#DadBod is basically the new #EffYourBeautyStandards but for ugly dudes trying to pretend they're desirable
Weight Loss Thread
- Thread starter Sean_sl
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
opiate82
Bronze Squire
- 3,078
- 5
Yeah, I imagine your body type looking like a Russell Wilson where as for myself I'm thinking more like a David Beckham? Am I getting way to metro here?
Warmuth
Molten Core Raider
- 877
- 520
188 at six feet and a six pack is fucking yoked. Most people seriously overestimate what they'd weigh if they were at very low bodyfat. Anyone that weighs 190 and is ripped is jacked. I'm naturally thin to begin with so it would take a hell of a long time to get to 190 with abs.
Warmuth
Molten Core Raider
- 877
- 520
Below 195 doesn't look good how? You have all legs and no upper body? One of the reasons I can do 170 at 6'3 is I have skinny legs and a big upper body. Classic do you even squat look but it's been that way for 42 years and it's not going to change now.
Xevy
Log Wizard
- 8,958
- 4,221
Some women are now using the male approach to crazy siting. Back in the day you'd see a girl doused in make up and you'd go "she looks good but she's 100% obssesed with herself". It's coming to that point with men. Y'all 20 hour a week gym rats are giving off that vibe. The DadBod thing is basically the Tina Fey look for men. They put in enough work to look decent, but they're not all about it. They probably go to the gym but they're not counting their oats in their oatmeal every day to make sure you can see striation on their intercostal muscles.
I'm not saying we should all be lardos or shit, but the ultra extreme narcissist are starting to get weeded out. Now that's for rational women. Drunk chicks/horndogs will fuck Chad Thundercock 99/100 times. But guys will fuck CrazyEyes 99/100 under same circumstances.
I'm not saying we should all be lardos or shit, but the ultra extreme narcissist are starting to get weeded out. Now that's for rational women. Drunk chicks/horndogs will fuck Chad Thundercock 99/100 times. But guys will fuck CrazyEyes 99/100 under same circumstances.
- 26,523
- 40,713
No one is saying to spend 20hrs a week in the gym. Just take a hard look at your shitty diet and spend 4 hours a week in the gym. Thats all it takes.
Btw narcissism is part of the dark triad, highly effective at pulling chicks, bro.
Itlan
Blackwing Lair Raider
- 4,994
- 744
I'm far from yoked and have a six pack at 194 lol. It's very susceptible to water retention, however.
Foggy
Ahn'Qiraj Raider
- 6,357
- 4,957
Depends on your definition of yolked or ripped. I think any weight can be ripped as ripped is just low body fat. Being big (lots of muscle mass) and ripped is very different. I am 6'3" and ~190, ripped but not big. I need to get into the 205+ range with low bf to be big and ripped.
Itlan
Blackwing Lair Raider
- 4,994
- 744
Well the popular saying of "natural, lean, big - pick two" holds true. I'll maintain being natty and lean. I'd like to think I could add another 15-20 pounds of muscle over the next two-three years and be happy.
I went ahead and did a tour of various BF% measurements today. I did a 3 point self caliper, home BIA scale, BodPod, and DEXA.
Based on visual estimation, which would you think I am at?
a) 8%
b) 13%
c) 18%
d) other
5'8" - ~162 lbs. Potentially NSFW, dude in boxers.
Sources
a) BodPod
b) Caliper / BIA
c) DEXA
This is a lesson in how vastly different these technologies can report. I am not sure how they all work at the technology level, but I trust the DEXA as it more reflects how I 'feel' and a general consensus from visual estimation on the internet. I didn't think the BodPod / DEXA difference would be so drastic, but I have a feeling my body type is related. Something about how the loose skin affects each of them. More research will be necessary.
On the bright side, with the convenience of the DEXA scan I think that is going to be my new measurement of choice. I will just have to space them out a bit more as it was $75 rather than $10. At least I can pay for it with my HSA. Perhaps use that and my scale in between and drop the BodPod altogether.
Edit: The only thing I did not like about the DEXA is that it is a doctor's office so they weigh you with clothes on. I doubt it impacts the results a ton, but I weighed in at 167 vs 163 which, depending on how it is interpreted, could be 1-2% BF.
Based on visual estimation, which would you think I am at?
a) 8%
b) 13%
c) 18%
d) other
5'8" - ~162 lbs. Potentially NSFW, dude in boxers.
Sources
a) BodPod
b) Caliper / BIA
c) DEXA
This is a lesson in how vastly different these technologies can report. I am not sure how they all work at the technology level, but I trust the DEXA as it more reflects how I 'feel' and a general consensus from visual estimation on the internet. I didn't think the BodPod / DEXA difference would be so drastic, but I have a feeling my body type is related. Something about how the loose skin affects each of them. More research will be necessary.
On the bright side, with the convenience of the DEXA scan I think that is going to be my new measurement of choice. I will just have to space them out a bit more as it was $75 rather than $10. At least I can pay for it with my HSA. Perhaps use that and my scale in between and drop the BodPod altogether.
Edit: The only thing I did not like about the DEXA is that it is a doctor's office so they weigh you with clothes on. I doubt it impacts the results a ton, but I weighed in at 167 vs 163 which, depending on how it is interpreted, could be 1-2% BF.
Warmuth
Molten Core Raider
- 877
- 520
Ripped is probably subjective I guess. 10% or under generally. At 190 and 10% thats big. The difference between ripped and big is bodyfat and most people who are big and want to get ripped will be well under 200 all day long. If I added 20 pounds and stayed at my current bf% I'd look pretty impressive. Not like Arnold or something but you gotta throw out the outliers and the gear heads,that never counts, we're talking the average non professional non lifetime dedicated here.
Tldr I'm jelly of 190 and ripped.
Cad
scientia potentia est
- 25,888
- 50,919
I'd have said 14-15%, but as you note that is only based on my personal perceptions about what 10-12% looks like due to bodybuilding forums.I went ahead and did a tour of various BF% measurements today. I did a 3 point self caliper, home BIA scale, BodPod, and DEXA.
Based on visual estimation, which would you think I am at?
a) 8%
b) 13%
c) 18%
d) other
5'8" - ~162 lbs. Potentially NSFW, dude in boxers.
Sources
a) BodPod
b) Caliper / BIA
c) DEXA
This is a lesson in how vastly different these technologies can report. I am not sure how they all work at the technology level, but I trust the DEXA as it more reflects how I 'feel' and a general consensus from visual estimation on the internet. I didn't think the BodPod / DEXA difference would be so drastic, but I have a feeling my body type is related. Something about how the loose skin affects each of them. More research will be necessary.
On the bright side, with the convenience of the DEXA scan I think that is going to be my new measurement of choice. I will just have to space them out a bit more as it was $75 rather than $10. At least I can pay for it with my HSA. Perhaps use that and my scale in between and drop the BodPod altogether.
Edit: The only thing I did not like about the DEXA is that it is a doctor's office so they weigh you with clothes on. I doubt it impacts the results a ton, but I weighed in at 167 vs 163 which, depending on how it is interpreted, could be 1-2% BF.
- 17,889
- 8,781
Yeah, no offense can even be given at this point. After more reading, DEXA captures visceral fat as well as subcutaneous. Given my obese nature before I must have more visceral stored and it is still being axed. That or more subcutaneous under extra skin which will be the very last thing to go ever.
In regards to tracking BF%, I do it for two reasons. The first is I am a nerd and like numbers. The more practical is that I am closely monitoring my calorie intake, weight, BF% to insure I don't start dumping large amounts of muscle as I have effectively been on nearly a 2 year 'cut' at this point and am closing in on a weight were muscle loss could be more of a reality.
In regards to tracking BF%, I do it for two reasons. The first is I am a nerd and like numbers. The more practical is that I am closely monitoring my calorie intake, weight, BF% to insure I don't start dumping large amounts of muscle as I have effectively been on nearly a 2 year 'cut' at this point and am closing in on a weight were muscle loss could be more of a reality.