Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: The_One77 on October 13, 2024, 12:31:24 AM

Title: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: The_One77 on October 13, 2024, 12:31:24 AM
Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport

Guy is shaped like a potato, has the personality of a wet sock, and comes off as arrogant to his fello competitors. He was never that good. Him constantly posting jesus and praying between sets was also cringe. Hes just a cringe guy all way round and honestly, standing relaxed he looks like a fat guy. Not to be too disparaging but he sucked for Mr O standards and atleast Dauda looks the part. Much credit to the wife - Milos you got outdone buddy!
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: wes on October 13, 2024, 01:34:08 AM
Good post, and the name is "Lumpsford" !!
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Gym Rat on October 13, 2024, 01:57:29 AM
Lumpy Rutherford is done..
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: wes on October 13, 2024, 01:58:37 AM
Lumpy Rutherford is done..
:D
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ProudVirgin69 on October 13, 2024, 02:43:02 AM
Was this the guy who won with the enormous SEO lumps in his lats?
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: wes on October 13, 2024, 02:56:07 AM
Was this the guy who won with the enormous SEO lumps in his lats?
yes
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Rambone on October 13, 2024, 03:01:25 AM
Good post, and the name is "Lumpsford" !!

It’s Minister Lumpsford! Show some goddamn respect!
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: French on October 13, 2024, 03:25:34 AM
2 robberies for Hadi
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Gym Rat on October 13, 2024, 03:37:33 AM
2 robberies for Hadi

Near Samson on stage he looks like a child...
Title: Re: Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: 1Patrick on October 13, 2024, 04:02:14 AM
2 robberies for Hadi
Hadi came with his max best and it wasn’t enough to win. Samson was close ,but not there yet. .Back in the day Weinerberg used to award conditioning /Branch/ over nice flow and pretty physique/ Wolf/ .Samson may be able to hold on to that title for awhile.
Title: Why dont people like Minister Lumpsford?
Post by: The_One77 on October 14, 2024, 07:33:00 AM
 For me, i could tolerate his blocky structure and excessive jesus worshipping if he just wasnt so boring to watch
Title: Re: Why dont people like Minister Lumpsford?
Post by: Grape Ape on October 14, 2024, 07:34:39 AM
For me, i could tolerate his blocky structure and excessive jesus worshipping if he just wasnt so boring to watch

What would like to see him do to excite you more?
Title: Re: Why dont people like Minister Lumpsford?
Post by: Van_Bilderass on October 14, 2024, 08:00:30 AM
Well of course if the person is very unlikeable people wouldn't care if the person lost, even if they clearly saw he actually was the best, sometimes just a little bad comment will sour people. Or they just don't like 'the persons smile or laugh' which they deem is just 'too much.' Like with Kamala, even Putin said he "liked" Kamalas 'infectuous laugh' but it could be taken a couple of different ways. Even my mom said "can a person with that cackle be President?" Lol.

The praying between sets can be demeaning as if he belives God is actually help him winning. I don't know about other peoples' thoughts on this but it's off putting, especially when it's connected to bodybuilding, this activity being very Satanic from a Christian perspective.

As far as Samson, you know how people always claim the winners are predecided due to "politics." But from what I've seen most seemed to think the top 3 were correct calls. Lunsford had some glaring weaknesses. Hadi had superior cuts and no extra glaring weaknesses so people thought he should at least beat Lunsford even if he is shitskin. I think there's some people who can overlook those weaknesses. But I just feel there's something dour about his visage, hard to explain. ;D I don't know if people have thought of this consciously but low hairline seems to signal stupidity to me. Kamali was proud of his Iranian hair but I always thought this low hairline is worse than being bald or semi-bald, maybe partly because I'm bald myself ;D
Title: Re: Why dont people like Minister Lumpsford?
Post by: mops on October 14, 2024, 09:03:31 AM
Men posting "couple-comedy" videos on intagram deserve to be repeatedly slapped with a fish.

Matching onesie wearing retarded cuck.

Title: If Lumpy Was Wise
Post by: Fortress on October 14, 2024, 02:45:05 PM
If Lumpy Lunsford is wise he will hang his battle thong and focus on his family and a new professional endeavour.

Watching interviews, he seems like a decent fellow.

The probability he will win another O, however, is almost zero.

Not only will continuing to try greatly diminish that you DID win the title (see: Samir), but you will further stress and damage your health. And you’re a husband and father.

That’s my thinking, anyway.



Title: Re: If Lumpy Was Wise
Post by: Royalty on October 14, 2024, 04:17:40 PM
Nothing stops!


Double the doses

Triple the protein
Title: Re: If Lumpy Was Wise
Post by: io on October 14, 2024, 04:34:19 PM
Nonsense. He'll be back next year... Bigger, leaner, lumpier. He lost this year because his lat lumps were yesterday's news. It's been done before. He'll have to innovate again. Bigger lumps. In new body parts. Lumps in places no one's ever seen before. Then the trophy will once again be his. Mark my words.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Rambone on October 14, 2024, 05:55:43 PM
“If you ain’t first, you’re lats.” - Minister Lumpsford
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: bhank on October 14, 2024, 10:34:33 PM
His legs just look weird to me short and bowlegged no calves additionally his arms are smooth but yeah his back is massive. He should go back to 212 or they should get rid of 212 and make height classes let 5foot8 be the over under
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: illuminati on October 14, 2024, 10:40:55 PM
His legs just look weird to me short and bowlegged no calves additionally his arms are smooth but yeah his back is massive. He should go back to 212 or they should get rid of 212 and make height classes let 5foot8 be the over under

Stolen Valor   why they kick you out of the army ? = Faggottry

Why did you have a parole officer ? = Beating up women
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: falco on October 15, 2024, 03:15:28 AM
“If you ain’t first, you’re lats.” - Minister Lumpsford

(https://media4.giphy.com/media/Q7ozWVYCR0nyW2rvPW/200w.gif)
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: wes on October 15, 2024, 03:48:52 AM
It’s Minister Lumpsford! Show some goddamn respect!
Pardon my ignorance sir,I will modulate my tone from now on where Minister Lumpsford is concerned.    :-[
Title: Re: If Lumpy Was Wise
Post by: Fortress on October 15, 2024, 10:16:28 AM
Nothing stops!

Double the doses

Triple the protein

LOL
Title: Re: If Lumpy Was Wise
Post by: Fortress on October 15, 2024, 10:18:54 AM
Nonsense. He'll be back next year … Bigger, leaner, lumpier. He lost this year because his lat lumps were yesterday's news. It's been done before. He'll have to innovate again. Bigger lumps. In new body parts. Lumps in places no one's ever seen before. Then the trophy will once again be his. Mark my words.

HAHAHAHAHAHA
Title: Re: If Lumpy Was Wise
Post by: Rambone on October 15, 2024, 10:23:56 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Lmao!!! Completely missed this post.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Van_Bilderass on October 15, 2024, 11:17:24 AM
Lunsford might have beat Hadi with a different judging panel. Luimarco posted this pic. Compare the quads.
Title: Re: If Lumpy Was Wise
Post by: irishdave on October 15, 2024, 11:38:48 AM
Nonsense. He'll be back next year... Bigger, leaner, lumpier. He lost this year because his lat lumps were yesterday's news. It's been done before. He'll have to innovate again. Bigger lumps. In new body parts. Lumps in places no one's ever seen before. Then the trophy will once again be his. Mark my words.

Funny guy  ;D
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: deadz on October 15, 2024, 12:07:48 PM
Listen to his post interviews, guy is devastated. His new gym will now likely go bankrupt.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: oldschoolfan on October 15, 2024, 02:23:51 PM
derrick is stupid in real life his wife does everything for him, she runs his social media , cooks his food derrick does not even know how to turn on a stove. worst mr olympia of all time on top of that
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Rambone on October 15, 2024, 03:15:03 PM
derrick is stupid in real life his wife does everything for him, she runs his social media , cooks his food derrick does not even know how to turn on a stove. worst mr olympia of all time on top of that

He’s got a very busy ministering schedule
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ESFitness on October 15, 2024, 03:21:27 PM
all the Jesus/christian bullshit was annoying. aside from that, his training vid's on YouTube weren't bad. dude's back looks great when he's standing  alone (or next to Hadi), but next to a regular-height dude he looks like a toddler.

"check out my worship playlist I listen to while training"  gets a Unsubscribe from me pretty quick
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Rambone on October 15, 2024, 03:32:55 PM
I’m going to check with my minster (Derek) to see if we can hold an emergency group prayer session for fellow Getbigger Funk51’s deteriorating mental health
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: MAXX on October 15, 2024, 04:15:27 PM
Lunsford might have beat Hadi with a different judging panel. Luimarco posted this pic. Compare the quads.
(https://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=694265.0;attach=1533158;image)
I'd say Hadis are about the same size but just looks more dense and detailed. Actually I'd say Hadis are bigger aswell not only denser.

2023 here where Derek had more fullness and sweep than this year
(https://www.gannikus.de/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/derek-lunsford-hadi-choopan-2023.png.webp)
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Fortress on October 15, 2024, 04:32:31 PM
To go from (new) champ to (just the next year) third must be quite a harsh reality with which to reconcile.

But as I say, he’s not reclaiming the throne, so to continue the abuse is beyond foolish.

He won a Mr. Olympia.

No one can take that away from him.

Quite an achievement.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: joswift on October 15, 2024, 04:35:42 PM
To go from (new) champ to (just the next year) third must be quite a harsh reality with which to reconcile.

But as I say, he’s not reclaiming the throne,so to continue the abuse is beyond foolish.

He won a Mr. Olympia.

No one can take that away from him.

Quite an achievement.

But Samir went from winning in 83 and then to 5th in 84 and he.........never mind......
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Rambone on October 15, 2024, 04:40:15 PM
I think Hadi should be a 3 time Mr. Olympia champ at this moment (and I don’t even like Muslims or midgets)
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: MAXX on October 15, 2024, 04:41:39 PM
To go from (new) champ to (just the next year) third must be quite a harsh reality with which to reconcile.

But as I say, he’s not reclaiming the throne, so to continue the abuse is beyond foolish.

He won a Mr. Olympia.

No one can take that away from him.

Quite an achievement.
Disagree. Would be wise to continue to abuse simply because of just how much better the price money are now. Should capitalize while having the chance to do so. Retiring he won't make anywhere near that money as being active and top 3

500k Arnold
600k Mr.O

2nd place maybe half?
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: AbrahamG on October 15, 2024, 06:48:42 PM
3rd for Derek might have been a gift.  Happy for Sampson although I feel like Hadi was better.  Especially at the night show.  Sure would have liked to have seen Fitz and Derek compared more directly as well as Andrew and Sampson. 
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ThisisOverload on October 15, 2024, 07:09:27 PM
worst mr olympia of all time on top of that

Agreed.

He's a complete hypocrite as well with all the Jesus stuff.

With the religious nonsense and ridiculous amount of obvious oil, he's near the worst in my book.

If he wants to pray to baby Jesus for his sins of injecting massive amounts of illegal drugs, that's on him. But keep that shit to yourself.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ThisisOverload on October 15, 2024, 07:11:12 PM
His new gym will now likely go bankrupt.

It will because he spent a bunch of money on things no gym goer cares about and thinks his name will be enough to stay afloat.

It will go under in less than 2 years.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: MAXX on October 16, 2024, 04:51:59 AM
Agreed.

He's a complete hypocrite as well with all the Jesus stuff.

With the religious nonsense and ridiculous amount of obvious oil, he's near the worst in my book.

If he wants to pray to baby Jesus for his sins of injecting massive amounts of illegal drugs, that's on him. But keep that shit to yourself.
Most christians are hypocrits and even worse than atheists. Because many of them just use the relgion as a disquise.

One example is a large poll done on christian practicing men that showed 60% of them where addicted to porn.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: joswift on October 16, 2024, 05:20:23 AM
Most christians are hypocrits and even worse than atheists. Because many of them just use the relgion as a disquise.

One example is a large poll done on christian practicing men that showed 60% of them where addicted to porn.
why would a christian admit to being addicted to porn?
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ESFitness on October 16, 2024, 02:30:28 PM
To go from (new) champ to (just the next year) third must be quite a harsh reality with which to reconcile.

But as I say, he’s not reclaiming the throne, so to continue the abuse is beyond foolish.

He won a Mr. Olympia.

No one can take that away from him.

Quite an achievement.

continue the abuse? retire? and do what? make $60k a year doing whatever his degree is in?

or continue to compete and earn $500k/yr for as long as his kidneys and heart are good?


 to suggest he quit now makes you seem jealous and not wanting another man to succeed. weird dude
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: joswift on October 16, 2024, 04:04:30 PM
continue the abuse? retire? and do what? make $60k a year doing whatever his degree is in?

or continue to compete and earn $500k/yr for as long as his kidneys and heart are good?


 to suggest he quit now makes you seem jealous and not wanting another man to succeed. weird dude
drug use at the pro level is abuse, pure and simple, these guys are on borrowed time

Hes never going to win again and will just start slipping down the placings, Samson is doing the Arnold so the win isnt happening there either.

Compete as long as his kidneys and heart are good?

You are aware once they are not good there is no fixing them?
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: falco on October 17, 2024, 02:18:45 AM
continue the abuse? retire? and do what? make $60k a year doing whatever his degree is in?

or continue to compete and earn $500k/yr for as long as his kidneys and heart are good?


 to suggest he quit now makes you seem jealous and not wanting another man to succeed. weird dude

It's not like those are car parts one can buy new and get on the road again.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ESFitness on October 17, 2024, 01:22:02 PM
It's not like those are car parts one can buy new and get on the road again.
drug use at the pro level is abuse, pure and simple, these guys are on borrowed time

Hes never going to win again and will just start slipping down the placings, Samson is doing the Arnold so the win isnt happening there either.

Compete as long as his kidneys and heart are good?

You are aware once they are not good there is no fixing them?


after watching Lunsford's vid's, I doubt stage 4 CKD or congestive heart failure is going to sneak up on him.

or do you guys think you know about his health better than he does? honest question.


also, where else is he going to make 1/2 million a year for the next 3yrs?  use his engineering or accounting degree and make $60-100k?

continue bodybuilding = $1.5 million
go back to work = $180k-$300k

some people would rather punish success or wish others would fail, rather than do better themselves.

jealous men would rather drag winners down, because the winner's success casts their faults and failures in an even dimmer light

it's like seeing a guy drive past in a Ferrari while sitting in your Mercedes. Instead of thinking "hey, I gotta figure out how to get a Ferrari", it's easier to wish the Ferrari guy crashes and ends up in a Honda, not even a Lexus.

that mindset is like a virus & gladly I don't have it. I can't relate
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: joswift on October 17, 2024, 01:53:27 PM

after watching Lunsford's vid's, I doubt stage 4 CKD or congestive heart failure is going to sneak up on him.

or do you guys think you know about his health better than he does? honest question.


also, where else is he going to make 1/2 million a year for the next 3yrs?  use his engineering or accounting degree and make $60-100k?

continue bodybuilding = $1.5 million
go back to work = $180k-$300k

some people would rather punish success or wish others would fail, rather than do better themselves.

jealous men would rather drag winners down, because the winner's success casts their faults and failures in an even dimmer light

it's like seeing a guy drive past in a Ferrari while sitting in your Mercedes. Instead of thinking "hey, I gotta figure out how to get a Ferrari", it's easier to wish the Ferrari guy crashes and ends up in a Honda, not even a Lexus.

that mindset is like a virus & gladly I don't have it. I can't relate
By the way Derek Anthony was a cokehead meth addict GHB attic painkiller addict who dance naked for men let men jerk them off to pay for his drugs. Me? I'm not a cool kid I'm not a meth addict that shit ain't my thing never was never has been never will be. Derek Anthony? That do can burn in hell for all I care fucking piece of shit. The world is a better place without that mother fucker. I've been essentially clean off of antibiotics for damn near 2 years minus a handful of HRT injections including Maybe three injections for injections in the past I don't know maybe a month or so since I've been out of the hospital. Sure I had an addiction to heroin but I never had the fucking have no dudes jerk me off to pay for it. And I was smart enough to realize when it was a fucking problem and I went to rehab. Ever see Derek Anthony go to rehab? No in fact I went to rehab twice. Me and Derek Anthony ain't the same. Even though I may be 205 pounds or so and what was Derek maybe 230-240 I don't give a fuck if I saw him in person I kick his teeth on his fucking throat the same way I would anybody else to run their fucking mouth. Like I said I do not give a fuck
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: falco on October 17, 2024, 03:36:39 PM

after watching Lunsford's vid's, I doubt stage 4 CKD or congestive heart failure is going to sneak up on him.

or do you guys think you know about his health better than he does? honest question.


also, where else is he going to make 1/2 million a year for the next 3yrs?  use his engineering or accounting degree and make $60-100k?

continue bodybuilding = $1.5 million
go back to work = $180k-$300k

some people would rather punish success or wish others would fail, rather than do better themselves.

jealous men would rather drag winners down, because the winner's success casts their faults and failures in an even dimmer light

it's like seeing a guy drive past in a Ferrari while sitting in your Mercedes. Instead of thinking "hey, I gotta figure out how to get a Ferrari", it's easier to wish the Ferrari guy crashes and ends up in a Honda, not even a Lexus.

that mindset is like a virus & gladly I don't have it. I can't relate
You have a fertile imagination. You were saying Derek should juice till he piss blood, for the sake of earning money, and i only replied that his health should come first. I am being positive i believe. His family needs him, not a corpse, no matter how much money he leaves them.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ESFitness on October 17, 2024, 04:28:29 PM
You have a fertile imagination. You were saying Derek should juice till he piss blood, for the sake of earning money, and i only replied that his health should come first. I am being positive i believe. His family needs him, not a corpse, no matter how much money he leaves them.

In his reply, the user appears to be reframing my argument to suggest that I'm advocating for Derek Lunsford to prioritize money over his health, implying that I'm supporting a reckless approach. Let's break it down further:

Tone shift and exaggeration: He accuses me of saying that Derek should "juice till he piss blood," which exaggerates my point. Nowhere did i suggest pushing health to that extreme, but rather questioned others' assumptions about Derek's ability to manage his health.

Focus on family: He shifts the conversation to an emotional argument, stating that Derek's family needs him alive, not as a "corpse," which is designed to make me appear indifferent to health risks in favor of financial gain. This appeals to an audience's sense of responsibility and emotional values regarding family over career.

Redirection of the debate: Instead of addressing the specific economic comparison I made (about Derek's earnings in bodybuilding versus other professions), the reply redirects the discussion to health, sidestepping my key argument about financial success.

Portraying his stance as positive: He positions himself as the one with a more "positive" outlook, claiming that prioritizing health is a more noble or commendable goal, despite not engaging with the practical considerations I raised regarding career longevity and earning potential.

His response doesn't directly address the balance between health management and financial success that I was trying to highlight. Instead, he reframes it into an emotional appeal with a focus on risk and family needs.

The argument he's using can be classified as a strawman argument. A strawman occurs when someone misrepresents or exaggerates an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. In this case, he exaggerates my point about Derek's career and health management into something extreme: that I'm suggesting Derek should "juice till he piss blood," which isn't what I implied.

Additionally, this argument also contains elements of an appeal to emotion (pathos). By emphasizing Derek's family needing him alive, he’s using an emotional appeal to shift focus away from the logical economic comparison i presented and draw attention to the potential tragic consequences of neglecting health.

What type of person would use such an argument?
Someone who wants to discredit my point: They feel that their original argument is weak, so they distort or exaggerate my stance to make it easier to dismiss. They focus on an emotional aspect (health, family) to avoid engaging with the more complex issue of balancing health risks with career decisions.

Someone who debates emotionally, like a woman: They may prioritize emotional appeals over logic, especially in discussions involving sensitive issues like health, family, or life risks. This type of person may struggle with staying focused on objective reasoning and instead tries to win the argument by appealing to the emotions of others.

Someone feeling defensive: He may feel personally attacked or challenged by my reply and could be reacting by diverting the conversation into a more extreme and emotionally charged direction to put me on the defensive. This could be an attempt to gain moral high ground in the discussion.

In essence, the person may either be trying to manipulate the conversation to avoid addressing the practical point i raised or genuinely believes that silly emotional appeals will resonate more strongly with others.

So there's that..
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: joswift on October 17, 2024, 04:32:57 PM
In his reply, the user appears to be reframing my argument to suggest that I'm advocating for Derek Lunsford to prioritize money over his health, implying that I'm supporting a reckless approach. Let's break it down further:

Tone shift and exaggeration: He accuses me of saying that Derek should "juice till he piss blood," which exaggerates my point. Nowhere did i suggest pushing health to that extreme, but rather questioned others' assumptions about Derek's ability to manage his health.

Focus on family: He shifts the conversation to an emotional argument, stating that Derek's family needs him alive, not as a "corpse," which is designed to make me appear indifferent to health risks in favor of financial gain. This appeals to an audience's sense of responsibility and emotional values regarding family over career.

Redirection of the debate: Instead of addressing the specific economic comparison I made (about Derek's earnings in bodybuilding versus other professions), the reply redirects the discussion to health, sidestepping my key argument about financial success.

Portraying his stance as positive: He positions himself as the one with a more "positive" outlook, claiming that prioritizing health is a more noble or commendable goal, despite not engaging with the practical considerations I raised regarding career longevity and earning potential.

His response doesn't directly address the balance between health management and financial success that I was trying to highlight. Instead, he reframes it into an emotional appeal with a focus on risk and family needs.

The argument he's using can be classified as a strawman argument. A strawman occurs when someone misrepresents or exaggerates an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. In this case, he exaggerates my point about Derek's career and health management into something extreme: that I'm suggesting Derek should "juice till he piss blood," which isn't what I implied.

Additionally, this argument also contains elements of an appeal to emotion (pathos). By emphasizing Derek's family needing him alive, he’s using an emotional appeal to shift focus away from the logical economic comparison i presented and draw attention to the potential tragic consequences of neglecting health.

What type of person would use such an argument?
Someone who wants to discredit my point: They feel that their original argument is weak, so they distort or exaggerate my stance to make it easier to dismiss. They focus on an emotional aspect (health, family) to avoid engaging with the more complex issue of balancing health risks with career decisions.

Someone who debates emotionally, like a woman: They may prioritize emotional appeals over logic, especially in discussions involving sensitive issues like health, family, or life risks. This type of person may struggle with staying focused on objective reasoning and instead tries to win the argument by appealing to the emotions of others.

Someone feeling defensive: He may feel personally attacked or challenged by my reply and could be reacting by diverting the conversation into a more extreme and emotionally charged direction to put me on the defensive. This could be an attempt to gain moral high ground in the discussion.

In essence, the person may either be trying to manipulate the conversation to avoid addressing the practical point i raised or genuinely believes that silly emotional appeals will resonate more strongly with others.

So there's that..
(https://media1.tenor.com/m/ZykHOca_E2AAAAAC/mark-cuban-shark-tank.gif)
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ThisisOverload on October 17, 2024, 04:57:38 PM

after watching Lunsford's vid's, I doubt stage 4 CKD or congestive heart failure is going to sneak up on him.

or do you guys think you know about his health better than he does? honest question.


also, where else is he going to make 1/2 million a year for the next 3yrs?  use his engineering or accounting degree and make $60-100k?

continue bodybuilding = $1.5 million
go back to work = $180k-$300k

some people would rather punish success or wish others would fail, rather than do better themselves.

jealous men would rather drag winners down, because the winner's success casts their faults and failures in an even dimmer light

it's like seeing a guy drive past in a Ferrari while sitting in your Mercedes. Instead of thinking "hey, I gotta figure out how to get a Ferrari", it's easier to wish the Ferrari guy crashes and ends up in a Honda, not even a Lexus.

that mindset is like a virus & gladly I don't have it. I can't relate

Being dead by 40 doesn't sound like a good retirement plan.

He started a gym and will lose his ass in 2 years because he isn't very smart.

If he invested the winnings he has today wisely and got a good engineering job making $120k per year, he'd be fine. But i'm thinking based on his intelligence of a doorknob he'd be a shit engineer and worth maybe $80k.

Ferraris are shit cars to drive daily. Get a sweet AMG Merc with 600+ HP and reliability.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ESFitness on October 17, 2024, 05:00:09 PM
Being dead by 40 doesn't sound like a good retirement plan.

He started a gym and will lose his ass in 2 years because he isn't very smart.

If he invested the winnings he has today wisely and got a good engineering job making $120k per year, he'd be fine. But i'm thinking based on his intelligence of a doorknob he'd be a shit engineer and worth maybe $80k.

Ferraris are shit cars to drive daily. Get a sweet AMG Merc with 600+ HP and reliability.

I'm a Porsche guy myself
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ThisisOverload on October 17, 2024, 05:04:14 PM
I'm a Porsche guy myself

Same.

They are reasonable daily drivers.

I have an eye on a 911 GT3 that's been for sale locally.

Need to see how the market goes after the election.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: illuminati on October 17, 2024, 05:39:31 PM
Same.

They are reasonable daily drivers.

I have an eye on a 911 GT3 that's been for sale locally.

Need to see how the market goes after the election.


Great cars - well out of my Porsche price league.
Mind I'm happy with my boxster & C4s.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: falco on October 18, 2024, 01:59:26 AM
In his reply, the user appears to be reframing my argument to suggest that I'm advocating for Derek Lunsford to prioritize money over his health, implying that I'm supporting a reckless approach. Let's break it down further:

Tone shift and exaggeration: He accuses me of saying that Derek should "juice till he piss blood," which exaggerates my point. Nowhere did i suggest pushing health to that extreme, but rather questioned others' assumptions about Derek's ability to manage his health.

Focus on family: He shifts the conversation to an emotional argument, stating that Derek's family needs him alive, not as a "corpse," which is designed to make me appear indifferent to health risks in favor of financial gain. This appeals to an audience's sense of responsibility and emotional values regarding family over career.

Redirection of the debate: Instead of addressing the specific economic comparison I made (about Derek's earnings in bodybuilding versus other professions), the reply redirects the discussion to health, sidestepping my key argument about financial success.

Portraying his stance as positive: He positions himself as the one with a more "positive" outlook, claiming that prioritizing health is a more noble or commendable goal, despite not engaging with the practical considerations I raised regarding career longevity and earning potential.

His response doesn't directly address the balance between health management and financial success that I was trying to highlight. Instead, he reframes it into an emotional appeal with a focus on risk and family needs.

The argument he's using can be classified as a strawman argument. A strawman occurs when someone misrepresents or exaggerates an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. In this case, he exaggerates my point about Derek's career and health management into something extreme: that I'm suggesting Derek should "juice till he piss blood," which isn't what I implied.

Additionally, this argument also contains elements of an appeal to emotion (pathos). By emphasizing Derek's family needing him alive, he’s using an emotional appeal to shift focus away from the logical economic comparison i presented and draw attention to the potential tragic consequences of neglecting health.

What type of person would use such an argument?
Someone who wants to discredit my point: They feel that their original argument is weak, so they distort or exaggerate my stance to make it easier to dismiss. They focus on an emotional aspect (health, family) to avoid engaging with the more complex issue of balancing health risks with career decisions.

Someone who debates emotionally, like a woman: They may prioritize emotional appeals over logic, especially in discussions involving sensitive issues like health, family, or life risks. This type of person may struggle with staying focused on objective reasoning and instead tries to win the argument by appealing to the emotions of others.

Someone feeling defensive: He may feel personally attacked or challenged by my reply and could be reacting by diverting the conversation into a more extreme and emotionally charged direction to put me on the defensive. This could be an attempt to gain moral high ground in the discussion.

In essence, the person may either be trying to manipulate the conversation to avoid addressing the practical point i raised or genuinely believes that silly emotional appeals will resonate more strongly with others.

So there's that..

Nothing wrong with writting essais for strangers in the internet, regarding life options of other strangers.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: oldschoolfan on October 19, 2024, 11:28:21 AM
He’s got a very busy ministering schedule

rambo do you think god will answer derricks prayers and bless him with the olympia title next year lumps and all and no veins in his arms. and also do you think he will forgive derrick for doing a ton of strucks and letting hairy and rich arab schmoes destroy his asshole
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: oldschoolfan on October 19, 2024, 11:33:02 AM
derrick lost out big this year, he made what 100 before taxes and before hany took his cut. so lets say hany takes his 20% off the bat

thats 20k -  so now he down to 80 before taxes  and other expenses i doubt he cleared 40k  after it is all said and done, he took a huge loss this year and this moron just opened a gym as well.

Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Rambone on October 19, 2024, 12:38:08 PM
rambo do you think god will answer derricks prayers and bless him with the olympia title next year lumps and all and no veins in his arms. and also do you think he will forgive derrick for doing a ton of strucks and letting hairy and rich arab schmoes destroy his asshole

I think Minister Derelict Lumpsworth should be on his knees begging and pleading to the Lord above for improved arm vascularity and turnip thigh mass and separation.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: falco on October 19, 2024, 12:39:48 PM
derrick lost out big this year, he made what 100 before taxes and before hany took his cut. so lets say hany takes his 20% off the bat

thats 20k -  so now he down to 80 before taxes  and other expenses i doubt he cleared 40k  after it is all said and done, he took a huge loss this year and this moron just opened a gym as well.
Maybe he openend the gym to do money laudering for the church.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: oldschoolfan on October 19, 2024, 01:09:27 PM
I think Minister Derelict Lumpsworth should be on his knees begging and pleading to the Lord above for improved arm vascularity and turnip thigh mass and separation.


rambo  i am not making this up  that close homo greg doucette actually said derrick had one of the best backs of all time ! i got a good chuckle out of that
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: oldschoolfan on October 19, 2024, 01:10:13 PM
Maybe he openend the gym to do money laudering for the church.

falco that is actually a pretty good observation. derrick is a man of the lord, he serves god and himself !
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Rambone on October 19, 2024, 02:03:37 PM

rambo  i am not making this up  that close homo greg doucette actually said derrick had one of the best backs of all time ! i got a good chuckle out of that

Coming from the parrot from Aladdin, I would take this opinion with a grain of salt
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: TRIX on October 19, 2024, 03:01:44 PM
how can you have shredded glutes, but no definition on the front of your body
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: falco on October 19, 2024, 03:07:24 PM
how can you have shredded glutes, but no definition on the front of your body
You are on to something there. You mean glute control might be chemically induced and not solely trained?
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: deadz on October 19, 2024, 03:20:22 PM
derrick lost out big this year, he made what 100 before taxes and before hany took his cut. so lets say hany takes his 20% off the bat

thats 20k -  so now he down to 80 before taxes  and other expenses i doubt he cleared 40k  after it is all said and done, he took a huge loss this year and this moron just opened a gym as well.
100k in garbage in this life. Poverty if you have a family to support.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: oldschoolfan on October 19, 2024, 07:09:15 PM
how can you have shredded glutes, but no definition on the front of your body

He had no veins in his biceps it baffles me how this midget lump turd got third or even won last year I know he is at his church praying to god to bless him again with the a Mr Olympia win
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: illuminati on October 19, 2024, 08:00:29 PM
how can you have shredded glutes, but no definition on the front of your body

Drugs- notice all top 3 have full round bloated faces - no death face for them.

They're using different drugs nowadays.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: oldschoolfan on October 20, 2024, 04:07:51 AM
Drugs- notice all top 3 have full round bloated faces - no death face for them.

They're using different drugs nowadays.

do you think they are even doing much cardio?  shit i remember shawn ray said he did two hrs every day going into a show and the food he ate was normal and basic i dont think he had a guru either .  nick walker probably couldnt even walk up a flight of stairs  without being out of breath
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: illuminati on October 20, 2024, 05:08:14 AM
do you think they are even doing much cardio?  shit i remember shawn ray said he did two hrs every day going into a show and the food he ate was normal and basic i dont think he had a guru either .  nick walker probably couldnt even walk up a flight of stairs  without being out of breath


By the look of them I very much doubt it. I'd strongly doubt they're
dieting very hard either - I really don't like to use the Term "all drugs"
only very clearly things are very different now - Not All drugs maybe
Just different Drugs.  Look at Samson's conditioning it was far from
anything dry / tight - Hadi yes he always bring the conditioning.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: joswift on October 20, 2024, 06:48:08 AM
no cardio, no real diet, they just sit about all day weighing food and watching TV throwing down T3,T5, Clen, DNP and going through half assed workouts while gassing out doing bicep curls
Title: Re: Why dont people like Minister Lumpsford?
Post by: POB on October 20, 2024, 08:23:12 AM
What would like to see him do to excite you more?

Stick his tongue out more
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: illuminati on October 20, 2024, 09:32:51 AM
no cardio, no real diet, they just sit about all day weighing food and watching TV throwing down T3,T5, Clen, DNP and going through half assed workouts while gassing out doing bicep curls

Quite probably - I have to say I've seen a few clips of Hadi training
& he does appear to push himself hard.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: oldschoolfan on October 20, 2024, 09:44:31 AM

By the look of them I very much doubt it. I'd strongly doubt they're
dieting very hard either - I really don't like to use the Term "all drugs"
only very clearly things are very different now - Not All drugs maybe
Just different Drugs.  Look at Samson's conditioning it was far from
anything dry / tight - Hadi yes he always bring the conditioning.


you have a great point there.

i recent watched some old videos of shawn ray , and levrone training, none of these guys even train remotely that hard.and yates to of course. hell paul dillet in his prime would have smoked dauda 
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: Van_Bilderass on October 21, 2024, 03:22:04 AM
That's an interesting post by ES. I just want to know "how" he wrote it because it's not in his usual style. ;D It contains well written aspects specific to those replies though. Really, I'd be curious  ;D
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: beakdoctor on October 21, 2024, 09:21:08 AM
That's an interesting post by ES. I just want to know "how" he wrote it because it's not in his usual style. ;D It contains well written aspects specific to those replies though. Really, I'd be curious  ;D

I was thinking an AI app.
Title: Re: 2024 Olympia - Minister Derek Lungsford losing is good for the sport
Post by: ESFitness on October 21, 2024, 03:53:11 PM

rambo  i am not making this up  that close homo greg doucette actually said derrick had one of the best backs of all time ! i got a good chuckle out of that

standing by himself or next to someone similar height, he does have one of the best backs of all time. He's on the Mt. Rushmore of backs along with Dorian, Ronnie, & Stubbs. Put him next to taller guys and he looks like a child, but that doesn't make his back any less developed.

look at Momo or Franco Colombo.