Is this finna achievable natty?

>>41042089
Most of it yes. You can get that big in about 5 or 6 years natty but you won't have those traps or dickskin.

>>41042089
Let me go ahead and throw my stupid opinion out there for mockery and critique.

There is no "natty limit". Each body has its own genetic disposition to either grow muscle or not to grow muscle. So much of developing your physique is finding a training routine that will stimulate the greatest amount of adaptive change in your body as you can. Trying to nail down a "natty limit" is just a way to create an artificial ceiling to your progress.

TL;DR there's no natty limit, experiment with training techniques until you find what works for you

>>41042168
Everyone has a natural limit and most people will find a natural limit that is equal to another groups.

That's kind of how things work.

>>41042089
If you don't mind being in the 20% bodyfat range? Kinda. You can get close but you're not getting all the way there.

BASED HARDBODY MAHAL CONCUSSING THE VANILLA MIDGETS

> Is this finna achievable natty?
> Finna

I don't actually care that you used hood speak, what bothers me is that you used it wrong.

"Finna" means "Gonna" which means "Going to"

So you said "Is this going to achievable natty?"

Just shut the fuck up.

>>41042361
kek

>>41042089
>Huge traps
>Gyno

Genetics permitting sure, but natty he aint

>>41042361
Ya SEETHING pinhead

>>41042361
it's "thinking of" you moron

say thinking of like a british slav 10 times faster each time and eventually you'll be saying "finna"

>>41042089
>Poo in charge of ruining Smackdown

>>41042571
>thinking of
it's "fixing to"
nice try bongo

DO NOT HINDER THE JINDER

>>41042571
>Is this thinking of achievable natty

>>41042571

No, it's "going to".

>>41042676
where the fuck does finna come from "going to" it doesn't even make sense

>pale otter mode manlets returns
>based jinder gives him a concussion
/fraud/ wishes they could be that alpha

File: image.jpg (10KB, 225x183px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 225x183px

>>41042089
>roiding like crazy to still have peakless biceps, mediocre delts, and gyno

everything good he has going on (size, abs, general leanness) is achievable natty. Plus you won't have his gyno or dick skin, which no one really likes. The roids gave him 8/10 traps at least, but that's literally guaranteed with gear so it's no accomplishment.

>>41042089
Why does he look so bad? (besides the gyno)

File: image.jpg (23KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 300x300px

>>41042777
Looks like he did some newby cycles and maybe went to the gym once a week to hit chest. Literally any motivated lifting would leave you looking much bigger and defined combined with whatever cocktail of gear he's on.

>>41042770
This.

His physique is good but I think it could have almost been achieved natty. The traps are ridiculous, the vascularity as well, and his legs might be pretty big too.

Other than that its possible if you train long and hard.

>>41042777
besides the gyno, it's that he has (relatively) high bf% along with high vascularity and poor skin texture. This doesn't happen without roids,

why do people want to do things natty?

i dont understand. juicing = guaranteed easier recovery, more gains, less work, faster results

being injured and in pain all the time isnt good for you, thats why HGH is amazing

this isnt a competition. you are not cheating, there is NO RULES against pinning, i dont understand?

its not even remotely wrong, why not do it?

>>41042811
Not at that bodyfat level no.

If you were genetically blessed and trained from child? Maybe but not at those bodyfat levels. >>41042811

>>41042688

It comes from "Fixing to"

Like "I'm fixing to go to the store" became "I'm finna go to the store"

But "fixing to" just means "Going to" anyway, so that first anon was correct