, but eventually had to acknowledge you just weren't that good at?



A man who is 120 pounds at his adult weight may never be as massive as Cutler. But he could most likely become a very strong, very muscular 190-200. IFBB pro? Nah, not in the heavyweights. But maybe in the lighter weight classes. A guy with long arms and a narrow chest... world record bencher? Nah. But could still become brutally strong in other lifts. Hell, with the right gear (both kinds) and grip he could end up pushing some impressive weight.

OK, well at least you acknowledge this. Some would go so far as to claim that biomechanical advantages don't exist, and that 6'6" lanky guy has just as much potential to become the next world-record bencher as anyone.



Yes, a lot of guys here bust their asses as have a hard time getting where they need to be.

I agree, and this sounds like the very definition of "genetic differences". Some people don't bust their ass and have results come easy; others bust ass and have a hard time getting where they want to be.



But I ask, have the "hardgainer" types here tried EVERYTHING? Drastic switch in routines? Diet? Recovery? Loading protocol? Exercise selection?

I thought you didn't believe in obsessing about little details like this? I thought you said most people try and overcomplicate things?





The people who try their hardest, yet still suck at sports, should maybe be trying smarter, not harder, or changing their given sport. I can go out every day and practice with a MLS team, but I will probably never be fantastic at soccer (football, whatever). However, throw me in there as a middle linebacker with all the resources I need to train and practice full time, and I'd probably have the knack for it.

If someone tries their hardest and still sucks at a given sport, that sounds like a genetic limitation to me. Also, if you were to play linebacker, how confident are you that you would make it to the NFL? According to RhodeHouse, anyone can make it to the professional level in any sport if they only "want it bad enough".



Again, I say genetics is the last 5% of the puzzle. Very, very few people outside the top echelon of any sport (or oiled-up beauty pageant) can fall back on that 5% and use it to explain a lack of success.


I guess it depends on how you define "success". If your goal is to build a Men's Health cover body, then I would say yes, you have no business blaming genetics for you inability to achieve that. I think most people without any major handicaps or drawbacks should be able to achieve a body like the ones that are typically displayed on the cover of Men's Health, given enough time. But if your definition of "success" is to become an IFBB pro, or a world-record setting PL/olympic lifter, then I don't think it's fair to say the only reason they can't achieve that is because they didn't "work hard enough".

Honestly I think part of the reason we have this debate is because everyone has their own idea of what it means to "succeed".

SpecialK
08-17-2007, 08:44 AM
Wah, wah, wah, cry cry cry ..... (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108002/)

You're the guy who tries out, gets cut, and chalks up to whatever excuse feels good at the time. No offense - at least you tried.

Rudy (and every other pro) is the guy who tries out, fails, but gets back up and repeats the process until success is achieved. No matter what.

Do you know what "no matter what" actually means? HUGE SACRIFICE. HUGE COMMITMENT. Most people will NEVER display that attitude about ANYTHING in their life - it has **** all to do with genetics.

For every sport you list with skill/size requirements, I can demonstrate someone who bucks the trend and wins a spot out of sheer determination.

Rudy got to play ONCE. Did he make it to the NFL? Was he even the best on his team? You're just defining "success" to mean whatever is convenient for your example. Success just happens to be whatever the person in question achieved.

I set a deadlift PR of 545 @204 last spring. I was pretty proud of that. If I had set a goal to deadlift 545, then I "suceeded". However, if my goal was to deadlift 700, then I didn't come anywhere close.



HUGE SACRIFICE. HUGE COMMITMENT. Most people will NEVER display that attitude about ANYTHING in their life - it has **** all to do with genetics.


You don't know anything about how hard I work for stuff, lifting-related or otherwise.

So tell me, how does one apply this to lifting? Again, let's say someone does the following:

1. Trains to (or near) failure using a sensible routine
2. eats enough to grow
3. gets sufficient rest

Tell me, what else is there?

And tell me Anthony, why aren't you an IFBB Pro? Why aren't you setting records in the squat, bench, or deadlift?

Oh, and one more thing - a person only has finite resources. You only have so many hours in a day to devote to whatever it is you want to "succeed" at. If you have to put in 80+ hours/week and give "whatever it takes" to be successful in your particular job, it's probably not going to be possible to also give "whatever it takes" to training. If you have a family, it becomes even more difficult; something has to give. That's an aside, but I felt it was worth mentioning.

SpecialK
08-17-2007, 08:49 AM
Have you SEEN some of the routines people are doing??

Like who? What's so terrible about them? Could you give an example (seriously)?

Cirino83
08-17-2007, 08:53 AM
For every sport you list with skill/size requirements, I can demonstrate someone who bucks the trend and wins a spot out of sheer determination.

Will a 6 footer be a center in the NBA because he's determined?

He will be lucky to get in the NBA at that size even if he's nasty.

Alex.V
08-17-2007, 08:56 AM
Now I'm getting irritated. You're not understanding what I'm saying at all.



How is it that you can take a field of relatively untrained guys, put them through the EXACT same training program for several months, training seasons, etc. and see VAST differences in race times as the seasons go by?

Uh. Duh. This is my point. Why the hell would you put different bodies through the exact same program? Did you try anything different? Doesn't sound that way.




It seems the ones who always say genetics have nothing to do with it are always the ones with the best stats.

I believe I specifically said there is a genetic component to this.


Of course you'd rather have everyone believe that you didn't have any natural advantages, and that all of your accomplishments are due to nothing but "hard work" (however the heck you quantify that). Tell me, is there anything in life you have tried hard at, but eventually had to acknowledge you just weren't that good at?

I didn't say this, so stop putting juvenile words in my mouth. Yes, there are plenty of things I acknowledge I'm not good at. However, I could probably be great at the majority of them. I just haven't given them my all, and I can admit that.

And once again, might I add, people need to stop thinking that trying "harder" is the answer. Again, this is the fundamental flaw in the thinking.




OK, well at least you acknowledge this.

Yes. At least. Because my other points are so unreasonable.



I thought you didn't believe in obsessing about little details like this? I thought you said most people try and overcomplicate things?

Nice. When you can't make an intelligent point, bring up an old comment out of context. Trying something different doesn't amount to overcomplication, nor obsessing about little details. Nowhere in my statement did I ever imply that the person in question should start micromanaging calories, or implementing micro and macrocycles in their training, or carb cycling, or any of that stupid ****. I simply said "try something drastically different". That can encompass quite a few things. Address this point if you're going to argue, don't bring up completely different conversations.



If someone tries their hardest and still sucks at a given sport, that sounds like a genetic limitation to me.

Did I say "sucks"? No. I'm fairly agile. Have decent endurance. If I spent my life training, I could probably become a damn good soccer player. But no world cup superstar. Genetic limitation keeping me a few levels below Ronaldinho? Sure. But I'm not going to say I'm genetically cursed because I practiced a whole bunch in high school and never started.


Also, if you were to play linebacker, how confident are you that you would make it to the NFL?

I can't speak to that with any level of confidence. Far too many variables, and a great deal of luck. But genetics would likely be the last thing holding me back.


But if your definition of "success" is to become an IFBB pro, or a world-record setting PL/olympic lifter, then I don't think it's fair to say the only reason they can't achieve that is because they didn't "work hard enough".

Honestly I think part of the reason we have this debate is because everyone has their own idea of what it means to "succeed".

I agree. I think we're all arguing different points. I'm simply saying that people bust out the genetics excuse FAR too early on. "I've tried everything!". Yeah, how often have you heard that and known its not true. I know every time I've thought that, I've really just been doing a great job of lying to myself.

sharkall2003
08-17-2007, 08:56 AM
Will a 6 footer be a center in the NBA because he's determined?

He will be lucky to get in the NBA at that size even if he's nasty.

So, now you've questioned ethics and another persons power to reign over someone else. He might be good enough to play, but people don't want him. That's how the world works sometimes. That's not genetics, that's environment.

Cirino83
08-17-2007, 09:11 AM
^^ You missed the point. Anthony said he can name someone in any sport regardless of SKILL/SIZE requirements that can win a spot out of determination.

I simply said even if a 6 foot guy is the most determined man in the NBA (if he makes it because of size) he will in no way EVER become a center which tend to be 6'8 or larger. That is an example of genetics holding you back.

SpecialK
08-17-2007, 09:12 AM
Now I'm getting irritated. You're not understanding what I'm saying at all.



Uh. Duh. This is my point. Why the hell would you put different bodies through the exact same program? Did you try anything different? Doesn't sound that way.

OK, well that was my coaches' doing, not mine. As a high school athlete, you pretty much do what the coaches tell you if you want to play ;) I suppose they probably don't have the resources to supervise everyone individually.





I believe I specifically said there is a genetic component to this.


OK, but it just seemed like more than the 5% figure you said earlier.






Nice. When you can't make an intelligent point, bring up an old comment out of context. Trying something different doesn't amount to overcomplication, nor obsessing about little details. Nowhere in my statement did I ever imply that the person in question should start micromanaging calories, or implementing micro and macrocycles in their training, or carb cycling, or any of that stupid ****. I simply said "try something drastically different". That can encompass quite a few things. Address this point if you're going to argue, don't bring up completely different conversations.

Fair enough - I thought you were encompassing all of that with your statement.





Did I say "sucks"? No. I'm fairly agile. Have decent endurance. If I spent my life training, I could probably become a damn good soccer player. But no world cup superstar. Genetic limitation keeping me a few levels below Ronaldinho? Sure. But I'm not going to say I'm genetically cursed because I practiced a whole bunch in high school and never started.

But I thought you said earlier that genetic differences only comes into play once you reach the olympic (or whatever the top is) level? Lance vs. Millar was the example you gave.

RhodeHouse
08-17-2007, 01:21 PM
Some people get it and some people don't. There are a few in this thread that just don't get it. I'm gonna go take my incredibly genetically gifted body an take a nap, eat well, and train to or close to failure - and that's ALL I need to do.

SpecialK
08-17-2007, 02:03 PM
Some people get it and some people don't. There are a few in this thread that just don't get it. I'm gonna go take my incredibly genetically gifted body an take a nap, eat well, and train to or close to failure - and that's ALL I need to do.

OK - I want a plan to follow, seriously. My current routine has been getting pretty stale lately anyway. I'm long overdue for something new.

Tell me exactly what needs to be done beyond what I said to get a 500 lb bench, or build an IFBB-caliber physique.

Chubrock
08-17-2007, 02:14 PM
One of the biggest things Matt said in that video Rhodes linked us to, was the key to getting stronger is to find what works for you. The exact same thing isn't going to work for every single person. Matt said he took the basic WSB and after following it for a period of time, he started altering what he was doing. He kept certain things and let certain things go. The point is, he listened to the suggestions of those that had been there, took their advice, used it, and then as the returns trailed off, he started altering the original advice in order to keep making gains.

DoUgL@S
08-17-2007, 02:20 PM
On topic, you can gain weight if you don't eat more.

Off topic, do not let your genetics be your crutch.

The whole point of the iron game is to best yourself. I can ralistically devote 4-10 hrs a week to training (any kind), I will become the strongest I can be given those constraints. Isn't that the point, to maximise "YOUR" potential?

Paul Stagg
08-17-2007, 03:23 PM
Again, just curios. Why are you here?

Bench: 620
Squat: 955
Deadlift: 750

Who cares why he's here. Honestly, I'm not sure... but we better ****ing appreciate that he is.


Didn't read a book about training the whole time. I listened to those that were bigger and stronger than me. The best way to learn is to train with people who have done it. We had a guy at the gym who had more fancy degrees and initials after his name. I learned nothing from him. Lift weights, not books. Use some common sense. That will get your further than you think.

To summarise some of what some of you seem to be missing: You can get very, very big, very, very strong, and even very, very lean without knowing any of the 'science' and instead understanding and applying very basic principles. It's when you CAN'T get past a point* in your training or your physique that you need to spend some time with your nose in Supertraining. 'Till then, go find something heavy and pick it up. Come back in a couple of days, and pick up something a little heavier.



* If the point isn't pretty freaking impressive, you don't have the basics down. If you can't bench 300 yet, you don't need anything fancy. (I've LIVED this.... I'm someone who applied 'advanced' techniques when I had lifts of a beginner, and it ended up holding me back. I've been training for more than a decade, and I just essentially started over.)

SpecialK
08-17-2007, 03:28 PM
On topic, you can gain weight if you don't eat more.

Off topic, do not let your genetics be your crutch.

The whole point of the iron game is to best yourself. I can ralistically devote 4-10 hrs a week to training (any kind), I will become the strongest I can be given those constraints. Isn't that the point, to maximise "YOUR" potential?

But would devoting more than 4-10 hours per week even yield any additional benefits? I mean you have to rest sometime, right? I don't think it always makes sense to say that more time spent in gym = better results.

RhodeHouse
08-17-2007, 04:34 PM
SpecialK - if you're serious, call me at 413-433-9026. I'll certainly give you my thoughts. I'll have a better chance at getting you to a 500 bench, but have some basic ideas on getting lean as well. You can PM me if you want. The phone is easier because we can address all questions rather than emails back and forth.

DoUgL@S
08-17-2007, 04:36 PM
But would devoting more than 4-10 hours per week even yield any additional benefits? I mean you have to rest sometime, right? I don't think it always makes sense to say that more time spent in gym = better results.

I agree with your statement in the traditional sense (see bellow). "any kind" = weights, cardio, sports, etc. . . I am lucky if I get to the gym 3-4X in one week to train with the weights. I have kids so they come first, if they are sick and I have to skip a session, I do, if I have to work a 16hr shift and have to miss a session, I do. The point is that I can't totally focus on my training, I have other priorities. Do the best you can in you particular situation and maximize your potential under those constraints.

Just to kind of hit your point, having more time to train does not necessarily mean max or near failure type stuff. It could be perfecting your form, or learning how to squat with a wider stance, or re-evaluating DL technique, or many other things.


SpecialK - if you're serious, call me at 413-433-9026. I'll certainly give you my thoughts. I'll have a better chance at getting you to a 500 bench, but have some basic ideas on getting lean as well. You can PM me if you want. The phone is easier because we can address all questions rather than emails back and forth.

Truthfully, whether you agree with him or not, you have to respect the fact that he is here and willing to help. He is a strong man, he knows enough to eclipse the lifts of most of of us posting.

Like Paul said. For most of us it is still pretty basic.

mickyjune26
08-18-2007, 10:36 PM
I think it's funny that even though the thread starter asked for research and statistics, only 2 - 3 people have posted links to articles.

Alex.V
08-18-2007, 11:45 PM
I think it's funny that even though the thread starter asked for research and statistics, only 2 - 3 people have posted links to articles.

I feel like in these cases the burden of proof is usually on the stupid people saying things that don't make logical sense. In this case, the trainers.

Leeman
08-19-2007, 12:21 AM
I feel like in these cases the burden of proof is usually on the stupid people saying things that don't make logical sense. In this case, the trainers.

Not realy, some one stupid enough to say you dont need to eat alot to get big also probably thinks 130lb lean guys are big. In wich case they would be right,those 130lb guys didnt have to eat alot...

Basicly if the person wants to disagree on this subject you can never convince them. You can use all the logic in the world and all they will have to do is find one person who dosent eat that much but looks like they lift and thier point is proven.
_
The best thing to do in a situation like this would be to just tell the personal trainer to stop giveing you and your friends/girl friend or wife advice because they have no idea what they are talking about if they think they can put on "calorie burning muscle" without consumeing more calories.

That or ignore...

Leeman
08-19-2007, 12:23 AM
I think it's funny that even though the thread starter asked for research and statistics, only 2 - 3 people have posted links to articles.

Why have it writen down when you can easily explain it in person. Anyone dense enough to disagree with some one on a subject as clear as "you need more fuel to fuel a bigger engine" isnt worth the paper the research is printed on.

Alex.V
08-19-2007, 09:50 AM
Not realy,

Not sure exactly which part you're disagreeing with.

sCaRz*Of*PaiN
08-19-2007, 10:32 PM
So anyone who doesn't have the right information is considered "stupid"?

Alex.V
08-20-2007, 06:10 AM
So anyone who doesn't have the right information is considered "stupid"?

If they are professionals paid to provide information, and they continue to give out information that is obviously false, even to the casual observer... then they are either stupid or dishonest.

sharkall2003
08-20-2007, 06:50 AM
If they are professionals paid to provide information, and they continue to give out information that is obviously false, even to the casual observer... then they are either stupid or dishonest.

I think we're arguing with a group of dead horses. A lot of people seem to think that they've reached their genetic potential already. They also think that anything that doesn't let them be as strong as they want to be means that they're not genetically gifted. I think it's understood that not everyone can bench 800 pounds, but there are many people that can bench 315 pounds and squat more than 500 pounds with years of training and diet. Those are just rough numbers, but I think they get my point across. Everyone will need an excuse, Belial. You, though, already know that. I think that a lot of people are brought up now to think that everything should be easy. And, as discussed in another thread a long time ago, people are nurtured from the day they are born to think they're something great. That's what society tries to do. They try and help all the weak and then as a result everyone is worse for it. People need to understand that not everything will be what you want and that's just how life is.

bill
08-20-2007, 07:25 AM
Wow what a thread

RhodeHouse
08-20-2007, 10:23 AM
Shark - that was a good post.