genetic limitations

Sorry I reread the rules and it didn’t say we couldn’t talk about how people really train at any level beyond Junior High school level.

The raw powerlifting records are 715lb bench, 900-1000lb squat(i forget what it exactly was), and 936lb deadlift(1000lbs got up half way). These were done by SHW(in the 300s).

Now seriously, do you REALLY believe a 180lb man can beat these records, when powerlifters of over 300lbs can only do these lifts raw??

With a forum name like “Frank N. Steroid” it seems to me as though you are out to cause some controversy your days are numbered on this forum IF you do not tone it down or change your forum name thats a certainty.

You’ve got to be joking…

as a guy who was exactly as you mentioned ( a completely potato in 2004 ) and now is running around 11 and 24,
i can say that, the gap on time reduction ( 100m ) will come from --stride style & foot strike-- and in 200m
from a very good conditioning work ( base ).
Genetics are just a wall must be broked ( firstly in your head )

you can post all you now know the rules and please stick by them.

stick by the rules or start to stick your posts’ somewhere else.


To get the thread back on track… it is not possible to know your genetic limits, humans are too complicated. Ben Johnson was not a good sprinter when he first started, Johnathon (sp?) Edwards was nothing too special when he started jumping, Lance Armstrong came in last place when he first did a major competition (if memory serves).

Unless you are badly injured, obese, very tall or very short it shouldn’t too much of a problem getting under that time you mentioned, with half decent training. The only problem is training half-decently.

At 2-3% body fat, I doubt that you would be healthy enough to run. You would barely be alive. I don’t believe I even wasted my time on this stuff.


I am working on the name change, please don’t ban me.

All I was trying to say is that until you are at 3% bodyfat and have extreme levels of strength in proportion to bodyweight, and have perfected your technique, you will not have a clue what kind of natural ability you have.

And yes you can be 3% bodyfat naturally.

Even the best bodybuilders can only maintain less than 4-5% body fat for a few hours. I know one who got down to under 3%, but he was in a wheelchair after his competition. 3% is extreme and the body doesn’t like extremes. The person will either die soon, or the body will fight back and increase the fat stores.

I agree with Herb but remember bodyfat measurements have a huge range of error. For example, I’ve heard many instances of ~3% when using bodyfat calipers or (cheap) electronic (bioimpedence) mesurement. Unfortunately, these methods seem to be used most often.

I guess both starvation and death are NATURAL.
I simply meant to say that ones physical performance in the sprints would not be optimal at 3-5%BF. Which one do you want: 3-5% body fat or the 100m WR. You can’t have both simultaneously.


Linford Christie had 3-4% body fat measurements and looked ripped in real life. So thats not necessarily true. 2% is excessive and i doubt any one can maintain that for long periods of time without emotional and physical consequences. 7-10% is more than enough. Any lower and you compromise hormonal output. Remember that the endocrinal system needs fat produced by the body fat to store certain fat soluble vitamins and nutrients and fat to synthesis testosterone and other hormones in the body. Also starving yourself to that level may lead to your testicles going into shock. This was a classic sympton of holocaust victims who had low testosterone levels even after reagining normal body weight. Of course this is the extreme but there are shades in between.

At 3-4% bodyfat with skinfold caliper measurements I was seeing visable vascularity in my mid back, and visable vascularity in my lats and mid obliques. No matter how you look at it this is very, very lean. I personally experienced modest strength increases over a 4 month period of going from 8% bodyfat down to 3-4%. I wish I knew what that would equate to underwater weighing or whatever you guys are talking about as a bodyfat measuring device. But I tell you I was RIPPED. I had moon face; I looked like a horse and got creases on my cheeks, and my eyes were sucked in. It actually looked good in certain light; made my face look really chisled; then in other lighting it looked downright scary.

It is true that people who are squatting 1,000+ are usually very big. Of course in the Natural Raw Powerlifting meets that I have followed in Powerlifting USA the most I have seen anyone do is between 570-660 and these guys are usually around 220-275 and fat. These are the top 10 lifters in the world.

So my point is this; there have been some people like Ed Coan and Kirk Kowarski who have squatted very near or a little over 1,000 at a bodyweight of between 220-275. Yet the people in Natural competition are close to the same weight and they are doing only 570-660. So maybe it would be possible to squat 1,000 at under 200 lbs, if you can already squat over 600 at 173.

Of course if a sprinter was capable of squatting 1,000 he would never actually lift that much weight in training, there would be no point. I would say that he could somewhat safely train with 700 for reps. I know that naturally training with 500 for reps is damn hard on the body, but it is feasable. I believe I could train with 600 for reps, but it would be dangerous. It could be done though. And the difference between what 400 for reps and 500 for reps as a natural is astounding what it does for athleticism.

So wouldn’t that cause a sprinter to break into the stratosphere with that level of strength and quickness?

If it is feasable to squat over 600 naturally raw at a bodyweight of 173 when the top 10 natural raw squatters in the world are squatting between 570-660 at 220-275, why wouldn’t it be feasable to squat 1,000+ at under 200 lbs. after you know what?

Unfortunately for you I do know what you are talking about and I am going to recommend that you are banned from the site. You already aknowledged that you read the rules and now you go and break them. Sorry. People usually only get one strike and they are out. I am pretty sure you are now out.

All I need is the answer to the one question;

After that there is no reason for me to post anything.

I’ve had oblique veins and definitely not 3%.

On a side note, the amount of TIME in training it would take to reach that level of strength would detract from the development of speed. One step forward (increasing strength) and two steps back (not enough event specific work).

I really do need an answer; I simply cannot get a credible, educated answer to this question anywere else.

If you could let it be known it would probably save the question from even coming up again on the site.

How much improvment can the average sprinter get with drugs, and how much can a maximally trained athlete get in 1 year and 3 years? Starting at age 27.

Since you are hell bent on getting an answer, I think you know the answer to what you are asking you just want us to rubber stamp what you want to do. FRANKLY YOU ARE PUSHING THE ISSUE and you are being disrespectful in doing so. Why don’t you just go and do what you are planning to do anyway? Why do you need the forum to answer questions that you know the solution to?

are you high, or just incredibly stoopid? there are many boards that could answer your question (which is unanswerable in the first place).