Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum
» Being lean>being big, change my mind
  1. Results 31 to 42 of 42
  2. First
  3. 1
  4. 2
post 1681565973 04-26-2023, 05:31 PM
-
#31
  1. kingmanaverage
  2. Terrible poster
  1. kingmanaverage
  2. Terrible poster
  3. Join Date: Dec 2013
  4. Posts: 15,250
  5. Rep Power: 107906
Originally Posted By Robmnrd
Adding my thoughts:


The 12% area (real 12%, not "but but muh calipers and impedance results!!!) is where 80% ofnattieslook their best under the largest array of circumstances and to the largest portion of the general population.

Only BBers and wannabe BBers prefer leaner than that, and their perception is so skewed itshould notbe applied to other circumstances. Because as impressive as it is for a nattie to reach a true, real 9% bf (and to be clear it actually is impressive), outside of the BBing world and niche fetish communities it doesnotactually look "attractive". Chicks don't want your arms to be the same size (small) and veininess (excessive) as your cawk. Dudes that aren't into lifting DGAF about how lean you are, and honestly dudes that aren't into liftingactually aremore impressed by size and strength (hence the comments like "bro do you play football!" "Holy cow I bet you carried your new fridge in by yourself lul") than by how lean you are.

Plus the nonlinear loss of size, muscle, and "fullness" (the filling out Sennas mentioned) when a nattie starts cutting below 11% means that it is nearly impossible to look builtin clothesas a natty sub-11%.


TLDR:

-No idea what OP is referring to when he says "better to look good" because he gives zero actual measurements (other than just arbitrarily saying "less than 200")
-Law of diminishing returns applies to everything, and the pursuit of being excessively lean (for a natty) hits a spot where you aren't actually getting anything out of it quicker than some people would think
-12% and as big as you can get is where it's at for 80% of natties
I would say around 10-12% ish is ideal for aesthetics. I would agree that shooting for sub 10% is pointless unless you're a pro athlete or competitive bber. My op was in reference to all those who bloat up to 18+% so they can look big big in a t shirt, not worth it mane imo.
“Steroids is now just a word that the lazy and ignorant use to describe any guy that has more muscle and dedication than them”– Mike O'Hearn


"I am like getting the feeling of cumming in the gym; I'm getting the feeling of cumming at home; I'm getting the feeling of cumming backstage; when I pump up, when I pose out in front of 5000 people I get the same feeling, so I am cumming day and night. It's terrific, right? So you know, I am in heaven."
post 1681566063 04-26-2023, 05:33 PM
-
#32
  1. gmenfan40
  1. gmenfan40
  2. Join Date: Mar 2007
  3. Location: Fuck Israel
  4. Posts: 37,479
  5. Subscribers: 6
  6. Rep Power: 156588
Originally Posted By Robmnrd
Adding my thoughts:


The 12% area (real 12%, not "but but muh calipers and impedance results!!!) is where 80% ofnattieslook their best under the largest array of circumstances and to the largest portion of the general population.

Only BBers and wannabe BBers prefer leaner than that, and their perception is so skewed itshould notbe applied to other circumstances. Because as impressive as it is for a nattie to reach a true, real 9% bf (and to be clear it actually is impressive), outside of the BBing world and niche fetish communities it doesnotactually look "attractive". Chicks don't want your arms to be the same size (small) and veininess (excessive) as your cawk. Dudes that aren't into lifting DGAF about how lean you are, and honestly dudes that aren't into liftingactually aremore impressed by size and strength (hence the comments like "bro do you play football!" "Holy cow I bet you carried your new fridge in by yourself lul") than by how lean you are.

Plus the nonlinear loss of size, muscle, and "fullness" (the filling out Sennas mentioned) when a nattie starts cutting below 11% means that it is nearly impossible to look builtin clothesas a natty sub-11%.


TLDR:

-No idea what OP is referring to when he says "better to look good" because he gives zero actual measurements (other than just arbitrarily saying "less than 200")
-Law of diminishing returns applies to everything, and the pursuit of being excessively lean (for a natty) hits a spot where you aren't actually getting anything out of it quicker than some people would think
-12% and as big as you can get is where it's at for 80% of natties
Realistically anything under 15% with a decent amount of mass will look better than 99% of the population. (Ded fkn Srs)
post 1681566163 04-26-2023, 05:34 PM
-
#33
  1. gmenfan40
  1. gmenfan40
  2. Join Date: Mar 2007
  3. Location: Fuck Israel
  4. Posts: 37,479
  5. Subscribers: 6
  6. Rep Power: 156588
Originally Posted By kingmanaverage
I would say around 10-12% ish is ideal for aesthetics. I would agree that shooting for sub 10% is pointless unless you're a pro athlete or competitive bber. My op was in reference to all those who bloat up to 18+% so they can look big big in a t shirt, not with it mane imo.
I've bloated up to 20% at times, simply because I love to fukking eat during the holidays. I get fat a fukk very fast if I'm not disciplined. I can kill 5-6k calories in 20 minutes. It's also ridiculously hard for me to go from 15% to 10%. Genetics plays a major factor with bodyfat on an aesthetics side of things for most people. Some people hardly have to try to get shredded.(Super Ded fkn Srs)
post 1681566183 04-26-2023, 05:35 PM
-
#34
  1. LogicalLifts
  2. Registered User
  1. LogicalLifts
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Aug 2022
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 13,157
  6. Rep Power: 204849
Yup. Even a reasonably jacked dadbod mogs a beefcake approach.
post 1681566233 04-26-2023, 05:36 PM
-
#35
  1. guest89
  2. Forever aBOARD
  1. guest89
  2. Forever aBOARD
  3. Join Date: Sep 2003
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 41,691
  6. Rep Power: 169649
A lot of it depends on your bone structure/size. But in general its better to be big and lean.

I've a few buddies in the 5'4-5'5 range that are 200-220lbs lean (On juice) and they look pretty good whether their shirt is off or if they are wearing a t-shirt, polo, v-neck or even fitted dress shirt. They might be manlets but at least they give off the appearance of being a man.

On the flip size I know a few other guys about that height range that are 135-140lbs lean/shredded. They look great in photos. But when they are wearing clothes they basically look like a skinny teenager. They get weight mogged by the majority of females walking around too.




I'm 5'8. Back when I was in the 160s and really lean/athletic looking I felt great and performed well at that weight. Fast forward a few cycles/years later and I'm 193 with just slightly higher body-fat. Still relatively lean and vascular though. I get way more compliments at this body weight from females. My girlfriends friends/cousins/coworkers even tell her they think I look good at this size (srs). When you are jacked and lean you get more respect from men, more all around attention/being noticed. And if women are into muscles they are easy AF/its like shooting fish in a barrel because so few dudes out there have a standout physique.




As someone who's been average physique. Really lean/light/athletic. And now jacked & lean. There is no comparison. Its easy to see the superior choice. Anyone who hasn't run a few cycles and been jacked and lean can't possibly have an accurate opinion on this topic. As you've never lived the before & after.
post 1681566603 04-26-2023, 05:43 PM
-
#36
  1. Sevenlionz
  2. 6’2/cali
  1. Sevenlionz
  2. 6’2/cali
  3. Join Date: Mar 2020
  4. Posts: 9,524
  5. Rep Power: 107152
Being big AND lean and looking athletic is the best

post 1681567193 04-26-2023, 05:52 PM
-
#37
  1. Robmnrd
  2. Who the **** was phone?!
  1. Robmnrd
  2. Who the **** was phone?!
  3. Join Date: Jan 2011
  4. Location: Michigan, United States
  5. Age: 34
  6. Posts: 6,472
  7. Rep Power: 69123
Originally Posted By kingmanaverage
I would say around 10-12% ish is ideal for aesthetics. I would agree that shooting for sub 10% is pointless unless you're a pro athlete or competitive bber. My op was in reference to all those who bloat up to 18+% so they can look big big in a t shirt, not worth it mane imo.
That is a fair bf% range - should edit it into your OP so Miscers know what you're referencing when they come in the thread brah (srs)
Originally Posted By gmenfan40
Realistically anything under 15% with a decent amount of mass will look better than 99% of the population. (Ded fkn Srs)
Agreed (super ded fkn srs)
Originally Posted By gmenfan40
I've bloated up to 20% at times, simply because I love to fukking eat during the holidays. I get fat a fukk very fast if I'm not disciplined. I can kill 5-6k calories in 20 minutes. It's also ridiculously hard for me to go from 15% to 10%. Genetics plays a major factor with bodyfat on an aesthetics side of things for most people. Some people hardly have to try to get shredded.(Super Ded fkn Srs)
Another big factor that many people aren't as attuned to is fat distribution.

Some people are just really fukking unlucky and hold all of their fat in their lower chest, abs, and lower back. It makes looking good fukking difficult because you could achieve a nice bf% but those areas attract so much attention that the remaining fat deposits significantly detract from aesthetics. You'll see it now and then - brahs who are genuinely pretty lean but their midsection just doesn't have any real definition, and the v-taper just isn't there in spite of achieving good delt:upper arm separation and serratus visibility. Decent quad definition, even that little bit of vascularity starting to show itself, etc.... and yet that midsection is just. So. Stubborn.

Then on the flipside you get those fukkers that look cotdam yoked all the time because their traps and upper back are 'soft', tris are 'soft', and glutes and legs are 'soft' - yet everything else stays lean longer and becomes lean on a cut quicker.
MISC Haxball Crew
(Haxball Username: "Jus' Saiyan...")

Misc Positivity and Never Neg Crew

I always pick second to last in the pick a number threads Crew
post 1681567703 04-26-2023, 06:02 PM
-
#38
  1. PaulJerome
  2. Zealot from the housetops
  1. PaulJerome
  2. Zealot from the housetops
  3. Join Date: Jan 2011
  4. Posts: 3,410
  5. Rep Power: 54695
Originally Posted By kingmanaverage
Better to look good and weigh less than 200lbs
Why is the cutoff at 200 lbs?
6'5" 210 lbs, 10.9% body fat

Disagree with me, fine; but before calling me a fraudster click: https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=185252663

Bodily exercise profits a little, but godliness is profitable unto all things.
post 1681567733 04-26-2023, 06:03 PM
-
#39
  1. havoc00
  2. Former 40OZ King
  1. havoc00
  2. Former 40OZ King
  3. Join Date: Mar 2009
  4. Posts: 141,927
  5. Subscribers: 8
  6. Rep Power: 566647
Originally Posted By PaulJerome
Why is the cutoff at 200 lbs?
if u arent 200 or over are you even a man?
post 1681567743 04-26-2023, 06:03 PM
-
#40
  1. guest89
  2. Forever aBOARD
  1. guest89
  2. Forever aBOARD
  3. Join Date: Sep 2003
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 41,691
  6. Rep Power: 169649
Originally Posted By kingmanaverage
I would say around 10-12% ish is ideal for aesthetics. I would agree that shooting for sub 10% is pointless unless you're a pro athlete or competitive bber. My op was in reference to all those who bloat up to 18+% so they can look big big in a t shirt, not worth it mane imo.
12% bodyfat is probably the best all around body-fat for males. Leaner then 99% of the population. Healthy range. And can still live life without being too extreme.

I do agree getting fat just to look bigger in a t-shirt is dumb. The good news is, there is an easy way to determine leanness. If you can flex and have visible abs, you good. If you can't see your ab out-line, too fat.

Actual body-fat percentages are irrelevant for anyone not in the fitness industry.
Originally Posted By gmenfan40
Realistically anything under 15% with a decent amount of mass will look better than 99% of the population. (Ded fkn Srs)
15% looks fine when you have muscle mass. But most guys don't have a lot of muscle mass at 15% so they look like crap.

It really just depends on the physique under that 15%
post 1681568513 04-26-2023, 06:16 PM
-
#41
  1. mattb717
  2. Registered User
  1. mattb717
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Mar 2016
  4. Age: 47
  5. Posts: 3,909
  6. Rep Power: 13801
Most women dislike the body builder physique. Lean and in shape is better.
post 1681570153 04-26-2023, 06:42 PM
-
#42
  1. Omnivium
  1. Omnivium
  2. Join Date: Feb 2013
  3. Location: United States
  4. Posts: 19,694
  5. Rep Power: 80934
If you're natty with normal genetics, you're gonna look like a nonlifting twink when really lean. Might as well be 15% body fat so you can be a respectable size and look like you lift in a shirt
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts