Saturday Morning in Del Mar

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261091]FD, when I see a person run down a cow, kill it with pressure on the jugular with elongated incisors, rend the dead body with teeth and claws, then devour the warm bloody flesh in large chunks without chewing, I will accept Im in the presence of an animal adapted to eating meat. I dont doubt humans have been eating meat for a llong time, Im just pointing out we are not naturally adapted to it[/QUOTE]

What a lame argument.

Ok well on that basis when I see a person graze and browse all day on grass, leaves, roots and wild berries with a mouth full of flat molars I will accept that I am in the presence of an animal adapted to living exclusively on plant life.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261119]What a lame argument.

Ok well on that basis [B]when I see a person graze and browse all day on grass, leaves, roots and wild berries with a mouth full of flat molars [/B]I will accept that I am in the presence of an animal adapted to living exclusively on plant life.[/QUOTE]

That's been me since New Years except for the flat molars. Down 8, 2 to go.

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261086] Most of the better than average players I know play the Titleist Pro V1 line. [/QUOTE]

And yet Titleist says that unless the golfer has clubhead speed above 110mph, he can't benefit from playing the ProV1; he can't compress it enough to achieve the distance it was designed for. Most amateurs should play the NXT, etc. NXT and ProVI have almost identical spin and other near the green accuracy.

So I play a used and usually dirty NXT. I think it having been soaked in water a few weeks actually helps its trajectory!

Regarding food, our teeth indicate what we were designed to eat. Since we don't have big canines, and we do have a mouthful of flat teeth like a goat does, we were obviously intended to eat veggies, grain and sticks. I remember our goats would eat cigarette butts, not lit, of course.

Surgeons will tell us that they make a nice living cutting out bowels when undigested meat becomes cancer tumors. So if swinging a golf club with a colostemy bag peeking out from under your shorts doesn't turn you off, eat a LOT of red meat.

Larry

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261120]That's been me since New Years except for the flat molars. Down 8, 2 to go.[/QUOTE]

Pounds or kilos?

[QUOTE=Larryrsf;260728]

Single friend of mine in his 60s loved to go over and spend months in Thailand and the PI. He finally bought a nice waterfront house in the PI and married one of the local girls, one that looked like a child. Now he is basically "patrone" of that little area, the only person with money, ha. But what do they talk about? [B]He spends his day on the Internet. [/B]

Larry[/QUOTE]

What a doofus. Imagine retiring to a PI and then spending all your time on the internet. You wouldn't waste time on the internet if you lived in a great place like say, Rancho Santa Fe, would you? Would you Larry?

[QUOTE=Larryrsf;261128]And yet Titleist says that unless the golfer has clubhead speed above 110mph, he can't benefit from playing the ProV1; he can't compress it enough to achieve the distance it was designed for. Most amateurs should play the NXT, etc. NXT and ProVI have almost identical spin and other near the green accuracy.

So I play a used and usually dirty NXT. I think it having been soaked in water a few weeks actually helps its trajectory!

[B]Regarding food, our teeth indicate what we were designed to eat. Since we don't have big canines, and we do have a mouthful of flat teeth like a goat does, we were obviously intended to eat veggies, grain and sticks.[/B] I remember our goats would eat cigarette butts, not lit, of course.

Surgeons will tell us that they make a nice living cutting out bowels when undigested meat becomes cancer tumors. So if swinging a golf club with a colostemy bag under your shorts doesn't turn you off, eat a LOT of red meat.

Larry[/QUOTE]

There you go NAH. Larry has come out on your side which completely validates and confirms your argument. We all know there is no greater knowledge/authority than Larry to mediate on these discussions.

You win! :D

[QUOTE=Larryrsf;261128][B]And yet Titleist says that unless the golfer has clubhead speed above 110mph[/B], he can't benefit from playing the ProV1; he can't compress it enough to achieve the distance it was designed for. Most amateurs should play the NXT, etc. NXT and ProVI have almost identical spin and other near the green accuracy.

So I play a used and usually dirty NXT. I think it having been soaked in water a few weeks actually helps its trajectory!

Larry[/QUOTE]

I think you read that incorrectly. Titleist simply stated that many tour pros have swing speeds greater than 110mph. That had nothing to do with a recommendation for any particular ball.

Titleist states that there is only a 4 yard gap in distances between any of their given balls. The fitting for a particular ball becomes important based on the player's skill level. A better player wants more control around the greens with additional spin. The lesser player needs less spin to control his tee shots and long iron shots better.

So, it has nothing to do with swing speed and everything to do with the player's skill level. I like to play a high spin ball because I want more control around the green. I hit it pretty straight so I'm not concerned with side spin off the tee.

Of course, it also has to do with money. High spinning balls are more expensive. Each ball manufacturer needs a mid and low price point ball.

I too think the NXT Tour is a great ball, especially on wet greens where a high spinning ball will suck back too far. The type of greens you play is a big factor as well in choosing the right ball.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261129]Pounds or kilos?[/QUOTE]

Lbs. One kilo to go. I'll tell you what, the virtual elimination of carb foods with alot of raw veggies has me feeling phenomenal. Haven't cut the alcohol but haven't had to. Salads with olive oil and balsamic vinegars, celery and hummous or doctored plain yogurt (southwest spices), lean marinated chicken, fish flllets with low fat sauces, small doses of cheese and chocolate, apples and oranges are about 90% of what I'm consuming right now.

The food's good enough that my friends still want to come over and eat it. When I hit my goal I'll do a week of mostly healthy but more normal stuff alternating with a week of the above, so forth and so on.

[QUOTE=Larryrsf;261128]And yet Titleist says that unless the golfer has clubhead speed above 110mph, he can't benefit from playing the ProV1; he can't compress it enough to achieve the distance it was designed for. Most amateurs should play the NXT, etc. NXT and ProVI have almost identical spin and other near the green accuracy.[/quote]

My god but you talk a lot of bull.

Where does Titleist say this, Larry? Let's see the source. Because here's what I can find them saying:

[URL="http://www.titleist.com/teamtitleist/team-titleist/f/5/p/4202/16890.aspx"][INDENT][I]Team Titleist
post: 27 Aug 2010 9:23 AM
Well said Drew.

Just to build on that a bit more, we spoke with our golf ball fitting team and they wanted to emphasize that Titleist golf balls are not designed for any one wing speed or player type. Titleist golf balls are designed for optimal performance when exectuing all of the shot types that are played during a normal round of golf. This includes full swing shots, partial swing shots, chips and putts. And as you know, all of these different shots require varying swing speeds.[/I][/INDENT][/URL]

[quote]So I play a used and usually dirty NXT. I think it having been soaked in water a few weeks actually helps its trajectory! [/quote]

It helps you get more roll out on your irons? 130 carry + 30 yard roll = 160 yard 6 iron?

[quote]Regarding food, our teeth indicate what we were designed to eat. Since we don't have big canines, and we do have a mouthful of flat teeth like a goat does, we were obviously intended to eat veggies, grain and sticks. I remember our goats would eat cigarette butts, not lit, of course. [/quote]

We have canines and bicuspids, Larry. They are for meat. That we don't have huge canines only means we don't kill our meat by biting.

[quote]Surgeons will tell us that they make a nice living cutting out bowels when undigested meat becomes cancer tumors.[/quote]

No. No surgeon anywhere will tell you that because:

1. The idea that meat hangs out in your bowels undigested is just nonsense.

2. Your tumors can only be formed from your own tissue.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261135]Lbs. One kilo to go. I'll tell you what, the virtual elimination of carb foods with alot of raw veggies has me feeling phenomenal. Haven't cut the alcohol but haven't had to. Salads with olive oil and balsamic vinegars, celery and hummous or doctored plain yogurt (southwest spices), lean marinated chicken, fish flllets with low fat sauces, small doses of cheese and chocolate, apples and oranges are about 90% of what I'm consuming right now.

The food's good enough that my friends still want to come over and eat it. When I hit my goal I'll do a week of mostly healthy but more normal stuff alternating with a week of the above, so forth and so on.[/QUOTE]

My GF is a triple black belt martial artist and she introduced me to her low carb diet while training for a match and we ate like kings and lost weight!

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261135]Lbs. One kilo to go. I'll tell you what, the virtual elimination of carb foods with alot of raw veggies has me feeling phenomenal. Haven't cut the alcohol but haven't had to. [B]Salads with olive oil and balsamic vinegars, celery and hummous or doctored plain yogurt (southwest spices), lean marinated chicken, fish flllets with low fat sauces, small doses of cheese[/B] and chocolate, apples and oranges are about 80% of what I'm consuming right now.

The food's good enough that my friends still want to come over and eat it. When I hit my goal I'll do a week of mostly healthy but more normal stuff alternating with a week of the above, so forth and so on.[/QUOTE]

What you have described is EXACTLY the type of eating I am talking about, excluding the chocolates??? :confused:. When I followed that type of diet strictly about 8 years ago I dropped 10kgs in about 8 weeks. I did no extra exercise during that period but I played a lot of tennis back then. Having said that I got fat playing a lot of tennis too so it's what goes in your mouth that is all important. These days I follow it in a relaxed manner, most main meals are still based around it but I'm not strict enough outside of meals and drink too much. Plus I love my asian food, sushi etc which usually includes rice.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261142]What you have described is EXACTLY the type of eating I am talking about, excluding the chocolates??? :confused:. When I followed that type of diet strictly about 8 years ago I dropped 10kgs in about 8 weeks. I did no extra exercise during that period but I played a lot of tennis back then. Having said that I got fat playing a lot of tennis too so it's what goes in your mouth that is all important. These days I follow it in a relaxed manner, most main meals are still based around it but I'm not strict enough outside of meals and drink too much. Plus I live my asian food, sushi etc which usually includes rice.[/QUOTE]

I've lost 4 pounds in two weeks simply by avoiding the free chocolate kisses and other candies at work and not eating between meals. At first it was tough to break the snacking habit but now it just feels normal. I've noticed that I actually feel better if I'm a little hungry at times.

Hey, what's going on??? I post and our resident nutcase (someone said my remora fish) instantly posted only 2 harassing and contradicting posts. I feel cheated!!! My posts usually elicit 3 or 4 or sometimes a wild-eyed cussing and spitting post every few minutes all day, long after most of us have yawned and turned our computers off.

Have I lost my touch?

Signed, disappointed and despondent in Rancho Santa Fe.

Larry

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261142]What you have described is EXACTLY the type of eating I am talking about, excluding the chocolates??? :confused:. When I followed that type of diet strictly about 8 years ago I dropped 10kgs in about 8 weeks. I did no extra exercise during that period but I played a lot of tennis back then. Having said that I got fat playing a lot of tennis too so it's what goes in your mouth that is all important. These days I follow it in a relaxed manner, most main meals are still based around it but I'm not strict enough outside of meals and drink too much. Plus I love my asian food, sushi etc which usually includes rice.[/QUOTE]

Go sashimi, it's more satisfying with better consequences. If that's a little too much for you, a good sushi chef can do sauces. I love rice in many forms but feel so much better without things like that.

I didn't want to lose too fast because then it's partly muscle. It's an utter ass pain at first to control what you eat this way but after a while it becomes natural and it's astounding how much better you feel. The cravings for the bad s.hit go away after a week or so. The chocolate aside from having some good things going on curbs appetite. A couple of hours after dinner I'm ready to go again, but a small piece of low sugar chocolate tames that.

[QUOTE=Larryrsf;261150]Hey, what's going on??? I post and our resident nutcase (someone said my remora fish) instantly posted only 2 harassing and contradicting posts. I feel cheated!!! My posts usually elicit 3 or 4 or sometimes a wild-eyed cussing and spitting post every few minutes all day, long after most of us have yawned and turned our computers off. [/quote]

I love reading about this fantasy world you inhabit, Larry!

:)

[quote]Have I lost my touch?Signed, disappointed and despondent in Rancho Santa Fe[/QUOTE]

I'm despondent that you haven't yet manned up on the wager you accepted on RSG, Larry:

[URL="http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.golf/msg/46327d718d8df755"][INDENT][I]Waiting for Alan to show his stuff, sorta like the strutting and flexing before a cage match. I showed that I can hit them straight and long with every club. My swing may not look like a pro's, I need to rehearse my backswing, get it right and then swing, but I do find a way to hit it crisp and propel that sucker toward the target. I don't play the treeline and I seldom need to recover from beside or over the greens.

Hey AB, put up or shut up. There is no shame in backing down when you know you are in WAY over your head. [/I][/INDENT][/URL]

Any chance you'll live up to your talk any time soon? You feeling "froggy" enough, yet?

[QUOTE=alangbaker;261140]My GF is a triple black belt martial artist and she introduced me to her low carb diet while training for a match and we ate like kings and lost weight![/QUOTE]

Before long I started looking at moderate carbs as kind of a poison. It's not from getting carried away it's based on how you feel. Way more energy and you just feel better.

[QUOTE=SoonerBS;261178]You know guys, it is really not that difficult. Just get you a calorie counting app for you phone. Put in all the info about your weight and height. It will give you your daily calorie limit for your size. Now, plug in what you eat each day. If you will keep your caloric intake 1,000 cals below your allowance, you will lose weight. If you will exercise daily doing something (it doesn't freaking matter what you do), you will drop the weight quicker. It is a simple formula -- consume less calories than you burn in a day.

See how simple that was? And to think, I didn't have to cut 'n paste volumes for everyone to read.[/QUOTE]

Do they have an app that makes you lose weight no matter what you eat? That's the one I'm going to download. I might even pay the $1.99 fee.

You know guys, it is really not that difficult. Just get you a calorie counting app for you phone. Put in all the info about your weight and height. It will give you your daily calorie limit for your size. Now, plug in what you eat each day. If you will keep your caloric intake 1,000 cals below your allowance, you will lose weight. If you will exercise daily doing something (it doesn't freaking matter what you do), you will drop the weight quicker. It is a simple formula -- consume less calories than you burn in a day.

See how simple that was? And to think, I didn't have to cut 'n paste volumes for everyone to read.

You know guys, it is really not that difficult. Just get you a calorie counting app for you phone. Put in all the info about your weight and height. It will give you your daily calorie limit for your size. Now, plug in what you eat each day. If you will keep your caloric intake 1,000 cals below your allowance, you will lose weight. If you will exercise daily doing something (it doesn't freaking matter what you do), you will drop the weight quicker. It is a simple formula -- consume less calories than you burn in a day.

See how simple that was? And to think, I didn't have to cut 'n paste volumes for everyone to read.

[img]http://smilies.sofrayt.com/cha/fitness20.gif[/img]

[QUOTE=SoonerBS;261178]You know guys, it is really not that difficult. Just get you a calorie counting app for you phone. Put in all the info about your weight and height. It will give you your daily calorie limit for your size. Now, plug in what you eat each day. If you will keep your caloric intake 1,000 cals below your allowance, you will lose weight. If you will exercise daily doing something (it doesn't freaking matter what you do), you will drop the weight quicker. It is a simple formula -- consume less calories than you burn in a day.

See how simple that was? And to think, I didn't have to cut 'n paste volumes for everyone to read.[/QUOTE]

That's awesome. Dietary approach from the year 1942, food from 1942 and a modern I-phone interface to legitimize it. How much was the app?

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261182]That's awesome. Dietary approach from the year 1942, food from 1942 and a modern I-phone interface to legitimize it. How much was the app?[/QUOTE]

$3.99, but it comes with a free vinyl record and song done by the Andrew Sisters.

[QUOTE=SoonerBS;261187]$3.99, but it comes with a free vinyl record and song done by the Andrew Sisters.[/QUOTE]

I did the math and I'm pretty sure they overcharged you by $3.99.

Although some of the older vinyl is priceless.

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261105]I would guess that you are much more of a follower and "sheep" than I am. In fact, the people who voice their opposition to all things popular are usually the ones screaming for acceptance and just want to belong.

I use Callaway i(z) tour balls, Titleist 990 irons, Callaway Hyper X driver and Cobra Hybrids. Hardly what you would call popular equipment.

It's clear that you are too simple to understand my message. In fact, my tastes are the exact opposite of what you are thinking and I would argue that I am much more open than the majority of the people on this forum. The key is that I'm not embarrassed to admit that I like certain music that just happened to be very popular at the time and was not considered "cool" for a guy to like.

If I like something that just happens to be very popular with many other people at the time, I'm not going to say I don't like it just to sound original.

If I like to drink Budweiser, I'm not going to choke down some other beer that's darker just to look cool.

Don't you get it? YOU are the one who is a puppet on the strings. You can't think for yourself. You're so afraid of being labeled or judged by other men. That's just pathetic.[/QUOTE]

Sounds like a ton of rationalizing to me. Just the fact that you would consider that doing something might make you "look cool" makes my point. I haven't thought about "looking cool" since I was 17. Sad really.

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261227]The unthinkable has happened. Im in a real pickle now. I really dont want to re-evaluate every instinct I have about the validity of anything larry posts, but he has never said anything remotely sensible before.[/QUOTE]

Don't worry, NaH: he hasn't said anything remotely sensible now.

You're a normal human, and you're allowed to have a few misguided ideas (such as the idea that because we can't bring down a cow with our bare hands that means we can't be biologically designed to eat meat). The fact that occasionally your normal human fallibility will happen to intersect with Larry's delusion-filled existence doesn't mean anything.

You're all good, man.

:thumbsup:

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261133]There you go NAH. Larry has come out on your side which completely validates and confirms your argument. We all know there is no greater knowledge/authority than Larry to mediate on these discussions.

You win! :D[/QUOTE]

The unthinkable has happened. Im in a real pickle now. I really dont want to re-evaluate every instinct I have about the validity of anything larry posts, but he has never said anything remotely sensible before.

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261227]The unthinkable has happened. Im in a real pickle now. I really dont want to re-evaluate every instinct I have about the validity of anything larry posts, but he has never said anything remotely sensible before.[/QUOTE]

Tell me about it NAH. I'm left handed and knowing that Lary swings LH has made me wonder at times if I should switch to the other side.

[QUOTE=alangbaker;261138]My god but you talk a lot of bull.

Where does Titleist say this, Larry? Let's see the source. Because here's what I can find them saying:

[URL="http://www.titleist.com/teamtitleist/team-titleist/f/5/p/4202/16890.aspx"][INDENT][I]Team Titleist
post: 27 Aug 2010 9:23 AM
Well said Drew.

Just to build on that a bit more, we spoke with our golf ball fitting team and they wanted to emphasize that Titleist golf balls are not designed for any one wing speed or player type. Titleist golf balls are designed for optimal performance when exectuing all of the shot types that are played during a normal round of golf. This includes full swing shots, partial swing shots, chips and putts. And as you know, all of these different shots require varying swing speeds.[/I][/INDENT][/URL]



It helps you get more roll out on your irons? 130 carry + 30 yard roll = 160 yard 6 iron?



We have canines and bicuspids, Larry. They are for meat. That we don't have huge canines only means we don't kill our meat by biting.



No. No surgeon anywhere will tell you that because:

1. The idea that meat hangs out in your bowels undigested is just nonsense.

2. Your tumors can only be formed from your own tissue.[/QUOTE]
Sorry Alan but Larry is right. Our so called canines are good for tearing fruit but not meat. A simple definition is that animals who have molars, produce saliva and can move their teeth side to side are plant eaters. Animals who can only move their teeth up and don and dont produce saliva are meat eaters. Real carnivores swallow meat without chewing and digest it with strong stomach acid. Humans have weak stomach acid compared to say carnivores but thats a different argument you would no doubt be also wrong about.

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261230]Sorry Alan but Larry is right. Our so called canines are good for tearing fruit but not meat. A simple definition is that animals who have molars, produce saliva and can move their teeth side to side are plant eaters. Animals who can only move their teeth up and don and dont produce saliva are meat eaters. Real carnivores swallow meat without chewing and digest it with strong stomach acid. Humans have weak stomach acid compared to say carnivores but thats a different argument you would no doubt be also wrong about.[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry, but your'e wrong.

There is a difference between being specialized for eating meat and being biologically able to eat it. The very same argument that you make that humans aren't meat eaters because they lack specialist meat eaters characteristics can be made about specialist herbivores traits. And some of your arguments are just plain out to lunch. You'd never say that dogs can't eat meat, but they most certainly produce saliva for instance.

Read this:

[URL="http://www.vrg.org/nutshell/omni.htm"]Humans are Omnivores - The Vegetarian Resource Group[/URL]

It's hardly a group to be biased in my favour, wouldn't you agree?

Hey, lets keep the surgeons and the colostomy bag manufacturers in business! Anyone know a stock symbol? I will invest! The meat industry and the morons who scarf it up will keep it going! Wow!

And don't forget the funeral directors and casket makers! They too benefit from our eating more red meat and huge portion of fat eating. Paula Dean GO! Forget diabetes and high blood pressure. Who needs to live past 55?

Larry

[QUOTE=Larryrsf;261233]Hey, lets keep the surgeons and the colostomy bag manufacturers in business! Anyone know a stock symbol? I will invest! The meat industry and the morons who scarf it up will keep it going! Wow!

And don't forget the funeral directors and casket makers! They too benefit from our eating more red meat and huge portion of fat eating. Paula Dean GO! Forget diabetes and high blood pressure. Who needs to live past 55? [/QUOTE]

Larry: you do realize that life expectancy is quite a bit above that, right?

And that 5 pounds of undigested meat in the digestive tract is just nonsense, right?

(sigh)

Probably not.

I do agree that Paula Dean should be put out of our misery.

[QUOTE=SoonerBS;261187]$3.99, but it comes with a free vinyl record and song done by the Andrew Sisters.[/QUOTE]

My grandfather had some of those 78 rpm records. The vinyl was about a quarter inch thick, much better than those K-tel albums I bought in the 70's. The best k-tell album was titled Stars and it had Beth, Rich Girl, A Little Bit More by Dr. Hook...awesome.

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261237]You do realise that the vegetarian movement is infiltrated by the meat industry who spread their propaganda under the cover of 'vegetarians'. You do also realise that the meat industry is a multi billion dollar industry who fund 'research' right? You could find support for a diet of McDonalds if you look hard enough. When you apply basic logic its quite easy to see through the bs and see the truth. Even larry can do it so its not that hard.[/QUOTE]

Apply your basic logic to that article. Thrill me.

You do know that are closest genetic relative—the chimpanzee—eat meat, right?

[QUOTE=alangbaker;261232]I'm sorry, but your'e wrong.

There is a difference between being specialized for eating meat and being biologically able to eat it. The very same argument that you make that humans aren't meat eaters because they lack specialist meat eaters characteristics can be made about specialist herbivores traits. And some of your arguments are just plain out to lunch. You'd never say that dogs can't eat meat, but they most certainly produce saliva for instance.

Read this:

[URL="http://www.vrg.org/nutshell/omni.htm"]Humans are Omnivores - The Vegetarian Resource Group[/URL]

It's hardly a group to be biased in my favour, wouldn't you agree?[/QUOTE]
You do realise that the vegetarian movement is infiltrated by the meat industry who spread their propaganda under the cover of 'vegetarians'. You do also realise that the meat industry is a multi billion dollar industry who fund 'research' right? You could find support for a diet of McDonalds if you look hard enough. When you apply basic logic its quite easy to see through the bs and see the truth. Even larry can do it so its not that hard.

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261237]You do realise that the vegetarian movement is infiltrated by the meat industry who spread their propaganda under the cover of 'vegetarians'. [B]You do also realise that the meat industry is a multi billion dollar industry who fund 'research' right? [/B]You could find support for a diet of McDonalds if you look hard enough. When you apply basic logic its quite easy to see through the bs and see the truth. Even larry can do it so its not that hard.[/QUOTE]

The conspiracy theory. The last bastion of crackpot science.

If the evil meat industry is so prevalent and all powerful how come all the messages out there are to cut down on meat, eat more whole grains and carbs etc.

For the past 30 years we've been told to cut red meat consumption. Who's pushing this high carb agenda?

Oh yeah, conspiracy theory #2 the multi billion dollar grain industry! :D

... or is it the sugar industry? :confused:

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261239]The conspiracy theory. The last bastion of crackpot science.

[B]If the evil meat industry is so prevalent and all powerful how come all the messages out there are to cut down on meat, eat more whole grains and carbs etc. [/B]

For the past 30 years we've been told to cut red meat consumption. Who's pushing this high carb agenda?

Oh yeah, conspiracy theory #2 the multi billion dollar grain industry! :D

... or is it the sugar industry? :confused:[/QUOTE]

I think I can explain this. Anyone who's tried to maintain a diet of any sort understands that as soon as something becomes restricted or forbidden it becomes alot more desirable. Kind of a universal human trait. Why else would westerners' asses be getting fatter by the minute despite how much more we know now? So the meat industry's obvious plan is to increase sales by trying to decrease sales.

Don't think life gets any easier when you're able to see through things like this.

Kiwi I agree that grain producrs are full of bs. Grain makes you feel sluggish and flat. Zo is on the right track with salads. Raw vegetables make you feel light and energised. I know somw raw vegans and they are the healthiest people Ive ever met. Lean and fit as fiddles and rarely get sick. Lots of them are endurance athletes. Cooking takes a lot of goodness out of food.

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261249]Kiwi I agree that grain producrs are full of bs. Grain makes you feel sluggish and flat. Zo is on the right track with salads. Raw vegetables make you feel light and energised. I know somw raw vegans and they are the healthiest people Ive ever met. Lean and fit as fiddles and rarely get sick. Lots of them are endurance athletes. Cooking takes a lot of goodness out of food.[/QUOTE]


Didn't want to weigh into this but:

1/ Have you seen fat,sick and nearly dead? Great dvd, worth a look. Its ok to give your body a grease and oil change every so often, maybe not all the time.

2/ Beer is good for you

3/ Where i come from, we take down cows all the time.......seriously

[QUOTE=alangbaker;261238]Apply your basic logic to that article. Thrill me.

You do know that are closest genetic relative—the chimpanzee—eat meat, right?[/QUOTE]

You'd have to include bonobos as well as chimps as humans closest relatives. I always thought they ate meat but I just read many papers and they don't. The bonobos and chimps were seperated a couple of million years ago. The chimps ended up having to compete with apes and don't have an abundant supply of roots so the eat mostly fruit. They also hunt and eat meat to supplement their diet.

In contrast, the bonobos do not have any competition and eat roots and fruit. They also are female dominant and use sex to strengthen bonds and relieve stress. They don't use tools but they don't have to because food is abundant.

So, does that change your argument?

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261242]I think I can explain this. Anyone who's tried to maintain a diet of any sort understands that as soon as something becomes restricted or forbidden it becomes alot more desirable. Kind of a universal human trait. Why else would westerners' asses be getting fatter by the minute despite how much more we know now? So the meat industry's obvious plan is to increase sales by trying to decrease sales.

Don't think life gets any easier when you're able to see through things like this.[/QUOTE]

Lobbyist are cheaper than advertising and research is almost always paid for by companies or industries with an intrest. This is why we get some crazy information. Plus we're lazy.

Low cost of corn (government subsidies) and wheat have caused some of the deits we eat. It took 30 plus years to get us where we are now. If change is going to happen it will take a long time.

[QUOTE=rooboy;261256]Didn't want to weigh into this but:

1/ Have you seen fat,sick and nearly dead? Great dvd, worth a look. Its ok to give your body a grease and oil change every so often, maybe not all the time.

2/ Beer is good for you

3/ Where i come from, we take down cows all the time.......seriously[/QUOTE]

1/ Sounds interesting - I'll look it up. Have you seen Fathead?

2/ I like it. So I can continue my health binges?

3/ WTF? Please explain further? :confused:

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261230]Sorry Alan but Larry is right. Our so called canines are good for tearing fruit but not meat. A simple definition is that animals who have molars, produce saliva and can move their teeth side to side are plant eaters. Animals who can only move their teeth up and don and dont produce saliva are meat eaters. Real carnivores swallow meat without chewing and digest it with strong stomach acid. Humans have weak stomach acid compared to say carnivores but thats a different argument you would no doubt be also wrong about.[/QUOTE]

The first homonid who was able to spark a fire and then throw an animal limb freshly separated from the animal's body on the fire, opened up an entire new universe of culinary delights for his two-legged successors. "Somebody give me a cheeseburger!" Steve Miller. "Livin' In The U.S.A>"

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261154]Go sashimi, it's more satisfying with better consequences. If that's a little too much for you, a good sushi chef can do sauces. I love rice in many forms but feel so much better without things like that.

I didn't want to lose too fast because then it's partly muscle. It's an utter ass pain at first to control what you eat this way but after a while it becomes natural and it's astounding how much better you feel. The cravings for the bad s.hit go away after a week or so. The chocolate aside from having some good things going on curbs appetite. A couple of hours after dinner I'm ready to go again, but a small piece of low sugar chocolate tames that.[/QUOTE]

I've always like sashimi over sushi.

I have a friend that used a blood sugar monitor for a week to determine what foods she reacted to. I've been thinking about this and it would be interesting. She's active and works out. She found that her blood sugar was way too low when she woke up in the morning. Basically she was loosing muscle over night and woke up tired. She started having protein snack right before bed, like nuts or almond butter, and found she was better in the morning. She also slept better and was more alert in the am. She also found some carb's were ok for her but others sent her blood sugar levels too the moon. For example, she was ok with baked potatoes but if she ate pasta or rice of any kind her blood sugar level would sky rocket. She learned a lot about her body and the effects of food on her blood sugar level. She also believes she can better relate to the feeling when she spikes and doesn't need to test as much. She's not diabetic but she was interested in tuning her diet but ultimately just curious.

Honestly though, weight is on of the worst indicators of health in general terms. Sure, if your morbidly obese you need to get weight off but for the average person is not. Looking at blood work and blood pressure is more of an indicator of health that weight. Feeling fit and having more energy is better than starving yourself to look thin. I've put my weight on over years not over night. Why must we feel compelled to loose the weight quickly.

I think it is better to start the exercise/mobility program to get asymmetry of muscle and flexibility along with balance. Then start working on some good strength routines. The biggest problem with growing older is you loose muscle. Loss of muscle reduces your resting metabolic rate. This is the main reason older people eat less and get fat. Finally start working on some endurance activities. Weight will naturally drop off. But many people gain weight or hold at their current weight for many months. Basically replacing fat with muscle. This is very discouraging for the average non-fit person and many give up before the scales start to drop. Body measurements would probably be better than weight. Besides, like you said, loosing weight too fast usually goes with loss of muscle not fat and once you stop dieting your body restores the lost muscle and weight.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261297]I've always like sashimi over sushi.

I have a friend that used a blood sugar monitor for a week to determine what foods she reacted to. I've been thinking about this and it would be interesting. She's active and works out. She found that her blood sugar was way too low when she woke up in the morning. Basically she was loosing muscle over night and woke up tired. She started having protein snack right before bed, like nuts or almond butter, and found she was better in the morning. She also slept better and was more alert in the am. She also found some carb's were ok for her but others sent her blood sugar levels too the moon. For example, she was ok with baked potatoes but if she ate pasta or rice of any kind her blood sugar level would sky rocket. She learned a lot about her body and the effects of food on her blood sugar level. She also believes she can better relate to the feeling when she spikes and doesn't need to test as much. She's not diabetic but she was interested in tuning her diet but ultimately just curious.

Honestly though, weight is on of the worst indicators of health in general terms. Sure, if your morbidly obese you need to get weight off but for the average person is not. Looking at blood work and blood pressure is more of an indicator of health that weight. Feeling fit and having more energy is better than starving yourself to look thin. I've put my weight on over years not over night. Why must we feel compelled to loose the weight quickly.

I think it is better to start the exercise/mobility program to get asymmetry of muscle and flexibility along with balance. Then start working on some good strength routines. The biggest problem with growing older is you loose muscle. Loss of muscle reduces your resting metabolic rate. This is the main reason older people eat less and get fat. Finally start working on some endurance activities. Weight will naturally drop off. But many people gain weight or hold at their current weight for many months. Basically replacing fat with muscle. This is very discouraging for the average non-fit person and many give up before the scales start to drop. Body measurements would probably be better than weight. Besides, like you said, loosing weight too fast usually goes with loss of muscle not fat and once you stop dieting your body restores the lost muscle and weight.[/QUOTE]

Interesting approach as to blood sugar. I've felt as though I can just tell but who knows.

On weight, isn't it the case the lower your weight the better your blood chemistry and pressure? There are also studies showing the thinner you are the healthier. That said, I'm fine where I am now, I have no interest in being super thin.

If I were married and working my fanny into the sofa a night, I'd be fine carrying some excess. You have to realize, I'm single and living in Orange County. I need a vanity physique plain in simple. Why let others have the fun I could be having?

As to exercise and fitness, I like where I am, I don't really have goals other than to maintain or accomplish the same with less work.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261297]I've always like sashimi over sushi.

I have a friend that used a blood sugar monitor for a week to determine what foods she reacted to. I've been thinking about this and it would be interesting. She's active and works out. She found that her blood sugar was way too low when she woke up in the morning. Basically she was loosing muscle over night and woke up tired. She started having protein snack right before bed, like nuts or almond butter, and found she was better in the morning. She also slept better and was more alert in the am. She also found some carb's were ok for her but others sent her blood sugar levels too the moon. For example, she was ok with baked potatoes but if she ate pasta or rice of any kind her blood sugar level would sky rocket. She learned a lot about her body and the effects of food on her blood sugar level. She also believes she can better relate to the feeling when she spikes and doesn't need to test as much. She's not diabetic but she was interested in tuning her diet but ultimately just curious.

Honestly though, weight is on of the worst indicators of health in general terms. Sure, if your morbidly obese you need to get weight off but for the average person is not. Looking at blood work and blood pressure is more of an indicator of health that weight. Feeling fit and having more energy is better than starving yourself to look thin. I've put my weight on over years not over night. Why must we feel compelled to loose the weight quickly.

I think it is better to start the exercise/mobility program to get asymmetry of muscle and flexibility along with balance. Then start working on some good strength routines. The biggest problem with growing older is you loose muscle. Loss of muscle reduces your resting metabolic rate. This is the main reason older people eat less and get fat. Finally start working on some endurance activities. Weight will naturally drop off. But many people gain weight or hold at their current weight for many months. Basically replacing fat with muscle. This is very discouraging for the average non-fit person and many give up before the scales start to drop. Body measurements would probably be better than weight. Besides, like you said, loosing weight too fast usually goes with loss of muscle not fat and once you stop dieting your body restores the lost muscle and weight.[/QUOTE]

The best way to lose weight is to exercise 45 minutes a day and eat about 75% of what you normally do. To do that is to eat healthy and is far from starving yourself.

What absolutely does not work is simply working out and eating the same amount of food. That my work over the period of a year but the human brain doesn't work that way. It gets encouragement from fairly quick results.

Your point about getting older and burning calories more slowly is true but you left out a very important point--the appetite of an older person isn't as great as a younger person.

There is absolutely no reason why someone who is 60 years old should be any heavier than when they were 25 years old (assuming they were a healthy 25year-old).

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261300]The best way to lose weight is to exercise 45 minutes a day and eat about 75% of what you normally do. To do that is to eat healthy and is far from starving yourself.

What absolutely does not work is simply working out and eating the same amount of food. That my work over the period of a year but the human brain doesn't work that way. It gets encouragement from fairly quick results.

Your point about getting older and burning calories more slowly is true but you left out a very important point--the appetite of an older person isn't as great as a younger person.

There is absolutely no reason why someone who is 60 years old should be any heavier than when they were 25 years old (assuming they were a healthy 25year-old).[/QUOTE]

You're muscles start shrinking at about age 27 for most men, younger for women. The average increase in weight is about 1 lbs a year. That's 33 lbs by the time you reach 60. Not too far off, based on general observations.

Yes, old people loose weight but that's usually doesn't happen until they start to loose their sense of taste and more likely smell. Your older than a 27 year old. How's your appetite? I bet it's not that much less. I bet your muscle mass is less. I bet your overall activity is less.

You stepped right into it, again. If all you do is track your weight, then yes you will quit. If you track other health objectives, you'll have a better chance of succeeding and staying with a program. A goal of being health continues while loosing weight has a finite goal that is reached. Once reached, most people stop and start the cycle of gaining and loosing weight over and over again.

Overweight is a side effect of unhealthy lifestyle. If you realize that and just try to get healthy the weight will come off.

BTW - 45 minutes a day is not sustainable for most people. I know I couldn't, especially at first. But once you feel results and later start to see results you can build on the success and build it into your lifestyle.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261306]You're muscles start shrinking at about age 27 for most men, younger for women. The average increase in weight is about 1 lbs a year. That's 33 lbs by the time you reach 60. Not too far off, based on general observations.

Yes, old people loose weight but that's usually doesn't happen until they start to loose their sense of taste and more likely smell. Your older than a 27 year old. How's your appetite? I bet it's not that much less. I bet your muscle mass is less. I bet your overall activity is less.

You stepped right into it, again. If all you do is track your weight, then yes you will quit. If you track other health objectives, you'll have a better chance of succeeding and staying with a program. A goal of being health continues while loosing weight has a finite goal that is reached. Once reached, most people stop and start the cycle of gaining and loosing weight over and over again.

Overweight is a side effect of unhealthy lifestyle. If you realize that and just try to get healthy the weight will come off.

BTW - 45 minutes a day is not sustainable for most people. I know I couldn't, especially at first. But once you feel results and later start to see results you can build on the success and build it into your lifestyle.[/QUOTE]


It really is about finding a healthy lifestyle. When you feel good because of your food choices and get the body muscled/toned you don't want to give it up, so eating well may come naturally. I don't think I've ever known someone who eats well, conditions physically and has a real weight problem.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261306]You're muscles start shrinking at about age 27 for most men, younger for women. The average increase in weight is about 1 lbs a year. That's 33 lbs by the time you reach 60. Not too far off, based on general observations.

Yes, old people loose weight but that's usually doesn't happen until they start to loose their sense of taste and more likely smell. Your older than a 27 year old. How's your appetite? I bet it's not that much less. I bet your muscle mass is less. I bet your overall activity is less.

You stepped right into it, again. If all you do is track your weight, then yes you will quit. If you track other health objectives, you'll have a better chance of succeeding and staying with a program. A goal of being health continues while loosing weight has a finite goal that is reached. Once reached, most people stop and start the cycle of gaining and loosing weight over and over again.

Overweight is a side effect of unhealthy lifestyle. If you realize that and just try to get healthy the weight will come off.

BTW - 45 minutes a day is not sustainable for most people. I know I couldn't, especially at first. But once you feel results and later start to see results you can build on the success and build it into your lifestyle.[/QUOTE]


Everything you mentioned above is a rationalization for being overweight. These are the types of arguments that overweight people voice over and over again.

The idea that it's normal to naturally gain a pound a year after the age of 27 is silly. Unless you do nothing and continue to eat the same.

Let's cut through the crap. We all know what our waist size should be. We all know what we should weigh if we are working out and eating right.

Human beings can't have a goal as ambiguous as simply having a healthy lifestyle. The human brain needs goals that are specific and preferably number-oriented. That's why we time our runs or track our weight lifting. But, the universal determinate of being healthy is attaining the right weight based on your age and height. We all know what we should weigh.

I know that I should weigh right around 155 pounds in order for me to feel really healthy and for my clothes to fit properly. At that weight, I have a 32 inch waist and I feel light on my feet. As long as I keep lifting weights 3 times a week there is no reason that 155 shouldn't be my goal.

Of course you should have related goals, such as timing yourself on runs or lifting a certain amount of weights x repetitions. In the end, though, people who are thin and work out will far outlive anyone else, regardless of what they eat, within reason.

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261308]Everything you mentioned above is a rationalization for being overweight. These are the types of arguments that overweight people voice over and over again.

The idea that it's normal to naturally gain a pound a year after the age of 27 is silly. Unless you do nothing and continue to eat the same.

Let's cut through the crap. We all know what our waist size should be. We all know what we should weigh if we are working out and eating right.

Human beings can't have a goal as ambiguous as simply having a healthy lifestyle. The human brain needs goals that are specific and preferably number-oriented. That's why we time our runs or track our weight lifting. But, the universal determinate of being healthy is attaining the right weight based on your age and height. We all know what we should weigh.

I know that I should weigh right around 155 pounds in order for me to feel really healthy and for my clothes to fit properly. At that weight, I have a 32 inch waist and I feel light on my feet. As long as I keep lifting weights 3 times a week there is no reason that 155 shouldn't be my goal.

Of course you should have related goals, such as timing yourself on runs or lifting a certain amount of weights x repetitions. In the end, though, people who are thin and work out will far outlive anyone else, regardless of what they eat, within reason.[/QUOTE]

Do you ever wonder whether you know anything at all about what you're talking about or do you just figure whatever comes out must be right?

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261299]Interesting approach as to blood sugar. I've felt as though I can just tell but who knows.

On weight, isn't it the case the lower your weight the better your blood chemistry and pressure? There are also studies showing the thinner you are the healthier. That said, I'm fine where I am now, I have no interest in being super thin.

If I were married and working my fanny into the sofa a night, I'd be fine carrying some excess. You have to realize, I'm single and living in Orange County. I need a vanity physique plain in simple. Why let others have the fun I could be having?

As to exercise and fitness, I like where I am, I don't really have goals other than to maintain or accomplish the same with less work.[/QUOTE]

Yah, and there are studies that show having some fat helps if you become ill. I guess I'm just pointing out that many are very focused on weight. Weight is just one aspect of the whole idea of being healthy. Weight is usually the driving factor for someone starting to exercise. It is better off focusing on the goal of being health. Weight will usually take care of itself if that is your goal. You'll exercise, eat better, sleep your 7-8 hours, drink your 2-3 liters of water a day, etc. It's a package and it's about finding a way to do it long term.

My comments were more in general not specifically about you. I understand your motivations. It's not too hard to get.

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261308]Everything you mentioned above is a rationalization for being overweight. These are the types of arguments that overweight people voice over and over again.

The idea that it's normal to naturally gain a pound a year after the age of 27 is silly. Unless you do nothing and continue to eat the same.

Let's cut through the crap. We all know what our waist size should be. We all know what we should weigh if we are working out and eating right.

Human beings can't have a goal as ambiguous as simply having a healthy lifestyle. The human brain needs goals that are specific and preferably number-oriented. That's why we time our runs or track our weight lifting. But, the universal determinate of being healthy is attaining the right weight based on your age and height. We all know what we should weigh.

I know that I should weigh right around 155 pounds in order for me to feel really healthy and for my clothes to fit properly. At that weight, I have a 32 inch waist and I feel light on my feet. As long as I keep lifting weights 3 times a week there is no reason that 155 shouldn't be my goal.

Of course you should have related goals, such as timing yourself on runs or lifting a certain amount of weights x repetitions. In the end, though, people who are thin and work out will far outlive anyone else, regardless of what they eat, within reason.[/QUOTE]

Hard to argue with fiction. But in general I agree with most except the weight focus. Focus on the others and weight will take care of itself. In golf it's like watching your score. It won't help and you can't change your score. You can only affect what your doing now. You can track your food intake and eat the right stuff, exercise, etc. but your weight is the outcome of doing the other stuff right. Barring having liposuction.

155? Really? We can't help it that you are an ectomorph... I passed 155 at 17. How tall are you anyway?

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261307]It really is about finding a healthy lifestyle. When you feel good because of your food choices and get the body muscled/toned you don't want to give it up, so eating well may come naturally. I don't think I've ever known someone who eats well, conditions physically and has a real weight problem.[/QUOTE]

And it's very empowering. I've read over and over that it takes between 6 and 9 months to see any major differences in physique. You can loose some weight and add a little muscle but you have to take the time to get enough change to become visible.

After about 6 months of working out my hip and back issues and about 3 months of summer layoff due to work, I'm finally getting back into a routine. It's interesting. I've done this many times in my life.

Some things I've noticed...
First off, you have friends and family that will derail your efforts. They want to bring you back to what was. Wife's especially. I'll get home late and have to work out and I get this attitude. I try to be polite and explain "Sorry, I'm working out. You want dinner now then eat. I'll have a something when I'm done." After a few exchanges like this the attitude changes to "oh, your working out. OK". But it's change and it takes time.

I'm now 2 months into the workouts at 4-5 times a week, 45-60 minutes a workout. I've lost a total of 3 lbs but I'm noticing it in my clothes and my strength is up. My back and hip feels great. I need to lose another 10-15 lbs to get down to my desired weight but at 1 lbs a month it will take about a year. I'm fine with that. It took me about 5 years to put on the weight. If I tracked 1 lbs a month I would go crazy. Instead I'm tracking my workouts and paying attention to what I eat. Especially I have to guard against the over consumption of wine and beer...

Just got done reading a few days of banter on this thread and had to take the dog out. -4 degrees right now so that didn't take to long. Came back in the house, opened the fridge to crack open a beer and have a snack with it. On one side of the fridge was a pack of beef sticks (kind of like a mini summer sausage to who ever doesn't know) or on the other side was a head of lettuce. Tell ya, I stood there for 15 minutes pondering the decision. NOT!!!!!.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261320]And it's very empowering. I've read over and over that it takes between 6 and 9 months to see any major differences in physique. You can loose some weight and add a little muscle but you have to take the time to get enough change to become visible.

After about 6 months of working out my hip and back issues and about 3 months of summer layoff due to work, I'm finally getting back into a routine. It's interesting. I've done this many times in my life.

Some things I've noticed...
First off, you have friends and family that will derail your efforts. They want to bring you back to what was. Wife's especially. I'll get home late and have to work out and I get this attitude. I try to be polite and explain "Sorry, I'm working out. You want dinner now then eat. I'll have a something when I'm done." After a few exchanges like this the attitude changes to "oh, your working out. OK". But it's change and it takes time.

I'm now 2 months into the workouts at 4-5 times a week, 45-60 minutes a workout. I've lost a total of 3 lbs but I'm noticing it in my clothes and my strength is up. My back and hip feels great. I need to lose another 10-15 lbs to get down to my desired weight but at 1 lbs a month it will take about a year. I'm fine with that. It took me about 5 years to put on the weight. If I tracked 1 lbs a month I would go crazy. Instead I'm tracking my workouts and paying attention to what I eat. Especially I have to guard against the over consumption of wine and beer...[/QUOTE]

If you're eating right and losing then sounds like you're doing great and as we know, we're much better off with a long ramp for weight loss, particularly when you're talking about a mere 10-15 lbs.

This stuff does involve sacrifice so I don't judge those who opt out. But unless and until you've done it it's silly to guess at what the benefits are vs. the sacrifice particularly when it's rationalizations.

And you're right some who haven't done it will throw stones. Oh well.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261319]Hard to argue with fiction. But in general I agree with most except the weight focus. Focus on the others and weight will take care of itself. In golf it's like watching your score. It won't help and you can't change your score. You can only affect what your doing now. You can track your food intake and eat the right stuff, exercise, etc. but your weight is the outcome of doing the other stuff right. Barring having liposuction.

155? Really? We can't help it that you are an ectomorph... I passed 155 at 17. How tall are you anyway?[/QUOTE]

I think having a target weight is a good goal. Just like having a target handicap index is a good goal. From there, you put together an action plan on how you'll achieve that goal such as exercise and eating relatively well or maybe just less. I think it's difficult for most people to have a goal of simply becoming healthy. An alternative would be to have a goal related to the exercise, such as setting milestones for running, swimming, etc.

I agree that losing weight in itself isn't a good idea because if you only cut calories eventually you'll quit doing it, so exercise and a healthy diet is a habit that needs to be formed.

[QUOTE=jt1135;261321]Just got done reading a few days of banter on this thread and had to take the dog out. -4 degrees right now so that didn't take to long. [B]Came back in the house, opened the fridge to crack open a beer and have a snack with it. On one side of the fridge was a pack of beef sticks [/B](kind of like a mini summer sausage to who ever doesn't know) or on the other side was a head of lettuce. Tell ya, I stood there for 15 minutes pondering the decision. NOT!!!!!.[/QUOTE]

Yeah screw it. I've got some of those in the fridge too. I'm gonna go get em and wash em down with an ice cold beer!

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261319]Hard to argue with fiction. But in general I agree with most except the weight focus. Focus on the others and weight will take care of itself. In golf it's like watching your score. It won't help and you can't change your score. You can only affect what your doing now. You can track your food intake and eat the right stuff, exercise, etc. but your weight is the outcome of doing the other stuff right. Barring having liposuction.

[B]155? Really? We can't help it that you are an ectomorph... I passed 155 at 17. [/B] How tall are you anyway?[/QUOTE]

I was thinking the same thing, but then again don't knock it. In boxing terms he could be world middleweight champion. Not a bad physique on this guy who used to weigh in about 157.

[IMG]http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/multimedia/photo_gallery/1007/top.10.new.jersey.athletes/images/marvin-hagler.jpg[/IMG]

I'm not sure FD's manly body is quite as toned as your example.

Well 12 sent the little woman to the market. I told here I'd kick her ass if she came home with any bs. She did great. I saw portabella, salmon, strawberry, blueberry, bare naked granola, a cereal I enjoy, provolone, queso fresco, avocado, all kinds of great stuff for me to work with, as I have took over most of the cooking, as she's going to kill me with her cooking I told her.
I did break over some today as I seared a 4 pound rib eye roast seasoned it with garlic, a smidge of cavenders, some Italian seasonings, I had her pick up 2 green peppers, and one red, I julienne cut the peppers and a onion, and put it in the slow cooker early yesterday for about 8 hours, and I had killer Italian beef, with some crusty bread, provolone, topped it off with some giardinera, it was nearly as much veggie as meat. The house smelled amazing.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261275]1/ Sounds interesting - I'll look it up. Have you seen Fathead?

2/ I like it. So I can continue my health binges?

3/ WTF? Please explain further? :confused:[/QUOTE]

1/ no
2/ yes
3/ Ummmm, after re-reading its the only known down-side to # 2, confusion ie: cows, women etc. But don't worry, it wears off :)

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261331]I was thinking the same thing, but then again don't knock it. In boxing terms he could be world middleweight champion. Not a bad physique on this guy who used to weigh in about 157.

[IMG]http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/multimedia/photo_gallery/1007/top.10.new.jersey.athletes/images/marvin-hagler.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

What would you gues is s his non fighting weight?

Here's the thing, most can't maintain that level of fitness your whole life. Your body will eventually wear out. How many hours a day does a pro boxer train anyway? Besides, pro athletes, especially the ones that fight, train to peak for an event.

I know I was in my best shape when I wrestled in high school. I remember riding my bike 3 miles to the gym for 6:00 am weight lifting, going to school, wrestling and conditioning for 2 plus hours and then riding my bike home.

Edit - here's a link to an article on his workouts.
[URL="http://www.muscleprodigy.com/marvelous-marvin-hagler-workout-arcl-1107.html"]http://www.muscleprodigy.com/marvelous-marvin-hagler-workout-arcl-1107.html[/URL]

I think it depends more on your body type, ectomorph vs. mesomorph vs endomorph.

[QUOTE=mongrel;261277]The first homonid who was able to spark a fire and then throw an animal limb freshly separated from the animal's body on the fire, opened up an entire new universe of culinary delights for his two-legged successors. "Somebody give me a cheeseburger!" Steve Miller. "Livin' In The U.S.A>"[/QUOTE]

No doubt fire makes lots of things we wouldnt otherwise taste great. Grains arent great and couldnt eat them raw, but cooked they are addictive.

In hisfirst thread of the year Larry effortlessly racks up 250 with no sign of slowing down. He really is the gr rainmaker.

[PHP][/PHP][QUOTE=Not a hacker;261339]In hisfirst thread of the year Larry effortlessly racks up 250 with no sign of slowing down. He really is the gr rainmaker.[/QUOTE]

Since Marvelous' body had obvious chemical assistance, Larry's 250 involved use of anabolic steroids which unfortunately invalidates it.

I'm fully geeked as I just pulled the trigger on this:

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/ellipticals-machines/smooth-ce-80.htm[/url]

Was able to get another couple hundred knocked off so for the price of a good sofa I'm getting a state of the art top rated commercial grade elliptical. Once I've installed a tubing circuit I'll be fully operational at home.

This is a cool feature brought about by today's digital world. Coming from a 15 year old Lifestep with no motion handles and action that felt like a cobblestone road, this is a couple of steps forward. No, my last machine didn't have a USB port for a memory stick so I could track my statictics and get help on-line.

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/mysmooth/[/url]

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261342]I'm fully geeked as I just pulled the trigger on this:

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/ellipticals-machines/smooth-ce-80.htm[/url]

Was able to get another couple hundred knocked off so for the price of a good sofa I'm getting a state of the art top rated commercial grade elliptical. Once I've installed a tubing circuit I'll be fully operational at home.

This is a cool feature brought about by today's digital world. Coming from a 15 year old Lifestep with no motion handles and action that felt like a cobblestone road, this is a couple of steps forward. No, my last machine didn't have a USB port for a memory stick so I could track my statictics and get help on-line.

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/mysmooth/[/url][/QUOTE]

Maybe it's a midwest thing, but it always looks funny when men are using elipticals or stairmasters. It's kind of like when you see a father wearing a baby on his chest with a Baby Bjorn. It just doesn't look right, even if it is a sensible thing to do.

[QUOTE=Horseballs;261343]Maybe it's a midwest thing, but it always looks funny when men are using elipticals or stairmasters. It's kind of like when you see a father wearing a baby on his chest with a Baby Bjorn. It just doesn't look right, even if it is a sensible thing to do.[/QUOTE]

So do you have your little one in a Baby Bjorn? That is so adorable. Does he try and breastfeed with you?

I'm perfectly willing to look like a p.ussy while exercising to get p.ussy. It's all about priorities.

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261339]In hisfirst thread of the year Larry effortlessly racks up 250 with no sign of slowing down. He really is the gr rainmaker.[/QUOTE]

Larry had very little to getting this thread going.
Is roo edible? Are there recipes fior say an eastern grey with portabella? I would think there very lean, and tasty as there a
Herbivore.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261344]So do you have your little one in a Baby Bjorn? That is so adorable. Does he try and breastfeed with you?

I'm perfectly willing to look like a p.ussy while exercising to get p.ussy. It's all about priorities.[/QUOTE]

I guess everyone has a line they don't cross in their pursuit (be it pusssy, wealth, etc.). You are willing to look past elipticals whereas I will not. What about Zumba? Jazzercise? Those clearly would allow you to look at the pusssy you so adore.
The problem with elipticals and its slightly more gay relatives zumba and jazzercise, is that pusssy is likely to quickly dismiss its participants as "playing for the other team." While this isn't true in all cases, it's a strike against you and first impressions are hard to shake.
It's wise of you to quietly perform your elliptical in the privacy of your home. Just make sure you can easily hide it in the closet.

[QUOTE=Horseballs;261347]I guess everyone has a line they don't cross in their pursuit (be it pusssy, wealth, etc.). You are willing to look past elipticals whereas I will not. What about Zumba? Jazzercise? Those clearly would allow you to look at the pusssy you so adore.
The problem with elipticals and its slightly more gay relatives zumba and jazzercise, is that pusssy is likely to quickly dismiss its participants as "playing for the other team." While this isn't true in all cases, it's a strike against you and first impressions are hard to shake.
It's wise of you to quietly perform your elliptical in the privacy of your home. Just make sure you can easily hide it in the closet.[/QUOTE]

Good advice for sure. Although out here it doesn't seem to have the stigma. Remember, the midwest is at least 10 years behind California in most respects particularly when it comes to fear of latent homosexuality. I'll use my climber loud and proud.

Tell you what, I'll ask my female friend for her opinion later on when she comes over for a lunch break.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261337][B]What would you gues is s his non fighting weight?
[/B]
Here's the thing, most can't maintain that level of fitness your whole life. Your body will eventually wear out. How many hours a day does a pro boxer train anyway? Besides, pro athletes, especially the ones that fight, train to peak for an event.

I know I was in my best shape when I wrestled in high school. I remember riding my bike 3 miles to the gym for 6:00 am weight lifting, going to school, wrestling and conditioning for 2 plus hours and then riding my bike home.

Edit - here's a link to an article on his workouts.
[URL="http://www.muscleprodigy.com/marvelous-marvin-hagler-workout-arcl-1107.html"]http://www.muscleprodigy.com/marvelous-marvin-hagler-workout-arcl-1107.html[/URL]

[B]I think it depends more on your body type, ectomorph vs. mesomorph vs endomorph[/B].[/QUOTE]

In the fight game they used to say that Hagler was 'born at middleweight' and his non fighting weight was only a few lbs above his fighting weight. He fought as a middleweight his entire career whereas other boxers tend to go up in weight during their fighting career. Roberto Duran went from lightweight (135lbs) to middleweight (160lbs). Thomas Hearns went from welterweight (147lbs) all the way to light heavyweight (175lbs). The light heavyweight champions of Haglers era (Dwight Braxton, Michael Spinks) wanted to fight Hagler as it would have been a big money marquee fight but as Hagler himself said in an interview at the time. "Those guys walk around at 190lbs, my walking around weight (i.e. non fighting weight) is 160" In other words he was admitting they were too big for him.

I think you are correct that it depends on your body type but also how you deal with food. My father in law is lighter now than when he played football in his 20's. He doesn't follow any particular diet or fitness program but food is just something to be eaten 3 times a day. He doesn't get hungry and outside of those 3 square meals food doesn't even cross his mind. Others, especially those trying to diet, are obsessed with food and think about it all the time.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261342]I'm fully geeked as I just pulled the trigger on this:

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/ellipticals-machines/smooth-ce-80.htm[/url]

Was able to get another couple hundred knocked off so for the price of a good sofa I'm getting a state of the art top rated commercial grade elliptical. Once I've installed a tubing circuit I'll be fully operational at home.

This is a cool feature brought about by today's digital world. Coming from a 15 year old Lifestep with no motion handles and action that felt like a cobblestone road, this is a couple of steps forward. No, my last machine didn't have a USB port for a memory stick so I could track my statictics and get help on-line.

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/mysmooth/[/url][/QUOTE]

Does she come with that device?

[IMG]http://www.smoothfitness.com/mysmooth/images/woman.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Horseballs;261347]I guess everyone has a line they don't cross in their pursuit (be it pusssy, wealth, etc.). You are willing to look past elipticals whereas I will not. What about Zumba? Jazzercise? Those clearly would allow you to look at the pusssy you so adore.
The problem with elipticals and its slightly more gay relatives zumba and jazzercise, is that pusssy is likely to quickly dismiss its participants as "playing for the other team." While this isn't true in all cases, it's a strike against you and first impressions are hard to shake.
It's wise of you to quietly perform your elliptical in the privacy of your home. Just make sure you can easily hide it in the closet.[/QUOTE]

Good advice for sure. Although out here it doesn't seem to have the stigma. Remember, the midwest is at least 10 years behind California in most respects particularly when it comes to fear of latent homosexuality. I'll use my climber loud and proud.

Tell you what, I'll ask my female friend later on when she comes over for a lunch break.

[QUOTE=Horseballs;261343]Maybe it's a midwest thing, but it always looks funny when men are using elipticals or stairmasters. It's kind of like when you see a father wearing a baby on his chest with a Baby Bjorn. It just doesn't look right, even if it is a sensible thing to do.[/QUOTE]

As a Kiwi I have to admit I'm definitely in the midwest/Horseballs camp on this one. I only ever see females using those stupid looking machines. There is one woman who I know outside of the gym, she's a vegetarian, skinny to the point of anorexic, and EVERY time I go to the gym she is on the elliptical when I arrive and she is still going when I leave (about 45-50mins later). I don't know how long she spends on that thing in total but she looks thoroughly exhausted and miserable the whole time. The elliptical trainer seems to fit nicely with her gaunt, pale, sickly vegetarian image.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261352]Does she come with that device?

[IMG]http://www.smoothfitness.com/mysmooth/images/woman.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]

That's why I'm considering buying two of them.

[QUOTE=oldplayer;261332]I'm not sure FD's manly body is quite as toned as your example.[/QUOTE]

Are you sure about that? Maybe I'll post a photo in a few weeks and you'll see how close I resemble that physique. I don't philosophize about exercising and eating healthy, I actually do it.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261353]As a Kiwi I have to admit I'm definitely in the midwest/Horseballs camp on this one. I only ever see females using those stupid looking machines. There is one woman who I know outside of the gym, she's a vegetarian, skinny to the point of anorexic, and EVERY time I go to the gym she is on the elliptical when I arrive and she is still going when I leave (about 45-50mins later). I don't know how long she spends on that thing in total but she looks thoroughly exhausted and miserable the whole time. The elliptical trainer seems to fit nicely with her gaunt, pale, sickly vegetarian image.[/QUOTE]

Well, the popular opinion here seems to be I'm emasculating myself for p.ussy. I can live with that, knowing that my not using a pushcart means I'm not even close to the bottom of the heap around here.

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261357]Are you sure about that? Maybe I'll post a photo in a few weeks and you'll see how close I resemble that physique. [B]I don't philosophize about exercising and eating healthy, I actually do it.[/B][/QUOTE]

Why do we have to wait a few weeks then? Why not post a photo now Marvelous Famousdavis?

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261359]Why do we have to wait a few weeks then? Why not post a photo now Marvelous Famousdavis?[/QUOTE]

I just looked at the extended forecast and he does need to wait. At 155 it isn't safe for him with winds over 10mph.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261342]I'm fully geeked as I just pulled the trigger on this:

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/ellipticals-machines/smooth-ce-80.htm[/url]

Was able to get another couple hundred knocked off so for the price of a good sofa I'm getting a state of the art top rated commercial grade elliptical. Once I've installed a tubing circuit I'll be fully operational at home.

This is a cool feature brought about by today's digital world. Coming from a 15 year old Lifestep with no motion handles and action that felt like a cobblestone road, this is a couple of steps forward. No, my last machine didn't have a USB port for a memory stick so I could track my statictics and get help on-line.

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/mysmooth/[/url][/QUOTE]

Cool but you still need some kettlebells, a set of powerblock dumbbells (or similar), and an suspension trainer, pull-up bar, plyo box, and finally a Bulgarian bag. I'd also include a balance pad but it's optional.

Have you bought your bands? These always looked good to me. When mine wear out I'll probably go with them.[URL="http://www.bodylastics.com/"]http://www.bodylastics.com/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261365]Wash your mouth out immediately!

Although I agree that Larry must be on something to allow him to hit all the fairways and all the greens. Doesn't seem to have enhanced his physique much though, at least not from the youtube clips he's posted.[/QUOTE]

I'm talking Marvin here. No, seeing Larry swing we can rule out steroid use.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261362]I just looked at the extended forecast and he does need to wait. At 155 it isn't safe for him with winds over 10mph.[/QUOTE]


Thank you. Walking sideways through a gale isn't as easy as you'd think.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261340][PHP][/PHP]

[B]Since Marvelous' body had obvious chemical assistance[/B], Larry's 250 involved use of anabolic steroids which unfortunately invalidates it.[/QUOTE]

Wash your mouth out immediately!

Although I agree that Larry must be on something to allow him to hit all the fairways and all the greens. Doesn't seem to have enhanced his physique much though, at least not from the youtube clips he's posted.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261366][B]I'm talking Marvin here[/B]. No, seeing Larry swing we can rule out steroid use.[/QUOTE]

I know, that's why I said wash your mouth out!

So are you saying this because his physique was just too good not to be roided or are you seeing other telltale signs?

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261357]Are you sure about that? Maybe I'll post a photo in a few weeks and you'll see how close I resemble that physique. I don't philosophize about exercising and eating healthy, I actually do it.[/QUOTE]

Staying true to GR tradition, all you need to post is a photo of your calf.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261368]I know, that's why I said wash your mouth out!

So are you saying this because his physique was just too good not to be roided or are you seeing other telltale signs?[/QUOTE]

Few people are able to get cut like that without altering body chemistry. This includes bodybuilders, football players, actors and everyone else. Also, his career took place right at the emergence of very widespread steroid use amongst athletes. All boxers give their physical health a backseat to their careers by deciding to become boxers. Of course we can't be sure but I'd place the odds at 99%.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261383]Few people are able to get cut like that without altering body chemistry. This includes bodybuilders, football players, actors and everyone else. Also, his career took place right at the emergence of very widespread steroid use amongst athletes. All boxers give their physical health a backseat to their careers by deciding to become boxers. Of course we can't be sure but I'd place the odds at 99%.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. Ive known some clean pro boxers over the years who train their arses off and look nowhere near as cut as marv in that pic, or other boxers who are juiced. Ali was a legendary hard trainer and he looked whimpy compared to a ripped Kenny Norton, who had a huge question mark on his training methods. Some guys are naturally more ripped than others, but imo all guys who look as ripped as Marv are on something.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261383]Few people are able to get cut like that without altering body chemistry. This includes bodybuilders, football players, actors and everyone else. Also, his career took place right at the emergence of very widespread steroid use amongst athletes. All boxers give their physical health a backseat to their careers by deciding to become boxers. Of course we can't be sure but I'd place the odds at 99%.[/QUOTE]

I'd place them at about 20%. I don't think Haggler was on steroids. Haggler was something like 5-7 and 155 pounds. He looks much bigger in the photo than he really is because of how little fat he has on his body. The key to looking like you've got big muscles is to have a very small waist and very little fat on you. That's why Camillo looks like he's got huge muscles when he really doesn't. He's just very defined.

A boxer's workout would easily create the kind of physique that Haggler possessed. I've seen wide receivers and defensive backs that were on my high school football team that had builds identical to that. They didn't take steroids. It's much easier for a middleweight to lightweight boxer to have that kind of physique because in many cases they are trying to keep their weight to a minimum. Now, if a heavyweight boxer looked like that and was 40 pounds heavier then I might question it. Holyfield would be one example of someone who looked a little too chiseled for his size.

Boxers work out harder than just about anyone and it's very common for a middleweight to look just like that without taking steroids.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261363]Cool but you still need some kettlebells, a set of powerblock dumbbells (or similar), and an suspension trainer, pull-up bar, plyo box, and finally a Bulgarian bag. I'd also include a balance pad but it's optional.

Have you bought your bands? These always looked good to me. When mine wear out I'll probably go with them.[URL]http://www.bodylastics.com/[/URL][/QUOTE]

I've got a set of traditional dumbells, ab stuff, leg stuff, a pull-up bar, benches, etc. left over from my home gym before the divorce. With a crosstrainer and resistance bands I can cover a whole workout. The kettlebells would be cool to integrate.

Those RB-s look pretty cool, you've heard good things? Which package?

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261390]I'd place them at about 20%. I don't think Haggler was on steroids. Haggler was something like 5-7 and 155 pounds. He looks much bigger in the photo than he really is because of how little fat he has on his body. The key to looking like you've got big muscles is to have a very small waist and very little fat on you. That's why Camillo looks like he's got huge muscles when he really doesn't. He's just very defined.

A boxer's workout would easily create the kind of physique that Haggler possessed. I've seen wide receivers and defensive backs that were on my high school football team that had builds identical to that. They didn't take steroids. It's much easier for a middleweight to lightweight boxer to have that kind of physique because in many cases they are trying to keep their weight to a minimum. Now, if a heavyweight boxer looked like that and was 40 pounds heavier then I might question it. Holyfield would be one example of someone who looked a little too chiseled for his size.

Boxers work out harder than just about anyone and it's very common for a middleweight to look just like that without taking steroids.[/QUOTE]

The question begs to be asked. Do you think Camillo, Wow!, Villegas was on the sauce? (We've put to rest that Tiger was taking.) See, I find it interesting that the year following testing some key performers on the PGA disappeared. Tiger, Camillo, VJ to cherry pick a few.

How do you know your HS players weren't juicing as well?

[QUOTE=Not a hacker;261384]Agreed. Ive known some clean pro boxers over the years who train their arses off and look nowhere near as cut as marv in that pic, or other boxers who are juiced. Ali was a legendary hard trainer and he looked whimpy compared to a ripped Kenny Norton, who had a huge question mark on his training methods. Some guys are naturally more ripped than others, but imo all guys who look as ripped as Marv are on something.[/QUOTE]

I remember seeing Norton not long after his day. He looked absolutely inflated with air which meant he was still on them. Ali is a good example, he was buff but not ridiculously cut.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261393]The question begs to be asked. Do you think Camillo, Wow!, Villegas was on the sauce? (We've put to rest that Tiger was taking.) See, I find it interesting that the year following testing some key performers on the PGA disappeared. Tiger, Camillo, VJ to cherry pick a few.

How do you know your HS players weren't juicing as well?[/QUOTE]

Please, the guy's never been in that world, just ignore it.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261393]The question begs to be asked. Do you think Camillo, Wow!, Villegas was on the sauce? (We've put to rest that Tiger was taking.) See, I find it interesting that the year following testing some key performers on the PGA disappeared. Tiger, Camillo, VJ to cherry pick a few.

How do you know your HS players weren't juicing as well?[/QUOTE]

Typically, especially in high school, the people who juiced were those who wanted to get bigger in size as opposed to being cut. The guys I knew who took steroids got much bigger but didn't look cut at all. In fact, most of them tended to go the opposite way and gain weight in their midsections as well. Now all of them are fat. Another "tell" of taking steroids is that the users face becomes swollen and it makes their head appear much bigger.

I have never known anyone to take steroids in an effort to look "cut", like Hagglers photo. You take steroids to get big muscles. You don't need to take roids to look like Haggler does. Most of that is training with your own body weight, running, sit ups and the result of having under 5% body fat.

[QUOTE=famousdavis;261399]Typically, especially in high school, the people who juiced were those who wanted to get bigger in size as opposed to being cut. The guys I knew who took steroids got much bigger but didn't look cut at all. In fact, most of them tended to go the opposite way and gain weight in their midsections as well. Now all of them are fat. Another "tell" of taking steroids is that the users face becomes swollen and it makes their head appear much bigger.

I have never known anyone to take steroids in an effort to look "cut", like Hagglers photo. You take steroids to get big muscles. You don't need to take roids to look like Haggler does. Most of that is training with your own body weight, running, sit ups and the result of having under 5% body fat.[/QUOTE]

See what I mean?

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261383]Few people are able to get cut like that without altering body chemistry. This includes bodybuilders, football players, actors and everyone else. Also, his career took place right at the emergence of very widespread steroid use amongst athletes. All boxers give their physical health a backseat to their careers by deciding to become boxers. Of course we can't be sure but I'd place the odds at 99%.[/QUOTE]

I call BS on this one. Drug testing was widespread in boxing years before it gained prominence in other sports. Hagler and his managers weren't the most sophisticated crew so I doubt they were ahead of the game with masking agents etc to negate the tests.

Also comparing Norton and Ali is silly. Some guys just have more impressive physiques and are more naturally ripped than others. Ali had a great physique for boxing but even in his prime in the 60s he wasn't particularly muscular or ripped.

[IMG]http://web.hcsps.sa.edu.au/projects/heroes/josh/ali%205.jpg[/IMG]


Larry Holmes didn't have a particularly impressive physique either .

You see it all the time in sports and in everyday life. Some guys are ripped without an ounce of fat visible whilst others carry love handles even though extremely fit. Same with chicks. Some have smoking hot bodies without even trying. Others spend their life dieting and exercising and still look plain. It's just the genetic cards we're dealt.

As they say in body building. Champions are born, not made.

Remember when Norton was in the movie Mandingo? Started people talking with his scenes with white women.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261403]I call BS on this one. Drug testing was widespread in boxing years before it gained prominence in other sports. Hagler and his managers weren't the most sophisticated crew so I doubt they were ahead of the game with masking agents etc to negate the tests.

Also comparing Norton and Ali is silly. Some guys just have more impressive physiques and are more naturally ripped than others. Ali had a great physique for boxing but even in his prime in the 60s he wasn't particularly muscular or ripped.

[IMG]http://web.hcsps.sa.edu.au/projects/heroes/josh/ali%205.jpg[/IMG]


Larry Holmes didn't have a particularly impressive physique either .

You see it all the time in sports and in everyday life. Some guys are ripped without an ounce of fat visible whilst others carry love handles even though extremely fit. Same with chicks. Some have smoking hot bodies without even trying. Others spend their life dieting and exercising and still look plain.[B] It's just the genetic cards we're dealt.[/B]

As they say in body building. Champions are born, not made.[/QUOTE]

True unless you enhance your genetics. I'm not saying he did but it's a fact.

I don't know much about boxing but I imagine it similar to wrestling. The guys that put on too much weight in muscle gas out too early. That's why it's difficult to go up in weight too much. Naturally big guys love to see smaller more muscular guys in wrestling. You might be stronger but your leverage is less and you gas out early.

Is it a big deal to carry a few ponds at the heavy weight level? It's not like there's an upper end. Where fighting at a lower weight class every pond of muscle counts.

[QUOTE=poe4soul;261407]True unless you enhance your genetics. I'm not saying he did but it's a fact.

I don't know much about boxing but I imagine it similar to wrestling. The guys that put on too much weight in muscle gas out too early. That's why it's difficult to go up in weight too much. Naturally big guys love to see smaller more muscular guys in wrestling. You might be stronger but your leverage is less and you gas out early.

Is it a big deal to carry a few ponds at the heavy weight level? It's not like there's an upper end. Where fighting at a lower weight class every pond of muscle counts.[/QUOTE]

Until fairly recently testing only caught sloppy cheaters. You ever hear about the East German Women's Swim Team? There were plenty of guys circling athletes and their managers in all the sports who would administer the whole thing and get paid.

[QUOTE=Kiwi Player;261403]I call BS on this one. Drug testing was widespread in boxing years before it gained prominence in other sports. Hagler and his managers weren't the most sophisticated crew so I doubt they were ahead of the game with masking agents etc to negate the tests.

[B]Also comparing Norton and Ali is silly. Some guys just have more impressive physiques and are more naturally ripped than others. Ali had a great physique for boxing but even in his prime in the 60s he wasn't particularly muscular or ripped. [/B]
[IMG]http://web.hcsps.sa.edu.au/projects/heroes/josh/ali%205.jpg[/IMG]


Larry Holmes didn't have a particularly impressive physique either .

You see it all the time in sports and in everyday life. Some guys are ripped without an ounce of fat visible whilst others carry love handles even though extremely fit. Same with chicks. Some have smoking hot bodies without even trying. Others spend their life dieting and exercising and still look plain. It's just the genetic cards we're dealt.

As they say in body building. Champions are born, not made.[/QUOTE]
My point was Ali was supremely fit and trained hard but couldn't get the ripped muscle of Norton. Larry Holmes didn't have an impressive physique because he probably didn't juice either. I've read stuff about Norton almost making it as a pro footballer before turning to boxing, so he had an early grounding in roids before going into boxing. The worst case of roiding in boxing I can remember is the transofrmation of Holyfield for hs first fight with Tyson. Holyfield was always a pumped up light heavy, but for the Tyson fight he was unrecogniseable from the guy we had seen previously. He made huge muscle mass gains in a short period of time and actually made Tyson look soft and small, which had never happened before as he has been a roid head from way back too. I'm pretty sure it's an open secret in the industry Holyfeld is a big steroid user and has been for a long time, but for the first Tyson fight he was particularly juiced.

[QUOTE=lorenzoinoc;261342]I'm fully geeked as I just pulled the trigger on this:

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/ellipticals-machines/smooth-ce-80.htm[/url]

Was able to get another couple hundred knocked off so for the price of a good sofa I'm getting a state of the art top rated commercial grade elliptical. Once I've installed a tubing circuit I'll be fully operational at home.

This is a cool feature brought about by today's digital world. Coming from a 15 year old Lifestep with no motion handles and action that felt like a cobblestone road, this is a couple of steps forward. No, my last machine didn't have a USB port for a memory stick so I could track my statictics and get help on-line.

[url]http://www.smoothfitness.com/mysmooth/[/url][/QUOTE]

Son, are you serious? An elliptical? Serious?

Real talk son: No man does an elliptical... And to think I loved you.

That is just about as gay as this workout (scroll to about 3 minutes to see it):

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/w3DiQKA30Mc?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>