Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

He doesn't look that far removed from the natty guy I posted on the last page?

I'm surprised you think that Troy after the achievements you've had in such a short time. Give it 4 more years and surely you don't expect to look the same?

Edited by jangles

amphetamines aren't talked about much but a lot of guys who are single digit body fat are using ephedrine, speed, dexamphetamine, ritalin, whatever they can get their hands on

they have a double effect of supercharging your metabolism whilst reducing your appetite... not to mention making you train like a demon... they have been used in bodybuilding since the golden era

in the US you can get a doctor to prescribe diet pills... which are basically speed, then a sleeping tablet to knock you out at night time

you'd have to be stupidly vain... and if your interested in health I wouldn't touch the stuff for obvious reasons... you might have a heart attack and die would be right up there on the list lol

Troy: progress ain't linear mate... you have peaks and valleys but as long as you see it as a long term goal then you'll be right... I'm a bit the same at the moment but it's just this time of year... I had lots of fun and now I have to pay for it... by not being able to walk for two days after my first session back... seriously I had to roll off the couch and almost crawl to bed the other night it was that bad lol

Never a fan of Zyzz's chest, always looked too flat to me. He also said in an interview once that he neglected to train obliques, because he didn't want any thickness to his mid section, which is a bit Hollywood. Albeit not as heavy, I honestly believe I have a better proportioned physique. There are much better bodies out there, Zyzz just had the celebrity effect going on...exposure...same reason girls go ga ga over Hollywood celebs who look no better than people walking down the street. You see enough of someone and it's gonna become the norm for you.

Channing tatum for example.

lol yeah didn't understand the appeal at first, but after seeing him in The Dilemma and 21 Jump Street...he's alright. Oh god I'm a victim of my own effect :/

Cam Gigandet and Paul Walker...pretty faces, but fairly disproportionate bodies. Yet you still hear girls claim they have "the best bodies" when talking about them.

On the topic of Zyzz and doing it naturally or 'assisted' and all these ideal physiques that you just question: we all might be able to look ripped etc if we eat healthy, live healthy and train for a few years, but that is so hard... or you could do what most blokes at the gym do and get there in 3-6 months. With the 'drug culture' that exists nowadays for not only steroids but lifestyle drugs, most often don't say no when offered a pill or even an injection that will help him look better in a quarter of the time without the really hard work for only the price of some supplements!! Stating the obvious, there's no doubting you can look good naturally but it will never be as quick and easy as taking roids, particularly if you want everything now! Some people just dont have the ability, dedication or determination to do it the natural and much harder way over a year or two and more.

I saw a guy at the gym that hadn't trained in 3 months, was overseas. Lost all his size but maintained the shape. Got back into it and literally 2 months later was cut and shredded beyond belief as well as putting on substantial size - just 2 months! In 2 months on roids he gained more than I have in 1 year naturally. He openly admitted to taking them, it was that obvious. Even said himself, he can train hard for a year or 2 and not end up looking like he was now. Its depressing in some ways but also rewarding when complimented on gains made, but it sure is hard work!

Edited by SRS13

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...