Post: #351

Definitely. Most girls like the muscular but still somewhat slim, toned, athletic look. Not the monsterous oversized gorilla look.

The key here is steroids. You're not going to get enormous unless you use them, and in most cases not past the point where women start reacting more negatively to you either. Also, steroids will often bloat up your face and guts (bad eating/too much food can do this too), and make you look fat even if you have low bodyfat. So even if you're muscular and strong as hell, you'll still be "fat" or at least chubby to most chicks. This especially applies if you have the short and stocky build, and not so much for taller people. Here's a perfect example, Joe Rogan:

http://www.twoscoopsgethuge.com/post/604...k-this-out

So then you'll have to get very low bodyfat to compensate for the perceived chubbiness, which is a pain in the ass in itself, and will give you an unnatural, veiny, jacked gorilla-look that most women don't care for, even if you're not hugely muscular either.

Post: #352

I still think this is the look most women love and all you really need:

   

   

   

   

Most women go for lean muscularity over the jacked meathead look. Notice how Pitt doesn't look big when he's fully clothed but you can tell he's lean and toned underneath. The proportions of his chest and shoulders are good compared to his waist. His belly is flat.
His face is angular, which I believe is a huge attraction point. His biceps and triceps have some size and are defined. This is an ideal that natty guys with decent genetics can actually achieve.

At 6 ft, by far the most compliments I have gotten on my body have been when I'm around 175 lbs. Not when I had more muscle, and more fat at 185-190, and definitely not when I was a distance runner at 145-160. At 175, I look pretty close to Pitt in clothes, though I've never been that ripped. A 4 pack, not a 6 pack.

Granted, I've never been jacked and never could be without gear, so I can't say how girls would react to me then. But I do know that I typically don't see the most jacked guys with the hottest girls, and often the girls they are with are not that great at all. The ones I do see with hot girls are more often than not similar to Pitt.

Post: #353

^This argument always comes up and Pitt is the reference point. I say BS to those that say this is what most women like, just for the record he took gear to achieve that look.
Quite frankly I don't care what they like, I care what I like and the respect I get by other fit/big dudes.
I had a girl tell me that I need to work on my stomach, even though I have a 4 pack. I know bitches will say that crap just to try and find fault.

Post: #354

I've gone from 160-200 in 3 years at 6 ft, and I think not too much changed from 180 pounds on. I'm talking going from 8-12% body fat at 180-200 respectively, and going from 180 upward didn't really do that much. Let's be real here - you aren't going to ever build enough muscle naturally for this to become an issue, so I suggest everyone regardless of this exact point of diminishing returns to build their maximum amount of muscle and see for themselves. So yes, probably there is diminishing returns and I think many girls don't care beyond a little muscle mass coupled with a low-ish body fat, but once you're ''there'' you'll want to progress just for progress itself, seeing the body change and weight on the bar increase.

Edit: I agree with the Pitt reference as being BS, because he did look better in Troy with more muscle mass and anyone saying these two physiques are only possible with steroids has very low expectations of what the natural body can achieve. I looked like him at 160 and the attention I got then can't even be compared to what I get now. This sort of body is a good physique to aim for, yes, but you'll look like a twig in clothes. If you chop off the head, he'll look like just another skinny teenager with good muscle insertions, bellies and proportions and you either have them or you don't.

In conclusion, more muscle mass with same body fat is always going to be better, but diminshing returns are real. Still, you're gonna be working out anyhow, so why not just eat a small surplus and continue getting bigger, even if it gives you less of a return than it did before? It's not like you're gonna spend more time to achieve more muscle than you have to spend to maintain. This whole debate is pointless if you look at it that way.

Post: #355

(04-05-2015 11:46 PM)Bilboswaggins Wrote:  I've gone from 160-200 in 3 years at 6 ft, and I think not too much changed from 180 pounds on. I'm talking going from 8-12% body fat at 180-200 respectively, and going from 180 upward didn't really do that much. Let's be real here - you aren't going to ever build enough muscle naturally for this to become an issue, so I suggest everyone regardless of this exact point of diminishing returns to build their maximum amount of muscle and see for themselves. So yes, probably there is diminishing returns and I think many girls don't care beyond a little muscle mass coupled with a low-ish body fat, but once you're ''there'' you'll want to progress just for progress itself, seeing the body change and weight on the bar increase.

Edit: I agree with the Pitt reference as being BS, because he did look better in Troy with more muscle mass and anyone saying these two physiques are only possible with steroids has very low expectations of what the natural body can achieve. I looked like him at 160 and the attention I got then can't even be compared to what I get now. This sort of body is a good physique to aim for, yes, but you'll look like a twig in clothes. If you chop off the head, he'll look like just another skinny teenager with good muscle insertions, bellies and proportions and you either have them or you don't.

In conclusion, more muscle mass with same body fat is always going to be better, but diminshing returns are real. Still, you're gonna be working out anyhow, so why not just eat a small surplus and continue getting bigger, even if it gives you less of a return than it did before? It's not like you're gonna spend more time to achieve more muscle than you have to spend to maintain. This whole debate is pointless if you look at it that way.

Exactly Dwayne > Brad.

Post: #356

People like easy answers to complex questions. Here are some things to consider.

- Do you have boyish looks that pull chicks, or have your facial features matured already? Because when you're 250 pounds from all those androgens you took, you won't look like a boy no more.

- Do you have a large or small frame? Lots of muscle on a small frame will look unnatural and give you problems.

- How's your cardio? Can you carry big muscle without wheezing and sweating like a pig when you walk around? Not to mention your heart rate/blood pressure.

- Are you athletic or an actual athlete? Is big muscle an asset in your sport(s)? Can you carry extra muscle without becoming inflexible? I remember a particularly good looking and sexy gymnast/athlete girl from school telling me about how disgusted she was by guys who couldn't even jog properly because they were too inflexible from too much lifting and too little all round athleticism. Her boyfriend was the most muscular guy in our class, but all round athletic too.

- Will you come off as a natural human alpha male that's just bigger than other guys because you're more alpha, or a weirdo who thinks adding more muscle will get rid of your insecurity and inferiority issues? Are you a leader like a manager or business owner, do you have a good mood and a winning attitude like Arnold to counter what many people perceive as threatening and intimidating? If you're not that type, can you appear dangerous and intimidating in a way that make women attracted to you, or will you just be a monsterously big asexual/strange freak instead? Because let's face it, a lot of chicks like scary guys.

Post: #357

Very few guys get freakishly large - even those on gear. Frankly your post below smacks of lack of knowledge about "androgens". Getting HYOOGE requires more than androgens.

Lifting changed my life. I pull smooth and easy now and I'm no badass playah. I'm in my late 40's I get IOI's from girls in their mid-20's, that simply wasn't the case before I carried the muscle mass I do.

There are many reasons to lift, all of them contribute to poontang pullage. Anyone saying that being ripped doesn't contribute to game is a hater, delusional, uninformed or a liar.

(04-07-2015 07:43 AM)Lechon Wrote:  People like easy answers to complex questions. Here are some things to consider.

- Do you have boyish looks that pull chicks, or have your facial features matured already? Because when you're 250 pounds from all those androgens you took, you won't look like a boy no more.

- Do you have a large or small frame? Lots of muscle on a small frame will look unnatural and give you problems.

- How's your cardio? Can you carry big muscle without wheezing and sweating like a pig when you walk around? Not to mention your heart rate/blood pressure.

- Are you athletic or an actual athlete? Is big muscle an asset in your sport(s)? Can you carry extra muscle without becoming inflexible? I remember a particularly good looking and sexy gymnast/athlete girl from school telling me about how disgusted she was by guys who couldn't even jog properly because they were too inflexible from too much lifting and too little all round athleticism. Her boyfriend was the most muscular guy in our class, but all round athletic too.

- Will you come off as a natural human alpha male that's just bigger than other guys because you're more alpha, or a weirdo who thinks adding more muscle will get rid of your insecurity and inferiority issues? Are you a leader like a manager or business owner, do you have a good mood and a winning attitude like Arnold to counter what many people perceive as threatening and intimidating? If you're not that type, can you appear dangerous and intimidating in a way that make women attracted to you, or will you just be a monsterously big asexual/strange freak instead? Because let's face it, a lot of chicks like scary guys.

Post: #358

I never said gear will make you enormous just from taking it. What I'm saying is, unless you use gear, you're not going to be so big you'll get diminishing returns from it, so no need to worry about it.

And the discussion here isn't about whether or not it's good to have low bodyfat and more muscle than an average man. Everyone knows that's an asset. It's about whether you reach a certain point where more is less. Take pro bodybuilders. How many chicks like that look? Not very many. And you don't need to go that big either, most women will start to dislike it well before that point.

Post: #359

Agreed. Your previous post puts forth a very different tone than the one below. Glad you get it.

(04-07-2015 08:40 AM)Lechon Wrote:  I never said gear will make you enormous just from taking it. What I'm saying is, unless you use gear, you're not going to be so big you'll get diminishing returns from it, so no need to worry about it.

And the discussion here isn't about whether or not it's good to have low bodyfat and more muscle than an average man. Everyone knows that's an asset. It's about whether you reach a certain point where more is less. Take pro bodybuilders. How many chicks like that look? Not very many. And you don't need to go that big either, most women will start to dislike it well before that point.

Post: #360

What you lot need to realise is this: You need to look muscular in clothes. Forget being satisfied with the Brad Pitt, Fight club look if you look regular with clothes on. That look is only good if you are able to take your clothes off in front of the lizard or if you are in the habit of going out clubbing with no top on. This can be the case in tropical climates but most of you lot live in the West which adheres to a no shirt, no service type of policy and culture.

Get swole enough that you look powerful and not fat in regular clothes. Wear clothes to accentuate that physique. How many men have lost the bang because they took off their clothes and shocked the lizard with a large sprawling belly and unsightly love handles in the heat of the moment? Very few. And any lizard that cancels the bang based on that, can step off.

There is NO point of diminishing returns for a non steroid user weightlifting and getting reptiles. If you keep your bodyfat no higher than 15 percent as a natural lifter and put on muscle, it can only get sweeter not more sour.

Post: #361

(04-08-2015 01:38 PM)Moma Wrote:  What you lot need to realise is this: You need to look muscular in clothes. Forget being satisfied with the Brad Pitt, Fight club look if you look regular with clothes on. That look is only good if you are able to take your clothes off in front of the lizard or if you are in the habit of going out clubbing with no top on. This can be the case in tropical climates but most of you lot live in the West which adheres to a no shirt, no service type of policy and culture.

Get swole enough that you look powerful and not fat in regular clothes. Wear clothes to accentuate that physique. How many men have lost the bang because they took off their clothes and shocked the lizard with a large sprawling belly and unsightly love handles in the heat of the moment? Very few. And any lizard that cancels the bang based on that, can step off.

There is NO point of diminishing returns for a non steroid user weightlifting and getting reptiles. If you keep your bodyfat no higher than 15 percent as a natural lifter and put on muscle, it can only get sweeter not more sour.

In the original point of the thread, diminishing returns means that the increase in attention from going as a skinny guy to being athletic is bigger than going from athletic to full-on natural bodybuilder. So, I would say that diminishing returns indeed exist. The increase is only marginal after you look like you lift with clothes on.

Also, how many natural guys actually look big while being over 12% body fat? It's all an illusion. Once you have enough muscle, the fastest way to look bigger is to drop 5lb of fat. Sorry to disappoint you guys, but if you are an average height male, weighing 160-180 pounds shredded is and looks HUGE by natural standards.

Post: #362

I'm 5'10" kinda average height, I'm 185 give or take and sub10% bf. I'm vascular arms and such but I'm by no means "big" - being 8-10% at 195-200 would be ideal for me and I wouldn't look like a BB just strong.

Post: #363

Thrustmaster - you are no doubt in good shape. I myself am roughly the same height and in the 195 - 200 range, no idea what my bodyfat is but I have a four pack.

To get to the next hurdle I know I have to eat cleaner and work out more often than my current 3x a week. The guys saying it doesn't matter, are the guys that aren't in shape.

No one is talking about bodybuilders, I mean how many of those guys do you see in your everyday life. Guys I know that are juice monkeys are generally with girls I would fuck in heartbeat, I am not concerned about what the average girl likes. I don't want the average girl.

Post: #364

Post: #365

I've only been able to pull 9's and own them when I was really jacked and on a test cycle
Off cycle, 7's are easy, 9's will bite but not submit
I find it's a linear equation like y=mx+b
y is a woman's rating out of ten
m is your game
x is your social standing
b is your musculature

game amplifies your social standing
a high b value means you need less game

9=2(2) + 5 would be the equation on cycle
9=/= 2(2) +3 would be the equation off cycle.. here, you're net worth is only 7, so you don't get the 9's. If you want 9's with a 3 body, you'd need to increase your game by 1, or your social standing.

I'm not autistic I swear, this just makes sense to me

Post: #366

I bet someone could come up with a chart that showed optimum LBM per inch height or something like that.

As you increase muscle past some point, perhaps quantity attracted goes up but quality goes down. You become a "type" searched out by "Jersey Shore" sort of girls. I think this requires steroids, though.

Post: #367

(04-14-2015 08:36 AM)RexImperator Wrote:  I bet someone could come up with a chart that showed optimum LBM per inch height or something like that.

As you increase muscle past some point, perhaps quantity attracted goes up but quality goes down. You become a "type" searched out by "Jersey Shore" sort of girls. I think this requires steroids, though.

I was in bed beside a smokin hot blonde blue eyed aryan beauty. She was telling me how much she hated steroids. Her last boyfriend was on steroids and she juuuuust hated it. Hated it so much she dated and banged him for months. The thing that makes this extra funny is that I was on "steroids" at the time. Yeah, she really hates guys on steroids.
As always, watch what they do, not what they say.

I put steroids in quotations up there because I detest the term. Is someone who drinks alcohol on drugs? Not really, I mean technically yeah, but no one who knew anything about alcohol consumption would say that. Why then is someone on testosterone said to be on steroids? Because people don't understand it, or rather, they misunderstand it because of all of the false propaganda out there against it.

Post: #368

(04-05-2015 10:29 PM)MrXY Wrote:  I still think this is the look most women love and all you really need:









Most women go for lean muscularity over the jacked meathead look. Notice how Pitt doesn't look big when he's fully clothed but you can tell he's lean and toned underneath. The proportions of his chest and shoulders are good compared to his waist. His belly is flat.
His face is angular, which I believe is a huge attraction point. His biceps and triceps have some size and are defined. This is an ideal that natty guys with decent genetics can actually achieve.

At 6 ft, by far the most compliments I have gotten on my body have been when I'm around 175 lbs. Not when I had more muscle, and more fat at 185-190, and definitely not when I was a distance runner at 145-160. At 175, I look pretty close to Pitt in clothes, though I've never been that ripped. A 4 pack, not a 6 pack.

Granted, I've never been jacked and never could be without gear, so I can't say how girls would react to me then. But I do know that I typically don't see the most jacked guys with the hottest girls, and often the girls they are with are not that great at all. The ones I do see with hot girls are more often than not similar to Pitt.

This thread just keeps on going.

Brad Pitt definitely looked good in that film, but you've got to take into account that he would have been pumped, dried out, tanned, and shot in the best possible lighting. If you can look like that cold without the lighting etc., then you're doing pretty well.

As for the lean mass per inch of height, I think there's just too much variation in skeletal structure to be able to do it, which is also one of the problems with BMI. I remember back at 15 when my training partner and I first joined a gym. We were both the same height, and both extremely scrawny because we played so much sport, with single digit body fat. If anything I was a little thicker than him, and yet he outweighed me by around 18 pounds. He had extremely wide shoulders (must have been 21 inches plus without any muscle on), thick bones, and a wider pelvis than me (though not necessarily wide for his height). On the other hand I had a really narrow pelvis, pretty narrow shoulders, and fairly small wrists. Even in my late twenties, I could still make 135 at 6 feet tall pretty comfortably, as long as I didn't lift weights, whereas he would have to go anorexic to be able to do that.

Post: #369

(04-14-2015 09:05 AM)Kieran Wrote:  Even in my late twenties, I could still make 135 at 6 feet tall pretty comfortably, as long as I didn't lift weights, whereas he would have to go anorexic to be able to do that.

Thank you hungry skeleton

Seriously though, I feel your pain with small wrists. I wish I could grow my hands and wrists. I'm always jealous of people with big hands.
No matter how strong I get, they'll always be average..

Post: #370

Did a test cycle once went from 6"2 167 to 6"2 185 in 10 weeks, always been in shape and low bodyfat was a bball player and track athlete in highschool but the extra muscle mass at a low bf made me look bigger. When I went to the club chicks would come up and hit on me in ways I wasn't use to. The quality of the girls that would show interest in me went up a notch, pulled the hottest chick from the club one night (airline stewardess from out of town) and I told her she was sexy and stuff after sex, then she said I think your sexy also but you know that. Think money look for women isn't the jacked bodybuilder look but the NFL wideout look, Russell Westbrook or Cristiano Ronaldo nowdays, he has lean muscular athletic look.

Post: #371

Damn this thread has gone on. I'm thinking in terms of body size it has a bit to do with the kinds of gals you are trying to pull.

Club girls are probably going to gravitate more towards the "boss" looking types that are big and dominating/intimidating. Hipster girls like skinny guys. Acedemic/young professionals like athletic guys.

It speaks a lot that guys who get big pull better during night game. It's the most primal setting where some of the most primal attributes are going to attract attention.

Post: #372

Like Big Brandon Carter said, "You damn near need muscles to pull a chick at a club."

But let's use common sense on night game.

Chicks make an effort to look their absolute best when they go out to nightclubs, so what would possibly make us think that they'd put in that effort just to meet "average" guys?

Guys who don't have some combination of dance skills, good looks/style, and outgoing personality will never do well at night game.

Post: #373

Jariel. That is exactly why I don't like night clubs. Me on the dance floor is BAD news. I'm the rare arhythmic black man. But I'm reasonably friendly (wouldn't say outgoing), and I can figure how how to put my clothing on in a way that doesn't make me look like a retard.

Honestly, guys are splitting too many damn hairs in this thread. If you wanna look roided out, go for it. if you think your body looks better lean and muscular, go for it. If you think that you actually can pull off that higher BF but huge muscle head look you should go for that. There is no fucking one size fits all that you can put on all men. I'm 5'7-8 and I would look like an idiot if I was 200 pounds. It's just not a good look for most men at my height. The amount of money I would have to spend on drugs, food, custom clothing and other such things would make it cost-prohibitive for me, not to mention I just don't think I need to be that big. I think the cut off for me at my height would be 155-160. I would have visible muscule mass, but I would still play up my naturally lean/athletic look.

Now 200lbs at 6' is a completely different matter. But 240 at 6' would begin to look a little unnatural for many man. I think It really depends on how your body is naturally built. I think every body type has its pluses and minuses. A lot of my very large friends look great in clothing because of how large they are, but they struggle to keep their weight down.

A lot of my smaller friends disappear in clothing, but you would swear they're much bigger than they are if we hit up the beach together and they're shredded down and six-packed up.

I think the whole point of this is to play up your strengths and downplay your weaknesses. Let's face it, even with roids most of us aren't going to look like a fitness model, but you can still look better than most of the competition if you take the time to build an adequate physique.

Post: #374

(04-14-2015 09:05 AM)Kieran Wrote:  Brad Pitt definitely looked good in that film, but you've got to take into account that he would have been pumped, dried out, tanned, and shot in the best possible lighting. If you can look like that cold without the lighting etc., then you're doing pretty well.

This is a good point.

The smaller you are, the more you are a victim to lighting and complexion.

For a naturally very fair/ pale guy like myself, I can literally go from looking amazing to good to shitty by simply changing the lighting. I'm assuming this is the same for the darker black, Indian, etc. guys. Fuck you tan bastards in the middle

But that mostly only applies to definition. If you're big, you're going to look big in every light. Just like you're going to look big whether you're wearing clothes or not.

To address the question, I think where the diminishing returns come in is when guys think about this stuff to the point of obsession.

"Do you think I'll attract more HB8s at 8% BF and 185 pounds or 9% BF and 190 pounds?"

Who the fuck cares? Whatever tiny advantage you may get one way or the other will be offset by the approval seeking mentality that even lead you down that line of thinking in the first place.

You'd be much better off just working out for yourself and owning it.

Post: #375

For reference with all the numbers, Victor Pride is pretty damn big and he just posted that he's 6 feet tall and 180 in this picture, and while he's lean enough to look good, he could probably go another 3-5 pounds to look truly ripped which would take him to around 175.