PDA

View Full Version : I'm not a woman anymore



brihead301
12-13-2007, 07:19 AM
I stepped on the scale this morning, post-dump. I weighed 202 lbs. It must be because my balls grew about 2" in diameter in the past couple weeks, but hey, I'm not a woman anymore!!!

Rhodes would be proud.

Cirino83
12-13-2007, 08:23 AM
I stepped on the scale this morning, post-dump. I weighed 202 lbs. It must be because my balls grew about 2" in diameter in the past couple weeks, but hey, I'm not a woman anymore!!!

Rhodes would be proud.

LOL! congrats on breaking the 200 barrier. what are you aiming for?

AKMass
12-13-2007, 08:26 AM
Nice dude! It was post-dump too so that makes it official. Hopefully one day I'll join you.

brihead301
12-13-2007, 08:52 AM
Thanks fellows, I guess my goal is something like 225, but I'm sure once I get there, I will still want to be bigger.

RhodeHouse
12-13-2007, 10:01 AM
YOU F#$%ING ROCK, DUDE! Remember this fellas, when you're gaining weight, it doesn't matter what you have on when you weigh yourself. I would recommend sweats, a long sleeve shirt, and Timerlands when you step on the scale. Also, drinkning a 32oz Gatorade right before is recommended. Hold all dumps until after weigh-ins.

Congratulations! Very nice work. Keep after it. One step closer to Rhodestown.

brihead301
12-13-2007, 10:17 AM
Thanks bro. It's nice to finally cross that 200 mark.

whiteman90909
12-13-2007, 04:13 PM
Very nice man. I exactly where you are right now, and I have the same goal of 225-ish.

Ill race 'ya ;)

brihead301
12-13-2007, 04:26 PM
IT's on white boy

RhodeHouse
12-13-2007, 04:30 PM
Start eating fellas! We'll finally have some big dudes on this site after all. I feel like a momma bear rearing her young. If you guys could see the excitement in my eyes. No more Abercrombie homos. No more abs. Nothing smaller than a 2xl shirt. There is a god! I knew it! Eat up, men. Eat up.

brihead301
12-13-2007, 04:37 PM
I'm definately don't care much to have a nice lean phyisique. I wouldn't mind having a six pack although I never once in my life had one, then again I never really tried to get one either. Big back, shoulders, traps, and legs was always what I aimed for, and of course freakish strength. Basically, if I happen to grow a 6pack along the way to becoming freakishly strong, I won't be pissed off. My main goal is to just be a monster though.

AL_DA_GREAT
12-16-2007, 06:10 AM
You beat me by a few weeks (I will break the barrier this christmas) congrats man.

samadhi_smiles
12-16-2007, 09:09 AM
If you want a six pack you will eventually have to cut the fat off your body. Bulking clean and bulking dirty is the difference between cutting with cardio and cutting with a knife :D

brihead301
12-16-2007, 02:28 PM
Nah, I don't really care much to have a six pack. I just said that if my abs happen to become visible while I continue to try and pack on as much muscle as possible, I won't be pissed off about it.

I don't know if I bulk clean or dirty. I eat mostly healthy stuff, but I don't pass up unhealthy stuff either.

samadhi_smiles
12-16-2007, 04:15 PM
true enough, sometimes a pepperoni pizza just NEEDS to be eaten :D

I'm with ya Bri, I like what you post up here, very sensical.

RhodeHouse
12-16-2007, 04:34 PM
If you want a six pack you will eventually have to cut the fat off your body. Bulking clean and bulking dirty is the difference between cutting with cardio and cutting with a knife :D

Not true.

Holto
12-17-2007, 11:43 AM
Excellent post samadhi!

Lets break this down:


If you want a six pack you will eventually have to cut the fat off your body.

If you don't have a six pack it's because it's covered in fat = true

To reveal the six pack you need to remove fat = true



Bulking clean and bulking dirty is the difference between cutting with cardio and cutting with a knife :D

* Most people refer to bulking slowly as bulking clean.

When you bulk slowly you minimize the fat you gain, resulting in less time spent cutting and getting back to bulking sooner.

* Most people refer to bulking fast as bulking dirty

When you bulk quickly you put on more fat than bulking slowly. You should put on more muscle also but the cost is gaining more fat. The result is spending more time cutting and getting back to bulking later.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 01:00 PM
Muscle is the only mechanism in the body that burns fat - 100% correct

So, if you put on a some good fat while you pack on some appreciable muscle, it stands to reason that your body WILL be better at burning off the fat once you decide to cut - 100% correct

So, the more muscle you have on your body, the more fat your body will burn. We all know this is true. So, even if you pack on some more fat than you might like, it'll be a hell of a lot easier cutting it if you have built more muscle. And, as we all know, you HAVE to gain some fat to gain some muscle.

Clean bulking = eating clean (hence the term "clean bulking")
Dirty bulking = eating crappy or "dirty" foods like candy, cookies, McD's, etc...

I know this is hard to understand, but seriously, more muscle = more fat loss when it's time to waste all those calories you ate by cutting.

Holto
12-17-2007, 03:33 PM
Muscle is the only mechanism in the body that burns fat - 100% correct

Did someone tell you that? Did you read that somewhere? I'm genuinely curious as to where you get this information.

This is why it's good to read stuff from people like Lyle McDonald. (Even though he is skinny) Most of the bodybuilding and powerlifting guru's have no idea how the body really works.

Any tissue in the body that requires energy can burn fat. Even nerve tissue that prefers glucose can run on ketone bodies.



So, the more muscle you have on your body, the more fat your body will burn. We all know this is true.

This is absolutely false. More lean mass results in more calories burned. The rest of your diet and training will determine how much of that is fat. Your body can also burn lean mass (muscle, tendon, ligament and bone) in a time of energy deficit. Being a bigger guy also puts you more at risk for muscle catabolism.



So, the more muscle you have on your body, the more fat your body will burn. We all know this is true. So, even if you pack on some more fat than you might like, it'll be a hell of a lot easier cutting it if you have built more muscle. And, as we all know, you HAVE to gain some fat to gain some muscle.

Based on this logic it should be dead easy for a pro bodybuilder to cut. Huge amounts of lean mass. Sadly your body doesn't work this way.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The bottom line is for someone that is building a lean body, the Rhodes bulking method results in more time (wasted) cutting. Even if you (theoretically) are cutting faster, you still have so many more weeks to cut that you are experiencing downtime in the context of bulking.

Guido
12-17-2007, 03:41 PM
I stepped on the scale this morning, post-dump. I weighed 202 lbs. It must be because my balls grew about 2" in diameter in the past couple weeks, but hey, I'm not a woman anymore!!!

Rhodes would be proud.Dude. You might wanna get that checked out by a doc, man. ;)

BrettC
12-17-2007, 03:58 PM
Dude. You might wanna get that checked out by a doc, man. ;)

Or publish a book with what you did to help us all.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 06:44 PM
Did someone tell you that? Did you read that somewhere? I'm genuinely curious as to where you get this information.

This is why it's good to read stuff from people like Lyle McDonald. (Even though he is skinny) Most of the bodybuilding and powerlifting guru's have no idea how the body really works.

Any tissue in the body that requires energy can burn fat. Even nerve tissue that prefers glucose can run on ketone bodies.




This is absolutely false. More lean mass results in more calories burned. The rest of your diet and training will determine how much of that is fat. Your body can also burn lean mass (muscle, tendon, ligament and bone) in a time of energy deficit. Being a bigger guy also puts you more at risk for muscle catabolism.




Based on this logic it should be dead easy for a pro bodybuilder to cut. Huge amounts of lean mass. Sadly your body doesn't work this way.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The bottom line is for someone that is building a lean body, the Rhodes bulking method results in more time (wasted) cutting. Even if you (theoretically) are cutting faster, you still have so many more weeks to cut that you are experiencing downtime in the context of bulking.

I actually have access to real people, not books, to get information from. I had a lengthy discussion with Alwyn Cosgrove about just this little topic. Now, as a geek who only gets their info from people who are published and have fancy initials behind their names, you should know who Alwyn is.

So, as you shoot everything I said down, a "guru" relayed all this info to me. He's actually published 2 workout plans and is in the process of refining his 3rd. So, my skinny little friend. Suck it! Take your fancy talk, big words, horrible information, and sell it to someone who cares.

For those of you who are interested in Alwyn and his methods, go to

alwyncosgrove.com and check out his stuff. Read his bio. Absolutely amazing person who is very smart and well read.

And, Holto, my boy, glad to see you continue to rip every post I make. Too bad your life sucks so bad that you have to knock every post I make.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 06:48 PM
Holto, I'd love to know who these pro bodybuilder are that you've trained and helped get on stage.
1. Who are they?
2. How many champions are there?
3. Before and After pictures and measurements to prove your incredible work
Enlighten us with your mastery of the human body. After all, us dumb powerlifters must have no idea about how our bodies work. It's easy to squat 1000lbs. Anybody could do it. According to your theory, all we have to do is lift and there's no need to understand how the body works. You're still a F$%^ing moron.

brihead301
12-17-2007, 06:50 PM
Alwyn Cosgrove is the man. He is the one who came up with the routines from the new rules of lifting, which are the routines that I always preach to everyone to do. That's cool as hell that you met him.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 06:54 PM
Alwyn Cosgrove is the man. He is the one who came up with the routines from the new rules of lifting, which are the routines that I always preach to everyone to do. That's cool as hell that you met him.

Alwyn is the funniest man alive. When we were in Boston for an EliteFTS seminar he was there. Jim, Dave, Alwyn, Jason Ferrugia, CJ Murphy, Vincent, and myself went out to dinner after the seminar. We spent 6 hours at Pizzeria Uno. Some of the funniest stuff ever. About 80% of it was video taped, but is not suitable to be posted on EFS's YouTube site.

brihead301
12-17-2007, 06:59 PM
That's cool as hell that you know him though. Seriously, the NROL book and routines basically "enlightened me" about lifting. If you see him again tell him Brihead301 says thanks a lot! If it wasn't for that book, I'd probably still be trying to curl my way to getting huge.

brihead301
12-17-2007, 07:01 PM
Or publish a book with what you did to help us all.

Well, they just grow naturally. I'm just blessed with huge nuts.

Sensei
12-17-2007, 07:03 PM
This is why it's good to read stuff from people like Lyle McDonald. (Even though he is skinny) Most of the bodybuilding and powerlifting guru's have no idea how the body really works.I like Lyle, but if I was trying to get big and strong there's no chance I'd be talking to him over Rhodes...

This is absolutely false. More lean mass results in more calories burned. The rest of your diet and training will determine how much of that is fat. Your body can also burn lean mass (muscle, tendon, ligament and bone) in a time of energy deficit. Being a bigger guy also puts you more at risk for muscle catabolism.So, what is your point? That you should stay small because you'll lose less muscle on a cut? That makes no sense whatsoever.

Based on this logic it should be dead easy for a pro bodybuilder to cut. Huge amounts of lean mass. Sadly your body doesn't work this way.Again, what's your point? Stay small and skinny?




The bottom line is for someone that is building a lean body, the Rhodes bulking method results in more time (wasted) cutting. Even if you (theoretically) are cutting faster, you still have so many more weeks to cut that you are experiencing downtime in the context of bulking.Damn dude you are slow... Rhodes (and I for that matter) never said that eating everything in sight is the best method for "building a lean body", but if you want to get big and strong, you'll be a lot better off following the "Big Boy's Menu Plan" over cracking open a tin of tuna or measuring cups of cottage cheese.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 07:15 PM
Sensei, he just doesn't like me. Or, maybe he's seen my picture and he does like me. Remember elementary school? You'd run around the playground and hit the girl that you liked? Maybe this is his e-punch. I am flattered.

Sensei
12-17-2007, 07:37 PM
Sensei, he just doesn't like me. Or, maybe he's seen my picture and he does like me. Remember elementary school? You'd run around the playground and hit the girl that you liked? Maybe this is his e-punch. I am flattered.HAHAHA! Wait... You mean girls don't like that?

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 08:36 PM
HAHAHA! Wait... You mean girls don't like that?

I'm pretty sure they do like that. That's how I've roped my last 3 girlfriends. Walked up to them and punched 'em right in the face. Love is a strange thing. I'm gonna marry the one that punches me back.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 08:44 PM
I like Lyle, but if I was trying to get big and strong there's no chance I'd be talking to him over Rhodes

With respect to both sides.....

The issue was pertaining to fat loss, not getting big and strong.

I do however realize you point, while I think it would be stronger if Rhodes held a lower BF%.


On another note, Rhodes is incorrect. Muscle is not the only thing in the body that utilizes/gets rid of fat (fatty acids...)

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 08:47 PM
. According to your theory, all we have to do is lift and there's no need to understand how the body works.

Rhodes, correct me if I am wrong, but I think that is what you have been preaching for quite some time on this site (?)

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:00 PM
With respect to both sides.....

The issue was pertaining to fat loss, not getting big and strong.

I do however realize you point, while I think it would be stronger if Rhodes held a lower BF%.


On another note, Rhodes is incorrect. Muscle is not the only thing in the body that utilizes/gets rid of fat (fatty acids...)

Slim, you tell me how fat I am? Strength athletes perform the best somewhere between 16-18%, which is a very respectable BF%. Not even close to fat, even for the skinny guys on here. The ideas of what's fat and what isn't is very skewed on here. A lot of guys don't have a clue about fat or not. To say I'm fat (which I know you didn't) is absolutely ridiculous. At 300lbs I'm able to see abs when I flex. That's gonna get me thrown out of my cult, so I'll get to fixing tha real soon.

As far as the info, talk to Alwyn Cosgrove. I got the ideas from him. Remember, I'm too stupid to read. I just get it straight from the horse's mouth.

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:07 PM
I actually have access to real people

So the answer to my question is, someone told you. You're spewing something as fact before you've verified it as accurate. Typical.



Now, as a geek who only gets their info from people who are published and have fancy initials behind their names, you should know who Alwyn is.

So now you're resorting to name calling. I'll take that to mean you realize you don't know enough about the body to debate this with me.



And, Holto, my boy, glad to see you continue to rip every post I make.

I'm tempted to start ripping every post you make. You immature behavior (in response) is probably enough to get you banned.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:08 PM
Slim, you tell me how fat I am? Strength athletes perform the best somewhere between 16-18%, which is a very respectable BF%. Not even close to fat, even for the skinny guys on here. The ideas of what's fat and what isn't is very skewed on here. A lot of guys don't have a clue about fat or not. To say I'm fat (which I know you didn't) is absolutely ridiculous. At 300lbs I'm able to see abs when I flex. That's gonna get me thrown out of my cult, so I'll get to fixing tha real soon.

As far as the info, talk to Alwyn Cosgrove. I got the ideas from him. Remember, I'm too stupid to read. I just get it straight from the horse's mouth.

Rhodes, calm down for just a sec :)


I never said your BF% was high, or that did it did not benefit you.


The issue that arose pertained to losing fat.

Sensei criticized Holto's use of Lyle writings for those wishing to learn about the ins and outs of getting lean and that those looking to get big and strong should listen to you (not Lyle)

I understood Sensei's point 110%. However, I said that if YOU were lower BF% (10% or below (esp at your current weight or a little below) ) his point would be much much stronger.

Do you see my point now?

Nowhere did you negatively criticize or slander you.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:09 PM
Rhodes, correct me if I am wrong, but I think that is what you have been preaching for quite some time on this site (?)

For most people on here, at the training level that they are at, yes, it is true. There's no real need to understand why, yet. You need to experiment and play around with things. After you've figured out what works for you, you can then go and read about the why. Knowing the why before the how, causes people to over-analyze things before they actually do anything. Since the science of weight training is not even close to being correct, it's better to experiment before you read. Ideas that you read may cause you to never explore options that might work for you and your goals.

In my quest for 1000, I didn't waste my time reading. I spent my time doing and "reading" how my body reacted to training. No book can tell me what's going on in my body after squatting 705 for 5. People need to learn to read their bodies before they read a book. Trouble is, everyone wants to be spoonfed information. No one wants to go out there and find out for themselves anymore. Hence, the arguments I constantly get in over training. Put down the book and pick up some weights. After 10 years of lifting, pick up a book and see what happened. No book can tell you how to reach your goals.

I may have rambled, but I don't care.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:11 PM
Rhodes, calm down for just a sec :)


I never said your BF% was high, or that did it did not benefit you.


The issue that arose pertained to losing fat.

Sensei criticized Holto's use of Lyle writings for those wishing to learn about the ins and outs of getting lean and that those looking to get big and strong should listen to you (not Lyle)

I understood Sensei's point 110%. However, I said that if YOU were lower BF% (10% or below (esp at your current weight or a little below) ) his point would be much much stronger.

Do you see my point now?

Nowhere did you negatively criticize or slander you.

I didn't take it that way at all

Sensei
12-17-2007, 09:11 PM
With respect to both sides.....

The issue was pertaining to fat loss, not getting big and strong.Actually, no. The thread had nothing to do with fat loss until some negative Nancys decided to piss all over the OP who was happy about weight gain.

I do however realize you point, while I think it would be stronger if Rhodes held a lower BF%.Soo, if Rhodes lost 40 lbs and 200lbs on his total that would prove what exactly?...

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:11 PM
For most people on here, at the training level that they are at, yes, it is true. There's no real need to understand why, yet. You need to experiment and play around with things. After you've figured out what works for you, you can then go and read about the why. Knowing the why before the how, causes people to over-analyze things before they actually do anything. Since the science of weight training is not even close to being correct, it's better to experiment before you read. Ideas that you read may cause you to never explore options that might work for you and your goals.

In my quest for 1000, I didn't waste my time reading. I spent my time doing and "reading" how my body reacted to training. No book can tell me what's going on in my body after squatting 705 for 5. People need to learn to read their bodies before they read a book. Trouble is, everyone wants to be spoonfed information. No one wants to go out there and find out for themselves anymore. Hence, the arguments I constantly get in over training. Put down the book and pick up some weights. After 10 years of lifting, pick up a book and see what happened. No book can tell you how to reach your goals.

I may have rambled, but I don't care.


Yeah, I get all that.

(whether or not I agree does not matter, b/c I undertand you)

Unless I am reading wrong, you crticized Holto for implying the very same thing you just rambled about.



After all, us dumb powerlifters must have no idea about how our bodies work. It's easy to squat 1000lbs. Anybody could do it. According to your theory, all we have to do is lift and there's no need to understand how the body works. You're still a F$%^ing moron.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:14 PM
So the answer to my question is, someone told you. You're spewing something as fact before you've verified it as accurate. Typical.




So now you're resorting to name calling. I'll take that to mean you realize you don't know enough about the body to debate this with me.




I'm tempted to start ripping every post you make. You immature behavior (in response) is probably enough to get you banned.

I'll never get banned. The mods know that I know what I'm talking about.

As for your childish remarks about me not knowing anything about the body, keep telling yourself that you're the man.

Still waiting for the list of pro's that you've helped get to the top of their game. Anything?

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH1

Sensei
12-17-2007, 09:15 PM
So the answer to my question is, someone told you. You're spewing something as fact before you've verified it as accurate. Typical.
So now you're resorting to name calling. I'll take that to mean you realize you don't know enough about the body to debate this with me.Holto,
You do know who Alwyn is, right?

I'm tempted to start ripping every post you make. You immature behavior (in response) is probably enough to get you banned.Wow. Somehow I don't think you'll win any mod popularity contests with that attitude...

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:17 PM
I like Lyle, but if I was trying to get big and strong there's no chance I'd be talking to him over Rhodes...

Have you read that Rhodes thinks his clients can eat under maintenance calories and still gain weight??????????

(I know you've spent enough time here to realize how incredibly ignorant he would have to be to think that)




So, what is your point?

My point is that increasing LBM and increasing RMR doesn't increase the rate of fat burned as Rhodes claimed. If you would care to debate this scientifically, I'm game.


Damn dude you are slow... Rhodes (and I for that matter) never said that eating everything in sight is the best method for "building a lean body", but if you want to get big and strong, you'll be a lot better off following the "Big Boy's Menu Plan" over cracking open a tin of tuna or measuring cups of cottage cheese.

Really why? Please explain it scientifically I'm all eyes.

Do you think gaining 20lbs a month is going to net more LBM than gaining 10?

That is the crux of the reasoning behind kitchen sink bulking being a thing of the past. Now that we have access to better information about the body we can determine that it's of no benefit. This is why the folks here that take the time and put in the work to learn about the body have issues with Rhodes' advice.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:18 PM
I didn't take it that way at all

Cool beans

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:19 PM
Sensei, he just doesn't like me.

Personally, I think you are hilarious. I think you mean well. I'm legitimately concerned about you giving bad advice to impressionable young men and costing them months of cutting for nothing.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:21 PM
Wow. Somehow I don't think you'll win any mod popularity contests with that attitude...

Rhodes said it himself that he should be banned

(after I jokingly made mention in a previous thread that he is lucky the mods like him because he obviously breaks all the written rules pertaining the way we are to E-treat others)

lol

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:23 PM
Yeah, I get all that.

(whether or not I agree does not matter, b/c I undertand you)

Unless I am reading wrong, you crticized Holto for implying the very same thing you just rambled about.

That was internet sarcasm. It doesn't come across that well in print. I am criticizing Holto because he never has anything positive to say about anything I post. He thinks that us big fat powerlifters are dumb because we just lift heavy stuff. Believe it or not, I don't care what he thinks. He's wrong and he's a nobody. I have yet to read anything worthwhile from him.

Another rant.

Because I keep things as simple as they need to be, I'm stupid or lazy. Because I can get info directly from people who know better than I do, he says I'm not educated. That gets old. I'm tooting my own horn here, but I'm part of, probably, the biggest online fitness company in the world. How dumb am I?

Sensei
12-17-2007, 09:26 PM
Really why? Please explain it scientifically I'm all eyes.

Do you think gaining 20lbs a month is going to net more LBM than gaining 10?

That is the crux of the reasoning behind kitchen sink bulking being a thing of the past. Now that we have access to better information about the body we can determine that it's of no benefit. This is why the folks here that take the time and put in the work to learn about the body have issues with Rhodes' advice.We've already beat this to death in numerous threads and in so many ways, you either agree or you don't. You troll the guy and then you act incredulous that he reacts.

...and yes, gaining 20bls a month will very likely net more LBM than gaining 10.

Keep counting your calories and eating a tin of tuna and adding a cup of cottage cheese here and there to boost your protein intake and watch your total skyrocket... We are all anxious to see you on the cover of PLUSA.

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:27 PM
Holto,You do know who Alwyn is, right?

Are you calling Rhodes a liar?

He just told us that Al told him to his face that only muscle can burn fat.

Anyone that has put the time in to learn about the body knows this is DEAD WRONG.

Slim just confirmed it's DEAD WRONG.

So is he lying or is Al wrong?

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:30 PM
Personally, I think you are hilarious. I think you mean well. I'm legitimately concerned about you giving bad advice to impressionable young men and costing them months of cutting for nothing.

Bad advice? Why don't we ask some of the guys on here that have tried some of my ideas? My man, BFGUITAR has a thread going right now about some interesting things. I'm not saying he followed my advice, but some of his findings back up my BS that I apparently spread.

If this advice is so bad, why do the competitive bodybuilders I know tell me I'm right on the mark as far as bulking goes? Here's why. Because I'm right. Don't be mad because I didn't spend a lot of money on books. Your biggest problem is that you think everything can be answered with science. It can't be. If there was a holy grail of training, it would've been found by now. Keep searching, though. You'll find it.:bang:

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:33 PM
Are you calling Rhodes a liar?

He just told us that Al told him to his face that only muscle can burn fat.

Anyone that has put the time in to learn about the body knows this is DEAD WRONG.

Slim just confirmed it's DEAD WRONG.

So is he lying or is Al wrong?

Go check out Alwyn's site. When you can produce your own site, with your own ideas and theories on it, and make a mint in the process, then maybe I'll listen to your ignorant banter. Until then, I'll listen to the guy that knows what he's talking about.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:34 PM
That was internet sarcasm.

Gotya.

I read sarcasm only up until the point I highlighted red. I didn't know it went further.


(I'm not as dumb as you think I is)

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:36 PM
I'm not saying he followed my advice

Thank god!

BTW did Al really say that to you?

Because I've lost all hope for North American Universities if that is the case...

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:36 PM
Gotya.

I read sarcasm only up until the point I highlighted red. I didn't know it went further.


(I'm not as dumb as you think I is)

You ain't be dumb

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:39 PM
Until then, I'll listen to the guy that knows what he's talking about.

I can get a dozen people on this site that hold universtiy degrees in relevant fields to tell you Al is wrong about muscle being the only thing that can burn fat.

I will purchase and mail you a textbook that states it.

What would it take for you to admit you were wrong? Are you saying Slim is wrong?

My god man, you are ignorant.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:41 PM
Actually, no. The thread had nothing to do with fat loss until some negative Nancys decided to piss all over the OP who was happy about weight gain.
Soo, if Rhodes lost 40 lbs and 200lbs on his total that would prove what exactly?...

Sensei, the issue Holto called into question about misinformation pertained to fat loss (specifically, how fat is oxidized....which is why Lyle's name was mentioned), not strength, power, totals, powerlifting.

I never said the thread pertained to fat loss.


You said Rhodes would be a better candidate to listen to instead of Lyle.

(keep in mind, Holto even said Lyle is skinny)


Based strictly on these facts, yes, your recomendation to listen to Rhodes and not Lyle pertaining to fatty acid oxidation is not a strong one.

Holto brought up fat oxidation and knowledge of physiology....you brought up getting big and strong.

Do you see where it went wrong now?

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:42 PM
Thank god!

BTW did Al really say that to you?

Because I've lost all hope for North American Universities if that is the case...

Why would I lie about knowing Alwyn Cosgrove? As for your ridiculous comment about our educational systems, it's exactly that - ridiculous. What I know of Canada's educational system and great athletes is Ben Johnson and STEROIDS.

1. The more muscle you carry, the more energy it takes for your body to maintain it - correct?

2. The more muscle you have, the more fat you'll burn on a day to day basis, assuming you're training and diet are relatively squared away - correct?

3. So, it would be safe to assume that IF you carry more muscle, your body is will burn more energy to maintain itself, therefore, making your body into a "furnace" of sorts - correct?

I know this is true, because I spend everynight sweating my balls of in my sleep because my metabolism is kicking.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:46 PM
I will purchase and mail you a textbook that states it.


I have one in front of me as we speak....er, type.

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:46 PM
Why would I lie about knowing Alwyn Cosgrove? As for your ridiculous comment about our educational systems, it's exactly that - ridiculous. What I know of Canada's educational system and great athletes is Ben Johnson and STEROIDS.

1. The more muscle you carry, the more energy it takes for your body to maintain it - correct?

2. The more muscle you have, the more fat you'll burn on a day to day basis, assuming you're training and diet are relatively squared away - correct?

3. So, it would be safe to assume that IF you carry more muscle, your body is will burn more energy to maintain itself, therefore, making your body into a "furnace" of sorts - correct?

I know this is true, because I spend everynight sweating my balls of in my sleep because my metabolism is kicking.

You tapdance very well for such a big man.

I love it...

You stated something plain as day, I called you on it. You played the Al card.

Everyone on here that knows who Al is knows he didn't say that. Once again, I love it...

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:49 PM
I can get a dozen people on this site that hold universtiy degrees in relevant fields to tell you Al is wrong about muscle being the only thing that can burn fat.

I will purchase and mail you a textbook that states it.

What would it take for you to admit you were wrong? Are you saying Slim is wrong?

My god man, you are ignorant.

No thanks. Take your textbook and stick it where the sun don't shine. As you sit on your soapbox spewing semen on all of us.

Since you seem to take every word I write as absolute gospel, with no ability to read between the lines of common sense, you can take this next comment as it is - literally, stick that text up your a$$.

I just figured out your hard-on for me. I bet you count the number of pumps it takes to get your girl off. If she doesn't get off in 13 thrusts, you probably yell at her and tell her science says you should've gotten off by now.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:51 PM
You tapdance very well for such a big man.

I love it...

You stated something plain as day, I called you on it. You played the Al card.

Everyone on here that knows who Al is knows he didn't say that. Once again, I love it...

Read his program, Afterburn. You f#$%ing moron. I sat in front of the man and he explained it to me for about 20 minutes. You got me on nothing.

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:52 PM
Since you seem to take every word I write as absolute gospel, with no ability to read between the lines of common sense,

Oh. My. God. I love it!

Help me out here Matthew, where exactly should I read between the lines here:


Muscle is the only mechanism in the body that burns fat - 100% correct

Yeah, I'm sure I'm misinterpreting this....:p

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:54 PM
You got me on nothing.

Welll....errr....

except for the fact that muscle is not the only thing in the body that can utilize fatty acid oxidation for energy

Holto
12-17-2007, 09:54 PM
Read his program, Afterburn. You f#$%ing moron. I sat in front of the man and he explained it to me for about 20 minutes. You got me on nothing.

The problem for you bro is you don't know enough basics to even take advantage of that (alleged) 20 minute convo.

We all come here to learn, you came here to teach. The problem is we have teenagers here that know more about the body than you do.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 09:54 PM
Oh. My. God. I love it!

Help me out here Matthew, where exactly should I read between the lines here:



Yeah, I'm sure I'm misinterpreting this....:p

Little boy, you really impress yourself, don't you? You have all the answers. Send me to your website. I need to do some reading to learn everything that you know.

I love it...:hello:

deeder
12-17-2007, 09:58 PM
:lurk:

Everyone loves to argue with Rhodes hehe

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 09:59 PM
:lurk:

Everyone loves to argue with Rhodes hehe

I like arguing with anyone.

As long as I am right.

deeder
12-17-2007, 09:59 PM
I like arguing with anyone.

As long as I am right.

:thumbup: Good for you. To some that may seem childish.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:00 PM
The problem for you bro is you don't know enough basics to even take advantage of that (alleged) 20 minute convo.

We all come here to learn, you came here to teach. The problem is we have teenagers here that know more about the body than you do.

Dude, don't hate me because this stuff is simple. Don't be mad at me because I've become known in this industry.

You're (allegedly) the smartest man in the world. I'm still waiting for the list of pros you've helped. If you're as great as you claim, you should be more than willing to put me in my place with evidence of your mastery of the human body. Pictures, names, contests these pros have won with your guidence. Not texts, but actual, real-life examples of your brilliance.

Here's my email address. Send me the photos and everything

mjrhodes2@comcast.net

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 10:01 PM
:thumbup: Good for you. To some that may seem childish.

It was a joke bro

deeder
12-17-2007, 10:04 PM
It was a joke bro

The last two pages of this thread disagree.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 10:05 PM
The last two pages of this thread disagree.

****ing jesus

lighten up


I was kinda making fun of myself with my original comment

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:18 PM
Welll....errr....

except for the fact that muscle is not the only thing in the body that can utilize fatty acid oxidation for energy

So, I reread my post. Maybe I chose my words poorly, but we all know that the more muscle you carry, the more fat you'll burn. If you want to split hairs on EVERYTHING I write, we'll have mre ridiculous dialouge like this. My point is, more muscle = more fat loss - very simply.

But, on here, complicated makes people feel like they have excuses for not being man enough to reach their goals.

Holto
12-17-2007, 10:19 PM
Dude, don't hate me because this stuff is simple. Don't be mad at me because I've become known in this industry.

I don't hate you. I'm not mad.

I'm f-ing thrilled to have exposed you as a liar.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:23 PM
I don't hate you. I'm not mad.

I'm f-ing thrilled to have exposed you as a liar.

A liar? Interesting hypothesis. All I can say is, don't be jealous. It's a very ugly emotion.

For christ's sake, I'm part of the same team with him on EFS. I can talk to him anytime I want. Now, you're just acting like a spoiled brat that had his mommy take his little red ball away.

I love Alwyn, but I'd rather lie about talking to Michael Jordan than Alwyn.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:25 PM
When are you gonna send me those photos? You keep dodging my inquiries into your successes with real-life bodybuilders. Send those pictures, or are you being exposed as a complete idiot who know nothing of what he speaks?

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 10:26 PM
If you want to split hairs on EVERYTHING I write

I only call-out what I see as incorrect based on what I know.

This goes for anyone. I do not pick and choose certain members.

Holto
12-17-2007, 10:27 PM
A liar? Interesting hypothesis. All I can say is, don't be jealous. It's a very ugly emotion.

For christ's sake, I'm part of the same team with him on EFS. I can talk to him anytime I want. Now, you're just acting like a spoiled brat that had his mommy take his little red ball away.

I love Alwyn, but I'd rather lie about talking to Michael Jordan than Alwyn.

Oh, wait.

I'm not saying you haven't spoken with Al. I'm saying he didn't tell you that fat can only be burnt by muscle. As you clearly stated and then claimed he told you.

You stated it and then had the audacity to say it was 100% accurate. I countered it with stuff that high school kids would know and you were immediately out of gas and started dropping names and talking about how great you are.

When I enter into a discussion with someone and they duck out right away I consider that cowardice. You haven't been man enough to debate anything with me.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:27 PM
I only call-out what I see as incorrect based on what I know.

This goes for anyone. I do not pick and choose certain members.

Well, thank you for patrolling this forum, Officer Schaedle. You contribution is...

Holto
12-17-2007, 10:30 PM
I only call-out what I see as incorrect based on what I know.

This goes for anyone. I do not pick and choose certain members.

...and I love it when you do it to me bro. It gives me an opportunity to learn. It's amazing what I've been able to learn here for free.

You guys shell out big money for school, and put time in with self-teaching, and are very gracious to share it.

It's sad that some people can't put aside ego and actually learn something.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:31 PM
While I'm here, where was Dr. Holto when I asked for diet advice a few weeks back? I was waiting for some pearls of wisdom from the master. Afterall, he knows the human body like God himself. I was sure he'd want to help a dumb powerlifter like myself. That way he could brag about his immense background in fitness and nutrition, and actually have 1 person to use as an example of his knowledge.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 10:32 PM
Well, thank you for patrolling this forum, Officer Schaedle. You contribution is...

:)


Matt, theres no reason to be sarcastic with me.

I am not attacking you or your philosophy.

Holto
12-17-2007, 10:33 PM
While I'm here, where was Dr. Holto when I asked for diet advice a few weeks back? I was waiting for some pearls of wisdom from the master. Afterall, he knows the human body like God himself. I was sure he'd want to help a dumb powerlifter like myself. That way he could brag about his immense background in fitness and nutrition, and actually have 1 person to use as an example of his knowledge.

I was going to give you my opinion, but when you admitted you lacked the discipline to count calories I wrote you off.

Oh, and you insulting just about everyone on the board kind of curbed my enthusiasm also.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 10:33 PM
While I'm here, where was Dr. Holto when I asked for diet advice a few weeks back? I was waiting for some pearls of wisdom from the master. Afterall, he knows the human body like God himself. I was sure he'd want to help a dumb powerlifter like myself. That way he could brag about his immense background in fitness and nutrition, and actually have 1 person to use as an example of his knowledge.

Did you try that shake recipe I posted?

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:36 PM
...and I love it when you do it to me bro. It gives me an opportunity to learn. It's amazing what I've been able to learn here for free.

You guys shell out big money for school, and put time in with self-teaching, and are very gracious to share it.

It's sad that some people can't put aside ego and actually learn something.

I learn from those that know and have done it and demonstrated it. Talk the Talk/Walk the Walk kinda thing. You have done nothing and showed me nothing to waste my time listening to you. I don't just listen to people because tbey spew information. I listen to those that have been there and are accomplished at what they do. If it's not demonstrated to me, I won't listen. To much BS out there to listen to everything. If you could produce these champion bodybuilders, maybe I'd listen to what you have to say. Since you keep avoiding my requests, you have confirmed that you have nothing to offer anyone. Shoo!

Holto
12-17-2007, 10:37 PM
I learn from those that know and have done it and demonstrated it. Talk the Talk/Walk the Walk kinda thing. You have done nothing and showed me nothing to waste my time listening to you. I don't just listen to people because tbey spew information. I listen to those that have been there and are accomplished at what they do. If it's not demonstrated to me, I won't listen. To much BS out there to listen to everything. If you could produce these champion bodybuilders, maybe I'd listen to what you have to say. Since you keep avoiding my requests, you have confirmed that you have nothing to offer anyone. Shoo!

Pop quiz:

Can fat be burnt by tissue other that fat?

If you haven't at least learned that in this thread that is truly sad.

Perhaps one day you will be man enough to debate something with me...

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:40 PM
Did you try that shake recipe I posted?

Something similar.

1 cup of whole milk
1 cup of oats
1 cup of yogurt
60 grams of protein powder
1 tablespoon of Olive Oil

It goes down pretty easy and fills me up for a few hours. I have such a hard time eating in the morning. I'm not sure if eating is more effective than drinking breakfast (I'm not sure why I wonder about this), but it gets in about 1100 calories to start my day.

I gotta get my weight back up again. I'm getting eye surgery, so I'm getting another meet in before I go under the knife. It's hard getting abck on the eating horse again. It was a pain in the ass gaining all that weight over the summer and fall.

BTW - I'm eating General Tso's chicken, pork fried rice, rolled up ham and cheese, and egg nog before bed. Gotta get a shake in, too.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:43 PM
Pop quiz:

Can fat be burnt by tissue other that fat?

If you haven't at least learned that in this thread that is truly sad.

Perhaps one day you will be man enough to debate something with me...

Do you know anything about lifting? You tell me how to squat 1025 in February.

Let's talk weight gain, my tiny little friend.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 10:43 PM
Something similar.

1 cup of whole milk
1 cup of oats
1 cup of yogurt
60 grams of protein powder
1 tablespoon of Olive Oil




Get that fruit in there.

Frozen bluerries, etc. etc.


The physical difference in how you feel will be noticeable, I guarantee it.


(I learned that from someone posting in this very thread)

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:44 PM
:)


Matt, theres no reason to be sarcastic with me.

I am not attacking you or your philosophy.

That wasn't sarcasm. That was serious.

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 10:45 PM
That wasn't sarcasm. That was serious.

Well, thanks then.


I was actually called Officer Schaedle (sort of) at one point in my life.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:47 PM
Get that fruit in there.

Frozen bluerries, etc. etc.


The physical difference in how you feel will be noticeable, I guarantee it.


(I learned that from someone posting in this very thread)

I know I should get the fruit in. I've added cardio 2x per week, for now. I'll move that up to 3x in a few weeks as long as my strength isn't hurt. Hopefully, I'll get up to 4x per week in 6-8 weeks. 2 days 20 minutes - 2 days 10 minutes.

If I get close to 320, like I hope I can, I'll feel like crap no matter what. My body just doesn't like being that heavy. I'm just too damn tall to not be that heavy. Genetics

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 10:48 PM
Well, thanks then.


I was actually called Officer Schaedle (sort of) at one point in my life.

Was that your porn name?

"Excuse me, Officer Schaedle"

"Yes ma'am. Can I help you with your bra?"

Slim Schaedle
12-17-2007, 10:51 PM
Was that your porn name?

Unfortunately no.

I was a security controller and fire team leader for the largest above ground nuclear storage area in the world while in the air force, among other things.


Porn name is Ross Lovell, however.

RhodeHouse
12-17-2007, 11:10 PM
Unfortunately no.

I was a security controller and fire team leader for the largest above ground nuclear storage area in the world while in the air force, among other things.


Porn name is Ross Lovell, however.

You should blow some stuff up, then.

My porn name is John Sherwood. She loved it!

Holto
12-17-2007, 11:11 PM
Do you know anything about lifting? You tell me how to squat 1025 in February.

Let's talk weight gain, my tiny little friend.

Thats all you got huh? Amazing. :thumbup:

CrazyK
12-18-2007, 01:32 AM
Personally, I think you are hilarious. I think you mean well. I'm legitimately concerned about you giving bad advice to impressionable young men and costing them months of cutting for nothing.This really bothers me. Rhodes has a method, that is endorsed by many great minds in the field, and has backed it up with pics, video's, etc... of himself.

Where is any of the above for you? Or for someone you have trained? I'd love to see your spectacular physique that you've accomplished with this goal.

Sensei
12-18-2007, 06:39 AM
Do you see where it went wrong now?Yeah, it's pretty clear that Holto and yourself decided to knit-pick the **** out of one thing the guy said that's all you've got. You pick and choose the things to respond to and whenever the subject of strength comes up, you have nothing to say.

I work with a ton of young people in and out of the weight room. Most of the guys who come to me for advice don't eat breakfast, spend hundreds of $$$ a year on supplements, and buy into the counting calories approach to weight gain. Guess what? Most of them have a tough time gaining weight. A "see-food" diet is not a long term, healthy plan - no one ever said it was. But, a lot of young people would be making much better gains in the weight room if they understood basic (very basic) nutrition and ate their asses off. There really is nothing more to be said on the topic and if you disagree, tough.

Slim Schaedle
12-18-2007, 08:47 AM
Yeah, it's pretty clear that Holto and yourself decided to knit-pick the **** out of one thing the guy said that's all you've got. You pick and choose the things to respond to and whenever the subject of strength comes up, you have nothing to say.

I work with a ton of young people in and out of the weight room. Most of the guys who come to me for advice don't eat breakfast, spend hundreds of $$$ a year on supplements, and buy into the counting calories approach to weight gain. Guess what? Most of them have a tough time gaining weight. A "see-food" diet is not a long term, healthy plan - no one ever said it was. But, a lot of young people would be making much better gains in the weight room if they understood basic (very basic) nutrition and ate their asses off. There really is nothing more to be said on the topic and if you disagree, tough.

If the answer is dodged, I repeatedly question it.

(I did the same thing when mc wb threw around the "Dr." in front of his/her name...and I finally got an answer)

I addressed fatty acid oxidation/fat loss.

I did not address the responses from others pertaining to strength because I never disagreed or challeneged anything pertaining to it.

So yes, I do pick and choose what to respond to because reading comprehension, articulate cummunication, and healthy debate mandate that.

Had I said that Lyle M. is better to listen to with regards to powerlifting or olympic lifting, etc....then yes, I would have some major explaining to do to back that up.

If someone is told something that is wrong, especially by a big name guru/trainer/whatever, I do not see one problem with calling it out in order to clear things up.

My job and field requires me to do such things so I see no problem extending that to other mediums such as an internet forum because the whole purpose of a site like this is to help others learn.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 09:55 AM
Thats all you got huh? Amazing. :thumbup:

Talk to me little man. You tell me how to squat 1025 in february. You give me the answers that I need. You tell me how to gain back the 15lbs or so that I've lost since my last contest. That's all I got. I want to squat 1025. That's it. No abs, no biceps peak, I juat want to squat 1025. Enlighten me, Guru. You want to debate - let's debate. Tell me how it's done.

And, make sure to send me those pictures of the pros that you've helped reach the top of their game. Still waiting on those, Guru.

As far as writing me off because I don't waste time counting calroies, that tells me how little you know about this game. Quote all the big text books you want to. You know nothing of this game and how to play it. You're small, weak, and a nobody in the world of weightlifting and fitness.

Still waiting on the pictures and names of the pros and your advice on squatting 1025. Can't wait to read it.

Sensei
12-18-2007, 10:10 AM
If the answer is dodged, I repeatedly question it.

(I did the same thing when mc wb threw around the "Dr." in front of his/her name...and I finally got an answer)

I addressed fatty acid oxidation/fat loss.Which had what exactly to do with the original intent of the thread?... Reread the very first post and you'll see why the thread has deteriorated as it has.
I did not address the responses from others pertaining to strength because I never disagreed or challeneged anything pertaining to it.

So yes, I do pick and choose what to respond to because reading comprehension, articulate cummunication, and healthy debate mandate that.What you and Holto have added to the thread had nothing to do with "healthy debate". You "repeatedly question" because you have have found one point of contention in the argument that you know you can win. We all know that having more LBM = burning more calories and it doesn't take a genius to see that it was this point that Rhodes was making. Feel free to be a-holey and cut and paste a sentence here and there to "prove" something contrary to that, but that is his point.

Had I said that Lyle M. is better to listen to with regards to powerlifting or olympic lifting, etc....then yes, I would have some major explaining to do to back that up.

If someone is told something that is wrong, especially by a big name guru/trainer/whatever, I do not see one problem with calling it out in order to clear things up."Clearing things up" is very different than the trolling that has pervaded this and other threads dealing with weight gain. The point has always been, at least in part, that there is purpose in gaining WEIGHT. Holto brought up the question (meant to be rhetorical, I'm sure) "Do you think gaining 20lbs a month is going to net more LBM than gaining 10?" - I replied that, yes, indeed, very often it will net you more LBM, which is the crux of almost everything Rhodes and I post in this sub-forum. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with Rhodes bodyfat % or how the body oxidizes fat...

My job and field requires me to do such things so I see no problem extending that to other mediums such as an internet forum because the whole purpose of a site like this is to help others learn.
Your field requires you to nag, argue, and be off-topic?

Holto
12-18-2007, 11:15 AM
This really bothers me. Rhodes has a method, that is endorsed by many great minds in the field, and has backed it up with pics, video's, etc... of himself.

Where is any of the above for you? Or for someone you have trained? I'd love to see your spectacular physique that you've accomplished with this goal.

I'm sorry, you lost me at method.

What is his method?

brihead301
12-18-2007, 11:22 AM
My thread got over 100 replies!

galileo
12-18-2007, 11:24 AM
My thread got over 100 replies!

This is the least controversial post in the thread.

brihead301
12-18-2007, 11:27 AM
I try my best to stay nuetral in these arguments, unless of course it is an argument that I started, then I'll argue my ass off.

Holto
12-18-2007, 11:29 AM
You "repeatedly question" because you have have found one point of contention in the argument that you know you can win.

What you seem to be missing is how this impacts his credibility.

1) Rhodes states something plain as day
2) I questioned the source of this info (if you look closely it's the only statement I asked him about)
3) Rhodes alleges that Al told him this
4) Anyone here who knows who Al is & the basics of human A&P knows this is false

He's proven that he is a lair. He's proven that he is a coward for not engaging in a debate.

All he ever does is talk about how great he is. I'm sorry, but being an elite powerlifter does not give you credentials in the world of science. Nor does it give you any knowledge of the body. If he wants to help people in the lifting forums, that is awesome. I'm sure the practical knowledge he has gained is very valuable. The problem is that is the only knowledge he has gained. He doesn't understand the basics of nutrition. That was made extremely obvious when he claimed he had a client eating below maintenance and gaining weight.

Are you such a Rhodes nuthugger you don't realize that he told a bold faced lie and got exposed?

galileo
12-18-2007, 11:32 AM
I try my best to stay nuetral in these arguments, unless of course it is an argument that I started, then I'll argue my ass off.

Good point.

I'd waste a few moments to introduce some science and levity to the discussion, but my fragile ego couldn't handle being called out for being "not lean enough" or "not big enough" to have a valid point. I'd guess that the scientist who first studied the effects of testosterone on muscle growth in humans was probably 142lbs wet, thereby causing his science to be rejected by others and substituted with knowledge provided by those who reaped its benefits. :)

Sensei
12-18-2007, 11:55 AM
Wow. This forum is truly a piece of work.

Are you such a Rhodes nuthugger you don't realize that he told a bold faced lie and got exposed?You're really PMDL, aren't you?

Holto
12-18-2007, 12:51 PM
Wow. This forum is truly a piece of work.
You're really PMDL, aren't you?

Yep, this forum is kinda crazy. A guy like slim, who busts his ass in the gym has developed an impressive physique, and studies the human body at the highest level, is given respect and credibility.

A guy like Rhodes who (if I have this right) is at the top of his sport, does not understand the basics of sports nutrition (energy balance etc.) is not immediately given credibility because he failed to squat 1000lbs.

I know it is wacky.

PMDL was one of the most brilliant, self-educated posters on this board. I would be lucky to know half of what he knows about nutrition and exercise physiology some day.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 01:01 PM
What you seem to be missing is how this impacts his credibility.

1) Rhodes states something plain as day
2) I questioned the source of this info (if you look closely it's the only statement I asked him about)
3) Rhodes alleges that Al told him this
4) Anyone here who knows who Al is & the basics of human A&P knows this is false

He's proven that he is a lair. He's proven that he is a coward for not engaging in a debate.

All he ever does is talk about how great he is. I'm sorry, but being an elite powerlifter does not give you credentials in the world of science. Nor does it give you any knowledge of the body. If he wants to help people in the lifting forums, that is awesome. I'm sure the practical knowledge he has gained is very valuable. The problem is that is the only knowledge he has gained. He doesn't understand the basics of nutrition. That was made extremely obvious when he claimed he had a client eating below maintenance and gaining weight.

Are you such a Rhodes nuthugger you don't realize that he told a bold faced lie and got exposed?

Dude, you're nobody. Where are the pictures to back up your incredible knowledge of the human body? I have yet to see any evidence that you know anything about what you babble about.

And, if you think I'm lying about Alwyn, that's fine. You're wrong, as usual. Show me the pictures and names. Stop dodging my questions.

As for the basics of nutrition - It's not that hard. You seem to think that I don't understand how to eat. If I had no understanding of this, how could I compete at ther level I do? How could I be 300+ lbs at 17-18%BF and not know what I'm doing. You're the f$%^ing idiot when it comes to this same argument.

Holto
12-18-2007, 01:07 PM
And, if you think I'm lying about Alwyn, that's fine.

So you're saying he did indeed tell you that:

"Only muscle can burn fat"

I can't believe he's stupid enough to believe that...


As for the basics of nutrition - It's not that hard.

Nope, it's not. I can't believe you don't understand energy balance. I can't believe you haven't at least overheard it from someone. It gives me an idea of the knowledge levels of who you rub shoulders with.


Stop dodging my questions.

This is cute because it's so ironic. You've dodged questions dating back to my first post in this thread. So you are not in a position to tell me this.

You might be the worlds best 300lb tapdancer...

C.Pop
12-18-2007, 01:34 PM
Dude give it a rest.

Rhodes may have spoken in generalities, but I know him and I can assure you of the following:

1) He has a working (basic) knowledge of how the body works.
2) He is not a liar.

I'm not sure what your goals are here. Are you trying to discredit him? You're painting him as a tapdancer, trying to make the accusation stick but I just don't see it.

My guess is that Alwyn said something fairly complicated and intelligent. Rhodes boiled it down to, "overall, the biggest expenditure of calories that we can easily manipulate is our muscle mass". This got truncated to "muscle is the only thing that burns fat".

Was he technically correct with his first statement? Nope. It still applies, if you look at it in terms of generalities, because at the end of the day the important take home lesson is: More muscle burns more calories.

Rhodes is many things, a technician with details is not one of them. On the contrary, one of his greatests strengths is simplifying things. So maybe he took this one a step too far. Big deal.

Why didn' t you just post: Rhodes, I'm sure you were speaking in generalities, but there is more than just muscle that burns fat -there is also x, y, & z. Muscle does tend to burn the greatest number of calories in a given person though, and is the easiest to manipulate".

Maybe I'm saying things a little too far fetched, but my point is this:

You don't contribute information in a useful manner. You try to antagonize Rhodes, you try to discredit him, you want to crucify him. Why? You discredit yourself by your zealousness to attack him. Give it up. Try something new here; be positive.

P.S. I'm not trivializing that he wasn't 100% correct. Lots of people look up to him and he should choose his words carefully. I'm chastising you because your method of "correcting" is so vengeful.

Sensei
12-18-2007, 01:50 PM
Well said. :bow:

Holto
12-18-2007, 01:54 PM
How cute, Matthew brought his mommy.


1) He has a working (basic) knowledge of how the body works.

He has demonstrated on this site he doesn't understand energy balance. If you don't get that, you don't have a working understanding of how the body works. You don't grasp the basics of weight loss and gain.



Rhodes may have spoken in generalities

Do you go to the same tapdancing school?

This is not a generality (thanks for coming out):


Muscle is the only mechanism in the body that burns fat - 100% correct




You don't contribute information in a useful manner.

I've been here for 6 years, I'm sure you had time to read all of my posts and make this intelligent observation.

I can appreciate the guy not wanting to learn how the body functions. It's a lot of work. I just can't stand the guy pretending to know, posting something that is false, and then instead of engaging in an intelligent debate, he talks about his powerlifting career as if that is relevant to his knowledge of nutrition science.

Based on his logic, when he retires and grows old he will have to stop giving advice. He will no longer be big and strong...Brilliant!

Sensei
12-18-2007, 01:58 PM
How cute, Matthew brought his mommy.

He has demonstrated on this site he doesn't understand energy balance. If you don't get that, you don't have a working understanding of how the body works. You don't grasp the basics of weight loss and gain.

Do you go to the same tapdancing school?

This is not a generality (thanks for coming out):

I've been here for 6 years, I'm sure you had time to read all of my posts and make this intelligent observation.You've been here 6 years and started three threads... Wow, what a contributor! If I was a mod, I'd be glad you're here and overlook you're trolling too!

C.Pop
12-18-2007, 02:07 PM
Your condescending tone doesn't suit you. If you want to have an attitude, try being right.

1) I'm not his mommy, but this just goes to show what I'm talking about wrt you not contributing in a useful manner. I'm not even busting your balls. I'm sure you have some good info, some useful knowledge, why not share it with less hate?

2) I'm pretty sure he understands the energy balance. He understands it well enough to simplify it. I think his (gross) simplification will work for most of the guys here.

3) I have never gone to a tapdancing school, but once more, we have another example of you not contributing something useful. Why so angry?

4) Your conclusion is erroneous. According to Rhodes, once he stops lifting, he'll still be able to coach because he once DID accomplish all that he helps coach. You made the mistake of mixing up his desire to learn from those that have proven what they know with him only learning from those that currently are doing something that he can learn from. If you squatted a grand 10 years ago then stopped lifting, you still have learned something -you had to have that knowledge to accomplish whatever you did.

He talks about his powerlifting career as a rebuttal to advice given by guys taht may or may not know what they're talking about. The proof is in the pudding, so to speak. There are many voices on the internet, everyone is an expert. He has accomplished something. Many of the "experts" have not. Most of us that have accomplished anything of note have done some heavy listening to those that have gone before us.

I don't understand why you struggle with this concept.

Slim Schaedle
12-18-2007, 02:24 PM
Which had what exactly to do with the original intent of the thread?... Reread the very first post and you'll see why the thread has deteriorated as it has.What you and Holto have added to the thread had nothing to do with "healthy debate". You "repeatedly question" because you have have found one point of contention in the argument that you know you can win. We all know that having more LBM = burning more calories and it doesn't take a genius to see that it was this point that Rhodes was making. Feel free to be a-holey and cut and paste a sentence here and there to "prove" something contrary to that, but that is his point.
"Clearing things up" is very different than the trolling that has pervaded this and other threads dealing with weight gain. The point has always been, at least in part, that there is purpose in gaining WEIGHT. Holto brought up the question (meant to be rhetorical, I'm sure) "Do you think gaining 20lbs a month is going to net more LBM than gaining 10?" - I replied that, yes, indeed, very often it will net you more LBM, which is the crux of almost everything Rhodes and I post in this sub-forum. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with Rhodes bodyfat % or how the body oxidizes fat...

Your field requires you to nag, argue, and be off-topic?

I brought up two things.

1. I disagreed with your example or trusting Rhodes over Lyle with respect to knowledge in physiolgy.

You clearly disagree with the fact that I disagree...and that's perfectly ok. I am totally fine with that.

2. I indicated that Rhodes (or whoever really said it) was wrong about fatty acid oxidation. In order to clear it up for the thousands out there reading this thread and not posting or not signed up as WBB members, which I see as a good thing. Again, it is perfectly ok if you disagree. Just say so. Everything else is just fluff and you don't need to bring it up b/c I never addressed it.

Obviously these two things were not the purpose of what this thread is about.

And yes, if I am not anal (or whatever other adjective) in my current job, and past jobs, people die.

Slim Schaedle
12-18-2007, 02:25 PM
Good point.

I'd waste a few moments to introduce some science and levity to the discussion, but my fragile ego couldn't handle being called out for being "not lean enough" or "not big enough" to have a valid point. I'd guess that the scientist who first studied the effects of testosterone on muscle growth in humans was probably 142lbs wet, thereby causing his science to be rejected by others and substituted with knowledge provided by those who reaped its benefits. :)

I like this post

Slim Schaedle
12-18-2007, 02:29 PM
PMDL was one of the most brilliant, self-educated posters on this board. I would be lucky to know half of what he knows about nutrition and exercise physiology some day.

He still actively posts over on Lyle's board.

I wonder why he doesn't spend time here anymore.

Itsnotaboutme
12-18-2007, 03:14 PM
I stepped on the scale this morning, post-dump. I weighed 202 lbs. It must be because my balls grew about 2" in diameter in the past couple weeks, but hey, I'm not a woman anymore!!!

Rhodes would be proud.

O so those surgeries do work. How is the whole penis thing working out for you?

Hehe I kinda laughed. I hit the 200 barrier in the 8th grade.

Invain
12-18-2007, 03:15 PM
I'm with some of the others as well when I say I really don't like taking advice from people that don't have physical proof they know what they're talking about. I know this has nothing to do with this argument, but Holto, you seem very intelligent and know a ****load about nutrition, but there's little proof you know what you're really doing besides some stuff you learned in a book or on the net. I'd much rather listen to somebody that can back up their statements with real world proof.

There's others on this board that love to preach **** and for all we know might have never touched a weight in their lives as well.

Holto
12-18-2007, 03:22 PM
2) I'm pretty sure he understands the energy balance.

He claimed he had/has a client that is eating below maintenance and gaining weight. I can find it if you like. Pretty embarrassing actually and enough to make me realize he is as ignorant as he seems.



You've been here 6 years and started three threads... Wow, what a contributor! If I was a mod, I'd be glad you're here and overlook you're trolling too!

So I'm not contributing if I'm not starting threads?

I actually even said 'posts'...

I wouldn't have guessed you are actually stupid, thanks for clearing that up.

brihead301
12-18-2007, 04:06 PM
O so those surgeries do work. How is the whole penis thing working out for you?

Hehe I kinda laughed. I hit the 200 barrier in the 8th grade.

HAHA. Yup! Wait no...Damn you bastard!!

I wish I was 200 lbs. in 8th grade. I'd probably be like...205 now.

It did feel good crossing that mark. I just upped my calories too because I'm determined to hit 225. From there I'll maintain my weight for a while.

C.Pop
12-18-2007, 04:18 PM
He claimed he had/has a client that is eating below maintenance and gaining weight. I can find it if you like. Pretty embarrassing actually and enough to make me realize he is as ignorant as he seems.




Let me hazard a guess.

Rhodes had a client figure out the number of calories she burns in a day. She undercut this so much that she crashed her metabolism. She ended up gaining some weight or at least she didn't lose what she expected even though she ate less than the number of calories she calculated (pre metabolism crash) she'd burn in a day.

I'm pretty sure that Rhodes knows that you can't gain weight if you eat less than you burn.

Do you really belive he doesn't know that? Really?

Holto
12-18-2007, 05:14 PM
I'm pretty sure that Rhodes knows that you can't gain weight if you eat less than you burn.

Do you really belive he doesn't know that? Really?

I know...it's so sad, it's pathetic. I'm glad you realize that it's impossible. Perhaps he could hit you up and you could help him learn the basics. Anybody that has spent time on this site would know that. The problem with him is he came here to teach, not to learn.

He posted last week he had/has a female client that was eating below maintenance and was gaining weight. He called it the 'survival mechanism' and told me to google it because it was a scientific term.

Unfortunately the thread was deleted because he can't have an adult discussion and resorted to name calling.

I will GLADLY pm some users to come here and verify the sheer inbred ignorance that he displayed.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 05:55 PM
Good point.

I'd waste a few moments to introduce some science and levity to the discussion, but my fragile ego couldn't handle being called out for being "not lean enough" or "not big enough" to have a valid point. I'd guess that the scientist who first studied the effects of testosterone on muscle growth in humans was probably 142lbs wet, thereby causing his science to be rejected by others and substituted with knowledge provided by those who reaped its benefits. :)

Actually, the genius who invented steroids won a Nobel Prize

Itsnotaboutme
12-18-2007, 07:35 PM
HAHA. Yup! Wait no...Damn you bastard!!

I wish I was 200 lbs. in 8th grade. I'd probably be like...205 now.

It did feel good crossing that mark. I just upped my calories too because I'm determined to hit 225. From there I'll maintain my weight for a while.

Kinda fun being big in grade school. No one really messes with you, and when they do mess you with you its only once. :D

Lol speaking of which this kid hit me with like a skittle in the hand and it hurt. So I turned around and he was laughing his head off. So I walked over there and put him in a headlock and then said "don't do that" and he stopped.

That same kid that hit me also picks on this other kid that I'm friends with. So I taught my friend a standing arm-bar. So I walk in to class one day to see my friend holding this kid in a arm-bar and the kid is like screaming. It was so funny because he was like hey! It works!

galileo
12-18-2007, 07:41 PM
...the scientist who first studied the effects of testosterone on muscle growth in humans...

This is not that.


Actually, the genius who invented steroids won a Nobel Prize

Derek HR Barton, won his Nobel prize in comformational analysis. His paper on steroid compounds, although genius, did not target muscle growth in humans.

Although I can see you're trying to loosely dismantle my point, it stands. I can say with full confidence that the vast majority of the people in this world who are smarter than you and know more about human physiology/biochemistry than you...are smaller than you. Why? God's irony perhaps? You don't have to be blessed with a large bone structure and a preferential metabolism to know what you're talking about. It just helps other people believe that the truth is as you see it.

No matter how much guitar theory I know, I'll never be Steve Vai or Yngwie Malmsteen. Can I be the best guitar player I can be? Certainly. But given the contraints of my short and wide fingers, my potential is limited. Any day someone may come along who can play faster and more precisely than me, even with far less knowledge. That's life.

Sensei
12-18-2007, 07:44 PM
So I'm not contributing if I'm not starting threads?

I actually even said 'posts'...You certainly have contributed zero here except to troll it up. The mods obviously like you... I try to spend as little time outside of the training forums as possible and threads like this make it pretty easy to stay away.

]I wouldn't have guessed you are actually stupid, thanks for clearing that up.Eeeerrr, good one eeerrr, ummm tapdancer!

Sensei
12-18-2007, 07:45 PM
Although I can see you're trying to loosely dismantle my point, it stands. I can say with full confidence that the vast majority of the people in this world who are smarter than you and know more about human physiology/biochemistry than you...are smaller than you. Why? God's irony perhaps? You don't have to be blessed with a large bone structure and a preferential metabolism to know what you're talking about. It just helps other people believe that the truth is as you see it.

Maybe as a mod, you could lock, clean up, block, or otherwise improve the thread rather than join the trollation...

Holto
12-18-2007, 08:25 PM
Maybe as a mod, you could lock, clean up, block, or otherwise improve the thread rather than join the trollation...

Perhaps the mods feel some trolling (of Rhodes) is necessary.

It's really not cool to dodge any and all accountability for what one posts. When people state something as fact they are often asked to substantiate it. When a poster basically claims he is the only person on the site qualified to give advice it really doesn't support the accountability that keeps this site free of mis-information. This is a discussion board, Rhodes does not engage in discussions, he just assumes you are small and weak and therefore not a credible source of anything.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 09:23 PM
This is not that.



Derek HR Barton, won his Nobel prize in comformational analysis. His paper on steroid compounds, although genius, did not target muscle growth in humans.

Although I can see you're trying to loosely dismantle my point, it stands. I can say with full confidence that the vast majority of the people in this world who are smarter than you and know more about human physiology/biochemistry than you...are smaller than you. Why? God's irony perhaps? You don't have to be blessed with a large bone structure and a preferential metabolism to know what you're talking about. It just helps other people believe that the truth is as you see it.

No matter how much guitar theory I know, I'll never be Steve Vai or Yngwie Malmsteen. Can I be the best guitar player I can be? Certainly. But given the contraints of my short and wide fingers, my potential is limited. Any day someone may come along who can play faster and more precisely than me, even with far less knowledge. That's life.

I'm not trying to dismantle anything you f$%^ing ******. I'm saying the man is a genius, because he developed steroids - plain and simple. Get over yourself.

Only a small person makes the point that the man/people that know more about biochemistry than me are smaller than me. No kidding?

My point has always been, and will always be - if you haven't done it - don't talk about it because you don't know what it takes. Plain and simple. I've been tiny and ripped. I've been big and ripped. Now I'm bigger and strong. I've been 8%. I've been everything I ramble on about. No book, no scientist, nothing, except getting under the bar can duplicate that knowledge.

Take any test that some pencil-neck comes up with. Random, double-blind, blah, blah, blah. It means nothing. Anyone can get results on detrained subjects. I know that some jackass that's never trained or eaten properly will make tremedous gains the first time they train/eat properly. That is useless information.

Show me the study that takes REAL athletes/lifters and studies them. Give me elite-level athletes/lifters and test them. Who are these false idols that you science guys pray to? Have they tried all of their theories on themselves, or are they just theories? No little pencil-neck can tell me how to get strong/big if they HAVEN'T done it themselves. They don't know because they haven't done it. In theory, everything sounds great. In practice, all the science in the world tell us that you have to time your carb/protein intake properly. At first it was more inportant to get protein in post-workout. The, that changed to carbs. Then it was found that it's more important to get amino acids in first, and the BS list goes on. And, all you science guys follow this horse$hit. Remember in the 80's when cardio was the rage? Then. all of a sudden, cardio was bad for you? Well, which is it? It doesn't matter. Do something, and that's ok.

At the end of the day, the only thing that holds true is, you need to eat pretty clean. Eat more if you want to gain, less if you want to lose. Get in good amounts of protein, fats, and carbs. Stay away from sugar and processed foods.

Science has it's place in the world. Unfortunately, you science gurus have missed the bus in the training world. Practice is what rules the lives of those that really succeed (with the possible exception of Pro Bodybuilders)

You guys are so "open-minded" to blindly following some scientist. Why should you listen to them? Who have they trained? What have they done with their own information? Why is what they found, the answer? Did you read all of their test results? Were you there to see if the tests were run accurately or were they doctored to give them the answers they had hoped for? Where is the real-world evidence? Or, because they have fancy initials behind their name, you seem to think that they know best. Remove your heads from your asses. Put down the books and pick up some weights. I've never dealt with people so blindly disabled and paralyzed by words in a book. Actions speak louder than words. Go do something.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 09:39 PM
Perhaps the mods feel some trolling (of Rhodes) is necessary.

It's really not cool to dodge any and all accountability for what one posts. When people state something as fact they are often asked to substantiate it. When a poster basically claims he is the only person on the site qualified to give advice it really doesn't support the accountability that keeps this site free of mis-information. This is a discussion board, Rhodes does not engage in discussions, he just assumes you are small and weak and therefore not a credible source of anything.

I'm tired of your piss-poor attitude. You misread and come up with your own thoughts on my posts. Sorry my conversation wasn't taped and recorded. I know what we spoke about.

Eveyone on here can go to EliteFTS and read about me. They can read my replies to posters. They can look at the site, read about all of the team members and see where I'm coming from, who I'm associated with, and my credibility. Then they can choose to listen to me or not to listen to me. But, they have the ability to see who I am, what I have done, and what I can do. The rest is up to them. I am accessable to anyone that is interested in hearing what my thoughts are on any subject relating to lifting, getting stronger/bigger, life - whatever they might want to ask me about. I've posted my email address numerous times. I've posted my phone number numerous times. I'm here if anyone want to talk and discuss anything I say or post.

Who are you again? No name. No phone number. No email address. No pictures/video. No website. No affiliation to anything in the fitness industry. Why should anyone listen to you? You are just like the scientists in those useless studies that you cling to for some sense of well-being. You have no proof of any sort of success in this industry. Even if your goals are not what mine are, at least I'm out there to be read about. You hide behind your keyboard typing away with no evidence to back up you claims.

If I'm so stupid - If I'm so uneducated - If I'm so ignorant - Why do people know who I am? Because I'm out there talking the talk (sometimes a little too much) and walking the walk. I am easily accessable and more than willing to talk about my experiences in my journey to where I am today. Am I arrogant? Not really. But, I know what I've accomplished and have no problem being very proud of it. That's confidence my small, close-minded little canuck.

mjrhodes2@comcast.net
413-433-9026

galileo
12-18-2007, 09:43 PM
Maybe as a mod, you could lock, clean up, block, or otherwise improve the thread rather than join the trollation...

1. I'm not a moderator.
2. I'm not joining in anything, I'm merely expressing the point that being big or not is in invalid qualifier for correctness. I don't care who is right or wrong in this entire subject, the fact that the only proof required is how big you are enfeebles even the greatest of men from making any difference when placed within this confine. Eating my way to a respected opinion is not something I care to do.

galileo
12-18-2007, 09:48 PM
I stopped reading after you insulted me within your first few words. You're petty. Rather than accepting a valid point, you attack. If I were a mod, I'd probably have to assume that you were in fact the troll based on your quick-to-engage behavior.

Squatting more than me doesn't make you a better person. But calling me by expletives for disagreeing (very mildly I might add), makes you a worse one.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 09:52 PM
I stopped reading after you insulted me within your first few words. Rather than You're petty. Rather than accepting a valid point, you attack. If I were a mod, I'd probably have to assume that you were in fact the troll based on your quick-to-engage behavior.

Squatting more than me doesn't make you a better person. But calling me by expletives for disagreeing (very mildly I might add), makes you a worse one.

Well, you missed the whole point because of your bruised little ego. My quick to engage behavior is because a lot of you little (not in stature) punks are jumping down my throat for everything I say. Maybe you guys oughts read my stuff a little closer before you insult and demean me. it's going both ways here, so don't act like I'm the only one on the attack.

galileo
12-18-2007, 09:54 PM
Well, you missed the whole point because of your bruised little ego. My quick to engage behavior is because a lot of you little (not in stature) punks are jumping down my throat for everything I say. Maybe you guys oughts read my stuff a little closer before you insult and demean me. it's going both ways here, so don't act like I'm the only one on the attack.

I didn't jump on you, here nor anywhere else. I didn't insult or demean you and I don't appreciate being lumped into your stereotype. It's your ego that appears bruised, I'm going to sleep just fine without qualifying myself to you.

Holto
12-18-2007, 10:03 PM
Who are you again? No name. No phone number. No email address. No pictures/video. No website. No affiliation to anything in the fitness industry. Why should anyone listen to you?

Dead serious question:

Are you the only person on here you deem fit to dispense advice, or are there others?

I know you will dodge this question, because you always do. I've asked you this three times now I think.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 10:05 PM
I didn't jump on you, here nor anywhere else. I didn't insult or demean you and I don't appreciate being lumped into your stereotype. It's your ego that appears bruised, I'm going to sleep just fine without qualifying myself to you.

Well then, I'm proud of you.

ectx
12-18-2007, 10:06 PM
He still actively posts over on Lyle's board.

I wonder why he doesn't spend time here anymore.

LMFAO... sarcasm with that protein shake?

galileo
12-18-2007, 10:07 PM
Well then, I'm proud of you.

Lord knows you have plenty of pride to spare.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 10:07 PM
Dead serious question:

Are you the only person on here you deem fit to dispense advice, or are there others?

I know you will dodge this question, because you always do. I've asked you this three times now I think.

No, I am not the only person on here fit to give advice. Question answered. Let me know if I should elaborate on my answer. Any follow up comments by me, will undoubtedly get you talking about my ego. Fire away, and I shall answer.

RhodeHouse
12-18-2007, 10:10 PM
Lord knows you have plenty of pride to spare.

Good point. I am proud of what I've accomplished. Without going into it, I have just recently realized what I've been able to do without making excuses. I've actually read some books (WOW!) about a condition I suffer with. Pretty cool stuff I found out about it.

Holto
12-18-2007, 11:02 PM
No, I am not the only person on here fit to give advice. Question answered. Let me know if I should elaborate on my answer. Any follow up comments by me, will undoubtedly get you talking about my ego. Fire away, and I shall answer.

Ok, who else here do you feel is qualified to give advice?

Sensei
12-19-2007, 06:56 AM
1. I'm not a moderator.
2. I'm not joining in anything, I'm merely expressing the point that being big or not is in invalid qualifier for correctness. I don't care who is right or wrong in this entire subject, the fact that the only proof required is how big you are enfeebles even the greatest of men from making any difference when placed within this confine. Eating my way to a respected opinion is not something I care to do.I guess I thought you were a moderator because your username is listed at the bottom of the page as such. If you've commented, you've joined the fray and it's pretty clear what you are trying to say even though you've chosen your words more carefully than others.

If any mods actually read these threads, I'm wondering why they haven't deleted posts, the entire thread, or locked it yet.

Chubrock
12-19-2007, 06:58 AM
If any mods actually read these threads, I'm wondering why they haven't deleted posts, the entire thread, or locked it yet.



I don't think it should be censored or deleted. It gives everybody a place to go at it and vent. If we continuously delete threads, these arguments are going to pop up in new threads over and over. This gives it one central place for people to go back and forth.

Sensei
12-19-2007, 07:01 AM
Well, IMHO, if you want to rant, do it in general chat. The arguments will pop up as long as they are allowed to - every thread that talks about "The Big Boys Diet" or anything like it in the nutrition subforums ends up like this. JMO.

RhodeHouse
12-19-2007, 01:15 PM
Ok, who else here do you feel is qualified to give advice?

There are a few people that I always read what they have to say.

Sensei, Built, CPop (usually on the phone) - There's always some very good advice from most people. I have the biggest problem with the science, count everything types. And, I am not trying to throw insults right now, but there's my biggest problem on here. When someone boils everything down to science ALL THE TIME. Contrary to your popular belief of me, I am very well read in this field. That being said, I've learned 95% of what I know under the bar and/or experimenting with eating habits. I read the books, but have never really taken much away from them because of the same thing I always mention - they haven't done it. They studied it.

I'll take my car to a guy who grew up working on cars, his dad fixed cars, etc... before I take it to a place where some guy went to school to be a mechanic. I ALWAYS want someone who's been there and done that. It's the same philosophy in the gym. So, when someone gives me advice, I want to know what their background is. Who taught them? What have they done in their quest to give them credibilty? Basically, why should I listen to them?

I know most of my advice is regurgitated and dumbed down for my benefit and for whoever cares to listen. The simpler things are, the more progress you'll make. I saw it coaching football, all the time.

I understand that you have a huge belief in science. I believe in practice. In my whole lifting experience, science has never helped me get bigger, stronger, leaner. Now, the info that was given to me has some genesis in science, but it's the real-world advice that got into my head. When someone who's big gives advice to those that are small and trying to gain weight - they should shut up and listen. If you KNOW that I don't care too much about my bodyfat%, then take my eating advice and tweek it to fit your needs. Don't eat fast food, or whatever you feel is detrimental to your goals, but I know my method works. I'll gain more because I eat whatever I want to. One may not gain as much with cleaner food, but they will certainly make huge gains shoveling food down their throat, rather than counting calories. One should also realize, that the first 2-3 times you really bulk up, you're gonna get fat. Cut it off each time. Do what you need to do to get it off. The bigger you get each time, the more you'll retain. You'll get to a point where when you bulk, you'll gain a lot more lean mass than before. But, the first few times, you'll get fat. Read BFGUITAR's post on this. He stated the exact same thing I just wrote. Dave Tate told me the same thing when I saw him in October. It happened to me on my last bulk. I gained 25lbs and all of my measurements were smaller where it "matters" and bigger where it doesn't. You may not like my methods, my ways of explaining things, or how I come off, but it works, especially for those that have trouble with all the scientific stuff, counting, and all that stuff that cause more stress for some, than it's worth. When I stopped writing stuff down, I blew up in size and in strength. Don't sweat the details.

Sorry about the long-winded response. I have some free time at work.

But, there is always some good advice from everyone on here. I am at the point where I know if I should listen or not.

And, you're right. I do come here to teach. I have a select few that I go to when I need help. I'm very lucky to have personal access to these guys. A lot of people,especially younger guys, don't have what I have. This is my way of trying to give back what's been taught to me. I don't want young guys to make the same mistakes I made. I know they will, but I might reach some of them. And, that's cool for me. I get emails and PM's all the time, thanking me for my BS advice. That's what I'm here for. If I'm no help to anyone, I'll go somewhere else. But, I think there are a few on here who like what I have to say. If I'm wrong, so be it.

Holto
12-19-2007, 02:23 PM
I don't know how you can possibly consider yourself 'very well read' when you don't understand the fundamentals of metabolism or energy balance.

You post a lot of stuff that is dead wrong (& easily referenced as so) but I think you're heart is in the right place and you're a cool novelty to have on the board.

You also make a ton of ignorant assumptions. How do you know I have a huge belief in science? Because I know about the body? How do you know it wasn't part of a previous career I had, where I was required to learn. You don't. If you stopped making assumptions you would start learning.

Regardless, this thread will be the last time I question anything you post. You won't engage in a debate so it's pointless. My only concern was that people on the board recognize you for what you are, an experienced powerlifter with tons of practical knowledge and not much else.

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/05/what_things_cost/image/bigmac.jpg

WBBIRL
12-19-2007, 03:17 PM
I'm not taking sides.... thats the first thing I will say and make it very clear

First off I know for a FACT that from experience I became bigger and stronger faster when I chowed down and lifted heavy then ever before. It may have netted me a little bit more fat but I gain size and strength much faster and the little extra fat when considered in ratio to the extra muscle was pretty much meaningless. As stated the extra muscle would work to burn that fat off anyways.

I won't pretend to know a ton about the topic of muscle being the only thing that burns fat, because I don't know.

But Rhodes has proven he can walk the walk and talk the talk. He's a world class PL'er and has lots of people who can speak to his creditability.

Anyone who tries to say he's full of ****, is full of **** themselves. No one and NO ONE gets to 300 pounds with abs without knowing what the **** their talking about. A lot of people who DO KNOW what their talking about don't get that far. His training and physique proves that he isn't just blowing smoke.

I think it's safe to say that at the LEAST if your gaining by the method Rhodes uses that your putting on enough muscle to make the gain in bodyfat percent very negligible. Especially when you consider how valuable LBM or even body mass in general is to an elite power lifter.

To say a man that can see abs at 300 pounds is dumb would be a very foolish statement.

arnoldsclone
12-19-2007, 03:24 PM
I'm not taking sides.... thats the first thing I will say and make it very clear

First off I know for a FACT that from experience I became bigger and stronger faster when I chowed down and lifted heavy then ever before. It may have netted me a little bit more fat but I gain size and strength much faster and the little extra fat when considered in ratio to the extra muscle was pretty much meaningless. As stated the extra muscle would work to burn that fat off anyways.

I won't pretend to know a ton about the topic of muscle being the only thing that burns fat, because I don't know.

But Rhodes has proven he can walk the walk and talk the talk. He's a world class PL'er and has lots of people who can speak to his creditability.

Anyone who tries to say he's full of ****, is full of **** themselves. No one and NO ONE gets to 300 pounds with abs without knowing what the **** their talking about. A lot of people who DO KNOW what their talking about don't get that far. His training and physique proves that he isn't just blowing smoke.

I think it's safe to say that at the LEAST if your gaining by the method Rhodes uses that your putting on enough muscle to make the gain in bodyfat percent very negligible. Especially when you consider how valuable LBM or even body mass in general is to an elite power lifter.

To say a man that can see abs at 300 pounds is dumb would be a very foolish statement.

i agree abs at 300 lbs is a serious accomplishment, and this thread is waaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too long, holto take it easy man, why do you have to "expose" rhodes for what he is??? why debate if you know what you're talking about

RhodeHouse
12-19-2007, 05:23 PM
I don't know how you can possibly consider yourself 'very well read' when you don't understand the fundamentals of metabolism or energy balance.

You post a lot of stuff that is dead wrong (& easily referenced as so) but I think you're heart is in the right place and you're a cool novelty to have on the board.

You also make a ton of ignorant assumptions. How do you know I have a huge belief in science? Because I know about the body? How do you know it wasn't part of a previous career I had, where I was required to learn. You don't. If you stopped making assumptions you would start learning.

Regardless, this thread will be the last time I question anything you post. You won't engage in a debate so it's pointless. My only concern was that people on the board recognize you for what you are, an experienced powerlifter with tons of practical knowledge and not much else.

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/05/what_things_cost/image/bigmac.jpg

There you go again. I explained myself and how I feel about this topic, and you continue to act like I'm an idiot. A novelty. Dude, you're nobody. Nobody knows who you are, you've done nothing. Nuff said. I won't post anything in response to your comments in the future, do the same for me.

RhodeHouse
12-19-2007, 05:24 PM
I'm not taking sides.... thats the first thing I will say and make it very clear

First off I know for a FACT that from experience I became bigger and stronger faster when I chowed down and lifted heavy then ever before. It may have netted me a little bit more fat but I gain size and strength much faster and the little extra fat when considered in ratio to the extra muscle was pretty much meaningless. As stated the extra muscle would work to burn that fat off anyways.

I won't pretend to know a ton about the topic of muscle being the only thing that burns fat, because I don't know.

But Rhodes has proven he can walk the walk and talk the talk. He's a world class PL'er and has lots of people who can speak to his creditability.

Anyone who tries to say he's full of ****, is full of **** themselves. No one and NO ONE gets to 300 pounds with abs without knowing what the **** their talking about. A lot of people who DO KNOW what their talking about don't get that far. His training and physique proves that he isn't just blowing smoke.

I think it's safe to say that at the LEAST if your gaining by the method Rhodes uses that your putting on enough muscle to make the gain in bodyfat percent very negligible. Especially when you consider how valuable LBM or even body mass in general is to an elite power lifter.

To say a man that can see abs at 300 pounds is dumb would be a very foolish statement.

Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate it.

Holto
12-19-2007, 05:31 PM
Anyone who tries to say he's full of ****, is full of **** themselves.

He told an obvious lie in this thread. I'm not sure if you read it or not. It's not like this thread is a quality read. In my experience people who lie tend to continue to do so. I'm not saying he's a compulsive liar or anything. He just doesn't know enough to enter into a debate with anybody here and he tried to drop a name and it didn't work.



No one and NO ONE gets to 300 pounds with abs without knowing what the **** their talking about.

This is inductive logic of the highest order. There are tons of guys in the NFL for example that do what their strength and nutrition coaches tell them and don't know more (or even as much) as the average bodybuilder.

You don't learn about the proteolytic actions of cortisol, metabolism, energy balance while lifting, sorry, it just doesn't happen.



To say a man that can see abs at 300 pounds is dumb would be a very foolish statement.

Who said he was dumb?

There are astrophysicists that don't understand energy balance, it's not their field. Much like power lifting does not teach human physiology or nutrition science.

Holto
12-19-2007, 05:32 PM
i agree abs at 300 lbs is a serious accomplishment, and this thread is waaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too long, holto take it easy man, why do you have to "expose" rhodes for what he is??? why debate if you know what you're talking about

Yeah he tapdanced for a few pages, thats what happens when a poster is too cowardly to enter into a discussion on a discussion board.

I'm officially done with this thread, any questions comments or concerns, please PM me.

dbx
12-19-2007, 07:24 PM
http://blog.pbwiki.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/fail.jpg

Itsnotaboutme
12-19-2007, 07:29 PM
I stepped on the scale this morning, post-dump. I weighed 202 lbs. It must be because my balls grew about 2" in diameter in the past couple weeks, but hey, I'm not a woman anymore!!!

Rhodes would be proud.

Dude. You might wanna get that checked out by a doc, man.


That is what Happened to Lance Armstrong and look what happened to him. Hmmm maybe bri will get a ball cut off and win 7 straight Mr. Olympia's.....:strong:

Itsnotaboutme
12-19-2007, 07:34 PM
There you go again. I explained myself and how I feel about this topic, and you continue to act like I'm an idiot. A novelty. Dude, you're nobody. Nobody knows who you are, you've done nothing. Nuff said. I won't post anything in response to your comments in the future, do the same for me.

Instead of just trying to tear him down, why don't you just try and prove him wrong? Then everyone would know who really wins here.

Chubrock
12-19-2007, 07:50 PM
why don't you just try and prove him wrong? Then everyone would know who really wins here.


The proof is in actually accomplishing it. Rhodes has accomplished almost everything he talks about, using the methods he discusses. What a book says can and can't happen isn't necessarily correct and that is where Rhode's differs from A LOT of people on this board. He'd rather learn from those that have accomplished what they speak of and use those methods, instead of taking advice from someone that hasn't been there.

Songsangnim
12-19-2007, 08:01 PM
Anyone who tries to say he's full of ****, is full of **** themselves. No one and NO ONE gets to 300 pounds with abs without knowing what the **** their talking about.

To say a man that can see abs at 300 pounds is dumb would be a very foolish statement.

Without getting into the whole Rhodes/Holto thing, I will just say by that logic Ronnie Coleman would be the most qualified person to give advice here.

Yet it is recognized by most in the bodybuilding world that Mr. Coleman (while undoubtedly a great bodybuilder) is, as some famous guru put it "not the sharpest pencil in the box".

Nor would Mr. Coleman's training routines be what the natural, genetically average trainee requires for optimal results.



Mr galileo said it best. Being big doesn't necessarily mean you know what you are talking about. Again not getting into the whole Rhodes/Holto thing just making some generalized comments.

Slim Schaedle
12-19-2007, 08:30 PM
For now on I am only listening to doctors who have had heart attacks themselves.

RhodeHouse
12-19-2007, 08:39 PM
Instead of just trying to tear him down, why don't you just try and prove him wrong? Then everyone would know who really wins here.

I don't have the time, nor desire to prove someone wrong. I know I'm right because I've done it. I've said many times, I'm easy to find on the internet. I've proven I can do what I say. He's done nothing. No pictures, names, no website - he's produced nothing to show me that he knows anything about what he claims. He's an keyboard intellect.

And, at the end of the day, I really don't care what people think. My ways work and I keep reaching my goals and helping those that choose to listen, reach theirs.

RhodeHouse
12-19-2007, 08:42 PM
For now on I am only listening to doctors who have had heart attacks themselves.

As well you should. Your ridiculous point is why you fail. This is exactly the crap you pull - like someone earlier mentioned. You find one point and rip it, and miss the big picture. I don't care which nuclear dump you managed, you just don't get it. You're like a broad - nit-pick,, nit-pick nit-pick

RhodeHouse
12-19-2007, 08:45 PM
Without getting into the whole Rhodes/Holto thing, I will just say by that logic Ronnie Coleman would be the most qualified person to give advice here.

Yet it is recognized by most in the bodybuilding world that Mr. Coleman (while undoubtedly a great bodybuilder) is, as some famous guru put it "not the sharpest pencil in the box".

Nor would Mr. Coleman's training routines be what the natural, genetically average trainee requires for optimal results.



Mr galileo said it best. Being big doesn't necessarily mean you know what you are talking about. Again not getting into the whole Rhodes/Holto thing just making some generalized comments.


Dude, if you want to be a pro bodybuilder and you DIDN'T listen to Ronnie Coleman, you really should be shot, so that you can't reproduce and contaminate the gene pool anymore than it already is.

This is the problem with the internet, science, and young people today. Too much stupidity goes unpunished.

Slim Schaedle
12-19-2007, 08:47 PM
As well you should. Your ridiculous point is why you fail. This is exactly the crap you pull - like someone earlier mentioned. You find one point and rip it, and miss the big picture. I don't care which nuclear dump you managed, you just don't get it. You're like a broad - nit-pick,, nit-pick nit-pick

What point did I make?

What did I fail at?

What big picture did I miss?


I think you need to pay a little closer to who you target with your comments.

A few posts ago I thought I was joking around with you and then make one sarcastic comment, to, I don't know...maybe throw a little humor in just as I attempted by ripping on myself which deeder commented on.

And then you come back out a be a complete prick.

In fact, I never nit-picked you.

I disagreed with something Sensei said and spent alot of time trying to clear it up b/c he brought up other factors I was not addressing.

I admitted to misunderstanding something you wrote as sarcasm.

If trying to clear something up is nit-picking, then I was not aware of that.

I never tried to insult your livelihood or anything about you, but you seem to have no problem doing the same to me. (I even tried to help you with a shake recipe)

So, thanks.

Songsangnim
12-19-2007, 08:51 PM
Dude, if you want to be a pro bodybuilder and you DIDN'T listen to Ronnie Coleman, you really should be shot, so that you can't reproduce and contaminate the gene pool anymore than it already is.

This is the problem with the internet, science, and young people today. Too much stupidity goes unpunished.


Dude, Ronnie Coleman doesn't come up with this stuff himself. He does what CHAD NICHOLS (a pencil neck scientist) tells him what to do. That won him 8 Mr. Olympias. But according to YOUR logic, he shouldn't listen to Chad, because Chad hasn't even won ONE Mr. Olympia.


Nor did I say ANYTHING about being a pro bodybuilder. I said that Ronnie's advice is not applicable for the genetically average unassisted trainer.

RhodeHouse
12-19-2007, 09:02 PM
Dude, Ronnie Coleman doesn't come up with this stuff himself. He does what CHAD NICHOLS (a pencil neck scientist) tells him what to do. That won him 8 Mr. Olympias. But according to YOUR logic, he shouldn't listen to Chad, because Chad hasn't even won ONE Mr. Olympia.


Nor did I say ANYTHING about being a pro bodybuilder. I said that Ronnie's advice is not applicable for the genetically average unassisted trainer.

This Chad guy, wasn't there when Ronnie started. He got to a certain point by himself, before he had the money to hire these homos. I do see your point, but will give Ronnie 90% of the credit because HE DID IT!

RhodeHouse
12-19-2007, 09:05 PM
What point did I make?

What did I fail at?

What big picture did I miss?


I think you need to pay a little closer to who you target with your comments.

A few posts ago I thought I was joking around with you and then make one sarcastic comment, to, I don't know...maybe throw a little humor in just as I attempted by ripping on myself which deeder commented on.

And then you come back out a be a complete prick.

In fact, I never nit-picked you.

I disagreed with something Sensei said and spent alot of time trying to clear it up b/c he brought up other factors I was not addressing.

I admitted to misunderstanding something you wrote as sarcasm.

If trying to clear something up is nit-picking, then I was not aware of that.

I never tried to insult your livelihood or anything about you, but you seem to have no problem doing the same to me. (I even tried to help you with a shake recipe)

So, thanks.

Sarcasm doesn't translate well in writing. And, as a bunch of tools rip me, it's not a great place to drop it in. Timing is everything.

Sorry to misinterpret your meaning. I'm a sarcastic prick most of the time. It's some kind of defense mechanism. I'm probably scarred from something my parents did or some girl di when I was a kid, but that's a whole other story.

HahnB
12-19-2007, 09:28 PM
Someone with Ronnie Coleman's genetics and a ton of gear would achieve great results doing ANYTHING in the gym. Would he win Olympia's doing just anything, probably not, but he'd still look better than 99% of all people who lift.

It doesn't automatically make him qualified to give anyone advice, nor does it make his advice golden.

Experience is a form of knowledge, but it should still be questioned and analyzed just as advice that was given from someone who is unexperienced but well informed.

CrazyK
12-20-2007, 01:52 AM
Dude, Ronnie Coleman doesn't come up with this stuff himself. He does what CHAD NICHOLS (a pencil neck scientist) tells him what to do. That won him 8 Mr. Olympias. But according to YOUR logic, he shouldn't listen to Chad, because Chad hasn't even won ONE Mr. Olympia.


Nor did I say ANYTHING about being a pro bodybuilder. I said that Ronnie's advice is not applicable for the genetically average unassisted trainer.Chad Nichol's is an insulin and plasma enhancer specialist. Training and dieting are not what he is paid for. They learned that by going through the fire and learning from others. Those others usually being other bodybuilder's turned trainers.

Songsangnim
12-20-2007, 03:32 AM
Chad Nichol's is an insulin and plasma enhancer specialist. Training and dieting are not what he is paid for. They learned that by going through the fire and learning from others. Those others usually being other bodybuilder's turned trainers.


Chad Nichols would beg to differ.

RhodeHouse
12-20-2007, 10:05 AM
Chad Nichols would beg to differ.

Do you know Chad? How do you know what he would beg to differ with?

AKMass
12-20-2007, 01:55 PM
For now on I am only listening to doctors who have had heart attacks themselves.

Not trying to be a dick, but this doesn't make sense. It would make sense if you were trying to HAVE a heart attack, but not trying to prevent/fix one. I think what you meant to say was that you'd only follow advice from doctors who had treated heart attack patients. I'm a big fan of listening to those with experience. Theory is good, but oftentimes practice is better. Ideally you'd have a nice mix of both. From what I can tell, Rhodes is pretty damn close to the ideal mix.

Slim Schaedle
12-20-2007, 02:13 PM
Not trying to be a dick, but this doesn't make sense. It would make sense if you were trying to HAVE a heart attack, but not trying to prevent/fix one. I think what you meant to say was that you'd only follow advice from doctors who had treated heart attack patients. I'm a big fan of listening to those with experience. Theory is good, but oftentimes practice is better. Ideally you'd have a nice mix of both. From what I can tell, Rhodes is pretty damn close to the ideal mix.

I meant exactly what I said.

I wasn't attempting to make any significant point with it.

It was exactly like my previous commenting poking fun at myself.

Some people obviously don't get the humor/sarcasm.

AKMass
12-20-2007, 02:22 PM
I meant exactly what I said.

I wasn't attempting to make any significant point with it.

It was exactly like my previous commenting poking fun at myself.

Some people obviously don't get the humor/sarcasm.

:hello:

Songsangnim
12-20-2007, 05:23 PM
Do you know Chad? How do you know what he would beg to differ with?


I've read some articles by him in which he claims to have monitored Ronnie's diet and training.

RhodeHouse
12-20-2007, 05:44 PM
I've read some articles by him in which he claims to have monitored Ronnie's diet and training.

Claims.

brihead301
12-20-2007, 06:08 PM
Come on, 25 more replies....Wait, actually 24 more replies....Keep this s*** goin.

Ok I mean 23. Then I'll hit 200 in my thread. I've never done that before.:alcoholic:

RhodeHouse
12-20-2007, 06:28 PM
No more posts. You've already reached man-hood. No need to pop the 200 post cherry just yet. So selfish. :hump:

brihead301
12-20-2007, 06:46 PM
No way dude, I've never been this close, I can't give up now.

AKMass
12-21-2007, 06:30 AM
I've read some articles by him in which he claims to have monitored Ronnie's diet and training.

Monitoring <> Controlling/running.

samadhi_smiles
12-21-2007, 07:57 AM
a drop in the bucket, that is all I can contribute, Bri.

Seriously though, I am proud of your passage into manhood :)

brihead301
12-21-2007, 08:07 AM
Thanks bro.

samadhi_smiles
12-21-2007, 08:39 AM
no prob ;)

Songsangnim
12-21-2007, 05:41 PM
Claims.

Right, HE claims. Therefore I can say with confidence that he would beg to differ with Mr. CrazyK as he HAS already done so.

LouPac
12-21-2007, 10:46 PM
Wow, Canadians are funny people.

RhodeHouse
12-22-2007, 12:29 AM
Right, HE claims. Therefore I can say with confidence that he would beg to differ with Mr. CrazyK as he HAS already done so.

Oh, so you know him? Therefore, making your statement 100% true. No guessing or assuming? Cool.

CrazyK
12-22-2007, 11:23 AM
Oh, so you know him? Therefore, making your statement 100% true. No guessing or assuming? Cool.lol exactly. If Song thinks that these guys pay Chad Nichol's all this money to learn how to carb cycle and lift heavy...that's funny.

...and of course he claims that's what he does. Just like half of the Olympia competitors got huge off of NO-Explode and nitro tech.

Noxon
12-22-2007, 12:30 PM
I am down for the 225 race.

At 205 now or so..

RhodeHouse
12-22-2007, 02:25 PM
lol exactly. If Song thinks that these guys pay Chad Nichol's all this money to learn how to carb cycle and lift heavy...that's funny.

...and of course he claims that's what he does. Just like half of the Olympia competitors got huge off of NO-Explode and nitro tech.

Nitro tech doesn't work? Dammit!

notveryclever
12-22-2007, 02:36 PM
lol gratz

brihead301
12-22-2007, 03:48 PM
I am down for the 225 race.

At 205 now or so..

Right on. This is getting harder. I just added an extra BIG scoop of peanut butter to all my protien shakes everyday (about 2 - 3 a day), and I've been doing that for like 2 weeks, but I still haven't gained anymore weight. I'm stuck at around 202 lbs.

minime_moomey
12-22-2007, 05:26 PM
Rhodehouse...After being entertained by this thread for the past thirty minutes (and all of your other posts I have come across) I am so sad that I will never be able to join Rhodestown :bash: I am only 5'4 and started my journey at 104 lbs....Although I am up to 169 I just dont think I will ever be able to meet the weigh requirements...I just wanted to let you know that I love your methodology and will continue to follow it from outside the gates of Rhodestown!!!

Noxon
12-22-2007, 05:32 PM
I dunno, Rhodes... Minime's got some heart, man. He could be Rhodestown material after all.

RhodeHouse
12-22-2007, 10:05 PM
Rhodehouse...After being entertained by this thread for the past thirty minutes (and all of your other posts I have come across) I am so sad that I will never be able to join Rhodestown :bash: I am only 5'4 and started my journey at 104 lbs....Although I am up to 169 I just dont think I will ever be able to meet the weigh requirements...I just wanted to let you know that I love your methodology and will continue to follow it from outside the gates of Rhodestown!!!

Dude, you can do it. It's only 275lbs. At 5'4", you could carry it. Vincent is 5'8" and was 328 at one point when he benched 600 unequipped. I love the enthusiasm, though.

RhodeHouse
12-22-2007, 10:08 PM
I dunno, Rhodes... Minime's got some heart, man. He could be Rhodestown material after all.

The rules are in place. I do not have final say in who is let in. All I can tell you for sure is, 275 is the cut-off. Jim Wendler and Jabba are sticklers for the rules and that's why they're in charge.

It's kinda like letting someone be a teacher without having a Masters Degree.

LouPac
12-22-2007, 10:30 PM
If I was a little younger I might try for that 275, I can get up to 220 pretty easily, but at 275 my wife might leave me. lol

minime_moomey
12-23-2007, 07:42 AM
LOL. Its ok...I wasnt searching for any special treatment...I was just letting you guys know if you see a small guy outside of town with binoculars dont pound him in the dirt. Its just me trying to learn from the great society!:burger:

VikingWarlord
12-23-2007, 10:19 AM
The rules are in place. I do not have final say in who is let in. All I can tell you for sure is, 275 is the cut-off. Jim Wendler and Jabba are sticklers for the rules and that's why they're in charge.

It's kinda like letting someone be a teacher without having a Masters Degree.

Wasn't one of the rules that they can be less than 275 but really want to be?

This thread has moved across about 23 different topics. Amazing.

TobyzBigDay
12-23-2007, 12:10 PM
Tob's contribution to your thread....Just start eating Lard right out of the can, bro...you'll be over 202 in no time. Heck, look at me...you'd think that's what my flabby arse has been doin for the past ten years! :spam:

Songsangnim
12-23-2007, 08:33 PM
Oh, so you know him? Therefore, making your statement 100% true. No guessing or assuming? Cool.



I don't need to know him. If he writes in several articles that he monitors Ronnie's diet and training, that makes my statement 100% true. Let's recap.

I pointed out that Chad Nichols HAS REPEATEDLY CLAIMED to supervise Ronnie's diet. You can Google and find out for yourself if you don't believe it.

Whether or not these CLAIMS are true, is another thing altogether and wasn't my point.

My point was that Nichols has claimed to be responsible for Ronnie's diet and training numberous times during his winning streak at the Mr. O title. This is true as you can easily verify for yourself. Don't argue with facts.

Songsangnim
12-23-2007, 08:40 PM
lol exactly. If Song thinks that these guys pay Chad Nichol's all this money to learn how to carb cycle and lift heavy...that's funny.

....


Read more carefully. I never said that's what I think. I said that IS WHAT CHAD SAYS HE DOES. (This is the kind of nonsense that led me to change my sig-line)

Obviously Chad knows what he is doing. Otherwise he wouldn't have such a reputation and have the top BB's working with him.

Back in 2004 he claimed Ronnie's condition was largely due to a "rapid-loading starch" that he developed. Sounds like diet to me.

Yes most top pros know the basics. But gurus like Chad know how to fine-tweak it and a lot of little tricks to get the best out of one's physique. Were that not so, BB's wouldn't be working with them and follow their advice.

Detard
12-23-2007, 10:54 PM
Dude your 200 post cherry has just been popped!

RhodeHouse
12-24-2007, 12:06 AM
I don't need to know him. If he writes in several articles that he monitors Ronnie's diet and training, that makes my statement 100% true. Let's recap.

I pointed out that Chad Nichols HAS REPEATEDLY CLAIMED to supervise Ronnie's diet. You can Google and find out for yourself if you don't believe it.

Whether or not these CLAIMS are true, is another thing altogether and wasn't my point.

My point was that Nichols has claimed to be responsible for Ronnie's diet and training numberous times during his winning streak at the Mr. O title. This is true as you can easily verify for yourself. Don't argue with facts.

Unless you know him or know Ronnie, it's all just claims. Just because he's written it in a magazine, doesn't mean it's true. Do you believe everything you read?

Songsangnim
12-24-2007, 04:07 AM
Unless you know him or know Ronnie, it's all just claims. Just because he's written it in a magazine, doesn't mean it's true. Do you believe everything you read?


Well if this is false..both Ronnie and Chad are lying about the same thing. I could see Chad's motivation...but where's Ronnie's?

brihead301
12-24-2007, 11:21 AM
Dude your 200 post cherry has just been popped!


:alcoholic: :alcoholic: :alcoholic: :alcoholic: :alcoholic: :alcoholic:

I can now die happy!!

CrazyK
12-26-2007, 01:44 AM
Well if this is false..both Ronnie and Chad are lying about the same thing. I could see Chad's motivation...but where's Ronnie's?I think it would suit Ronnie's best interest to not divulge what he really uses Chad Nichol's for. Which is drug protocols and plasma enhancing pre contest. Of course he'll attribute his increased vascularity to things like starch loading to the public.