except thats not what happened, plus he posted ITT anyway

You're drawing a false dichotomy. No one is advocating excluding curls. They're useful skill specific work, and, in some rare individuals like dzh alleges he is, could be superior to rowing/chins to increase arm size.

The point is that the idea is so fundamentally flawed. Like no one ever argues that tricep kickbacks build huge arms. Why?

how did you read that argument and conclude it was just the premise of it that we had a problem with?

Nobody's arguing that a substantial amount of lean body mass isn't needed to look good.

no, this has nothing to do with curls or not doing curls. this has to do with the zealot, closed minded, only the party line goes, attitude of almost everyone here. INCIDENTALLY, i think the ideas you circle jerkers have are really amazing and great... but anklebreaker has always been one of the best posters and he said he was going to, to paraphrase, "indulge in nycballers ridiculous demands of proof" and then proceeded to give not too pertinent information, which nycballer pointed out, and then was banned.

i suppose it's possible that some or all of you have indepth knowledge of these subjects, but it is extremely suspicious how they so often say "do your own research." like, isn't the point of this forum to share information? and isn't everyone only too keen to repeat SOME information over and over and over again? and what is conclusive for me is that from most people i have never even seen any post which can serve as an example of how a person does have that indpeth knowledge.

the one example i can think of off the top of my head is kyle and his understanding of anatomy, baseball, and perhaps even strength training in general. but beyond that, it would really be best if you guys had the courage, every once in a while, to say "i don't know." perhaps to engage in constructive debate, research, and learning together... but really, i am trying to live in a different reality because we all know that learning and helping others is not most peoples objective.

Projection ITT.

to who? bodybuilders or the rest of the population? cause you'd be right on one count and wrong on the other

Search my posts for nutrition. I say "I don't know anything about this subject" about 200 times in this forum. Well, aside from the basic stuff like "set calories, then protein, then who cares." Which covers the needs of 95% of requests, mind you.

this is a health and fitness forum, yet i'm getting ripped by people who are overweight and would get beat by most girls in a mile run. you'd think this was a strictly bodybuilding forum because 25% bf, 10:00 mile, and 0 pullups is completely ok and even looked up to apparently as long as you can squat 300 pounds. you'd be completely laughed at by anyone who isn't a bodybuilder for claiming that to be healthy, fit, or even desirable

It's called "Different goals." And again, a point you have repeatedly failed to address, some of us are in different parts of our mesocycles compared to your... poorly defined ideas of fitness.

Additionally, some people may be training for powerlifting or weightlifting. What exactly is the point of cutting for them beyond making weight for competition? None.

Feel free to start your own threads about running a sweet mile and busting out mad kipping pullups while squatting 135. We call that "CrossFit" around here. You might enjoy their forums a bit more.

you have as much lbm as a girl

weak + small + one pullup + it means u line me up next to most of the people here and ask who is more in shape they would say myself = fit

nyc, stop talk talk talking that blah blah blah

why is squatting the end all of everything? if i told u i could curl x amount u'd be think LOL BIG DEAL BRO I SQUAT X. you sound just as stupid as the bros who rip on someone for not being able to curl x amount, every single rebuttal has to do with how much someone squats. see how absurd that is? you care about a quad dominant excercise, fantastic. someone else who excels in a bicep dominant excercise has just as much ground to brag as you do.

It clearly doesn't matter that lets say I have good endurance, am a fast runner, can do alot of pullups, chinups, and a bunch of other excercises but my squat sucks so therefore i'm as not fit, big whatever you want to call it. Apparently its better to excel in 1 excercise then many, that makes sense

so then why does everyone here rip on someone for not caring about the squat but just getting ripped and in shape?

what part of my idea of fitness is poorly defined? that it should include not being overweight? or that it should not include being able to beat at least most girls in a mile run? or that you should at least have to be able to do a chinup?

Strength is the most general fitness aspect btw. Everything is dependent on it, while it depends on nothing.

You know there are posters here that are stronger than you, leaner than you, can run further and faster than you, do more pull ups than you, basically in every aspect of fitness someone here beats you. I doubt you are top in a single category you can think of, including what the average female thinks. Yet you insult these same people as if you are hot **** and they are fat and out of shape. Ridiculous.

no doubt about that. but there is no doubt that overall i am in vastly better shape then most here, i can tell by the diet advice and the general lack of care for anything other then how much u squat, and besides the fact of the resident experts being overweight. the point tho has nothing to do with me, it has to do with what is considered to be healthy, fit, and "in shape". Is it some 240 dude with a beer gut who can squat 350 or a 170 pound dude with 12% bodyfat

lol if we are talking about which body type women find more attractive there is absolutely no contest there buddy


someone who is 25% bodyfat is fat and out of shape. how could you possibly argue this point?

Squatting is the most important exercise for almost any fitness goal. Squats are not quad dominant necessarily.

It would be better to be a good squatter than all upper body exercises put together in terms of athletic ability.

is a person who can run marathons and has a bf% of less than 10% "in shape" even though he or she can't bench the bar (or a piece of hollow foam)?

You actually think you have the most desirable physique to females out of everyone on this forum? Are you really this narcissistic?

25% BF does not necessarily mean out of shape. There are plenty of professional athletes who would fit the bill.

Also that doesn't necessarily represent someones end goal. Gaining mass is a means to an end, their long term goal is not necessarily to carry that amount of fat but you don't know anything about long term goals I am sure.

Please use specific words. What exactly is "in shape"? Are you specifically referring to cardiovascular fitness? Most people don't care about running because the latter is negatively correlated with the former. I happen to care almost solely about my looks. Lifting crap is a means to be more vain. Squatting is an excellent way to build muscle, which prevents people from just being manorexic and having sufficient LBM to be "ripped". Assuming that the idea of "ripped" means having a certain amount of LBM.



Well its pretty poorly formed and misogynistic. In addition, specialized physical preparedness could preclude this. You define fitness in an extremely narrow way that doesn't make any sense. Why isn't strength of flexibility included? Why do you only use a relative strength measure of upper body pulling for an indicator? Why a mile run? Why are we using "most girls" as the benchmark?

Its just incredibly poorly conceived.

Also, how do we define overweight? Is that by BMI/Bodyfat % or what?

hmm, im really curious what my body fat % is. from perusing lyles forum and that pic from the other thread i would have guessed i was around 20-22%. that would put me at a pretty high ffmi but im not very strong really.

ffmi has flaws in that you can support additional LBM via more FM and it doesn't account for frame size, merely using height as a proxy. But its not a bad way to do things. Its just extremely limited.

If the answer to this is yes, I may have to go get my roomate's camera.