Can tennis players be "ripped"?

[Ronaldo]

Originally Posted by Rickson

Maybe I should increase my vertical leap by 20 inches. I was also thinking about increasing my bench press by 150 lbs. later in the week.

Guess getting strong and ripped in a hurry makes a chemical shortcut really attractive.

[hewittfan3]

Originally Posted by Rickson

If you were extremely muscular, you would be "ripped". If you're gaining a combination of fat and muscle, that's not "good weight gain", but if you were gaining all muscle like you claim is easy for you, your body would be ripped in a short time. Now be realistic, you're gaining a combination of fat and muscle, aren't you? If you tell me you can gain pure, rock solid muscle quite easily without gaining bodyfat, I will call you on it.

I used to be a little chubbier...i was 6' and 225 and now im 6'1 and 190. I'm not saying its really easy to gain muscle but i am saying that i think it takes less effort atleast for me. I am starting to notice more and more tone in my muscles but i dont know if i could ever be ripped. My arms are pretty big right now but their not near ripped.

And what about like the worlds strongest men...their not ripped

[Rickson]

Originally Posted by Ronaldo

Guess getting strong and ripped in a hurry makes a chemical shortcut really attractive.

As you probably guessed, I was being facetious because ogruskie seems to think that becoming "ripped" is just one of those easy things to accomplish. I suppose I got offended because I'm a bit of a hard gainer although I am quite strong. You won't see a lot of muscle mass on this body, but you will see this poster benching 3 plates on each side without any "chemical shortcuts". I just got offended that someone who isn't even close to my strength is going to get "ripped" (which he defines as overly muscular), like it's nothing. It just seemed that he totally underestimated how difficult it is to gain muscle and lose bodyfat simultaneously.

[hewittfan3]

I'm glad to hear that you did it without any chemical shortcuts. I think that shows much more character and devotion. It is definitely harder but more rewarding in the end.

[Rickson]

Originally Posted by hewittfan3

I used to be a little chubbier...i was 6' and 225 and now im 6'1 and 190. I'm not saying its really easy to gain muscle but i am saying that i think it takes less effort atleast for me. I am starting to notice more and more tone in my muscles but i dont know if i could ever be ripped. My arms are pretty big right now but their not near ripped.

And what about like the worlds strongest men...their not ripped

Ok, now I'm starting to get the picture. You lost 35 lbs. yet you still don't see the "cuts" you desire. Do you know why? Your bodyfat is still too high to show a lot of definition. Out of the 35 lbs. you lost, was it all bodyfat? Probably not. If you had gained muscle while you lost 35 lbs., you would have lost more than 35 lbs. of bodyfat, right? As for those Met-Rx contestants, they don't bother dieting at all. They may not be ripped, but can you imagine how they'd look without all that muscle? Believe it or not, those strong man contestants have lower bodyfat than a lot of lighter men out there, but they're certainly not "ripped" by bodybuilding standards.

[hewittfan3]

I wouldnt say i have a lot of body fat. I checked a month ago and im around 11% which im very happy with. I actually dont want to lose anymore body fat than i have. Im very comfortable with my weight right now and how much i can lift.

I have definitely gained muscle though, atleast I think I have considering I can lift more

[Rickson]

Originally Posted by hewittfan3

I wouldnt say i have a lot of body fat. I checked a month ago and im around 11% which im very happy with. I actually dont want to lose anymore body fat than i have. Im very comfortable with my weight right now and how much i can lift.

I have definitely gained muscle though, atleast I think I have considering I can lift more

Aha, I caught you again. What did I say earlier about my build? I do not possess a lot of muscle mass, but I do lift some heavy metal. Muscle gain and strength gain are 2 different things. Look at Dwight Howard for example. Dwight has a 40" vertical leap, but his legs aren't nearly as muscular as Tom Platz's legs in his prime. Do you think Tom could ever have jumped as high as Dwight? I seriously doubt that. Dwight trained his muscles for explosive jumping while Tom worked on gaining some serious mass (chemical enhancement too).

[hewittfan3]

Originally Posted by Rickson

Aha, I caught you again. What did I say earlier about my build? I do not possess a lot of muscle mass, but I do lift some heavy metal. Muscle gain and strength gain are 2 different things. Look at Dwight Howard for example. Dwight has a 40" vertical leap, but his legs aren't nearly as muscular as Tom Platz's legs in his prime. Do you think Tom could ever have jumped as high as Dwight? I seriously doubt that. Dwight trained his muscles for explosive jumping while Tom worked on gaining some serious mass (chemical enhancement too).

ok so i dont get it...what did we just accomplish...i still think that for me its easier to gain muscle than to get ripped

by the way dwight howard is a beast...his shoulders are like miles a part....idk if you know who joey dorsey on memphis tigers is but he looks like that too...and i heard ben wallace can curl 300 lbs. u think thats true?

[Ronaldo]

Btw, see guys in their 50s and 60s with defined abs, cut. But in each case these guys admitted planning and following their diet, lifting, and working hard at cardio. Each lost at least 40# which took nearly a yr. They did not do it by just playing tennis.
Begun to wonder whether pros like Ben Wallace are discouraged by their teams from heavy lifting to prevent injuries. A bicep or pec tear keeping Ben Wallace out of the lineup would bite. Read stories of Dennis Rodman lifting for 2 hrs after a game then sleeping in his pickup in the parking lot when he was a Piston and he was ripped.

[krprunitennis2]

Originally Posted by hewittfan3

I have to disagree....atleast for me...i just cant seem to get ripped and i hate doing ab workouts and cardio stuff but i love lifting weights. For me, anyways, its definitelly easier to get extremely muscular than ripped

HA. it's hard for me to get ripped OR buff..

T_T

but i'm working on it :]

[Rickson]

Originally Posted by krprunitennis2

HA. it's hard for me to get ripped OR buff..

T_T

but i'm working on it :]

Now here's an honest man.

[hewittfan3]

Originally Posted by Rickson

Now here's an honest man.

I dont remember ever saying that it was easy...i remember saying that it was easier...it definitely takes a lot of time, hard work, and dedication to be anywhere near ripped or extremely muscular

[1337Kira]

Originally Posted by Rickson

Aha, I caught you again. What did I say earlier about my build? I do not possess a lot of muscle mass, but I do lift some heavy metal. Muscle gain and strength gain are 2 different things. Look at Dwight Howard for example. Dwight has a 40" vertical leap, but his legs aren't nearly as muscular as Tom Platz's legs in his prime. Do you think Tom could ever have jumped as high as Dwight? I seriously doubt that. Dwight trained his muscles for explosive jumping while Tom worked on gaining some serious mass (chemical enhancement too).

Yeah. Lifting more doesn't mean you get more "buff".
I increased by bench weight by about 30 lbs and 4 reps last year and my arms look essentially the same.
If you really wanna get buff or ripped, it'll take a consistent effort and committment.

[OrangeOne]

What a strange thread. So many people using many, many words that are all not exactly defined - ripped, toned, buff, etc - and this is where 80% of the problems lie.

I interpret 'ripped' as simply meaning 'of very low bodyfat for a given level of muscle', others seems to imply that ripped, to them, means a fair amount of muscle too.

It shouldn't matter. What the OP is essentially asking is, when working with weights, if he should prioritise size or strength. The answer here for tennis is clearly to prioritise strength. Now the OP also has some appearance desires, and to paraphrase someone along the way - someone said something like "get as big as you want to for appearance reasons, then prioritise only strength", which makes sense too.

Whether or not it's hard or easy to become *any of the above*... well, that's up to the OP to learn. The OP wants to get fitter, and good luck to him. How Rickson can take it as a personal affront that someone thinks getting big is easy, well, I'm not sure.

We all know it's not much harder than lifting weight every second or third day for a year or three, and that may take some dedication, but it sure doesn't (necessarily) take anything much between the ears, (which is easy to know if you've ever spoken to some of the big boys at a gym ).

To the OP: Good luck, and happy lifting...

[stormholloway]

Way to be "sensible".

Wasn't it obvious there was a legitimate war of semantics taking place here? And you had to ruin it...

[Rickson]

Originally Posted by stormholloway

Way to be "sensible".

Wasn't it obvious there was a legitimate war of semantics taking place here? And you had to ruin it...

Don't worry, storm. I don't think too many people would confuse "ripped" with big, but buff might throw off some posters. I haven't heard that word since the eighties while in So Cal.

[stormholloway]

Ripped is synonymous with shredded, i.e. low body fat, exuding cuts. Big could mean any number of things. Big and ripped sounds like the right way to go.

[superman1]

Originally Posted by hewittfan3

ok so i dont get it...what did we just accomplish...i still think that for me its easier to gain muscle than to get ripped

IMO it's genetic. Some people are ectomorphs, it's a lot easier for them to be ripped, they don't even have to pay that much attention to what they eat. However, it's harder for them to put on muscle, so even if they have ripped abs, they are still pretty weak and pathetic. Others tend to naturally carry more body fat, so it's harder for them to be ripped. The amount of effort it takes to gain muscle or lose fat is different for everyone, so which is easier would depend on who you ask.

Bottom line: both are f'ing hard, especially when you're trying to do a balancing act of cutting the fat and not losing too much muscle, and then gaining muscle but not getting too fat and negating the effects of the cut, and then going back and doing another cut but trying not to negate the bulk... If you do it right it's like taking 2 steps forward and 1 step back. If you don't do it right, then you take 2 steps forward and 2 steps back. Well, as long as you're stepping, at least you're doing something.

[J011yroger]

Originally Posted by OrangeOne

but it sure doesn't (necessarily) take anything much between the ears, (which is easy to know if you've ever spoken to some of the big boys at a gym ).

I have, they are some of the nicest and most awesome guys around.

J

[Ano]

Originally Posted by stormholloway

Ripped is synonymous with shredded, i.e. low body fat, exuding cuts. Big could mean any number of things. Big and ripped sounds like the right way to go.

this is an example of a shredded body.