PDA

View Full Version : How Significant are Body Types?



LevesqueIsKing
03-15-2008, 11:00 PM
I've always been led to believe that body types are very significant in terms of potential. I am an ectomorph. I've heard some people say that if I work hard I can be just as big as anyone, yet others have said that there are weights which are simply impossible for an ectomorph to achieve. So what are my chances? Will I ever play with the big boys, or will I always be the strongest 'pound for pound'? I realize that dedication has a lot to do with it, but is there a cap to that lid? Can I only go so far?

I don't expect many of you guys to understand, but its just so frustrating going through every day knowing that I'll probably never be as big as I want to be.

Paul Stagg
03-16-2008, 07:26 AM
I think they are an excuse for failure.

My fame is that of a marathon runner. When I was 18, I was 5'11, 135 pounds. At almost 38, I'm 235. Fatter, sure. But I don't look like an ectomorph any more.

VikingWarlord
03-16-2008, 10:18 AM
There are always genetic limitations, but most people can go pretty far before they hit that wall. I'll bet you're very far from that barrier.

strongkid963
03-16-2008, 10:36 AM
don't let limitations stop you in your weight training goals.

LevesqueIsKing
03-16-2008, 11:06 AM
Okay, okay. Spare me the motivational speech. I want facts.

Limitations stop people. Period. Its not a matter of whether they want them to or not. I'm going to continue gaining, I'd just like an idea of how far I might get.

Paul Stagg
03-16-2008, 11:25 AM
You'll get as far as you want.

Your body type will not be the limitation.

Torrok
03-16-2008, 12:53 PM
not get big? impossible! if that were true you would be inhuman, which means you have the amazing super power of not getting fat and/or huge.
so......eat?

LevesqueIsKing
03-16-2008, 01:06 PM
...?

I didn't say I couldn't get big. I didn't say I wanted words of wisdom from you prophets. I'd like to know how big of a disadvantage I'm at being an ectomorph.


You'll get as far as you want.

Your body type will not be the limitation.
And that's simply not true.

VikingWarlord
03-16-2008, 02:02 PM
It is true, though Paul seems to be purposely unclear.

Your body type isn't going to be your biggest limitation. Your limitations are going to be determined by your individual genetics. Put all the "ectomorph" **** out of your head because it's meaningless. Even if you can neatly classify yourself into a category, you're still not going to be the same as any other person in that same category because your chemistry and genes are different than everyone else's.

The short version is that no one can really answer that question.

Paul Stagg
03-16-2008, 02:44 PM
I'm being perfectly clear.

There is a reason I'm not a professional football player, and there is a reason I've never run a marathon. Neither has anything to do with body type.

LevesqueIsKing
03-16-2008, 03:36 PM
It is true, though Paul seems to be purposely unclear.

Your body type isn't going to be your biggest limitation. Your limitations are going to be determined by your individual genetics. Put all the "ectomorph" **** out of your head because it's meaningless. Even if you can neatly classify yourself into a category, you're still not going to be the same as any other person in that same category because your chemistry and genes are different than everyone else's.

The short version is that no one can really answer that question.
First of all, thank you for a genuine response. My choice to use the word 'ectomorph' was in an attempt to represent my genetics in their entirety, like you've said. I've just been told in the past that it would be impossible for me to reach a number like 300 lbs. And even if that is untrue, its discouraging to know I'll have to work twice as hard to reach it. I suppose this thread served as more of a vent for me than anything.

Thanks.

VikingWarlord
03-16-2008, 03:41 PM
I'm being perfectly clear.

There is a reason I'm not a professional football player, and there is a reason I've never run a marathon. Neither has anything to do with body type.

You were being unclear in not explaining WHY his assumption was wrong. Just saying "you're wrong" to someone really isn't all that helpful when the question is asking for a more detailed answer.


First of all, thank you for a genuine response. My choice to use the word 'ectomorph' was in an attempt to represent my genetics in their entirety, like you've said. I've just been told in the past that it would be impossible for me to reach a number like 300 lbs. And even if that is untrue, its discouraging to know I'll have to work twice as hard to reach it. I suppose this thread served as more of a vent for me than anything.

Thanks.

**** what people say. Sure, you might have to work harder, it might take you longer, but it's less about where you're going than how you get there. You also won't know how far you can go until you do it.

Paul Stagg
03-16-2008, 03:43 PM
You're wrong.

Sensei
03-16-2008, 03:56 PM
You were being unclear in not explaining WHY his assumption was wrong. Just saying "you're wrong" to someone really isn't all that helpful when the question is asking for a more detailed answer.
I'm not really sure what kind of detailed answer can be given... Umm, yes - you can gain exactly 53.8 lbs over the course of 10 years under a training protocol of WSBB and eating plenty of Lil' Chocolate Donuts...

To the OP,
I don't know how old you are, but if you are young there are amazing changes that can be made (or can happen) to your "body type" with time and effort (or lack thereof). Maybe that's not what you want to hear - maybe you want to hear "No, you will NOT be Mr. Olympia, nor will you be the World's Strongest Man" - if so, there you are.

VikingWarlord
03-16-2008, 04:16 PM
I'm not really sure what kind of detailed answer can be given... Umm, yes - you can gain exactly 53.8 lbs over the course of 10 years under a training protocol of WSBB and eating plenty of Lil' Chocolate Donuts...

To the OP,
I don't know how old you are, but if you are young there are amazing changes that can be made (or can happen) to your "body type" with time and effort (or lack thereof). Maybe that's not what you want to hear - maybe you want to hear "No, you will NOT be Mr. Olympia, nor will you be the World's Strongest Man" - if so, there you are.

Well, based on the response to the post I made above, I'm guessing that's pretty much what he was looking for. It's ridiculous to try to make assumptions about something as heterogeneous as human genetics.

It's probably a perspective issue, but the question, again, wasn't looking for the type of details you ever so sarcastically included above. The initial question was how body type affected development. When told that it didn't, the second question was pretty much "ok, why not?" and the answer was "Your body type will not be the limitation" which is basically answering a "why" question with a "no".

Truthfully, I'm not entirely sure why my answer was satisfactory. Maybe it was because I took the time to type a couple extra lines and seem like I actually gave a ****.

No, chances are he won't be Mr. O, but neither will most of the rest of the 6.6 billion people in the world. That's not really the point.

OGROK
03-16-2008, 04:22 PM
Actually ectomorph, mesomorph and endomorph are all pseudo-scientific classifications. Look it up. It's all bull**** excuses made up by people. The somatotype theory is outdated bull**** from the 1930's.

Sensei
03-16-2008, 04:31 PM
Well, based on the response to the post I made above, I'm guessing that's pretty much what he was looking for. It's ridiculous to try to make assumptions about something as heterogeneous as human genetics.

It's probably a perspective issue, but the question, again, wasn't looking for the type of details you ever so sarcastically included above. The initial question was how body type affected development. When told that it didn't, the second question was pretty much "ok, why not?" and the answer was "Your body type will not be the limitation" which is basically answering a "why" question with a "no". I didn't mean the sarcasm as a dig towards you or your responses to the OP, just that I felt Paul's answers were very valid and the OP was being an a-hole to someone who took time to type out an answer.


Truthfully, I'm not entirely sure why my answer was satisfactory. Maybe it was because I took the time to type a couple extra lines and seem like I actually gave a ****.

No, chances are he won't be Mr. O, but neither will most of the rest of the 6.6 billion people in the world. That's not really the point.I actually do give a ****, but it's tough to type a CONSTRUCTIVE answer to a post like this. Ectomorph? Train hard. Then eat and sleep more. Mesomorph? Train harder (and eat and sleep more). Endomorph? Train hard, Then eat cleaner (and eat and sleep more).

As the OP stated, maybe he wasn't really looking for answers - just blabbing and needed someone to listen... in which case he needs to go to general chat for some serious flaming.

MPB
03-16-2008, 05:05 PM
“using no way as a way, using no limitations as a limitation.” -Bruce Lee

Why do you care about other people's body. Just focus on your own goal. If you think your bodytype (not that I believe there is such a thing, I personally think it's bs) is a handicap, it should encourage you to train even harder.

I started off as real skinny what other people would call as ectomorph but in the end, it's just an excuse that people make up. If you're worried about not getting big, you need to look at yourself 10 or 20 years from now, not something like 1~2

LevesqueIsKing
03-16-2008, 07:19 PM
I didn't mean the sarcasm as a dig towards you or your responses to the OP, just that I felt Paul's answers were very valid and the OP was being an a-hole to someone who took time to type out an answer.

I actually do give a ****, but it's tough to type a CONSTRUCTIVE answer to a post like this. Ectomorph? Train hard. Then eat and sleep more. Mesomorph? Train harder (and eat and sleep more). Endomorph? Train hard, Then eat cleaner (and eat and sleep more).

As the OP stated, maybe he wasn't really looking for answers - just blabbing and needed someone to listen... in which case he needs to go to general chat for some serious flaming.
I had repeated multiple times that I wasn't looking for a bs response like "You'll be as big as you want to be." Facts are facts, and thats simply not true, otherwise we'd see guys 2,300+ lbs, no? If my question was unanswerable than thats fine, tell me that, but don't give me crap to fill the void.

I don't appreciate being called an ass by someone I once had a lot of respect for, either. I understand that you're the big kid on the block, I've got my own forums as well, just try not to flaunt your superiority too much. It looks bad. And I'm not saying that out of spite, that's constructive criticism.

You can scoff at my advice if you like. I'm just a noob, y'know?

Sensei
03-16-2008, 08:04 PM
Wow, you ARE an hypersensitive a-hole.

Please disregard the fact that I actually tried to give you a sincere answer w. my first post and just keep telling yourself that I'm the a-hole.

LevesqueIsKing
03-16-2008, 08:18 PM
I didn't say anything like that about you, Sensei. I'm not the one throwing out insults.

I apologize for trying to resolve the problem in a mature matter. I'll try not to let it happen again, sir.

Sensei
03-16-2008, 08:31 PM
I said you were being an a-hole and you were. If you can look back on the thread and say that I'm wrong, then fine - consider the bridge burned and I'm sorry I ever said I gave a ****.

In the end, your thread is no different than all the others that ask questions like "How much can I gain in a year?" or "How many pounds can I add to my XYZ?" - there is no way that it can be answered. Of course genetics play a role, but if every person took what they looked like and how they performed early on in their careers as a life-sentence, there would be no Michael Jordan or countless other stars. Does any of this answer your question? No and that's why I'm sorry I am wasting my time typing it.

WBBIRL
03-16-2008, 09:10 PM
You may never get to 300+ pounds... I think very few people walking the face of this earth can sustain such a weight and not be over %30 bodyfat.

If you've ever seen pictures of unholys younger brother, who was like 210 at 6'4 and looked pretty big, or of HB who's around 6'0 and weighs 225 (and looks stacked to the teeth) you'll realize you don't have to weight a ton to look good or even be "big".

Being a shorter guy myself at just under 5'10 and weighing 270 I can easily lose 70 of those pounds and end up having a very big physique.

99% of the limitations people have are in their minds. Few people ever really hit that "wall", and most of those people resort to gear to push past their genetic limits.

You want to know how far you'll get? Why not try and find out how far you can get? You'll have a hell of a lot more fun finding out and to show yourself how far you can get you'll actually have to "get" there improving yourself much beyond what you currently are.

There's no forumla, or rule of thumb to even give a piss poor estimation on what you'll be able to do in what time frame.

Thats up to your willpower and your genetics.

I also played football at over 300 pounds in highschool, you do not want to carry that much weigh unless your a good half a foot taller then me and a lot leaner then I was.

Wild Cat McCane
03-17-2008, 02:19 PM
Fact:
Endomorphs and all the other morphs were used to describe peoples ability to succeed in life. Then the theories went to a perfect man image. Now? anyone is capable of success.

My point, this classification was used for leadership. it was not designed for body building, weight lifting, sports or anything like that.

And it is 100 years disproved.

Fact. Wow, amazaing, that business leadership finally turned out to be worthy while.

Doobs
03-17-2008, 03:29 PM
And even if that is untrue, its discouraging to know I'll have to work twice as hard to reach it.

I don't know why, but this sentence is really, really bothering me. I think of bodybuilders and weightlifters as people who don't care what kind of body they're genetically supposed to have, they know what they want to get and will do what it takes to get there. Maybe you typed something that you're not really thinking, but if that's the way you feel then I would save yourself the time and quit right now.

JSully
03-17-2008, 03:47 PM
I don't understand how everyone says somatotypes are disproved over the past 100 years.

Ectomorphs are difficult to gain weight.
Mesomorphs are gain weight easily and stay lean easily
Endormorphs gain weight very easily and have difficulty losing fat.

period. There is no breakdown for "success" categories. Where the hell did you get that from?

Even if science did disprove the somatatype theory.. IT STILL MAKES SENSE. Instead of calling everyone equal, they are put into a category. My brother can eat 3k calories per day and not gain an ounce of weight, I will gain 10lbs in 2 weeks at 3k cals/day. At the same time, in order for him to gain any muscle he's gotta eat 5k cals and train his butt off for what I can do with 2500 cals a day. Is this not comparable to the somatotypes ectomorph and endomorph? Everyone is different, therefore it's easier to categorize people. So what if there is no real category or it has been disproved, its still perfectly logical to that way. It's not easy to eat 5k cals/day therefore ectomorphs do have it harder, they have to train harder, eat more and sleep more.. however, they don't get near as fat as someone like me with the same regimen. On the flipside, I can bulk off of 2800 cals/day so for me to drop weight I have to go down to 1600-1800 cals or else I get nowhere.

The OP asked a couple questions. 1: Can you compete with the big dogs.. certainly. Drugs may be needed to apply but of course. Anybody can, it takes time and effort and a whole helluva lot of discipline and it will be difficult, but you can do it. Thats the answer you didn't want. 2: can you only go so far? yes, period. everyone has a genetic limitation that somatotypes do not relate to.

Just as paul said, he was what you consider an ectomorph, but may not be now. Your body will go through many changes as you age including the acceleration and deceleration of metabolism and so forth. I believe in somatotypes because they have not yet proved ME wrong. I don't care what science can explain, explain the logic behind someone like BCC that bulks off of 9k cals a day and diets with 5k cals a day meanwhile I get fat as hell at 3500 cals/day. How does that not put him in an ectomorph body, even though his he huge.

You can be 230lbs and still be an ectomorph.. look at Johnnie Jackson and a few of the other pros and check out what they eat. 6-9k cals a day... endomorphs can't do that, period. Look at Goldberg (though he is not a bb'er by any means). Goldberg weighed 290lbs and ate 6k cals per day. The amount of cals you eat is relative to your bodyweight as we all know, so how come a 230lb bber needs 6-9k/day when a 290lb wrestler needs 6k/day. There is a classification there in my opinon, and it's MUCH easier to throw yourself into a classified group of people and follow what they're doing then to start figuring out cal multpiliers yourself and take 10 years to figure out what works for you when you can try things and have yourself dialed in in a matter of weeks.

If somatotypes are so incorrect.. then why would professional bodybuilders be putting themselves in their respective groups in their books they've written?


Simple answer:: yes you can play with the big dogs, but you'll have to work for it and work hard for it. yes there is a cap, your genetics decide it and then drugs push that limit so you can get even bigger.

Sensei
03-17-2008, 04:23 PM
Just as paul said, he was what you consider an ectomorph, but may not be now. Your body will go through many changes as you age including the acceleration and deceleration of metabolism and so forth.Exactly. We've been saying that.


I believe in somatotypes because they have not yet proved ME wrong. I don't care what science can explain, explain the logic behind someone like BCC that bulks off of 9k cals a day and diets with 5k cals a day meanwhile I get fat as hell at 3500 cals/day. How does that not put him in an ectomorph body, even though his he huge.

You can be 230lbs and still be an ectomorph.. look at Johnnie Jackson and a few of the other pros and check out what they eat. 6-9k cals a day... endomorphs can't do that, period. Look at Goldberg (though he is not a bb'er by any means). Goldberg weighed 290lbs and ate 6k cals per day. The amount of cals you eat is relative to your bodyweight as we all know, so how come a 230lb bber needs 6-9k/day when a 290lb wrestler needs 6k/day. There is a classification there in my opinon, and it's MUCH easier to throw yourself into a classified group of people and follow what they're doing then to start figuring out cal multpiliers yourself and take 10 years to figure out what works for you when you can try things and have yourself dialed in in a matter of weeks.

If somatotypes are so incorrect.. then why would professional bodybuilders be putting themselves in their respective groups in their books they've written?

Simple answer:: yes you can play with the big dogs, but you'll have to work for it and work hard for it. yes there is a cap, your genetics decide it and then drugs push that limit so you can get even bigger.I don't think anything like this can be proven one way or the other - there are just too many variables like activity levels, response to stress, and diet that you would have to control for to say unequivocally that Person A loses on 3K/day and Person B gains on 3K/day and that it is because of bodytype.

I'm NOT saying genetics isn't a huge factor in athletics btw.

Klotz
03-17-2008, 04:51 PM
Nothing is as important as hard work.

JSully
03-17-2008, 09:41 PM
I don't think anything like this can be proven one way or the other - there are just too many variables like activity levels, response to stress, and diet that you would have to control for to say unequivocally that Person A loses on 3K/day and Person B gains on 3K/day and that it is because of bodytype.

I'm NOT saying genetics isn't a huge factor in athletics btw.

I agree that it cannot be proven one way or the other, however, logically it makes more sense to read about someone, figure out their "somatotype" and compare. If you compare pretty damn well, then it's easiest to try what their doing, obviously to the lesser extent. From my experiences, a good bit of the time it will work. I can't eat the way Dexter Jackson eats (even with assitance) and look that way, however, if I ate like Markus Ruhl or Gunter Schlierkamp, that fits my body type better. Science has "disproved" this but my logic still has not. Human nature is to make things easier for ourselves and with every invention, that happens... therefore, our nature is to compare ourselves, our body types, to others of our stature and try it.

I just don't see the point in bashing someone because they believe in somatotypes. I do agree, however, that anything is achievable with hard work and dedication and that is the main point here. It's a give and take world for all somatotypes. Where one has trouble gaining weight, the other has trouble losing it. How much discipline do you have is what it comes down to.

Nothing in the bodybuilding world is easy and if it was everyone would be there. I sure as hell am not and I've been working my ass off for years, but laziness creeps up on me. eh.. what can I say, I'm normal. haha.



Sensei.. I do see where you're coming from. There are many many variables. I'm a Claims Adjuster, I sit on my ass all day long at a computer with a headset on calling people and telling them how much their car isn't worth. I OBVIOUSLY have a lot lower activity level than a construction worker for instance. Like you said, too many variables to distinguish spot on. I suppose if a research was done and, say, 100 men were all put on a sedentary lifestyle job for 3 months with a certain amount of calories, that might show something.. however, then you have the difference in genetics again. It's an infinite circle that, in my opinion, can't be proven correct or incorrect. I just know that when I read about how so and so eats 6k a day and doesn't gain fat and I eat 3k a day and gain fat I can't do it. It's really difficult to explain but it all makes sense in my head. I love the science of things, but sometimes I think the science of things can bring us away from what we know will work. I know I've tried MANY things because science told me to and it didn't work. Then I go back to my logic thinking and I start making gains again. Everyone is different... period.


It's also human instinct to bitch and complain. I bitch and complain because I can't be ripped easily, however, I can gain muscle easily. Hardgainers bitch because they don't know how to eat enough and hence can't gain muscle. I wish I had that problem. I feel like I'm starving on 2k cals/day but that's the only way I can drop fat. I know people at 165lbs sit on their ass all day and eat 4k cals a day via pizza/burger king and don't get fat. Must be nice.


Now I'm rambling. Sorry, I just had a great workout myself! lol

WBBIRL
03-17-2008, 09:58 PM
I'm in exactly the same boat as little jake, I can blow up pretty easy but shedding the fluff takes some ball busting for what seems like forever.

The battles are different, but the discipline required is the same. Man up or give up.

Wild Cat McCane
03-18-2008, 12:30 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somatotype

Its out dated.

Body builders use it because they have no idea what the **** they are talking about. It originally was created to do with leadership success. nothing to do with anything else.

Very common misconception.

Don't be a jack ass without looking up what you are talking about.

Paul Stagg
03-18-2008, 07:29 AM
To provide a slightly clearer answer to the question, but the OP still won't like it:

Can you get as big and as lean as Ronnie Coleman? Yes. Will you be Mr Olympia? Can't tell you. Physique competition does have a 'genetic' component with respect to muscle attachment.

Can you squat 1000 pounds? Yes. Will you beat Chuck Vogolpol? Dunno. I'm not sure I would want to play checkers against him, much less lift against him.

The limiting factor is want.

The reason for my short answer has been addressed above, essentially this is a question that has no answer, and sounds like a failure mentality.

I can't because of my genetics.

Bull****.

You can't because you don't want to.

JSully
03-18-2008, 10:04 AM
This linkage is fairly simplistic and is seen as outdated in physiological science, but the account of somatotypes is still probably a valid, if limited way to sort basic body types.


don't be a jackass by referencing something that contradicts yourself. OR, maybe you should read an entire post before trying to disprove something that I was never in argument in the first place. I said that it is easier to categorize yourself with someone else and try what their doing than to spend 10 years trying to figure out what's right for you, then finding out the somatotype "stereotype" fit you. I don't know one person who entered the bodybuilding world as a know it all and it took me 2-3 years to figure out what worked with my body. The point was everyone responds differently but there are too many variables to prove or disprove the somatotypes completely.

Where did I say that science has proved it legit? I did not. I don't care how outdated it is or how unscientific it is... it makes sense... period.

Somatotype is basic, I never said anything more than that. It is a basic group to put yourself in when you don't know what you're doing, which nobody knows at first. You start off with doing what they do, then along the course you figure out exactly what works for you. That's it, plain and simple. Again, I don't give a rats ass if this has been disproved scientifically, it hasn't been disproved logically because it makes sense. Its a ****ing group that people can relate to. Why is that so difficult to understand?

Wild Cat McCane
03-18-2008, 10:20 AM
"makes sense"

"I don't care how unscientific"

Means you don't know what you are talking about. Scientist have proven that these "body types" truly never have existed.

Everyone who is saying anyone is capable of becoming built is what science says currently. There are no such things as body types. Just lazy people putting themselves into a group in a particular part of their life.

Thats all the sense there is to it.

JSully
03-18-2008, 10:42 AM
You're completely correct. I don't know what I'm talking about.

I've been fat all my life, very difficult to lose weight, very easy to gain weight. Thick bones, strong, easy to put on muscle. I graduated high school at 6' 180lbs with a 225lb bench and a 260lb power clean. I started really lifting about 1.5 years later and bumped myself up to a fatass 230lbs. Then back down to 190lbs, then back up to 250lbs then back down to 215lbs then once more back up to 250lbs. I'd love to see an ectomorph jump their weight that much.

At 22 years old I was 6' 235lbs @ 9% bodyfat with a 425lb bench and a 545lb squat. There are people on this board that were in person for the accomplishments to confirm they aren't exaggerated. 3 months later I was 278lbs @ 18% bodyfat with a 455lb bench and a 585lb squat. I would love to see an "ectomorph" gain that kind of weight that fast, muscle or fat. It just doesn't happen.

It doesn't matter how low I get my bodyfat, in a matter of 2 weeks of eating like an ectomorph would, I will gain about 20lbs of fat, period. I've been there and done it. Sure, muscles gets added and strenght goes up. Big deal, now I look like a lardass. I would pay to see an "ectomorph" gain 20lbs in 2 weeks. I'm sure they would pay to gain it as well.

I put myself in the endomorph somatotype group and ate and trained such as the rest of the group did, and guess what? I made fantastic progress...... however, I don't know what I'm talking about.


Science hasn't disproved my results, so why am I a jackass for believeing in somatotypes?

How hard do you have to work to stay at 8% bodyfat? Not as hard as me. How hard do you have to work to gain 5lbs of muscle? I would wager alot harder than me.

Is there not a separation between us? A group that you could put us in, separating us from the same bodytype? Again, the concept must be very difficult to grasp since you argue it so. Everyone already knows that when it comes down to the brink of things, it's all in how hard you have to work. People have to work harder at different things, and that's where the grouping lies.

LevesqueIsKing
03-18-2008, 01:17 PM
Thank you, LittleJake. I couldn't have asked for a better response.

HahnB
03-18-2008, 01:25 PM
Nothing is as important as hard work.

That's weird. My lifting partner in high school was a black kid who looked better than every single football player we had, and he did a half ass 5 minute workout about once a week. Genetics are a HUGE influence on the way we look. Hard work comes first, genetics is a close second.

LevesqueIsKing
03-18-2008, 01:36 PM
That about sums up my feelings right about now.

I'm in highschool. I'm more dedicated to lifting and my diet than anyone I know, yet I'm one of the lightest and weakest within my group of friends. They act like they're big and tough, but they don't know ****. They go into the gym and do ALL isolated work, 5 sets of wrist rollers and a few pushups and they call THAT a workout. And to top it all off, they try to tell me that their workout is better, with their statement of, "Lets see which one of us is stronger" backing them. Lets see which one of us is stronger in ten years, bitch.

rtrose
03-18-2008, 01:53 PM
One of your benefits as an ectomorph, is that you will look bigger, with less muscle. If you are truly and ectomorph, your joints will be smaller, making your muscle gains appear much larger. Its all about proportions. If you make it to 300 lbs, you will look much larger than another somatotype.
I do believe that it is alot more complicated than simply saying that an ectomorph is someone with a small bone structure, who can't put on weight. I have a tiny frame, and I have been putting on muscle, plus an excess of fat. So, I think that even if you are an ectomorph, it isn't going to limit you from getting big. Its just going to help you to look even larger than you already are.
Hope that helps...

Wild Cat McCane
03-18-2008, 02:07 PM
Genetics or hormones play the part.

Not classification of "i am a blahblahtype"

You have missed the point of my disagreement. Those classifications were never intended to be for the purpose of ANYTHING other then determining if a person who looks fat could be a successful leader. Thats it. Nothing more.

The fact that body builder use the terminology proves they understand the basic concept, but that does not change the fact that no other science uses this type. And no science has used this type for over 50 years.

After the body type idea was extinguished the "perfect man" idea came up. The point, you had to be a perfect MAN. Tall, male, strong, KEY ATTRIBUTES.

Where are we today you ask? Garry Yukil points out anyone can be successful. Women, fat people, short people. Anyone can be successful. there are NO characteristics that you need to be successful.

My point, the terms being used right now, haven't been used in any science for over 50 years.

So argue it until you are blue in the face.

You are wrong.

Some may have better test hormone levels. Thats it. Some may have bigger bones. thats it. There is no classification as the types being discussed in current science.

Wild Cat McCane
03-18-2008, 02:10 PM
bottom of the wiki post I gave you, which you said contradicted what I said...:confused:

The majority of scientists today generally consider these theories from the 1930s and 1940s outdated. Sheldon's theories had popularity through the 1950s. Some saw in the somatotypes a link to eugenics and racial hygiene. Sheldon's 4,000 photographs of naked Yale undergraduates and other similar photographs were destroyed.[2][3] The words endomorphic, mesomorphic and ectomorphic are still sometimes used to describe body types, maybe especially in association with weight training aimed at gaining muscle. In some types of New Age there is an interest in this kind of correlation between physiology and psyche.

Paul Stagg
03-18-2008, 04:20 PM
That's weird. My lifting partner in high school was a black kid who looked better than every single football player we had, and he did a half ass 5 minute workout about once a week. Genetics are a HUGE influence on the way we look. Hard work comes first, genetics is a close second.

Jesus H ****ing Christ.

Of course they do.

But the question was about limitation of an individual, not comparisons between individuals.

ProLogic
03-18-2008, 04:24 PM
If body types do not exist, how can we explain fat people that eat very little? I knew someone like this.

LevesqueIsKing
03-18-2008, 04:33 PM
Jesus H ****ing Christ.

Of course they do.

But the question was about limitation of an individual, not comparisons between individuals.
limitation is defined by other people. If there was no one else, than how would we know what limitation was?

Limitation = A lack of potential in comparison to the average person

Paul Stagg
03-18-2008, 04:36 PM
I give up.

Keep spending your time looking for the reason you won't succeed.

jiujitsubr04
03-21-2008, 10:50 AM
heard that hgh can change ur genetics....is this true??
started takin it this week...3iu day

IronGrip IV
03-21-2008, 12:17 PM
Levesque, what is your specific goal? Perhaps that's where you should start. Identify a numerical goal and a timeframe. I haven't seen this stated, or did I miss it?

Trevor M.
03-21-2008, 12:23 PM
Ectomorphs are difficult to gain weight.
Mesomorphs are gain weight easily and stay lean easily
Endormorphs gain weight very easily and have difficulty losing fat.
This is completely and totally bull **** nonsensical crap.


heard that hgh can change ur genetics....is this true??
No

frank
03-21-2008, 01:26 PM
That's weird. My lifting partner in high school was a black kid who looked better than every single football player we had, and he did a half ass 5 minute workout about once a week. Genetics are a HUGE influence on the way we look. Hard work comes first, genetics is a close second.

yeh theres a black kid that did the same at my school. he looks better than almost everyone on the football team.

what is it called when you have a hard time gaining weight but you can lose it easily?

Trevor M.
03-21-2008, 01:41 PM
what is it called when you have a hard time gaining weight
Its called not eating enough.


but you can lose it easily?
Its called eating to little.

WBBIRL
03-21-2008, 02:04 PM
LittleJake and Paul are dead on the money.

As an endo I went from 205 in 8th grade to around 300 pounds in 10th grade and my strength went through the roof.

I'd like to see anyone who just happens to "magically" fit the category of these made up somatotypes either meso or ecto do what I did.... hell over the course of their LIVES not just in 2 years. Granted I gained a lot of fat, but I probably put more muscle on my body in that span then any ecto will over his life time.

JSully
03-21-2008, 02:10 PM
This is completely and totally bull **** nonsensical crap.

I don't understand why this is so ****ing difficult to understand. Lets pretend we're on another subject. You have a tennis ball, a football, a soccer ball, a baseball, a softball, a golf ball etc...

are those not all classified as balls of some sort?

Regardless of the VERBIAGE "ectomorph, mesormorph and endomorph" THERE ARE CLASSIFICATIONS that peoples body structure and metabolism fall into.


Its called not eating enough.


Its called eating to little.

That's genious, think of that all by yourself?

Theres a god damn classification there and everyone that's too smart to know there's no "somatotypes" can still figure out theres a ****ing classification this kids bodytype falls into.

Everyone has a different meaning of easy. I can eat 4k cals EASY, however, someone else can't. 4k cals will make me gain weight at an incredible weight, however, may cause others to lose weight because of the speed of their metabolism. Maybe this kid can't eat 4k cals a day, therefore it is difficult for him to gain weight so when he eats less than gorging himself it's easy for him to lose it. Maybe this kid can eat 4k cals a day and still can't gain weight, being that his metabolism is much faster than mine, hell I don't know. There's still a ****ing classification that he can fit in.

I'm not saying live your life by and use your "somatotype" as your sole excuse as to why you don't look good, that's you're own fault and discipline. I'm saying that there IS a generality of bodytype that bone structure, metabolism, insulin release, cortisol etc can be referenced to.

As it's already been pointed out, I don't know what I'm talking about so I don't give a **** who tells me I'm wrong according to modern science. But when I implemented training and dieting techniques, yes TECHNIQUES, NOT "OMG IM AN ENDOMORPH I HAVE TO DO THIS VERBATIM", from endomorphs into my regimen, I suddenly was able to pull things together EASIER. I'm not saying I couldn't have done it without this general "nonsensical" classification, but it sure made things easier.

Continue not believing in somatotypes and take as long as you like to figure out what works for you. I know I took a good 3 years off of my learning curve by just trying a couple things from this nonsensical generalization that is scientifically outdated and has no relation to anything that has to do with the manipulation of the human physique.




Flame on.



Flame on.

frank
03-21-2008, 02:11 PM
Its called not eating enough.


Its called eating to little.

pfft, the only way i can gain weight is if i dirty bulk. i have eaten everything healthy in sight and havent managed to gain weight over the course of two weeks. im gonna see what happens in another week or so.

Trevor M.
03-21-2008, 02:57 PM
pfft, the only way i can gain weight is if i dirty bulk. i have eaten everything healthy in sight and havent managed to gain weight over the course of two weeks. im gonna see what happens in another week or so.

It doesn't matter whether its clean or dirty... I mean no disrespect but its obvious you have done very little research into this subject or you would understand the simple principle of thermodynamics and its connection to weight gain/loss.

Hears a fact, "dirty" foods generally have more calories than "clean" foods.
This is why you find it easier to gain on a "dirty" bulk than a "clean" one.

Take two people who are completely genetic duplicates.
Both have the exact same BMR and do nothing but sleep 24 hours a day.
Their BMR rest at about 2,200Kcals.
Feed one of them 3,000Kcals of "dirty" food. The other 3,000Kcals of "clean" food. Both people will consume the EXACT same ratios of pro/fat/carbs

Both will gain approximately the same amount of weight by the end of the week. The 3,000Kcals of dirty food are no better at increasing ones size than the 3,000Kcals of clean food. Besides the individual difference in macros, a calorie is a calorie.

frank
03-21-2008, 03:29 PM
It doesn't matter whether its clean or dirty... I mean no disrespect but its obvious you have done very little research into this subject or you would understand the simple principle of thermodynamics and its connection to weight gain/loss.

Hears a fact, "dirty" foods generally have more calories than "clean" foods.
This is why you find it easier to gain on a "dirty" bulk than a "clean" one.

Take two people who are completely genetic duplicates.
Both have the exact same BMR and do nothing but sleep 24 hours a day.
Their BMR rest at about 2,200Kcals.
Feed one of them 3,000Kcals of "dirty" food. The other 3,000Kcals of "clean" food. Both people will consume the EXACT same ratios of pro/fat/carbs

Both will gain approximately the same amount of weight by the end of the week. The 3,000Kcals of dirty food are no better at increasing ones size than the 3,000Kcals of clean food. Besides the individual difference in macros, a calorie is a calorie.

yeh but its unhealthy to have high cholesterol which can lead to problems that are much more important than gaining weight

Trevor M.
03-21-2008, 03:51 PM
I don't understand why this is so ****ing difficult to understand. Lets pretend we're on another subject. You have a tennis ball, a football, a soccer ball, a baseball, a softball, a golf ball etc...

are those not all classified as balls of some sort?

Regardless of the VERBIAGE "ectomorph, mesormorph and endomorph" THERE ARE CLASSIFICATIONS that peoples body structure and metabolism fall into.



That's genious, think of that all by yourself?

Theres a god damn classification there and everyone that's too smart to know there's no "somatotypes" can still figure out theres a ****ing classification this kids bodytype falls into.

Everyone has a different meaning of easy. I can eat 4k cals EASY, however, someone else can't. 4k cals will make me gain weight at an incredible weight, however, may cause others to lose weight because of the speed of their metabolism. Maybe this kid can't eat 4k cals a day, therefore it is difficult for him to gain weight so when he eats less than gorging himself it's easy for him to lose it. Maybe this kid can eat 4k cals a day and still can't gain weight, being that his metabolism is much faster than mine, hell I don't know. There's still a ****ing classification that he can fit in.

I'm not saying live your life by and use your "somatotype" as your sole excuse as to why you don't look good, that's you're own fault and discipline. I'm saying that there IS a generality of bodytype that bone structure, metabolism, insulin release, cortisol etc can be referenced to.

As it's already been pointed out, I don't know what I'm talking about so I don't give a **** who tells me I'm wrong according to modern science. But when I implemented training and dieting techniques, yes TECHNIQUES, NOT "OMG IM AN ENDOMORPH I HAVE TO DO THIS VERBATIM", from endomorphs into my regimen, I suddenly was able to pull things together EASIER. I'm not saying I couldn't have done it without this general "nonsensical" classification, but it sure made things easier.

Continue not believing in somatotypes and take as long as you like to figure out what works for you. I know I took a good 3 years off of my learning curve by just trying a couple things from this nonsensical generalization that is scientifically outdated and has no relation to anything that has to do with the manipulation of the human physique.




Flame on.



Flame on.


Haha

Your not arguing a point at all. All you have said is you think people are different from one another. I never argued this not to be true.

To be honest, a persons anatomical difference between another persons is generally not that great. Most people have around 206 bones, some people have a few more others have less. Most people have 32 teeth but there are people who will have more or less than that.

If you care to speak about BMR, Show me a normal healthy person who requires 4,000Kcal to maintain weight who lays in bed and not move and I'll show you a flying purple hippo.

No normal person will ever have such a high BMR. Such futile metabolism doesn't exist.

Do some people have a greater tendency to gain weight(BLM)? Sure.
Things such as leptin resistance, PYY insufficiency syndrome, MC4-R alterations, and other like naturally occurring chemical abnormality's explain minor difference in a person likely hood to gain fat.

Low Test levels, HGH, thyroxine,triiodothyronine, corticosteroids, TSH, and differences in LBM are all further examples that explain the individual difference in BMR.

These abnormalities can not be classified by "body types". To say they can is laughable.


The thermic effect of motion accounts for nearly ALL differences in calories needed to maintain weight.

Look at most tour de france winners. Are you going to tell me there all ectomophs because of the way they look? THATS the reason they eat upwards of 6,000calories a day around competition time and gain little to no weight? No, the thermic effect of exercise is what allowed them to eat that much and gain little to nothing.

Thermic effect of eating, living, and motion are the main three things that determine "metabolism".

But, you are saying that the BMR of people. Thats the base metabolic rate. The absolute minimum number of calories a person needs to function without loosing or gaining weight in a suspended state.

You honestly believe, that the BMR of all people is determined by their body type? Haha.

On average the difference between BMR's in grown adults don't sway more than a few hundred calories.

there is no such thing as a hard gainer. There is no such thing as an easy gainer.

Some people BMR is 2,200Kcal. Others is 2,600 Kcal. Regardless. Some people have to eat more than others to gain. This is "duh" true. However, in most cases this is because of peoples activity levels. Not "their body type".

It would be nice if you would be more specific with your argument. Your post was kinda all over the place. Some parts of it didin't even make much sense. Its hard to respond when its like that.

Sensei
03-21-2008, 07:06 PM
Haha

Your not arguing a point at all. All you have said is you think people are different from one another. I never argued this not to be true.

To be honest, a persons anatomical difference between another persons is generally not that great. Most people have around 206 bones, some people have a few more others have less. Most people have 32 teeth but there are people who will have more or less than that.

If you care to speak about BMR, Show me a normal healthy person who requires 4,000Kcal to maintain weight who lays in bed and not move and I'll show you a flying purple hippo.

No normal person will ever have such a high BMR. Such futile metabolism doesn't exist.

Do some people have a greater tendency to gain weight(BLM)? Sure.
Things such as leptin resistance, PYY insufficiency syndrome, MC4-R alterations, and other like naturally occurring chemical abnormality's explain minor difference in a person likely hood to gain fat.

Low Test levels, HGH, thyroxine,triiodothyronine, corticosteroids, TSH, and differences in LBM are all further examples that explain the individual difference in BMR.

These abnormalities can not be classified by "body types". To say they can is laughable.


The thermic effect of motion accounts for nearly ALL differences in calories needed to maintain weight.

Look at most tour de france winners. Are you going to tell me there all ectomophs because of the way they look? THATS the reason they eat upwards of 6,000calories a day around competition time and gain little to no weight? No, the thermic effect of exercise is what allowed them to eat that much and gain little to nothing.

Thermic effect of eating, living, and motion are the main three things that determine "metabolism".

But, you are saying that the BMR of people. Thats the base metabolic rate. The absolute minimum number of calories a person needs to function without loosing or gaining weight in a suspended state.

You honestly believe, that the BMR of all people is determined by their body type? Haha.

On average the difference between BMR's in grown adults don't sway more than a few hundred calories.

there is no such thing as a hard gainer. There is no such thing as an easy gainer.

Some people BMR is 2,200Kcal. Others is 2,600 Kcal. Regardless. Some people have to eat more than others to gain. This is "duh" true. However, in most cases this is because of peoples activity levels. Not "their body type".

It would be nice if you would be more specific with your argument. Your post was kinda all over the place. Some parts of it didin't even make much sense. Its hard to respond when its like that.Except for the a-holey manner it was presented, I agree w. this completely.

I have never met an "endomorph" who did not eat plenty and "move" less. When self-reporting their caloric intake and expenditure, they generally underestimate the former and overestimate the latter. Ectomorphs, the opposite is, in my experience, always true - they overestimate their caloric intake and underestimate how much calories they are burning in a given day.

Like I said in my last post, there are so many variables to consider that it is probably impossible to control for all (or enough) of them and say without a doubt that the reason Person A gains and Person B doesn't is because of body-type.

Built
03-21-2008, 07:11 PM
I have never met an "endomorph" who did not eat plenty and "move" less.

I ate fewer calories when I was a fat jogger than I do now. I also spent way more time training than I do now.

There you go Boris. Now you've met your first! ;)

Sensei
03-21-2008, 07:15 PM
I ate fewer calories when I was a fat jogger than I do now. I also spent way more time training than I do now.

There you go Boris. Now you've met your first! ;)Training (modality, EPOC, etc.) would be variables to control for, of course.

WBBIRL
03-22-2008, 12:07 PM
I know people who eat twice what I do and aren't half as active yet they're rail thin and I know people who eat less then me and are fatter.

I wouldn't have a hard time believe that some peoples BMR can vary by as much as 2000 calories. I know I'm not the most active person out there, but no matter what I did short of the most extreme physical activity out there (like swimming across the english channel) I would ballon up damn fast on 4,500 calories while some people eat that much and are in my ballpark of average activity.

HahnB
03-22-2008, 01:35 PM
OK, what about kids? If body type doesn't dictate anything, why are children, lets say 8-12, all different shapes and sizes? Clearly none of them are training, and even if you took a sample out of the kids that don't play sports, they're all pretty much leading the same lifestyle. I've seen it with my own eyes. I've seen people with terrible diets, little or no exercise and they have a fantastic build. They're genetically pre-disposed to look this way, obviously.

I'll go as far as saying that regardless of body type, anyone can build a decent body for themselves-but that doesn't mean body type/genetics aren't a huge role in that body.

Sensei
03-22-2008, 06:19 PM
OK, what about kids? If body type doesn't dictate anything, why are children, lets say 8-12, all different shapes and sizes? Clearly none of them are training, and even if you took a sample out of the kids that don't play sports, they're all pretty much leading the same lifestyle. I've seen it with my own eyes. I've seen people with terrible diets, little or no exercise and they have a fantastic build. They're genetically pre-disposed to look this way, obviously.Again... if we could control for diet, exercise, activity levels, stress, sleep, lbm, etc. we could have a discussion of how body-type matters. Otherwise, it's all just idle talk.

As far as youngsters go, we could look at genetics and say "Yeah, that's kid's fat because his parents are fat and it must be genetic.", but we could just as easily say it's environment. Despite how it may sound, I'm not judging people who are overweight at all, but I've never known anyone who was obese (and I've known/do know plenty) who didn't eat more and move less than thinner people. Kids are no exception to that.

We all know people who are overweight who "move all day and eat nothing but salads and drink only water", but I think we all know that isn't true.

Bupp
03-22-2008, 07:08 PM
If you were the kid who used to get his glasses broken playing dodgeball in gym class you are probably going to have to work that much harder than the kid who was a gym-class hero back in the day.

Sensei
03-22-2008, 07:38 PM
If you were the kid who used to get his glasses broken playing dodgeball in gym class you are probably going to have to work that much harder than the kid who was a gym-class hero back in the day.Of course, but really this begs the question "Is the gym-class hero a gym-class hero because of physical giftedness, or is it something else?".

The longer I'm in S&C, the more and more I wonder because time after time I meet the parents of kids who everyone would consider genetically gifted and scratch my head thinking "How did their kid get so good?"... Plenty of cases where it's the exact opposite as well (parents amazing athletes, kids not athletic at all or mediocre at best)... Now, I don't know who said "If the facts don't fit the theory, throw out the facts.", but there are just too many exceptions to the idea of bodytypes and, in many cases, even genetic limitations that I don't think people should be giving it that much thought. Again (and again), I'm not saying that genetics don't matter - of course they do, just that #1, you can't change 'em and #2, thinking about how they help or hinder you doesn't help you perform or look any better. JMO and I'll bow out here because I really think I've said all I want to say on the subject - feel free to PM me if you have any thoughts you want to share or questions you'd like to pose to me.

RhodeHouse
03-23-2008, 08:22 AM
You guys knew I'd chime in on genetics. Stop crying about genetics, bodytypes and all that crap. Stop making excuses for your failure. I've said this before, my mom is 5'1" about 100lbs - my dad is 5'10" about 180lbs - at my biggest, I was 6'4" 317lbs - Someone explain to me my genetics.

Whoever the Op is, stop holding yourself back. You said people are telling you that you can't get bigger, blah, blah, blah. If they tell you to jump off a bridge, are you going to believe them? Probably not (I hope). So, why would you listen to them tell you that you can't reach your goals.

Now, if you want to limit yourself by listening to and making excuses, go for it. At the end of the day, you have to look at yourself in the mirror and say whether or not your reached your goals or not. If you think genetics will hold you back, they will. And, you'll always be the guy who says, "well, I'm an ectomorph, so I can't get big." And, therefore, you will suck as a person. But, I don't think you suck as a person. Set a goal, and go achieve it.

HahnB
03-23-2008, 09:59 AM
You guys knew I'd chime in on genetics. Stop crying about genetics, bodytypes and all that crap. Stop making excuses for your failure.

Nobody is failing. I don't want to be much bigger than I am now. I've invested a significant amount of money in tailoring/suits that fit me perfectly. Even if I could put on 30lbs, I choose not to. I would also assume that nobody else in the thread considers themselves a failure. I'm not sure why you automatically assume that because someone argues for a specific point, they must have some sort of agenda. I believe genetics play a huge role, I argue for that because I believe it's a fact, not because of a personal agenda.


I've said this before, my mom is 5'1" about 100lbs - my dad is 5'10" about 180lbs - at my biggest, I was 6'4" 317lbs - Someone explain to me my genetics.

There are individual genetics and genetics that come from your family lineage.

Mad Max
03-23-2008, 10:29 AM
This thread appears to be a mish mash of the psychological impact of being too fixated with body-type/genetic potential, and the physical reality of body-type/genetic potential.
I'm sure everyone on this thread agrees with the truism that we all have different genetic potential, that our starting size/strength will be different and that some of us will get bigger and stronger, quicker and easier and by eating less. Yes environment plays a big role, but for crying out loud we are genetically different, we're not clones. I'm sure we all agree on that.
Some people on this thread seem to have divirged from this issue, probably out of boredom or frustration at having encountered it so many times. They seem to argue that those who are fixated on the whole issue of genetic potential are those that aren't training or eating hard enough to get to where they want. This is probably true. I think the point they are trying to make is that you should stop 'whining like a p***y and eat goddammit!!!' or some other such gung ho expression.
But should we not forgive the weaklings amongst us for getting a bit p*ssed off at the prospect of another day force feeding themselves oats and peanut butter, just so they can add a couple of pounds by the end of the month, and everything that was ever aesthtically pleasing about their lean physique can become further submerged under a coating of fat.

RhodeHouse
03-26-2008, 06:26 PM
Nobody is failing. I don't want to be much bigger than I am now. I've invested a significant amount of money in tailoring/suits that fit me perfectly. Even if I could put on 30lbs, I choose not to. I would also assume that nobody else in the thread considers themselves a failure. I'm not sure why you automatically assume that because someone argues for a specific point, they must have some sort of agenda. I believe genetics play a huge role, I argue for that because I believe it's a fact, not because of a personal agenda.



There are individual genetics and genetics that come from your family lineage.

This was not a direct response to your posts. It was a blanket statement. The point of my post was to say that if you want to gain weight you can. Genetics and body typing are easy ways of making up excuses for failure. I will use myself as an example because of what I've overcome with Marfans and a very small framed family. To me, if you can't gain weight, or achieve your goals, you're making excuses for it. "I'm this body type so it's hard to gain weight." No doubt, it's easier for some, but it's not impossible. Find people that you want to look like and ask them how they did it. Genetics will have a role, but very small. We can achieve whatever we put our minds to, simple as that. For some, it's harder to do, but for me, that makes it all the more satisfying when I reach my goals.

Notorious
03-26-2008, 07:34 PM
This was not a direct response to your posts. It was a blanket statement. The point of my post was to say that if you want to gain weight you can. Genetics and body typing are easy ways of making up excuses for failure. I will use myself as an example because of what I've overcome with Marfans and a very small framed family. To me, if you can't gain weight, or achieve your goals, you're making excuses for it. "I'm this body type so it's hard to gain weight." No doubt, it's easier for some, but it's not impossible. Find people that you want to look like and ask them how they did it. Genetics will have a role, but very small. We can achieve whatever we put our minds to, simple as that. For some, it's harder to do, but for me, that makes it all the more satisfying when I reach my goals.

I agree 100%.

Majestic
03-26-2008, 09:02 PM
What is ironic here, is that, unless I'm mistaken, the O.P. has Triple-H in his avatar, who by his own admission, is a "...natural ectomorph...".

(his words)

So, if the O.P. chooses to believe in the labels & classifications discussed above, he can certainly feel good about being classified/labeled in the same category as his hero.

Even before he took his gear to the "next level" back in 2000 or 2001, he had a good physique for a tall guy. In fact, he looked BETTER then, IMO. Now he looks like a soft, bloated mess.