Official Dids Gym Thread - Page 8

nation · #71 03-16-2007, 11:05 PM

Dids,

setting a primary goal for 200 is great. all the literature i've read though says that 200 is overweight even for a big frame at 5'8-5'9 (i'm the same height). Go for it, but when you hit 200, try to shoot for around 170 as your final goal.

Dids · #72 03-17-2007, 01:30 AM

Nation,

You've seen the pictures of me, right, that's me at 260, do you really think 200 is going to be significantly overweight? To be brutally frank, given your posts in this forum, you're better suited to be taking advice than giving it at this point.

Obviously, if I find at 200 I don't like it, it's not like I'm going to stop though.

nation · #73 03-17-2007, 02:14 AM

It's called google Dids, find one site that agree with your ideal weight to be 200 at 5'8.

And so basically you're not really sure, but you felt the need to take a shot at me. Nice.

TimM · #74 03-17-2007, 02:40 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously, if I find at 200 I don't like it, it's not like I'm going to stop though.

[/ QUOTE ]

You probably won't like it. I'm 5'10" and I went from 295 to a low of 208. And I still felt like a fatass, and definitely looked like one in the mirror shirtless.

thirddan · #75 03-17-2007, 03:15 AM

the bad thing about people that are severely overweight is that even if you lose a ton of weight you still seem like a fatty to people you just met or that don't know you well...i imagine most of the guys here want to lose weight for health/self confidence/meeting chicks whatever...but if a guy that is 100lbs overweight loses 50lbs (which is quite an accomplishment) meets a chick all she sees is a dude that is 50lbs overweight...

Thremp · #76 03-17-2007, 12:48 PM

Nation,

Weight shouldn't be dictated by some arbitrary website. Dids is right.

I'm 5'8 and >170 ATM. I don't think anyone would use phrases like "You're too big" with me aside from the fact my frame is much smaller than Dids.

nation · #77 03-17-2007, 01:01 PM

thremp,

i know, but the number in question was 200...that's a big difference and i've never heard that as an ideal weight for anyone at 5'8.

Thremp · #78 03-17-2007, 01:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
thremp,

i know, but the number in question was 200...that's a big difference and i've never heard that as an ideal weight for anyone at 5'8.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who tells you these things? Why is that too much?

Why does everyone want to be super small?

How is that any more horrid than someone at 5'8 weighing 140?!?

nutsflopper · #79 03-17-2007, 02:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
thremp,

i know, but the number in question was 200...that's a big difference and i've never heard that as an ideal weight for anyone at 5'8.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would your ideal weight be dictated by others? I personally like being "big". I'm 6'4", 235 and can guarantee I am healthier than 95%+ of the population. This is b/c body weight is different considering muscle/fat ratio. Jay Cutler has a body mass index of a morbidly obese person, with less than 8% body fat.

TimM · #80 03-17-2007, 03:13 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Why would your ideal weight be dictated by others? I personally like being "big". I'm 6'4", 235 and can guarantee I am healthier than 95%+ of the population. This is b/c body weight is different considering muscle/fat ratio. Jay Cutler has a body mass index of a morbidly obese person, with less than 8% body fat.

[/ QUOTE ]

No one is dictating anything, and how does it help to cite extreme examples that don't apply to >99% of the population?

All I am saying is that, in my opinion, a 5'8" man will still look and feel quite overweight at 200 lbs., just as I did when I got under 210 from 290+, at 5'10". However, he will look and feel significantly better and healthier than at 260 or 330, and whether enough motivation or concern exists to continue trying to lose weight is an individual issue.