Wisdom On Facebook

Old and Grey

Old and Grey

Super Moderator
Staff member
I came across something on FaceBook this morning that I thought was worth sharing. It is aimed at strength but applies to hypertrophy as well.

Self-limiting beliefs on full display today.

Related to my new article (upload_2015-9-30_11-6-31.pnghttp://www.strengtheory.com/your-drug-free-muscle-and-strength-potential-part-1/, I've already gotten a bunch of messages and emails saying things along the lines of, "that can't be right. I'd have to gain 15lbs of muscle and put 200lbs on my total to hit those numbers. There's no way that's possible."

My follow-up question: "How long have you been training."

Thus far, 3 years of training or less for everyone with this complaint.

Look, getting strong takes time. Getting really strong, for the vast majority of people, takes a lot of time.

So, let's say you've been training for 3 years, you're 15lbs from the muscle predictions, and you're 200lbs away from the strength predictions.

That's AWESOME!

Give it 3-5 more years, put on 3-5lbs of muscle per year (yes, it's frustrating when it takes months for it to even register on the scale), and grind away for another 40-60lbs on your total per year. That's TOTALLY realistic.

That would mean you were entering your prime as a lifter and hitting a damn solid total after 6-8 years of serious training. That's about normal.

Sure, there are some people who are freaking jacked, hitting superhuman totals after a year or two of training, but those people are few and far between. Most people take 5-10 years of serious training to start approaching their potential.

If you're really committed to being strong and jacked, you need to be in this for the long haul. There are Masters and Submasters lifters still hitting PRs 20+ years into their strength career.

If you've been training for 3 years, you're not at your muscle and strength limits. You're probably nowhere close.

If you've been training for 10 years, there's probably still some ground to gain.

If the models in that article say you're a long way from your potential, that's great news for you!

Raise your sights, keep grinding, enjoy your PRs, and enjoy the process.

If you have some faith in yourself, and work your ass off for a prolonged period of time, good things happen.
 
That is great information there. But actually a little depressing as Well. I thought I was going to hit my goals in say 3 to 5 years. Well probably closer to 3. I will have to reconsider I guess...
 
Mojo77 said:
That is great information there. But actually a little depressing as Well. I thought I was going to hit my goals in say 3 to 5 years. Well probably closer to 3. I will have to reconsider I guess...
Click to expand...

It depends on what your short and long term goals are Mojo. Health and fitness is a life long pursuit. Set realistic goals and you won't be disappointed. Experiment and change things up twice a year or so until you hit upon something that gives good results. Then change again when the gains taper off. But, most importantly, keep plugging along. Everyone who persists within the principles of HST will be creating a better body. Guaranteed.
 
adpowah said:
Gnuckols always bringing the heat.
Click to expand...

That cat has game, no doubt about it.

I disagree with a few things he says and advocates, but mainly in his method and/or interpretation of his results.

For instance, his recent piece on expectations of steroids vs non-steroids; about 10% etc. was very poor in my opinion. A case of not being able to see the forest for the trees; when your data is $hit, non-existent or highly questionable, you can't draw conclusions from it and you definitely shouldn't write an article about it and then get defensive.

In terms of goal setting and achievements; I sometimes get frustrated that at nearly 32 years old, I'm a LONG way behind a lot of folks I know in their early 20s and that I squandered a long time as far as lifting was concerned. But having said that, there's more in front of me than behind me, and I'll be busting out a 300kg deadlift befor e the year is done. Hard to be mopey about that.
 
But if you hit your peak after 3 years of training... what have you got to look forward to for the rest of your life?!
 
Still something to add here... It is nice to see these drug free potential calculations, but if these standards are taken off elite lifters, then most probably 98% off all lifters will fall far short of these natural limits, even with serious training.
I also read on various fora that a natural lifter will max out after 3 to 4 years of serious lifting, adding squat zero after that. Which is probably true when you see trainees looking the same year after year after that point (besides more or less fat) or turn to chemical assistance.
A vast drug test in my country alone proved 40% of gym goers to be on drugs in 2014 after a positive test for some kind of chemical, because most probably this natural potential isn't all that impressive. I don't necessarily have a problem with chemical assistance, but for christ sake be honest about it. Stop this bullshit of whatever is possible and claiming natty when the vast majority is not! The standards in above calculators are not only derived from elite lifters, but most probably also from elite lifters who were using some kind of assistance as well.
So most of us being natty will most probably end up far below the said potential. Which isn't an issue if everyone would be frank about what is truely possible natural and what is not.
I for one would like to see some pictures of a truely natural trainee at its peak. I'm not talking about the true natural bodybuilder website who claims natty and then compares himself to Arnold and comes out at the same stats, which means he's probably a roider too as Arnold acknowledged drug use.
 
Nobody can max out after 3-4 years. In fact, no one can ever actually max out. You can stop gaining muscle but still be miles away from maxing out. That is a training and diet problem, not genetics. I speak of naturals, not drug abusers because I have no idea what their limitations may or may not be.
 
Old and Grey said:
Nobody can max out after 3-4 years. In fact, no one can ever actually max out. You can stop gaining muscle but still be miles away from maxing out. That is a training and diet problem, not genetics. I speak of naturals, not drug abusers because I have no idea what their limitations may or may not be.
Click to expand...
Agree, still getting PBs at 50!!!!
 
Old and Grey said:
Nobody can max out after 3-4 years. In fact, no one can ever actually max out. You can stop gaining muscle but still be miles away from maxing out. That is a training and diet problem, not genetics. I speak of naturals, not drug abusers because I have no idea what their limitations may or may not be.
Click to expand...
So you say that genetics don't play a role? I think they do. People will have more or less "talent" for muscle development then others, small bone structures do not accomodate for extremely large muscles, declining hormone levels with age don't help either, etc etc... . Me thinks after 4 years of serious training you should have reached 95% of your potential.

The article above states that an ffmi of 25 is attainable for everyone and even many have surpassed this naturally. This is just bullshit adding up to giving people false hope and an incorrect image of what is really attainable. Hence why the majority of advanced trainees have used some kind of gear at some point in their training career.
How your body is composed will have a large impact on what you can gain naturally. What makes everyone think they would be in the 95th percentile and up to reach an ffmi of 25? The truth is 95%+ of people will end up far south of that figure.
An ffmi of say 22 is far more realistic and probably attainable for the vast majority of lifters.

That is what this rant is about, setting realistic goals, instead of unrealistic dreaming, only attainable for the happy few or the drug assisted. The internet is too filled up with BS about this. If only training and diet played a role, every footballer would be a pro footballer, every tennisplayer would be a grand slam winner, every swimmer would be an olympic medalist and every rider would win the tour de france, yet no matter how hard, intelligent the train, how good they eat, how well they recover, 99% of these folks don't even come close to ever reach that level, because they simply lack the talent, the gift, in some way. Why do you think this would be different in bb-ing?
 
Did I say genetics do not play a role in bodybuilding? Where did you ever come up with that nonsense? Genetics plays a role in individualizing everyone. It is not a factor in determining if you have reached YOUR maximum potential. Every living person can make some type of improvement from where they are today. I am currently improving my rear delts and traps significantly after 55 years of training. To do that, I am making sacrifices elsewhere. There are over 650 muscles in the human body. It is not possible to ever have them all max out at the same time, more less in 4 years.
 
I'm with @Old and Grey, you keep training and keep making adjustments. It slows down and you can be severely behind others but the only talent it takes to improve your FFMI is to simply continue to build mass. Comparing the gaining of muscle mass to all of these other skills such as football, tennis, swimming etc is a bit skewed. All of those require multiple systems in your body to be in the elite percentile and then come together in a unified manner over years of training. Gaining mass requires less systems to be unified and none of them need to be elite. Gaining FFM is as simple as, eat in a surplus, recover from training faster than you detrain, lift in a progressive manner and not die. If you do that (while results will vary), you will get bigger and you will improve.

Gregs argument is that if you can string together those requirements for long enough, you will continue to improve even if the improvements slow down even for decades. Granted it is anecdotal but I have never personally seen anyone cap out in 3-4 years.
 
My point is that 99% of the images out there regarding bb-ing are majorely skewed and are showing bodies that are unattainable naturally. This article stating an ffmi of 25 is very well attainable natty is only adding up to this BS because frankly... It is not! The ffmi of Essmaker Roland around 22,5 is probably all you can dream off and you have probably done fucking great if you got there. That is reality, stop selling dreams man. Now this Essmaker dude doesn't look all impressive compared to today standards right. Hence the reason why so many turn to roids.

Unless you made it before 30-35 you ll never reach your theoretical potential because you are physically unable due to declining testlevels. Face it man, less test means less muscle building and less muscle retention capacity. So you will be smaller. Look at Jeffry Life, no 75 year old can look like him as if he were 25! But he admits hey I am topping up my hormone levels like those of a youngster. He admits doing test, dea, hgh and what not... That is his fucking program for age management to retain youth as long as possible and it brings him a zillion clients.
 
Last edited:
If you consider a steroid abuser to be the "standard" today, of course you cannot compare them to naturals. That is beside the point. You stated that people max out genetically after 3-5 years of lifting. That is the point we are discussing here and that is absolutely false despite your having read it on the internet. If you want to talk about abusing steroids, please start a different thread where that can be discussed and not digressed from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top