Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

six pack abs vs. big size dude

abs. vs size

  • six pack

    Votes: 263 50.6%

  • big dude

    Votes: 256 49.2%
  • Total voters
    520
Nobledude

Nobledude

Well-known member
What are you sporting? size vs abs....

I used to weigh 245 lb my heaviest and worked my ass off hard to get that elusive 6 pack abs....once I got to 222 lb my abs were showing nicely...I am 6 feet tall..
I am now happy at 225 lb even though my abs arent as they used to be....still a decent shape....I just feel better a bit bigger than skinnier with a 6 pack abs..

ND
 
Size, I think I'm still over 300 but haven't stepped on a scale in over a month.

Besides my ab will kick the shit out of a six pack any day.

Cheers,
Scotsman
 
Scotsman said:
Size, I think I'm still over 300 but haven't stepped on a scale in over a month.

Besides my ab will kick the shit out of a six pack any day.

Cheers,
Scotsman
Click to expand...
damn dude....how tall are you?
 
as i have said in other threads......

4/6 pak doesn't impress me all that much....pumped up pecs, bis, traps, calves, glutes...with waist in proportion....make me envious and keep me going to the gym.
 
Until I reach 250lbs I couldn't care less. They are slightly visible right now, but that won't stop the bulk! I prefer substance over showy.....I see tons of guys 155lb shredded abzzz (jkurz anyone??) that don't wanna bulk 'cause they'll lose the ladies lmfao.
 
size over abs? why cant you have both-

viewpic.php


Pudsianski easily weighs 300+.
 
mavssolaj said:
Marius is not 300 hes like 275, hes short, but hes DEF. A FREAK go to his site and read his workouts, its unbelievable.
Click to expand...


He weighed in at 320 for the 2006 Arnold classic and is just over 6' so not that short.

Cheers,
Scotsman
 
I usually sit around 270-280 and you can see my abs in the same sense that you can see legs under a quilt or duvet. At least, that was true until my wife brought home another 7lbs of 60%-cocoa bittersweet chocolate which I've finally managed to get rid of.

I'm reluctant to look either at my weight or ab for a while. I look good in a sweatsuit.
 
Mariusz weighed in at 330lbs at the Mohegan Sun Superseries show this past weekend. He looked as lean as he ever has. I've met him in person, and he is right at 6' in sneakers, at the time he told me he was ~290, well he told me ~130 and I acted like I was down with it, then I had to multiply by 2.2 later, lol.....super nice guy, didn't speak the greatest English (at the time, anyway), but real personable and charasmatic and interacted well with the fans......that said, his stats/look aren't very realistic goals for 99% of the population for more reasons that I want to get into.

Anyway, you don't have to be fat to be strong and you don't have to lift like a bitch to look, at the very least, like an athlete. If you want to gain muscle and strength, you do need to carry around a little bit more bodyfat that you'd ideally like, that's the reason most guys in general (and the a good amount on this board) get ''stuck'' with the same lifts and muscle mass year after year, they simply won't eat.....you can pretty much have well rounded strength and a solid/athletic look at a happy medium. If you want to maximize lifts, particularly bench and squat and overhead numbers, you need some fat and if you want to be absolutely shredded, then you're gonna be a weak bitch....but I think most of the general population would like what they see and what they lift around 12-15% bodyfat

All that said, I love lifting too much to want to be much lower than 11% bodyfat at any time, the weightroom just blows when you're than lean.....I even like to go near 15-18 a lot of times, and can keep my waist under 36, so I'm happy there.
 
No that's a tough one, what does 'fit' mean. I've yet to see any definition that I'm happy with other than 'suitable'.

A marathon runner typically isn't fit if the goal is to squat a ton, just as most weightlifters areen't fit if the goal is to run 26 miles.

The next thought is that squatting a ton has nothing to do with thoughts of fitness only of strength but then how about someone like Platz when he squatted 500 for 23 reps? Would that have been considered a display of fitness?

In my experience, most people think in terms of cardio capacity or some aspect of endurance when they refer to being fit. Fat and fit and not incompatible.
 
I think you wmore or less said what I was getting at, muscle mass aside, fat people are not fit. Fat is extra weight (up to a point - you need some obviously to be healthy) that only serves its purpose in times of caloric deficit, which in modern day society in North America is not often, if ever (at least for anyone posting on a fitness site).

For anyone who has been 15% bf, then 10%, then 7%, then 5%, you progressively feel fitter. Plus, I sweat way easier than I used to. It's like atthe drop of a dime - I often have to bring a spare t-shirt with me to school in the summers after only a 10 minute walk. I sweat right through them to the point of them dripping. That never happened at 10% bf. Mostly it's just you notice how much easier it is to throw your body around - like lunging up stairs or doing pull-ups, etc.
 
I know what you mean: as one slims down then moving around becomes easier. I remember thinking about this a while back, though, and I wasn't convinced that it was a good way to look at fitness.

I've seen 'fat' guys at the gym who would struggle with a 100-yard sprint. Nevertheless, they can pick up a bar and do a max set of squats and then do it again a couple of minutes later. Shortly afterwards, they're maxing out for reps on bench and then again on deads. This I see as fitness.

Usually, when we're talking about the fitness to get someone through a hard workout session like that we refer to it as conditioning or GPP. I can't see any good reason to think of it as an inferior type of fitness to the ability to do a hundred pushups, just as I wouldn't think of a marathon runner as unfit due to being unable to squat heavy weight.

If you take the typical guy who tends to be thought of as fit and compare him with someone who is like the above 'fat' gymrat and then have them do an equal workload in the gym how do readers think they'd compare. Obviously, the workload would need to be pitched such that they could each do it but you'd have them doing the same lifts at the same weights with same rest times.

I was really just saying that the idea of 'fit' has more facets than being able to move around an ever-decreasing bodyweight with ever-increasing ease. Equally, it's hard to balance ther concept of 'strong' with simple muscular fitness and an ability to recover from an effort.
 
Great post blut!

I think part of it may have been being a lineman in foutball and doing short burst training. I'm pretty sure I'd lose my lunch right now from a 100yd sprint. I do have a very quick recovery rate though and can do lots of sets of burst activity. I got tested for VO2 max one time and because the girl doing it hadn't factored in strength I got an elite athlete rating. Basically even though my true VO2 wasn't anywhere near that high I was able to "overpower" the test by having excess muscle to break down insteat of a better oxygen exchange. She consulted her boss and they factored it back a lot.LOL

I do carry quite a bit of "extra" weight now but it helps tremendously with strongman events. I'd like to slim down a bit just to increase mobility for events but don't see this as becoming more "fit". I see it in terms of physics that you described: Less mass takes less energy to move.

Cheers,
Scotsman
 
I'm now 310 with a barely visible 4 pack. I prefer this look to last NOV when I was 270 with a clearly visible 4 pack, with the bottom row almost visible.
Unfortunately at my present size my asthma is worse, and I get short winded from a brisk walk. Excessive sweating, and a excelerated heart rate are some other negatives.
I look forward to the end of this bulk cycle so I can lean out for a few months.
 
the weightroom just blows when you're than lean
Click to expand...

amen to that.

While bulking I feel empathy with the fatties on TLC documentaries who whine about how fit they are while cramming down twinkies, but seriously... you can't compare the average 50% bf american sack o' shite with a heavyweight lifter. The extra water helps prevent injuries and gives better leverage so it's worth sacrificing your bottom abs for imo (not that you could see mine since I stopped shaving myself)
 
The VO2-max test is an interesting aspect. I'm not sure whether it indicates a way to correlate strength with cardio fitness or is just a gaping hole in yet another medical measuring method.

I think I might slim down this year. :)
 
it's easy to tell who here is doner DNA skinny here and who isn't....lololol
 
I vote 6-pack, but that is probably b/c I've had to work my way up to 155 and have no aspirations of ever reaching 200 and above.
 
meh. i believe in functional strength. abs are an affectation. period. like tits on a woman.
 
HumanTarget said:
meh. i believe in functional strength. abs are an affectation. period. like tits on a woman.
Click to expand...
yeh u rite! :artist:
 
I agree with rnch. shoulders, pecs, and arms are more important than a six-pac. Functional core training can be very important for athletes. Fitness levels can be different according to what you are trying to accomplish. The idea of being able to muscle out max weight sets on multiple different exercises, or run a marathon, are both fine. But neither of those guys could compete on a rugby field. The guy weighing 300lbs probably wouldn't be able to catch me, and the skinny ass runner would get knocked on his ass when he tried to tackle. The big boy would do great in a scrum though, we have had a couple of those who can dominate at close range. This issue just comes down to what "you" want out of your workouts. I have to be big enough to tackle any size guy on a pitch, fast enough to run around or through people, have enough stamina to play for 80 minutes, and look good enough to get laid.
 
PrimordialMan1 said:
I agree with rnch. shoulders, pecs, and arms are more important than a six-pac. Functional core training can be very important for athletes. Fitness levels can be different according to what you are trying to accomplish. The idea of being able to muscle out max weight sets on multiple different exercises, or run a marathon, are both fine. But neither of those guys could compete on a rugby field. The guy weighing 300lbs probably wouldn't be able to catch me, and the skinny ass runner would get knocked on his ass when he tried to tackle. The big boy would do great in a scrum though, we have had a couple of those who can dominate at close range. This issue just comes down to what "you" want out of your workouts. I have to be big enough to tackle any size guy on a pitch, fast enough to run around or through people, have enough stamina to play for 80 minutes, and look good enough to get laid.
Click to expand...

Im from a similar mindset. All I realy care about is athletics. I am fast ennough and strong enough to play football, and it just happens that I look rather good too because of the requirements of football.
 
any natural lifter with a 6 pack is about as skinny and weak as they come.. they look like somethings not right.. you just cant be nautraly huge and have a six pack.. but with roids yo ucan be big with a six pack...i got big dude... i look better with a little gut and swollen.. i lose lots of muscle triming down to show abs..
 
I'm more of the big dude/six pack type hybrid. I can't ever get my BF that low. Even if I did, I won't ever have a six pack unless I get some plastic surgery. I used to be really, really fat years ago and still have some of that terrible loser skin that goes along with large weight loss. However, I train my abs heavy like any other body part. I can see my top 4 abs pretty well and they look pretty good. I think its a result of really hitting my abs with heavy weights, but I guess I really don't know. I'm satisfied with that at 260. My perfect body would be about 275 with the same type of look I have now.

Don't get me wrong, I'd LOVE a six pack but I've accepted I just don't have the discipline to get to some really low BF percentage. I'd rather not lose any size either, because I love being bigger more than anything.
 
I am 5-10 and 191 and no longer have a six pack, it's more of a four pack when the lighting is right. When I was 170, I was shredded. Now I feel alot stronger and better about myself. I don't know why people say when you gain weight you are slower? I don't understand. I am more explosive than I ever was. I run the 40 .05 faster than I did when I weighed 165. As for long distance, not so much. Explosive, yes.

I'd def go for being the big guy, even though I'll never be that guy due to my genetics. If I was smart I'd just cut down and look nice for chicks, but fuck it
 
Well I would rather be big then have a 6pack, right now I am 6'5", 182lbs. I'm just trying to build alot of muscle and since I have a pretty light frame I think even 20lbs would make a big difference, I'm 18 now but when I was 16 I was 6"4' 165lbs and I look way bigger then I did then so I think 25lbs would make a pretty big difference as well.

Anyways for me Stronger>Sixpack although if the sixpack comes naturally I won't complain, don't have any expectations of that though.
 
Last edited:
Without abs yo would not be able to stand up. Not sure what 'functional' means in your book. But I'd rank standing up as being pretty important.

If benching is 'functional' strength, then core is important. Intercostals, serratus, tva. all important for benching.
 
I play tons of basketball and some soccer, so I rather have a 6 pack, I'm not sure what big size dude means, but I don't want to be 300 lbs, since I'm only 5'10.
 
A man can have excellent core strength and not have exposed abs.
A man can have exposed abs and a weak core



Singleton said:
Without abs yo would not be able to stand up. Not sure what 'functional' means in your book. But I'd rank standing up as being pretty important.

If benching is 'functional' strength, then core is important. Intercostals, serratus, tva. all important for benching.
Click to expand...
 
gjohnson5 said:
A man can have excellent core strength and not have exposed abs.
A man can have exposed abs and a weak core
Click to expand...

There's some fat lady in my pilates class that has really good abdominal strength.
 
I definitely like size but want to see some abs. I'm 240+ and can see my abs somewhat. On any male I don't care if his abs are visible so long as his waist from the front and the back tapers down nicely and there is no "overhang" as I like to call it. Especially the fat that hangs over the back of the waist. So when you see them from behind it looks like an "hourglass." I think that looks lousy.
 
chicagobuffedbod said:
I definitely like size but want to see some abs. I'm 240+ and can see my abs somewhat. On any male I don't care if his abs are visible so long as his waist from the front and the back tapers down nicely and there is no "overhang" as I like to call it. Especially the fat that hangs over the back of the waist. So when you see them from behind it looks like an "hourglass." I think that looks lousy.
Click to expand...
100% agreed.Nicely said.
 
I still have a slight outline of a six'r, BUT, much stronger now that i've put some on. Anyone that says a lard ass can't run, should have any lineman from the NFL run at you. It may not be far, but fast. Watched some videos of the cowboys training camps, them boys were fast for their size.

Whiskey
 
Size commands respect and gets it.

Six pack abs are great for the beach but we only get 2 months of that up here and there is no one I know that wanders around outside here at 40 below.
 
I used to be shredded...but lacked in the size department....when I got BIG....I got the respect of every bodybuilder in the gym. anyone can get lean. It's not that hard. But size? Now thats a challenge!! I agree with nolongerconfused, size demands respect....and gets it EVERY time.
 
six pack here. Six pack doesn't mean being small, means just harder work. Six pack still can be pumped pecs, tris and bis with a killer back and awesome waist. And heavy of course. It is just hard work. In my opinion, giving importance just to size and weight, is justifying fat. That is not real size. Is self-cheating.
 
I personally believe it just depends on who you are. I am not big by any means, but at times have reached a decent size for my height. (5'7 205lbs) With some abs showing. Then 2yrs later due to sports had to drop down to 157 to 165 pretty cut. I personally loved having a bit of bulk on me at 205, but also loved seeing my abs pop out when I dropped down in weight. So I guess it all depends on the person and their personal goals at the time, both have pros.
 
i got pretty close to a 6 pack, decently ripped up during wrestling...even thinking about it depesses me.

i wanna be lean, yeah, but i cant be small. my bigorexia wont let me. im always thinking about that next meal, and next PR at the gym
 
i got pretty close to a 6 pack, decently ripped up during wrestling...even thinking about it depesses me.

i wanna be lean, yeah, but i cant be small. my bigorexia wont let me. im always thinking about that next meal, and next PR at the gym
Click to expand...

I've always had a six-pack, up until one month ago wehn i started my bulking cycle...no i have a measle 4 pack :P
 
The_Alcatraz said:
I've always had a six-pack, up until one month ago wehn i started my bulking cycle...no i have a measle 4 pack :P
Click to expand...
aaah lucky man...iv always been a fat skinny bitch,
 
DJ_UFO said:
six pack here. Six pack doesn't mean being small, means just harder work. Six pack still can be pumped pecs, tris and bis with a killer back and awesome waist. And heavy of course. It is just hard work. In my opinion, giving importance just to size and weight, is justifying fat. That is not real size. Is self-cheating.
Click to expand...


Not to mention that 99.9 % of women prefer the "skinny" ripped look.
 
I have to fight pretty hard to keep the abs away...

If I can see abs...I'm not trying hard enough.
 
Holy poop, sup b fold!!

Abs - hmmm, never really had em. I won't lie, they are good for the summers, especially when you live in a beach town. But unless I plan to compete, I don't feel the need to get down to 4% and have em sick style poppin.
 
KillahBee said:
Holy poop, sup b fold!!

Abs - hmmm, never really had em. I won't lie, they are good for the summers, especially when you live in a beach town. But unless I plan to compete, I don't feel the need to get down to 4% and have em sick style poppin.
Click to expand...

Beach town...I feel you. I can see the Sea from my window and the front porch at my gym. In the Summer (I am still driving with the top down on my car) I go to the beach at least 4x a week. I'm the guy sitting in a Coleman chair with my headphones and snacks going on. Having more fun than anyone else out there.
 
redguru said:
99.9% of the women that have never seen the inside of a gym.
Click to expand...

My wife makes fun of my belly. She called it "Ethopian Bloat" since I have abs but they stick out nice and round with my belly!
 
def size for me, every time ive ever put effort (or stopping putting effort into stuffing my face that is) into leaning out i feel like im taking 1 step forward and two steps back. all the muscle/strength lost takes too long to get back, and for what?? to have abs that noone but yourself and your significant other see. I am 5'9" 210 with a fourpack right now (prob 12-13%) and look plenty big and strong imo. I could cut down to 190 in a month and be fuckin shredded but id feel and look like a marathon runner, not for me srry.
 
having been on both sides (currently 6'1 230ish) I preferred my 190 lbs with six pack but weaker/smaller. Im not fat by any means now, but playing sports was much easier when I was lighter. Course the goal is 215 with a sixer :)
 
I wish I could decide wich one I'd rather be!! Seems like every other month I change my routine and diet from bulking to leaning and back to maintenance.

What I really need is to pick some goals and stick with them.
 
skacorica said:
having been on both sides (currently 6'1 230ish) I preferred my 190 lbs with six pack but weaker/smaller. Im not fat by any means now, but playing sports was much easier when I was lighter. Course the goal is 215 with a sixer :)
Click to expand...


funny, im 6'2" 230 and 215 is the size i wanted to get to with abs. I can get down to 215 but i still am not ripped enough to get the full 6 pack. i probably have to drop to 205 to show all abs, and that just to small for me..
 
BigboyAl said:
funny, im 6'2" 230 and 215 is the size i wanted to get to with abs. I can get down to 215 but i still am not ripped enough to get the full 6 pack. i probably have to drop to 205 to show all abs, and that just to small for me..
Click to expand...


Bulking up has never been a problem. Gaining size using 3-5 sets of 10 reps was the easy part. Getting that hard lean look while maintaining the size was always elusive. So hired a personal trainer for legs and back only. The trainer had me doing one body part per day (Legs or back), 22-27 sets per body part, using as HEAVY a weight as I could, to pump out high reps 20-25. VERY Intense workouts, with clean eating got me down from 180lbs 17-18% to 174 lbs 11-12%. cardio 4-6 days a week, 44 in chest--15.5 arms-3 months all natural. It was a hell of a lot of work, ha! age 44. One thing I learned, eating CLEAN is KEY. If i new how I'd post before and after pics. It was quite the transformation. Don't even know if I can post, I only have the the basic membership. "You Will Be What You WILL To Be"
 
Im 6'1 225 and abs are coming in. Its not about size. Just low body fat and hard work.
 
I'd rather be lean. I feel better when I am leaner, and everyday tasks are easier. It might be nice to bench 500+ or squat half a ton, but I know guys like that who cant run 3 miles in under 25 minutes or do more than 14 pull ups. They are carrying too much extra weight for me to cinsider it healthy.
Plus nutritional needs are much lower at 170lbs than at 270lbs.

That and I just like being hard. I like that my body shapes my clothes, not the otherway around.
 
easy to spot the naturally skinny dudes from the guys with bigger doner DNA here.... :FRlol:
 
rnch said:
easy to spot the naturally skinny dudes from the guys with bigger doner DNA here.... :FRlol:
Click to expand...

lolololololol

I'm naturally skinny, weigh near 290, can squat well above 800, have recently deadlifted a completely raw 750, have overhead log pressed 341 (close with 352), and can do mid teens on chins, can run pretty well (although I prefer not to, have ran the 400M in 57 sec at near 290 lbs), and look pretty decent in clothes.

My life was easier to maintain at 170 than at 270. I practically didn't even have to eat, sleep, or train to be 170.
 
Being lean is not only more impressive because I believe it takes a lot more work but also it is more attractive than a huge piece of meat.
 
MsBeverlyHills said:
size over abs? why cant you have both-

viewpic.php


Pudsianski easily weighs 300+.
Click to expand...

exactly, I think guys that are all about size just have a hard time getting shredded abs, and vice versa. don't get mad.....if the shoe fits wear it.
 
i just think that if you're wearing a suit or regular clothes and nobody can tell that you train, you might look like an average person but you could have the best 6 or 8 pack inthe world but it wouldn't mean shit becuase you'd look like any other guy on teh street.
now if you're in that same suit and the sleeves are tight and the seam on the coat might split if youcough, then everyone immediately knows that you train hard, you're strong and they don't want to piss you off.
 
The question to take size or a six pack is unfair. Bođybuilding is well... building and sculpting your body and doing it '___proportionally___. Its not the same as powerlifting because thats for just being able to lift the most and really has nothing to do with sculpting. From a bodybuilding point of view, size should come from training intense all the bodyparts and eating CLEAN.

I consider myself a bodybuilder as I am always trying to improve my whole body which includes abs. If you eat clean and train hard, hitting 200 plus with a six pack is hard but it can be done.

You might as well rephrase the question to 'LOW or HIGH BODY FAT' . The abdominals are a group of muscle that are important and they should be trained. They just look good especially if you eat right have low bodyfat. Most fat accumulates on the abdominals and is hard to get rid off but that shouldn't be an excuse. FAT IS FAT. You can strong as hell but it will ruin your appearance not just for the abs but chest, arms, shoulders. Most of you are bodybuilders as you are lifting weights to get stronger, bigger(in respect to muscle) and therefore transforming your body. Strongman and Powerlifters are another story.



Also I must say I rather be 190 of muscle with little fat and keep making progress in muscle size than 190 of muscle and 10 more pounds of fat. Yes that 10 pounds of FAT will give me size and strength but as a 'bodybuilder' and not a 'powerlifter', its not what I want. I rather be all muscle and keep going up even if its harder. Just look at some of the avatars of people being big over 200 with a 6 pack. Its all about DEDICATION
 
well i suppose i can throw my .02 in. i recently started dieting 2months ago. went from 235lbs at 5'10, doing 315 for 10reps, squatting 405 for many reps, and deadlifting over 600, to a lean 197lbs, with an 8-pack visibile. in the summer time, i will get lean, i never dieting up until this point. but over the winter i will bulk, but in the future ill do more of a clean bulk, add alot more clean carbs, and maybe jump up to maybe 13% body fat like Biggt noted. before i was maybe 15% maybe more, i dont know, just no visible abs at all, no belly though, just a block. dont wanna get like that again. middle of the row is good, not too bulked to where tieing your shoes has you taking a deep breath.
 
19psi said:
i just think that if you're wearing a suit or regular clothes and nobody can tell that you train, you might look like an average person but you could have the best 6 or 8 pack inthe world but it wouldn't mean shit becuase you'd look like any other guy on teh street.
now if you're in that same suit and the sleeves are tight and the seam on the coat might split if youcough, then everyone immediately knows that you train hard, you're strong and they don't want to piss you off.
Click to expand...

i see what your saying. but the answer to this all depends on what your goals are. what you want to accomplish. if you workout to prevent yourself from getting in fights, then obviously a six pack is not important to you.

I personally workout to look good first of all, 2nd to be healthy, and it has pretty much become a hobby or sport of mine. i like to put on mass in the winter lose fat in the spring, and show it off in the summer.
 
I think its interesting that the poll on this thread is exactly down the middle. I guess I fall into the ripped 218lbs 5'10 with a 6 pack category. I aspire to be bigger & have great respect for guys that have built up a 280lb powerful body. However, a few of my gym buddies who are this size, will tell me that they dont want to get any bigger & would rather have a body that looked like mine. So just be happy with who you are & what you got.
 
[CinnamonBuns] said:
for those who chose big size dude, do you have any maximum bodyfat percentage you would get too?
Click to expand...
I guess you are looking just dam fat if you are over say 20%. Most BBers try to get down around 12%. At 10% or lower your muscularity ,definition,& vascularity comes out. I'm sitting on 9% & I like that look but it gets harder to put on weight & keep that look in place. However, the more lean muscle mass you have the faster the metabolism is & the fat burning machine works.
 
OK SOAP BOX ON!!! Whoever said eat like a horse and get big then cut down!! Brilliant!! Thank you!! It annoys me when I see people say OH No get your diet in order and get to 12 percent bodyfat before you cycle...

Why the hell you gonna row up stream dude? NO ADD MUSCLE Pack that shit in like a blond on prom night. Stuff every ounce you can handle!! Then let the beef eat away at the fat. Story time kids...sorry someone can delete or bad karma me for this..

Guy at the bar chris rock song comes on I am not thinking he's looking at me saying some shit..I ask him...are you picking a fight with me? I stand up..He says Oh god no your huge!! What are you drinking? Want another one? That's me...today at 6 foot 3 251 lbs.NOT what I consider a "big guy" other than 36 inch waist and my chest is much larger at around 52 inches under arm and just over 60inches all the way around the shoulders. (up 3 lbs from last week and my current heaviest yet but BF Seems to be down) Do I like being big enough that when I walk up to girls their eyes get big and they hide behind someone elses boyfriend?

Not really but when their boyfriend hides behind them..Priceless. Arnold was a pretty big fella. Competition he was 235lbs at almost exactly the same height as me. you can be both. Just quite telling people to cut down first then bulk up..That's like saying eat rice cakes for a year so you can get buff.
 
ExtraMile said:
On that wikipage it says he is 5foot 11? :confused:
Click to expand...

People who have met him have said between 5'10" and 6'1".

He also got 2nd place at Poland's "Dancing With the Stars" this year...
 
s8nlilhlpr said:
Until I reach 250lbs I couldn't care less. They are slightly visible right now, but that won't stop the bulk! I prefer substance over showy.....I see tons of guys 155lb shredded abzzz (jkurz anyone??) that don't wanna bulk 'cause they'll lose the ladies lmfao.
Click to expand...
Hey Fuck yourlself....lol......He'ssssss back,,,,,,,206 beatch!
 
rediculus said:
OK SOAP BOX ON!!! Whoever said eat like a horse and get big then cut down!! Brilliant!! Thank you!! It annoys me when I see people say OH No get your diet in order and get to 12 percent bodyfat before you cycle...
Click to expand...


Always remember...we can get lean a lot quicker than they can get big. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Best steroid stack for heavier guy looking for strength?
Replies
20
Views
3K
Luigi167
L
FishyAnchovy
Approved Log My Orals-Only Pre-Cycle LOG
Replies
21
Views
4K
MUSTANG_18
MUSTANG_18
V
Six pack abs and steroids
Replies
17
Views
5K
Nelson Montana
Nelson Montana
Macedog24
The best STEROIDS for your arsenal to get MONSTER SIZE + Hardcore bulking article
Replies
8
Views
4K
Tazz
Tazz
jasonhill800
Napsgear, Grow Massive Triceps with These Techniques
Replies
16
Views
4K
ballin2504
ballin2504
Top Bottom