Thread 76363630 - /fit/ [Archived: 426 hours ago]

Anonymous
7/11/2025, 6:09:17 AM No.76363630
1418381634639
1418381634639
md5: 369c86ff45f3d4fca5a9ca3588d5b0ec🔍
did he build a strength base?
Replies: >>76363716 >>76363919 >>76363978 >>76363983 >>76363987 >>76364080 >>76364345 >>76364459 >>76364471 >>76364693
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 6:21:36 AM No.76363653
I'm glad the fad of making guys get fat to lift weights is dying. People realized the Curlbros were unironically in better shape and got more bitches than the strong fats.
Replies: >>76363661
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 6:26:10 AM No.76363661
>>76363653
Yep it has always been so.
> Get yoked bodybuilding, doing curls and chin ups.
> Bench press and lat pullovers.
> Then hit the legs with some deadlifts and split squats and do some core work to get your abs to pop and if your triceps/fores are lacking by the end throw in a few sets.
Literally the cheat way to build up a physique that makes women lust after you.
Replies: >>76363928 >>76364303
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 6:47:31 AM No.76363716
>>76363630 (OP)
Why doesn't Rip market SS to skinny girls so they can get mewtwo bodies?
Replies: >>76363745
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 7:06:25 AM No.76363745
>>76363716
Women only need to bulk up and do squats, hip thrusts, split squats and deadlifts to get huge legs. They have easy mode even in gym just for them.
Replies: >>76364476
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 8:35:29 AM No.76363919
>>76363630 (OP)
No way this guys is actually doing the program. Maybe he followed the schedule but ignored the LP; you don't get a chest like that when you're adding weight every workout.
Replies: >>76363969
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 8:38:52 AM No.76363928
>>76363661
basically every single one of my friends built muscle at maintenance or small caloric surplus
some even on a cut with really high protein %
for a while everyone on /fit/ was insistent that the body absolutely CANT build muscle without a caloric surplus, as if the body was conscious enough to know when or where the surplus even began lmao... yeah dude your body knows it's 8pm and you're not going to eat anymore for today so you're not on a surplus got it
if your body needs protein for muscles then it will use the protein you give him to build muscle and other basic functions, no other bullshit
Replies: >>76363942
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 8:41:08 AM No.76363934
You don't need a strength base. You need strength. The problem with SS is that mass is technically strength too. A smarter man would say okay but I want to get it from hypertrophy and not fat leverage but RIP can't figure out how to program for that and just has you take two steps back, eat, and run forward and bang your head into the wall until every time it gets hard.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 8:45:39 AM No.76363942
>>76363928
The fitness subculture has been poisoned by various ideologies for a couple of decades now.
>food quality doesn't matter, only quantity / CICO / IIFYM
>powerlifting compounds are the best way to do everything
It's partly the fault of the "science" community for producing so much junk data over so many years to the point where people have built entire careers from preaching bullshit about food (Norton, Israetel, Schoenfeld) and partly a carryover from powerlifting being so entrenched into American culture at this point. I think what is changing is that the ScienceFrauds are losing their grip on the narrative as their ideas are increasingly shown to be bogus, and the internet is generally becoming less America-centric so people are taking a greater interest in non-powerlifting forms of training.
Replies: >>76363964 >>76363984
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 8:59:14 AM No.76363964
>>76363942
Are you saying to do other heavy compounds or other things that aren't heavy compounds? Because one of these is based and the other is ignorant.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 9:02:46 AM No.76363969
>>76363919
Thats a false premise of powerlifting blocks, you usually go down in atrength until after deload, but 1 week isnt nearly enough especially if doing extra bench to get bench up etc long term fatigue.

I can put on 5lbs/mo on bench easily but its averaged through the year and in practice the more often and hard you lift the lighter youre lifting. This guy isnt programming himself and cant lift good either.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 9:09:07 AM No.76363978
>>76363630 (OP)
Lemme see his ass.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 9:10:35 AM No.76363983
>>76363630 (OP)
you could fix this guy with a different haircut
legit have him buzzcut hair and beard with no guard an he'd look much better
or let the hair grow to shoulder length, still no beard
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 9:10:47 AM No.76363984
>>76363942
CICO is an objectively correct principle. Nobody actually claims that food quality doesn't matter, that's a strawman.
Replies: >>76364204 >>76364205
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 9:11:48 AM No.76363987
>>76363630 (OP)
>ss claims another victim
I'm so happy that we are finally escaping the 2010s dark age of lifting.
Replies: >>76364003
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 9:16:39 AM No.76363999
i will never do deadlifts
i will never do squats
i will never do OHP
i will never do bench press
simple as
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 9:17:47 AM No.76364003
>>76363987
>/fit/ still tells newbies to read the sticky in 2025
>last update 2012
>99% of it is SS and 5x5
kek, longest ongoing bait trap
Replies: >>76364311
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 9:46:23 AM No.76364080
>>76363630 (OP)
idk, what are his numbers?
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 10:41:22 AM No.76364204
>>76363984
>MUH THERMODYNAMICS
It's "objectively correct" only if hormones are controlled for, since how nutrients are partitioned depends entirely on hormones.

That's why midwits like you have to constantly caveat your CICO shit with "except for noob gains and/or roiders" ie except for any time your hormones change in a significant way. It's such a stupid way to look at nutrition especially now that people know so much more about food. I personally realised CICO was nonsense years ago when I used to roid, and as a natty it was debunked to me when I started eating more meat and then went carnivore. Over 1000 cals daily more than before, more muscle and less bodyfat. Shouldn't be possible according to the legacy CICO garbage, but is easily explained when you understand the hormonal model of body composition.
Replies: >>76364212 >>76364248 >>76364492
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 10:42:23 AM No.76364205
>>76363984
IIFYM or any macro-centric dietary guideline by definition ignores food quality. It's a good thing that this sort of faddish thinking is on the way out.
Replies: >>76364255
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 10:47:18 AM No.76364212
>>76364204
Schizo ramblings
Digesting protein rich foods takes more energy then foods not rich in protein
So 1000 kcal of meat takes more energy to digest than 1000 kcal of sugar
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 11:15:44 AM No.76364248
>>76364204
>nooooo fork putdowns r hard
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 11:19:13 AM No.76364255
>>76364205
>if it fits your macros
>ignores food quality by definition
/fit/ somehow gets dumber every year.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 11:58:30 AM No.76364303
>>76363661
> cheat way to make women lust after you
> deadlifts and split squats
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 12:03:05 PM No.76364311
>>76364003
Someone should finally update the sticky, then.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 12:22:28 PM No.76364345
>>76363630 (OP)
He built an impressive gut
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 1:17:55 PM No.76364459
>>76363630 (OP)
Cant blame program if you have a shit diet
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 1:22:13 PM No.76364471
1751740002915314m
1751740002915314m
md5: 1ee64c9e86ecac204b5ea48aebbb2300🔍
>>76363630 (OP)
>do SS
>look worse than when you started

Lol. Every fucking time.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 1:24:22 PM No.76364476
>>76363745
>Women only need to bulk up and do squats, hip thrusts, split squats and deadlifts to get huge legs
That's all you would need to do to get huge legs too retard.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 1:30:33 PM No.76364492
>>76364204
>Over 1000 cals daily more than before,
Ok, and what do you think would have happened if you went over 2000 calories instead?
It always comes back to calories in the end. And hormones or other variables being "controlled for" doesn't even need to be said because it's literally baked into the premise. Which is: all things being equal, more calories will lead to weight gain and fewer calories to weight loss.
That last bit doesn't need to be said because only a midwit wouldn't intuitively grasp it already or feel clever for having to point it out.
Anonymous
7/11/2025, 3:07:53 PM No.76364693
>>76363630 (OP)
Calisthenics fags and brosplitters were right all along.