Random crap

Post by **stuward** » Sat Mar 14, 2009 12:01 pm

Different people are built for different lifts. I'd love to hit 185 someday but it's not likely to happen.

Wouter · Post by **Wouter** » Sun Mar 15, 2009 4:55 am

I like Lil' Wayne's music

EDIT:
youtube=> bailando - paradisio

I still remember that song from when I was about 8 years old

manofsteel1385 · Post by **manofsteel1385** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 10:37 am

Matt Z wrote:Last week at the gym I saw a little old man bench pressing. He was about 5-foot-nothing and at least 70 with white hair and a pot belly. He didn't look especially fit or muscular, but he was barrel chested with short, relatively thick arms. Anyway, he went up to 225 lbs for 2 reps. Meanwhile, the guy on the next bench was about my age (late 20s) and around 6 feet tall. He was struggling to manage a few reps at 185 lbs (spotter had help a little near the end) and looking a little embarassed.

Theres different kinds of strength matt that I have noticed throughout life. One there is something called retard strength no offense to anyone and i have retarded people in my family but they are strong as hell also another is old man strength old men who have lived long have gotten there because they are tough and been through a lot of stuff. Both are usually surprisingly strong ask that 20 yr old who was embarrassed lol.

Matt Z · Post by **Matt Z** » Tue Mar 17, 2009 4:10 pm

I remember watching a Worlds Strongest Man competitions a while back, where one of the compeditors was my father's age.

KPj · Post by **KPj** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 5:47 am

One thing that's stuck with me for years now, is this guy that used to be in my gym. Literally when I first joined. He looked about just like anyones grandparent that you would come across. Well, he may have had a musclular body or whatever, but he didn't exactly sport tank tops. If you seen him out in the street or in a bar or something, you would have no idea he was fit/strong/whatever.

Anyway, I remember training beside him, then noticed he was doing curls with 45lbs DB's, with so much ease that it made my eyes pop out my head (didn't look like he was trying). He was some guy, he was into OL and PL, but mostly OL. He actually taught me how to Clean. He didn't like most of the people in the gym. He liked me because i wasn't a 'poser' and trained hard, but I done far too much 'bodybuilder stuff'. LOL. Man, how right he was.

Incidentally, A competing BB told me the same thing about a year after that and I still never listened!

Still, that old guy was amazing. That's how I see myself. I think that's my ultimate goal - to be like that guy when i'm his age.

KPj

Wouter · Post by **Wouter** » Wed Mar 18, 2009 10:12 am

Did you know that taking aspirins lowers your testosterone levels?
And that training for a prolonged time causes your T levels to increase by 40%?

Post by **Jungledoc** » Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:11 pm

My ambition is to be the little old man that the young guys comment on as being pretty strong "for his age". Maybe, maybe.

wilburburns · Post by **wilburburns** » Wed Mar 25, 2009 10:03 pm

Returning to the Gym after a couple of months of missed workouts SUCKS.

I can barely walk from the squats, and I have been lifting ~30% less than my prior Max lifts...

Oh, and NIT games just aren't that exciting...

Cliff

KPj · Post by **KPj** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:40 am

A new revolutionary diet pilll is being released in the UK today. I think it's today, anyway. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... pills.html

It somehow prevents the body from absorbing fat....

......Hold on a minute whilst I try scratch my own eyes out.....

* trying to scratch eye balls out of sockets *

OK i'm back. Anyway. How BAD is this?

The funniest thing is, you 'qualify' for it if you have a BMI of over 28. Who's betting that those with a BMI of ~25 will 'binge' so they can get up to 28 and get the magic pillls?

You know what else - I'm 5'7, 175lbs. That makes my BMI 27.4. I would say my body fat is about 12%. I have abs, but I doubt i'm in the single digits as you can only see the bottom 2 in a certain light. ANYWAY...

I'm going to put on another few lbs, then go into every chemist I come across and get weighed for the diet pill, just to screw with them a little. Maybe not every chemist, but i'll do it in my local one atleast.

Idiots.

It's worth saying again...

Idiots.

I'm done.

KPj

toby123 · Post by **toby123** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:15 pm

I see that this stuff (2.27kg) is on 'offer' at my gym for [1 million dollars].99!!! What a f---ing rip-off! Does the 'Peptide Bonded Glutamine' make all the difference?

nygmen · Post by **nygmen** » Tue Apr 21, 2009 7:52 pm

toby123 wrote:I see that this stuff (2.27kg) is on 'offer' at my gym for [1 million dollars].99!!! What a f---ing rip-off! Does the 'Peptide Bonded Glutamine' make all the difference?

Tomorrow's nutrition today.

Suitable for:
vegetarians

HA HA

And the nutrition label doesn't even list protein, ahhhh hhhaaaaaa

crap product is crap

KPj · Post by **KPj** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:57 am

When I was watching the news this morning, they were talking about a new FSA report which showed the drastic amounts of sugar in the most common breakfast cereals over here, specifically, the one's targetted at kids. Some allegedly have the same sugar content as a bowl of Ice Cream. There was a big crackdown on this 3 years ago, it's made the news again because there's no improvement.

This woman came on for an interview, who was from some "Board of Sugary Cereals that Brain Wash Kids and Parents", or something. The interview was terrible. Well, revealed a terrible mindset.

The Womam presenter is actually very good - quite provocative, doesn't hold back. But you should of heard the crap this women who got interviewed came out with. I'll rattle off a few, the quotes are accurate, but not exact, as it's from memory,

"Research shows us that in fact, sugar isn't linked with obesity. It's actually Fat that's linked with Obesity."

"It's interesting that the media only focuses on the Sugar and not the wealth of other valuable nutrients that are in the cereals"

"Sugar is a vital nutrient and children especially need a lot of it".

When asked about why all the breakdowns on labels referred to 35g servings, when the average serving was clearly much more than that, she said,

"It's the sugar intake throughout the period of around a year that really matters. You're also not taking into account the other sugar from other sources that are being consumed."

What a load of crap. There was more, but these are the points that stick in my mind. I want to rant about this, but I don't even know where to start. Best left alone. It's just interesting to see the mindset of these people.

I'm in Internet Marketing, which is very close to marketing in general. What these people do with 'the research' reminds of a consultant that we used to work with. He had huge accounts and was very succesful, so we hired him for 2 days per month for 6 months. He was a Microsoft Excel genius. He used to always say, "as long as the numbers work, everything else will work. You can always make the numbers work". What he meant by that, was, even if campaigns were going badly, he could use real numbers and statistics, and present them in such a way that the campaign looked good. Sounds very far fetched, but, trust me, it's very true, and very common, especially from big marketing companies.

It was also used when a customer would say, "we want to make X turnover and Y profit". He would start with the final number and trace it way back to the start of the campaign. "you just need to get the numbers to work

KPj

nygmen · Post by **nygmen** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 10:22 am

KPj wrote: "you just need to get the numbers to work

KPj

I do this for a living. The more commas in the back account, the happier people are when you are good at it.

Research shows us that in fact, sugar isn't linked with obesity. It's actually Fat that's linked with Obesity."

Solid Gold man, Solid gold.

(I read it as she is talking about body fat!

)

pdellorto · Post by **pdellorto** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 4:45 pm

nygmen wrote:
KPj wrote:
Research shows us that in fact, sugar isn't linked with obesity. It's actually Fat that's linked with Obesity."
Solid Gold man, Solid gold.

It's brilliant. Not a single skinny person is, in fact, obese. Just the fat ones.

I think we can expand this logic to training.

"I mean, research shows us that in fact, lifting heavy weights isn't linked with strength. It's actually being strong that's linked with strength."

nygmen · Post by **nygmen** » Wed Apr 29, 2009 7:45 pm

pdellorto wrote:
"I mean, research shows us that in fact, lifting heavy weights isn't linked with strength. It's actually being strong that's linked with strength."

LOLZ

Oh man, Whey just sprayed all over my laptop...