So my friend recently invited me to like the facebook page of some sort of customized work-out company that he's apparently a part of. One of the before-after examples is himself, showing this transformation over the course of only 7 months. While he's not gigantic, this seems really fast to me in 7 months. Maybe their program is just really good, but I'm wondering if any of you guys could tell me whether he's likely been using steroids etc.?
not possible natty
>>35145316
yes
>>35145316
probably not on roids but more than 7 months of training.
i always catch people i know in real life lying about their progress time
>>35145316
He has shit genetics though>>35145330
Damn. How did he shrink?
>>35145316
That's achievable in 7 months naturally.
All that got bigger was his arms and chest, he has baby lats lmao.
I gained 12kg the first year of lifting and only got a little fatter. I was a hungry skeleton so I presume it was muscle memory or something.
>>35145344
This + no leg pics and he looks to be ~5'6
How strong is he and height/weight?
if he is extremely short, and lying about the timeframe, and has a pump in the pic, then perhaps he is natty
>>35145388
It's been a while since I've seen him but I think he is like ~180 cm so 5'9-6'0 in Freedom units. I don't know his stats.
>>35145316
He does look natty in the after pic, but
1) The lighting is different
2) He appears to have a pump in the second pic
3) There's some sort of editing in the second pic, possibly a different camera lens
4) No, that's not a 7 month transformation.
The lighting issue matters so much more than people realize. It's why people still think Brad Pitt was huge in Fight Club even though he only weighed 149 lb.
>>35145316
Not in 7 months.
>>35145411
>The lighting issue matters so much more than people realize
This honestly lighting is king it can make you look shredded.You could trick some girls lmao.
I mean I mostly used dbs for a long time.Just got barbells but since I did cardio a fair bit.I got lean.I mean my physique is absolute rubbish but in adequate lighting I look Pgood.
>>35145316
Creatine is natty so yes.
>>35145344
>muscle memory
You don't sem to know what that is
>>35145316
Not natty you retard.
>>35145342
we are taller in the morning, so my guess is that pic2 is taken at night.
>>35145316
If you are fantastically strict on your diet and have a perfect 6-day on, 1 day off exercise/weights regimine, you would be maybe 3/4 the way there in 7 months. Impossible natty though.
Once you get there it's easier to stay and you'll be there for at least the next 20 years of your life, so start today and make it happen, foo.
Tbh hard to say he looks like he just benches and curls alot.Maybe some shoulder exercises .We can't see his legs for all we know he could just do upper body.he's not particularly big and he has no lats whats ever.He even has a chest(not sure if gyno)in the before.I think people are underrating what can be achieved 7 months is a long time.So I think he is natty.
Why the right looks kinda funny bros? Did he overdo it? Considering his height I think he overdid it
>>35145675
It looks weird because it's not balanced like the before photo. He clearly only worked pecs and arms and it made his upper body get all out of whack with his torso. Look at the shape and size of his lower torso, it's almost exactly the same. He just dropped some bf% and that made the abs show. God only knows how bad his legs are.
>>35145316
hellll nooooooo. You can clearly see that his bodyfat% didn't really change. The difference in appearance is just from sheer muscle mass. Take into account his bigger arms, chest, delts. You can't just put on 15 pounds of muscle in 7 months
>>35145326
>>35145434
>>35145518
>>35145735
Yeah, he's definitely not natty, these guys are experts on the matter. You can make no gains whatsoever in 7 months as natty. It's impossible to put on any muscle without a fair amount of anabolics injected. Hell, you can even see the roid rage in his eyes. You can certainly believe fit, after all everyone here is far past 2/3/4/5, implying people here don't lift would be ridiculous.
>>35145316
It's possible natty, but not in 7 months. That is assuming he really does look like that and it's not facebook lighting and angles.
>>35145316
>>35145866
I'm not sure why you think this is bait. I'm not really that close with him anymore, so it would be weird/insulting to ask him if he was using gear.
>>35145316
He's lying about the time frame.
>>35145832
>That is assuming he really does look like that
He doesn't. This is like one of those "make up free" selfies instagram models post where they're really wearing 10 lb of foundation, have the right lighting, took 15 pics and used the best and then filter it to fuck on top of that.
>and it's not facebook lighting and angles.
It's a combination of that and lying and about the timeframe.
Easily done natty in 7 months for a young guy coming from DYELand.
>>35145316
that's 4 months progress tops, shit program
that's at the end of noob gains
>>35145706
This
>>35145406
Haha, that's not how it works pham. I'll educate you
5'7=170 cm
5'8=173
5'9=175
5'10=178
5'11=180
6'0=183
Lel if you believe that after 7months of roids you look like that
Full naty unless lanklet ( 6'2+) - then he lied about time frame
Also 404: lats not found
>>35145316
possibly with perfect diet and a good routine but
>company uses him as an example to sell their wares
>he is part of the company
this is why he isn't natty
>>35145316
Different lighting, clearly not 7 months.
Probably not roids, but most before and after shots are deceptive in one way or another.
I am so confused by this natty meme.
For example, I saw this video the other night and it seems legit to me. Is this guy not natty? This seems totally possible but after this thread now I'm not sure.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asy5VrHkl2c
7 months is a long time. Especially if you have a controlled diet and you are very consistent. It's not like every buff guy is on steroids wtf /fit/,
>>35145735
Uh for novice lifters it's expected you can put on 2 lbs of muscle every months for around 12 months...
>can't captcha muh freedoms
>>35145316
As other have said, definitely natty, but that's a timespan of longer than 7 months. People lie about the amount of time they've been training just as much as their height or e statting on lifts.
>>35150231
That guy doesn't have much mass, he just lost a ton of weight while making noob gains. Guy in OP's pic managed to put on a fair amount of muscle while not putting on any fat (maybe even lowering his bf%). Might be possible with a perfect diet and never missing a workout, but most people won't get anywhere near those results. Guy in your video is absolutely achievable in 7 months from starting as a fat noob.
>>35145316
Thats a couple years of lifting right there, if not more. I went through a similar transformation over the course of three + years.
>>35145344
Novice confidently saying what's achievable natty or not
keep up the delusion and the muscle memory boy
wow i feel bad about those hips.
>>35145568
also there is this thing called 'perspective'
>>35145316
>those abs
>that face
why do ugly people even lift?
>>35145316
It's possible natty, but not in 7 months.
>>35145316
what was the routine do you know?
>>35145316
He doesn't seem roided to me, but it's quite an exagerated progress in 7 months, even with perfect nutrition and optimum muscle building workouts. He's probably lying about the time it took him.
>>35145316
Seems natty but i can see no lats, no traps... he just focused on pecs, arms and abs. more than 7 months imo tho and he is a manlet probably.
>>35145316
Looks pretty similar to what i did in 6-8 months so eat well, train a shit load and you'll be good to go
>>35145316
No.
With decent diet and hard work you can get that size but have denser stronger better looking and life long easily maintained muscle in 3 years.
But if your job isn't in how you look or how you function then you can do roids and the like and be one of those soon to be g4p "aesthetics" queers.
>>35155364
>no pics
Uh huh..
>>35145316
His lack of trap and lat and oblique development despite his biceps being so full means that he was went full fucking Dom Mazetti for 7 months. He's just built up the "showy" muscles so, yes, What he got is more than possible in 7 months.
I'm not judging him or anyone else for being a curlbro but if you wanna look aesthetic to most regular people, that's all you need to do is curlbro the fuck out.
>>35145316
Hate to rumble everyone's feathers here but this is abso-fucking-lutely not possible in 7 months natty. Anyone saying it is has gotta to be fucking moronic, and all those saying they did post your personal progress pics. This guy put on at least 30-40 pounds of muscle by the looks of it, all the whilst keeping very low bf%. Unless he's 5'4" there's no way he did that naturally.
/fit/ just keeps getting more and more delusional and dysmorphic
Not possible natty in 7 months, anyone who tells you otherwise is lying. Checking his face, hands and midsection, you can tell he hasn't put on any body fat and most likely has lost a percent or two.
To gain decent mass, you have to eat over caloric maintenance. Since he hasn't gained any body fat, he must have cut for at least a month at the end. That means a 6 month bulk, 1 month cut in the best case scenario (i.e. most time allowed to put on mass). So in that 6 months, he put on that much muscle but little enough fat to shred it away in 1 month for the progress pic. Change that 6 and 1 to any value you want, it doesn't add up for the amount of mass he's put on and the amount of body fat he's retained.
There's enough there to say he did it in a relatively short time frame, but not 7 months.
