Post by Thinkbig on Nov 20, 2004 14:55:10 GMT -5
We as Bodybuilders are constantly in search of substances that will increase anabolism. We take our creatine, glutamine, pyruvate, and a host of other nutritional supplements in our quest for more muscle.
Those who choose to go the "enhanced" route are always searching for the anabolic drug that will take their physique to the next level. With all of the means at our disposal to increase muscular bodyweight, one simple fact often gets overlooked.
Food is the most anabolic substance we can put in our bodies.[/u]
So what separates pro-bodybuilders from the rest of us?
Yes, some people like to engage in discussions about aesthetics, muscle maturity, and symmetry.
However to me, it's painfully obvious that the primary difference is muscular size. It's amusing for me to hear competitors talk about how great their symmetry is despite the fact that they don't have enough muscle to win a local qualifier. Muscular size is the primary indicator of success in bodybuilding competition. With regular certainty, the largest man on stage wins the show, when all else is equal, conditioning etc.
inside the industry there has been a push for low-calorie mass building.
We've seen "lean-mass" products appear on the market, with all of the major supplements companies like Met-RX and EAS, and even Beverly International advocating their MRP's as a way to add lean tissue without gaining additional fat.
Its considered old-school to "Bulk-Up" in the off-season as if all of a sudden it is now possible to be both massively muscled and lean at all times. Horsesh*t!!!
Those who disagree need to think of this:
Most bodybuilding aficionados/experts don't have the slightest idea of what these athletes look like 95% of the year. It's mistakenly assumed that these guys always look fairly lean and chiseled. Nothing could be further from the truth.
If you are trying to stay lean year round, you are sabotaging your goals to become as muscular as humanly possible.
You may say , well I have gained 6-10 lbs. this year of mass, well thats good, but if you weren't eating EXTREME!!! you could have gained even more.
Ask yourself this:
Which is harder to build, fat or muscle? Obviously, muscle.
Which is easier to lose, fat or muscle? ok...
I have to say that I do not fault anyone for following these "lean mass" programs. Being bloated and fat in the off-season isn't any fun.
...But ask yourself this do you want to get huge...or just a little bigger?
If you are only hoping to increase your muscle mass some or "tone-up" as if you can actually do that, or you have no goals of competing, then Maybe...this isn't for you...
On the other hand if you want to get F#*&ing Huge then you should eat huge!!!
Those who choose to go the "enhanced" route are always searching for the anabolic drug that will take their physique to the next level. With all of the means at our disposal to increase muscular bodyweight, one simple fact often gets overlooked.
Food is the most anabolic substance we can put in our bodies.[/u]
So what separates pro-bodybuilders from the rest of us?
Yes, some people like to engage in discussions about aesthetics, muscle maturity, and symmetry.
However to me, it's painfully obvious that the primary difference is muscular size. It's amusing for me to hear competitors talk about how great their symmetry is despite the fact that they don't have enough muscle to win a local qualifier. Muscular size is the primary indicator of success in bodybuilding competition. With regular certainty, the largest man on stage wins the show, when all else is equal, conditioning etc.
inside the industry there has been a push for low-calorie mass building.
We've seen "lean-mass" products appear on the market, with all of the major supplements companies like Met-RX and EAS, and even Beverly International advocating their MRP's as a way to add lean tissue without gaining additional fat.
Its considered old-school to "Bulk-Up" in the off-season as if all of a sudden it is now possible to be both massively muscled and lean at all times. Horsesh*t!!!
Those who disagree need to think of this:
Most bodybuilding aficionados/experts don't have the slightest idea of what these athletes look like 95% of the year. It's mistakenly assumed that these guys always look fairly lean and chiseled. Nothing could be further from the truth.
If you are trying to stay lean year round, you are sabotaging your goals to become as muscular as humanly possible.
You may say , well I have gained 6-10 lbs. this year of mass, well thats good, but if you weren't eating EXTREME!!! you could have gained even more.
Ask yourself this:
Which is harder to build, fat or muscle? Obviously, muscle.
Which is easier to lose, fat or muscle? ok...
I have to say that I do not fault anyone for following these "lean mass" programs. Being bloated and fat in the off-season isn't any fun.
...But ask yourself this do you want to get huge...or just a little bigger?
If you are only hoping to increase your muscle mass some or "tone-up" as if you can actually do that, or you have no goals of competing, then Maybe...this isn't for you...
On the other hand if you want to get F#*&ing Huge then you should eat huge!!!
