^ B. Hank,
For a personal definition, that makes sense.
I feel similarly, which is part of why I want be 175-lb is because I want to be the fastest man in my city who can bench press 350. I also want to be within reach of my BMI, have blood pressure of 110/70, a resting heart rate under 55, and have all other health markers not only in the healthy range, but in the optimal range. I don't want a gut, which I assume will make it harder to get full use of your dick when you fornicate with a woman. It is my preference to not use cycles, except maybe 3-week oral cycles a few times a decade, just to look good for brief windows so that I can claim to be natural in those pictures. Jk.
Mainly because I don't want my testicles and my hairline to retreat!
There's an ad on YouTube that's been playing recently...maybe for Hotels.com or something...in it, a bellhop from the future comes and gives his last self a bunch of information. The past self asks the future self visiting him if he has anything else to say, and he takes off his bellhop hat and says "We're bald."
Also, ugly - but that doesn't get mentioned.
So as you can see - I have many goals which prevent from being my personal strongest in terms of absolute numbers I can achieve; mainly a body weight bottleneck.
I do not wish to be 180-lb or more, and I don't want to have a physique that I need to juice to maintain.
How many retired pros look like they never picked up a weight in their life, let alone juiced to the gills for years? That must be a tough pill to swallow. Especially if they not only maintain few if any of their juice gains, but also have side effects to that stick around.
I want to be the strongest I can be within a HUGE number of constraints that seriously limit me.
But back to strength, what contest do you think measures pure strength the most accurately in your opinion?
