Is he natty?
He lives in my area and I called him for an interview for my final paper in college.
What question should I ask him?
If this thread last long enough I'll take a picture with him and post it here.
>>35208184
>Is he natty?
Most likely test unless he just has incredibly genetics, nothing heavy though
Please don't mention /fit/ memes
>>35208212
Does he know about fit?
Mention fit and he'll ditch the interview and probably beat you up. We made him quit youtube for a while when people started saying hes on synthol.
>>35208184
>He lives in my area and I called him for an interview
>>35208243
I'll use a trip now just in case. Also I doubt it, I met him by luck and asked him for the project a month ago.
FeelsGoodMan, we are planning to meet up at a local gym so no rapey rapey.
>>35208218
please be bait.
>>35208305
Not really I barely browse this part of 4chan just decided to post this since my thread died in another board and it's fitness related.
I'll take that as a yes though.
>>35208242
>We made him quit youtube for a while when people started saying hes on synthol.
I think it was the whole doxing and calling him at work thing that did it, also always going on about his sexuality.
>>35208335
How did you recognize him if you don't visit fit/?
>>35208424
nah online harassment isn't a real thing. gamergate taught me that
>>35208335
0/10
>>35208463
To be honest I didn't know this before now either :/
>>35208454
Pretend this is real then, what kind of questions would you ask scooby?
>>35208516
Ask. Can I touch your benis.
Report answer and actions here.
>>35208516
Difficult since most things he is willing to answer he has already answered on his website or channel. Maybe ask what has motivated him for so long or what inspired him in the first place. FFS do not mention 4chan or his personal life.
>>35208184
Ask HIM if he's natty.
Also ask him what he thinks of /fit/ and how much it inspires younger people especially to get in shape.
Ask him where he buys his fedoras.
Ask him if he's married and if not can you borrow his sperm.
>>35208598
sperm taken
>>35210495
o__O
>>35208212
Actually, I'm pretty convinced he's natty. He's just been lifting a very long time.
Considering the amount of time he's been lifting and working out, his physique is not that impressive. What is impressive is his dedication.
>>35212443
>I'm pretty convinced he's natty.
I'm pretty convinced you're fucking retarded.
>>35212462
Why is it that anyone who has any physics has to be on drugs? He doesnt look like he is on anything.
>>35212462
Maybe, but I still beleive him.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qARAvB6eKRI
DO NOT
>ask anything about steroids
>ask anything about fedoras or /fit memes
DO ASK
>how long has been training
>why he goes to the gym
>about injuries etc.
>what to avoid when beginning lifting
>etc.
>>35212495
Scooby rekts dyels
>>35212477
This. Why the fuck can't you all just accept someone worked hard nd now is reaping the rewards
>>35212443
See the thing about being natty is that you cant progress and constantly add muscle every year. There comes a point where you can physically just maintain and its impossible to gain muscle.
Now does anyone have scoobys height and weight? I wanna calculate his ffmi he is probobly around 10% bf
>>35212477
>mid 50s
>gay
>jacked
all signs point to roids
There is nothing shameful about a bodybuilder injecting testosterone when he's getting on his in his years. Nothing shameful about a young man doing it either. But scooby does put needles in himself.
>>35208461
it wasn't so much online
>>35212925
He is just maintaining what he has build up over 40 years of training and strict diet.
Train for 40 years than give an opinion.
>>35208184
tell him he is famous for his Fedora and ask him why he started wearing it.
ask him about his motivations.
weather or not he takes cheat days
and if you want to keep your head don't talk about 4chan
>>35212932
You do realize that you actually have to maintain a certain level of testosterone not to loose muscles? Especially if have big ones like scoobster
>>35212903
According to Scooby, he's 6'3", 238lbs, and he has 8% body fat.
Keep in mind as well, that there obviously is going to be a physical limit for each individual, but that that limit is going to be different for everyone. Everyone has different genetics, and everyone inherited different epigenetics as well. Even ignoring genetics, there's all the environmental factors that go into your initial growth and development when your growing up.
Does that mean much at a low level, fuck no. But it means that people who are lifting for a long time and the ones who have the dedication to reach the professional levels will have a huge amount of variance between their body types and their own personal limits.
What may be true for Scooby, might not be true for other people. That's just the way it is. Even if someone is performing at a higher level than everyone else on the planet, it doesn't mean that they're nessarily cheating. He might just actually be the best.
Only way to know for sure if he's riding now would be to do a blood test. Even that wouldn't tell us if he's done it in the past for absolute certain if it turns up negative. That being said, it's kinda pointless to speculate it because he is right on that bar where you can't say for sure based on his physique when you put his history into the equation.
Honestly, I just am inclined to beleive him, because I like giving people the benefit of the doubt and I see nothing that particularly screams that he's on gear.
That's my rant, you have a good night /fit/. I'm going to bed.
>>35208184
>tfw scooby is lurking and is gonna rage rape OP becouse of this memester thread
Good luck to your meeting OP.
Love, scoobster
>>35212945
Some guys have higher T levels and some guys don't hemorrhage it nearly as much as they age.
He is pretty much natty, I guess he only uses test to maintain since he is getting really old, he isn't roiding like /fraud/, also, OP, ask him about what you think is interesting, that doxx stuff was ages ago and he pretty much knows about everything here since he still lurking, he is a good g0y, memes apart, ask him about gym, life and here if you want.
>>35212990
He is at 27.5, obvious roiding.
Anything over 25 is the limit. And if you reach 25 as a natty you are geneticaly superior
>>35212443
agree, scooby is the natty king
>>35213023
I think he is not 8% bodyfat. CBB bodybuilders who are tested and they have 25-27 FFMI
>inb4 they roid
>>35213047
If you go over 25 your not natty. Its pretty simple. For scooby to be at the upper limit 24.9 he would have to be 17% bodyfat. Now we can both agree that he is not that.
>>35213065
YES! If your FFMI is 24.9 you are not roiding, but when it bumps up 0.1 YOU ARE DEFINITELY ON ROIDS!!!!!!!!! a scientific fact!!!!
>>35212932
is this b8...
man natties are deluded
>>35213023
The adjusted FFMI should be lower because he's taller than average. The study adjusted for height because tall people are often broader too and generally have more lean mass.
So beyond it being a bad study, the adjusted FFMI calculators are all made by salty manlets. I have never seen one that uses the equation from the study
>>35212945
> Implying test falls to zero when you get over 40
>>35213094
What are you talking about.
Scooby has size but he hasn't got the definition or hardness of a roider...
Try training sometime.
>>35212990
>According to Scooby ... he has 8% body fat
Afaik he has never claimed such low bodyfat. He's nowhere near there anyway.
>>35213070
So I looked at the site you're using, and I'm gonna take a peek at the study they are using to get their results.
Download the PDF on the right side to follow along if you want maybe we can all learn something here.
>>35213129
>Forgot link...
http://journals.lww.com/cjsportsmed/Abstract/1995/10000/Fat_Free_Mass_Index_in_Users_and_Nonusers_of.3.aspx
>>35213121
Not even for a comp weigh in?
>competing
>natural
Choose one. And by the way, he competed in his 50s.
>>35213129
>>35213137
Alright, so immediately I notice this right in the abstract.
>The normalized FFMI values of athletes who had not used steroids extended up to a well-defined limit of 25.0. Similarly, a sample of 20 Mr. America winners from the presteroid era (1939-1959), for whom we estimated the normalized FFMI, had a mean FFMI of 25.4
Notice the word "mean" there, that means that there were several individuals who existed above 25.4 FFMI before steroids were even a thing. If anything the statment that someone cannot reach that level without steroids is completely invalidated the moment that's even mentioned in the abstract.
I have a few other ideas of where we might run into some trouble with the study just from analyzing the abstract, but I'll keep those to myself until I read in a bit more.
>>35208184
He looked better in his 50s than in his 20s. It just doesn't work that way naturally.
>>35213172
Ok, so here's another interesting point. Forgive walls of text here. This is referring to the "cutoff" line, where they determined that a physique was not natural was.
>Brackets indicate Anon's notes here
>The "cuttof" line has a positive rather than a zero slope in the figure, perhaps because of the factor of height^(-2) in the FFMI calculation does not fully account for the fact that human beings are three dimensional rather than two dimensional objects. In other words, the tallest athletes were not only aleer, but also wider and thicker than the shorter athletes of apparently comparable muscularity; thus, the tallest athletes scored somewhat higher on the FFMI calculation.
>Our clinical impression supported this speculation. During the preparation of this article, we called in the shortest nonuser (height 1.59m [~5'3"]) and one of the tallest nonusers (height 1.93m [~6'4"]) and remeasured both of them. The shortest athlete displayed an FFMI (without normalization) of 23.5, whereas the the tall one scored 25.4. However, on visual inspection, the short athlete appeared more muscular than did the tall one. [kek, manlet gains]
That second block of green might be very important, gonna read up on what they do with that now to see what I think of how they compensated for that.
>>35213187
1991 best scooby
>>35213297
1990 looks good too. That chest.
>>35213291
Ok, wowie zowie, let's take a look at this! Want to mention this specifically before I get into my own personal analysis of this.
This is referring to the Mr. America winners that were mentioned earlier and how their anyalisis panned out. Again, any personal notes are bracketed
>The estimated normalized FFMIs for the for the other 20 athletes are shown in Table 2 and charted on the left hand side of Fig.3. It will be seen that the presteroid Mr. America winners displayed a mean (+-SD) normalized FFMI of 25.4+-1.5 [SUPER IMPORTANT], with only three having values of >27.0 [Special mentions to Steve Stanko at 27.3, George Eiferman at 27.7, and Jack Delinger coming in at a massive, natty score of 28.0. Look these guys up if you aren't familiar, just to get an idea of their physique]
So yea, that's interesting. Out of the 20 former Mr. America winners they measured from before the steroid era, 13 of them had a FFMI above 25, with 7 of them above 26, and 3 of them above 27.
I would think that this pretty definitively says, that in the context of the data gathered in this study, that a a body builder can potentially surpass a FFMI of 25 without using steroids.
Gonna wrap up my thoughts after this.
>>35213458
So, I'm gonna look at the discussion and for the most part I agree with what these people are saying.
Firstly, the sample size for the main study, the one where they drew their conclusion from is 157 men. This isn't a diminutive sample size by any means, but it certainly isn't nearly as big as it could be. The researchers themselves mention this, saying that additional studies should be performed to gather more data.
Past that, they also mention that there can be some error in the BF% measurements. This is a point where I disagree with them significantly however. They list that the measurement of body fat percentage came with a standard error of 3.4%, meaning that an individual who was ascertained to have a BF% of 10% could have easily had a BF% of 13.4% or down to 6.6%.
They say that that is an insignificant margin of error, obviously they have never been to /fit/ if they are willing to claim that a potential margin of measurement ranging 13.4% BF and 6.6% BF is insignificant.
After that, I would like to point out, again, that they cite individuals that were above 25 FFMI as early as 1941. It should go without saying that bodybuilding has advanced a lot since then, so if it was possible to do that back in the 1940's without the use of any kind of steroid it should be easier to do so now without the use of steroids. I give them credit though, because they definitely own up to this possibility and cite it as a possible source of error.
I would also like to point out, that they cited advancement in the community as a potential source of error, when this study was performed back in 1995. That is to say that this is a twenty year study, and whatever advancements have come to bodybuilding since then are, by definition, outside the scope of this study.
Final thoughts up next.
>>35213187
Man, didn't realize how handsome Scooby is.
Bet he's always been a really cool dude too.
Where is my Scooby gym partner? Imagine the progress we could make together~
>>35213187
He definitely did a cycle between 96 and 01
>>35213535
Alright, so yea.
My biggest gripe with this study is that it's outdated and that the sample size is too small. Not only that, but they state right in the fucking thing that exceptional individuals can surpass 25 FFMI and they imply that it's possible that they could even surpass 28 without the use of performance enhancing drugs if you consider that we have more knowledge about how to build muscle than Jack Delinger would have had 56 years.
Let me repeat that, there was a man who achieved a FFMI of 28 using techniques that were pioneered before Scooby was even born, and he most likely wouldn't have had access to steroids.
This study is outdated and it's scope was too small to be able to draw any kind of hard and fast conclusions, and it even admitted that there should be a follow up study. Though unfortunately, it seems that such a study doesn't exist, or I imagine that the newer study would be cited as opposed to one that is twenty years out of date.
My final word? Most guys aren't gonna hit 25 without roids, but there is absolutely nothing preventing individuals from passing that without roids. I'm gonna concede that it's probably not possible for the majority of guys to hit that point, but there's definitely gonna be guys who can smash past that with no problems.
Oh, and as an addendum, study puts a big disclaimer on it that says that it's accuracy is gonna be spotty for anyone with a BF% of over 20%. So don't even try to apply this kind of a measurement to anyone who has over 20% BF to see if they're riding or not, because the data for them is gonna be completley inconclusive.
Again, if you want to dispute me, read the study here. I think I've made my point, FFMI literally proves nothing unless someone is pushing up and past 30 or if they got above 25 in a couple of years. Then I'll agree with you 100% that they're definitely roiding.
Have a good day, /fit/.
>>35213187
Can it be that he is gay? Those necklace on 1996 looks pretty gay for me.
>>35213616
how did you not know scoob is gay
this is common knowledge, he has a husband
Ask him why he started lifting in the first place.
>>35213639
I just missed /x/
>>35213687
Seconding this, we know a lot about Scooby now, but his formative years are a bit foggier.
>>35213580
Yep. I don't have anything against steroids if your intention is to compete, but he's not natural.
