GH15 might want to look in to The Luke knowledge

[The Luke]

pics of said 20 inch 7% bodyfat arm?

You can't prove your arm is 20'' if it isn't... better to simply hang your hat on some silly precondition and then pretend you're above it all.


The Luke

[TRIX]

Luke can you tell me how much bigger a 17 inch arm is to a 18 and to a 19 and too a 20. Whats the maths?

[mesmorph78]

old pics



my arms are quite bigger now

[The Luke]

Luke can you tell me how much bigger a 17 inch arm is to a 18 and to a 19 and too a 20. Whats the maths?

Just a ratio of the squares...

Circumference = 2pi x radius

radius = Circumference/2pi

Area = pi x (radius)² = pi x (Circumference/2pi)²

Ratio of two upper arm cross-sectional areas: Areas1/Area2 = (pi x Circumference1²)/4pi² ...divided by... (pi x Circumference2²)/4pi²
 ...sorry I can't do a proper equation with this text editor.

Cancel all the identical terms above and below: Area1/Area2 = Circumference1²/Circumference2²
 ...it doesn't matter if you measure in inches or centimetres or parsecs.

So:
...to go from 14'' to 15'' you have to increase your upper arm 14.8% ...because 15²/14² = 225/196 = 1.148 = 14.8% increase
...to go from 15'' to 16'' you have to increase your upper arm 13.8%
...to go from 16'' to 17'' you have to increase your upper arm 12.9%
...to go from 17'' to 18'' you have to increase your upper arm 12.1%
...to go from 18'' to 19'' you have to increase your upper arm 11.4%
...to go from 19'' to 20'' you have to increase your upper arm 10.8%
...to go from 20'' to 21'' you have to increase your upper arm 10.3%
...to go from 21'' to 22'' you have to increase your upper arm  9.8%
...to go from 22'' to 23'' you have to increase your upper arm  9.3%
...to go from 23'' to 24'' you have to increase your upper arm  8.9%

...so while it may seem that it gets easier and easier to increase arm size, remember those are slightly decreasing percentage increases of an ever escalating bodyweight. Bodyweight increases faster than the incremental percentage increase in upper arm cross-section. You gotta get much bigger to add an inch to your arms.


Compare the difference between a 15'' arm (able to curl 100 lbs) and a 24'' arm: a 156% increase

Assuming direct strength correlation, a 24'' arm should be able to curl 250 to 300 lbs strictly... how may of these 24'' armed pros can actually do that?



Now let's consider a simple direct relationship between arm size and lean bodyweight using those crude percentages, maybe it might work:


15'' arm assumed to be 150 lbs of solid muscle ...everyone can agree with this, it holds for most average build average height non-trainers

16'' arm would go with 171 lbs ...which surprisingly matches most middleweights mass/measurement ratio

17'' arm would go with 193 lbs ...which surprisingly matches the mass/measurement ratio for most 202 competitors, and Franco Colombu

18'' arm would go with 216 lbs ...which surprisingly matches the verified mass/measurement ratio for most 1970s competitors

19'' arm would go with 241 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Schwarzenegger's verified mass/measurement ratio

20'' arm would go with 267 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Dorian Yates' verified (offseason '93) mass/measurement ratio

21'' arm would go with 294 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Lou Ferrigno's verified mass/measurement ratio

22'' arm would go with 323 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Ronnie's VERIFIED mass/measurement ratio


...do we dare to extrapolate a little further after all this direct correlation showing just how right the math is?


23'' arm would go with 353 lbs ...a measurement claimed by a contest ready 225 lb Flex Wheeler (oh borther)

24'' arm would go with 384 lbs ...the measurement you tools ascribe to Ronnie Coleman: 384 lbs at about 10% bf



Hope this explains my reasoning to all those interested. I'm not pulling numbers out of my ass... these simple ratios (with some minor corrections) not only hold for humans, but also for our closest relatives: chimpanzees; orangs and gorillas.

There are occasionally the odd mutant with unusual proportions/attachments who can measure a full inch or so outside of the scale (Lee Priest comes to mind: 21.5'' arms at 240 lbs) but such deviations are so obvious that the physique is seemingly dominated by the upper arms (Priest is obviously somewhat dwarfed and "all arms" for example).

NO ONE... repeat NO ONE... no one measures 2'' outside the scale... it just doesn't happen.

You guys have all been brainwashed by FLEX Magazine's policy of instilling unrealistic expectations in teenage boys.

Don't believe the hype.


The Luke
(sorry for the long post)

[EL Mariachi]

Im no expert, Luke, your formula is usually correct, but there are a lot of exceptions, but how did you formulate that the exceptions cant get over 2 inch in size? You just cant, arms are no different than any other bodypart like calves, how is it possible that a 180p guy can have 20 inch calves and a 240p guy cant get them bigger than 19 inch? Flex wheeler had huge arms when flexed. Your argument is is not valid come on, meso will tape his arms pumped at 20 inch and he will show you on video that the tape is correct.

[The Luke]

Im no expert, Luke, your formula is usually correct, but there are a lot of exceptions, but how did you formulate that the exceptions cant get over 2 inch in size? You just cant, arms are no different than any other bodypart like calves, how is it possible that a 180p guy can have 20 inch calves and a 240p guy cant get them bigger than 19 inch? Flex wheeler had huge arms when flexed. Your argument is is not valid come on, meso will tape his arms pumped at 20 inch and he will show you on video that the tape is correct.

The formla is (roughly) correct (for guys of average height).

No one weighing 180 lbs has genuine 20'' calves.

Flex Wheeler's arms only got outside the scale I presented when he filled them with oil.

My argument is valid.

...and no he won't, cause he can't.


The Luke 

[mesmorph78]

If ur so sure luke wager

[g101]

[Per Se]

Just a ratio of the squares...

Circumference = 2pi x radius

radius = Circumference/2pi

Area = pi x (radius)² = pi x (Circumference/2pi)²

Ratio of two upper arm cross-sectional areas: Areas1/Area2 = (pi x Circumference1²)/4pi² ...divided by... (pi x Circumference2²)/4pi²
 ...sorry I can't do a proper equation with this text editor.

Cancel all the identical terms above and below: Area1/Area2 = Circumference1²/Circumference2²
 ...it doesn't matter if you measure in inches or centimetres or parsecs.

So:
...to go from 14'' to 15'' you have to increase your upper arm 14.8% ...because 15²/14² = 225/196 = 1.148 = 14.8% increase
...to go from 15'' to 16'' you have to increase your upper arm 13.8%
...to go from 16'' to 17'' you have to increase your upper arm 12.9%
...to go from 17'' to 18'' you have to increase your upper arm 12.1%
...to go from 18'' to 19'' you have to increase your upper arm 11.4%
...to go from 19'' to 20'' you have to increase your upper arm 10.8%
...to go from 20'' to 21'' you have to increase your upper arm 10.3%
...to go from 21'' to 22'' you have to increase your upper arm  9.8%
...to go from 22'' to 23'' you have to increase your upper arm  9.3%
...to go from 23'' to 24'' you have to increase your upper arm  8.9%

...so while it may seem that it gets easier and easier to increase arm size, remember those are slightly decreasing percentage increases of an ever escalating bodyweight. Bodyweight increases faster than the incremental percentage increase in upper arm cross-section. You gotta get much bigger to add an inch to your arms.


Compare the difference between a 15'' arm (able to curl 100 lbs) and a 24'' arm: a 156% increase

Assuming direct strength correlation, a 24'' arm should be able to curl 250 to 300 lbs strictly... how may of these 24'' armed pros can actually do that?



Now let's consider a simple direct relationship between arm size and lean bodyweight using those crude percentages, maybe it might work:


15'' arm assumed to be 150 lbs of solid muscle ...everyone can agree with this, it holds for most average build average height non-trainers

16'' arm would go with 171 lbs ...which surprisingly matches most middleweights mass/measurement ratio

17'' arm would go with 193 lbs ...which surprisingly matches the mass/measurement ratio for most 202 competitors, and Franco Colombu

18'' arm would go with 216 lbs ...which surprisingly matches the verified mass/measurement ratio for most 1970s competitors

19'' arm would go with 241 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Schwarzenegger's verified mass/measurement ratio

20'' arm would go with 267 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Dorian Yates' verified (offseason '93) mass/measurement ratio

21'' arm would go with 294 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Lou Ferrigno's verified mass/measurement ratio

22'' arm would go with 323 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Ronnie's VERIFIED mass/measurement ratio


...do we dare to extrapolate a little further after all this direct correlation showing just how right the math is?


23'' arm would go with 353 lbs ...a measurement claimed by a contest ready 225 lb Flex Wheeler (oh borther)

24'' arm would go with 384 lbs ...the measurement you tools ascribe to Ronnie Coleman: 384 lbs at about 10% bf



Hope this explains my reasoning to all those interested. I'm not pulling numbers out of my ass... these simple ratios (with some minor corrections) not only hold for humans, but also for our closest relatives: chimpanzees; orangs and gorillas.

There are occasionally the odd mutant with unusual proportions/attachments who can measure a full inch or so outside of the scale (Lee Priest comes to mind: 21.5'' arms at 240 lbs) but such deviations are so obvious that the physique is seemingly dominated by the upper arms (Priest is obviously somewhat dwarfed and "all arms" for example).

NO ONE... repeat NO ONE... no one measures 2'' outside the scale... it just doesn't happen.

You guys have all been brainwashed by FLEX Magazine's policy of instilling unrealistic expectations in teenage boys.

Don't believe the hype.


The Luke
(sorry for the long post)

Dude I'm actually starting to think you're crazy!!

As Meso said, do u genuinely believe that ur silly formula applies to EVERY man on the planet with no exceptions??

Complete lunacy.

[mesmorph78]

[kiwiol]

Dude I'm actually starting to think you're crazy!!

As Meso said, do u genuinely believe that ur silly formula applies to EVERY man on the planet with no exceptions??

Complete lunacy.

Going by Teh Luke's logic, a shorter / lighter woman can never have a bigger butt or breasts than a taller / heavier woman. I've never seen so much obfuscation and unnecessary complication of a simple arm measurement, by introducing factors like circumference and surface area.

It's like there are 2 roads, one longer and one shorter. But rather than simply say that, Teh Luke will introduce needless new variables like cars traveling on that road, their fuel efficiency and driver hand-eye co-ordination to try and make an argument for the short road being longer, when the plain measurement proves it simply and otherwise.

Eric Fankhouser has bigger calves than the taller, heavier Toney Freeman, just like Lee Priest has bigger arms than the taller, heavier Dan Hill, just to give a couple of examples. How dare those bastards fall out of line with Teh Luke's logical, "mathematically sound" blanket statement

[mesmorph78]

Ha ha ha ha kiwol they will have to be punished

[EL Mariachi]

We agree ronnie had the biggest arms, cant recall anyone else that were that big, maybe kovacs, luke's formula is not always accurate, but we need to keep this real, his arm cant be bigger than 22,5 inch there, you know how ridiculous a 24 inch not fat arm would look like, thats 61 cm, not in this lifetime. If khan taped his arm right it cant get to 23 inch, probably 22,5 inch pumped max.

[JOCKTHEGLIDE]

luke is refering to NATURALS,,,no hormones,,,,based on his calculations YES luke fella is right on his weight,,,but yout throw hormones into it and your porportions go out style,,,I told him already ronnie coleman came in metrofelx dobson and I measured arm at 18inchs already all natural at 210lbs,,,,this was back in early 90s then after a year of hormone use his arms jumped to 21inchs his offseason was 240lbs back then,,,but he jumped more porportionally with GH,,,his arms went out of control at 310lbs off season they mearsured 23.5inches that was his best with a PUMP!!!!!  HE HAD PUMP TO GET THAT MEASUREMENT,,,BUT NO COLD PUMP HE IS 22.75INCHS OR SO,,,,,VERY LARGE EITHER WAY,,,BUT LUKES MEASUREMENT IS FOR NATURALS ONLY,,,,

Going by Teh Luke's logic, a shorter / lighter woman can never have a bigger butt or breasts than a taller / heavier woman. I've never seen so much obfuscation and unnecessary complication of a simple arm measurement, by introducing factors like circumference and surface area.

It's like there are 2 roads, one longer and one shorter. But rather than simply say that, Teh Luke will introduce needless new variables like cars traveling on that road, their fuel efficiency and driver hand-eye co-ordination to try and make an argument for the short road being longer, when the plain measurement proves it simply and otherwise.

Eric Fankhouser has bigger calves than the taller, heavier Toney Freeman, just like Lee Priest has bigger arms than the taller, heavier Dan Hill, just to give a couple of examples. How dare those bastards fall out of line with Teh Luke's logical, "mathematically sound" blanket statement

[#1 Klaus fan]

Dude I'm actually starting to think you're crazy!!

As Meso said, do u genuinely believe that ur silly formula applies to EVERY man on the planet with no exceptions??

Complete lunacy.

I think those formulas atleast show what difference there is between 24 and 22 inches. It would be better if people stopped shrugging the 2 inch differential off as if it could be gained during offseason, or lost during diet just like that.

[Lion666]

Just a ratio of the squares...

Circumference = 2pi x radius

radius = Circumference/2pi

Area = pi x (radius)² = pi x (Circumference/2pi)²

Ratio of two upper arm cross-sectional areas: Areas1/Area2 = (pi x Circumference1²)/4pi² ...divided by... (pi x Circumference2²)/4pi²
 ...sorry I can't do a proper equation with this text editor.

Cancel all the identical terms above and below: Area1/Area2 = Circumference1²/Circumference2²
 ...it doesn't matter if you measure in inches or centimetres or parsecs.

So:
...to go from 14'' to 15'' you have to increase your upper arm 14.8% ...because 15²/14² = 225/196 = 1.148 = 14.8% increase
...to go from 15'' to 16'' you have to increase your upper arm 13.8%
...to go from 16'' to 17'' you have to increase your upper arm 12.9%
...to go from 17'' to 18'' you have to increase your upper arm 12.1%
...to go from 18'' to 19'' you have to increase your upper arm 11.4%
...to go from 19'' to 20'' you have to increase your upper arm 10.8%
...to go from 20'' to 21'' you have to increase your upper arm 10.3%
...to go from 21'' to 22'' you have to increase your upper arm  9.8%
...to go from 22'' to 23'' you have to increase your upper arm  9.3%
...to go from 23'' to 24'' you have to increase your upper arm  8.9%

...so while it may seem that it gets easier and easier to increase arm size, remember those are slightly decreasing percentage increases of an ever escalating bodyweight. Bodyweight increases faster than the incremental percentage increase in upper arm cross-section. You gotta get much bigger to add an inch to your arms.


Compare the difference between a 15'' arm (able to curl 100 lbs) and a 24'' arm: a 156% increase

Assuming direct strength correlation, a 24'' arm should be able to curl 250 to 300 lbs strictly... how may of these 24'' armed pros can actually do that?



Now let's consider a simple direct relationship between arm size and lean bodyweight using those crude percentages, maybe it might work:


15'' arm assumed to be 150 lbs of solid muscle ...everyone can agree with this, it holds for most average build average height non-trainers

16'' arm would go with 171 lbs ...which surprisingly matches most middleweights mass/measurement ratio

17'' arm would go with 193 lbs ...which surprisingly matches the mass/measurement ratio for most 202 competitors, and Franco Colombu

18'' arm would go with 216 lbs ...which surprisingly matches the verified mass/measurement ratio for most 1970s competitors

19'' arm would go with 241 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Schwarzenegger's verified mass/measurement ratio

20'' arm would go with 267 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Dorian Yates' verified (offseason '93) mass/measurement ratio

21'' arm would go with 294 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Lou Ferrigno's verified mass/measurement ratio

22'' arm would go with 323 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Ronnie's VERIFIED mass/measurement ratio


...do we dare to extrapolate a little further after all this direct correlation showing just how right the math is?


23'' arm would go with 353 lbs ...a measurement claimed by a contest ready 225 lb Flex Wheeler (oh borther)

24'' arm would go with 384 lbs ...the measurement you tools ascribe to Ronnie Coleman: 384 lbs at about 10% bf



Hope this explains my reasoning to all those interested. I'm not pulling numbers out of my ass... these simple ratios (with some minor corrections) not only hold for humans, but also for our closest relatives: chimpanzees; orangs and gorillas.

There are occasionally the odd mutant with unusual proportions/attachments who can measure a full inch or so outside of the scale (Lee Priest comes to mind: 21.5'' arms at 240 lbs) but such deviations are so obvious that the physique is seemingly dominated by the upper arms (Priest is obviously somewhat dwarfed and "all arms" for example).

NO ONE... repeat NO ONE... no one measures 2'' outside the scale... it just doesn't happen.

You guys have all been brainwashed by FLEX Magazine's policy of instilling unrealistic expectations in teenage boys.

Don't believe the hype.


The Luke
(sorry for the long post)

like "they" say, it looks good on paper BUT...
     get real, anyone that thinks a boiler plate "math" formula like that can be applied in this situation is delusional.  are natty's considered in this, or are you grouping nat and chems together...? if so that pokes those figures.  as far as the body lbs. goes, some people can work upper body add size while leaving legs small thus keeping overall bodyweight low,,, factor in legs and that would make the ovrall bw go up, so that knocks formula down a bit.  as far as the lil curl scenario you have there,,, your not taking into account connective tissue, lig, tendns, training exp. etc., the way you have it, heavier people would be able to always outlift someone lighter in anygiven excercise. sometimes you can't measure someones heart or will.   we (people that seriously train and have been doing so for years +) know that is not always true. look at oly lifters, so thats down also.
     have to wonder what training exp. you have luke, build etc. because anyone with long term exp. and success (important also, as we wouldn't want to be getting info from someone disgruntled about their gains or lack of)..  there are far too many variables when dealing with the human body to fit into any type of formula like that.  certain instances, especially dealing with the human body can never be quantified.   nice try but leave the calculations for adding up how much weight is on the bar, total sets, reps, total work poundage, etc.

[TRIX]

18.2% difference in size ^^^^

[Palpatine Q]

Just a ratio of the squares...

Circumference = 2pi x radius

radius = Circumference/2pi

Area = pi x (radius)² = pi x (Circumference/2pi)²

Ratio of two upper arm cross-sectional areas: Areas1/Area2 = (pi x Circumference1²)/4pi² ...divided by... (pi x Circumference2²)/4pi²
 ...sorry I can't do a proper equation with this text editor.

Cancel all the identical terms above and below: Area1/Area2 = Circumference1²/Circumference2²
 ...it doesn't matter if you measure in inches or centimetres or parsecs.

So:
...to go from 14'' to 15'' you have to increase your upper arm 14.8% ...because 15²/14² = 225/196 = 1.148 = 14.8% increase
...to go from 15'' to 16'' you have to increase your upper arm 13.8%
...to go from 16'' to 17'' you have to increase your upper arm 12.9%
...to go from 17'' to 18'' you have to increase your upper arm 12.1%
...to go from 18'' to 19'' you have to increase your upper arm 11.4%
...to go from 19'' to 20'' you have to increase your upper arm 10.8%
...to go from 20'' to 21'' you have to increase your upper arm 10.3%
...to go from 21'' to 22'' you have to increase your upper arm  9.8%
...to go from 22'' to 23'' you have to increase your upper arm  9.3%
...to go from 23'' to 24'' you have to increase your upper arm  8.9%

...so while it may seem that it gets easier and easier to increase arm size, remember those are slightly decreasing percentage increases of an ever escalating bodyweight. Bodyweight increases faster than the incremental percentage increase in upper arm cross-section. You gotta get much bigger to add an inch to your arms.


Compare the difference between a 15'' arm (able to curl 100 lbs) and a 24'' arm: a 156% increase

Assuming direct strength correlation, a 24'' arm should be able to curl 250 to 300 lbs strictly... how may of these 24'' armed pros can actually do that?



Now let's consider a simple direct relationship between arm size and lean bodyweight using those crude percentages, maybe it might work:


15'' arm assumed to be 150 lbs of solid muscle ...everyone can agree with this, it holds for most average build average height non-trainers

16'' arm would go with 171 lbs ...which surprisingly matches most middleweights mass/measurement ratio

17'' arm would go with 193 lbs ...which surprisingly matches the mass/measurement ratio for most 202 competitors, and Franco Colombu

18'' arm would go with 216 lbs ...which surprisingly matches the verified mass/measurement ratio for most 1970s competitors

19'' arm would go with 241 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Schwarzenegger's verified mass/measurement ratio

20'' arm would go with 267 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Dorian Yates' verified (offseason '93) mass/measurement ratio

21'' arm would go with 294 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Lou Ferrigno's verified mass/measurement ratio

22'' arm would go with 323 lbs ...which surprisingly matches Ronnie's VERIFIED mass/measurement ratio


...do we dare to extrapolate a little further after all this direct correlation showing just how right the math is?


23'' arm would go with 353 lbs ...a measurement claimed by a contest ready 225 lb Flex Wheeler (oh borther)

24'' arm would go with 384 lbs ...the measurement you tools ascribe to Ronnie Coleman: 384 lbs at about 10% bf



Hope this explains my reasoning to all those interested. I'm not pulling numbers out of my ass... these simple ratios (with some minor corrections) not only hold for humans, but also for our closest relatives: chimpanzees; orangs and gorillas.

There are occasionally the odd mutant with unusual proportions/attachments who can measure a full inch or so outside of the scale (Lee Priest comes to mind: 21.5'' arms at 240 lbs) but such deviations are so obvious that the physique is seemingly dominated by the upper arms (Priest is obviously somewhat dwarfed and "all arms" for example).

NO ONE... repeat NO ONE... no one measures 2'' outside the scale... it just doesn't happen.

You guys have all been brainwashed by FLEX Magazine's policy of instilling unrealistic expectations in teenage boys.

Don't believe the hype.


The Luke
(sorry for the long post)

LOLOLOLOL......what a bunch of fucking nonsense.

Luke is the biggest pseudo-intellectual moron this place has ever seen...what a tool

[Parker]

Dude I'm actually starting to think you're crazy!!

As Meso said, do u genuinely believe that ur silly formula applies to EVERY man on the planet with no exceptions??

Complete lunacy.

When I was 175, I had 17 inch arms. And I wasn't a fat fuk. So I guess I threw is stats off...height has A lot to do with it, and I am 5'5.

[The Luke]

When I was 175, I had 17 inch arms. And I wasn't a fat fuk. So I guess I threw is stats off...height has A lot to do with it, and I am 5'5.

Exactly!

Even if you're ALL arms; and shorter than average; you can still only beat the scale by less than an inch.

NO ONE beats that scale by 2 or more inches... NO ONE.


By the way, I notice my simple extrapolation (which managed to predict pretty much every VERIFIED arm measurement for a pro bodybuilder ever), has won over a few fans... the thread title has been changed to "Levrone had 22'' arms in contest shape" from "Levrone had 24'' arms in contest shape".

Of course the truth is probably somewhere along the lines of "Levrone had nearly 20'' arms in contest shape".


The Luke

[mesmorph78]

Ha ha ha as mad as a hatter

[The Luke]

Ha ha ha as mad as a hatter

...basic math that anyone can verify for themselves versus a self-professed natural with 20'' arms?


The Luke

[dr.chimps]

Going by Teh Luke's logic, a shorter / lighter woman can never have a bigger butt or breasts than a taller / heavier woman. I've never seen so much obfuscation and unnecessary complication of a simple arm measurement, by introducing factors like circumference and surface area.

It's like there are 2 roads, one longer and one shorter. But rather than simply say that, Teh Luke will introduce needless new variables like cars traveling on that road, their fuel efficiency and driver hand-eye co-ordination to try and make an argument for the short road being longer, when the plain measurement proves it simply and otherwise.

Eric Fankhouser has bigger calves than the taller, heavier Toney Freeman, just like Lee Priest has bigger arms than the taller, heavier Dan Hill, just to give a couple of examples. How dare those bastards fall out of line with Teh Luke's logical, "mathematically sound" blanket statement

A new challenger enters the Thunderdome!    

[mesmorph78]

...basic math that anyone can verify for themselves versus a self-professed natural with 20'' arms?


The Luke

ok man whatever you say ... 

[Figo]

The Lukes arguments make sense and the math, well, not even going to attempt...

however, 2 things to take into account, are :

superior arm building genetics, much like mesmorph78's, and many pros

and



but no, kevin levrone, ronnie, etc did not have 23/24 inch arms contest shape. maybe ronnie had 23's offseason, maybe.

but, this guy here at 6'5" , almost 300lbs onstage, yes, he might have had 23 inch arms in contest shape. Anyone else? I doubdt it...