Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Fake Natties Will Never Admit that It's All Drugs
#1
Training is the least important part of the equation. Nutrition and drugs are the true pillars of modern hypertrophy. Fake natties will never admit to that. 

They prefer the spectators to think that some stupid routine is the secret. This is how they keep you in the labyrinth of delusions. You keep looking for an exit, but you are not going to find it. You will stay there wondering forever. They will give you an endless number of routines while knowing very well that "Dbol" is where it's at. 

Sure, intelligent strength training is required to perform your barbell duties on a high level, but as far as mass is concerned - it's all about the hormones. All fake natties use more than they say - kinda like the girls who purposely reduce the number of guys that have entered the temple to look less slutty. This is why you should always multiply a woman's body count by 3.
Reply
#2
(02-13-2019, 01:44 PM)TruthSeeker Wrote: Training is the least important part of the equation. Nutrition and drugs are the true pillars of modern hypertrophy. Fake natties will never admit to that. 

They prefer the spectators to think that some stupid routine is the secret. This is how they keep you in the labyrinth of delusions. You keep looking for an exit, but you are not going to find it. You will stay there wondering forever. They will give you an endless number of routines while knowing very well that "Dbol" is where it's at. 

Sure, intelligent strength training is required to perform your barbell duties on a high level, but as far as mass is concerned - it's all about the hormones.
 
Would make a nice wallpaper for the gyms: drugs > nutrition > training

(02-13-2019, 01:44 PM)TruthSeeker Wrote: ... kinda like the girls who purposely reduce the number of guys that have entered the temple to look less slutty. This is why you should always multiply a woman's body count by 3.

Right. It's multiplication for women ... and division for men.
Reply
#3
Drugs + Genes > 99% of the results.

I would also add that progressive overload is bullshit for muscle mass. Yeah if you want to reach certain personal record for reps x weight is good, but for muscle volume doesn't really matter that much as it is over represented by the youtube gurus.
I didn't do any specific training, just random stuff, to go from 3x8 bodyweight dips to 3x8x20kg, and i gained a lot of muscle mass(for my physique at least).
After I started training with serious progressive overload program, calculated rests between sets and workouts, meals and stuff, I definitely gained a lot strength > 3x8x50kg, but insignificant amount of muscle mass ???. Same happened with pull ups and squats. Going beyond certain workout volume will be pointless for muscle mass volume.
I know bunch of guys going on these street workout bars and they do only bodyweight pull ups, dips, leg raises and some jump squats and they are muscular as much as me without doing any progressive overload crap like me for years. Even without counting calories.

So my conclusion is if you want to reach certain strength/endurance goal go for progressive overload, but don't expect the crazy gains.

I think TruthSeeker said in between these lines > even if you do all the hard work and right moves that doesn't mean life will serve you success on a plate.
Reply
#4
(02-14-2019, 09:13 AM)twp Wrote: Drugs + Genes > 99% of the results.

I would also add that progressive overload is bullshit for muscle mass. Yeah if you want to reach certain personal record for reps x weight is good, but for muscle volume doesn't really matter that much as it is over represented by the youtube gurus.
I didn't do any specific training, just random stuff, to go from 3x8 bodyweight dips to 3x8x20kg, and i gained a lot of muscle mass(for my physique at least).
After I started training with serious progressive overload program, calculated rests between sets and workouts, meals and stuff, I definitely gained a lot strength > 3x8x50kg, but insignificant amount of muscle mass ???. Same happened with pull ups and squats. Going beyond certain workout volume will be pointless for muscle mass volume.
I know bunch of guys going on these street workout bars and they do only bodyweight pull ups, dips, leg raises and some jump squats and they are muscular as much as me without doing any progressive overload crap like me for years. Even without counting calories.

So my conclusion is if you want to reach certain strength/endurance goal go for progressive overload, but don't expect the crazy gains.

I think TruthSeeker said in between these lines > even if you do all the hard work and right moves that doesn't mean life will serve you success on a plate.

Progressive overload is probably the only thing that does work... but the problem is that there's a lot of misinformation on what it is and most people don't do it right.
1) New to training, or an exercise: the progressive overload that occurs right away is just neural adaption.  The exercise may feel heavy or awkward, but your muscles are usually big enough to handle it, it's a matter of learning the movement pattern. Each week you'll progress but your muscles wont have a lot of reason to grow.  It's like the first time you bench, your arms shake/etc with light weight, you then add 5 pounds to the bar each week , but you're not growing, you're just adapting.

2) If body adapted to exercise: progressive overload will work if done properly, but a lot of times people use different compensation techniques to tell themselves they are progressing, but they end up using less range-of-motion on a few reps, or they start using using other body parts in isolation movements, etc .. anything to say they did more...

I think the problem is that progressive overload concept is pretty easy to understand but very hard to actually do.
Reply
#5
Progressive overload is not technically a scam. It's simply a concept that is given too many properties and responsibilities that it cannot satisfy.

One of the biggest reasons why progressive overload can seem to be totally useless is the fact that past a certain point it actually is useless in terms of muscle gains.

A lot of the adaptation is mental (CNS) and connected tissue related. Hence why some guys look weaker than they are.

Let's say that you take your deadlift from 400lbs to 475lbs without visual changes other than placebo. Where is the strength coming from? If you haven't gained weight, it comes from CNS and joint adaptation.

This is why smart bodybuilders don't bother as much with strength. It's counterproductive and risky.
Reply
#6
One instagram guru admittied using steroids. As a result people started to make fun of him. Pure natties still look for proper form and believe that thay will have ''3D-delts'' in three, six or sixteen months.
That guru copy global scammers like Scobby and do not want to realise that men going to gym because of women. He is nota a fool, but he balances between the true and the money.
Reply
#7
‘Liver King’ influencer stuns followers with huge admission

"Yes, I’ve done steroids. And yes, I’m on steroids.

He made the admission ... days after his $11,000-a-month habit was exposed"
Reply
#8
Sadly anyone with adequate training experience would know he was full of shit. However pieces of shit like that feast on the next and upcoming generation of noobs, youngsters and dreamers. Works every go round.
Reply
#9
What is the psychology of why athlete fans are so desperate to believe that their heroes are natural? I see 30+ year old grown men say for example Evander Holyfield was on steroids but their own favorite, Mike Tyson, wasnt and was a "genetic freak". Why are people so eager to believe?
Reply
#10
(11-25-2023, 10:24 AM)Loverboy Wrote: What is the psychology of why athlete fans are so desperate to believe that their heroes are natural? I see 30+ year old grown men say for example Evander Holyfield was on steroids but their own favorite, Mike Tyson, wasnt and was a "genetic freak". Why are people so eager to believe?

Firstly, I’m not a boxing expert, so apologies for everyone in advance. I think that in this case the saying “false evidence appearing real” is at least one of the reasons why people want to believe. Mike is and was the wet dream of every casual boxing fan. Back at the day, he was one of the big superstars in the world, and rightly so. He became the youngest heavyweight champion of the world, and to my knowledge, he still is. It’s like the late great hall of fame boxing trainer Manny Steward said, Mike did more to boxing, especially to heavyweight boxing than any other boxer after Ali. Steward also recalled how during Tyson’s prime in the 80’s, people would leave from the clubs etc. at night just to see Mike fight and destroy his opponent. Brutal KOs with heads snapping back and all that. Even though most of Mike’s fights took only a round or two, everybody wanted to se him fight.

Mike also had a compelling story. Coming from rags to riches and getting under the tutelage of Cus D’Amato who mold him into a fighting machine. The fascinating peek-a-boo style and all the real fear that Mike instilled in his opponents. And the fake stories of Mike being being a nephew of Sonny Liston. How he avenged Ali’s loss to Holmes. All these things grew his legendary story. People really were into him, the Kid Dynamite. He even got his own Nintendo game.

I think Evander wasn’t ever really loved that much by the general public. Although as a fighter he was much more than Mike. He came to heavyweight from the lower weight class. Probably did it better than anyone has ever done, to this day. He fought all the best fighters, many of them multiple times. Technical boxer, great ring IQ, he had everything. And many think that contrary to Mike, Evander also had that iron will that Mike seemed to lack when things actually got tough.

To me, many seem to remember the controversies over Evander. It’s said that Mike was really BIG from a very young age, even though short, he was heavy and without fat. It’s also said that he was beating up grown up men who actually knew how to box at a time when young Mike didn’t really know how to box himself. Judging from the stories, people may believe he just was a big guy from the beginning. When Evander jumped from cruiserweight to heavyweight. he did seem to grow a lot. He also ended up with all the classic symptoms of PED-usage. Hair loss, 3D-shoulders, enormous traps and gynecomastia. His face seemed suddenly very old too. Then he had the notorious “Evan Fields” incident, where he had ordered testosterone and growth hormone and whatnot using the afore mentioned name, Evan Fields. I don’t remember all about the incident and I’m too lazy to check the facts but the stories can be easily found in the web. Holyfield also did have some heart problems during his career if I remember correctly.

In the end, I think Holyfield’s usage was just too evident and transparent for people. He also had a lot of bad luck and bad media tension. And it looks like he really had a great response to all those drugs in bodybuilding sense which of course made it worse. Mike’s aura seemed to protect his reputation better when it comes to PEDs. At least in eyes of a regular sports fan. Of course the truth is a bit different, TS has actually gone through with this long time ago in the article https://nattyornot.com/mike-tyson/.

I really think that Evander just had bad luck, similarly to how Larry Holmes who never seems to get enough praise of his career because of the way he won Ali. To me they were all drugged in the 80’s. At least the heavyweights, for example Frank Bruno. Google the name and you’ll see. People have just always fell in love with Mike and his story. And it’s the same with any sport, or with movie stars. People just love them, and they don’t want to believe.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)