Its funny because people think it takes 10 years to build a good body from the gym
In reality you make 70-80% of your life-time gains in your first 12 months of training.
You can literally catch up to most 10 year lifters within 1 year.
For some reason nobody seems to ever talk about this or mention it.... I guess im the only honest person here, everyone just seems to lie for some reason
Everybody knows about noob gains & that gains slow down. But this '70-80% of the gains you'll ever make will be in your first year' you've got absolutely no idea if that's necessarily true. You're just throwing numbers around.
Your reply to this post will not contain any evidence for your stupid untrue claim.
Oh and the other thing LOL
When people say
>No, he is natural bro!, he's been lifting for 10+ years bro!, if you lift for that long and do it right, people will accuse you of steroids!!!!
Fricking LOL
The people saying this have to be young and ignorant, only someone who hasn't lifted, or thinks 10 years is a long time (they're probably 15 years old the people saying this) actually believe this non-sense crap.
Lifting for 10 years doesn't magically make you look like a steroid user.
You make 70-80% of your gains in the first 12 months (1 year)
You then make the next 20-30% of your gains in Year 2/3
By the end of year 3, you're basically at 99-100% of your potential noticeable gains that you will ever make in your life, but honestly there's not much of a big difference between you having 70-80% of your gains vs having 100% of your natural gains, it really is not a massive difference, it's a minor difference.
So this whole thing of making gains year after year after year after year and each year making you look different, is utterly delusional.
The only way to make noticeable changes after 1-3 years is to do crazy insane bulks where you put in 50 pounds of fat, and then proceed to lose the 50 pounds of fat, and look exactly like you did before you did the bulk/cut started cycle.
Timestamped body or stfu
That guy is probably 55-60kg at 6ft
Yes, even just doing some kind of terrible bro-split routine with low frequency you can look like that in 12 months no issue if you have the same insertions and bodyfat%
If you don't look better than that after 1 year of lifting you need to CUT brother. It's not hard
It's more like 2-3 years for 70%.
I went from 62kg -> 73kg first year
73kg -> 81kg 2nd year
81kg -> 94kg 3rd year
Started at like 5% bf (very skinny could be even lower) and am now around 10-12% bf at 183cm height.
If it took you 2-3 years to hit 70% it means you are probably a naturally skinny guy who doesn't eat much.
If you eat any normal amount of calories in a western country and aren't a natural under-eater, you will achieve 70-80% of your life-time gains in the first 12 months.
You're right bro, and just to rub it in to all these liars you should post body
Why would i post body again?
I started lifting in 2012, my 2015 body is basically the same as it is right now in 2023 give or take a few kg. No difference you'll see in pictures. In-fact lighting and angles and shadows will create more of a difference than a few kg of muscle, muscle is very small and dense, its hard to really notice it. on a body unless you have significant amounts of it
I gained roughly 20kg of lean muscle mass in 3 years (2012 > 2015) and since then maybe Ive gained 1 or 2kg.
You aren't going to notice 20kg +gain of muscle mass from 2012 - 2015 and +1-2kg of muscle mass gained 2015 - 2023.
Diminishing returns hits hard when it comes to this "sport" and I dont understand why this information comes as a shock to people when I post about it here. This is just common sense. I guess because nobody talks about it nobody knows.
Only high IQ autists like me notice this shit, normalgays just quit lifting during the first 1-3 years so they never realize, and other serious lifters just jump on steroids by that point, so I guess what happens is only autists like me who keep lifting for 10+ years naturally actually realize this reality.
>Why would i post body again?
Why wouldn't you?
Awesome pics. Great size. Look thick. Solid. Tight. Keep us all posted on your continued progress with any new progress pics or vid clips. Show us what you got man. Wanna see how freakin' huge, solid, thick and tight you can get. Thanks for the motivation
>should post body
I've been lifting for 6 months. Started at 160lbs 5'10 Jan 2022, now 195lbs Jan 2023. All natty except SARMs, it's possible bro.
Worthless without a timestamp you moron
Listen here c**t. I'm not going to take my shirt off, walk to the bathroom, walk back to thr study to get a pen and paper, walk back to the bathroom, take a photo for you then upload it.
I'm natty and those are my stats and that is me.
Yeah cardio kills gains
>all natty except sarms
GUYS, I AM NATTY IF YOU DISCOUNT THE STEROIDS
>he thinks SARMs are steroids
Tell me you're an idiot, without telling me you're an idiot.
>"haha you think performance enhancing drugs are performance enhancing drugs!"
Sarms means not natty stop the copium.
>SARMs are performance enhancing drugs
You know.. we have Google in 2023. One search and you can look at what SARMs are actually designed for. By your theory, drinking a black cup of coffee pre-workout makes you enhanced.
Top lel
>"just google SARMS bro, they aren't steroids!"
>le googles sarms...
"Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs) area class of therapeutic compounds that have similar anabolic properties to anabolic steroids"
I really don't have to say it at this point, but you are a moronic, coping roidtroony. Kek.
>"Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs) area class of therapeutic compounds that have similar anabolic properties to anabolic steroids
>similar anabolic properties to steroids
>similar anabolic properties
>similar
Thanks for proving my point. They're not steroids but have similar properties. Similar you idiot
Hahahaha
SO YOU ARENT NATTY IF YOU TAKE SARMS YOU STUPID FRICK LOLL
>takes protein powder
>takes creatine
>takes BCAAs
>hurr that's natty bro! Not SARMs!!!
Imbecile.
>thinks sarms are the same as protein powder or creatine
you really are moronic coping
All those things assist in anabolism and would hold anabolic properties. You absolute dunce.
Post body. I guarantee you're a skinny little homo.
So which foods are sarms naturally found in the way protein (a macronutrient, no less) and creatine are then? moron.
None of that shit has "SIMILAR EFFECTS TO ANABOLIC STEROIDS"
pathetic troony
>All natty except SARMs
>roiding for this
Thats actually really impressive if true,most people I know on Sarms made 0 visual chances ,but atleast the scale said they gained a couple of pounds and lofts increased.
But Im serious no changes as in they looked the exact fricking same after 2 sarm cycles.
Thanks bro. Getting a lot of hate here but I guarantee I MOG lifters that are 2+ years in. I work my ass off for that physique, SARMs did very little of it.
SARMs can be stronger than steroids. It is time to get off of those before you go blind or your dick shrinks
I always think those noob gains have that fluffy look, and it's usually arms, chest, lats. You see a seasoned lifter, natty, they keep their routine, bf% low, maintain their diet, they have a hardness and striation to their musculature and the smaller muscle groups have a refined quality. That takes years to finesse. So it's a yes but a no.
>they have a hardness and striation to their musculature and the smaller muscle groups have a refined quality.
This is moronic shit Ive heard people say for ages.
There's no truth to it at all.
I've seen newbies comes into the gym 120lbs soaking wet skinny as hell with 0 definition and by the end of the year be 160lbs shredded with dense/striated muscles, and these guys are natty.
Ive been lifting for 20+ years natty, I can tell the difference between those who are natty vs those who are not.
>I've seen newbies comes into the gym 120lbs soaking wet skinny as hell with 0 definition and by the end of the year be 160lbs shredded
>natty
You're pretty dumb for someone who has been lifting for 20+ years. I pity you.
There's a lot of truth to this. The fluffy look is when an increase in volume increases your non-fat but also non-muscle mass. It's just water and some science words like glycogen or sarcowhatever. It does increase performance and so it technically is gains but what the dudes who've been there for years have that noobs don't is significantly more actual muscle fiber gains, which came every time the weight or reps with a given weight increased. Really the only misconception with this general idea is that it necessarily takes 10 years and that doing ten years of more volume with the same weight and reps will even achieve it.
Exposed yourself for being DYEL.
That's why he won't post his body.
I don't think it's as drastic as OP claims but there's some definite truth to it. Fitness is a game of rapidly diminishing returns. Most people, both natties and roidtrannies, would hit 95% of their potential within 3 to 4 years. It really doesn't make sense to lift past that point for more than maintenance. I mean look at olympic athletes. They all peak at 20-25 and then proceed to have another decade of a declining career while continuing to work their asses off on gear every day. Life isn't fricking anime, you don't break your limits with persistence alone. Guys eho spend decades in a gym do it out of habit, it's their smoking.
This is actually true if you learn fast and/or are already have a natural inclination to the exertion of maximum skeletomuscular tension. Nothing is actually stopping you from adapting to stimulus quickly if you actually do it, otherwise we would just die. But most won't actually do much of anything most of the time. 99% of workouts are wasted and tangible progress is accidentally squeezed in there once every month or so. Rapid adaptation will never apply to someone with 90IQ who moves so lackadaisical that he makes a pair of shoes stay fresh for 10 years, aka the average man. Or in other words, the lowest common denominator, who standard advice is aimed at. Furthermore even if you are equipped to do it quick, you also have to be tough enough to handle it. The most optimal training plan is only really optimal for a handful of men and everyone else would move faster on a lighter workload that won't break them the frick off.
Why does it make people seethe so hard when I tell them this reality?
Because they suck at lifting and they're not very smart. What did you expect?
Ok can you post body?
He already did.
I didn't realize sarm rage was a thing till I saw this thread
The Ostarage is real
Dude! Those are totally epic wholesome chungus roids that affect androgens like "actual" steroids but aren't steroids!
>I'm natty except for sarms!
Post body or go homo.
you're obsessed with gays, do sarms gaymaxx you?
Yes, just like tren but not really cause I'm natty!!
I'm trans by the way
I'm on tren but I'm natty because the voices in the wall told me that
I actually never made noob gains. I am not sure why. I always thought maybe i was too athletic and strong already so when I started lifting my body didn't respond the way a complete beginner would. Or maybe I just gain slow and steadily.