How to get rid of muscly bulky shoulders on a female

yor_candy_girl

Hi,

Im a twenty year old moderately active female.
I used to train as a discus thrower which required me to do alot of explosive weight training with my upper body. Unfortunately for me, my shoulders and arms went really muscly and bulky which really doesn't look lady like (not meaning to sound vein!)

I stopped training two years ago now and since then I have lost a bit of weight on my arms but my shoulders are still really bulky and my arms are extremly un-toned. I want to tone my arms without increasing the muscle mass on my shoulders...in fact I want to reduce the size of my shoulders and arms, but get them toned.

Also, my legs have lost the tone. I would like to reduce the size of my thighs without the fear of exercise increasing the muscle (and not losing the fat)

Has anyone got any suggestions?

Thanks x

rasherboy

are your shoulders auctually muscly or just thats the way your bone structure is? i no a few girls who are like that!
also are you doing any exercise? or does your job involve any exercise of your shoulders?

yor_candy_girl

Yea,...my shoulders are a little broad anyway but they weren't muscly before I used to train. When I lift my arms up you can see the muscles tense and they feel real tense as well.

Im a support worker for which requires quite a lot of manual handling. When I go to uni, I walk up and down the stairs to the 7th floor just for a little extra exercise..that only affects my shoulders cuz of the stress of the weight of my bag full of books... Quite recently (over the past few months) I have been doing javelin, shot put and discus training (but without the weights training) and Ive noticed an increase in shoulder size. Other than that I play netball once or twice a week.

Just looked in a book and I think Im refering to the subscapularis and latissimus dorsi muscles?...

Saruman

You know, without being PC, some guys dig muscles on chicks!!!

GreeBo

yor_candy_girl wrote:

I have been doing javelin, shot put and discus training (but without the weights training) and Ive noticed an increase in shoulder size.

I think you are gonna have to choose between these sports and slim shoulders coz they dont appear to be compatible.
if you play any sport for a while your body will start to adapt to play that sport better, in your case thats a large upperbody.

yor_candy_girl

yea Ive given up the athletics again because of it...I was training for a uni competiton and now that's over,...ive stopped cuz of my arms...oh and its my deltoid muscles I think actually

Transform

Same could be said of swimmers.
Stick to the netball and do lots of cardio

GreeBo

Transform wrote:

Same could be said of swimmers.

just swimming wont bulk you up, just look at Maek Spitz, its the gym work that gives swimmers that phisique.

pwd

http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=239902

rasherboy

yor_candy_girl wrote:

yea Ive given up the athletics again because of it...I was training for a uni competiton and now that's over,...ive stopped cuz of my arms...oh and its my deltoid muscles I think actually

regard;less of what muscles it is its gonna take a while and chances are it will go through the stage of flabby like relaxed muscle! not nice! but keep up the cardio do to make sure it dont turn to fat!

ApeXaviour

aye, take up non-sprint running (>1000m) or something similarly low-impact/aerobic and give up the discus, shot-put and javelin. Only way I'm afraid to lose muscle but keep toned.

Also your diet is a factor..

logic1

rasherboy wrote:

regard;less of what muscles it is its gonna take a while and chances are it will go through the stage of flabby like relaxed muscle! not nice! but keep up the cardio do to make sure it dont turn to fat!

What are you even talking about? What will go through a stage of relaxed muscle? Muscle will never appear flabby. It doesn't go through stages. When it's tensed it's solid when it's relaxed it's still not flabby.

It doesn't get gradually harder or softer over time. And muscle will never "turn to fat".

You really need to read a textbook or something and stop giving rubbish advice.

.logic.

rasherboy

not ment literally that it would turn to fat!! that if she does no upper body cardio the muscle will go and auctually muscle can appear flabby! fact! its still muscle but just less defined!

logic1

rasherboy wrote:

not ment literally that it would turn to fat!! that if she does no upper body cardio the muscle will go and auctually muscle can appear flabby! fact! its still muscle but just less defined!

Not meant literally so why say it? We're supposed to magically interpret your grammatical minefields to expose the true meaning as if by magic?

And what's "upper body cardio" when it's at home? And muscle can't appear flabby FACT! Muscle is muscle fat is fat. If you lose muscle and gain fat you can appear flabby because, well basically you are flabby.

Less muscle does not appear more flabby than a greater mass of muscle. This is truly ludicrous. Look at any lightweight bodybuilding competitors then look at the heavyweights. The lightweights should appear flabby according to your rationale right because of course they have less muscle FACT?

.logic.

rasherboy

jebus man! think about it muscle becomes more "solid" when you tense it!
but in some people seems flabby when untense(what i ment)

upper body cardio was a typo i ment upper body exercises

dude stop trying to be a book! every body probably knew what i ment! as for my use of the word "flabby" it was what it looks like not what it is!

logic1

rasherboy wrote:

jebus man! think about it muscle becomes more "solid" when you tense it!
but in some people seems flabby when untense(what i ment)

That's not what you said and I've never seen anyone that has muscle which looks flabby when untensed unless they actually are flabby.

dude stop trying to be a book!

Dude stop being an idiot!

every body probably knew what i ment!

I'd highly doubt it. And even if they did, you're still wrong.

as for my use of the word "flabby" it was what it looks like not what it is!

Right..... Glad you cleared that up.

.logic.

rasherboy

how can you never of seen people whos muscles seem flabby-ish when not tensed? they are everywher! people have this especially on their thighs etc..

logic1

rasherboy wrote:

how can you never of seen people whos muscles seem flabby-ish when not tensed? they are everywher! people have this especially on their thighs etc..

Because that's not muscle it's flab. I've trained with dozens of competitive bodybuilders, muscle will never look like flab, they're two distinctly different cell types with very recognoisable characteristics.

.logic.

rasherboy

yeh in body builders whos job is to get bigger and more defined! i no people who have had body fat test of about 8 and had muscle that was soft to touch and looked flabby when un tensed

OfflerCrocGod

Saruman wrote:

You know, without being PC, some guys dig muscles on chicks!!!

Ye.



About 1 in 1000.

yor_candy_girl

OfflerCrocGod wrote:

Ye.



About 1 in 1000.

Ok...not necessary!..anyways...yea thanks for all tha info...out of all of it I think I might try the skipping PWD- http://boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=239902 or jogging in the morning (although I know this will mainly for my thighs)...unless anyone else has any other suggestions?????

koala

swimming will tone you up, but wont get rid of muscle

nesf

It can be very hard to lose the muscle you build up from training in years past.

I've never really heard of a good healthy way of doing it.

Sometimes your body just gets used to having muscle in certain places even when said muscles aren't being used.

(This is from personal experience rather than empirical evidence, I've noticed in myself and in other people that sometimes a body can keep some "leftovers" from the sports you trained for as a kid. Thick legs after running as a kid, general body strenght from doing a lot of (relatively) heavy manual work when younger etc)

poobum

losing muscle is hard and relaitvely unresearched thing at the moment...m not realy sure what could do it except stop all upperbody work altogether this will speed up the degradation of the muscles...i think

ApeXaviour

yor_candy_girl wrote:

out of all of it I think I might try the skipping

Skipping is intensive and will actually build upper-body strength. Why do you think boxers do it? I don't recommend it. You need to do things that are as aerobic as possible (aerobic: think skinny marathon runners, anaerobic think muscely sprinters). Long distance, low resistance jogging/cycling/stepping etc. are what you need. When you feel a burn, break a sweat, get a second wind and pant with exhaustion you know you are doing the right type of training.

pwd

boxers skip to develop agility and rhythm, and to improve their ability to exercise at very high intensity for short periods, like a 2-3 minute round. This is how long they perform the exercise at a time, and when done for such a short period it will not have the sort of catabolic effect I described.
Skipping is highly aerobic. It is well documented that muscle is destroyed at the maximum rate when the body is pushed beyond its ability to attain energy from other sources. This occurs during high intensity exercise over a period of time. The only thing about skipping for this goal is that most people wouldn't be able to do the exercise for long enough at a time for this sort of effect.

nesf

ApeXaviour wrote:

Skipping is intensive and will actually build upper-body strength. Why do you think boxers do it?

Eh. When I trained as a boxer, I skipped to improve my footwork and make me lighter on my feet and more agile.

So long as your using a light rope you won't build be building a lot of muscle on your upper body. This is where a "weighted" rope comes in.

ApeXaviour

nesf wrote:

Eh. When I trained as a boxer, I skipped to improve my footwork and make me lighter on my feet and more agile.

Did ya? I did it mostly for fitness.

Okay I do concede that skipping is definitely aerobic, but there are degrees of aerobic. Now maybe I just have a heavy rope but I still wouldn't recommend it as ideal training to lose shoulder/arm muscle.

Now that I think about it though, I suppose it does depend on how you skip. I'd do about 400 skips in a 3min round (or so my handy counter would have me believe). Which is intensive and if I'm out of shape, will give me the DOMS in my upper body the next day. My point still stands but I suppose if you were to skip leisurely for an extended period with a light rope, it might do

nesf

ApeXaviour wrote:

Did ya? I did it mostly for fitness.

Eh, I used to be a "strong" light heavyweight when I was younger. It was always my footwork that was the weakest thing for me. So I used to put a lot of effort into improving that. Found skipping to be a good way of improving my co-ordination and make my foot work "automatic" rather than something I needed to think about.

It stayed with me actually, people still comment today how light on my feet I am considering my height and weight.

ApeXaviour

I wasn't doubting you nesf Fair play, yeah I suppose it would do that, though I was always kinda light on my feet so wouldn't have regarded that aspect of it really.
You goin to boards beers?

nesf

ApeXaviour wrote:

I wasn't doubting you nesf Fair play, yeah I suppose it would do that, though I was always kinda light on my feet so wouldn't have regarded that aspect of it really.
You goin to boards beers?

Definitely the Cork one, and hopefully the Dublin one

To be honest about it, I spent most of my time when boxing and kickboxing trying to stay out of heavyweight. I've thick bones and am about a stone heavier than would be normal for my build and height. Meant my punches were hard and I could absorb a lot of punishment but also meant that I was always fighting against my weight to get myself into light heavyweight.

I was too small to fight heavyweight seriously. I stopped all that 5 years ago, and nowadays i've about 10kg over what I used to weigh back then...

Back in the gym and training again now though. Although I don't think I'll return to contact sparring/boxing, my back and jaw are still messed up from 5 years ago!

logic1

nesf wrote:

Eh, I used to be a "strong" light heavyweight when I was younger.

Yeah? Where did you train? Who trained you? Ranked?

.logic.

nesf

logic1 wrote:

Yeah? Where did you train? Who trained you? Ranked?

.logic.

Did my boxing training as a sideline activity to kickboxing/tae kwon do. It arose from me getting a lower back injury that prevented me from "using my legs" so I trained purely from a boxing point of view for a few months and sparred with training partners under boxing rather than kickboxing rules. Most my training was done at home. I attended one or two trainings in Rylane as it was the closest boxing club to me but it was nearly 30 miles away and I didn't drive at the time so not really realistic.

I grew up in the middle of the countryside with no club close enough to me to train with from an exclusive boxing point of view. I did however bring in training techniques from boxing itself to help me. My kickboxing/taekwondo trainer also trained boxers on and off so he was very helpful. I also trained on and off with the UCC Boxing Club when I started college but that didn't last long because of various reasons including injury.

I never fought compeditively and never entered any boxing tournaments. So never ranked in boxing.

Does that answer your questions or sate your disbelief Logic?

logic1

nesf wrote:

Does that answer your questions or sate your disbelief Logic?

Not really, my disbelied it seems is well justified.

You called yourself a boxer and even extrapolated on that to categorise yourself as a '"strong" light heavyweight'. Personally I'm unsure as to how you can have the audacity to call yourself a boxer when it seems you've done nothing more than prance about at home and consistently injure yourself.

As for your history in TKD and kickboxing I fear to broach the subject. Personally I trained TKD for 5 years and boxed for a considerable length of time however I'd neither call myself a martial artist nor a boxer even though I trained and competed nationally in both sports. Anyone that labels themselves with a bravado title looking to garner immediate repsect is I find, usually full of ****.

With every post you make on this board I've noticed you consistently post with an air of authority and as if everyone should take note of your infallibility, however it seems you're overweight and unfit and by your own admission haven't gone to a gym in 5 years until very recently and even then you say you did most of your training "at home".

You'll excuse me if I take anything you say with more than a grain of salt.

.logic.

nesf

logic1 wrote:

Not really, my disbelied it seems is well justified.

You called yourself a boxer and even extrapolated on that to categorise yourself as a '"strong" light heavyweight'. Personally I'm unsure as to how you can have the audacity to call yourself a boxer when it seems you've done nothing more than prance about at home and consistently injure yourself.

Did I claim to be a compeditive boxer? Did I claim to have a vast knowledge of the subject? Did I at any time offer an opinion on any topic phrased as anything but my own opinion? I didn't catagorise myself as a "strong" light heavyweight, it was meant in a descriptive fashion, in that for the fighting weight that I competed at (in TKD) it wasn't my strenght that let me down but my footwork and agility. And when I fought in TKD my weight was that of a light heavyweight.

My "prancing about at home" was kind of necessary since outside of a weekly training session in the local community hall there was no gym, or club to train in. How exactly was I supposed to train? In the middle of a field with the cattle?

logic1 wrote:

As for your history in TKD and kickboxing I fear to broach the subject. Personally I trained TKD for 5 years and boxed for a considerable length of time however I'd neither call myself a martial artist nor a boxer even though I trained and competed nationally in both sports. Anyone that labels themselves with a bravado title looking to garner immediate repsect is I find, usually full of ****.

Right. Logic, have a pinch of salt with this if you wish.

One, I don't label myself as a martial artist or a boxer. I trained as one for a time when I was younger. I do not go around now claiming to be a great and mighty martial artist or boxer, but I do still retain all the knowledge I gained during my training.

I trained in TKD under Master Don Dalton of the IUTF. Know the name perhaps? My brother is a first dan blackbelt in TKD and a kickboxing instructor. This is who I trained with at home. As you can imagine it was a little more than "prancing about".

I'm not going to into personal details here, but anyone who knows me personally can confirm all of the above. And yes there are people on here who know me personally.

logic1 wrote:

With every post you make on this board I've noticed you consistently post with an air of authority and as if everyone should take note of your infallibility, however it seems you're overweight and unfit and by your own admission haven't gone to a gym in 5 years until very recently and even then you say you did most of your training "at home".

You'll excuse me if I take anything you say with more than a grain of salt.

.logic.

Your point?

Was what I was saying totally wrong or something? Or is it that someone who isn't a paragon of fitness can't have knowledge of the subject? What does my present situation that was caused by factors beyond my control have to do with anything? I'm not about to go into the nitty gritty details of my personal life and why exactly I let my fitness get so bad, so don't bother asking.

Plus, how do I have an "air of authority"? Surely that's down to interpretation? It's not like my body language or tone is going to come into it.

You like to attack people logic, why is this?

Sputnik

A tad over the top logic.

Not being an expert on a subject does not preclude one from having an opinion on it.

As for nesfs fitness, I've known him for a number of years and he's accurate in his assessment. You're familiar with nesf postings. You say he posts with an air of authority. How does this translate into lying about his physical state, or anything else for that matter?

Sangre

How would anyones current level of fitness affect their knowledge on a subject?

Usually your bang on with the bull**** radar logic but I think you're a bit over the top here.

logic1

nesf wrote:

I didn't catagorise myself as a "strong" light heavyweight

nesf wrote:

I used to be a "strong" light heavyweight when I was younger.

Seems pretty categorical to me.

it was meant in a descriptive fashion, in that for the fighting weight that I competed at (in TKD) it wasn't my strenght that let me down but my footwork and agility. And when I fought in TKD my weight was that of a light heavyweight.

So you rebute categorising yourself as a "strong light heavyweight" but you are strong and you fought competitively at light heavyweight? Ahh I get it now..... :rolleyes:

My "prancing about at home" was kind of necessary since outside of a weekly training session in the local community hall there was no gym, or club to train in. How exactly was I supposed to train? In the middle of a field with the cattle?

This is a piss poor excuse at best tbh. Why can't you just admit that you didn't have the drive and determination to travel to somewhere to train? Why do people consistently feel like they have to make excuses for their own laziness. 5 years ago you were what 19 years old? And you couldn't catch a bus or get a lift to a training session? My brother regularly travelled an 80 mile round journey to train. A guy I trained with in TKD was 14 years old and travelled 40 miles per night on public transport. It's pathetic and mildly insulting that you'd expect anyone to believe you had absolutely no alternative.

Right. Logic, have a pinch of salt with this if you wish.

One, I don't label myself as a martial artist or a boxer.

I trained as one for a time when I was younger. I do not go around now claiming to be a great and mighty martial artist or boxer, but I do still retain all the knowledge I gained during my training.

Perhaps it's just your attitude that portrays a false emphasis on your terminology. I'm also unsure of how vast a knowledgebase a young guy trainee retains after a short time training but that's neither here nor there.

I trained in TKD under Master Don Dalton of the IUTF. Know the name perhaps? My brother is a first dan blackbelt in TKD and a kickboxing instructor. This is who I trained with at home. As you can imagine it was a little more than "prancing about".

I know the name. And I couldn't imagine that it was anything more or less as I've never trained with you. In my experience a black belt has absolutely no significance on a level of skill or otherwise it's simply an indicator or time spent fruitfully or otherwise. So insinuating that you had to be training hard because it was with an instructor is a misnomer. Of course I take you at your word and it's of no interest to me either way.

I'm not going to into personal details here, but anyone who knows me personally can confirm all of the above. And yes there are people on here who know me personally.

I really have no interest of cross referencing your credentials. I'll take you at face value.

Was what I was saying totally wrong or something? Or is it that someone who isn't a paragon of fitness can't have knowledge of the subject? What does my present situation that was caused by factors beyond my control have to do with anything? I'm not about to go into the nitty gritty details of my personal life and why exactly I let my fitness get so bad, so don't bother asking.

I find that people who can't walk the walk usually turn into internet mouth pieces for what they could have been or could have done and generally give poor information that they've personally never followed. Would you take the advice of a dietician if for example he weighed 60stone and was telling you how to slim down? I for one certainly wouldn't pay for that advice.

A message board I feel should work no differently. Sure you can have someone who doesn't train to a high level give sufficient advice but usually it's not advice they've garnered from personal experience of being there and doing it. It's second hand advice they're gleamed from somewhere and relates to a specific set of conditions. If any one of those conditions change the advice is useless and the OP usually doesn't know or won't have the experience needed to alter it. Of course a forum is free speech and yadda yadda but for me I'll take advice form those I have sufficient faith in and who I know or suspect have a proven track record.

Also I have no interest in your personal problems. We all have problems which relate to our current circumstances. I have about as much interest in yours as you'd have in mine.

Plus, how do I have an "air of authority"? Surely that's down to interpretation? It's not like my body language or tone is going to come into it.

Isn't everything down to interpretation? And if my feeling is that you post with more of a self ordained air of authority than other posters than I must have interpreted that from the manner of your posts. Whether it's true or not is largely irrelevant as my opinion is unlikely to change but then again it's my opinion and probably not that of others so don't let it upset you too much eh?

You like to attack people logic, why is this?

So you're making an accusation and trying to pass it off as a fact? Again this would just be your opinion or your interpretation of my post. Luckily i don't need to explain myself to you.

Sputnik wrote:

A tad over the top logic.

Ahh I see nesf calls his mate Mr. 11 posts to defend.

Sputnik wrote:

Not being an expert on a subject does not preclude one from having an opinion on it.

My point being he was trying to add weight to his opinion by proclaiming to be something he wasn't.

Sputnik wrote:

As for nesfs fitness, I've known him for a number of years and he's accurate in his assessment.

Another expert

Sputnik wrote:

You're familiar with nesf postings. You say he posts with an air of authority. How does this translate into lying about his physical state, or anything else for that matter?

No I said he posts with an assumed air of authority. There's a difference. I also never accused him of lying about his physical state.

As for the "over the top comments" over the top of what? Should we all have a group hug and go **** each others sisters? I'm not here for happy families. I come here for training advice. If you want a hug go to personal issues.

.logic.

Sangre

can i **** your sister?

logic1

Sangre wrote:

can i **** your sister?

Again?

.logic.

Sputnik

Ahh I see nesf calls his mate Mr. 11 posts to defend.

Heh, I knew you were going to do that. I've been lurking as long as you've been posting so don't even bother.

Another expert

And YOUR an expert? Why should I put stock in anything you say? I have to way knowing if you're talking through you arse or not but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. It's reasonable to assume nesf has a better idea of his own level of ability then you.

With every post you make on this board I've noticed you consistently post with an air of authority and as if everyone should take note of your infallibility, however it seems you're overweight and unfit and by your own admission haven't gone to a gym in 5 years until very recently and even then you say you did most of your training "at home". You'll excuse me if I take anything you say with more than a grain of salt.

I also never accused him of lying about his physical state.

Sounds pretty close to me.

pwd

No.
He said Nesf's low fitness level discredits him as a poster on a fitness forum.
This is a forum where there are a lot of posters who know a great deal about the subject, and who have achieved strong results (I'm not including myself in that btw). I think what he said was fair enough personally.

Sangre

On my 'over the top' comment Logic it was referring to the fact that your attempts to discredit him weren't in relation to any incorrect or false advice. I would just give him the benefit of doubt until he states something wrong or even dangerous.

Its not like I give a **** if you hurt his feelings.

logic1

Sputnik wrote:

Heh, I knew you were going to do that. I've been lurking as long as you've been posting so don't even bother.

Ah the difference being I regularly contribute. You could be an unused alt. Who knows!

And YOUR an expert? Why should I put stock in anything you say? I have to way knowing if you're talking through you arse or not but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

I'd believe myself to have a proven track record of good advice on the board and I've trained with a number of people that post here who I'm sure could vouch for me if I felt it was needed. I however don't. I could care less if you take any advice I give or not. My statement was simple, I'll be taking nesf's with a grain of salt.

It's reasonable to assume nesf has a better idea of his own level of ability then you.

I also never took issue with his own idea of his level of ability or otherwise. He simply stated he "trained as a boxer", I politely asked for a little history out of curiousty and he seemingly took offense. Oh well.

Sounds pretty close to me.

So point out again where exactly I accused him of lying about his physical state? I take one point without question that at one stage in his life he was alot fitter and in better shape than he is currently in. I never questioned this.

Some reading comprehension classes might be worth looking into.

.logic.

nesf

logic1 wrote:

So you rebute categorising yourself as a "strong light heavyweight" but you are strong and you fought competitively at light heavyweight? Ahh I get it now..... :rolleyes:

I fought at light heavyweight compeditively in a different martial art, not boxing. Does it make a difference? My original point was that skipping could help someone improve their footwork and "lightness" on one's feet.

logic1 wrote:

This is a piss poor excuse at best tbh. Why can't you just admit that you didn't have the drive and determination to travel to somewhere to train? Why do people consistently feel like they have to make excuses for their own laziness. 5 years ago you were what 19 years old? And you couldn't catch a bus or get a lift to a training session? My brother regularly travelled an 80 mile round journey to train. A guy I trained with in TKD was 14 years old and travelled 40 miles per night on public transport. It's pathetic and mildly insulting that you'd expect anyone to believe you had absolutely no alternative.

So I'm lazy for staying at home with a heavy punchbag and barbell set and training there? Cut the elitist bull**** logic, just because someone doesn't train in a gym or club does not mean they are lazy and incapable. The reason why I didn't travel a 60 mile roundtrip to train was because I had a life and responsibilities other than my training. I trained at home simply because that was the most sensible option. I still made at least one training a week in a nearby town and more if I had time to attend them.

logic1 wrote:

Perhaps it's just your attitude that portrays a false emphasis on your terminology. I'm also unsure of how vast a knowledgebase a young guy trainee retains after a short time training but that's neither here nor there.

I'm unsure what you are getting at here. I don't go out of my way to make what I say sound technical. Far from it, my technical knowledge of much fitness training is not very high. I might sound technical by accident but that would not be intended. I did Physics/Applied Maths in college, not Sport Science.

logic1 wrote:

I know the name. And I couldn't imagine that it was anything more or less as I've never trained with you. In my experience a black belt has absolutely no significance on a level of skill or otherwise it's simply an indicator or time spent fruitfully or otherwise. So insinuating that you had to be training hard because it was with an instructor is a misnomer. Of course I take you at your word and it's of no interest to me either way.

I agree with you on this. A black belt does not automatically represent someone training hard. I wasn't insinuating that I trained hard, I was stating that I was training properly under the advice of somebody who knew what they were doing.

logic1 wrote:

I find that people who can't walk the walk usually turn into internet mouth pieces for what they could have been or could have done and generally give poor information that they've personally never followed. Would you take the advice of a dietician if for example he weighed 60stone and was telling you how to slim down? I for one certainly wouldn't pay for that advice.

Thats a very simplistic view isn't it? What happens if a fit person has some accident or long term illness that causes them to lose their fitness? Does this remove any knowledge of what they learned or invalidate their opinion? No, didn't think so.

If I went to a dietician I wouldn't care what weight he was. I'd be going there for his educated opinion, not to judge him on how he lives.

logic1 wrote:

A message board I feel should work no differently. Sure you can have someone who doesn't train to a high level give sufficient advice but usually it's not advice they've garnered from personal experience of being there and doing it. It's second hand advice they're gleamed from somewhere and relates to a specific set of conditions. If any one of those conditions change the advice is useless and the OP usually doesn't know or won't have the experience needed to alter it. Of course a forum is free speech and yadda yadda but for me I'll take advice form those I have sufficient faith in and who I know or suspect have a proven track record.

You're assuming that someone who isn't in good shape now never was. You are also assuming that opinion is only valid when it is gleaned from personal experience and not education or learning. Both are wrong.

A morbidly obese person could have an excellent in-depth knowledge of dieting and nutritional science. The fact that they are morbidy obese doesn't make their knowledge wrong or opinion they give false.

I appreciate what you are saying and I can see where you are coming from on it, but I'd ask you to open your mind slightly on the topic.

logic1 wrote:

Also I have no interest in your personal problems. We all have problems which relate to our current circumstances. I have about as much interest in yours as you'd have in mine.

Thanks. Appreciate that.

logic1 wrote:

Isn't everything down to interpretation? And if my feeling is that you post with more of a self ordained air of authority than other posters than I must have interpreted that from the manner of your posts. Whether it's true or not is largely irrelevant as my opinion is unlikely to change but then again it's my opinion and probably not that of others so don't let it upset you too much eh?

You haven't upset me mate, just made me want to justify myself.

Much of the problems and arguments that start online are down to people misinterpreting posts. The written word doesn't always convey a person's feelings of the subject. A person's writing style might make something that's meant in a neutral opinion giving fashion sound like arrogant preaching.

Apologies for coming off like I have some authority to you. Wasn't intended or meant. But then I can't do the interpreting for you, so can't be helped really.

logic1 wrote:

So you're making an accusation and trying to pass it off as a fact? Again this would just be your opinion or your interpretation of my post. Luckily i don't need to explain myself to you.

I think that it's a very justifiable statement. You do attack people a lot on this forum. Most of the time I agree with the reasons you do it. I was just curious as to why you feel the need to "bring people to task". Being a bulletin board crusader trying to keep people honest is a thankless task imo.

logic1 wrote:

Ahh I see nesf calls his mate Mr. 11 posts to defend.

Jerry is a lurker who doesn't post much. He's both a very old friend and my current gym partner. Cork boards people who attend the boards beers would know him.

Sputnik

No. He said Nesf's low fitness level discredits him as a poster on a fitness forum.

Someone who isn't fit can't post in a fitness forum? Why not?

logic1

Thanks for the post nesf and for keeping it civil where many others wouldn't have

As I have said I have absolutely no problem with any of the advice you have given on board and as Sangre said none of it has been incorrect or dangerous. Perhaps I was wrong to come off as confrontational as I did but it's usually the way I post good or bad.

The only aspect of your post I had an issue with was my interpretation of you describing yourself as a boxer. It's not even a big deal tbh and it's been blown up by this thread much more than was necessary but from my experience most people that label themselves never live up to the label, regardless it's obvious you have trained andhave a good level of knowledge.

sputnik wrote:

Someone who isn't fit can't post in a fitness forum? Why not?

Again sputnik in your fervour to defend your friend you're making a poor attempt to deliberately misconstrue posts for the purpose of generating heated debate.

Get your post count up and you'll be able to fine tune those trolling talents.

.logic.

pwd

Sputnik: you keep stating logic said things that he didn't.
Talking at length about your implicit achievements in boxing and calling yourself strong etc makes you sound like you are bragging, and also like you are asserting yourself as someone who knows something about the subject.

nesf

logic1 wrote:

Thanks for the post nesf and for keeping it civil where many others wouldn't have

As I have said I have absolutely no problem with any of the advice you have given on board and as Sangre said none of it has been incorrect or dangerous. Perhaps I was wrong to come off as confrontational as I did but it's usually the way I post good or bad.

The only aspect of your post I had an issue with was my interpretation of you describing yourself as a boxer. It's not even a big deal tbh and it's been blown up by this thread much more than was necessary but from my experience most people that label themselves never live up to the label, regardless it's obvious you have trained andhave a good level of knowledge.

Meh. It was two "confronationalist" posters butting heads over a word. It happens. Thanks for staying civil, this kind of thing usually degenerates into meaningless flames after the first post or two.

I can come across badly online, if you knew me personally you'd know that I spend most of the time pulling the piss out of myself for my flaws. I don't suffer from having an ego about fitness or martial arts. I just know what I'm capable of and I've an unquenchable thirst for knowledge, so I tend to get heavily into the theory of anything I do. Most of my fitness knowledge is strongest at quite a basic biological level. I've scientific leanings so to speak.

Plus I don't blame you for reacting the way you did. After my "treatment" of the BMI and all

logic1 wrote:

Again sputnik in your fervour to defend your friend you're making a poor attempt to deliberately misconstrue posts for the purpose of generating heated debate.

Get your post count up and you'll be able to fine tune those trolling talents.

.logic.

Be nice to him, I'm trying to encourage him to start posting on here regularily.

He is actually fairly knowledgeable about fitness, he keeps himself in good shape. He's well into his running.

28064212

So how do you get rid of muscly shoulders on a girl? Isn't this thread a tad off-topic?

Sputnik

I've lurked for this long, I'll probably just sink back into the abyss now...