Post: #1

So I've been working out for about 10 years. Sometimes I go off for 6 months to a year, but I've been pretty consistent with it. Allow me to share my thoughts and observations.

1. Contrary to what you read in muscle magazines, the majority of women prefer a lean muscular build. Broad shoulders and pecs are good to have, but becoming a beefcake is counterproductive. In my experience, women respond most favorably to definition. The best ROI get definition are shoulders, upper back, and arms.

2. Getting washboard abs are a total waste of time. The rigid diet and obsessive routines to get/keep this is not worth it. Furthermore, you make your body much more sensitive to storing fat (evolution).

3. It is far better to build muscle from a lean mass, than to become fat and convert that to muscle. This is harder to do, but over the long-run, the maintenance required to keep your form is much less.

4. When I have have gotten out of working out for a long period of time, I compensate by being especially rigid with my diet. I lose mass, but I still retain definition (see Point 3 above).

5. Work out your lower body too. Nothing is more awkward than chicken licks on a top-stacked guy.

6. If you want to work out less often and still retain the effects, you can do heavy weight-low rep workouts. If you go for 3 - 5 rep sets using heavy weights and you do it right, your body will take 6 days to recover. If you do lower weight/high rep sets, you have to go more often or the benefits wear off faster.

7. Form over mass. Too many dumb guys end up hurting themselves because they try to man up and lift too much. Ironically, no one is really watching them in the gym.

8. I prefer exercises that isolate the muscle group I want over exercises that use multiple muscle groups. Your smaller muscles (esp. the arms) can wear out faster and impede your ability to get maximum sets/reps.

9. If you're doing serious chest exercises, don't forget to work out your rotator cuffs.

There's a ton more, but since I started this thread, I'll take any questions you guys have.

Post: #2

I think guys should aim for a physique in between the lean muscle and beefcake look.

Lean muscle isnt to physically imposing and doesnt garner the attention that a well built solid muscular dude will.

Also think the two most important things to have is 1) Chest and 2) Arms. Next would be 3) Abs followed by 4) Shoulders then 5) Back

Abs are pretty tough for me to maintain / get due to my diet so I mainly focus on chest, arms, and shoulders

Post: #3

Dash, I've experimented with both body types. I've also seen various guys with each body type, and how they've done with the girls. And of course, I've factored in the feedback I've gotten from the chicks I've banged and how they touch me/what they want to see.

Absolutely, the ideal is to have some pecs and broad shoulders and powerful neck. And to have that tapered off through definition in your arms/shoulders/upper back. But I know that a lean guy with great definition and barely noticeable chest turns a girl on. Beefcake guys less so, although they have their admirers.

Post: #4

(09-13-2011 09:22 PM)scorpio Wrote:  1. Contrary to what you read in muscle magazines, the majority of women prefer a lean muscular build. Broad shoulders and pecs are good to have, but becoming a beefcake is counterproductive. In my experience, women respond most favorably to definition. The best ROI get definition are shoulders, upper back, and arms.

3. It is far better to build muscle from a lean mass, than to become fat and convert that to muscle. This is harder to do, but over the long-run, the maintenance required to keep your form is much less.

1. Bullshit. Post a picture of your ideal physique, words are meaningless. Do you have any proof that this is true? And definition doesn't mean lack of mass. When you experienced worse results with women, you were just fatter, not bigger at the same body fat level.

I'd put Steve Reeves over anyone:



And here's one of the top male fitness models, Greg Plitt



I don't think Dmitry Klokov suffers either (6'1 230)





Nor does Roosh's cousin



None of these guys are moderate by any means. And I'm not anywhere near these guys, I just think this whole "too muscular" thing is bullshit, that 99% of guys will quit long before that even remotely became a concern, so the whole issue is misleading. It's just skinnier guys trying to feel superior to the bigger guys. If you think you're too big, odds are you're too fat.

3. Fat doesn't become muscle, nor does muscle become fat. Maybe you'll learn this in the next 10 years.

Post: #5

These are the type physiques im trying to obtain. Ill take these in pickup over ANY other physiques!

Post: #6

what's with the hostility? I'm sharing what worked for me. If you disagree, you can state your position calmly. Respectfully even. Have I disrespected you on this forum?

Reeves has a great physique, but how many guys can put the effort to achieve that? As for Plitt, do you know how much work that guy has to put into that? I mean, does the dude have time for a real job or to go work on their game? Do guys here have 7 days a week, 6 hours a day to develop that?

Muscle to fat? Obviously one is a cell, the other is a form of stored nutrient. But you are aware that people try to gain weight and end up storing a lot of fat in their dermal tissue besides the normal storage areas in their ass and abdomen? And this is tough to get rid of? Hint: once a fat cell called adipose tissue is synthesized, it can never be destroyed, only deflated.

Here's what I think chicks really respond well too. The washboard abs are not necessary, but are a nice to have:

Post: #7

^^

Thats not a bad physique at all. Could stand to be alittle more defined in the shoulders, chest, and arms though.....

Both my pics beat out that guy. That first pic is to me a PERFECT physique, most desired by females.

Post: #8

I think "my pic" is a more realistic to attain physique, and that's why I posted it. That body alone will put you in the top 0.5% of men. As for definition, all that guy needs to do is flex and his definition will come out.

Washboard abs. Look into it and what's necessary to keep it. It's like a self-defeating game against your body.

Post: #9

My uncle is built like Henry Rollins. Not huge but not skinny, no 6 pack but a good upper chest and arms. I think he said he weighs about 175 and he's 5'8. He's in his mid 40's and had 18 yr olds going crazy when we went to the beach a while back. He told me he would never try to get bigger because from his experience, most girls aren't into huge guys.

Post: #10

My hostility is not so much with you but the sentiment. I just think it's wrong, and don't have much patience for misinformation.

Anyhow, you yourself suggest that the physiques are not necessarily worse, just that they take more time. Plitt is an extreme outlier, but more so in terms of body fat than total mass. IMO, once you have the mass, it's not too hard to maintain it. The hard part is building it, and keeping sub-10% body fat.

The problem with the physique you posted, as I see it, is that if you're wearing clothes, it's not that remarkable. He also strangely has no discernible lats. Guys with big and aesthetic bodies like Reeves and Plitt, and many professional athletes, have a strong presence that skinny jacked guys just don't have. We call it 'imposing.' Hell, one definition for imposing is: "Impressive, as by virtue of size, bearing, or power: the monarch's imposing presence. " We attribute status to an imposing stature, just like we do height. People who are lean and well built are visually arresting.

And studies suggest brawnier guys fuck more. In one of Haselton's studies, I recall reading how the brawniest guys had the most sex partners, even though girls claimed to like the not so brawny guys the most. Sure there are confounding variables, but I've yet to see strong evidence that a physique like what you posted is best.

I've patronized body building forums occasionally. According to you, at some point, a guy would put on too much mass, such that his results with women would diminish. But I haven't really seen anyone say that.

Post: #11

Guys, I guess I myself have this problem. I really need to build Shoulders and pecs, but nothing is building up as much as I try.
I guess I am doing something wrong - Planning to start over for third time!
Some suggestions will be welcomed.

Post: #12

(09-13-2011 11:49 PM)basilransom Wrote:  My hostility is not so much with you but the sentiment. I just think it's wrong, and don't have much patience for misinformation.

Anyhow, you yourself suggest that the physiques are not necessarily worse, just that they take more time. Plitt is an extreme outlier, but more so in terms of body fat than total mass. IMO, once you have the mass, it's not too hard to maintain it. The hard part is building it, and keeping sub-10% body fat.

The problem with the physique you posted, as I see it, is that if you're wearing clothes, it's not that remarkable. He also strangely has no discernible lats. Guys with big and aesthetic bodies like Reeves and Plitt, and many professional athletes, have a strong presence that skinny jacked guys just don't have. We call it 'imposing.' Hell, one definition for imposing is: "Impressive, as by virtue of size, bearing, or power: the monarch's imposing presence. " We attribute status to an imposing stature, just like we do height. People who are lean and well built are visually arresting.

And studies suggest brawnier guys fuck more. In one of Haselton's studies, I recall reading how the brawniest guys had the most sex partners, even though girls claimed to like the not so brawny guys the most. Sure there are confounding variables, but I've yet to see strong evidence that a physique like what you posted is best.

I've patronized body building forums occasionally. According to you, at some point, a guy would put on too much mass, such that his results with women would diminish. But I haven't really seen anyone say that.

I totally agree with this. I have fluctuations in body shape, from being muscular to not so muscular. When I am more muscular, my closes go waaay up. I would swear on a plank that having a Steve Reeves body helps to filter through the time wasting lizards and helps to move those who have an interest to actually fcuking.

You can't improve on your facial aesthetics but you can improve your physique.

I have heard lizards who have said "I don't like his face but I'd fcuk him because of his physique."

Buttaface is a term that lizards also acknowledge in their sexual partner selection.

Post: #13

Just don't be a primping, meathead, gym-rat douchebag. That's what turns girls off.

Post: #14

(09-13-2011 09:22 PM)scorpio Wrote:  women respond most favorably to definition. ... beefcake is counterproductive. ... The best ROI get definition are shoulders, upper back, and arms.

Getting washboard abs are a total waste of time.

I prefer exercises that isolate the muscle group

IMO your priorities are backwards. If you have definition then you should have decent abs. Get your diet together. Women like a nice ass and abs. Functional multijoint exercises are more efficient.

Finally, all the guys pictured in this thread are huuuuge. I'm seriously talking about 400 lb. bench press. They merely look lean and toned because they are ripped. If you stood next to them you would see how much bigger they are. Most guys here are in no danger of being too large (or too lean).

Post: #15

Loads of girls have told me that they like it this way:

http://youtu.be/c0BCoeOf-Ys

It doesn't hurt to be Cristiano Ronaldo of course.

Post: #16

Become as muscular as possible without getting a gut, and you won't have any shortage of women grabbing at and commenting on your body.

The rest is just details and debating at the margins.

Post: #17

If you're tall, your frame can carry a lot of muscle and not look big. I'm 6'4" and almost exactly 200 lbs and working on adding weight. As I can see in the mirror, I'm slowly starting to lose that skinny look. I think if you're over 6 feet tall, you need to weigh over 200 lbs to have a decent physique.

I do the 5/3/1 program, which consists of four compounds lifts based on percentages of your 1 rep max. The lifts are squat, standing military press, deadlift, benchpress. I also do pullups and pushups. I eat a lot and don't worry about having a cut stomach. For tall men, your first priority is adding mass and strength.

Post: #18

(09-14-2011 11:43 AM)cool Wrote:  If you're tall, your frame can carry a lot of muscle and not look big. I'm 6'4" and almost exactly 200 lbs and working on adding weight. As I can see in the mirror, I'm slowly starting to lose that skinny look. I think if you're over 6 feet tall, you need to weigh over 200 lbs to have a decent physique.

As a good general rule, start from this baseline:

6', 200 pounds - no gut, i.e., relatively lean.
For every inch taller or shorter, add or subtract 10 pounds.

That's why a guy who is 5'8" but "only" weighs 170 or 180 can looked jacked, while a tall guy can outweigh the shorter guy yet look skinny and frail.

There are some variables. I'm 6 and change, but look very good at 185. I have really small joints and a narrow waist, and thus don't need much weight to create a nice image.

It's all about guidelines, though, and the first principle of physique development: Get as muscular as possible without getting a gut.

P.S. For most of you guys (i.e, you don't have super genetics and aren't using steroids), that means 5-10 years of regular training. Regular training means no more than a couple of occasional week-long layoffs. That is, you should be lifting 48 weeks out of the year.

Post: #19

I didn't see this thread earlier

Post: #20

Another thing is, you're not trying to please the most girls possible. You want the girls who are attractive and DTF. According to studies, my experience, and hell, everyone, the more attractive and DTF girls are, the more they like muscle. I'd bet money on it. Some will say classier girls don't like muscle. Also false - it may not be as high a priority, but they still like it. There's no rule saying you have to suddenly start dressing and talking like a meathead once you bench 300.

Here's another interesting study:

Quote:Studies have found that women who perceive themselves as physically attractive are more likely to choose men with masculine facial dimorphism, than are women who perceive themselves as physically unattractive.

Translation: The girls who think they're hot like guys with manlier faces. And they probably like manly, muscular bodies more too.

Girls who are plain and not so slutty pre-emptively reject manly guys, because they know he won't stick around. Think of the fat chicks who say they love skinny guys - it's because his outside options are limited. So when half the girls in a survey are fat or unattractive, the results are worth a whole lot less than you think.

Plus girls have no effing clue about what actually turns them on. Their own preferences change over the course of their menstrual cycle. They lie about wanting something more moderate, so as not to feel superficial or slutty.

Women think in terms of archetypes, instead of 'all else equal' - when they're asked if they like brawny guys, they think, "meathead," and say "eww." In their minds' eye, they're comparing say, a slim guy who's suave and cosmopolitan to a guy who wears Ed Hardy shirts and fist pumps - there's a whole lot more going on than just a difference in muscularity. They don't imagine say, a jacked Don Draper (who is already pretty broad). If you're not too short, and you're not doing steroids, you won't have to worry about getting too big.

Post: #21

http://foxhoundstudio.com/blog/fitness-l...ant-to-be/

(This was posted also the the "girls" section under "Ideal Male Body Type).

This "study" basically corroborates with what people here are saying. I also agree that the figures above are the best looking, and this poll has a similar body type as the MALE ideal MALE body type.

The person above who mentioned Ronaldo gets a cookie.

As for the posts saying that more attractive girls like more muscular guys, there might be some truth to that, but I doubt it. In "Lesson #1" The poll further minces the data for self-selected girl attributes. The girls self-selected to be "athletes" still preferred Pitt at over 50% but the MMA guy with more bulk went up x3. I highly doubt you can equate "athletes" with attractiveness however. I think this is more telling that bigger girls, as in girls who are stronger, want a stronger man. My bet is that the "creative types" have a higher subset of attractive women.

This study also corroborates with the notion of women hating "meatheads" e.g. people who are TOO invested and concerned about their looks.

Post: #22

The OP does make a few good points with regards to treating your rotator cuff right and working out your lower body.

Nonetheless I do not understand this fixation with some people who worry about 'getting too big.' That's BS and muscles trump 'defined' every time. Who's to say you can't be jacked and defined? I just think many guys who say 'you don't want to be too big' are just trying to rationalise being skinny in most cases.

If you've got a skinny guy who's really toned and you can only tell he works out after he takes off his t-shirt what use is that? Especially in the initial attraction phase, as unless you're walking around on a nudist beach you're not gonna see skinny defined guy with his top off. If you work out you want people to be able to notice it, that's the whole idea.

Girls dig muscles, there's no two ways about it. As Athlone has said in the thread he's linked, girls LOVE a broad set of shoulder and traps, otherwise known as a 'yoke.' A big yoke...i.e. traps and neck is a calling card that you lift weights.

Isolation is good for some purposes and I do occasional isolation movements, but to base your whole training around it is wrong. Your body works as a unit and as such the muscles function together in unison. Moreover, you get more bang for your buck and hit more muscle groups doing heavy compound lifts...and they've stood the test of time. Why would you want to be in the gym six days a week for hours at a time doing every single muscle?

No man put slabs of muscle on his back and quads by doing bicep curls alone.

Post: #23

Shit like this is over the top. Should be obvious, but I see enough of these type of guys at the gym...

Post: #24

I agree people who worry about getting too big have never been big. Its hard as hell to put on weight and muscle. Its not something that just happens you really have to work at it and be dedicated.

Post: #25

All those guys scorpio just posted are on heavy doses of steroids, and train an incredible amount. If you're not on steroids, you will never look like that. And if you are, you still probably won't.

Here's a handy calculator for calculating your maximum muscular potential: http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html

This is a picture of the calculator's author, Casey Butt:



Butt believes he has reached his maximum muscular potential, after several years of drug free training. And he could be bigger with higher body fat levels. Take a look at the calculator to see what I mean. This is what's possible for a typical lifter, and this isn't extremely big. In this photo he's 5'9, 175, 10% body fat.