Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on August 19, 2020, 07:09:58 PM
-
-
No question he was something to see.What a monster.
Him and ruhl two giant freaks.
-
Great genetics. Too bad he was so lazy wnd preferred talking shit in magazines.
-
Saw him training once at Gold's Venice... the laziest trainer I ever saw. Light weights too. Wasn't even breathing hard after his sets. I don't understand how he was able to get so big training like a little girl. Very weak-minded. He would've been unbeatable if he had Arnold's drive and determination.
-
Not to mention a ‘brew with excellent calves. A fairly rare sight excluding Cormier. His back probably wouldn’t have even been bad if he trained harder and knew how to pose like a non-retarded person.
-
Saw him training once at Gold's Venice... the laziest trainer I ever saw. Light weights too. Wasn't even breathing hard after his sets. I don't understand how he was able to get so big training like a little girl. Very weak-minded. He would've been unbeatable if he had Arnold's drive and determination.
Why would he train heavy if he could get huge training light? Maybe he tried heavy training in the past with no better results.
-
He had the best potential and genetics of any bodybuilder that ever existed. Incredible legs, delts and arms. From the front he could hang with anyone.
-
He had the best potential and genetics of any bodybuilder that ever existed. Incredible legs, delts and arms. From the front he could hang with anyone.
Yes, like many bodybuilders, the back kills them. Gary Strydom comes to mind.
-
so was this Guy
-
Saw him training once at Gold's Venice... the laziest trainer I ever saw. Light weights too. Wasn't even breathing hard after his sets. I don't understand how he was able to get so big training like a little girl. Very weak-minded. He would've been unbeatable if he had Arnold's drive and determination.
What would the increased drive and determination change to make him unbeatable?
He was limited genetically by his back. Arms/legs/delts were all insane and would not get better.
I guess he could've worked harder at presentation and body control on stage, but I don't think that was the deciding factor in his losses.
-
A freak of freaks....
Too bad he was so dumb he couldnt flex his back.
As said earlier imagine what Arnold or someone else with a brain could have done with that body, it's hard to imagine anyone could have beaten him, bar maybe prime Coleman.
-
What would the increased drive and determination change to make him unbeatable?
He was limited genetically by his back. Arms/legs/delts were all insane and would not get better.
I guess he could've worked harder at presentation and body control on stage, but I don't think that was the deciding factor in his losses.
Another clueless post from you....^
He had no back and giant rear delts because he couldn't activate his back muscles properly, it had nothing to do with " genetics" if you even know what they means....
-
6ft1 285 air puff muscle slow as shit
-
Another clueless post from you....^
He had no back and giant rear delts because he couldn't activate his back muscles properly, it had nothing to do with " genetics" if you even know what they means....
Genetics is a broadly used term here. Encompasses a variety of things, but in this situation it was limitations of the shape/size of his back.
And what prevented him from "activating" his back muscles, yet enabled him to activate all of the other ones?
Explain how increased "drive and determination" would have made him unbeatable, which is the entire context of the discussion.
Or don't, I couldn't give a fuck.
-
Bay likey! :)
-
Biggest waste of talent ever to enter the sport. And one of the most hideous faces as well. Though Heath and Rolly come close.
-
so was this Guy
Comparison pic
-
Why would he train heavy if he could get huge training light? Maybe he tried heavy training in the past with no better results.
Exactly. I wish I could work out with 20 pound dumbbells and look like that, haha.
-
Between and Sergio and Dillet who had the greatest genetics of all time in bodybuilding. As crazy as he looks in videos and pics, to see him in person is unreal.
-
Tiny head helped him too.
-
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.DCdu8DbkEWqzUJhZfaGAMAHaFj%26pid%3DApi&f=1)
-
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.DCdu8DbkEWqzUJhZfaGAMAHaFj%26pid%3DApi&f=1)
That's What happens when you shrink without getting new clothes. To be fair, it happens to a lot of people.
-
Was an absolute monster but always had that gormless ‘did not evolve’ look on his face
-
That's What happens when you shrink without getting new clothes. To be fair, it happens to a lot of people.
But he's alive and still has all of his limbs so he's doing better than many that he competed against.
-
But he's alive and still has all of his limbs so he's doing better than many that he competed against.
True. I was just stating the obvious.
-
True. I was just stating the obvious.
I'll bet his veiny body looks horrible today with no muscle.
-
I'll bet his veiny body looks horrible today with no muscle.
It's the price of vanity. Popcorn muscles don't last.
-
It's the price of vanity. Popcorn muscles don't last.
No muscles last. In the end, we are all just dust in the wind.
-
No muscles last. In the end, we are all just dust in the wind.
Relax. I'm talking about normal muscles. They last.
-
What would the increased drive and determination change to make him unbeatable?
He was limited genetically by his back. Arms/legs/delts were all insane and would not get better.
I guess he could've worked harder at presentation and body control on stage, but I don't think that was the deciding factor in his losses.
But he was lazy. He could've channeled the drive and intensity into making his back better.
Weak-minded. Lost potential.
-
Relax. I'm talking about normal muscles. They last.
People with cotton candy muscles get them back quick by restarting training. Of course, Dillett would have to use the drugs he did before which wouldn't be healthy or smart.
-
lol at getbiggers calling him dumb and lazy ::)
-
Paul learned the secrets to hypertrophy from IFBB Mr Canada 1970.
(https://i.postimg.cc/3rbbDkYZ/Paul-Basile-Vince-Dillett-Copy.jpg)
-
:D
-
There was an interview once where others stated that Paul couldn't pose his back or do many of the regular back training exercises most do because he had some kind of shoulder impingement that prevented him from doing so.
If Paul had said this I would have thought it was bullshit, but other's said it.
-
:)
-
Paul learned the secrets to hypertrophy from IFBB Mr Canada 1970.
(https://i.postimg.cc/3rbbDkYZ/Paul-Basile-Vince-Dillett-Copy.jpg)
Hahaha ;D
-
:)
-
Saw him training once at Gold's Venice... the laziest trainer I ever saw. Light weights too. Wasn't even breathing hard after his sets. I don't understand how he was able to get so big training like a little girl. Very weak-minded. He would've been unbeatable if he had Arnold's drive and determination.
Same here... i saw him train in Golds in Las Vegas. he did a couple sets of seated curls and that was it...
-
Comparison pic
In this particular show I would have personally gave it to JJ.
-
Paul learned the secrets to hypertrophy from IFBB Mr Canada 1970.
(https://i.postimg.cc/3rbbDkYZ/Paul-Basile-Vince-Dillett-Copy.jpg)
Lmfao
-
Lee P has a lot of interesting Dillette stories. Basically he was all drugs. Would jab himself with whatever he could get his hands on.
-
Glass was training him, with all the angles he still couldn’t improve his back
All genetics, plus he couldn’t pose
-
Took half the juice of Flex and Chris, trained like a girl and ate one meal a day , best genetic response to gear seen on anyone in any era. In the end sealed his own by running up multiple debts with multiple dealers, easy to do when the contest prep tab exceeded what he made olympia time, rather than what he thought he would make. In the end his credit rating effected his placings and forced retirement.
-
Took half the juice of Flex and Chris, trained like a girl and ate one meal a day , best genetic response to gear seen on anyone in any era. In the end sealed his own by running up multiple debts with multiple dealers, easy to do when the contest prep tab exceeded what he made olympia time, rather than what he thought he would make. In the end his credit rating effected his placings and forced retirement.
Remind me not to cross you....
-
Paul looked the champ in the gym. In 1991 everyone thought he was the best....just walking around the gym. Tall, huge, and wide. The only flaw I saw were the ugly veins on his chest.
Too bad bodybuilding evolved to have to do the so-called compulsory poses. Just standing there in the lineup should be all that is required.
Btw Paul never won the Mr Canada title. He was disqualified.
-
Paul was huge.
-
Here are two photos I took of Paul at Golds Gym in April 1991. He said he weighed 290 pounds.
-
Genetics is a broadly used term here. Encompasses a variety of things, but in this situation it was limitations of the shape/size of his back.
And what prevented him from "activating" his back muscles, yet enabled him to activate all of the other ones?
Explain how increased "drive and determination" would have made him unbeatable, which is the entire context of the discussion.
Or don't, I couldn't give a fuck.
Dorian commented that Paul's arms were so huge and strong that they did most of the work in the back/lat movements. Dorian criticized the "top trainer" Paul was working with because all he did was count reps. Dorian said he would have tweaked the mechanics of the movements so that it will emphasize the back more. He was a believer in pre-exhaust which would have definitely put more stimulous on his lats.
I'm not a guy who goes into a gym with somebody and just stands there and counts reps. I've seen the so-called top trainers doing this. I saw a "top" trainer at Gold's Gym training Paul Dillett during a back session and Paul had way more arms than he could ever use, huge arms, but absolutely no lats.
He was doing a so-called lat exercise and he was just using his arms to do the exercise because they are very strong: he was using totally wrong body mechanics and this so-called top trainer was just standing there saying, "Come on Paul two, three, four, that's it buddy, come on, five." He should have been correcting his form and telling how he was doing it totally wrong, and explaining how to do it properly.
( Q ) Obviously you would have taken the arms out of the equation and concentrated the majority of the stress on the back.
dots
I would have chosen the correct mechanics, yes, so that the stress is going to the back. If you have a genetically strong body part, that part will take over all of the time. The body will always try to find the easiest way to lift the weight. It's almost like you have to override all of that and find the hardest way to lift it.
dots
( Q ) And Paul, in the example you used, clearly had stronger arms.
dots
https://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/dorian_yates_training_insight.htm
-
Between and Sergio and Dillet who had the greatest genetics of all time in bodybuilding. As crazy as he looks in videos and pics, to see him in person is unreal.
Just on height alone Dillet wins. But also the way he was put together. I really don't think there has ever been a more genetically gifted bber then Paul Dillet. To see him in person during his prime was just jaw-dropping.
-
Relax. I'm talking about normal muscles. They last.
LOL. NO muscles last. Your muscles waste away as you age (sarcopenia) no matter what you do.
-
Paul looked the champ in the gym. In 1991 everyone thought he was the best....just walking around the gym. Tall, huge, and wide. The only flaw I saw were the ugly veins on his chest.
Too bad bodybuilding evolved to have to do the so-called compulsory poses. Just standing there in the lineup should be all that is required.
Btw Paul never won the Mr Canada title. He was disqualified.
You'll always have that over him.
-
That's What happens when you shrink without getting new clothes. To be fair, it happens to a lot of people.
LMAO
WoooSHHHHHHHHHHHH
-
Dorian commented that Paul's arms were so huge and strong that they did most of the work in the back/lat movements. Dorian criticized the "top trainer" Paul was working with because all he did was count reps. Dorian said he would have tweaked the mechanics of the movements so that it will emphasize the back more. He was a believer in pre-exhaust which would have definitely put more stimulous on his lats.
I'm not a guy who goes into a gym with somebody and just stands there and counts reps. I've seen the so-called top trainers doing this. I saw a "top" trainer at Gold's Gym training Paul Dillett during a back session and Paul had way more arms than he could ever use, huge arms, but absolutely no lats.
He was doing a so-called lat exercise and he was just using his arms to do the exercise because they are very strong: he was using totally wrong body mechanics and this so-called top trainer was just standing there saying, "Come on Paul two, three, four, that's it buddy, come on, five." He should have been correcting his form and telling how he was doing it totally wrong, and explaining how to do it properly.
( Q ) Obviously you would have taken the arms out of the equation and concentrated the majority of the stress on the back.
dots
I would have chosen the correct mechanics, yes, so that the stress is going to the back. If you have a genetically strong body part, that part will take over all of the time. The body will always try to find the easiest way to lift the weight. It's almost like you have to override all of that and find the hardest way to lift it.
dots
( Q ) And Paul, in the example you used, clearly had stronger arms.
dots
https://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/dorian_yates_training_insight.htm
This sort of goes back to what I mentioned prior where he had the shoulder injury that prevented him from contracting his back properly, which is why his arms did most of the work.
Also, I can't remember who it was that stated Paul had petitioned the Arnold Classic to allow bodybuilders to have chairs onstage to sit in when they were not doing call out shots. In MM2K, there was an interview with Paul on arm training and the guy asked why he always walked around with his hands in his pockets and Paul said it was because his arms were so heavy that his fingers would go numb just from keeping his arms out and hanging down. Probably bullshit, but that is what he claimed.
-
LOL. NO muscles last. Your muscles waste away as you age (sarcopenia) no matter what you do.
in your case it´s spongiform encephalopathy
your Brain is wasted
-
Saw him training once at Gold's Venice... the laziest trainer I ever saw. Light weights too. Wasn't even breathing hard after his sets. I don't understand how he was able to get so big training like a little girl. Very weak-minded. He would've been unbeatable if he had Arnold's drive and determination.
Gifted and dumb.
-
Lee P has a lot of interesting Dillette stories. Basically he was all drugs. Would jab himself with whatever he could get his hands on.
at least Lee trained hard still had an old school mentality
not sure about his mental state now though :D
just kidding Lee ;)
-
Paul learned the secrets to hypertrophy from IFBB Mr Canada 1970.
(https://i.postimg.cc/3rbbDkYZ/Paul-Basile-Vince-Dillett-Copy.jpg)
;D
-
Not to mention a ‘brew with excellent calves. A fairly rare sight excluding Cormier. His back probably wouldn’t have even been bad if he trained harder and knew how to pose like a non-retarded person.
from a comment on that YT video:
"The reason, Paul Dillet can't hold a pose was, that he had a nervous disease. He can't hold the Muscle tension.
In the 80s he was in Germany for some Seminars and my Uncles were there and Paul Dillet talked about it.
So it shows again, never judge someone because you never know, whats behind the facade."
-
No question he was something to see.What a monster.
Him and ruhl two giant freaks.
paul dillett was a beast, from the front possibly the best ever ,
-
Just on height alone Dillet wins. But also the way he was put together. I really don't think there has ever been a more genetically gifted bber then Paul Dillet. To see him in person during his prime was just jaw-dropping.
I saw Dillet in Golds Gym in Sunrise Florida where he trained before moving to Venice. He was 285 and just ridiclous looking. I also got to see Sergio guest pose before he competed in the Olympia for the last time. Both just mind boggling freaks.
-
in your case it´s spongiform encephalopathy
your Brain is wasted
Still no pics from you. Still no reply as to how I handle a challenge and how you handle a challenge in a virtually identical situation.
You = Faceless coward
Pellius = Winning!
-
Just on height alone Dillet wins. But also the way he was put together. I really don't think there has ever been a more genetically gifted bber then Paul Dillet. To see him in person during his prime was just jaw-dropping.
I saw him and Yates guest pose separately in 96. I saw Yates in May and Paul a couple months later. After seeing Dorian I was underwhelmed by Paul. Not that he wasn't huge and impressive, just that Dorian was other worldly.
-
I saw him and Yates guest pose separately in 96. I saw Yates in May and Paul a couple months later. After seeing Dorian I was underwhelmed by Paul. Not that he wasn't huge and impressive, just that Dorian was other worldly.
Though great for his era, Segio was no Dorian. Nobody was Dorian.
People can go back and forth between who was the greatest, Dorian or Coleman. I think it's just a matte of taste and preferences. For me, it's Dorian. That conditioning, the density, the graininess that only comes from being deep in the fire -- that's what does it for me.
-
Though great for his era, Sergio was no Dorian. Nobody was Dorian.
People can go back and forth between who was the greatest, Dorian or Coleman. I think it's just a matte of taste and preferences. For me, it's Dorian. That conditioning, the density, the graininess that only comes from being deep in the fire -- that's what does it for me.
I think what made Sergio Oliva so impressive was his genetics, his extremely long muscle bellies and a very small waist.
In the photo below, it is later in his career and he has a torn left triceps but it barely makes a difference.
(https://www.ironmanmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/16/files/2012/11/Sergio-FDB.jpg)
-
I think what made Sergio Oliva so impressive was his genetics, his extremely long muscle bellies and a very small waist.
In the photo below, it is later in his career and he has a torn left triceps but it barely makes a difference.
(https://www.ironmanmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/16/files/2012/11/Sergio-FDB.jpg)
I don't mean to imply that Dorian had better genetics than Sergio or Dillet. He didn't. Sergio had better genetics than Arnold but still lost to Arnold because he wouldn't do whatever it took and nor could he come up with the strategies to win that Arnold did.
I think that is what makes Dorian so impressive. Dillet and Sergio, though more naturally gifted, didn't have the grit, determination, intelligence, and discipline that Dorian had.
Note in that example I gave regarding Dorian observing Charles Glass training Paul. Whether you agree with his observation or not you could see Dorian was a thinking a person. He kept notes and records and paid attention to how he trained and didn't just count sets and reps.
-
I don't mean to imply that Dorian had better genetics than Sergio or Dillet. He didn't. Sergio had better genetics than Arnold but still lost to Arnold because he wouldn't do whatever it took and nor could he come up with the strategies to win that Arnold did.
I think that is what makes Dorian so impressive. Dillet and Sergio, though more naturally gifted, didn't have the grit, determination, intelligence, and discipline that Dorian had.
Note in that example I gave regarding Dorian observing Charles Glass training Paul. Whether you agree with his observation or not you could see Dorian was a thinking a person. He kept notes and records and paid attention to how he trained and didn't just count sets and reps.
I agree with that, Sergio had the superior genetics, but he unfortunately lacked the mindset, the 'grit, determination, intelligence, and discipline' to make the most of it.
His posing was also not great which hurt him, while Arnold would focus on his posing to make it the best, even to minimise weaknesses such as his thicker waist, to use it to his advantage. Also realised he couldn't beat Sergio with size alone, so focused on conditioning. Would also try stand more forwards on the stage, while Sergio didn't take this into account.
He also liked pizza and coke, and mostly did not seem that strict about his dieting or conditioning. His training was obviously intense but that's just a part of the total package.
-
I agree with that, Sergio had the superior genetics, but he unfortunately lacked the mindset, the 'grit, determination, intelligence, and discipline' to make the most of it.
His posing was also not great which hurt him, while Arnold would focus on his posing to make it the best, even to minimise weaknesses such as his thicker waist, to use it to his advantage. Also realised he couldn't beat Sergio with size alone, so focused on conditioning. Would also try stand more forwards on the stage, while Sergio didn't take this into account.
He also liked pizza and coke, and mostly did not seem that strict about his dieting or conditioning. His training was obviously intense but that's just a part of the total package.
Let's not forget that Sergio beat Arnold, lost to him in a controversial decision, and was banned from the Olympia during the prime of his career. It's not like Arnold dominated him.
-
Let's not forget that Sergio beat Arnold, lost to him in a controversial decision, and was banned from the Olympia during the prime of his career. It's not like Arnold dominated him.
This is a good point, not often brought up. ^
I do still believe generally speaking Arnold had the edge on Sergio and that as arnold progressed the 73-74 versions could have handled Sergio pretty easily.
-
sergio looked good in street clothes
remember the picture of him in a shirt cut sleeves
-
This is a good point, not often brought up. ^
I do still believe generally speaking Arnold had the edge on Sergio and that as arnold progressed the 73-74 versions could have handled Sergio pretty easily.
Arnold would not have dared do a straight facing double bi like the Oliva pic above. It was almost always twisting to hide the waist. There are a few poses that Sergio had that nobody beat due to his proportions.
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
I expect some pushback on this post. Please change my mind or tell me I'm an idiot :D
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
It can be insightful but still qualify as a meltdown.
MELTDOWN.
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
I expect some pushback on this post. Please change my mind or tell me I'm an idiot :D
You are right about this.
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
I expect some pushback on this post. Please change my mind or tell me I'm an idiot :D
I don't know if it is that much of a lost cause as you imply. Arnold, as an advance bber made a huge change in his calves. Phil Heath as a pro brought up his back to make it a strong point, meaning that although his overall proportions increased, his back more so making it stand out more. Jay Cutler the same. Compare his back in 2001, when he was a breath away from being Mr. O to what it was later in his career.
-
I don't know if it is that much of a lost cause as you imply. Arnold, as an advance bber made a huge change in his calves. Phil Heath as a pro brought up his back to make it a strong point, meaning that although his overall proportions increased, his back more so making it stand out more. Jay Cutler the same. Compare his back in 2001, when he was a breath away from being Mr. O to what it was later in his career.
I'll have to search for pics to compare. Which year did Jay's back look particularly improved?
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
I expect some pushback on this post. Please change my mind or tell me I'm an idiot :D
Made a similar point on page one and it got somebody upset.
I know guys like Yates, etc made improvements after turning pro. But Dorian had shape and detail, so it could have been neglect early on or that everything got bigger. Dillet pretty much had every other body part developed fantastically, so I have a hard time believing concentrating on isolation/contraction would have made any difference, especially when view the shape of it.
-
Any idea of his cycles?
Lee priest claimed when they were roommates dillet used little, often less than female competitors. Lee would say they stared at a syringe of winny for a while before someone used it
-
I'll have to search for pics to compare. Which year did Jay's back look particularly improved?
In the first side by side set you can see the difference everywhere which I know is one of your points: an advance bber can get bigger all over but can't change natural proportions. One would have to have a very discerning eye, or "wishful" eye to determine if his back improved proportionately more than the others.
(https://musclemecca.com/imported-images/2009/09/2mw6wxu-1.jpg)
In the next set where he is closer in bodyweight, which was pretty consistent throughout his career (except in 2009) you can see in the second pic that he has more fullness in his traps all the way down to the middle back and his lats are wider. They jut out more at it's widest or peaked position as it were. That is one thing I thought was most noticeable later in his career. The way his lats flared out more when doing a front double bi, which, ironically, can't see to find.
(http://forums.steroid.com/attachments/professional-athlete-pictures/26157d1071790117-jay-cutler-2001-vs-jay-cutler-now-2001-jay-cutler-back-bicep.jpg)
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/0QRdJgDvNIpEDw1vOoE2aG81XdFmATUxVjTNr_ODXKS3S5VyCI0kbc3ucEmyRWEiYGUvGoX04G6cU2gHxGIFMKDIqKcL_1w_itifZCl_4bov)
-
In the first side by side set you can see the difference everywhere which I know is one of your points: an advance bber can get bigger all over but can't change natural proportions. One would have to have a very discerning eye, or "wishful" eye to determine if his back improved proportionately more than the others.
In the next set where he is closer in bodyweight, which was pretty consistent throughout his career (except in 2009) you can see in the second pic that he has more fullness in his traps all the way down to the middle back and his lats are wider. They jut out more at it's widest or peaked position as it were. That is one thing I thought was most noticeable later in his career. The way his lats flared out more when doing a front double bi, which, ironically, can't see to find.
Thanks for the pics. You could be right about the traps or the flare on the lats but for me it's very hard to draw those conclusions just based on this. And the reason is that the pics are not taken at exactly the same angle in the second set. He is crunching his back more in the first pic there also.
The first set is so similar that it could have been taken on the same day as far as I'm concerned, are you sure it's not? :D
It could be predjudge vs. night show where he combed up his hair :D
Fans often see major differences between predjudging and night show too, and even there I think the differences might be mostly imaginary as you can't compare side by side but go by memory. Hell, some feel the physiques change drastically within 10 minutes during the rounds. :D
Anyhow, Dillet's back was so comparatively small that he could have added an inch of lat mass and it still would have been undersized.
Someone in this thread said Lee P said Dillet shot a lot of shit at random. Where did he say this? I remember an early interview where Lee swore Dillet used very little gear and the two of them would skip shots for days - and Lee knew this because they were roommates. I read some claim that Dillet only used Anadrol off season, nothing else. Whatever the truth, Dillet had alien genetics for most bodyparts.
*edit: noticed the worm already said the same things above*
-
Made a similar point on page one and it got somebody upset.
I know guys like Yates, etc made improvements after turning pro. But Dorian had shape and detail, so it could have been neglect early on or that everything got bigger. Dillet pretty much had every other body part developed fantastically, so I have a hard time believing concentrating on isolation/contraction would have made any difference, especially when view the shape of it.
Bodybuilders will fight this type of perspective because they want to think they have a chance at making major changes.
Later on they will then convince themselves that they did make those changes even if they aren't really there. And they will be told this by fans and yes-men too.
Sure, if I were a pro I would also prioritize weaknesses even if I knew the chances of making changes to proportions were small, you can always hope you were undertrained in certain areas. :D
-
I think what made Sergio Oliva so impressive was his genetics, his extremely long muscle bellies and a very small waist.
In the photo below, it is later in his career and he has a torn left triceps but it barely makes a difference.
(https://www.ironmanmagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/16/files/2012/11/Sergio-FDB.jpg)
heres a photo from his physical prime 1971 that’s not so common it illustrates your point, it’s widely regarded that the 1972 Mr Olympia was Sergio’s best ever shape however there’s a case for the 1972 trip too Japan being the best he’s ever been where he guess posed onstage @ a exhibition I don’t think he ever regained that combination of size, fullness and conditioning
-
You can't outgrow your genetic shape, but Charles is very good at maximising your genetic potential, he acts like an exercise engineer, but he did everything he could with Dillet, his delts and arms overpowered everything, and in this instance i dont think Dorian could have done more, Paul did all the elbow fixed arm type stuff he just had narrow shallow long lats in comparison to his arms and delts, like Nasser and Strydom he was right in the mix as they were until they all turned around.
Never did quite understand the hate on Charles, he's hard working humble guy, just keeps to himself, imo a good guy he's just making a living.
-
I put Sergio on One Mile Beach at Foster, NSW.
-
You can't outgrow your genetic shape, but Charles is very good at maximising your genetic potential, he acts like an exercise engineer, but he did everything he could with Dillet, his delts and arms overpowered everything, and in this instance i dont think Dorian could have done more, Paul did all the elbow fixed arm type stuff he just had narrow shallow long lats in comparison to his arms and delts, like Nasser and Strydom he was right in the mix as they were until they all turned around.
Never did quite understand the hate on Charles, he's hard working humble guy, just keeps to himself, imo a good guy he's just making a living.
It wasn't Charles fault... It was dillets, it wasn't a physical issue, maybe there was a minor shoulder injury and lack of flexibility, but had dillet approached it as a professional and not a retard could have fixed the issue.
Some obvious things that disprove dillets excuses for his shit back.....
If dillet had a major shoulder issue, it would be obvious on other parts of his body... It was not.
Dillet had enormous rear delts, this shows they were taking all the load when he was training back and further proof the shoulders themselves were not the major issue.
The truth is dillet was a retard that couldn't flex his back.....
I remember in an old muscle mag when dillet made the comeback in early 2000's when he was asked about how he was going to improve his back he said something to the effect of " it doesn't matter because I will beat everyone in all the other poses if you win 5 of 7 who cares... You win" , this was his moronic attitude.
-
Thanks for the pics. You could be right about the traps or the flare on the lats but for me it's very hard to draw those conclusions just based on this. And the reason is that the pics are not taken at exactly the same angle in the second set. He is crunching his back more in the first pic there also.
The first set is so similar that it could have been taken on the same day as far as I'm concerned, are you sure it's not? :D
It could be predjudge vs. night show where he combed up his hair :D
Fans often see major differences between predjudging and night show too, and even there I think the differences might be mostly imaginary as you can't compare side by side but go by memory. Hell, some feel the physiques change drastically within 10 minutes during the rounds. :D
Anyhow, Dillet's back was so comparatively small that he could have added an inch of lat mass and it still would have been undersized.
Someone in this thread said Lee P said Dillet shot a lot of shit at random. Where did he say this? I remember an early interview where Lee swore Dillet used very little gear and the two of them would skip shots for days - and Lee knew this because they were roommates. I read some claim that Dillet only used Anadrol off season, nothing else. Whatever the truth, Dillet had alien genetics for most bodyparts.
*edit: noticed the worm already said the same things above*
Of course, it is very hard to tell because the difference is so subtle and more so as the physique grows more advance. But I do know this about Jay because he said so, he said that he realized Ronnie destroyed him in the back shots so he had to, and did bring his back up, and if he said so you know it has to be true. ;D
I've read about how Dillet pumped in whatever he could get his hands on and also that he used very little relatively speaking. In fact, these two contradicting view points are said on this very thread so who knows.
Lee P has a lot of interesting Dillette stories. Basically he was all drugs. Would jab himself with whatever he could get his hands on.
Any idea of his cycles?
Lee priest claimed when they were roommates dillet used little, often less than female competitors. Lee would say they stared at a syringe of winny for a while before someone used it
-
Lee P has a lot of interesting Dillette stories. Basically he was all drugs. Would jab himself with whatever he could get his hands on.
a video I saw of Lee talking about him said the Paul hated doing shots and often missed them
-
Priest is a total shit talker when it comes to drugs I wouldn't believe a word.
I remember a story from Peter mcgough that when dillet saw the 93 dorian pics he doubled all his doses. Wether this is an exaggeration or not doesn't matter it implied that dillet wasn't going easy on the roids.
And look at his physique ffs that is a heavy dose physique, you don't get a build like that on a gram or two a week, no matter how genetically talented you are.
-
a video I saw of Lee talking about him said the Paul hated doing shots and often missed them
The stories I heard and this was from someone who spent time with Lee in the UK a few years ago about Dillet was a little different.
Dillet would find out someone had a new source or drug and he'd go try get his hand on the same stuff. He would also only really bother training (if you can call it that) if he was on what he believed was an amazing drug cocktail.
As harman said just look at his physique and bodybuilding career and it isn't difficult to work out which version of events is likely to be true.
-
I know from someone who knew Dillet's gear supplier in Florida, that he owed him money when he left and went to Cali.
-
I don't know if it is that much of a lost cause as you imply. Arnold, as an advance bber made a huge change in his calves. Phil Heath as a pro brought up his back to make it a strong point, meaning that although his overall proportions increased, his back more so making it stand out more. Jay Cutler the same. Compare his back in 2001, when he was a breath away from being Mr. O to what it was later in his career.
Your calves would be a good example too. Not being a dick. Totally serious.
-
Superheavyweight , middleweight's back :-\
-
:)
-
:)
-
Saw him training once at Gold's Venice... the laziest trainer I ever saw. Light weights too. Wasn't even breathing hard after his sets. I don't understand how he was able to get so big training like a little girl. Very weak-minded. He would've been unbeatable if he had Arnold's drive and determination.
The irony is that training extremely hard is counterproductive in the long run, because you throw your body into overtraining state and then you can't grow. One of the reasons he was so massive is because he didn't train extremely hard all the time
-
No muscles last. In the end, we are all just dust in the wind.
Bro...
-
The irony is that training extremely hard is counterproductive in the long run, because you throw your body into overtraining state and then you can't grow. One of the reasons he was so massive is because he didn't train extremely hard all the time
What? Have you factored in frequency? You think if you train balls to the wall until you collapes but do it Mentzer style during his crazy years and only do it once or twice a month you will over train?
The other aspects to HIT wasn't just intensity but frequency and duration. Both drastically reduced to accommodate the intensity. I believe in the Colorado experiment every training session was under a half an hour.
-
What? Have you factored in frequency? You think if you train balls to the wall until you collapes but do it Mentzer style during his crazy years and only do it once or twice a month you will over train?
The other aspects to HIT wasn't just intensity but frequency and duration. Both drastically reduced to accommodate the intensity. I believe in the Colorado experiment every training session was under a half an hour.
Maybe you know something that I don't know
-
Maybe you bro something that I don't bro...
Bro...
-
It wasn't Charles fault... It was dillets, it wasn't a physical issue, maybe there was a minor shoulder injury and lack of flexibility, but had dillet approached it as a professional and not a retard could have fixed the issue.
Some obvious things that disprove dillets excuses for his shit back.....
If dillet had a major shoulder issue, it would be obvious on other parts of his body... It was not.
Dillet had enormous rear delts, this shows they were taking all the load when he was training back and further proof the shoulders themselves were not the major issue.
The truth is dillet was a retard that couldn't flex his back.....
I remember in an old muscle mag when dillet made the comeback in early 2000's when he was asked about how he was going to improve his back he said something to the effect of " it doesn't matter because I will beat everyone in all the other poses if you win 5 of 7 who cares... You win" , this was his moronic attitude.
It was a total physical issue, have a look at the supporting photos around his insertions and structure, like Nasser and Strydom, if the cells aren't there on a muscle that size being back your not going to make it to the top, you can shoot arms, delts, calves, and Nasser even his lats, but you cannot grow what you don't have when it comes to back.
As for Lee he's 100 percent on when it comes to Dillet he didn't like shots, he was as lazy with that as he was training and even eating, he never ate more than once a day, whether this was from his guts and liver being shot from pre contest anapolan and halotestin or something else who knows. But what Paul did worked for Paul, he has probably the best genetic response to gear of all the guys from that era, he just didnt have the back structure to support what was otherwise a massive freaky physique. Don't let the side and rear delts fool you either, when he could be bothered thats where it mostly went. He did half of what Flex and the others did, its wasn't nothing either, well maybe by Getbig standards where everyone 200 plus pounds is on 10 grams, your talking about the best guys in the world in the best era, they were all genetic freaks even factoring in all the mgs and ius. Unfortunately not everyone can look like they did
-
What? Have you factored in frequency? You think if you train balls to the wall until you collapes but do it Mentzer style during his crazy years and only do it once or twice a month you will over train?
The other aspects to HIT wasn't just intensity but frequency and duration. Both drastically reduced to accommodate the intensity. I believe in the Colorado experiment every training session was under a half an hour.
pellius i think alot of people do not even understand the true concept of h.i.t they think it is maximum weight and just moving a weight up and down, but it is not, i have some of mikes training videos he filmed with gmv video, he did very slow contractions. you shouldnt waste your time trying to explain to some morons on here, what h.i.t is they do not have the brain capacity to understand it
-
Maybe you know something that I don't know
Over training, is a form of stress in which you exceed you body's recuperative abiity. Just being alive requires metabolic support in which there is a cost. A cost in energy and what is loosely called "wear and tear". Even if you do no training at all, in fact, even if you just sit around all day, you are still using energy and cellular resources that cause varying degrees of "wear and tear." Unlike machines, the human body has the ability to regenerate by a process that takes effect when we sleep. Whether you are working construction all day, lifting weights, or just lying around the house you will still need sleep and "down time".
How much recovery you need depends on the level of stress and breakdown that your body has experienced. There are occasions where the stress and damage done to the body is so great, i.e., car crash, being set on fire, working in a concentration camp, not having sufficient fuel/nutrients/water... that you never recover and you die.
Your body has natural processes that protect you from doing this to yourself. You pass out during extreme exertion rather than push yourself until your body shuts down, i.e. die. You can't stay awake forever (your body forcing you to sleep and recover).
So no matter how hard you train, there is a given, which varies from individual to individual, amount of time in which your body has fully recovered. Otherwise that would imply that you can never recover from a hard HIT workout forever.
I would surmise that Tom Platz has experience some of the hardest most intense workout a human being has ever subjected himself to. I'm pretty sure he has recovered by now and his energy and metabolic equilibrium are at normal levels
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
I expect some pushback on this post. Please change my mind or tell me I'm an idiot :D
I’m 100 percent in agreement.
-
pellius i think alot of people do not even understand the true concept of h.i.t they think it is maximum weight and just moving a weight up and down, but it is not, i have some of mikes training videos he filmed with gmv video, he did very slow contractions. you shouldnt waste your time trying to explain to some morons on here, what h.i.t is they do not have the brain capacity to understand it
LOL! I wish I read your post before I replied to pamith.
-
I’m 100 percent in agreement.
Van B is the only person here whom if I find I disagree with my first thought is that I must be missing something and always seek clarification because my default position with him is that he's probably right and I have over looked or not been aware of some pertinent factor.
But he's going to get an argument.
-
Over training, is a form of stress in which you exceed you body's recuperative abiity. Just being alive requires metabolic support in which there is a cost. A cost in energy and what is loosely called "wear and tear". Even if you do no training at all, in fact, even if you just sit around all day, you are still using energy and cellular resources that cause varying degrees of "wear and tear." Unlike machines, the human body has the ability to regenerate by a process that takes effect when we sleep. Whether you are working construction all day, lifting weights, or just lying around the house you will still need sleep and "down time".
How much recovery you need depends on the level of stress and breakdown that your body has experienced. There are occasions where the stress and damage done to the body is so great, i.e., car crash, being set on fire, working in a concentration camp, not having sufficient fuel/nutrients/water... that you never recover and you die.
Your body has natural processes that protect you from doing this to yourself. You pass out during extreme exertion rather than push yourself until your body shuts down, i.e. die. You can't stay awake forever (your body forcing you to sleep and recover).
So no matter how hard you train, there is a given, which varies from individual to individual, amount of time in which your body has fully recovered. Otherwise that would imply that you can never recover from a hard HIT workout forever.
I would surmise that Tom Platz has experience some of the hardest most intense workout a human being has ever subjected himself to. I'm pretty sure he has recovered by now and his energy and metabolic equilibrium are at normal levels
“Being set on fire”
:D
-
“Being set on fire”
:D
A person a few days ago was stuck in a burning building but though they got him out alive that injuries he suffered from the burns was too much and he dies within 12 hours.
It was just a random thought that came into my mind when thinking of random examples.
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
I expect some pushback on this post. Please change my mind or tell me I'm an idiot :D
One of the only top pros I can think of that made dramatic gains and brought up his “weak points” was flex Lewis. When he turned pro, his chest, back and even shoulders (lesser degree) were weak. Yes, he did gain major size, as in most pros, but his weak areas improved very noticeably, and he’s much better than he was when he was an amateur which is rare. No gut either
But most don’t really make improvements, they gain lots of mass but their gut also protrudes and they look much worse. Flex wheeler, kuclo, Dennis Wolfe, Nasser, Ruhl, branch, Many others, all look much worse later on
(https://i.redd.it/pkvhlagpvu741.jpg)
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
I expect some pushback on this post. Please change my mind or tell me I'm an idiot :D
I was trying to explain to some daft twat on FB that bicep peak is genetic, he kept saying that if you do DB concentration curls anyone can get peaked bicep, he then posted a pic of himself with flat biceps to validate my point
-
The Colorado Experiment?
Complete bulls*it for marketing purposes.
-
One of the only top pros I can think of that made dramatic gains and brought up his “weak points” was flex Lewis. When he turned pro, his chest, back and even shoulders (lesser degree) were weak. Yes, he did gain major size, as in most pros, but his weak areas improved very noticeably, and he’s much better than he was when he was an amateur which is rare. No gut either
But most don’t really make improvements, they gain lots of mass but their gut also protrudes and they look much worse. Flex wheeler, kuclo, Dennis Wolfe, Nasser, Ruhl, branch, Many others, all look much worse later on
(https://i.redd.it/pkvhlagpvu741.jpg)
I was comparing the pics and it brought to mind another area bodybuilders almost never improve or change on. And that is posing. The way you hit your poses sort of gets ingrained very early on and it's almost impossible to change later, no matter how many choreographers they hire. Everyone always disagrees with me on this, but I maintain that you can't make a poor poser great, either they have this aesthetic sense or they don't. What I noticed here is how exactly the same Flex places his hands on his hips - the thumb on the right hand is slightly higher than the left thumb. Purely ingrained instinct :D
I think the proportions look very similar there to me. One possible confounder is SEO use, even regular gear can change size/shape a bit if you put large amounts in say delts over long periods of time.
I was trying to explain to some daft twat on FB that bicep peak is genetic, he kept saying that if you do DB concentration curls anyone can get peaked bicep, he then posted a pic of himself with flat biceps to validate my point
It's much worse when it's someone who should know better, such as a high level competitor or trainer. I've seen someone post comparisons where someone did appear to change the shape but it's most likely that the bicep tore a bit and it bunched up more.
-
pellius i think alot of people do not even understand the true concept of h.i.t they think it is maximum weight and just moving a weight up and down, but it is not, i have some of mikes training videos he filmed with gmv video, he did very slow contractions. you shouldnt waste your time trying to explain to some morons on here, what h.i.t is they do not have the brain capacity to understand it
I did it exactly as it was taught by Jones, Mentzer, etc. I still from time to time will do HIT for a couple weeks for a break in my normal routine. It's not that people don't understand it, but that they do.
-
HIT as prescribed by Jones or Mentzer or even Yates
is something that just doesn't suit a lot of people, the level
of effort required is just not something a lot of people can do unless in a life or death situation. Then there are those few who prefer and enjoy it. There are a lot of great bodybuilders who never go to that type of failure, who never did and who never could be taught this type of effort. I think even Arnold said he couldn't train like Viator, he'd rather be a ski instructor in Austria if he had to train like that to be champion.
Charles Poliquin once said you'd need to be hopped up on amphetamines to be able to train like that. An exaggeration but there is a small point there. So program preference is also very genetic, it has a lot to do with genetic psychological make-up imo.
-
HIT as prescribed by Jones or Mentzer or even Yates
is something that just doesn't suit a lot of people, the level
of effort required is just not something a lot of people can do unless in a life or death situation. Then there are those few who prefer and enjoy it. There are a lot of great bodybuilders who never go to that type of failure, who never did and who never could be taught this type of effort. I think even Arnold said he couldn't train like Viator, he'd rather be a ski instructor in Austria if he had to train like that to be champion.
Charles Poliquin once said you'd need to be hopped up on amphetamines to be able to train like that. An exaggeration but there is a small point there. So program preference is also very genetic, it has a lot to do with genetic psychological make-up imo.
A program only works if you do it. Working out is as much, or more, psychological as it is physiological. Jones himself went years between workouts and Mentzer was washed up in his 20's. It never occurred to them to lighten the load a little.
-
A program only works if you do it. Working out is as much, or more, psychological as it is physiological. Jones himself went years between workouts and Mentzer was washed up in his 20's. It never occurred to them to lighten the load a little.
Absolutely, some have an all or nothing mentality. If you aren't progressing somehow what's the use? I think it depends on why you train. There can be a joy in just moving your body or feeling healthy or whatever but for some this isn't enough, just maintaining.
Although HIT is tough I think Mentzer took a rational and unemotional approach to training, he talked about those he thought were acting irrationally by spending a lot of time in a dungeon suffering for the sake of suffering when they could get the same or better gains in a fraction of the time instead.
IOW, training his way was just a means to an end.
-
HIT as prescribed by Jones or Mentzer or even Yates
is something that just doesn't suit a lot of people, the level
of effort required is just not something a lot of people can do unless in a life or death situation. Then there are those few who prefer and enjoy it. There are a lot of great bodybuilders who never go to that type of failure, who never did and who never could be taught this type of effort. I think even Arnold said he couldn't train like Viator, he'd rather be a ski instructor in Austria if he had to train like that to be champion.
Charles Poliquin once said you'd need to be hopped up on amphetamines to be able to train like that. An exaggeration but there is a small point there. So program preference is also very genetic, it has a lot to do with genetic psychological make-up imo.
Come on, its all bullshit, I have watched Dorians video, sure he trains hard, but he only does sets and reps to failure, many, many people train exactly the same way, some people just breeze through workouts and look fantastic
You lift things up you put them down, genetics decides the rest.
Take a weight and rep out until you cant do another rep, who cant do that?
-
Come on, its all bullshit, I have watched Dorians video, sure he trains hard, but he only does sets and reps to failure, many, many people train exactly the same way, some people just breeze through workouts and look fantastic
You lift things up you put them down, genetics decides the rest.
Take a weight and rep out until you cant do another rep, who cant do that?
I agree that Dorian didn't do anything spectacular and there are a lot of people who train "harder". He was fairly weak too compared to some others. Though I would say he did put a lot more effort into the working sets than some other pros.
You can absolutely argue that perhaps some of this effort to beat your previous bests and getting really psyched isn't necessary but I do think you will probably be able to perform more work this way than if you approached a set more casually without the adrenaline dump and a rep goal in mind. Kind of like a powerlifter at a meet where the stakes are high psychologically - you will not be able to perform as well under normal circumstances.
Jordan Peters is a good example. If you aren't psyched this type of weight might not move at all.
https://www.instagram.com/p/B9EyWFml4eT/?igshid=1023odzo6f54p
https://www.instagram.com/p/B2MWxAhFpwe/?igshid=1ozfys1rwmujc
If this is necessary or if it might even be counterproductive can be debated.
-
Dillet had a poor back due to genetics, nothing else. If it was due to shoulder issues it would have affected the shoulders and pecs just the same.
And I'm sure the shoulder issues weren't there, at least to the same extent, earlier in his career, yet the back was always way small.
If someone has a bad bodypart it's rarely or never due to lack of "mind muscle connection". I have often made the claim that someone who is already an advanced amateur or pro never ever changes his proportions or makes a weak bodypart strong. It's pathetic seeing trainers and the clients say they are bringing up this or that bodypart, when does it ever work? Often they even post pics claiming they brought something up but you can't actually see it if you are honest. The only way something comes up is if they increased their overall size.... but then the proportions still stay the same. This is a major pet peeve of mine, like telling Dennis Wolf to bring up his lower lats - only an idiot thinks he had no lower lats due to not activating the area properly. I see these ideas by pros and amateurs accounts on IG all day long and no one ever says it's hopeless, genes are a bitch :D
Guys are going to Gold's to be trained by Charles Glass doing some stupid weird movements thinking this will change their genetic shape. It never worked and never will. You can maybe play with some site enhancements and hope it will look ok, or like I said before, just get bigger overall so you are so overwhelmingly big the judges will not care about you crappy calves or whatever. Calves are the prime example of how much genes matter - those with insane calves often never even train them, and the ones with shit calves shoot them up - soo many examples of syntholed calves; Ronnie, Dex, and half the Olympia lineup.
Milos did some insane training, hitting each muscle from 100 angles, yet he still felt he had to Synthol his arms because nothing was happening. Or maybe his mind muscle connection was poor ::)
I expect some pushback on this post. Please change my mind or tell me I'm an idiot :D
QFT!
-
I agree that Dorian didn't do anything spectacular and there are a lot of people who train "harder". He was fairly weak too compared to some others. Though I would say he did put a lot more effort into the working sets than some other pros.
You can absolutely argue that perhaps some of this effort to beat your previous bests and getting really psyched isn't necessary but I do think you will probably be able to perform more work this way than if you approached a set more casually without the adrenaline dump and a rep goal in mind. Kind of like a powerlifter at a meet where the stakes are high psychologically - you will not be able to perform as well under normal circumstances.
Jordan Peters is a good example. If you aren't psyched this type of weight might not move at all.
https://www.instagram.com/p/B9EyWFml4eT/?igshid=1023odzo6f54p
https://www.instagram.com/p/B2MWxAhFpwe/?igshid=1ozfys1rwmujc
If this is necessary or if it might even be counterproductive can be debated.
looked like he had another rep in the hacks
-
looked like he had another rep in the hacks
Haha maybe :D
One interesting thing I've noticed is that rarely do you actually see someone fail on the angled leg press, so most of the time there's still reps in the tank. Of course it's way more draining to go to failure on quads vs biceps for example. That and the possibility you get crushed and crippled for life :D
-
One of the only top pros I can think of that made dramatic gains and brought up his “weak points” was flex Lewis. When he turned pro, his chest, back and even shoulders (lesser degree) were weak. Yes, he did gain major size, as in most pros, but his weak areas improved very noticeably, and he’s much better than he was when he was an amateur which is rare. No gut either
But most don’t really make improvements, they gain lots of mass but their gut also protrudes and they look much worse. Flex wheeler, kuclo, Dennis Wolfe, Nasser, Ruhl, branch, Many others, all look much worse later on
(https://i.redd.it/pkvhlagpvu741.jpg)
The chest improvement was quite dramatic. Sure he got bigger everywhere else but not nearly to the extent that his chest did.
You know, I remember him explaining this to his training partner during one of is videos and what he did to improve it. I dismissed it as typical bber b.s. as it's all genetics and drugs. Now, I wish I paid attention
-
I was trying to explain to some daft twat on FB that bicep peak is genetic, he kept saying that if you do DB concentration curls anyone can get peaked bicep, he then posted a pic of himself with flat biceps to validate my point
If only Levrone did concentration curls, especially if he "squeezed" at the top.
-
The Colorado Experiment?
Complete bulls*it for marketing purposes.
And you were there.
They moved all that equipment from Florida to Colorado. Huge machines that cost a fortune to ship so they could avoid the accusation of bias conducting the experiment on their own facility and employed the services of independent observer Dr. Eliot Pleas who had no bias one way of another all for marketing.
-
HIT as prescribed by Jones or Mentzer or even Yates
is something that just doesn't suit a lot of people, the level
of effort required is just not something a lot of people can do unless in a life or death situation. Then there are those few who prefer and enjoy it. There are a lot of great bodybuilders who never go to that type of failure, who never did and who never could be taught this type of effort. I think even Arnold said he couldn't train like Viator, he'd rather be a ski instructor in Austria if he had to train like that to be champion.
Charles Poliquin once said you'd need to be hopped up on amphetamines to be able to train like that. An exaggeration but there is a small point there. So program preference is also very genetic, it has a lot to do with genetic psychological make-up imo.
I'm in my sixties and have been training HIT for decades. Force reps, drop sets, negatives, pre-exhaust.... I do it not so much for muscle hypertrophy. I've realize that how your muscles respond is primarily genetic no matter how you train. I do it because I was involved in sports and wanted to develop and be accustomed to pain, exhaustion, and physical stress. I felt it got me in better physical shape and developed a toughness that can prove useful in an individual contact sport. When I would reach positive failure, when I couldn't do another complete rep by myself, then in my mind that is when the set begins. I still often say that to myself while training. When I can't quite complete the rep and have to resort to force reps or partials or drop sets I would actually say that to myself, "And now it begins"
I've been able to endure it and remain consistent by modifying frequency. Resting more between sessions. Also, having to do just one set to failure you don't have that tendency to "save yourself" for future sets. This is your one and only chance.
When I use to do a more traditional program I would get burnt out, get into a rut, having to train everyday regardless of intensity. Just going everyday gets to be a grind.
-
And you were there.
They moved all that equipment from Florida to Colorado. Huge machines that cost a fortune to ship so they could avoid the accusation of bias conducting the experiment on their own facility and employed the services of independent observer Dr. Eliot Pleas who had no bias one way of another all for marketing.
Pellius,
You are a smart man.
Read up on the BS of the Colorado Experiment.
Clever marketing by Jones. Otherwise complete bullcrap.
As far as moving equipment, they were marketing the equipment to colleges all over the country and it was done at Colorado State University.
The experiment was done only on Viator and Jones himself and never successfully repeated by anyone. Isn't that a bit odd?
Viator had previously been ill, off drugs, and Jones then encouraged him to lose even more weight so he could have a huge rebound in his bodyweight.
This is not to say training on Nautilus machines has no value. They are excellent machines. What has to be said is that no "miracle" occurred through their use. Viator could have made similar gains using free weights eating the same and using his usual drug cocktail.
-
Come on, its all bullshit, I have watched Dorians video, sure he trains hard, but he only does sets and reps to failure, many, many people train exactly the same way, some people just breeze through workouts and look fantastic
You lift things up you put them down, genetics decides the rest.
Take a weight and rep out until you cant do another rep, who cant do that?
About 95% of the people training at any commercial gym. Just randomly pick someone and watch them do their set. They will terminate that set when they could have easily done maybe 4 or 5 more reps. The vast majority just go through the motions.
I try to make the point that if you want to progress, you have to, well progress, or at least try. That was one points that Jones made that made the strongest impression on me. This was during the time when all the magazines talked about were sets, reps, and the pump. Very little on actual progression. The point Jones made, that as long as you are doing what your body is already accustom to, that exercise would do little or nothing by way of increasing size, strength, and functional ability. If you can do 8 reps at a certain weight and exercise and just keep doing that 8reps, never trying for a 9th or 10th then it will do nothing to stimulate an adaptive response.
-
Come on, its all bullshit, I have watched Dorians video, sure he trains hard, but he only does sets and reps to failure, many, many people train exactly the same way, some people just breeze through workouts and look fantastic
You lift things up you put them down, genetics decides the rest.
Take a weight and rep out until you cant do another rep, who cant do that?
About 95% of the people training at any commercial gym.
I try to make the point that if you want to progress, you have to, well progress, or at least try. That was one points that Jones made that made the strongest impression on me. This was during the time when all the magazines talked about were sets, reps, and the pump. Very little on actual progression. The point Jones made, that as long as you are doing what your body is already accustom to, that exercise would do little or nothing by way of increasing size, strength, and functional ability. If you can do 8 reps at a certain weight and exercise and just keep doing that 8reps, never trying for a 9th or 10th then it will do nothing to stimulate an adaptive response.
-
Pellius,
You are a smart man.
Read up on the BS of the Colorado Experiment.
Clever marketing by Jones. Otherwise complete bullcrap.
Having first read about the Colorado Experiment back in 1979 and still fascinated by the subject to this dayyou don't think I have read up, both pro and con, on virtually everything written about the subject in the last 40 years.
It was a serious and sincere experiment. I believe the biggest factors, though not the only ones, for Casey's transformation had to to do was his genetic predispostion, and most importantly, muscle-memory. Rebuilding previously development muscle which I think everyone can relate to. Many, due to the Chinese virus, have been forced to stop training. They soon notice how fast everything comes back once they get back in the groove. I believe that Casey, under Jones influence, exacerbated this process by encouraging Casey to make a more concerted effort to lose even more weight in his depleted and untrained condition. It would not be unrealistic to drop another additional 10 or 15 pounds for an athlete prior to the experiment which could easily be regained in a matter of days along with a corresponding increase in strength.
His weight before being injured I believe was over 200 pounds and when he started he experimented at what I believed was a very concertedly achieved depleted condition of 168 lbs. Many who have experience rapid weight loss for an athletic event know you can gain 20 pounds virtually in one day.
-
A Few Questions.
1, Is there most productive & correct way to lift weights for bodybuilding purposes?
2, Are all training methods equal?
3, So doing different exercises won’t affect the shape of a muscle Ever?
4, Is Genetic muscular response to lifting weights The most important Thing?
5, How much bearing does the origin & insertion of muscles have?
6, What about the quality of muscle fibres in a muscle?
7, And what about splitting muscle fibres?
Look forward to some interesting & thought provoking answers.
-
Having first read about the Colorado Experiment back in 1979 and still fascinated by the subject to this dayyou don't think I have read up, both pro and con, on virtually everything written about the subject in the last 40 years.
It was a serious and sincere experiment. I believe the biggest factors, though not the only ones, for Casey's transformation had to to do was his genetic predispostion, and most importantly, muscle-memory. Rebuilding previously development muscle which I think everyone can relate to. Many, due to the Chinese virus, have been forced to stop training. They soon notice how fast everything comes back once they get back in the groove. I believe that Casey, under Jones influence, exacerbated this process by encouraging Casey to make a more concerted effort to lose even more weight in his depleted and untrained condition. It would not be unrealistic to drop another additional 10 or 15 pounds for an athlete prior to the experiment which could easily be regained in a matter of days along with a corresponding increase in strength.
His weight before being injured I believe was over 200 pounds and when he started he experimented at what I believed was a very concertedly achieved depleted condition of 168 lbs. Many who have experience rapid weight loss for an athletic event know you can gain 20 pounds virtually in one day.
I can't argue with anything you have said.
Jones made excellent machines too. He walked the walk.
His theories fall flat though. You can build a shapely and attractive physique with machines but from a strength and athletic standpoint machines fall short. One of his selling points was that his machines would develop superior strength vs. free weights.
-
A Few Questions.
1, Is there most productive & correct way to lift weights for bodybuilding purposes?
For nattys do what the 1940s and 1950s pre-drug guys did.
For drug users just about anything works.
2, Are all training methods equal?
No.
3, So doing different exercises won’t affect the shape of a muscle Ever?
A little but not a lot. If you have lousy bicep peak you're stuck with it.
4, Is Genetic muscular response to lifting weights The most important Thing?
Yes and No. Hard training and proper nutrition is also important. You'll never gain bodyweight if you don't eat enough for example.
5, How much bearing does the origin & insertion of muscles have?
For appearance it is everything.
6, What about the quality of muscle fibres in a muscle?
No idea.
7, And what about splitting muscle fibres?
Genetic like muscle insertion.
-
A Few Questions.
1, Is there most productive & correct way to lift weights for bodybuilding purposes?
For nattys do what the 1940s and 1950s pre-drug guys did.
For drug users just about anything works.
2, Are all training methods equal?
No.
3, So doing different exercises won’t affect the shape of a muscle Ever?
A little but not a lot. If you have lousy bicep peak you're stuck with it.
4, Is Genetic muscular response to lifting weights The most important Thing?
Yes and No. Hard training and proper nutrition is also important. You'll never gain bodyweight if you don't eat enough for example.
5, How much bearing does the origin & insertion of muscles have?
For appearance it is everything.
6, What about the quality of muscle fibres in a muscle?
No idea.
7, And what about splitting muscle fibres?
Genetic like muscle insertion.
Ok - Thanks for your replies
I agree with most of what you say - With a couple of exceptions.
Hopefully we’ll get more replies & thoughts.
-
Is total muscle isolation possible.
And what with the front delt reference?
How do you figure all training methods are equal?
No response to the other questions?
-
I'm in my sixties and have been training HIT for decades. Force reps, drop sets, negatives, pre-exhaust.... I do it not so much for muscle hypertrophy. I've realize that how your muscles respond is primarily genetic no matter how you train. I do it because I was involved in sports and wanted to develop and be accustomed to pain, exhaustion, and physical stress. I felt it got me in better physical shape and developed a toughness that can prove useful in an individual contact sport. When I would reach positive failure, when I couldn't do another complete rep by myself, then in my mind that is when the set begins. I still often say that to myself while training. When I can't quite complete the rep and have to resort to force reps or partials or drop sets I would actually say that to myself, "And now it begins"
I've been able to endure it and remain consistent by modifying frequency. Resting more between sessions. Also, having to do just one set to failure you don't have that tendency to "save yourself" for future sets. This is your one and only chance.
When I use to do a more traditional program I would get burnt out, get into a rut, having to train everyday regardless of intensity. Just going everyday gets to be a grind.
I love intensity techniques. In my early 20s I used to do things like this.
Bench press drop set:
405 to failure
315 to failure
225 to failure + a couple of forced reps
135 to failure + negatives to failure
Bar only to failure + negatives to failure
Then I would bring my arms across my body and flex my pecs as hard as I could for 30 seconds. That was it for chest and my pecs would be sore to the touch for a whole week.
You can't do this type of a set for legs or you might end up in the hospital. I did do some hard leg stuff that left my legs sore to the touch for 13 days once. In my teens I had to stay home from school a couple of times because I could literally not walk for a couple of days. Or I could walk on flat ground but stairs were a different matter :D
-
Ok - Thanks for your replies
I agree with most of what you say - With a couple of exceptions.
Hopefully we’ll get more replies & thoughts.
You should make new thread about this. It's an interesting topic.
-
:)
-
Is total muscle isolation possible.
And what with the front delt reference?
How do you figure all training methods are equal?
No response to the other questions?
Sorry i postet & deleted by mistake.. but i opened a new Thread. And i will Answer all you're questions there ;D
-
I did it exactly as it was taught by Jones, Mentzer, etc. I still from time to time will do HIT for a couple weeks for a break in my normal routine. It's not that people don't understand it, but that they do.
humble i dont totally agree with h.i.t there is no way i would do just one set, but i do agree with the slow reps and maximum contraction
-
:)
-
:)
-
I can't argue with anything you have said.
Jones made excellent machines too. He walked the walk.
His theories fall flat. You can build a shapely and attractive physique with machines but from a strength and athletic standpoint machines fall short. One of his selling points was that his machines would develop superior strength vs. free weights.
I don't think he ever said that machines would develop superior strength vs. free weights. To me that makes no sense at all. Strength is strength. If we could take out a specific muscle group, say the bicep, and precisely measure it's maximal contractile force. Then give it a few months and apply a method to stimulate hypertrophy and measure it again. You find now the maximal contractile force has increased by 15%. Now you conduct the exact same experiment on the other bicep but use a different stimulus and find that, low and behold, you also increased the maximal contractile strength by 15%. How do you determine which strength increase is a superior increase? A superior strength? Remember, there is a difference between pure muscle contraction, the most precise method to determine the muscles ability to contract, which is the only thing a muscle does, and coordinating those contractions to initiate movements both simple and complex.
-
I can't argue with anything you have said.
Jones made excellent machines too. He walked the walk.
His theories fall flat. You can build a shapely and attractive physique with machines but from a strength and athletic standpoint machines fall short. One of his selling points was that his machines would develop superior strength vs. free weights.
Furthermore, how do machines "fall short" compared to free weights from an athletic stand point? The primary purpose of resistance training is to improve the strength, and therefore, the functional ability of a muscle to perform a certain tasks. Developing muscle strength is a completely separate issue from developing athletic ability and Jones was very adamant that the two should never be combined. Sprinting with ankle weights, or shooting hoops with a heavier basketball, simulating a golf swing on weighted cables will do far more harm than good. Each individual movement require a precise coordination of very many factors. The closer two movements are to each other the more chance of neurological confusion.
I remember I had to remember two distincit set of numbers as passwords. I had no trouble recalling them when I needed to. Then when my passwords were changed and differed by only one number: 5277 and 5272, I was constantly getting them mixed up. They were so similar that I would forget which one was for which. Neurological confusion.
You practice precise, skill based movements under the exact same conditions as your would in real life and real competition. If you start wearing ankle weights and wrist weights during basketball practice you may improve your conditioning but you will throw off your coordination skills.
An increase in general muscle strength will improve you performance in any physical endeavor.
-
Is total muscle isolation possible.
And what with the front delt reference?
How do you figure all training methods are equal?
No response to the other questions?
Why can't I find his response to you? Was it deleted?
-
I love intensity techniques. In my early 20s I used to do things like this.
Bench press drop set:
405 to failure
315 to failure
225 to failure + a couple of forced reps
135 to failure + negatives to failure
Bar only to failure + negatives to failure
Then I would bring my arms across my body and flex my pecs as hard as I could for 30 seconds. That was it for chest and my pecs would be sore to the touch for a whole week.
You can't do this type of a set for legs or you might end up in the hospital. I did do some hard leg stuff that left my legs sore to the touch for 13 days once. In my teens I had to stay home from school a couple of times because I could literally not walk for a couple of days. Or I could walk on flat ground but stairs were a different matter :D
LOL! And here we are still at it. When I think of effort versus returns I just ... never mind. We're kindred spirits in this respect.
-
Sorry i postet & deleted by mistake.. but i opened a new Thread. And i will Answer all you're questions there ;D
Ah. OK, that explains it.
-
humble i dont totally agree with h.i.t there is no way i would do just one set, but i do agree with the slow reps and maximum contraction
Just to be clear, it's one work set where you take that one set to maximum failure. There are two to three sub maximal effort warm-up sets, sometimes more depending how heavy you go. No one jumps right into 500 lb squats. You have to work your way up plate by plate.
And it is not one set per body part but one set per exercise.
-
LOL! And here we are still at it. When I think of effort versus returns I just ... never mind. We're kindred spirits in this respect.
First time I touched weights I tried to see how much I could lift and how many reps I could do. I think it's just genetics like everything else, genetic psychological makeup. Others starting out are "afraid" and try to avoid going too hard. I still remember the first time I wrote down how much I could lift as a kid... it was 75lbs on the bench press. :D I immediately realised lifting should be progressive. I remember trying to force some friends to also push themselves. Some did and some absolutely would not. They might be capable of 100lbs but would lift 50. If I was capable of 100lbs I would try 110lbs, a little too eager :D
-
Just to be clear, it's one work set where you take that one set to maximum failure. There are two to three sub maximal effort warm-up sets, sometimes more depending how heavy you go. No one jumps right into 500 lb squats. You have to work your way up plate by plate.
And it is not one set per body part but one set per exercise.
Do you squat 500lbs?
Do you work up plate by plate?
can you show us in a video?
-
Furthermore, how do machines "fall short" compared to free weights from an athletic stand point?
The answer is not just free weights but how an exercise is performed.
Balancing the weight while standing involves many more muscles. Lifting weights while standing on your feet, pushing against an unsupported weight involves the muscles that align and support the spine.
Machines do not require you to balance the weight because you are pushing against a braced object.
For example, a barbell squat develops superior strength as compared to a leg press.
A standing barbell press develops superior strength compared to a machine press.
Spend your time doing machine presses and then try the same weight with a barbell. You'll fail.
So, it's really the way an exercise is performed. You could do free weight exercises in a supported fashion and get a less optimum result.
Some NFL teams jumped all over the Nautilus machines when they came out but after a few years of their players getting crushed by teams that used the old standbys (power cleans, barbell squats, free weight bench presses, etc.) those Nautilus machines were relegated to rehab/prehab.
-
Do you squat 500lbs?
Do you work up plate by plate?
can you show us in a video?
LOL, coming from a coward who makes empty threats and now wants me to post videos when you are too afraid to even post a picture.
Why do you ignore and grow silent when it comes to posting your pic? You post my picture. You post other people's picture. But not yours. Now you want videos of me.
-
The answer is not just free weights but how an exercise is performed.
Balancing the weight while standing involves many more muscles. Lifting weights while standing on your feet, pushing against an unsupported weight involves the muscles that align and support the spine.
Machines do not require you to balance the weight because you are pushing against a braced object.
For example, a barbell squat develops superior strength as compared to a leg press.
A standing barbell press develops superior strength compared to a machine press.
Spend your time doing machine presses and then try the same weight with a barbell. You'll fail.
Some NFL teams jumped all over the Nautilus machines when they came out but after a few years of their players getting crushed by teams that used the old standbys (power cleans, barbell squats, free weight bench presses, etc.) those Nautilus machines were relegated to rehab/prehab.
Balancing a weight does involved more muscles. Sure you are using more muscles to properly preform over head dumbell presses that you would on a machine. But why and how does recruiting these anncillary muscles to maintain stability make it a better deltoid exercise? It seems to me that having other muscle help and support the movement takes aways from the targeted muscle.
The "skill" and technique to performing a particular movement is independent to actual muscle strength. That's why one can increase the resistance of a particular movement with zero corresponding increase in strength simply by doing it better and more efficiently.
This is the reason Athur Jones, when measuring strength increases before and after the experiment, used the Universal weight station. One, is that he felt measuring strength just using his machines gave the appearance of bias, and, two, the Universal weight station duplicated traditional barbell exercise but took skill, having to balance a free weight, out of the equation.
-
Balancing a weight does involved more muscles. Sure you are using more muscles to properly preform over head dumbell presses that you would on a machine. But why and how does recruiting these anncillary muscles to maintain stability make it a better deltoid exercise? It seems to me that having other muscle help and support the movement takes aways from the targeted muscle.
The "skill" and technique to performing a particular movement is independent to actual muscle strength. That's why one can increase the resistance of a particular movement with zero corresponding increase in strength simply by doing it better and more efficiently.
This is the reason Athur Jones, when measuring strength increases before and after the experiment, used the Universal weight station. One, is that he felt measuring strength just using his machines gave the appearance of bias, and, two, the Universal weight station duplicated traditional barbell exercise but took skill, having to balance a free weight, out of the equation.
For aesthetic purposes (bodybuilding), machines are just as good. Some are better even.
Jones did say his machines were superior in strength building to free weights because of the cam.
I'm only saying machines are better for total body power and strength. For athletics you want total body power, the body expressing power and strength as one unit.
The Universal machines Jones used did not require you to balance the weight. I trained a lot on the original Zinkin Universal machines in college and high school. I made good gains from a bodybuilding perspective using them but compared to free weights the strength developed was inferior since you are forced to move the weight in a fixed plane for the pressing exercises and the leg press.
They were/are excellent machines though. If I had the space I'd like to have one of them.
(https://forum.bodybuilding.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8294771&d=1462761947)
-
The answer is not just free weights but how an exercise is performed.
Balancing the weight while standing involves many more muscles. Lifting weights while standing on your feet, pushing against an unsupported weight involves the muscles that align and support the spine.
Machines do not require you to balance the weight because you are pushing against a braced object.
For example, a barbell squat develops superior strength as compared to a leg press.
A standing barbell press develops superior strength compared to a machine press.
Spend your time doing machine presses and then try the same weight with a barbell. You'll fail.
So, it's really the way an exercise is performed. You could do free weight exercises in a supported fashion and get a less optimum result.
Some NFL teams jumped all over the Nautilus machines when they came out but after a few years of their players getting crushed by teams that used the old standbys (power cleans, barbell squats, free weight bench presses, etc.) those Nautilus machines were relegated to rehab/prehab.
do not argue with Pellius, he is an expert on everything
however i do agree with him on some of Jones theories
notice i said some
isolation of any muscle is not possible, not in a strict sence
athletic performance is in most cases better trained with free weights
-
do not argue with Pellius, he is an expert on everything
however i do agree with him on some of Jones theories
notice i said some
isolation of any muscle is not possible, not in a strict sence
athletic performance is in most cases better trained with free weights
We are not arguing, we are discussing. The original Nautilus machines were great, probably the best machines ever made, but I haven't used current modern machines so I can't really say. The bicep supinator is certainly up there at the top.
The best of all worlds is to use machines and free weights, whatever is best for your purposes.
-
For aesthetic purposes (bodybuilding), machines are just as good. Some are better even.
I'm only saying machines are better for total body power and strength. For athletics you want total body power, the body expressing power and strength as one unit.
The Universal machines Jones used did not require you to balance the weight. I trained a lot on the original Zinkin Universal machines in college and high school. I made good gains from a bodybuilding perspective using them but compared to free weights the strength developed was inferior since you are forced to move the weight in a fixed plane for the pressing exercises and the leg press.
(https://forum.bodybuilding.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8294771&d=1462761947)
I did say that Jones chose the Universal station precisely because it didn't require balancing, a skill, the weight being moved.
"I'm only saying machines are better for total body power and strength. For athletics you want total body power, the body expressing power and strength as one unit."
I really don't understand what you mean by this. Machines give you total body power and strength. For athetics, and I presume you are now talking about training with free weights, you want total body power "expressed" with power and strength as a single unit.
How is machine power different from free weight power? If you got two clones both training as boxers following the exact same training program except one trained with free weights and the other on Natilus machines how would their, say, right hook differ in terms of "power". How are they're actual muscle involved in the movement contracting differently?
-
We are not arguing, we are discussing. The original Nautilus machines were great, probably the best machines ever made, but I haven't used current modern machines so I can't really say. The bicep supinator is certainly up there at the top.
The best of all worlds is to use machines and free weights, whatever is best for your purposes.
it starts that way
before you know it you will be a punk,bitch & will know he is a BJJ expert
-
We are not arguing, we are discussing. The original Nautilus machines were great, probably the best machines ever made, but I haven't used current modern machines so I can't really say. The bicep supinator is certainly up there at the top.
The best of all worlds is to use machines and free weights, whatever is best for your purposes.
I do feel that once Jones sold off Nautilus it took a downward turn, or at least didn't improve as I believe it would have under Jones. When Jones developed the MedX line it was a marked improvement over Nautilus. It solved, or drastically reduced, the problem of friction where the resistance in relation to the weight stack increases during the concentric phase of the movement and acted as a brake on the eccentric portion. Ideally you'd want the opposite. To have the eccentric phase increase rather than decrease during the course of the movement. Jone's son, Gary, improved on this by his free weight based Hammer machines. With MedX the resistance is initiated from the bottom rather than pulled from the top and the weight stack stroke is greatly reduced. In other words, the weight stack doesn't move nearly as much in relation the full range motion it is providing resistance to. Less time dragging on the glides.
If you ever have an opportunity to try a MedX machine, jump on it. It's like greased lighting. Too bad few gyms carry the equipment and it is mostly found in medical rehab facilities.
-
it starts that way
before you know it you will be a punk,bitch & will know he is a BJJ expert
Please ignore this midget troll. It is obvious he is not very intelligent and having any kind of rational discussion is impossible.
I'm mean, just look at the way he writes. His grammar and punctuation. Note he likes to write in italics and goes through the trouble of noting this but instead of using just one italic notation to cover his whole post he goes line by line. You can see this when you quote him. He just hasn't figured it out.
-
I did say that Jones chose the Universal station precisely because it didn't require balancing, a skill, the weight being moved.
"I'm only saying machines are better for total body power and strength. For athletics you want total body power, the body expressing power and strength as one unit."
I really don't understand what you mean by this. Machines give you total body power and strength. For athetics, and I presume you are now talking about training with free weights, you want total body power "expressed" with power and strength as a single unit.
How is machine power different from free weight power? If you got two clones both training as boxers following the exact same training program except one trained with free weights and the other on Natilus machines how would their, say, right hook differ in terms of "power". How are they're actual muscle involved in the movement contracting differently?
let us use your example of your 500lb squats
why then can you use double that weight on a leg press machine
-
Please ignore this midget troll. It is obvious he is not very intelligent and having any kind of rational discussion is impossible.
I'm mean, just look at the way he writes. His grammar and punctuation. Note he likes to write in italics and goes through the trouble of noting this but instead of using just one italic notation to cover his whole post he goes line by line. You can see this when you quote him. He just hasn't figured it out.
not important
I do get under your skin
you are now trying to be rational
you will lose it
-
I have a machine just like that one in my home gym. I had 2 but i recently sold 1 of them. i also have the old blue nautilus line of machines including the pullover. again i had 2 but sold 1 a year ago. I also have cybex wateman titan and others. Plus i have free weights dumbells both hex and prostyle up to 120 lbs. I use machines more now than free weights and let me tell you there is no comparision between machine strength and free weight strength. The amount of weight you can move on a machine is so much higher than free weights its not even funny.
Strength is not equal. There is much more to it than what one crazy know it all poster seems to think. Free weights mimic the bodys natural movement and uses more other muscles to help. You have to stabilize it balance it learn the movement etc. Machines you just push or pull. Also does anyone notice you can do more with pull DOWNS than you can with pull UPS. Big difference. and pull UPS are way more superior than pull DOWNS. doing pull UPS is using the body in the natural way its meant. your actually pulling the weight (you) upward. pull DOWNS your doing an unnatural movement (pulling a weight down) . i love my machines and you can get great awesome workouts but nothing beats free weights. NOTHING
-
But remember bodybuilding is not strength training. We get stronger as a side effect of building our bodies. If you train just for strength all the time you will improve your body somewhat but nothing like you will if you bodybuild. So train hard (but dont kill yourself thinking there is a heavy duty way to get there faster. lmao) use the type of equipment and exercises that YOU like or feel works for YOU. Dont copy or do what others do find what works for you. (Unlike the one know it poster on here who thinks there is one type fits all weight training strategy. ) But some helpful hints eat good FOOD ( and no not supplements nothing but expensive garbage) sleep as much as your body needs ( some need 10 hours or 8 etc . i need 5 hours or less) reach your genetic potential BEFORE you experiment with steroids if you so decide to.
-
For aesthetic purposes (bodybuilding), machines are just as good. Some are better even.
Jones did say his machines were superior in strength building to free weights because of the cam.
I'm only saying machines are better for total body power and strength. For athletics you want total body power, the body expressing power and strength as one unit.
The Universal machines Jones used did not require you to balance the weight. I trained a lot on the original Zinkin Universal machines in college and high school. I made good gains from a bodybuilding perspective using them but compared to free weights the strength developed was inferior since you are forced to move the weight in a fixed plane for the pressing exercises and the leg press.
They were/are excellent machines though. If I had the space I'd like to have one of them.
(https://forum.bodybuilding.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8294771&d=1462761947)
Fuck that's jogged an old memory for me....^
I had a mate in high school I would work out in his old mans gym, he had a well equipped good sized shed setup..
In it was that very machine you just posted. Seems almost exact, it was a solid well built machine I had some great early workouts on it! Cheers for posting..
-
I did say that Jones chose the Universal station precisely because it didn't require balancing, a skill, the weight being moved.
Sorry, my bad. I read that wrong.
-
I did say that Jones chose the Universal station precisely because it didn't require balancing, a skill, the weight being moved.
"I'm only saying machines are better for total body power and strength. For athletics you want total body power, the body expressing power and strength as one unit."
I really don't understand what you mean by this. Machines give you total body power and strength. For athetics, and I presume you are now talking about training with free weights, you want total body power "expressed" with power and strength as a single unit.
How is machine power different from free weight power? If you got two clones both training as boxers following the exact same training program except one trained with free weights and the other on Natilus machines how would their, say, right hook differ in terms of "power". How are they're actual muscle involved in the movement contracting differently?
I can't really explain it better than I did.
-
Something I noticed a long time ago is how the resistance profile of most back machines is crappy.
This dude explains why:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CENQ_d4DWzP/?igshid=1pqi2hx2mryl8
You can typically do "twice" as much weight for the first part of the movement on most machines so the whole whole movement doesn't get overloaded optimally.
-
I did say that Jones chose the Universal station precisely because it didn't require balancing, a skill, the weight being moved.
"I'm only saying machines are better for total body power and strength. For athletics you want total body power, the body expressing power and strength as one unit."
I really don't understand what you mean by this. Machines give you total body power and strength. For athetics, and I presume you are now talking about training with free weights, you want total body power "expressed" with power and strength as a single unit.
How is machine power different from free weight power? If you got two clones both training as boxers following the exact same training program except one trained with free weights and the other on Natilus machines how would their, say, right hook differ in terms of "power". How are they're actual muscle involved in the movement contracting differently?
Using the boxer example I think the one who lifted free weights would develop more punching power because of the work of the stabilizer muscles. When you lift free weights it isn't just the resistance but also the balancing and the other muscles involved like the core to keep you up and holding that weight. With machines like Nautilus that focus on 1 muscle only you are only strengthening that 1 muscle.
-
Let's say you should strengthen the "stabilizers" during your weight training if you are an athlete. So a free weight squat is better than a smith squat. Well, say you are an MMA fighter, you get into a lot of weird positions. Would a squat where you also round your back and twist your upper body be even better than a standard squat? Perhaps lift one foot off the floor during your reps? The "stabilizers" would work even harder.
I'm not an expert on training athletes but I've seen a bunch of trainers say to keep your muscle strengthening and skill development separate and that the stabilizer stuff is outdated. Though I'm sure there are other opinions out there still.
I've seen some have issue with the term stabilizer muscles itself, as there's no such thing really. There's just muscles. Though I sort of get what people mean.
-
Let's say you should strengthen the "stabilizers" during your weight training if you are an athlete. So a free weight squat is better than a smith squat. Well, say you are an MMA fighter, you get into a lot of weird positions. Would a squat where you also round your back and twist your upper body be even better than a standard squat? Perhaps lift one foot off the floor during your reps? The "stabilizers" would work even harder.
I'm not an expert on training athletes but I've seen a bunch of trainers say to keep your muscle strengthening and skill development separate and that the stabilizer stuff is outdated. Though I'm sure there are other opinions out there still.
I've seen some have issue with the term stabilizer muscles itself, as there's no such thing really. There's just muscles. Though I sort of get what people mean.
Boxers, wrestlers and MMA fighters do all kinds of exercises for stabilizers. Farmer's walk, pushing sleds, lifting sand bags, plyometrics, calisthenics, etc, etc. No fighter trains for strength exclusively on machines and most never use weight machines at all.
-
End of thread
WHOSHHHHHHHHHHHHHH TANAKA
-
not important
I do get under your skin
you are now trying to be rational
you will lose it
Coming from a guy that threatened me over PMs. You've already lost it. Nobody takes you seriously. Nobody is going to have a serious discussion with you. Nobody here even likes you other than your other gimmick Roast Beef Pecs.
-
Boxers, wrestlers and MMA fighters do all kinds of exercises for stabilizers. Farmer's walk, pushing sleds, lifting sand bags, plyometrics, calisthenics, etc, etc. No fighter trains for strength exclusively on machines and most never use weight machines at all.
Are you able to point out specific muscles that are "stabilizers" as oppose to just skeletal muscles? Is there a specific class of muscles classified as stabilizers? To me, all muscles in a sense are stabilizers in that they hold your body together along with the skeleton. But if all muscles are stabilizers then it is a meaningless term. It's just muscle.
The argument I hear is that because free weights require "stabilizing" muscles they are harder to do and therefore more productive. So the implication being is that the more unstable the environment the more productive the exercise.
If I want to target my quads, it seems to me that the more unstable the environment the less I am able to target my quads because other muscles are taking over to maintain this stable environment. If recruiting more stabilizing muscles is a good thing to stimulate hypertrophy on a targetted muscle, shouldn't squatting on a Swiss ball be more productive than typical barbell squats? Certainly, squatting on a Swiss ball is much more difficult but is it more productive? It is if your goal is to enhance your ability, your skill, in Swiss ball squatting but because all these other "stabilizing" muscles are needed to perform the movement it takes away from maximizing resistance, and therefore stimulating an adaptive response, for your quads -- again assuming that you are squatting to increase the size and strength of you quads.
Mike Mentzer once joked that if he knew how important "stabilizing" muscles were and how an unstable environment promotes this, he would have hit the gym during an earthquake instead of seeking cover.
-
Boxers, wrestlers and MMA fighters do all kinds of exercises for stabilizers. Farmer's walk, pushing sleds, lifting sand bags, plyometrics, calisthenics, etc, etc. No fighter trains for strength exclusively on machines and most never use weight machines at all.
Sure, but there's really no such thing as a stabilizer muscle. I would say a farmer walk or pushing a sled is more conditioning work. Some powerlifters do those too, they call it GPP training, general physical preparedness, general endurance. What would be a stabilizer involved in pushing a sled that can't be trained with a machine? Pushing a sled is calves, quads... pulling is like a leg extension for quads and so on. Farmers walk might involve lots of obliques, but you could do side bends on a smith machine as well. So an athlete could train on machine more for pure strength and do those other things for endurance, not so much for a particular "stabilizer", which I haven't really seen defined anywhere. Any muscle on the body could be a stabilizer, if you do a machine press your quads and glutes could be stabilizing your body during the exercise - but here's the thing, the advantage with machines is in fact that you don't need as much stabilizing. Why is it an advantage? Because this will increase the output of the target muscle! Say a seated leg curl, the hams can be hit harder due to you being locked in so the stimulus for the hamstring will be higher = faster, better results.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CDyrldFDxDj/?igshid=1csz8w8hmyxxr
Edit: didn't see Pellius's post as I was writing mine at the same time, he said much the same things. :D
-
Are you able to point out specific muscles that are "stabilizers" as oppose to just skeletal muscles? Is there a specific class of muscles classified as stabilizers? To me, all muscles in a sense are stabilizers in that they hold your body together along with the skeleton. But if all muscles are stabilizers then it is a meaningless term. It's just muscle.
The argument I hear is that because free weights require "stabilizing" muscles they are harder to do and therefore more productive. So the implication being is that the more unstable the environment the more productive the exercise.
If I want to target my quads, it seems to me that the more unstable the environment the less I am able to target my quads because other muscles are taking over to maintain this stable environment. If recruiting more stabilizing muscles is a good thing to stimulate hypertrophy on a targetted muscle, shouldn't squatting on a Swiss ball be more productive than typical barbell squats? Certainly, squatting on a Swiss ball is much more difficult but is it more productive? It is if your goal is to enhance your ability, your skill, in Swiss ball squatting but because all these other "stabilizing" muscles are needed to perform the movement it takes away from maximizing resistance, and therefore stimulating an adaptive response, for your quads -- again assuming that you are squatting to increase the size and strength of you quads.
Mike Mentzer once joked that if he knew how important "stabilizing" muscles were and how an unstable environment promotes this, he would have hit the gym during an earthquake instead of seeking cover.
pellius the med x chest press , was the best chest press i have ever used, unfortunately only seen it one time.
-
I can't really explain it better than I did.
you explained it fine
some people Just can't understand simple explanations
-
Boxers, wrestlers and MMA fighters do all kinds of exercises for stabilizers. Farmer's walk, pushing sleds, lifting sand bags, plyometrics, calisthenics, etc, etc. No fighter trains for strength exclusively on machines and most never use weight machines at all.
agree & Anyone who thinks otherwise has never trained for Real fighting
a boxer needs strong shoulders, traps to hold his Hands up. They use battle ropes now. My day a medicine Ball.
a cycist needs strong Abs, lower back. Planks for the core stabilizers. Hours in the saddle need muscle strength & endurance. Rotator cuff muscles are stabilizers, tendons & ligaments are also stabilizers better trained with free weights
-
I can't really explain it better than I did.
Often the discussion has to do not so much with agreement but with clarity. That we are talking about the same thing. When I read the various replies and comments regarding the affect of resistance coming from free weights versus machines I keep a couple of things in mind. Muscle function is relatively simple and do just one thing, and one thing only, they contract. They contract to initiate movement, the concentric phase, like pushing open a door; they contract to hold or maintain a position, the static or isometric phase, like carrying a shoebox waiting in line at a cashier; and lastly, to act as a brake or control, the eccentric or negative phase so you don't go tumbling down a flight of stairs.
Now, if I recall correctly from my classes in human physiology muscle contraction is initiated by one thing: when a signal, and impulse, travels through a nerve cell, a motor unit, to be more precise. Not going into agonizing detail a chemical reaction takes place and the relationship between the chains of proteins within the muscle cells changes leading to the contraction.
So these two are just indisputable basic facts. All a muscle fiber does is contract and how it contracts is always the same. So from a muscles perspective it doesn't matter what causes it to contract; be it from pushing a barbell over head or pushing a bar from a Universal station or Nautilus overhead press, or simply doing a front double bi in front of a mirror. The process is the same, exactly the same, and therefore the stimulus is the same. A signal and an impulse is sent and the muscle contracts.
Though this basic process is fairly simple and unchanging, the coordination of the various cascade of these contractions that initiate and perform various movements postures, and positions is quite complex. Anyone involved in any type of physical activity be it in athletics, mechanics, medicine, engineering... know that even a slight deviaton from a specific movement, a muscle contraction, can make the difference between success, failure, or even complete disaster.
Now from a bbing perspective, how a targeted muscle responds does depend on the stimulous involved, i.e., the specific movement and resistance applied to that targeted muscle. For example, say we are talking about the pull-ups versus the lat pull-down. These are virtually identical movements with the resistance in both movements starting from the top and the muscle contracting drawing the elbows down and slightly back depending on form. From the muscle's perspective the main factor is simply the resistance, the weight involved, it makes no difference whether it is the bar that is being pulled down toward your chest or your chest being pulled up to the bar. The muscle contraction is the same and to claim that the traditional pull-up is inherently more productive to muscle, to lat, hypertrophy than the lat pull-down simply does not comport with common sense. This is proven in the real world as many professional bbers never do pull-ups but have great backs. Certainly I have never seen Dorian Yates or Ronnie Coleman do traditional pull-ups and these two have some of the greatest back development of all time. Ronnie in particular use the lat pull-down as a mainstay and never pull-ups.
So, from a muscle point of view it doesn't matter where the resistance is coming from be it free weights, machines, bands, body weight... just the amount of resistance and intensity, the force of effort, applied.
-
Using the boxer example I think the one who lifted free weights would develop more punching power because of the work of the stabilizer muscles. When you lift free weights it isn't just the resistance but also the balancing and the other muscles involved like the core to keep you up and holding that weight. With machines like Nautilus that focus on 1 muscle only you are only strengthening that 1 muscle.
Are you able to break this down into more specificity? Can you give a concrete example. Like how a bench press would give you more punching power than the hammer press. What specific stabilizer and core is activated that cannot be duplicate by a machine? And, as an aside, what machine, be it Nautilus, Hammer, Flex, Hoist... that only stresses ONE muscle.
-
Often the discussion has to do not so much with agreement but with clarity. That we are talking about the same thing. When I read the various replies and comments regarding the affect of resistance coming from free weights versus machines I keep a couple of things in mind. Muscle function is relatively simple and do just one thing, and one thing only, they contract. They contract to initiate movement, the concentric phase, like pushing open a door; they contract to hold or maintain a position, the static or isometric phase, like carrying a shoebox waiting in line at a cashier; and lastly, to act as a brake or control, the eccentric or negative phase so you don't go tumbling down a flight of stairs.
Now, if I recall correctly from my classes in human physiology muscle contraction is initiated by one thing: when a signal, and impulse, travels through a nerve cell, a motor unit, to be more precise. Not going into agonizing detail a chemical reaction takes place and the relationship between the chains of proteins within the muscle cells changes leading to the contraction.
So these two are just indisputable basic facts. All a muscle fiber does is contract and how it contracts is always the same. So from a muscles perspective it doesn't matter what causes it to contract; be it from pushing a barbell over head or pushing a bar from a Universal station or Nautilus overhead press, or simply doing a front double bi in front of a mirror. The process is the same, exactly the same, and therefore the stimulus is the same. A signal and an impulse is sent and the muscle contracts.
Though this basic process is fairly simple and unchanging, the coordination of the various cascade of these contractions that initiate and perform various movements postures, and positions is quite complex. Anyone involved in any type of physical activity be it in athletics, mechanics, medicine, engineering... know that even a slight deviaton from a specific movement, a muscle contraction, can make the difference between success, failure, or even complete disaster.
Now from a bbing perspective, how a targeted muscle responds does depend on the stimulous involved, i.e., the specific movement and resistance applied to that targeted muscle. For example, say we are talking about the pull-ups versus the lat pull-down. These are virtually identical movements with the resistance in both movements starting from the top and the muscle contracting drawing the elbows down and slightly back depending on form. From the muscle's perspective the main factor is simply the resistance, the weight involved, it makes no difference whether it is the bar that is being pulled down toward your chest or your chest being pulled up to the bar. The muscle contraction is the same and to claim that the traditional pull-up is inherently more productive to muscle, to lat, hypertrophy than the lat pull-down simply does not comport with common sense. This is proven in the real world as many professional bbers never do pull-ups but have great backs. Certainly I have never seen Dorian Yates or Ronnie Coleman do traditional pull-ups and these two have some of the greatest back development of all time. Ronnie in particular use the lat pull-down as a mainstay and never pull-ups.
So, from a muscle point of view it doesn't matter where the resistance is coming from be it free weights, machines, bands, body weight... just the amount of resistance and intensity, the force of effort, applied.
you were sleeping
not surprising is the assisted pull up comes closest to a pull up
this indeed would make sense
https://juniperpublishers.com/jpfmts/pdf/JPFMTS.MS.ID.555669.pdf
-
Boxers, wrestlers and MMA fighters do all kinds of exercises for stabilizers. Farmer's walk, pushing sleds, lifting sand bags, plyometrics, calisthenics, etc, etc. No fighter trains for strength exclusively on machines and most never use weight machines at all.
Not a challenge but a genuine question, what MMA gym have you trained at that even casually broached the notion of stabilizing muscles? I've trained at various MMA gyms beginning at the R1 training center ran by former number one welterweight contender in the UFC, Frank Trigg and D1 wrestler Rico Chiapparelli, as well as several here in Hawaii.
Hawaii's MMA community is a pretty tight knit group and you see the same people at tournaments and events and get to know one another over the years and discuss various issues as it pertains to MMA. I once had a somewhat lengthy conversation with Darin Yap, Max Holloway's strength and conditioning coach, and though we seemed to cover all aspects of strength and conditioning, as Max is known for having superb conditioning, never did the notion of stabilizing muscle ever come up in the conversation. Some of the tradition methods you mentioned was used: pushing sleds, rope pumps, calisthenics and all of it's varieties, but it was always for the purpose of muscle conditioning and endurance, a quality far more important than brute strength where there are weight classes. There was no mention of any exercise that focused on stabilizing muscles as the whole concept just is even considered or recognized.
This idea of stabilizing muscles and your "core" are relatively new ideas and was never considered or a factor in bbing, even up to the 1990s, considered the era where bbing peaked. And I doubt Cus D'Amato while training Tyson and putting through his paces of various calisthenics and drills had even the slightest idea what a stabilizing muscle was.
-
Sure, but there's really no such thing as a stabilizer muscle. I would say a farmer walk or pushing a sled is more conditioning work. Some powerlifters do those too, they call it GPP training, general physical preparedness, general endurance. What would be a stabilizer involved in pushing a sled that can't be trained with a machine? Pushing a sled is calves, quads... pulling is like a leg extension for quads and so on. Farmers walk might involve lots of obliques, but you could do side bends on a smith machine as well. So an athlete could train on machine more for pure strength and do those other things for endurance, not so much for a particular "stabilizer", which I haven't really seen defined anywhere. Any muscle on the body could be a stabilizer, if you do a machine press your quads and glutes could be stabilizing your body during the exercise - but here's the thing, the advantage with machines is in fact that you don't need as much stabilizing. Why is it an advantage? Because this will increase the output of the target muscle! Say a seated leg curl, the hams can be hit harder due to you being locked in so the stimulus for the hamstring will be higher = faster, better results.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CDyrldFDxDj/?igshid=1csz8w8hmyxxr
Edit: didn't see Pellius's post as I was writing mine at the same time, he said much the same things. :D
That's fine. It was very gratifying to read. The vast majority have bought into this whole made-up concept of stabilizing muscles and the "core" which no one can seem to adequately explain or define.
-
you were sleeping
not surprising is the assisted pull up comes closest to a pull up
this indeed would make sense
https://juniperpublishers.com/jpfmts/pdf/JPFMTS.MS.ID.555669.pdf
As the discussion goes into more depth and analysis you become increasing more and more irrelevant. Still seeking approval and acceptance from strangers on a message board that universally considers you a clown
What it must like to be your age and having achieved nothing in life. Just a cowardly little man hiding behind a computer screen to make up for being bullied in real life.
It's funny reading the way you write. You sound like a third grader. Did you even graduate high school? Everything about makes you seem so uneducated and low brow. Well, you did grow up in a third world country. I bet you're amazing working in the rice paddy fields.
-
Bodybuilding is a specialized form of training and machines are just as good or better. However, I'm not referring to bodybuilding. It all comes down to having to balance the weight during the movement. The muscles involved learn to balance the body and weight together. Since most machines (not all) used for pressing have a fixed plane of motion (like a Zinkin universal) you don't have to balance the weight. A standing barbell curl requires balance. A seated dumbbell curl does not. So it's not just free weight vs. machine. It's also how an exercise is performed.
-
agree & Anyone who thinks otherwise has never trained for Real fighting
a boxer needs strong shoulders, traps to hold his Hands up. They use battle ropes now. My day a medicine Ball.
a cycist needs strong Abs, lower back. Planks for the core stabilizers. Hours in the saddle need muscle strength & endurance. Rotator cuff muscles are stabilizers, tendons & ligaments are also stabilizers better trained with free weights
LOL @ "planks". "Training" ligaments.
You really are a clueless joke. A special class of stupid.
-
Bodybuilding is a specialized form of training and machines are just as good or better. However, I'm not referring to bodybuilding. It all comes down to having to balance the weight during the movement. Since most machines (not all) used for pressing have a fixed plane of motion (like a Zinkin universal) you don't have to balance the weight. A standing barbell curl requires balance. A seated dumbbell curl does not. So it's not just free weight vs. machine. It's also how an exercise is performed.
Yes, I understand. But this gets back to the point that Van B and I made, why does having to balance a weight make it a better exercise? It certainly does take away from the targeted muscle group. I admit it is harder because it is an acquired skill but what use is that skill other than to preform that specific movement. Taking the example of squating on a Swiss ball. This certain requires far more balance than the barbell squat but does that mean it is more productive in increasing lower body strength? All it does is improve your ability to squat on a Swiss ball which has zero practical application.
One does reach a point where doing a particular free weight movement, be it the bench press or squat, where after months and years of performing that particular movement that the notion of skill, the balancing/stabilizing of the muscles no longer becomes a factor because of the coordination skills develop over the years. You've trained your body to get into the proper groove that's ingrained in you. I am reminded of this whenever I see someone first starting to do bench press. To me the bench press is such a simply movement and I perform it the same way effortlessly. No real conscious effort is require to smoothly bring that bar up and down. But when I see a neophyte it's almost astounding if not comical seeing the difficulty they have doing this movement. The way the bring the bar to low then too hight and are unable to push at an even pressure so the bar starts tilting this way and that.
-
LOL @ "planks". "Training" ligaments.
You really are a clueless joke. A special class of stupid.
no you are full of shit
all talk & no action
a fraud
Global Stabilizer Muscles and their function
http://www.marchellerdc.com/pro_resources/Articles/DC_65_globalStabilizers.pdf
-
LOL @ "planks". "Training" ligaments.
You really are a clueless joke. A special class of stupid.
What’s wrong with planks?
-
What’s wrong with planks?
nothing..TUT
i used the example of a cyclist because i have a good friend who is a professional cyclist
i know his training plan
-
Not a challenge but a genuine question, what MMA gym have you trained at that even casually broached the notion of stabilizing muscles? I've trained at various MMA gyms beginning at the R1 training center ran by former number one welterweight contender in the UFC, Frank Trigg and D1 wrestler Rico Chiapparelli, as well as several here in Hawaii.
Hawaii's MMA community is a pretty tight knit group and you see the same people at tournaments and events and get to know one another over the years and discuss various issues as it pertains to MMA. I once had a somewhat lengthy conversation with Darin Yap, Max Holloway's strength and conditioning coach, and though we seemed to cover all aspects of strength and conditioning, as Max is known for having superb conditioning, never did the notion of stabilizing muscle ever come up in the conversation. Some of the tradition methods you mentioned was used: pushing sleds, rope pumps, calisthenics and all of it's varieties, but it was always for the purpose of muscle conditioning and endurance, a quality far more important than brute strength where there are weight classes. There was no mention of any exercise that focused on stabilizing muscles as the whole concept just is even considered or recognized.
This idea of stabilizing muscles and your "core" are relatively new ideas and was never considered or a factor in bbing, even up to the 1990s, considered the era where bbing peaked. And I doubt Cus D'Amato while training Tyson and putting through his paces of various calisthenics and drills had even the slightest idea what a stabilizing muscle was.
They might not use the term stabilizers but almost every exercise you do in a boxing or MMA gym works multiple muscles or even the whole body at once. I have never seen a Nautilus machine used by any fighter. Do they have Nautilus machines in your MMA gym?
Brooks Kubik's book Dinosaur Training: Lost Secrets of Strength and Development covers stabilizer muscles for athletes extensively.
http://www.brookskubik.com/
-
no you are full of shit
all talk & no action
a fraud
Global Stabilizer Muscles and their function
http://www.marchellerdc.com/pro_resources/Articles/DC_65_globalStabilizers.pdf
I've posted pics of where I live, the shape I'm in, where I work, and accepted your challenge you made to me except I am the one who has to come to you.
You have never backed up anything you have ever said. You hide behind a computer too afraid to even show your face.
Once again: Pellius > Escrima by every measure. Prove me wrong. Just one example.
-
They might not use the term stabilizers but almost every exercise you do in a boxing or MMA gym works multiple muscles or even the whole body at once. I have never seen a Nautilus machine used by any fighter. Do they have Nautilus machines in your MMA gym?
Brooks Kubik's book Dinosaur Training: Lost Secrets of Strength and Development covers stabilizer muscles for athletes extensively.
http://www.brookskubik.com/
Yes, pretty much every exercise you do requires other muscle to "stabilize" your body, but so what? You need your calves to do standing shoulder presses. You need your calves just to stand. Does that make it an effective calf exercise?
If you want to work your "core" to any appreciable degree which I am told is compose of the abs, obliques, and lower back then you do sit-ups, leg raises, side bends, and deadlifts and not do ballet movement carrying 2 lb dumbbells or holding yourself in unnatural positions until your trainer finishes texting his boy friend.
When doing a bench press even while lying down an inherently stable position you have to use so many other muscles to maintain that position while actually benching, starting from your feet, legs, glutes, lower back... pretty much your whole body acts as a stabilizer. With, say, the Hammer chest press you are pretty much supported all over and even the most uncoordinated person can do this. Now I know you think I am making your point but consider that you took the bench on a bench press and cut it half so that now you have 50% less surface area to rest your back. This would require even more stabilization. Stabilzation in the exact same way as the regular bench except now it is even more exaggerated. Would that be an improvement? Would a boxer be able to punch harder now? Now that he's made an exercise much harder and unstable?
He certainly would improve his skill in benching in an unstable environment but would this transfer to real world functional ability. It certain would compromise his ability to strengthen the targeted muscle group because so many other muscles and the skill required to do the movement would compromise his ability to maximize the load or resistance on the targeted muscle. Just like no matter how good you get at Swiss Ball squatting you will never be able to use nearly the weight that you could use doing a regular squat and therefore never provide the stimulus or over load for muscle hypertrophy. But it will make you great at squatting on a Swiss Ball.
Again, all these arguments is assuming that the purpose to increase the size, strength, and functional ability of a targeted muscle whether that muscle is used to show off to schmoes, punch someone in the face, or throw a baseball over 90mph.
-
They might not use the term stabilizers but almost every exercise you do in a boxing or MMA gym works multiple muscles or even the whole body at once. I have never seen a Nautilus machine used by any fighter. Do they have Nautilus machines in your MMA gym?
Brooks Kubik's book Dinosaur Training: Lost Secrets of Strength and Development covers stabilizer muscles for athletes extensively.
http://www.brookskubik.com/
In regard to the type of equipment we have in the various MMA gyms it's very little. It's an MMA gym and not a place for muscle building. We do have some machines such as the hammer underhand pull-down, a leg curl machine, Smith Machine but probably the most important, at least by my perspective, is the Nautilus neck machine. No machine has ever been created that can duplicate another example of Arthur Jones genius and hit the neck from all possible angles: side to side, front to back, back to front, twisting left and twisting right.
A strong neck is a must for wrestler and grapplers. You can't find them anywhere these days because most people train for looks and function and can't be bothered with neck work.
(http://www.drdarden.com/forum_images/3a899-NautilusGirlValerieClement.jpg)
-
What’s wrong with planks?
Can you tell me how planks has helped you in anyway? Did your abs become more developed? Did your squat or bench increase? Were you able to run faster? If you stopped doing planks would you even notice?
Do you think there's been any improvement at all in physiques or athletic performance due to planks?
-
Can you tell me how planks has helped you in anyway? Did your abs become more developed? Did your squat or bench increase? Were you able to run faster? If you stopped doing planks would you even notice?
Do you think there's been any improvement at all in physiques or athletic performance due to planks?
I feel they are horse shit.
-
I've posted pics of where I live, the shape I'm in, where I work, and accepted your challenge you made to me except I am the one who has to come to you.
You have never backed up anything you have ever said. You hide behind a computer too afraid to even show your face.
Once again: Pellius > Escrima by every measure. Prove me wrong. Just one example.
You are going round in circles
a weasel chasing its tail
you were run off the other thread
you accepted no challenge made
you are no fighter but a broken down old man
trying to stay relevant to a younger audience
your decline on this board is painful to watch
-
I feel they are horse shit.
Here is the world record holder for holding the plank position. 8 hours, 15 minutes, 15 seconds. His regular routing is 3-4 hours in the plank position per day. Imagine that? 3-4 hours just doing a plank. Doesn't anybody think his great condition would be any less if he dropped the plank entirely and just do his regular very intense daily routine. I would think the quality of his life would increase markedly unless he truly enjoys just holding an awkward position for 3-4 hours everyday. And why the plank position? Why not turn around and balance yourself with just your hands and feet and hold that for hours on end?
Unless you are a professional athlete, exercise and physical fitness should be use to enhance the quality of your life not be your life. I guess if you are low IQ and can't think of anything else to do to enjoy life then I guess it's OK. Me, I'd rather spend those 4 hours on the beach enjoying the sun and surf.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/23/us/new-planking-world-record-trnd/index.html#:~:text=But%20George%20Hood%2C%20who%20set,confirmed%20was%20the%20new%20record.
-
another great exercise
-
Here is the world record holder for holding the plank position. 8 hours, 15 minutes, 15 seconds. His regular routing is 3-4 hours in the plank position per day. Imagine that? 3-4 hours just doing a plank. Doesn't anybody think his great condition would be any less if he dropped the plank entirely and just do his regular very intense daily routine. I would think the quality of his life would increase markedly unless he truly enjoys just holding an awkward position for 3-4 hours everyday. And why the plank position? Why not turn around and balance yourself with just your hands and feet and hold that for hours on end?
Unless you are a professional athlete, exercise and physical fitness should be use to enhance the quality of your life not be your life. I guess if you are low IQ and can't think of anything else to do to enjoy life then I guess it's OK. Me, I'd rather spend those 4 hours on the beach enjoying the sun and surf.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/23/us/new-planking-world-record-trnd/index.html#:~:text=But%20George%20Hood%2C%20who%20set,confirmed%20was%20the%20new%20record.
some of us have to work a real job
this just proves you are a bum
you spend all day at the beach & trolling on a bodybuilding site(s)
probably not just this site
-
One of the iconic bodybuilding photos of the freak in his prime
-
8)
-
:o
-
:)
-
A young Ronnie Coleman with Dillet
-
Some of the greatest genetics ever seen in bodybuilding
-
Johnny1,
How dare you post pictures of Dillett in a thread about Dillett!
Let's get back on topic: "escrima vs. Pellius".
-
Johnny1,
How dare you post pictures of Dillett in a thread about Dillett!
Let's get back on topic: "escrima vs. Pellius".
lol.... ;D
-
8)
-
Johnny1,
How dare you post pictures of Dillett in a thread about Dillett!
Let's get back on topic: "escrima vs. Pellius".
ALL threads should be about this!
-
ALL threads should be about this!
Kwon-the-money.
-
8)
-
Some of the greatest genetics ever seen in bodybuilding
Talk about zero weak points in those pics from the front.
-
Talk about zero weak points in those pics from the front.
Just shows how tough the competition was in those days.
-
Talk about zero weak points in those pics from the front.
From the front he could hang with anyone.
-
Some of the best legs ever. Size, condition, shape. Are they the best?
-
Here is the world record holder for holding the plank position. 8 hours, 15 minutes, 15 seconds. His regular routing is 3-4 hours in the plank position per day. Imagine that? 3-4 hours just doing a plank. Doesn't anybody think his great condition would be any less if he dropped the plank entirely and just do his regular very intense daily routine. I would think the quality of his life would increase markedly unless he truly enjoys just holding an awkward position for 3-4 hours everyday. And why the plank position? Why not turn around and balance yourself with just your hands and feet and hold that for hours on end?
Unless you are a professional athlete, exercise and physical fitness should be use to enhance the quality of your life not be your life. I guess if you are low IQ and can't think of anything else to do to enjoy life then I guess it's OK. Me, I'd rather spend those 4 hours on the operating table due to my stupidity.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/23/us/new-planking-world-record-trnd/index.html#:~:text=But%20George%20Hood%2C%20who%20set,confirmed%20was%20the%20new%20record.
yes we see where your training got you
-
Just shows how tough the competition was in those days.
If he showed up 5 years earlier....... but the same could be said about a lot of guys. Insulin and GH created giants.
-
yes we see where your training got you
Pellius is more than capable of answering & dealing with you.
Only wether you like him or not He posts pics up of himself & on this Forum anybody that does
Is in a Minority & That alone Makes Them easy targets for Those That Don’t post pics.
Post yours up for comparison & criticism.
You Won’t.
-
If you can find the few pics of Dillett at the 94 Arnold, before he locked up and had to be carried off. He looks unbelieveable. He would have beaten Levrone, if he could have made through the prejudging. Thanks to Romano and his lasix.
-
nothing..TUT
i used the example of a cyclist because i have a good friend who is a professional cyclist
i know his training plan
LOL @ "friends". You have no friends. I have posted many pics over the years with me and my family and friends. You, nothing. Just talk.
-
You are going round in circles
a weasel chasing its tail
you were run off the other thread
you accepted no challenge made
you are no fighter but a broken down old man
trying to stay relevant to a younger audience
your decline on this board is painful to watch
I wasn't run off anywhere. I accepted your challenge. If you missed it, I'll say it here again, I accept your challenge. But unlike me where when I make a challenge it is my responsibility to see it through and go to the person. You, in your cowardly way, expect me to fly out to meet you to follow through on a challenge you made.
Everyone sees what a coward you are. You have not gotten one person except your gimmick, Roast Beef, to back you. Everyone sees what a joke you are. And it's not painful to me. It's hilarious as you keeping digging you own hole deeper trying to convince people otherwise.
I'm still waiting for you to follow through with your challenge.
-
another great exercise
Too bad you've haven't tried it.
-
If you can find the few pics of Dillett at the 94 Arnold, before he locked up and had to be carried off. He looks unbelieveable. He would have beaten Levrone, if he could have made through the prejudging. Thanks to Romano and his lasix.
Anyone who overdosed on lasix looks great... until they almost die.
When Dillett took normal levels of diuretics, he was always smooth... especially his back.
-
some of us have to work a real job
this just proves you are a bum
you spend all day at the beach & trolling on a bodybuilding site(s)
probably not just this site
Your lack of education and basic reading comprehension is again clearly evident. You don't see the difference between "I'd rather" and "I do".
I have a job. I posted pictures of where I work. I've posted a pic of my security clearance badge before I retired from Raytheon. I back up what I say with proof and evidence.
As for you -- nothing, your average post count is over 30% higher than mine. By the real evidence and proof presented it is you that are unemployed and just sit on this board all day waiting for me to post.
Pellius again winning by facts, proof, and evidence.
-
yes we see where your training got you
LOL. Still going through my post history. Talk about complete ownage. It took you quite a while to find a pic of my legs where I've been limping around for months and finally admitting that I need to have surgery. This was take the day before my full knee replacement.
Where's your pic? Exactly.
Before the injury took it's toll. A level of development and conditioning you have never achieved ever in your life.
-
Pellius is more than capable of answering & dealing with you.
Only wether you like him or not He posts pics up of himself & on this Forum anybody that does
Is in a Minority & That alone Makes Them easy targets for Those That Don’t post pics.
Post yours up for comparison & criticism.
You Won’t.
Of course he won't. He knows what he looks like.
He's getting desperate for board approval since he knows no one here likes him and he's now frantically going through my post history to find some dirt. I've been able to transform his whole existence to checking my most recent posts first thing when he's on this board, replying to me, going through my over 10,000 posts. Complete ownage.
A nervous break down is forthcoming.
-
LOL. Still going through my post history. Talk about complete ownage. It took you quite a while to find a pic of my legs where I've been limping around for months and finally admitting that I need to have surgery. This was take the day before my full knee replacement.
Where's your pic? Exactly.
Before the injury took it's toll. A level of development and conditioning you have never achieved ever in your life.
Great legs there mate, awesome condition and as big as legs ever need to be outside pro bodybuilding
-
Johnny1,
How dare you post pictures of Dillett in a thread about Dillett!
Let's get back on topic: "escrima vs. Pellius".
If you guys are willing to tolerate some lonely, cowardly, little punk highjacking a thread it's going to happen. People should know by now, after over a decade on this board, that I don't start shit but if someone is going to pick a fight with me I'm going to the death. Note on this thread we were having a civil discussion and then this troll rears his ugly head with unprovoked insults. And I only reply, only react, to his insults. He shuts up, I shut up. I would much rather have a civil discussion where we can learn from each other than trash talk with an uneducated low life like him that the board had proven repeatedly they don't want since he's been chased off before.
There use to be a concept called stigma. Where certain behavior was simply not tolerated. You didn't need laws and police enforcement. It was society's way of keeping people in line and defining acceptable behaviour. When I was a kid if you were pissing in public, pan handling, being loud and obnoxious, people use to say something. Now they just accept it. They accept it but in the same breath complain about it. You get what you are willing to tolerate.
Guys like Escrima should be chased off the board. He adds nothing to this board other than contributing to it's steady decline that so many people here complain about. It should be a clue since he knows so much of this board's history that he's been here for a long time and has been run off before.
Heres where it began with my comment about muscle wasting away regardless of whether you did steroids or not.
LOL. NO muscles last. Your muscles waste away as you age (sarcopenia) no matter what you do.
in your case it´s spongiform encephalopathy
your Brain is wasted
-
Great legs there mate, awesome condition and as big as legs ever need to be outside pro bodybuilding
Thanks. One set of leg extension, followed immediately by one set of the Hoist or Hammer leg press, followed by one set of the Hammer V-squat though I much prefer the hack squat because it keeps your back straight. The V-squat bends the upper portion forward as you squat down which prevents me from going below parallel as I would be crushed with my chest to my knees but they got rid of the Hack machine. These are all done HIT style with various intensity variable (forced reps, rest pause, partials ...). I do this once a week and though the leg routine goes pretty fast (about 15 minutes) I'm sucking wind big time.
BTW, I got an email from JPJ and she mentioned something about a pic she sent to you. She said to say "hi" to the board. She's been travelling a bit (went to Scotland) but is now focused on getting a new motorcycle and truck (down to the Ram and Ford).
-
Great legs there mate, awesome condition and as big as legs ever need to be outside pro bodybuilding
BTW, because of you, I'm starting to use the term "take away" instead of "take out" like we say here. It always gets a comment or a strange look. Kind of the look I had when I first heard you say it.
-
If you can find the few pics of Dillett at the 94 Arnold, before he locked up and had to be carried off. He looks unbelieveable. He would have beaten Levrone, if he could have made through the prejudging. Thanks to Romano and his lasix.
ND would be the man for those photos...This is one of those photos he was in best ever condition (according too most) shame he didn’t actually finish the contest however if memory serves correct he actually came back later in the night after his trip too the hospital and thanked the crowd and well wishes
-
If you can find the few pics of Dillett at the 94 Arnold, before he locked up and had to be carried off. He looks unbelieveable. He would have beaten Levrone, if he could have made through the prejudging. Thanks to Romano and his lasix.
ronnie repster, dillett was the only beast i thought back then if he brought his back up could have beaten yates from the front, i dont think anyone in history could match dillett he was scary
-
I wonder if in his mind he thinks he's doing a front double bi or a victory pose ..
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=667856.0;attach=1265983;image)
-
Thanks. One set of leg extension, followed immediately by one set of the Hoist or Hammer leg press, followed by one set of the Hammer V-squat though I much prefer the hack squat because it keeps your back straight. The V-squat bends the upper portion forward as you squat down which prevents me from going below parallel as I would be crushed with my chest to my knees but they got rid of the Hack machine. These are all done HIT style with various intensity variable (forced reps, rest pause, partials ...). I do this once a week and though the leg routine goes pretty fast (about 15 minutes) I'm sucking wind big time.
BTW, I got an email from JPJ and she mentioned something about a pic she sent to you. She said to say "hi" to the board. She's been travelling a bit (went to Scotland) but is now focused on getting a new motorcycle and truck (down to the Ram and Ford).
It turned you into a cripple
-
If you guys are willing to tolerate some lonely, cowardly, little punk highjacking a thread it's going to happen. People should know by now, after over a decade on this board, that I don't start shit but if someone is going to pick a fight with me I'm going to the death. Note on this thread we were having a civil discussion and then this troll rears his ugly head with unprovoked insults. And I only reply, only react, to his insults. He shuts up, I shut up. I would much rather have a civil discussion where we can learn from each other than trash talk with an uneducated low life like him that the board had proven repeatedly they don't want since he's been chased off before.
There use to be a concept called stigma. Where certain behavior was simply not tolerated. You didn't need laws and police enforcement. It was society's way of keeping people in line and defining acceptable behaviour. When I was a kid if you were pissing in public, pan handling, being loud and obnoxious, people use to say something. Now they just accept it. They accept it but in the same breath complain about it. You get what you are willing to tolerate.
Guys like Escrima should be chased off the board. He adds nothing to this board other than contributing to it's steady decline that so many people here complain about. It should be a clue since he knows so much of this board's history that he's been here for a long time and has been run off before.
Heres where it began with my comment about muscle wasting away regardless of whether you did steroids or not.
i should be chased off the Board? 😂
begging people to back you up?
Geeze..owned your ass
-
Of course he won't. He knows what he looks like.
He's getting desperate for board approval since he knows no one here likes him and he's now frantically going through my post history to find some dirt. I've been able to transform his whole existence to checking my most recent posts first thing when he's on this board, replying to me, going through my over 10,000 posts. Complete ownage.
A nervous break down is forthcoming.
True 👍🏻
I can’t stand the Sado gimmick - A Pathetic Specimen for sure.
Don’t rise to him & Treat Him with the Contempt he so Deserves.
-
Thanks. One set of leg extension, followed immediately by one set of the Hoist or Hammer leg press, followed by one set of the Hammer V-squat though I much prefer the hack squat because it keeps your back straight. The V-squat bends the upper portion forward as you squat down which prevents me from going below parallel as I would be crushed with my chest to my knees but they got rid of the Hack machine. These are all done HIT style with various intensity variable (forced reps, rest pause, partials ...). I do this once a week and though the leg routine goes pretty fast (about 15 minutes) I'm sucking wind big time.
BTW, I got an email from JPJ and she mentioned something about a pic she sent to you. She said to say "hi" to the board. She's been travelling a bit (went to Scotland) but is now focused on getting a new motorcycle and truck (down to the Ram and Ford).
Sounds good routine mate I just started something similar a few weeks back (not as intense as yours though) as knees are too knackered for heavy work now so been doing leg extensions warm ups then one top set of 50 reps then old fashioned vertical leg press one top set of 30 then Olympic pause squats One set of 20, train at home so options for legs are limited, I’d be more than happy to one day build legs the size and condition yours are in the photo you posted
Haha yes Jane sent me the best photo I’ve seen yet, she is in fantastic shape that ass is truly immense, was just speaking through email she mentioned you and her had been discussing her new truck, would like to see photos when she decides and gets one, Jane is great really enjoy hearing from her hope she back here soon
-
ever notice when some people post pics its just of their body parts and you cant see their face to determine if in fact they belong to that person or are just pics they got off internet and are trying to convince people that it is them. smh. until i see the whole pics i dont believe anything. anyways yes dilette was a freak, thats why his nickname was "frankenstein". very large guy who responded to drugs very well. light training ( actually lazy) but his response was amazing. nearly died on stage once. he had a good back but not great. he couldnt "see it" so he didnt train or pose it good enough. now he is as thin as an aids patient.
-
ever notice when some people post pics its just of their body parts and you cant see their face to determine if in fact they belong to that person or are just pics they got off internet and are trying to convince people that it is them. smh. until i see the whole pics i dont believe anything. anyways yes dilette was a freak, thats why his nickname was "frankenstein". very large guy who responded to drugs very well. light training ( actually lazy) but his response was amazing. nearly died on stage once. he had a good back but not great. he couldnt "see it" so he didnt train or pose it good enough. now he is as thin as an aids patient.
If he wasn't thin now he probably wouldn't be alive.
-
Thanks. One set of leg extension, followed immediately by one set of the Hoist or Hammer leg press, followed by one set of the Hammer V-squat though I much prefer the hack squat because it keeps your back straight. The V-squat bends the upper portion forward as you squat down which prevents me from going below parallel as I would be crushed with my chest to my knees but they got rid of the Hack machine. These are all done HIT style with various intensity variable (forced reps, rest pause, partials ...). I do this once a week and though the leg routine goes pretty fast (about 15 minutes) I'm sucking wind big time.
But, but, but...HIT of any sort just doesn't work! ;)
-
If you can find the few pics of Dillett at the 94 Arnold, before he locked up and had to be carried off. He looks unbelieveable. He would have beaten Levrone, if he could have made through the prejudging. Thanks to Romano and his lasix.
That would have been a real feather in his cap, too, because Kevin and Vince Taylor both looked amazing at that show.
Still, it seems KLo agreed with you. He was quoted, "The only guy harder than Paul in Columbus that day was in the morgue."
-
It turned you into a cripple
Wrong again. I have never ever injured myself training with weights. I never bought into the throwing around weights trying to impress others.
Unlike you, I actually engage in a sport and an activity that involved a lot of violent body contact. That's where I got all of my injuries, and there were many. Something you would know nothing about. Standing in front of a mirror swinging and dancing with sticks is quite safe.
-
Lol is that duct tape?
-
i should be chased off the Board? 😂
begging people to back you up?
Geeze..owned your ass
You were chased off.
I don't have to beg anybody to back me up. They do because I tell the truth and back it up. You are just another shit talking coward that hide behind a computer screen. No one respects a coward. No one repects you.
-
True 👍🏻
I can’t stand the Sado gimmick - A Pathetic Specimen for sure.
Don’t rise to him & Treat Him with the Contempt he so Deserves.
Nobody can stand this cowardly gimmick. That's why he's become so obsessed with me and I am firmly implanted in his mind. I'm always in his head. Even refers to me in totally unrelated threads.
He feels the world closing in on him and he's nearing a nervous breakdown.
-
Sounds good routine mate I just started something similar a few weeks back (not as intense as yours though) as knees are too knackered for heavy work now so been doing leg extensions warm ups then one top set of 50 reps then old fashioned vertical leg press one top set of 30 then Olympic pause squats One set of 20, train at home so options for legs are limited, I’d be more than happy to one day build legs the size and condition yours are in the photo you posted
Haha yes Jane sent me the best photo I’ve seen yet, she is in fantastic shape that ass is truly immense, was just speaking through email she mentioned you and her had been discussing her new truck, would like to see photos when she decides and gets one, Jane is great really enjoy hearing from her hope she back here soon
I'm pretty sure she'll be back, if she wants to. She has a lot going on in life and sometimes when you are off the board for a while you realize you're might be better off. Still, hope for her return. She really liven things up and is good for the board. Just don't piss her off. You probably know what she does for a living so you know she's no dummy.
-
So, JPJ is really a woman by birth and not a changeling?
-
So, JPJ is really a woman by birth and not a changeling?
of course he is a woman..FFS ;D
-
I'm pretty sure she'll be back, if she wants to. She has a lot going on in life and sometimes when you are off the board for a while you realize you're might be better off. Still, hope for her return. She really liven things up and is good for the board. Just don't piss her off. You probably know what she does for a living so you know she's no dummy.
Yes know what she does for living it’s immense basically as top as can be career wise in my eyes, I’d never piss her off as I like her and think her sense of humour is great, That said I’m honest about everything on here so couldn’t be exposed as a bullshitter like xfactor was, have put my photos Up, what I do for living ect
-
:)
He was huge, a monster
-
ever notice when some people post pics its just of their body parts and you cant see their face to determine if in fact they belong to that person or are just pics they got off internet and are trying to convince people that it is them. smh. until i see the whole pics i dont believe anything. anyways yes dilette was a freak, thats why his nickname was "frankenstein". very large guy who responded to drugs very well. light training ( actually lazy) but his response was amazing. nearly died on stage once. he had a good back but not great. he couldnt "see it" so he didnt train or pose it good enough. now he is as thin as an aids patient.
i wrote even down to my writting. im not gonna respond back. im a man. a real man. not a keyboard tuff guy. and no i wont show pics of myself so some of you fags can jack off. or post them elsewhere. smh. and ive noticed this one person who "brags" about his body wil show body pics with no face or face pics fully clothed. looking to be about 140 lbs. like a marathon runner NOT bodybuilder
Oh brother, how many times have you told me this? This is rich coming from someone who would never in a million years post a pic of himself because of the laughter and mocking that would ensue. And you use that tired old excuse that worked back in 2005 that you don't want people here jacking off to your pics. LOL! You really have the audacity to claim that people here, even gays, would be even remotely attracted to a old fat sack of shit like you?
It really, really bothers you that I disagree with you regarding Mentzer and Jones. It really got in your head. That says a lot about your ego. You accuse me of being a know it all when I welcome dissent, and disagreement, and engage in debate willing to back up my arguments and opinons. You just want to spout off with your unproven opinions and state it as fact and not subject to debate. You talk like you actually were there watching Mentzer and Viator train. That you ducked out in the middle of the night with Casey and Mike to "sneak in" an additional workout and smuggle in steroids. Fine. Preach on. Leave it that. You don't have the knowledge, proof, evidence and balls to defend your views and that's fine with me. I'll let it go. I won't waste my time with just a talker.
But I am flattered that you think the pics I post are so good and need a face pic to go with it to prove it's really me. And that's considering the fact that I never considered, nor have an aspirations, to be a bber. A bber builds his body. He has to eat and try to get bigger. I haven't done that seriously since I was in my mid twenties and only occassionally had periods where I attempted to gain weight. For the vast majority of my adult life I competed in a sport that had weight classes and I specificially kept a strict diet to keep my weight down to 185 lbs at over six feet tall. That's not bbing, my all-knowing friend.
I don't have a full lenght mirror and never went through the trouble of getting one so I can post full length pics for you. When I would post pics that included my face people would claim that I am hiding my abs. You're the only one that claims I don't post my face because it really isn't my body but something I took off the net. Really? You think I look that good?
Well, unlike guys like you and Escrima, and the majority of others on this board, I back up what I say. So while you remain in hiding ashamed to show yourself so you can continue to talk shit about others and not get laughed at, here is a pic that has been posted here before that includes face and body. Flame all you want. Claim that I don't look like I work out and in your words, "look more like a marathon runner". The actual facts are I have don't hide. I have the balls to show my face in public. You are just another one of the countless, faceless, cowards that talk shit behind a computer.
Jeeze, when it comes to phony, cowardly, shit talkers like you, I'm just a fuking owning machine. I keep backing up and proving the facelss COWARDS wrong again, and again, and again.
Believe it now, bitch?
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=295769.0;attach=803026;image)
-
Yes know what she does for living it’s immense basically as top as can be career wise in my eyes, I’d never piss her off as I like her and think her sense of humour is great, That said I’m honest about everything on here so couldn’t be exposed as a bullshitter like xfactor was, have put my photos Up, what I do for living ect
Yup, you're one of the good guys around here. If your ever in the States I'll treat you to some "take away". LOL!
-
Oh brother, how many times have you told me this? This is rich coming from someone who would never in a million years post a pic of himself because of the laughter and mocking that would ensue. And you use that tired old excuse that worked back in 2005 that you don't want people here jacking off to your pics. LOL! You really have the audacity to claim that people here, even gays, would be even remotely attracted to a old fat sack of shit like you?
It really, really bothers you that I disagree with you regarding Mentzer and Jones. It really got in your head. That says a lot about your ego. You accuse me of being a know it all when I welcome dissent, and disagreement, and engage in debate willing to back up my arguments and opinons. You just want to spout off with your unproven opinions and state it as fact and not subject to debate. You talk like you actually were there watching Mentzer and Viator train. That you ducked out in the middle of the night with Casey and Mike to "sneak in" an additional workout and smuggle in steroids. Fine. Preach on. Leave it that. You don't have the knowledge, proof, evidence and balls to defend your views and that's fine with me. I'll let it go. I won't waste my time with just a talker.
But I am flattered that you think the pics I post are so good and need a face pic to go with it to prove it's really me. And that's considering the fact that I never considered, nor have an aspirations, to be a bber. A bber builds his body. He has to eat and try to get bigger. I haven't done that seriously since I was in my mid twenties and only occassionally had periods where I attempted to gain weight. For the vast majority of my adult life I competed in a sport that had weight classes and I specificially kept a strict diet to keep my weight down to 185 lbs at over six feet tall. That's not bbing, my all-knowing friend.
I don't have a full lenght mirror and never went through the trouble of getting one so I can post full length pics for you. When I would post pics that included my face people would claim that I am hiding my abs. You're the only one that claims I don't post my face because it really isn't my body but something I took off the net. Really? You think I look that good?
Well, unlike guys like you and Escrima, and the majority of others on this board, I back up what I see. So while you remain in hiding ashamed to show yourself so you can continue to talk shit about others and not get laughed at, here is a pic that has been posted here before that includes face and body. Flame all you want. Claim that I don't look like I work out and in your words, "look more like a marathon runner". The actual facts are I have don't hide. I have the balls to show my face in public. You are just another one of the countless, faceless, cowards that talk shit behind a computer.
Jeeze, when it comes to phony, cowardly, shit talkers like you, I'm just a fuking owning machine. I keep backing up and proving the facelss COWARDS wrong again, and again, and again.
Believe it now, bitch?
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=295769.0;attach=803026;image)
Creepy old pest
we know your history :-X
-
what concentration camp were you in? you still there? there is a thing called grocery stores . maybe you should buy some food. oh and look for a thing called a gym. they have weights and machines and things that can help you build some muscle. i never said i thought any of your pics looked good. because they dont. you may need some mental health help too. you seem to really think highly of yourself. smh. and your safe posting your pics cuz not even fags would jack off to those.. so go ahead and respond with your typical tuff guy name calling responses. im not gonna respond. im a man. i have things to do all day besides argue with a dweeb on a forum.
-
what concentration camp were you in? you still there? there is a thing called grocery stores . maybe you should buy some food. oh and look for a thing called a gym. they have weights and machines and things that can help you build some muscle. i never said i thought any of your pics looked good. because they dont. you may need some mental health help too. you seem to really think highly of yourself. smh. and your safe posting your pics cuz not even fags would jack off to those.. so go ahead and respond with your typical tuff guy name calling responses. im not gonna respond. im a man. i have things to do all day besides argue with a dweeb on a forum.
spot on
guy really thinks he is the man
just a creepy old sack of shit who thinks he needs to make threats on here
he knows everything better, his posts are proof he has no job. long and tedious
-
Creepy old pest
we know your history :-X
"We"? Whose "we"?
There's only you. A sad, lonely, cowardly, little man looking for approval.
-
what concentration camp were you in? you still there? there is a thing called grocery stores . maybe you should buy some food. oh and look for a thing called a gym. they have weights and machines and things that can help you build some muscle. i never said i thought any of your pics looked good. because they dont. you may need some mental health help too. you seem to really think highly of yourself. smh. and your safe posting your pics cuz not even fags would jack off to those.. so go ahead and respond with your typical tuff guy name calling responses. im not gonna respond. im a man. i have things to do all day besides argue with a dweeb on a forum.
You always say you won't respond but here you are -- responding. It hurts when someone exposes you as the fraud that you are. Nobody thinks in the real world that I came out of a concentration camp or look like a marathon runner. I'm constantly asked what I do to keep in such good shape. Something that nobody else every asks you because you are just a fat, sack of shit and don't post pics because you are ashamed to. And it allows you to criticize others. If people saw what you really looked liked you wouldn't utter a word and keep very, very quiet so as not to call attention to yourself.
-
spot on
guy really thinks he is the man
just a creepy old sack of shit who thinks he needs to make threats on here
he knows everything better, his posts are proof he has no job. long and tedious
No, I present my opinion and reasoning as to why I believe it and leave it others to decide. I conclude that the Nautilus pullover is better because of full range rotary motion as oppose to freeweights which only provides partial resistance in a straight downward fashion due to the limitations of gravity. Anybody can disagree and give their reasons for it. That's the difference.
And again, I have actually proven that I have a job whereas you, like fatbychoice, prove and back up nothing. That's why I win. I tell the truth and back up what I say.
The only threat made was by you. I'm still waiting for you to follow through with your threat. Surely, this concentration camp victim would be no match for you. Why did you chicken out?
-
Sounds good routine mate I just started something similar a few weeks back (not as intense as yours though) as knees are too knackered for heavy work now so been doing leg extensions warm ups then one top set of 50 reps then old fashioned vertical leg press one top set of 30 then Olympic pause squats One set of 20, train at home so options for legs are limited, I’d be more than happy to one day build legs the size and condition yours are in the photo you posted
Haha yes Jane sent me the best photo I’ve seen yet, she is in fantastic shape that ass is truly immense, was just speaking through email she mentioned you and her had been discussing her new truck, would like to see photos when she decides and gets one, Jane is great really enjoy hearing from her hope she back here soon
My ass is not immense, you drunken English fucknozzle ! 🤣
Intense maybe, but not immense.
-
My ass is not immense, you drunken English fucknozzle ! 🤣
Intense maybe, but not immense.
It's good to see you back, Jane.
You are a welcomed and much-needed breath of fresh air here!
-
My ass is not immense, you drunken English fucknozzle ! 🤣
Intense maybe, but not immense.
Welcome back, Jane.
-
My ass is not immense, you drunken English fucknozzle ! 🤣
Intense maybe, but not immense.
Haha my apologies I stand corrected I always assumed immense could also mean something incredibly good, just looked it up and seen this is not the case. Maybe I shouldnt be admitting this and Just stuck with the assumption I was drunk
-
Yup, you're one of the good guys around here. If your ever in the States I'll treat you to some "take away". LOL!
Haha Thanks mate you too. To be fair we use the term take away As a broad term usually before deciding which we going with, if we know what having it will be “getting a chinkies” or “getting an Indians” ect. Would be awesome to meet a few Getbiggers like yourself, hopefully one day when kids aren’t dependant anymore and wind the buisness back a bit so more time for enjoying life
-
No, I present my opinion and reasoning as to why I believe it and leave it others to decide. I conclude that the Nautilus pullover is better because of full range rotary motion as oppose to freeweights which only provides partial resistance in a straight downward fashion due to the limitations of gravity. Anybody can disagree and give their reasons for it. That's the difference.
And again, I have actually proven that I have a job whereas you, like fatbychoice, prove and back up nothing. That's why I win. I tell the truth and back up what I say.
The only threat made was by you. I'm still waiting for you to follow through with your threat. Surely, this concentration camp victim would be no match for you. Why did you chicken out?
Yes why did you?...New York City !!
-
this is supposed to be a post about paul dilette. So lets keep it on topic. no one wants to hear the constant ranting from a certain someone who thinks hes always right about everything and thinks he could kick bruce lees chuck norris mike tyson and ken shamrocks ass all at the same time while doing a "hit" workout on the nautilus pullover while reading some "intellectual" scientific book in 8 different languages all while making stupid wrong and just plain crazy posts on getbig about how wonderful he is. and then bragging about how many posts he has. ( like posting alot means your an expert. what it does say is you have no life. none. so you try to convince othwers you do. a real man doesnt have to brag or talk about himself. )
-
My ass is not immense, you drunken English fucknozzle ! 🤣
Intense maybe, but not immense.
Something always made me think you were a hottie. And don’t think it’s an insult silly - Henda is just meaning that you must have the right curves. These chicks with no hips and an ass like a teen boy - no bueno.
Now - go post and shred some of the Nancy boy libbies - you don’t hold back and it’s fun to read.
-
this is supposed to be a post about paul dilette. So lets keep it on topic. no one wants to hear the constant ranting from a certain someone who thinks hes always right about everything and thinks he could kick bruce lees chuck norris mike tyson and ken shamrocks ass all at the same time while doing a "hit" workout on the nautilus pullover while reading some "intellectual" scientific book in 8 different languages all while making stupid wrong and just plain crazy posts on getbig about how wonderful he is. and then bragging about how many posts he has. ( like posting alot means your an expert. what it does say is you have no life. none. so you try to convince othwers you do. a real man doesnt have to brag or talk about himself. )
you forgot the Gracies in there
he called one of them a punk on here
said he would beat his punk ass
he really is the joke of Getbig.com
-
Haha my apologies I stand corrected I always assumed immense could also mean something incredibly good, just looked it up and seen this is not the case. Maybe I shouldnt be admitting this and Just stuck with the assumption I was drunk
In True GetBig tradition - Pics of aforementioned Immense ass or it Didn’t Happen. 👍🏻 🤣😂🤣
-
Yes why did you?...New York City !!
Facts say otherwise.
gonna fuck you up asshole
come to new york punk
Come to Hawaii, bitch!
You have big ears
what big ears you have
By looking at the date and times it was you who threatened me and then make it incumbent on me to come to you. When the situation was reverse I kept my word to Joe Valentino and was ready to fly out to meet him until he backed down. It is PROVEN and documented on this board.
Fact is, there is nobody here, neither my friends or enemies, that would bet against me and think I would back down from a challenge I made. I back up what I say and have proven it over and over again. You have no credibility at all and haven't proved or backed up a single claim that you have made. You are just a faceless coward behind a keyboard.
If you are brave enough to meet me in person why are you afraid to post a pic of yourself? That is the one question you always avoid and that is the one question that makes you go silent.
People here are not stupid. We've seen the likes of you before. They know a big mouth coward when they see one.
As always, Pellius > Escrima. Pellius = Winning!
-
pellius the weasel
telling the Joe Valentino Story again
stop telling old stories you cowardly weasel :D
-
pellius the weasel
telling the Joe Valentino Story again
stop telling old stories you cowardly weasel :D
Why? It bears repeating. It shows a stark contract between a man of honor that keeps his word and someone like you. A cowardly little man who remains in hiding making idle threats. Of course you don't want to hear that story again and be reminded how it exposes you for what you really are. An anonymous, faceless coward too afraid to come out of the dark. No one respects you here. No one supports you. Now that Roast Beef has been exposed as you, even that gimmick has to remain silent and you have nobody now. Your desperate need for approval of strangers has back fired once again.
Why do you keep avoiding the question about why you are so ashamed to show yourself?
Pellius = Winning
-
old stories
old creepy man :D
-
FFS E screama man the fuck up & admit you’re not going back your challenge
Admit your a pussy & hiding behind your computer
In Every aspect Pellius has you Beat.
Admit it - Apologise or Shut The Fuck up & Move on.
You’re mouth made a cheque that you cannot physically Cash.
Exposed & Loser.
-
I started a thread here on Getbig re photos I took of Paul at Golds Gym in 1991. He posed at my gym the next year.
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=85967.0
-
this is supposed to be a post about paul dilette. So lets keep it on topic. no one wants to hear the constant ranting from a certain someone who thinks hes always right about everything and thinks he could kick bruce lees chuck norris mike tyson and ken shamrocks ass all at the same time while doing a "hit" workout on the nautilus pullover while reading some "intellectual" scientific book in 8 different languages all while making stupid wrong and just plain crazy posts on getbig about how wonderful he is. and then bragging about how many posts he has. ( like posting alot means your an expert. what it does say is you have no life. none. so you try to convince othwers you do. a real man doesnt have to brag or talk about himself. )
Spoken like a true phaggot. You make reference to me, not even having the guts to directly confront me. If you have something to say, say it to me directly, coward. None of these half-ass cowardly references.
You claim I think I'm always right and know everything. Really? Unlike you I welcome dissent, disagreement, any challenge to my reasoning. You specifically say that what you claim is the truth and the absolute truth and will not tolerate any disagreement or debate. So much for being a "real man" as you claim.
I had no idea who you were. I never paid attention or noticed any of your posts. I never insulted you and I never addressed you. You disagreed and seemed offended and angry about my opinions on Jones', Viator, and Mentzer. You came at me with insults. I called you on your claims that Casey and Mentzer would "sneak in" additional workouts. You claim that none of them trained the way they claimed. I challenged you to provide any kind of evidence and proof for your claim. I'm still waiting.
So that's your problem. I hurt your feelings and your ego. I called and challenge your supposed insight. Now all you have left is calling me a know-it-all and skinny while you hide that belt of fat you're carrying around your waist. Fatsos like you with that bubble gut are a dime a dozen in today's overfed, undisciplined, self-indulgent society. A flat waist let alone visible abs is quite rare nowadays. Even more so for someone 60 years old.
You lose again fatman. Keep your word that you will shut up and keep this post on topic. I'll do the same. I don't start shit but I always end them.
Here's something you never had and will never have.
-
you forgot the Gracies in there
he called one of them a punk on here
said he would beat his punk ass
he really is the joke of Getbig.com
Again, just a bald face lie. A provable lie. Ralph Gracie recruited one of his students, another Black Belt, to gang up and beat up one of his ex-students. They ambushed him while he was walking alone. The reason? This student left Ralph's school and wanted to start his own dojo. Anybody reading this, other than Escrima who has no honor and is a coward, disagrees that this was a bitch move? Bad enough that Ralph had a problem with his ex-student leaving him, is training with Ralph a life long commitment?, but he didn't have the balls to confront him one on one. Man to man. That's a punk move in my opinion. Anybody disagree with that and want to give their reasons?
And, I specifically said that Ralph Gracie would beat my ass with ease. Ralph is a brutal and highly skilled fighter and few non-professionals are any match for him, least of all me.
Again, both claims are provable lies. Why someone would lie about something that has already been confirmed without a doubt shows what kind of person Escrima is. There is a reason Ralph fled the country and his brother Renzo had to fly out to California to represent him.
Once again Pellius telling the truth and backing it up with facts while the cowardly little man tells provable and obvious lies while hiding in the shadows backing up nothing. Not a single claim has he been able to back up. Just make things up. No honor. No pride. A hollow, vapid, cowardly little man. A claim that is proven by every post he makes.
Pellius > Escrima but every measure possible.
https://popculture.com/sports/news/mma-ralph-gracie-charged-felony-assault-on-jiu-jitsu-champion/
I've already answered your question about what it would take for me to defend myself.
I have no interest in picking a fight with Ralph Gracie. He would destroy me within minutes. But that wouldn't change my opinion of him and his evil brother, Ryan.
You seem to be quite interested and "curious" about me, my world view, and how I choose to live my life. Why is that?
-
FFS E screama man the fuck up & admit you’re not going back your challenge
Admit your a pussy & hiding behind your computer
In Every aspect Pellius has you Beat.
Admit it - Apologise or Shut The Fuck up & Move on.
You’re mouth made a cheque that you cannot physically Cash.
Exposed & Loser.
He knows he is getting owned into oblivion and now is just reduce to hysteric rants.
It's like he's bragging about beating my fists using his face and thinks the board is too stupid to notice.
I love exposing these phonies for the cowards that they are and not having the slightest clue about how a man is suppose to conduct himself. The pussification of men in our society is very real.
-
Paul had good lats. What a pity bodybuilding is judged by silly poses.
-
Again, just a bald face lie. A provable lie. Ralph Gracie recruited one of his students, another Black Belt, to gang up and beat up one of his ex-students. They ambushed him while he was walking alone. The reason? This student left Ralph's school and wanted to start his own dojo. Anybody reading this, other than Escrima who has no honor and is a coward, disagrees that this was a bitch move? Bad enough that Ralph had a problem with his ex-student leaving him, is training with Ralph a life long commitment?, but he didn't have the balls to confront him one on one. Man to man. That's a punk move in my opinion. Anybody disagree with that and want to give their reasons?
And, I specifically said that Ralph Gracie would beat my ass with ease. Ralph is a brutal and highly skilled fighter and few non-professionals are any match for him, least of all me.
Again, both claims are provable lies. Why someone would lie about something that has already been confirmed without a doubt shows what kind of person Escrima is. There is a reason Ralph fled the country and his brother Renzo had to fly out to California to represent him.
Once again Pellius telling the truth and backing it up with facts while the cowardly little man tells provable and obvious lies while hiding in the shadows backing up nothing. Not a single claim has he been able to back up. Just make things up. No honor. No pride. A hollow, vapid, cowardly little man. A claim that is proven by every post he makes.
Pellius > Escrima but every measure possible.
https://popculture.com/sports/news/mma-ralph-gracie-charged-felony-assault-on-jiu-jitsu-champion/
LMAO. Excrima, you are just a complete ass. go away.
-
New York City!!
you backed down
using a girl friend as an excuse
using money as an excuse
using Joe Valentino as an excuse
Now Gracie stories & gimmick Accounts
you Lose creepy old Pest! 🤭
-
every time i am online
pellius suddenly is online
Just waiting for my posts
i truly own this creepy old pest
he's online now.. 😁🤭
-
you're a weird individual, how do you cope in life acting so strangly
-
8)
-
Paul had good lats. What a pity bodybuilding is judged by silly poses.
How do you think that bodybuilding should be judged then ?
And Did you complain about the Silly poses for Judging when you competed ?
Good pic of Paul.
-
How do you think that bodybuilding should be judged then ?
And Did you complain about the Silly poses for Judging when you competed ?
Good pic of Paul.
It is always refreshing to hear the opinion of an expert.
-
It is always refreshing to hear the opinion of an expert.
Thank you - I’m as expert as your good self.
Why no answer to the questions - You made a statement about the posing why not Offer your
Thoughts if you disagree with the Judging criteria.
-
Thank you - I’m as expert as your good self.
Why no answer to the questions - You made a statement about the posing why not Offer your
Thoughts if you disagree with the Judging criteria.
so another expert
Sound like a buffoon to me
-
so another expert
Sound like a buffoon to me
Ahha Look who appears The Village Idiot Back for some more abuse & ridicule
Well done Boy keep it up , It’s Great having a idiot Like you to poke fun at. 👍🏻
-
ok PELLiUS. posting a pic saying "heres something you never had". what ? a bathroom sink? i have 3 in my house. or did you mean the pic of the aids victim in the mirror? sorry but i dont like gays. oh and the thing is with you i proved you wrong when you said mentzer was the first to get a 300 score in international contests. I showed you were carlos rodriguis was actually the first to get a 300 in an international contest. you still didnt believe it that the great and mighty pellius was wrong. and continued to argue about it. your wrong. always wrong you have nothing of value. you dont "own" anyone ( i doubt you even "own" a car) no one thinks about you other than when they get on this forum and see you constantly ranting about some stupid crap that you think is right . your wrong. on so many levels. you do remind me of mentzer though. he refused to believe he was wrong. maybe you two used the same drugs? or slept with the same guy? i dont know but your mental thinking is so off i wish you would seek real help. im not an internet tuff guy. you will never come here so why would i try. im glad you feel so confident in your skills mr tuff guy but lets just say be very careful. you dont know me. im not on here to be a key board tuff guy. im on here to talk bodybuilding. your stupid acts of tuffness online will get you hurt. badly . someday. so quit always getting your panties in a bunch when someone disagrees with you. i mean you are almost always wrong anyways. so accept the fact that your mentally challenged seek help and remember your a cuckold who looks like he has aids. you are not in the minds of anyone. you dont own anyone. no one gives a damn about you. you just irritate the fuck out of us normal straight bodybuilders with your constant posting of shit. so once again pellius= loser
everyone else=winning
pellius owns=no one
everyone else= owns pellius
im done. go kill yourself. make the people happy who do know you. supposed to be about bodybuilding but people like you just come here to act like your somebody cuz you are no body in real life. you can get on here and get attention . something you dont get in real life. i dont have time for this constant responding to a no body like you. im a man. i have things to do besides this or spend lots of time to always pull up the stuff to prove you wrong. i dont live in my moms basement like you. bigbychoices= done.
-
bigbychoices= done.
As a service to getbig, I've condensed this lowercase meltdown into the only relevant/good part to save you all the time.
-
ok PELLiUS. posting a pic saying "heres something you never had". what ? a bathroom sink? i have 3 in my house. or did you mean the pic of the aids victim in the mirror? sorry but i dont like gays. oh and the thing is with you i proved you wrong when you said mentzer was the first to get a 300 score in international contests. I showed you were carlos rodriguis was actually the first to get a 300 in an international contest. you still didnt believe it that the great and mighty pellius was wrong. and continued to argue about it. your wrong. always wrong you have nothing of value. you dont "own" anyone ( i doubt you even "own" a car) no one thinks about you other than when they get on this forum and see you constantly ranting about some stupid crap that you think is right . your wrong. on so many levels. you do remind me of mentzer though. he refused to believe he was wrong. maybe you two used the same drugs? or slept with the same guy? i dont know but your mental thinking is so off i wish you would seek real help. im not an internet tuff guy. you will never come here so why would i try. im glad you feel so confident in your skills mr tuff guy but lets just say be very careful. you dont know me. im not on here to be a key board tuff guy. im on here to talk bodybuilding. your stupid acts of tuffness online will get you hurt. badly . someday. so quit always getting your panties in a bunch when someone disagrees with you. i mean you are almost always wrong anyways. so accept the fact that your mentally challenged seek help and remember your a cuckold who looks like he has aids. you are not in the minds of anyone. you dont own anyone. no one gives a damn about you. you just irritate the fuck out of us normal straight bodybuilders with your constant posting of shit. so once again pellius= loser
everyone else=winning
pellius owns=no one
everyone else= owns pellius
im done. go kill yourself. make the people happy who do know you. supposed to be about bodybuilding but people like you just come here to act like your somebody cuz you are no body in real life. you can get on here and get attention . something you dont get in real life. i dont have time for this constant responding to a no body like you. im a man. i have things to do besides this or spend lots of time to always pull up the stuff to prove you wrong. i dont live in my moms basement like you. bigbychoices= done.
Where did the chick with the gallons of semen gimmick beatdown posts go?
She is needed now to clean up these idiots ruining every thread.
These lame gimmicks are almost as bad as Primehomosexual or Howard.
-
ok PELLiUS. posting a pic saying "heres something you never had". what ? a bathroom sink? i have 3 in my house. or did you mean the pic of the aids victim in the mirror? sorry but i dont like gays. oh and the thing is with you i proved you wrong when you said mentzer was the first to get a 300 score in international contests. I showed you were carlos rodriguis was actually the first to get a 300 in an international contest. you still didnt believe it that the great and mighty pellius was wrong. and continued to argue about it. your wrong. always wrong you have nothing of value. you dont "own" anyone ( i doubt you even "own" a car) no one thinks about you other than when they get on this forum and see you constantly ranting about some stupid crap that you think is right . your wrong. on so many levels. you do remind me of mentzer though. he refused to believe he was wrong. maybe you two used the same drugs? or slept with the same guy? i dont know but your mental thinking is so off i wish you would seek real help. im not an internet tuff guy. you will never come here so why would i try. im glad you feel so confident in your skills mr tuff guy but lets just say be very careful. you dont know me. im not on here to be a key board tuff guy. im on here to talk bodybuilding. your stupid acts of tuffness online will get you hurt. badly . someday. so quit always getting your panties in a bunch when someone disagrees with you. i mean you are almost always wrong anyways. so accept the fact that your mentally challenged seek help and remember your a cuckold who looks like he has aids. you are not in the minds of anyone. you dont own anyone. no one gives a damn about you. you just irritate the fuck out of us normal straight bodybuilders with your constant posting of shit. so once again pellius= loser
everyone else=winning
pellius owns=no one
everyone else= owns pellius
im done. go kill yourself. make the people happy who do know you. supposed to be about bodybuilding but people like you just come here to act like your somebody cuz you are no body in real life. you can get on here and get attention . something you dont get in real life. i dont have time for this constant responding to a no body like you. im a man. i have things to do besides this or spend lots of time to always pull up the stuff to prove you wrong. i dont live in my moms basement like you. bigbychoices= done.
😂.. Great post
And true!
-
Everyone who has been around the boards
knows pellius is a piece of filt
i will only say that he likes them young
Yes Sir.. Loves them in pig tails
-
Everyone who has been around the boards
knows pellius is a piece of filt
i will only say that he likes them young
Yes Sir.. Loves them in pig tails
Quoted.
This could be it for you donny boy
-
It is always refreshing to hear the opinion of an expert.
Just because big Paul hung dong in your wrinkled old face back in the 90's doesn't mean you can't be honest in properly assessing his shitty back development (from the rear).
-
ok PELLiUS. posting a pic saying "heres something you never had". what ? a bathroom sink? i have 3 in my house. or did you mean the pic of the aids victim in the mirror? sorry but i dont like gays. oh and the thing is with you i proved you wrong when you said mentzer was the first to get a 300 score in international contests. I showed you were carlos rodriguis was actually the first to get a 300 in an international contest. you still didnt believe it that the great and mighty pellius was wrong. and continued to argue about it. your wrong. always wrong you have nothing of value. you dont "own" anyone ( i doubt you even "own" a car) no one thinks about you other than when they get on this forum and see you constantly ranting about some stupid crap that you think is right . your wrong. on so many levels. you do remind me of mentzer though. he refused to believe he was wrong. maybe you two used the same drugs? or slept with the same guy? i dont know but your mental thinking is so off i wish you would seek real help. im not an internet tuff guy. you will never come here so why would i try. im glad you feel so confident in your skills mr tuff guy but lets just say be very careful. you dont know me. im not on here to be a key board tuff guy. im on here to talk bodybuilding. your stupid acts of tuffness online will get you hurt. badly . someday. so quit always getting your panties in a bunch when someone disagrees with you. i mean you are almost always wrong anyways. so accept the fact that your mentally challenged seek help and remember your a cuckold who looks like he has aids. you are not in the minds of anyone. you dont own anyone. no one gives a damn about you. you just irritate the fuck out of us normal straight bodybuilders with your constant posting of shit. so once again pellius= loser
everyone else=winning
pellius owns=no one
everyone else= owns pellius
im done. go kill yourself. make the people happy who do know you. supposed to be about bodybuilding but people like you just come here to act like your somebody cuz you are no body in real life. you can get on here and get attention . something you dont get in real life. i dont have time for this constant responding to a no body like you. im a man. i have things to do besides this or spend lots of time to always pull up the stuff to prove you wrong. i dont live in my moms basement like you. bigbychoices= done.
this is supposed to be a post about paul dilette. So lets keep it on topic. no one wants to hear the constant ranting from a certain someone who thinks hes always right about everything
Quite a meltdown. So much for keeping on topic.
You proved me wrong when I said Mentzer was the first to get perfect 300 score when it was really Carlos Rodriguez? You think I just make this stuff up? Like always, I made this claim and provided proof. The net is replete with references of Mike's perfect score. Nothing about Carlos Rodriguez. Maybe we are all wrong and only you are right but, unlike me, you prove nothing.
And again you lie. You think about me and you think about me a lot. You read and follow my posts very, very closely. It is I who never heard of you until you came after me after I said things about Jones and Mentzer that you disagreed with. And I questioned and challenged some your claims which obviously hurt your feelings. It's obvious I'm in your fat head. In deep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Mentzer
"In 1978, Mentzer won the Mr. Universe in Acapulco, Mexico with the first and only perfect 300 score. He became a professional bodybuilder after that 1978 Universe win."
https://www.evolutionofbodybuilding.net/mike-mentzer/#:~:text=In%201978%2C%20Mentzer%20won%20the,after%20that%201978%20Universe%20win.
"In 1978, Mentzer won the Mr. Universe in Acapulco, Mexico with the first and only perfect 300 score."
Pellius, again, backing up what he says with proof and evidence. fatsobychoice and escrima just talk. Empty words.
Pellius, im done. go kill yourself.
i dont have time for this constant responding to a no body like you. im a man.
bigbychoices= done.
How many times have you said this already? Do you ever keep and stand by your
word? You know, for being a real man and all? Something you have to keep reminding us about since it's easy to forget by your constant pussified behavior.
There seems to be a strong correlation between stupidity and those who don't know you are suppose to capitalize the first letter of a sentence. Just effortless grade school knowledge that should be second nature. It's hard to sound intelligent and credible when you write like a third grader. I mean, just look at how you format your reply. Doesn't make sense. Just a clusterfuck from a retard. No wonder my concepts go over your head and just makes you angry. You are not very educated. Just another illerate dum-dum.
-
As a service to getbig, I've condensed this lowercase meltdown into the only relevant/good part to save you all the time.
LOL!
-
Where did the chick with the gallons of semen gimmick beatdown posts go?
She is needed now to clean up these idiots ruining every thread.
These lame gimmicks are almost as bad as Primehomosexual or Howard.
They just lifted her ban. Once she dusts herself off Roast Beef/Escrima won't last much longer. Others will take notice and keep a low profile. BigByChoice will go back to whacking off to gay porn eating cheetos and peanut butter cups.
-
Quoted.
This could be it for you donny boy
It's always the last resort after being repeatly owned and they have nothing left. A charge that has been thoroughly and complete disproved and is now deemed a forbidden topic. The mods will catch and then you will have to come back, again, under yet a different gimmick.
This is so he can't claimed he wasn't repeatedly warned.
-
Pellius teaches us a lesson about the internet. You seldom can prove anything positive or negative on the internet. So what to do? Well, keep posting your story over and over to the bitter end. Some people will believe you!
As Goodrum demonstrates: online you can be anyone you want. Who can prove otherwise? What is the test of truth here? That is why so many can claim to be whatever they want. 8 inches, $60,000 in the bank, own several cars, etc.
-
Another recent asinine claim without proof that bigbychoice made to prove a nonexistent point. How can you trust anything this guy says. Just spouts off opinions without proof and evidence even when it is easily checked and disproved. Even when pointed out that he is obviously and provably wrong he isn't man enough to own up to it. The same guy who has to keep reminding us that he is a "real man."
even in pumping iron big louie tells his dad "dont let me complete a full rep" on the incline. and watch his training. shoulder presses and inclines he never did a full rep.
he actually does say "dont let me complete a full rep".
The truth.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4oaht6
Scroll to 3:30 minutes.
Pelllius once again telling the truth and actually backing up what he says.
-
Pellius teaches us a lesson about the internet. You seldom can prove anything positive or negative on the internet. So what to do? Well, keep posting your story over and over to the bitter end. Some people will believe you!
As Goodrum demonstrates: online you can be anyone you want. Who can prove otherwise? What is the test of truth here? That is why so many can claim to be whatever they want. 8 inches, $60,000 in the bank, own several cars, etc.
You're one of the resident bbing historians. Have you ever heard that it was really Carlos Rodriguez that got the first perfect 300 point score and not Mentzer? If it was Carlos why is there no mention of it in the official records and no mention of it in any of Carlos' biography? It's stated as such all throughout the net for Mentzer. It even mentions his perfect 300 score at the 1979 Olympia in which he won his class but loss the overall to Zane.
-
New York City!!
you backed down
using a girl friend as an excuse
using money as an excuse
using Joe Valentino as an excuse
Now Gracie stories & gimmick Accounts
you Lose creepy old Pest! 🤭
Nope. Every claim you have just made has been disproved. You just made it up. Gracies stories? I just proved it is Gracie facts. That's why nobody believes anything you say. You have zero credibility. Just and anonymous coward hiding behind a computer screen talking to yourself.
-
you're a weird individual, how do you cope in life acting so strangly
He is a weird little man. Fortunately, he still has his mother to take care of him and give him his meds so he doesn't drown himself in the toilet or poke his eyes out with a fork.
-
Ahha Look who appears The Village Idiot Back for some more abuse & ridicule
Well done Boy keep it up , It’s Great having a idiot Like you to poke fun at. 👍🏻
LOL! I think he kind of enjoys being the board's whipping boy. At least he's getting attention that he never gets in real life except for his late night visits by his uncle.
-
They just lifted her ban. Once she dusts herself off Roast Beef/Escrima won't last much longer.
Not the same guy.
-
You're one of the resident bbing historians. Have you ever heard that it was really Carlos Rodriguez that got the first perfect 300 point score and not Mentzer? If it was Carlos why is there no mention of it in the official records and no mention of it in any of Carlos' biography? It's stated as such all throughout the net for Mentzer. It even mentions his perfect 300 score at the 1979 Olympia in which he won his class but loss the overall to Zane.
The main fact here is that Mike used that "perfect score" to make it sound like he had the perfect physique. Today few care what Carlos scored. I would have to dig into my old magazines to find out what happened.
-
We need a rest from this squabble!
Look at these guys with their modified guitars. Makes me appreciate my guitars.
-
The main fact here is that Mike used that "perfect score" to make it sound like he had the perfect physique. Today few care what Carlos scored. I would have to dig into my old magazines to find out what happened.
Actually, I don't remember Mike ever mentioning his perfect score in that context. The only one who thought he had a perfect physique that day were the judges. It is odd that he also got a perfect score in the heavyweight division at the '79 Mr. O but still lost to Zane. A bigger perfect physique losese to a flawed smaller physique. I would have thought that with all else being equal the bigger man should always win.
-
Actually, I don't remember Mike ever mentioning his perfect score in that context. The only one who thought he had a perfect physique that day were the judges. It is odd that he also got a perfect score in the heavyweight division at the '79 Mr. O but still lost to Zane. A bigger perfect physique loses to a flawed smaller physique. I would have thought that with all else being equal the bigger man should always win.
We have to remember that the Weiders had control of the IFBB. Bev Francis never won the Ms Olympia. What Joe found was Arnold on the cover sold more magazines than Sergio on the cover. Result was Sergio not on many covers and eventually discarded from the Olympia. We know that Joe had Mike write for his magazines. Btw, Robby Robinson never won the Olympia even with his fantastic physique. Robbie ran into trouble with Joe and that could be a factor why Zane won. So Frank got lucky for whatever reasons were around in those days. He also was used on covers and appealed to both men and women whereas the bigger guys had a smaller following.
I honestly think Frank was overrated. Frank was a perfectionist re bodybuilding and posing so got rewarded after Arnold retired in 1975. Mike and his brother Ray never reached the top (Mr Olympia) in the IFBB but both tried hard to do so.
That 300 score was always mentioned when talking about Mike. I think John Grimek was one of the first to get a perfect score in the Mr America. He dominated so much they limited winning that title to one time.
-
We have to remember that the Weiders had control of the IFBB. Bev Francis never won the Ms Olympia. What Joe found was Arnold on the cover sold more magazines than Sergio on the cover. Result was Sergio not on many covers and eventually discarded from the Olympia. We know that Joe had Mike write for his magazines. Btw, Robby Robinson never won the Olympia even with his fantastic physique. Robbie ran into trouble with Joe and that could be a factor why Zane won. So Frank got lucky for whatever reasons were around in those days. He also was used on covers and appealed to both men and women whereas the bigger guys had a smaller following.
I honestly think Frank was overrated. Frank was a perfectionist re bodybuilding and posing so got rewarded after Arnold retired in 1975. Mike and his brother Ray never reached the top (Mr Olympia) in the IFBB but both tried hard to do so.
That 300 score was always mentioned when talking about Mike. I think John Grimek was one of the first to get a perfect score in the Mr America. He dominated so much they limited winning that title to one time.
You don't think Mike was part of the top of the top in bbing? He won his class at the '79 Olympia and was in the top five in the 1980. He was very popular and a crowd favorite and I think he would have been consistently in the top five, if not won, the Mr. Olympia. Being top five in the world puts you on the top of the top.
-
You don't think Mike was part of the top of the top in bbing? He won his class at the '79 Olympia and was in the top five in the 1980. He was very popular and a crowd favorite and I think he would have been consistently in the top five, if not won, the Mr. Olympia. Being top five in the world puts you on the top of the top.
Imagine how Mike felt in 1980? The dream he had evaporated that day. All his philosophy crumbled into a heap.
Sure, Mike might have won several Olympias had he come back better than ever the next two years. He was betrayed by the world. It worked by trickery and influence instead of logic and facts.
Arnold knew the promoter and all the judges. The rest is history. Mike didn't want to be part of this sordid pageantry any longer.
-
Imagine how Mike felt in 1980? The dream he had evaporated that day. All his philosophy crumbled into a heap.
Sure, Mike might have won several Olympias had he come back better than ever the next two years. He was betrayed by the world. It worked by trickery and influence instead of logic and facts.
Arnold knew the promoter and all the judges. The rest is history. Mike didn't want to be part of this sordid pageantry any longer.
I think Mike definitely had the potential to beat Dickerson and Samir. I also want to reemphaze the point that Mike never said that he should have won in 1980. He just said that he didn't think it should have been Arnold.
Yes, I can understand how one must feel devoting your life to something only to come up short due to politics or corruption. I believe that Danny Padilla and Tom Platz suffered a far greater injustice. Either one of these guys should have been the winner and it was obvious by what they presented on stage that they suffered and sacrificed like never before. They both brought a dramatically new and improve packaged which is so hard to do at that level. Just like what Jay brought in 2009.
It is a sad disappointment that Mentzer let this one defeat affect him so profoundly. I would have thought he had a stronger will than that.
-
Another recent asinine claim without proof that bigbychoice made to prove a nonexistent point. How can you trust anything this guy says. Just spouts off opinions without proof and evidence even when it is easily checked and disproved. Even when pointed out that he is obviously and provably wrong he isn't man enough to own up to it. The same guy who has to keep reminding us that he is a "real man."
The truth.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4oaht6
Scroll to 3:30 minutes.
Pelllius once again telling the truth and actually backing up what he says.
To be fair, Lou says something briefly before Matty also says something. It's only after those two brief words that Lou says "let me complete a full rep."
It's possible what he briefly said was "don't" before Matty interrupted and then he just continued with what he was saying. Personally, I feel he was saying for Matty to let him complete a full rep before offering assistance (spotting, etc) but that's just my opinion. Maybe an audio tech can disect the brief word or two between Louie and Matty before he starts the set.
-
Imagine how Mike felt in 1980? The dream he had evaporated that day. All his philosophy crumbled into a heap.
Sure, Mike might have won several Olympias had he come back better than ever the next two years. He was betrayed by the world. It worked by trickery and influence instead of logic and facts.
Arnold knew the promoter and all the judges. The rest is history. Mike didn't want to be part of this sordid pageantry any longer.
Mike was not even close to being the best in 1980. He dieted down too much to beat Zane who he had lost to the year before. Had he come in bigger and fuller who knows. I have never seen a pic from the 80 Olympia that shows Mike looking the best in the lineup. He was delusional if he thought he should have won it but I think he was more pissed that Arnold won it.
-
To be fair, Lou says something briefly before Matty also says something. It's only after those two brief words that Lou says "let me complete a full rep."
It's possible what he briefly said was "don't" before Matty interrupted and then he just continued with what he was saying. Personally, I feel he was saying for Matty to let him complete a full rep before offering assistance (spotting, etc) but that's just my opinion. Maybe an audio tech can disect the brief word or two between Louie and Matty before he starts the set.
I listened to it several times. It was pretty clear to me. Crystal clear. Fortunately, we live in the internet age and these things are very easily verifiable. The entire script is online. Unfortunately they don't have page numbers so you have to scroll through the whole thing to find this scene. Fortunately I've seen this movie so many times that it was relatively easy isolated that scene as I scrolled through the script.
http://www.script-o-rama.com/movie_scripts/p/pumping-iron-script-transcript-arnold.html
And I would say that from that moment on
when he first saw Arnold...
he wanted to be Mr. Olympia.
It was in his eye, in his heart,
and in his mind.
And it became part of his entire body.
Okay.
-Right, let me complete a full rep.
-Okay.
-One.
-Right.
-Two.
-Right.
Up!
Five.
Six.
Seven.
Eight.
Nine.
-Okay, Dad.
-Okay, come on.
Up, up come on.
Make it harder. All right.
Come on. Come on. Come on.
All the way.
All right. All right. All right.
-That was easy.
-Easy? You do it.
-
Mike was not even close to being the best in 1980. He dieted down too much to beat Zane who he had lost to the year before. Had he come in bigger and fuller who knows. I have never seen a pic from the 80 Olympia that shows Mike looking the best in the lineup. He was delusional if he thought he should have won it but I think he was more pissed that Arnold won it.
Again, as I just said in a couple of posts ago, Mike never said he felt he should have won. He just believed that Arnold shouldn't have won and the show was fixed.
-
I posted a screen shot from a muscle builder/power muscle and fitness magazine about carlos getting a 300 score to one of the many many arguments that mr know it all has on here. Carlos got it before mike did but Mr perfect still argued with me as he did not believe it. I dont have the time nor do i care to search for it again . Im sure someone who has no life ( like the hero on here) can go back and find it. And yes grimek also got a 300 but it wasnt in "international "competition like carlos. Thats why mentzer always would say "the first in international "competition. He knew grimek followers would prove him wrong asap ! But carlos no one really cared. And getting a perfect score really means nothing. Its just a persons opinion. Funny how mike thought the judges were fine to give him a 300 but were "fixed" to give arnold the win? smh.
After arnold retired in 75 weider needed a way to sell more maga and supplements. He needed a bodyy that would appeal to the masses. Someone that the average guy would say hey i can look like that. And at that time women would find attractive. before that most women were put off by guys arnolds size. So he had zane winning. A small but nicely developed body. Plus after arnold they didnt have any mass monsters. Robby was big but he wasnt marketable. ( plus he had issues with joe) waller wasnt gonna cut it either. There really wasnt anyone else but zane. Then when mike came along joe was actually grooming mike to be his next poster boy. he was always praising him and saying good things and stuff. Then they had a falling out . ( mike didnt want to endorse "supplements" anymore) Mike actually started to believe in the made up hype about how good he was. It was just to sell magz and products BUT mike really started to believe it. His mind was getting further and further into mental despair. he would bash arnold at every chance he got ( arnold was joes golden ticket) He even was saying all the other ways to train was wrong ( and joe had the trainer of champions courses too) and heavy duty was NOT a part of joes courses ( the weider principles) . So basically mike got to big for his britches ( and thought he was always right ( hmm sounds like someone else on here doesnt it? ) and needed a dose of reality. And he got it. The rest is history.
-
Again, as I just said in a couple of posts ago, Mike never said he felt he should have won. He just believed that Arnold shouldn't have won and the show was fixed.
That's why I mentioned it but the Mentzer fans on Youtube insist he won it.
-
We have to remember that the Weiders had control of the IFBB. Bev Francis never won the Ms Olympia. What Joe found was Arnold on the cover sold more magazines than Sergio on the cover. Result was Sergio not on many covers and eventually discarded from the Olympia. We know that Joe had Mike write for his magazines. Btw, Robby Robinson never won the Olympia even with his fantastic physique. Robbie ran into trouble with Joe and that could be a factor why Zane won. So Frank got lucky for whatever reasons were around in those days. He also was used on covers and appealed to both men and women whereas the bigger guys had a smaller following.
I honestly think Frank was overrated. Frank was a perfectionist re bodybuilding and posing so got rewarded after Arnold retired in 1975. Mike and his brother Ray never reached the top (Mr Olympia) in the IFBB but both tried hard to do so.
That 300 score was always mentioned when talking about Mike. I think John Grimek was one of the first to get a perfect score in the Mr America. He dominated so much they limited winning that title to one time.
Im not so sure Frank Zane got lucky Vince in regards too being overrated perhaps sometimes being really persistent wins out over just being really good, looking @ the era after Arnold retiring the title was up for grabs after 1975, Franco won his 1st Olympia after several attempts and then who was legitimately in the running after 1976?
A case can be made for Robby Robinson who had a fantastic physique however (from what footage exsists) photos etc his overall conditioning wasn’t quiet there in comparison too Zane, other than Robby who had that complete physique? Mike Mentzer as good as he was tried I think what was it 2 times too win the Olympia then “gave up” his condition @ the 1979 Olympia wasn’t his best and I don’t think his brother Ray even competed in a Mr Olympia but I could be wrong
When you say frank was overrated, in what context do you mean in regards too his competition of that timeframe and the argument there were others that should of beaten Zane in between 1977-1979
-
I posted a screen shot from a muscle builder/power muscle and fitness magazine about carlos getting a 300 score to one of the many many arguments that mr know it all has on here. Carlos got it before mike did but Mr perfect still argued with me as he did not believe it. I dont have the time nor do i care to search for it again . Im sure someone who has no life ( like the hero on here) can go back and find it. And yes grimek also got a 300 but it wasnt in "international "competition like carlos. Thats why mentzer always would say "the first in international "competition. He knew grimek followers would prove him wrong asap ! But carlos no one really cared. And getting a perfect score really means nothing. Its just a persons opinion. Funny how mike thought the judges were fine to give him a 300 but were "fixed" to give arnold the win? smh.
After arnold retired in 75 weider needed a way to sell more maga and supplements. He needed a bodyy that would appeal to the masses. Someone that the average guy would say hey i can look like that. And at that time women would find attractive. before that most women were put off by guys arnolds size. So he had zane winning. A small but nicely developed body. Plus after arnold they didnt have any mass monsters. Robby was big but he wasnt marketable. ( plus he had issues with joe) waller wasnt gonna cut it either. There really wasnt anyone else but zane. Then when mike came along joe was actually grooming mike to be his next poster boy. he was always praising him and saying good things and stuff. Then they had a falling out . ( mike didnt want to endorse "supplements" anymore) Mike actually started to believe in the made up hype about how good he was. It was just to sell magz and products BUT mike really started to believe it. His mind was getting further and further into mental despair. he would bash arnold at every chance he got ( arnold was joes golden ticket) He even was saying all the other ways to train was wrong ( and joe had the trainer of champions courses too) and heavy duty was NOT a part of joes courses ( the weider principles) . So basically mike got to big for his britches ( and thought he was always right ( hmm sounds like someone else on here doesnt it? ) and needed a dose of reality. And he got it. The rest is history.
Have you ever kept your word on anything? Isn't one of the hallmarks of a man, a real man, that you have to keep reminding us that you are, keeping your word?
Personally, I don't care if you respond or not. I like making you look like a fool and a coward. If you want to respond just respond. If you don't then don't. No bullshit and game playing. And if you want to address me just address me directly like a man. What is this always referring to me as a "certain someone"? What a fat, cowardly, little bitch you are. What kind of phag are you?
"im done. i dont have time for this constant responding to a no body like you. im a man."
"this is supposed to be a post about paul dilette. So lets keep it on topic. no one wants to hear the constant ranting from a certain someone who thinks hes always right"
"so go ahead and respond with your typical tuff guy name calling responses. im not gonna respond. im a man."
"so go ahead and start badmouthing everything i wrote even down to my writting. im not gonna respond back. im a man. a real man. not a keyboard tuff guy. and no i wont show pics of myself so some of you fags can jack off."
-
I posted a screen shot from a muscle builder/power muscle and fitness magazine about carlos getting a 300 score to one of the many many arguments that mr know it all has on here. Carlos got it before mike did but Mr perfect still argued with me as he did not believe it. I dont have the time nor do i care to search for it again . Im sure someone who has no life ( like the hero on here) can go back and find it. And yes grimek also got a 300 but it wasnt in "international "competition like carlos. Thats why mentzer always would say "the first in international "competition. He knew grimek followers would prove him wrong asap ! But carlos no one really cared. And getting a perfect score really means nothing. Its just a persons opinion. Funny how mike thought the judges were fine to give him a 300 but were "fixed" to give arnold the win? smh.
After arnold retired in 75 weider needed a way to sell more maga and supplements. He needed a bodyy that would appeal to the masses. Someone that the average guy would say hey i can look like that. And at that time women would find attractive. before that most women were put off by guys arnolds size. So he had zane winning. A small but nicely developed body. Plus after arnold they didnt have any mass monsters. Robby was big but he wasnt marketable. ( plus he had issues with joe) waller wasnt gonna cut it either. There really wasnt anyone else but zane. Then when mike came along joe was actually grooming mike to be his next poster boy. he was always praising him and saying good things and stuff. Then they had a falling out . ( mike didnt want to endorse "supplements" anymore) Mike actually started to believe in the made up hype about how good he was. It was just to sell magz and products BUT mike really started to believe it. His mind was getting further and further into mental despair. he would bash arnold at every chance he got ( arnold was joes golden ticket) He even was saying all the other ways to train was wrong ( and joe had the trainer of champions courses too) and heavy duty was NOT a part of joes courses ( the weider principles) . So basically mike got to big for his britches ( and thought he was always right ( hmm sounds like someone else on here doesnt it? ) and needed a dose of reality. And he got it. The rest is history.
You posted a screen shot but don't have the time to find it yet you have time to write all these lower-case, semi-literate, meltdowns?
You do know when you take a screen shot it is stored in your files? Did you immediately go and erase it after taking a screen shot? Running out of crucial disk space on your ten year old laptop?
Why is it so hard to find any reference to Carlos Rodriguez getting a perfect 300 score? You'd think it would be big news in bbing. Why can't I find it anywhere? Maybe he did. What was the date? But to imply that I am making up shit about Mike being the first to score a perfect score is simply ridiculous. It's all over the net. Nothing about Carlos. Nothing you can prove. But that is typical with you. Shooting off your fat pie hole and unable to back up your word. "Back up your word." Remember that when you once again want to claim you are a real man.
You say I'm full of shit. Everything I say is wrong. But the facts -- the facts! prove otherwise. That's why you are so angry and obsessed with me. I expose you for the cowardly, fat, slob that you are.
I don't just talk. I back up what I say. You, like your cowardly brethen, Escrima, just talk. A bag of hot air. Tell me again what a "man" you are? A "real man." More like another one of Pellius' bitches. Now respond to this, bitch.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Mentzer#:~:text=Universe%20in%20N%C3%AEmes%2C%20France%2C%20placing,after%20that%201978%20Universe%20win.
In 1978, Mentzer won the Mr. Universe in Acapulco, Mexico with the first and only perfect 300 score.
-
That's why I mentioned it but the Mentzer fans on Youtube insist he won it.
Well of course. That's why they are Mentzer fans. I thought Mentzer should have won. Certainly not Arnold. I was never a fan of Chris Dickerson's physique. And although I liked Frank Zane's build I felt he was too small to be a Mr. Olympia. Standing next to the thickly muscled Mentzer made Zane look skinny. I also never cared much for Boyer Cole's physique. He didn't have any quad sweep and had an odd condition with his abs. His waist was flat but no ab muscle. Maybe he should have taken a cue from Mentzer and train abs like any other bodypart and use progressive resistance. To make the ab muscle stronger, larger, and more developed. He had no visible ab muscle but just some kind of crease that ran across his waist just above his belly button.
John Meadows had this problem due to a surgery he had. I remember Meadows had a very flat, fat-free, waist line following surgery but no ab muscle. He was able to rectify that. But Meadows is a smart guy and probably did a lot of experimenting before he found something that worked.
Anyway, so in my subjective personal opinion, Mike was better than Dickerson, Zane, and Boyer -- all who placed ahead or equal to him (Boyer) so that would put him at first place by process of elimination.
(https://www.builtreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/boyer-coe-032.jpg)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/coe/bc251.jpg)
-
Well of course. That's why they are Mentzer fans. I thought Mentzer should have won. Certainly not Arnold. I was never a fan of Chris Dickerson's physique. And although I liked Frank Zane's build I felt he was too small to be a Mr. Olympia. Standing next to the thickly muscled Mentzer made Zane look skinny. I also never cared much for Boyer Cole's physique. He didn't have any quad sweep and had an odd condition with his abs. His waist was flat but no ab muscle. Maybe he should have taken a cue from Mentzer and train abs like any other bodypart and use progressive resistance. To make the ab muscle stronger, larger, and more developed. He had no visible ab muscle but just some kind of crease that ran across his waist just above his belly button.
In many photos, Boyer does have that flat look to his abs, with only a hint of abs visible underneath a contest-ready physique. In some rare photos, he does display great ab development, like the one below. It's possible that he just posed a certain way, to keep his abs nice and tight, rather than pushing them out. That's typical of the era he grew up in, where a tight core/waist was critical to symmetry and flow.
-
I don't know but Mike looked pretty ordinary at the 1980 Olympia to me, these days if someone with that body claimed natural "everybody" would believe it no problem. I would think Mike had more potential than that. From what I remember about his diet it was woefully inadequate with what we know today. Way underdosed on protein. I seem to remember him saying if somebody was building muscle at the fastest rate possible they would only need a bite out of an apple to cover the extra energy needed for growth. It doesn't quite work like that - but knowledge has increased since his time.
-
In many photos, Boyer does have that flat look to his abs, with only a hint of abs visible underneath a contest-ready physique. In some rare photos, he does display great ab development, like the one below. It's possible that he just posed a certain way, to keep his abs nice and tight, rather than pushing them out. That's typical of the era he grew up in, where a tight core/waist was critical to symmetry and flow.
I'm sure he would claim he was going for that look, they all claim that they are consciously aiming at a certain look. SLike small guys who claim they aren't big because they train for "symmetry". Or Lee Priest always complaining about glutes being judged. Well of course he didn't like it since he couldn't get the ripped glutes.
-
Well of course. That's why they are Mentzer fans. I thought Mentzer should have won. Certainly not Arnold. I was never a fan of Chris Dickerson's physique. And although I liked Frank Zane's build I felt he was too small to be a Mr. Olympia. Standing next to the thickly muscled Mentzer made Zane look skinny. I also never cared much for Boyer Cole's physique. He didn't have any quad sweep and had an odd condition with his abs. His waist was flat but no ab muscle. Maybe he should have taken a cue from Mentzer and train abs like any other bodypart and use progressive resistance. To make the ab muscle stronger, larger, and more developed. He had no visible ab muscle but just some kind of crease that ran across his waist just above his belly button.
John Meadows had this problem due to a surgery he had. I remember Meadows had a very flat, fat-free, waist line following surgery but no ab muscle. He was able to rectify that. But Meadows is a smart guy and probably did a lot of experimenting before he found something that worked.
Anyway, so in my subjective personal opinion, Mike was better than Dickerson, Zane, and Boyer -- all who placed ahead or equal to him (Boyer) so that would put him at first place by process of elimination.
(https://www.builtreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/boyer-coe-032.jpg)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/coe/bc251.jpg)
By looking at every photo I have ever seen of the '80 Olympia I can't see how Mentzer was the best or even impressive at all. He looks tiny next to Arnold.
-
Mentzer was in amazing condition, but his physique had huge structural flaws. Massive joints, a torn or poorly shaped trap ( look at his back shots ) narrow shoulders and hips so fucken wide it looks as if he could have given birth.
J
-
Mentzer was in amazing condition, but his physique had huge structural flaws. Massive joints, a torn or poorly shaped trap ( look at his back shots ) narrow shoulders and hips so fucken wide it looks as if he could have given birth.
J
Even his usual strong points, like chest and calves looked depleted. He over dieted to the extreme.
-
For the record when i say "im done" i mean im done arguing . i cant convince stupid to become smart so why try. anyways im glad my lower case bothers you. i didnt know this was a class on writing. hhmmmm. anyways boyer never had abs. he had a trim and nice waist but never could ever get abs. just genetics. ( like bill grant could never get calves) Also i never said that mr jerk me off made up the story about mentzer getting 300 so you are wrong once again smh. Its only been published a million times. And no i dont save stupid things to my computer. ( im sure you save all your stuff along with pics of naked boys too) and yes louie does say "dont" let me complete a full rep. Back to zane and mentzer. Both looked good when they were standing alone. BUT get them next to real bodybuilders and they look horrible. zane like a starving swimmer and mike like a , well like a , um um meth head mental case with hips wide enough to drive a truck thru. no chest. narrow shoulders ( makes heath look wide) and pretty much vanishes from the side. Remember this. the reason most think arnold looked bad was because arnold didnt look like arnold. BUT he was better than anyone else that day. Roger walker should of been 2nd or 3rd. dickerson and mentzer should not of even been allowed to compete. Back to paul dilette. lee priest has said how lazy paul was ( and seeing him train i believe it) that instead of dieting or doing cardio he would just "up" his clen use. lol
-
For the record when i say "im done" i mean im done arguing . i cant convince stupid to become smart so why try. anyways im glad my lower case bothers you. i didnt know this was a class on writing. hhmmmm. anyways boyer never had abs. he had a trim and nice waist but never could ever get abs. just genetics. ( like bill grant could never get calves) Also i never said that mr jerk me off made up the story about mentzer getting 300 so you are wrong once again smh. Its only been published a million times. And no i dont save stupid things to my computer. ( im sure you save all your stuff along with pics of naked boys too) and yes louie does say "dont" let me complete a full rep. Back to zane and mentzer. Both looked good when they were standing alone. BUT get them next to real bodybuilders and they look horrible. zane like a starving swimmer and mike like a , well like a , um um meth head mental case with hips wide enough to drive a truck thru. no chest. narrow shoulders ( makes heath look wide) and pretty much vanishes from the side. Remember this. the reason most think arnold looked bad was because arnold didnt look like arnold. BUT he was better than anyone else that day. Roger walker should of been 2nd or 3rd. dickerson and mentzer should not of even been allowed to compete. Back to paul dilette. lee priest has said how lazy paul was ( and seeing him train i believe it) that instead of dieting or doing cardio he would just "up" his clen use. lol
I agree on Roger Walker although he might have been a couple weeks away from peak condition. Arnold did look better than everyone up on that stage from the pics I've seen.
-
yes walker got so overlooked that day. i never understood why. He didnt get much exposure in the mags and he was never a "weider ass kisser". he always did his own thing.
-
Have we ever settled the question of who was the last impressive natural bodybuilder of any fame? I mean really natural- no prohormones, etc etc. Seems we have to go back to the early 30's to eliminate the effect of even exogenous testosterone. What a fucking joke this sport is.
I'm not limiting my disgust to just bodybuilding, to be fair. I'm a cyclist and even in my early years I knew guys taking amphetamines to boost their performance. I've also known guys who used EPO and blood doped. That's when I quit racing for real many years ago.
To be a truly natural athlete is the holy grail these days.
-
Have we ever settled the question of who was the last impressive natural bodybuilder of any fame? I mean really natural- no prohormones, etc etc. Seems we have to go back to the early 30's to eliminate the effect of even exogenous testosterone. What a fucking joke this sport is.
I'm not limiting my disgust to just bodybuilding, to be fair. I'm a cyclist and even in my early years I knew guys taking amphetamines to boost their performance. I've also known guys who used EPO and blood doped. That's when I quit racing for real many years ago.
To be a truly natural athlete is the holy grail these days.
The bodybuilders from the '40's were natural as well. I think Bobby Pandour, from the turn of the century, was the best natty.
-
For the record when i say "im done" i mean im done arguing . i cant convince stupid to become smart so why try. anyways im glad my lower case bothers you. i didnt know this was a class on writing. hhmmmm. anyways boyer never had abs. he had a trim and nice waist but never could ever get abs. just genetics. ( like bill grant could never get calves) Also i never said that mr jerk me off made up the story about mentzer getting 300 so you are wrong once again smh. Its only been published a million times. And no i dont save stupid things to my computer. ( im sure you save all your stuff along with pics of naked boys too) and yes louie does say "dont" let me complete a full rep. Back to zane and mentzer. Both looked good when they were standing alone. BUT get them next to real bodybuilders and they look horrible. zane like a starving swimmer and mike like a , well like a , um um meth head mental case with hips wide enough to drive a truck thru. no chest. narrow shoulders ( makes heath look wide) and pretty much vanishes from the side. Remember this. the reason most think arnold looked bad was because arnold didnt look like arnold. BUT he was better than anyone else that day. Roger walker should of been 2nd or 3rd. dickerson and mentzer should not of even been allowed to compete. Back to paul dilette. lee priest has said how lazy paul was ( and seeing him train i believe it) that instead of dieting or doing cardio he would just "up" his clen use. lol
So when you say you're done you mean done arguing, yet here you are still arguing. You insist to keep this thread on topic yet here you are, again, pounding your spoon sitting in your high chair crying like a little girl.
Just like Blacks who can't speak normal English, just like good manners, it's a testament to one's education and upbringing when they are barely literate. Even something so basic and commonplace that like capitalizing the first letter of a sentence or basic spelling and punctuation (especially with spell check) reflects on you coming across as so low-brow and uneducated. Do you have kids? If so, aren't you ashamed that they have to see their father sounding like a finger-counting hick? Probably not, you don't strike me as one who has any sense of shame. Your intellectual laziness corresponds with you physical laziness. Just look at that belt of flab you carry.
Still no proof of Dickerson's perfect score. A screen shot is automatically saved. Again, you have time for another one of your meltdowns but not do a simply goggle search. You're such a big mouth shit talker backing up nothing.
And even when I posted the video and the movie script dialogue of Lou specifically stating "let me complete a full rep" you still cannot admit you are wrong. Tell me again what a real man you are? When I have been proven wrong I readily admit it and retract my claim.
And to claim that a multiple Mr. O winner doesn't look like a "real" bodybuilder but like a starving swimmer just shows your colossal ignorance. What a skewed perspective you have on the human physique. Jeeze man, just how fat are you?
-
Pellius,
You seem to revel in confrontation. Do you ever question whether it is time well spent?
-
Pellius,
You seem to revel in confrontation. Do you ever question whether it is time well spent?
No. Pay attention. I never start a confrontation but I don't let it pass if someone comes at me. I never heard of this fat fuck before. He came at me because he disagreed with my opinions, opinions that I back with evidence, regarding Jones and Mentzer. He started to go into meltdown mold when I questioned his claims which he spouts off based on nothing but opinions such as his claim that Casey sneaked in some additional workouts during the Colorado experiment. Something he can't possibly know let alone get away with under such controlled conditions. He provides no evidence for this, and his other claims.
Most people just passively let others spout their bullshit and lies. Not me. Weeding out the liars and shit talkers is time well spent.
-
Frank Zane was lucky. How come this physique never won the Olympia? Zane never looked huge like this.
-
No he didn’t that’s why I asked the question you were actually around in person in that era something 95% of us didn’t see.
Why in your opinion was Zane lucky because he wasn’t as big as his competition of the era, there has to be more to it than that surely History is littered was smaller lighter structures beating bigger guys Columbu, Padilla, Makaway, Labrada, Ray, Bennazea, etc
-
Most people just passively let others spout their bullshit and lies. Not me. Weeding out the liars and shit talkers is time well spent.
In such situations (an Internet forum), I‘d just chalk it up as stupidity and move on. Whatever makes you happy, I suppose.
-
Frank Zane was lucky. How come this physique never won the Olympia? Zane never looked huge like this.
Agree Vince.
-
In such situations (an Internet forum), I‘d just chalk it up as stupidity and move on. Whatever makes you happy, I suppose.
You sound like a very reasonable and even tempered man. Probably a happy one too.
Good for you. Sometimes I wish I could just shrugged off slights and insults. I can't so I don't. There should be a price paid for being stupid.
-
In such situations (an Internet forum), I‘d just chalk it up as stupidity and move on. Whatever makes you happy, I suppose.
While I agree this is a rational approach to most things, this is the thunderdome, so fuck off!*
* I don't really mean that, you're a good poster, Mr. Pints
-
Even his usual strong points, like chest and calves looked depleted. He over dieted to the extreme.
Maybe you mean arms and calves. I don't think his pec were ever considered a strong point. I also never saw Mike as having wide hips. Certainly not to the extent that Arnold and say Platz had. Boyer's hips look wider in this group shot. And I never saw him as having a narrow shoulder structure either. Certainly not to the extent Arnold had somewhat low, slopping shoulder structures.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=481253.0;attach=1267479;image)
-
Agree Vince.
Back in 1979 when I was training at the first fully equipped Nautilus gym in the Hawaii, owned and operated by Hank Grundman, who created the Iron Man competition. There was this young guy who had recently competed and lost a power lifting contest in which he was the favorite to win. I remember one of the guys yelling over to him that he is like the Robby Robinson of powerlifting. Later I approached the guy and asked him what he meant because I was a fan of Robby and felt he was the best bber competing at the time. Better than Mentzer (my favorite) and Zane who was a multiple Mr. O. He told me that his friend reminded him of Robby because he could beat anybody, anywhere, at any time of the year -- except on the day of the competition.
That gave me food for thought.
-
While I agree this is a rational approach to most things, this is the thunderdome, so fuck off!*
* I don't really mean that, you're a good poster, Mr. Pints
Sign the waiver, let’s go! You’ve gone too far. I’ll not stand for this!
;)
-
You sound like a very reasonable and even tempered man. Probably a happy one too.
Good for you. Sometimes I wish I could just shrugged off slights and insults. I can't so I don't. There should be a price paid for being stupid.
The compunction to respond must be too strong for you to allow a perceived slight to go unchallenged. But have you stopped to wonder whether this makes you happier, or more agitated? It may be that you are actually the one who loses in this dynamic.
And we all know that cortisol is no good for the gainz, brah!
-
The compunction to respond must be too strong for you to allow a perceived slight to go unchallenged. But have you stopped to wonder whether this makes you happier, or more agitated? It may be that you are actually the one who loses in this dynamic.
And we all know that cortisol is no good for the gainz, brah!
Well, first of all, unlike most, and probably a huge surprise to many, is that in Christianity, your own personal happiness, though important and needs to be consciously strived for, is not the most important thing and goal in one's life. Sometimes one has to give up what makes them happy, what makes someone feel good, for a greater good. If I went by just feelings I would never have discipline any of the kids I had to raise. It breaks my heart when I see a little kid cry. I don't enjoy going to the gym per se. I do not like the pain and the physical discomfort it entails. If I could be in shape without ever stepping into a gym I would be like most people and stay home and eat ice cream. I do not like arguing with demonstrably ignorant and uneducated people. I mean, look at bigbychoice. I present a video where it is obvious what Lou is saying. I present the actual transcript of the movie which further proves my point. But still he denies it. That is the kind of people I am reduced to matching wits with. It's like talking to someone that believes the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. Objective facts do not matter to the congenital stupid.
You often have to sacrifice comfort for duty and doing what you believe is right. Most are like you and just want to avoid confrontation and just blend into the background. If I ask you, or most people, if they feel they are a good person, most will reply something to the effect that "Well, I'm not perfect and I'm no angel but I don't maliciously hurt other people, I don't lie, I don't steal, I don't cheat..." They will say all the things they don't do. But what they are telling me is that they are just not bad. That's quite different from being good. To be "not bad" is to not do bad things. To be good you have to do good things.
I was taught from a very early age that one has to take an active, a proactive role, in trying to make the world, or at least your tiny corner of it, a better place. The now common quote by Edmund Burke was introduce to me when I was in the 5th grade. I took it to heart because some of the greatest evil that has been done by the world was made possible simply because other people just did nothing. They always leave it to someone else. They just want to go through life in peace and safety and not try to make a difference. Many times I am warned that someday I'm going to run into the wrong guy. I always heard that as a kid when I saw someone get away with being being a punk. I always heard it but never saw it. That's when I made a conscious decision in high school that I was going to be that wrong guy. I am going to be the one that stands up and puts the bully in his place even if things don't go my way. When someone cuts in line and then everybody looks down meekly and act like they didn't see it I say something. And I don't just say it to people I think I can take in a fight. I once told Rampage Jackson to keep quiet when he was heckling a match between John Jacques Machado and Dean Lister. Something he did not take too kindly too.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
― Edmund Burke
-
Maybe you mean arms and calves. I don't think his pec were ever considered a strong point. I also never saw Mike as having wide hips. Certainly not to the extent that Arnold and say Platz had. Boyer's hips look wider in this group shot. And I never saw him as having a narrow shoulder structure either. Certainly not to the extent Arnold had somewhat low, slopping shoulder structures.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=481253.0;attach=1267479;image)
I think Mentzer had great pecs in the photos of him on the beach. Mentzer always looked phenomenal off stage. At the 80 Olympia he looked lost in the crowd which is why I think he over dieted.
-
I think Mentzer had great pecs in the photos of him on the beach. Mentzer always looked phenomenal off stage. At the 80 Olympia he looked lost in the crowd which is why I think he over dieted.
Hey, you're preaching to the choir. It's just that is a common criticism regarding his pecs. His arms were so thick that I think it over powered his pecs a bit especially when guys like Arnold, Lou and Nubret set the standard. You don't see that kind of look anymore not because the pecs are less developement today. I can't believe that Coleman's pecs are less developed than Arnold's. It's just that the arms, and especially the delts, are so much larger these day than in the golden age.
I read where Mike claimed he was ten pounds heavier that year than the year before. When the first pics came out in magazines in 1980 he didn't strike me as looking depleted. Zane did. But not Mike. It's only many years later that I would hear that criticism. To me, he looked better than Boyer, Zane, and Dickerson.
Looks good to me.
-
Hey, you're preaching to the choir. It's just that is a common criticism regarding his pecs. His arms were so thick that I think it over powered his pecs a bit especially when guys like Arnold, Lou and Nubret set the standard. You don't see that kind of look anymore not because the pecs are less developement today. I can't believe that Coleman's pecs are less developed than Arnold's. It's just that the arms, and especially the delts, are so much larger these day than in the golden age.
I read where Mike claimed he was ten pounds heavier that year than the year before. When the first pics came out in magazines in 1980 he didn't strike me as looking depleted. Zane did. But not Mike. It's only many years later that I would hear that criticism. To me, he looked better than Boyer, Zane, and Dickerson.
Looks good to me.
hey pellius have you read, any of the muscle smoke and mirrors books by randy roach? they are great, i just read the third one, which is about arnold and columbos comebacks i think you would enjoy it, randy is a nice guy he responds to emails as well.
-
Well, first of all, unlike most, and probably a huge surprise to many, is that in Christianity, your own personal happiness, though important and needs to be consciously strived for, is not the most important thing and goal in one's life. Sometimes one has to give up what makes them happy, what makes someone feel good, for a greater good. If I went by just feelings I would never have discipline any of the kids I had to raise. It breaks my heart when I see a little kid cry. I don't enjoy going to the gym per se. I do not like the pain and the physical discomfort it entails. If I could be in shape without ever stepping into a gym I would be like most people and stay home and eat ice cream. I do not like arguing with demonstrably ignorant and uneducated people. I mean, look at bigbychoice. I present a video where it is obvious what Lou is saying. I present the actual transcript of the movie which further proves my point. But still he denies it. That is the kind of people I am reduced to matching wits with. It's like talking to someone that believes the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. Objective facts do not matter to the congenital stupid.
You often have to sacrifice comfort for duty and doing what you believe is right. Most are like you and just want to avoid confrontation and just blend into the background. If I ask you, or most people, if they feel they are a good person, most will reply something to the effect that "Well, I'm not perfect and I'm no angel but I don't maliciously hurt other people, I don't lie, I don't steal, I don't cheat..." They will say all the things they don't do. But what they are telling me is that they are just not bad. That's quite different from being good. To be "not bad" is to not do bad things. To be good you have to do good things.
I was taught from a very early age that one has to take an active, a proactive role, in trying to make the world, or at least your tiny corner of it, a better place. The now common quote by Edmund Burke was introduce to me when I was in the 5th grade. I took it to heart because some of the greatest evil that has been done by the world was made possible simply because other people just did nothing. They always leave it to someone else. They just want to go through life in peace and safety and not try to make a difference. Many times I am warned that someday I'm going to run into the wrong guy. I always heard that as a kid when I saw someone get away with being being a punk. I always heard it but never saw it. That's when I made a conscious decision in high school that I was going to be that wrong guy. I am going to be the one that stands up and puts the bully in his place even if things don't go my way. When someone cuts in line and then everybody looks down meekly and act like they didn't see it I say something. And I don't just say it to people I think I can take in a fight. I once told Rampage Jackson to keep quiet when he was heckling a match between John Jacques Machado and Dean Lister. Something he did not take too kindly too.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
― Edmund Burke
Damn - Reading that post of yours is almost as if I was writing it,
So many similarities I see.
Have to say I totally agree with what you’re saying.
Also that quote is Chillingly accurate we only have to look around as Now at what’s being
Pushed & done to people, Though the MSM are very complicit in what’s happening.
-
It is always refreshing to hear the opinion of an expert.
I notice you never answered my original questions to you Vince
To difficult to answer were they - or you’d have admit you were happy with judging
Criteria when you competed Won. ??
-
Damn - Reading that post of yours is almost as if I was writing it,
So many similarities I see.
Have to say I totally agree with what you’re saying.
Also that quote is Chillingly accurate we only have to look around as Now at what’s being
Pushed & done to people, Though the MSM are very complicit in what’s happening.
Thanks. Unfortunately most people are back benches in life. They always leave it to others to make a stand. They are far more concerned with their own happiness, comfort, safety, and the need to be liked.
Of all the good human virtues; be it compassion, generosity, even goodness..., the most rare is courage.
-
Most are like you and just want to avoid confrontation
I believe that confrontation can be necessary and beneficial. I just don’t believe that arguing with unreasonable people on an Internet forum is a necessary and beneficial confrontation.
-
I believe that confrontation can be necessary and beneficial. I just don’t believe that arguing with unreasonable people on an Internet forum is a necessary and beneficial confrontation.
A very good point and one I should take to heart.
-
Some of the greatest genetics ever seen in bodybuilding
just standing there relaxed, yes
overrated when the posing starts
E
-
Quoted.
This could be it for you donny boy
PIP Escrima