Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
**8*8*8 March version Two(2) ***88***8 **8*8*8 March version Two(2) ***88***8

03-22-2010 , 09:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Micturition Man
Starting to wonder about this BF% estimator:

http://www.freeweightloss.com/calculator1.html.


Lyle said it was "surprisingly decent" for him, as did some others on his forum, but he did not endorse it or anything.

It gives Miles 16.67% BF (at 255!). You have a bright future in bodybuilding imo.


I guess the issue is just different distributions of fat?
definitely depends on bodyfat distribution. probably much more accurate at the low bodyfats those guys are dealing with, as usual. because that is definitely wrong.

i can extend my stomach to make the measurement around my belly button 45" btw. and 39" isn't "relaxed," but my stomach is never relaxed. it actually is uncomfortable to relax. but it's not like i'm sucking in hard to get to 39" though. it's just how i live my life.
03-22-2010 , 09:55 PM
That says my BF% is around 11%. Think thats a bit lower than reality.
03-22-2010 , 10:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thremp
lol. You folks don't know any normal fatbodies. All gut, skinny limbs. ez game
Ding ding. That's me. I hate it.

Edit: But if I lost 45 pounds from where I was I would probably go from a 38 to a 32 so I dunno

Last edited by JohnnyFondue; 03-22-2010 at 10:10 PM. Reason: hmmmm
03-22-2010 , 10:47 PM
Amazing work spenda. V. well done.
How much strength did you lose and how long did you do the RFL? I think you got a pretty good payoff imo strength loss vs 45lbs.

I should be starting a psmf in a few weeks myself.
03-22-2010 , 10:55 PM
42 to 32 with 45lbs weight loss seems like a lot. i was a 32 at 180 and am a (snug) 36 at ~225.

do you wear your pants really high up or something? like covering your belly button?
03-22-2010 , 10:57 PM
he said the measurement was around his belly button.
03-22-2010 , 10:58 PM
ok that makes more sense. if i brought my pants up to my belly button i'd be a 60
03-22-2010 , 11:00 PM
From what I can tell he is measuring an arbitrary point around his stomach, not wear he wears his pants, which would be much lower I assume. So his measurements really have no relation to pants size.
03-22-2010 , 11:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdock99
From what I can tell he is measuring an arbitrary point around his stomach, not wear he wears his pants, which would be much lower I assume. So his measurements really have no relation to pants size.
these two measurements are the same for me.
03-22-2010 , 11:03 PM
where the hell are we supposed to wear our pants? maybe i've been wearing them wrong all my life. it's google time!
03-22-2010 , 11:06 PM
i have a big friend who, in an effort to hide his large gut, decided long ago that he would wear his pants at his belly button and let his lower gut sit concealed behind the zipper of his jeans. he never goes shirtless, but you can tell he has a "waist" at this point. it was probably the biggest mistake of his life.
03-22-2010 , 11:06 PM
You guys do not wear your pants on your hips? I thought that was where all guys wore their pants. Maybe that is a 90s weak thing.
03-22-2010 , 11:08 PM
I wear size 32 pants and they're plenty loose, American pant sizes are lol though right?
03-22-2010 , 11:09 PM
ok, some preliminary google research has shown that guys should wear pants at the hips, not the waist. good. so i'm normal.
03-22-2010 , 11:11 PM
I wear a size 32 that is supposed to be a "relaxed" or "anti-fit" for the lol-omos. Its skin tight.
03-22-2010 , 11:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by derosnec
ok, some preliminary google research has shown that guys should wear pants at the hips, not the waist. good. so i'm normal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdock99
You guys do not wear your pants on your hips? I thought that was where all guys wore their pants. Maybe that is a 90s weak thing.
i don't think anyone was referring to "waist" as the smallest measurement of the torso. when i say it i mean where i wear pants.
03-22-2010 , 11:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by milesdyson
i don't think anyone was referring to "waist" as the smallest measurement of the torso. when i say it i mean where i wear pants.
I was just making a comment that I did not think Spenda was measuring where he wears his pants, but somewhere higher.
03-22-2010 , 11:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdock99
I was just making a comment that I did not think Spenda was measuring where he wears his pants, but somewhere higher.
he made that clear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spenda
You'll just have to take my word for it, I measured it at 42" when I started and it's at 32" as of this morning, same measuring tape. I carry all of my fat in my love handles/lower back, kind of annoying.

eta: what I'm calling "waist" is at belly-button level.
03-22-2010 , 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by milesdyson
he made that clear.
Missed that post. I think this is the first time I have said something incorrect on this forum Had to happen eventually I guess.
03-22-2010 , 11:36 PM
On a side note, I just watched Erin Andrews on Dancing with the Stars. She has lost so much weight her arms are twigs and she has lost her T&A. Very dissapointing, and not particularly attractive (or healthy) looking.
03-23-2010 , 02:06 AM
if i hit 2x5x260 then 2x3x260, can I increase my weight on wednesday for squats or should I repeat?
03-23-2010 , 02:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by busto_in_hawaii
if i hit 2x5x260 then 2x3x260, can I increase my weight on wednesday for squats or should I repeat?
When in doubt, increase it imo.

Edit: I actually don't know exactly what you did with that rep scheme but increase, obv

Last edited by JohnnyFondue; 03-23-2010 at 02:09 AM. Reason: hrm
03-23-2010 , 02:25 AM
I shoulda been more specific.. 2 sets of 5.. pussied out on third set after 3 reps.. then hit another triple..

Saw a dude in my gym hit 365, 385, 395 for doubles on close grip bench and he weights 194 lol.. ridiculous
03-23-2010 , 02:35 AM
So I'm in this hotel in Manila and I'm looking at the hotel gym. It's alright, but not ideal. I have:

Dumbells up to 60 pounds
Some sort of smith-like machine which I've seen before - it's a cage with a barbell attached to these metal poles but it can move in three dimensions, it just can't tip over on either side
A free standing barbell

So, keeping in mind that I will be squatting 280 but can probably only clean 135, should I do front squats outside the smith-like machine, front squats inside, back squats inside, or should I wield the barbell and destroy the machine for the good of mankind?

Also, what's the opinion on these machines in general? I mean, they seem pretty fine to me.
03-23-2010 , 03:11 AM
is this the ultimate 90's small dog. my sister just got her, she is very friendly though.






      
m