*massively over-complicates extremely simple concepts*

*massively over-complicates extremely simple concepts*

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    he says things like that to repell retards

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Fpbp
      Op, it’s the other way around. You’re just intelligent enough to understand what dr based bald TRT garden gnome is teaching us. He also has said the n word before so that’s a plus

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >He also has said the n word before so that’s a plus
        when you are 9 year old and hear the older kid use a bad word so you respect the fuck out of him because you know he must be tough

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    he actually dont do that you idiot

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    that's every single bodybuilding influencer out there. Lifting weights is easy as it gets, but clueless natties will eat up the bullshit because the snake oil salesmen looks good due to their steroids abuse. Lifting is a joke and a really pathetic one. Go do some sports or something that'll make you healthy and actually athletic

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >that's every single bodybuilding influencer out there.
      and yet nobody on this site figured it out

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I did. And I did it alone. You guys will get there eventually. I’m not hand holding you though.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >t.
      post body

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      hard gainer cope is so obvious

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Post body you gay.

      >just train and eat for 10+ years
      If my coach told me it was going to take 10 years to get results I'd fire him. Holy fuck. Lifting is easy but shrinking the time frame for achieving your goals is not; that's what separates knowers from conmen. He's a conman. He has very basic advice for retards and then "scientific" advice for people who fancy themselves brainiacs that ultimately amounts to - as you said - nothing; people getting the exact same result.

      If you cannot get your trainees to their goals faster than if they got literally no help at all then you're fucking worthless.

      There's a lot of Amerimutt tier retardation in this post, so lemme just look through it
      >If my coach told me it was going to take 10 years to get results I'd fire him
      Isn't that the beauty of lifting? This is supposed to be something you do your entire life, not 2 weeks. This sort of "abs in 2 weeks" thinking is exactly what comes out ot normie tier retards that don't have the slightest idea about lifting
      >If you cannot get your trainees to their goals faster
      Except, he does? He helps people optimize certain training variables which will get them there faster, or at least make the way there more efficient. Someone who listens to him could get somewhere in 10 years that he'd usually have needed 14 years without.

      It does not take ten years to get in shape.

      It doesn't even take ten years to get to OP's size if you're willing to use gear are aren't obese when you start. More like 5 at the most, 3 if you know what you're doing.

      Which a coach fucking should.

      have a nice day retard.

      >It does not take ten years to get in shape
      You fucking braindead monkey tier gay. Obviously only 3 months could make you somewhat better looking and more in shape but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about looking AMAZING, fucking natty on stage bodybuilder tier shit. "In shape" is always relative and dependent on goals that each individually take a different amount of time to fulfill.
      >doesn't even take ten years to get to OP's size
      Who the fuck ever said anything about using gear or getting as big as him? Who are you having this conversation with? Where are you pulling these weird ass arguments?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Isn't that the beauty of lifting?
        No? People go to the gym because they have a goal that they want to achieve, not because they're called to the priesthood of iron or whatever stupid fucking shit you believe.

        >Except, he does?
        "it doesn't matter what you do ultimately you just have to train and eat for 10+ years lmao"
        That's what anon said, that's what I said was fucking stupid. If it takes 10+ years without coaching it should take less time with coaching. If it still takes the same amount of time either 1. you're a shit coach or 2. the entire fitness industry is a scam. In reality both are true.

        >that's not what we're talking about
        WE aren't talking about anything. I posted, you're replied. I decide what I'm talking about. QQ moar.

        >Who the fuck ever said anything about using gear or getting as big as him?
        I did, retard. Consider reading posts before you reply to them.

        Never said that it does. But reaching ambitious size and strength goals might. Diminishing returns set in quick and to truly smoothen and improve the rough edges of your physique/performance might take a decade. Nobody becomes a champ overnight. A good coach is somebody who delivers short term but also sets you up for long term success.

        >But reaching ambitious size and strength goals might.
        Nah.

        Go and watch interviews with actual superheavyweights. Even dudes like Nick Walker will say they put on the vast majority of their size in a period of a handful of years - in Nick's case he reckons 3-4 years.

        If your goal is to be the size of a superheavyweight bodybuilder it shouldn't take more than 5 years to achieve it because we know from the people who actually ARE superheavyweight bodybuilders how long it took them.

        The role of a coach is to be able to tell you how much gear you need to use and how much food you need to eat to get to that bulk as fast as you can/want to, and then to monitor as you do it. If your coach doesn't have the knowledge to keep you gaining at the fastest possible rate - for example, assuming your goal is to get to superheavyweight size - then he's a shit fucking coach.

        Hence why "lmao just lift for 10 years" is dogshit advice from a retard. If your only goal is to be aesthetic "just lifting" won't get you there; if your goal is to be huge it shouldn't take 10 years; etc.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >because they have a goal that they want to achieve
          But that goal changes over time. Nobody has the same goal as they had at the start. You always chase a better physique/ability.
          >That's what anon said
          Yes, and what he meant is a very highly set goal that most of us want to achieve that will take over a decade to achieve.
          >If it takes 10+ years without coaching it should take less time with coaching
          Guess it takes 11 instead of 14 years with coaching then? Huge shortcuts don't exist in this market but those shortcuts sure are handy, especially if no coaching would mean that you get stuck somewhere along the way, meaning you get stuck as a lifetime intermediate and make no progress no matter how much time passes. Good coaches are there to prevent that, even if the time it takes to reach your goal doesn't change much.
          >the entire fitness industry is a scam
          Big statement. Be more specific
          >I decide what I'm talking about
          ...no you don't? You responded the thing about less than 10 years to look like Israetel in relation to the guy saying something would take 10+ years to achieve. You took his claim and warped his statement into "It'd take 10+ years to look like Israetel" which he never said?

          Anyway, you're an annoying cunt so post body.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >But that goal changes over time.
            Then you can adjust the plan.

            >Yes, and what he meant is a very highly set goal that most of us want to achieve that will take over a decade to achieve.
            Not if you pursue that goal effectively.

            You mentioned natty bodybuilding - sure, that could conceivably take a decade or even longer because natty gains are so marginal past the point of diminishing returns. That's the one exception I can think of, and very few people actually care about natty bodybuilding. Unless your goal is literally to win some kind of national/international bodybuilding competition it shouldn't take anywhere near ten years, and even if your goal IS to win one of those competitions even 10 years is a pretty long time before you even become competitive.

            >Guess it takes 11 instead of 14 years with coaching then?
            Sure but both of those timeframes are wrong.

            >Huge shortcuts don't exist in this market
            I agree but most people train completely ineffectively - or, rather, most people train effectively and then do nothing else right.

            Consider steroids, for example. Steroids have an almost linear dose-response relationship, but how many people who use them quadruple their suplus when they step up from 500mg/wk to 2000mg/wk effective dose? Not. Many. They are massively undereating their dose - the role of a coach is firstly to KNOW what kind of surplus goes with what dose and secondly to prescribe that. And, even preceding that, the role of a coach is to know/find what the maximum possible dose you can tolerate is and get you on that dose as fast as possible and get your calories up to match. That is effective coaching if your goal is to get huge, but that's not how it's approached because people have this idea that gains take time.

            They DO take time. But not ten fucking years.

            >Big statement. Be more specific
            See above. Coaches flogging "coaching" that isn't any more effective than the null case.

            Post continues.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              [...]
              >You responded the thing about less than 10 years to look like Israetel in relation to the guy saying something would take 10+ years to achieve. You took his claim and warped his statement into "It'd take 10+ years to look like Israetel" which he never said?
              Anon was interpreting Israetel's work, so let's cull him and hone in a bit. Israetel says that the key to achieving your goals is being consistent over a long time period - 10 years, for example. That's true and it's good advice.

              But it does not then logically follow that it should or will take 10 years to achieve your goals. It should NOT take that long. It's possible to achieve almost anything there is to achieve in fitness in way less than a whole fucking decade. Pic related is an 8 year gap, and Nick was already the size he is on the right for years before that pic was taken it's just the only comparison I can find.

              Now sure, he put years in to get to the left too. But that's my point - that time could have been shortened substantially if (hypothetically) he had a coach who put him on the big boy doses and surpluses much sooner.

              If you can put on that much size in like 3-4 years then there's nothing else I can imagine that you CAN'T do if you do it RIGHT. Coaches are supposed to tell you how to do it right and most of them have no fucking idea.

              >"i suppose you know better then???"
              Time will tell. I'll get back to you in 3 years, but I've already gained more LBM on my current cycle than "conventional wisdom" thinks is the maximum you can gain in a year lmao. People have no clue because there's no research and the average gym goer has no capacity to do his own experimental trials.

              >"but we're talking about natty bodybuilding"
              I'm not. I've already conceded that to win a natty competition might take a very long time because gains accrue over time; essentially the winner of a natty competition is whoever has been doing it (effectively) for the longest. It's inherent in the sport.

              And lastly (because I'm about to leave for gym):

              >post body.
              Cognition and physical activity are inversely correlated (cognition as distinct from IQ). The shittier you look the more likely you are to be better at thinking about how to train effectively. If you only listen to people who look good you're probably listening to the dumbest people available; if they're right about anything it will only be by accident.

              Case in point: Israetel.

              To some extent the proof is in the pudding but not to the whole extent. Newly graduated doctors are better at diagnosing rare diseases than experienced doctors; newbie lifters are more likely to be up on the current science than useless old fucks with steroid-rotted brains.

              Anyway, don't be close-minded :).

              watch out anons the cope-acitors are gonna blow!

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Then you can adjust the plan.
              Meaning the plan constantly changes, getting you to spend your lifetime improving. A beautiful system.

              >Steroids have an almost linear dose-response relationship
              Not true, pretty deminishing the higher you go with the dose tho. Kinda similiar to upping calories on a bulk. Also, you're describing steroid coaches once again, and that's not the topic, so why do you keep bringing that up? We're talking about coaches that will improve general training variables.

              >Pic related
              What pic?
              >Nick
              Assuming you're talking about Nick Walker, again, why are you mentioning roidmonkeys? They don't have anything to do with this? Their bodies obviously grow in different speeds to natties.

              >I'm not talking about natty bodybuilding
              Thennnn fuck off? We're talking about reaching long term goals as natties, why'd you even join this conversation?

              >winner of a natty competition is whoever has been doing it (effectively) for the longest
              Bullshit. I know people who train twice as long as me who look shittier than me due to me having worked harder to improve my training variables.

              Post continued.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Meaning the plan constantly changes, getting you to spend your lifetime improving
                Sure but "I'm going to be doing this forever" =/= "therefore it's fine if it takes forever for me to reach my goal". If the goal changes the plan changes but you should still be pursuing the goal effectively while you've got it. Otherwise you never get close enough to the goal to even want to change it.

                >Not true, pretty deminishing the higher you go with the dose tho.
                Completely true up to a point where diminishing returns then kick in, and that point is well above 2000mg/wk. There's some study from the 80s that vaguely confirms this in a shitty way (it's all we've got) but there's certainly plenty of anecdotal evidence and, in my own experience, I plotted my cycles based on the relationship described in that study and they worked out roughly as predicted.

                >What pic?
                Sorry I'm retarded.

                >why are you mentioning roidmonkeys?
                Because I decide what examples I'm going to give to make the point that I am making. I don't need your permission to introduce evidence.

                >We're talking about reaching long term goals as natties
                I don't give a fuck what you want to talk about. You replied to me, unless you actually are the original anon in which case your post doesn't specify and Israetel also gives roid advice to so there's zero fucking way to identify that in your post and I still accept no fault, retard.

                >I know people who train twice as long as me who look shittier than me
                How many of them compete at the top level in natty bodybuilding? Anyone who gets to the top rank of a competitive sport is already doing everything right. That's the point of qualifiers; to weed out the shitters who can't even train properly.

                Once you're down to the handful of elite competitors who have their training on point the only thing left to differentiate them is genetics and time. There's no merit involved at that level.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >But that goal changes over time.
            Then you can adjust the plan.

            >Yes, and what he meant is a very highly set goal that most of us want to achieve that will take over a decade to achieve.
            Not if you pursue that goal effectively.

            You mentioned natty bodybuilding - sure, that could conceivably take a decade or even longer because natty gains are so marginal past the point of diminishing returns. That's the one exception I can think of, and very few people actually care about natty bodybuilding. Unless your goal is literally to win some kind of national/international bodybuilding competition it shouldn't take anywhere near ten years, and even if your goal IS to win one of those competitions even 10 years is a pretty long time before you even become competitive.

            >Guess it takes 11 instead of 14 years with coaching then?
            Sure but both of those timeframes are wrong.

            >Huge shortcuts don't exist in this market
            I agree but most people train completely ineffectively - or, rather, most people train effectively and then do nothing else right.

            Consider steroids, for example. Steroids have an almost linear dose-response relationship, but how many people who use them quadruple their suplus when they step up from 500mg/wk to 2000mg/wk effective dose? Not. Many. They are massively undereating their dose - the role of a coach is firstly to KNOW what kind of surplus goes with what dose and secondly to prescribe that. And, even preceding that, the role of a coach is to know/find what the maximum possible dose you can tolerate is and get you on that dose as fast as possible and get your calories up to match. That is effective coaching if your goal is to get huge, but that's not how it's approached because people have this idea that gains take time.

            They DO take time. But not ten fucking years.

            >Big statement. Be more specific
            See above. Coaches flogging "coaching" that isn't any more effective than the null case.

            Post continues.

            >You responded the thing about less than 10 years to look like Israetel in relation to the guy saying something would take 10+ years to achieve. You took his claim and warped his statement into "It'd take 10+ years to look like Israetel" which he never said?
            Anon was interpreting Israetel's work, so let's cull him and hone in a bit. Israetel says that the key to achieving your goals is being consistent over a long time period - 10 years, for example. That's true and it's good advice.

            But it does not then logically follow that it should or will take 10 years to achieve your goals. It should NOT take that long. It's possible to achieve almost anything there is to achieve in fitness in way less than a whole fucking decade. Pic related is an 8 year gap, and Nick was already the size he is on the right for years before that pic was taken it's just the only comparison I can find.

            Now sure, he put years in to get to the left too. But that's my point - that time could have been shortened substantially if (hypothetically) he had a coach who put him on the big boy doses and surpluses much sooner.

            If you can put on that much size in like 3-4 years then there's nothing else I can imagine that you CAN'T do if you do it RIGHT. Coaches are supposed to tell you how to do it right and most of them have no fucking idea.

            >"i suppose you know better then???"
            Time will tell. I'll get back to you in 3 years, but I've already gained more LBM on my current cycle than "conventional wisdom" thinks is the maximum you can gain in a year lmao. People have no clue because there's no research and the average gym goer has no capacity to do his own experimental trials.

            >"but we're talking about natty bodybuilding"
            I'm not. I've already conceded that to win a natty competition might take a very long time because gains accrue over time; essentially the winner of a natty competition is whoever has been doing it (effectively) for the longest. It's inherent in the sport.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            And lastly (because I'm about to leave for gym):

            >post body.
            Cognition and physical activity are inversely correlated (cognition as distinct from IQ). The shittier you look the more likely you are to be better at thinking about how to train effectively. If you only listen to people who look good you're probably listening to the dumbest people available; if they're right about anything it will only be by accident.

            Case in point: Israetel.

            To some extent the proof is in the pudding but not to the whole extent. Newly graduated doctors are better at diagnosing rare diseases than experienced doctors; newbie lifters are more likely to be up on the current science than useless old fucks with steroid-rotted brains.

            Anyway, don't be close-minded :).

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              >Then you can adjust the plan.
              Meaning the plan constantly changes, getting you to spend your lifetime improving. A beautiful system.

              >Steroids have an almost linear dose-response relationship
              Not true, pretty deminishing the higher you go with the dose tho. Kinda similiar to upping calories on a bulk. Also, you're describing steroid coaches once again, and that's not the topic, so why do you keep bringing that up? We're talking about coaches that will improve general training variables.

              >Pic related
              What pic?
              >Nick
              Assuming you're talking about Nick Walker, again, why are you mentioning roidmonkeys? They don't have anything to do with this? Their bodies obviously grow in different speeds to natties.

              >I'm not talking about natty bodybuilding
              Thennnn fuck off? We're talking about reaching long term goals as natties, why'd you even join this conversation?

              >winner of a natty competition is whoever has been doing it (effectively) for the longest
              Bullshit. I know people who train twice as long as me who look shittier than me due to me having worked harder to improve my training variables.

              Post continued.

              >Cognition and physical activity are inversely correlated
              Pretty sure a certain Greek philosopher talked about how the perfect man is a hybrid of a warrior and a scholar and I definitely agree, your self proclaimed intelligence and weakness seems pretty sad. That aside, your claim is wrong anyway, they're directly correlated, not inversely: *link in another post*

              >If you only listen to people who look good
              Same if you only listen to people that look DYEL. The optimal person to listen to is a person who has logical reasoning behind every statement and has achieved the thing they have promised.
              Even if you don't consider Mike Israetel a part of this group due to his non natty status, there's still Jeff Nippard, Evan Holmes, Igor Openshansky and other natties preaching the exact same messages.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Here's the link broken down coz this shitty site won't let me send it:
                nat ure . com /articles /s415 98-022-0672 5-3

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Pretty sure a certain Greek philosopher talked about how the perfect man is a hybrid of a warrior and a scholar and I definitely agree
                Good to know that your understanding of how to do research hasn't advanced past 400 BC.

                >Same if you only listen to people that look DYEL
                It's almost as if you shouldn't base who you listen to on what they look like.

                I'm heading off right after I post this but I'll probably check this thread while I work out but I won't reply - just fyi so that if you want to reply to me I will see it but I won't be able to reply for you. I hate it when people leave me hanging so I try not to do it to others.

                >The optimal person to listen to is a person who has logical reasoning behind every statement and has achieved the thing they have promised.
                Unless your ability to reason logically is superior to theirs you're susceptible to being conned; deceptive people always SEEM like they're telling the truth, that's the fucking point - and if you rely on being able to personally investigate and confirm their claims then you'll only be able to catch people dumber than you. That's why you can't approach fraud in that way - you'll make yourself a victim.

                The optimal person to listen to is somebody who has a demonstrated ability to achieve exceptional results in varied circumstances. That's not Mike Israetel. Nothing about him is exceptional and several things are sub-par. All of his "arguments" could be utter bullshit and unless you knew more about the topic than he does (claims to) you wouldn't be able to tell. Approaching a fraud case from the perspective of "well I'll just listen to the fraudster and see if he can convince me!!!" is asking to be victimised. Of course he can convince you. That's why he's got millions of dollars. But just because you BELIEVE he is right, doesn't mean that he actually is.

                But you can't fake results. And that's why Israetel doesn't have any.

                See you around bro.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          You are laughably stupid.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Where is Mike Palestintel?

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    he actually doesn't. his take-away from every video is usually the exact opposite. he gives the benefit of doubt for every overcompliated extreme niche training/eating methods whatever and goes through the plausible marginal benefits they may or may not have and then in the end concludes that it doesn't really fucking matter just do whatever works for you because almost everything works its acutally really simple just train and eat for 10+ years, don't lie and cheat on yourself and you will make gains. people reach the same end results with completely different methods.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >just train and eat for 10+ years
      If my coach told me it was going to take 10 years to get results I'd fire him. Holy fuck. Lifting is easy but shrinking the time frame for achieving your goals is not; that's what separates knowers from conmen. He's a conman. He has very basic advice for retards and then "scientific" advice for people who fancy themselves brainiacs that ultimately amounts to - as you said - nothing; people getting the exact same result.

      If you cannot get your trainees to their goals faster than if they got literally no help at all then you're fucking worthless.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >if the person I hire to tell me the truth tells me the truth I fire them
        Great logic retard
        The simple truth is that it takes years to attain a good body and also truly have fundamental improvements to your physiology. You're all tripping on this modern instant gratification shit way too much. The only magic pill out there are roids but they don't even speed it up that much you'll still have to bulk for a long time and then cut after to look good not to mention all the other things you'll have to manage in terms of health. Shut up and do the work. This is something that's been figured out decades ago so you'd better get to it. Maybe you should hire someone to tell you how to not be a bitch.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It does not take ten years to get in shape.

          It doesn't even take ten years to get to OP's size if you're willing to use gear are aren't obese when you start. More like 5 at the most, 3 if you know what you're doing.

          Which a coach fucking should.

          have a nice day retard.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Mike is a 5'6 manlet and weighs 250lbs, He's like 100lbs above his natty limit. It is impossible to get that big in 3 years on gear.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Never said that it does. But reaching ambitious size and strength goals might. Diminishing returns set in quick and to truly smoothen and improve the rough edges of your physique/performance might take a decade. Nobody becomes a champ overnight. A good coach is somebody who delivers short term but also sets you up for long term success.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >he’s a conman
        >gives all his knowledge away for free multiple times a week

        What’s the con exactly? No one is forcing you to buy the RP workout templates. I’ve learned a ton from watching their YouTube channel that has improved my gains.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    He is gnomish.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Welcome to the fitness industry

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    *looks like shit and is also roiding*

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >*massively over-complicates extremely simple concepts*
    A symptom of lead deficiency.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    and gandy still mogs

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      He doesn't look like that now.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    You should spend a couple of years just trying to build muscle and get stronger
    Then you will be in a position where you need to specialize in strength/bodybuiding oriented training and his advice becomes applicable

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    ??

    He usually boils things down to the essentials. Maybe him not talking like an 8th grade downie is confusing to you,

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    ..in my way?

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The problem with science/studies gays is they're never going to have a solid opinion on how to do anything. They'll waffle around for hours on what different conflicting studies say and at the end of the day it's all experts fallacy and appeal to authority.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Training is hard. This was maybe my answer to Doucette, whom, as much as I admire him, I do quibble with. Coach Greg had a very medieval philosophy: that if the lifter tained harder than last time, he would prosper. We look at the data and it’s not that simple. Doucette can say that Anon trained hard and hit 1/2/3/4 in a year, and he was sick and shredded. But Doucette doesn’t ask the question: What was Anon's SFR looking like? Did he maintain sustainable RPE's? What did he do in times of caloric deficit? And what about all that accumulated fatigue? By the end of the mesocycle, Anons belly is gone but all of the accumulated fatigue isn't gone – they’re in his lumbar spine. Did Anon pursue a routine with planned deloads and skip them? Even the little rest days, in their little weekly microcycles?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Anon's gonna be all but full of squats and oats

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That's the only way most white collar workers in today's society make any money.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Looks like shit

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >OP gets filtered by an Israeli
    cope and seethe

Your email address will not be published.