Is this possible natty? Obviously, he does roids/TRT, but still.

>TRT

File: 132891327893.png (238KB, 1190x906px) Image search: [Google]

238KB, 1190x906px

>>39123276
>Is this possible natty? Obviously, he does roids
Are you retarded?

>>39123276
Yes

>>39123299
pretty sure op was asking if that physique is possible to acquire natty

>>39123299

???

Not him.

Obviously that guy does roids because he's a actor and they all do roids because they need to go from 115 LBS for one movie to 170 LBS in another movie in 2 months, they don't have 3 years to lift hard and eat right.

Anyways yes that body is super easy to achieve natty.

Just push yourself as hard as you can guys and you will see results

If you're weak and you can only handle 100 LBS x 8 reps on a bench make sure you're doing 100 x 8 reps not 90 x 8 reps because 90 is easier for you and less effort

>>39123276
says online he's 5'10" and 185lb, which means at 10% BF he's at 24 FFMI. Read possible natty, but if you were taking odds, bet on some kind of assistance. If you think he's higher BF, then you're approaching v possible natty, if you think he's lower BF, then odds are almost definite he's not. 180lb is FFMI of 23.3, so that's about where you'd expect upper natty limit to be, especially if you're trying to live a normal happy life aside. How tall are you OP?

>>39123318
>super easy to achieve natty
confirmed for too much time reading magazines or some shit

>>39123316
Yeah, its attainable but it's nearing natty limit, considering Statham maintains this with TRT and training.

>>39123359

Dude are you kidding me?

How tiny are you?

This has the hallmarks of a guy that's been lifting for 1 month and is discouraged that he isn't big yet.

Just keep lifting and stick with it dude and you will get the results you want

>>39123361
>nearing natty limit
Nah, his core is really good but his delts, traps and chest are lacking and his arms aren't great. You can be quite a bit bigger than that naturally, though you'd struggle to be any leaner.

>>39123382
>but his delts, traps and chest are lacking
lol

funny how natties subconsciously think that ONLY roided physiques are aesthetic, but will never actually consciously admit this to themselves or anyone

>>39123382

It's a coping mechanism for these guys.

They want to point at every guy that has any size at all and say 'He is roiding' because that makes them feel better about being small.

I have no resentment for small guys and I used to be one of them but it comes across as super insecure and petty when you try to do shit like that

Just work hard and don't quit and stop lifting and you too will be at a size where 125LB dudes point at you and say 'roids 4 sure'

>>39123424
while that shitty body is obviously achieveable natty that vascularity while being that fucking fat isn't, he's on mast or tren probably, maybe not tren but has to be on something dry

and op is right if you're an actor whose physique appears in a movie you're on something. simply how it works, regardless of whether the shitty body in the op is achievable natty or not

>>39123380
This is ignoring the simple limit of the FFMI, which is based on tested bodybuilders, not random anons m9.
>>39123382
Right, and FFMI is built around lean dudes, if you're happy to go up to 20%, you can expect to be able to maintain a higher FFMI than the low teens \ single digit people.

This physique is a good limit of natty limit \ grey area, based on his height \ weight and the assumption of 10% BF. You can believe all the "I've just been training for 15 years" type bullshit you want, but go ask the fraudsters how many of them tell that to newbies to be devilish.

>>39123424
You're trying to create bropsychology to ignore the fact that the studied limits of fat free mass for non-AAS users is a real thing, sure over time we'll find more ways to flex it and squeeze another few hundred grams here and there and keep nudging it higher. There's nothing wrong with the limit of natty physiques, and by all means, nothing wrong with taking gear and getting juicy AF, but be clear about what is and isn't achievable, and we can do that with quantifiable empirical methods.

>>39123472

Counter evidence

1. I'm natty and bigger than that guy

2. My dad is natty and bigger than that guy and 50

3. So many zillions of people are natty and bigger than him

4. You're trying to use all this mumbo jumbo bullshit to justify why you are 125 LBS

Just lift weights train hard and be patient

>>39123501
>>
>1. I'm natty and bigger than that guy
post pic then

go ahead

>>39123318
While most celebs do roid, Statham's physique hasn't changed for decades and his arms aren't that big.

I'd say he's natty. If he's not, I'm disappointed

>>39123579
he is not (if u mean the pic in the op)

no natty is going to get that vascular, especially when that fucking fat

ffs why would he even bother being natty?
even if he could achieve this look natty, why would he not rather hop on trt, blast from time to time, and enjoy a lifestyle of a hollywood celebrity?

btw, he's not natty.

>>39123593
im more vascular and natty and fatter

>>39123732
again post pics

go ahead

>>39123511
still waiting on this guy

>>39123780
Why do you think has naked pictures of themselves saved somewhere? Just curious

>>39123821
should be a simple matter to turn the light on and take a picture then, no?

but he won't since he is either some fat fuck or some dyel

I love jason

>>39123780
no im a new person
why would i post my pic are u tarded

>>39123835
Why do you think it's impossible to be much bigger than Statham natty? Phil Pfister was natty in his first WSM final and dwarfed Statham.

>>39123837
Thanks

>>39123848
>any top athlete competing in anything ever
>natty

kids these days

>>39123847
exactly

>>39123318
jason don't do anything other than action movies, he is probably natty, he lifts for over a decade, he has money to suport a good clean diet, he has time to mantain a good body

>>39123855
It's doable, if you look at late 90s strongman the events are entirely possible for a very big, gifted natty to at least do them
Yes, roids are ubiquitous in strongman and many sports but that doesn't mean some people in them aren't natty

>>39124000
>that doesn't mean some people in them aren't natty
actually yeah it does at the top level

no fucking natty is going to out perform someone using hgh (which, by the way, cannot currently be tested for) at ALL TIMES and fuckloads of short estered roids whose metabolites clear relatively quickly in the off season.

the top level is the genetic elite, COMBINED with drugs. the drugs ARE the top level, it's just that you also need genetics in the equation too

you can't be top level and not have BOTH genetics and drugs, simply how it works

genetics enough aren't alone, genetics don't give you the retardedly supraphysiological levels of hormones that roids can, and the drugs won't compensate for shit genetics

>>39123276

this is natty

>>39123472
thanks anon

>>39123276

seems attainable but not with that level of bodyfat

who cares OP, once you get 30 if you keep lifting there is no reason to not hop into TRT

>>39124032
I've placed above people who are roiding in strongman comps and I'm natty
Just because you're a fucking jobber doesn't mean everyone else is

>>39124534
i've been to the moon and been raped by hillary clintons asshole

and been granted a hunter body by yahawah bahasham yahawashi to dash edomites against the stones

>>39123276
He used to be a swimmer, that's how he got such a great body. So just start swimming I guess OP

>>39123276
>obviously
Do you really think you need roids for that?