What’s My Genetic Muscular Potential?
A question that comes up with some frequency on forums and message boards, usually from newbie lifters is along the lines of “What is my maximum muscular potential?” Invariably this leads to a repetitive and pointless argument between those who believe that there are genetic limits to such things as muscular gains and athletic performance and those who believe that anything can be accomplished if you just try hard enough or have the right work ethic.
Now, it should go without saying that nobody can really say upfront what someones genetic potential actually is. Until we live in the world of Gattaca where we can do a full genetic scan and know what it means, nobody can say ahead of time what someone can or can’t achieve. Well, not unless you look at some pretty ludicrous extremes (you’re not going to see someone at 400 pounds ripped any time soon for example).
And, of course, worrying about such things before you even start training is sort of missing the point in my opinion. At a fundamental level, trainees should train and eat properly and let the cards fall where they may. Worrying abut what you might or might not accomplish is putting the cart far before the horse. But that’s another topic for another day. And, of course, doesn’t really answer the question in the title of this article.
I’d note that while I do believe trainees should simply get into proper training and not worry up front what they may or may not accomplish, I also believe that there are genetic limits set by underlying biology (again, modulated by behavioral choices and patterns). That’s just reality and recognizing them can save people from a lot of mental anguish about what they think they should be able to or could be able to accomplish if they just worked hard enough.
Which is a long way of introducing the topic of today’s article, what is the maximum amount of muscle that someone can gain over a career of proper lifting and nutrition. I’m going to look at it from a few different perspectives but I think you’ll find that, on average, they all end up with pretty similar results.
I’d note that most of what I’m going to talk about applies to male lifters, data on females being much more difficult to come by. Just realize that the average female potential for muscle mass gains is even lower than that in males.
The McDonald Model
I’m not sure if I came up with this idea on my own or stole it from somewhere else (probably a combination of the two) but, in a slightly different context (how quickly can someone gain muscle), I have often thrown out the following values for rates of muscle gain.
| Year of Proper Training | Potential Rate of Muscle Gain per Year |
| 1 | 20-25 pounds (2 pounds per month) |
| 2 | 10-12 pounds (1 pound per month) |
| 3 | 5-6 pounds (0.5 pound per month) |
| 4+ | 2-3 pounds (not worth calculating) |
Again, these values are for males, females would use roughly half of those values (e.g. 10-12 pounds in the first year of proper training).
Please note that these are averages and make a few assumptions about proper training and nutrition and such. As well, age will interact with this; older individuals won’t gain as quickly and younger individuals may gain more quickly. For example, it’s not unheard of for underweight high school kids to gain muscle very rapidly. But they are usually starting out very underweight and have the natural anabolic steroid cycle called puberty working for them.
Year of training also refers to proper years of training. Someone who has been training poorly for 4 years and gained squat for muscle gains may still have roughly the Year 1 potential when they start training properly.
Now, if you total up those values, you get a gain of roughly 40-50 pounds of total muscle mass over a lifting career although it might take a solid 4+ years of proper training to achieve that. So if you started with 130 pound of lean body mass (say in high school you were 150 pounds with 12% body fat), you might have the potential to reach a level of 170-180 pounds of lean body mass after 4-5 years of proper training. At 12% body fat, that would put you at a weight of 190-200 pounds.
Again, that’s a rough average, you might find some who gain a bit more and some who gain a bit less. And there will be other factors that impact on the above numbers (e.g. age, hormones, etc.).
The Alan Aragon Model
In discussing this topic with Alan Aragon, who’s book Girth Control should be read by anyone interested in this topic. In his monthly Research Review, he addressed the issue of rates of muscle gain a bit differently although the results end up being pretty similar. He has found that that the following rates of muscle gain are roughly achievable for natural lifters. Note that this ignores things like creatine loading or temporary glycogen supercompensation which can cause rapid changes in ‘lean body mass’ but don’t represent actual skeletal muscle tissue.
| Category | Rate of Muscle Gain |
| Beginner | 1-1.5% total body weight per month |
| Intermediate | 0.5-1% total body weight per month |
| Advanced | 0.25-0.5% total body weight per month |
So a 150 pound beginner might be able to gain 1.5-2.25 pounds of muscle per month (18-27 pounds per year). After a year, he’s now an intermediate at 170 pounds and might be capable of gaining 0.85-1.7 lbs per month (10-20 pounds per year; I’d consider 20 lbs. an exceptional gain). After another year, he’s an advanced lifter at 180 and might only gain 0.5-1 lb per month (a true 1 lb/month gain in muscle mass for an advanced athlete would be pretty rare).
So he might top out at 190-200 pounds or thereabouts after another year or two of training, at 10% body fat, he’d have 170-180 pounds of lean body mass. Pretty much identical to my model even if we got there by a slightly different path.
Casey Butt’s Frame Size Model
Of course, both my and Alan’s model for maximum muscle growth are pretty simplified and don’t take into account some of the other factors that can go into determining maximum muscular potential. One that has been argued to impact on overall size and strength gain potential is frame size, usually assessed by wrist and/or ankle size (or other measurements).
Natural bodybuilder and all-around smart guy Casey Butt has done an exhaustive analysis of top level natural bodybuilders and developed a calculator that will predict maximum muscular potential based on height, ankle and wrist size along with goal body fat percentage. He’s also written an extensive, math heavy book showing how he came up with his model. You can find it here.
Casey Butt’s Maximum Muscular Potential Calculator
I’ve run a lifter of different heights with a 7″ wrist and 8.75″ ankle through the calculator to show his predicted body weights (at 10% body fat) and lean body mass.
| Height | Weight at 10% Body Fat | Lean Body Mass |
| 5’8″ | 189 lbs. | 170 lbs. |
| 5’10″ | 198 lbs. | 178 lbs. |
| 6′ | 206 lbs. | 185 lbs. |
Of course, variations in ankle and wrist will change the numbers but you can go plug in your own numbers. I’d note that Casey’s calculations end up being a bit more conservative than mine or Alan’s but they are all at least within shooting distance of one another. You’d need to be towards the taller end of things to reach the highest levels suggested by my or Alan’s method.
And while some might argue that frame size has nothing to do with this, there is research to support the idea (I’d mention again that Caseys analysis is based on examination of real-world bodybuilders, arguably the group that you’d expect to surpass any supposed limits if it were possible).
At least one study showed that light framed individuals gained less muscle mass compared to heavier framed individuals on the same training program and, at a more basic level, hormones such as testosterone/etc. impact on things like bone growth and frame size. So there is a biologically potential link between frame size and hormone levels that would contribute to trainability and ultimate gains in muscle mass.
It’s also no accident that top strength athletes typically have large frames and robust joints (or that those with relatively smaller frames tend to be drawn/succeed in endurance sports). Some of this is simply so they can handle the level of training needed to succeed at their sport; but some of it is probably indicative of overall hormonal status as well.
Martin Berkhan’s Model
Martin Berkhan of Leangains.com has a somewhat simpler model than Casey’s, also based on his observation of top level natural bodybuilding competitors who are contest lean (e.g. 4-5% body fat).
His equation is:
Height in centimeters – 100 = upper limit of weight in kilograms in contest shape.
So take your height in inches and multiply by 2.54, that’s your height in centimeters. Subtract 100 and that’s your predicted maximum weight in contest shape (which is 5% body fat or less for males) in kilograms. Multiply that value by 2.2 to get pounds. So let’s look at body weight at 10% body fat using the same heights I used for Casey’s calculator. I’ve also calculated out lean body mass at 10% body fat.
| Height | Weight at 5% Body Fat | Weight at 10% Body Fat | Lean Body Mass |
| 5’8″ | 160 lbs. | 170 lbs. | 153 lbs. |
| 5’10″ | 171 lbs. | 180 lbs. | 162 lbs. |
| 6′ | 182 lbs. | 192 lbs. | 173 lbs. |
While not identical, these values are certainly right in line with Casey’s calculator. I would note that contest lean bodybuilders are often highly dehydrated and may be glycogen depleted and this will tend to lower the measurement of lean body mass. We might realistically add 5-10 pounds of lean body mass to the above values to account for dehydration/etc. With that adjustment, they are more or less identical to Casey’s values.
A Final Reality Check
As I noted in the introduction, a lot of lifters get fairly angry or upset over the above types of estimations, assuming that they don’t take into account individual differences in motivation, work ethic, etc. To that I say nonsense.
Both Casey and Martin’s equations are based on top level natural bodybuilders, the group that you’d expect to surpass such limits if they existed (and who’s dedication and work ethic is pretty hard to question). Mine and Alan’s are based on years of experience in the field. If a massive number of exceptions to the above existed, someone would have seen them by now.
Now I think part of this has to do with exceedingly skewed ideas about what’s achievable, a problem driven by pro-bodybuilding. After seeing a pro-bodybuilder stepping on stage at 260 pounds or more and shredded, the idea that a natural may top out at 180-190 pounds of lean body mass (if that) can be disheartening.
Of course, to the general public, an individual at a lean 180-190 pounds is still pretty enormous. It’s just that compared to the absurd size of a pro bodybuilder, it seems absolutely tiny. But it is reality.
People forget that Arnold Schwarzenegger competed at perhaps 230 pounds (assuming 5% body fat, that’s only 220 pounds of lean body mass) and that was with (admittedly low doses) of anabolic steroids in the mixture.
The simple real-world fact, which can be verified by going to any natural bodybuilding show is that you simply don’t see naturals coming into contest shape much above 200 pounds (the exceptions can usually be counted on one hand) and few even achieve that level of size. It’s always the lighter classes (e.g. 165 lb class) that have the most competitors at natural shows with fewer and fewer coming in at the heavier weights, especially in contest shape.
Now, some guys on stage may weigh more than 200 pounds but they usually aren’t lean enough. At even 10% body fat, a guy at 220 pounds only has 200 pounds of lean body mass. By the time you got him contest lean, he’d likely come in with less than that.
Even when people point to large natural strength athletes who might be 270-280 lbs. natural, by the time you figure in 28-30% body fat, that still puts them right back at a maximum lean body mass of 189-196 lbs. Certainly near the higher end of things but not by that much.
And while many will argue that improvements in training methods and nutrition should change the above values, that simply doesn’t seem to be the case. Human genetics have not changed and you still don’t see natural bodybuilders or other athletes coming in with more lean body mass than would be predicted by the above models. They might get there a bit faster but the overall size of natural bodybuilders doesn’t seem to have changed much, if at all, in decades.
To quote from Casey’s site:
Over the years I’ve also received many emails full of unsubstantiated claims, hostile remarks and even personal attacks because of the information presented here. But in that time, though many have told me they’re easily going to surpass these predictions, I haven ‘t received any legitimate, verifiable statistics that significantly exceed the results of the equations presented above …including correspondence with some of today’s top-ranked drug-free bodybuilders upon which the equations were partially based.
I anticipate a similar response in the comments section of this article and I’d just refer you to what Casey wrote above.
I’d finish by only saying that I’m not writing this in an attempt to be negative in any way shape or form, as I noted in the introduction, I would rather see people put their energy into their training and nutrition than worrying ahead of time about what they might or might not accomplish. And while I certainly wish that everyone reading this is the lone exception to the values calculated above, well…that’s not what an exception is.
At the same time, a failure to recognize that there are genetic limitations can lead people to do some very silly things in terms of their training or diet. Folks nearing their genetic limits, in an attempt to gain muscle at a rate that simply not achievable will put on enormous amounts of fat in hopes that it will net them a ton of muscle gain. And that just doesn’t ever end up being the case.
I’d only note in closing that the above calculations also has some real-world implications in terms of diet (e.g. what kind of weekly or daily surplus should be attempted to maximize muscle gain without excessive fat gains) but that will have to wait for a future article.
its true what appear here, but i have to say that one day i performed the diet of your book The rapid fat loss diet, for about 2 week, and i trained 4 times a week when doing that, then
i coudnt follow it more, so i do 5 days of big cheat days, eating everyday between 10000-15000kcals every day, using 20 gram of creatine everyday, with cromium picolinate,l arginine,ALA,fish oils, and other suplements that i dont remember now,
I dont care if you believe but i really have to share my own experience…
I went from 158.4lb to 189.2lb in just 5 days, yeah i get liquid but let me tell you something, it was only 10 lb of liquid, because after i went doing that i do a low carb diet like 70 grams of carbs so i gain 20 lb of weight wich i can say it was something like 7 pounds of fat and the other 3 were of LBM, in just 5 days of doing that rare technique, like i said before i dont care if something believe me because i know its true, before that i didnt have remarkable biceps, but now i really have a decent par of arms,
so if you ask me i were doing again something like this? Hell no! it was too much fat gain in just a few days, but like i said before, i gained like 2-3 lbm in just 5 days, and im now a newb, im an intermediate weight lifter with a genetic that have gained muscle even when doing definition only by doing something similar to the IF, EATING A LOT OF CALORIES AROUND THE WORKOUT, PRE&PW using whey with a lot of grams of BCAA
good god no.
|
|
|
V
I understand the reasoning for these guidelines and also with the guidelines for the rate of muscle gain, but there are still exceptions I see that don’t seem to be explained by this…
For example:
http://www.ironmanmagazine.com/articles/6510-20lbs-of-Muscle.pdf
Is this just crap? If what’s written is true then this guy put on 20 lbs of muscle in two months (far beyond what you’ve said is possible in such a short time) and ended at 217 lbs with 6.5% bodyfat (which is beyond what you’ve stated here as a maximum gain for naturals).
What do you think of this?
Lyle,
You definitely make excellent points about both your and Alan’s experiences in the trenches giving you major insight into what can be expected in most situations and how most who try to play the “exception” card are in need of a dose of your reality.
Along these lines it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall if you ever had a discussion with Coach Christian Thibaudeau on this topic.
There’s been a lot of bluster on the T-Nation site about their soon-to-drop “super muscle building system” that is supposed to be unlike any other and the new paradigm in optimal muscle growth. (this being their hyperbolic preview of the system and not my own speculation on what might lie ahead).
On the forums over there, Coach Thibaudeau has been claiming that his system coupled with their latest supplements has led to HUGE new gains in muscle mass and strength in himself and several experienced bodybuilders he has been working with on this latest project. These gains he has mentioned seemed to border on the lines of 1st or 2nd year gains rather than on the ones to be expected for very experienced lifters who are close to their natural threshold and not chemically-assisted. (NOTE: Thibaudeau has said that while optimal para-training nutrition isn’t specifically Biotest-dependent, no other company currently offers what he presently considers to be optimal, and he claims that Biotest was the only one willing to take the plunge, in spite of the huge cost associated with producing such supplements and the accompanying low profit margin).
While it may be hard for you to speculate if this is merely over-exaggeration or fully legitimate without having followed or read through some of the related threads over there, it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on whether this is a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing or if they may indeed be on the cusp of something groundbreaking/revolutionary.
Lyle. Thanks for this article. It has been something I’ve wondered about a lot recently.
I’d be interested if you could expand more on age in this topic.. You touched very quickly on how the rate you can build muscle at will drop, but didn’t mention the effect on maximum potential (assuming there is an effect). I am a 44 year old male and just started proper training perhaps a year ago after a couple years of not-so-proper training, and it would be nice to know there are solid potential gains ahead of me. FWIW, the Casey Butt’s model puts my max at 177lbs at 10%BF, and I’m currently about 40lbs under that for a similar BF percentage.
Lyle,
In all my years of fitness, I don’t think I’ve seen anybody tackle this impossible question in such a complete fashion. Hardly anything impress me anymore regarding bodybuilding theories, nutrition, etc. There’s not a lot of “new” things just newbies with blogs re-hasing the wisdom of the pioneers.
But this one stands out as unique and interesting. It gets asked all the time and nobody ever comes up with a reasonable method. Even if it’s all theory, you’ve put together one of the most unique posts I’ve seen in 19 years.
Thank you for this.
Thibaudeau is a bullshit scammer supplement pusher. That whole website, T-nation is just to sell their supplements. Nothing new there.
I am 6.1 and 192lb with around 7-8% body fat, so does that mean I should be nearing my max? I have not seen any significant slowdowns in my muscle gain, as a matter of fact it has been much greater than in the last 4-5 years (I am 22). I did gain massive amounts of muscle during the first 1-2 years of weight lifting as the chart says, after that it slowed down significantly, but now I am using more sophisticated training and dieting, and been gaining a lot of muscle. All natural by the way. For supplements I been taking Creating and Glutamine and fish oil + vitamins. oh and protein of course
“Even when people point to large natural strength athletes who might be 270-280 lbs. natural, by the time you figure in 28-30% body fat, that still puts them right back at a maximum lean body mass of 189-196 lbs. Certainly near the higher end of things but not by that much.”
Do you believe that fatter athletes / constantly overeating athletes can simply hold more total muscle amounts than leaner athletes? From what I see around me, this seems to be the case. There are natural powerlifters, football players, farmboys etc who are pretty darn huge and strong, even if you subtract the fat on top.
Maybe, for example, Martin’s calculations are right for people who usually go down to 5%. When they diet down they start losing muscle near their genetic limit. But what about a guy who wants to stay around his set point? I think he could theoretically hold more muscle and be stronger naturally. By how much? Not sure… if you agree with me, please give me your thoughts on how much this would amount to. Guys willing to get fat could definitely get stronger and maintain more muscle, but not many of us want to be fat, although it would be a fun ride. Some of us don’t want to diet down to contest levels either (me).
Also Lyle, one more question. Do you think if someone uses steroids to get to say, 20lbs above their calculated genetic limit, are they destined to slowly lose all of that over the next couple of years if their training, diet, and natural hormone levels are good?
I’m working towards being a natural bodybuilder, but I still have a long way to go. I’m 6’5, and still very thin (as in 14 inch biceps), but I’m already 220 lbs at 10% body fat. When I reach anything close to looking muscular, I know I’ll be well over 200 lb lean mass. I followed your link to weightrainer.net and the result is that my top genetic potential is to only gain another 5 lbs. I guess I’m an exception
It’s a shame really, because I think your information is so valuable and well researched.
Lyle,
Great post! Thanks for taking the time to put together all the different theories on this one. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything that attempts to answer this frequently asked but impossible question.
Outstanding article! I’m a shameless math geek myself, and I take predictions and progress tracking to levels most people haven’t the stomach for. I especially like your idea that guys should just train at 100% of their capabilities without worrying about such things, but just as reality dictates there are speed limits built into the human body, we don’t do ourselves any favors setting unrealistic goals. The amount of guys who get frustrated and quit early, or turn to the needle because they haven’t achieved what the glossy mags told them they could in record time probably ranks in the millions. But perspective and reality can be a total buzzkill, so we ignore both, and the flame wars ensue.
I’m finally at that point in my lifting adventures where I would be ECSTATIC to hit 190 Lbs at 10% body fat. That, in my estimation, is the entry level to “huge” for my body type, and far enough above average that I could be very content with that kind of gain (even tho I may toil futilely forever to surpass it naturally).
Nicely done, Lyle — your reference documentation is what keeps me coming back (and buying your books…). It’s now down, but About.com USED to have in the bodybuilding section a “compare yourself to Arnold” plug-in calculator based on height and wrist dimensions.. SInce it’s been down for years I can’t forward the link but I printed mine off and — surprise! — it’s fairly close to Casey’s model as listed above. I suppose it’s an entirely different question as to whether “genetic potential” implies anabolic enhancements. The kicker? I’m trying “au natural” but I live in Bangkok, where all steroids are sold cheaply over the counter. The Universe, She is an ironic place.
thanks for posting.
such an important subject
Hey I was wondering about the guy who gained 20 lb with X REP. is THAT BULL SHIT?
Well, this was certainly disheartening, and while I am upset, it’s with what I’ve learned from this article, not you, the author. I mean, I’m 22, 5’7.5 and 180lb at ~12-14%BF. That puts me at 156.6 LBM, already above the projected number by Berkhan’s model, and I’ve only trained for three years, or which only one has involved actual solid training. My first two years were awful, as I went from ~145 to ~160, while the last year and a half I’ve moved towards 180 and I still fit into size 32 jeans. Once I (hopefully) cut down to 10%BF, I should have a LBM right at 153, my genetic limit.
Am I to believe that 1year good training+2years stupid high volume/pump set training-=Genetic Limit? I hope not.
For what it’s worth, Butt’s calculator says I can reach 191.3@10%BF, giving me 172.17LBM.
kyle,
i’m like 8′ tall. does that mean i can only carry 200# lbm? i think not. i think i can carry at least 205 # lbm, BRO. i guess i am an exception.
btw, i also do think that mike hayden is an exception … an exceptionally retarded individual. jesus h, with his 14″ arms and “10%” and all. natural bodybuilding … about as exciting as women’s basketball, only gayer.
hugs and kisses,
dano
I think starting with realistic expectations should actually encourage new trainees, lest they go into it believing they’ll look like Arnold after two months.
Hey Lyle,
Another one I found is the Steeve Reeves model, although it tends to overestimate the Casey Butt’s prediction by a LOT for me, because it is only based on height and doesn’t take into account wrist and ankle size (which is probably more accurate unforunately).
http://www.bodybuildingsecrets.com/articles/the_ideal_body_measurements.php
So according to Steve Reeves, as a 6′ male, I should reach a competition weight of 200lb, but with smaller joints in Casey’s model, I would only reach 187lb (at 6% bf), so it’s MUCH lower.
Anyway, just wanted to add that Steve Reeves link.
How does this explain a running back in the NFL like LaDainian Tomlinson, 5’10, 222lbs….couldn’t be much more than 10% bf….is it most definitely steroids or are there some genetic freak exceptions?
Do the math: 222@10% bodyfat = 22 lbs fat. Putting him at 200 lbs. LBM. Near the top end of the genetic curve (which you would probably expect for a professional athlete) but not shockingly impossible by any stretch.
Diet him down to contest lean he’d come in under 200 lbs ( due to loss o glycogen/water loss which shows up as LBM) so maybe 195 at the end of it all. Again, it’s not unheard of to find natural bodybuilders (e.g. the guy on the cover of Stubborn Fat Solution) at that level. Not common but certainly not unheard of.
What you don’t see is naturals coming into contest shape at 220 or whatever.
Lyle
I’d add this: drugs, including anabolics, have been part of pro-football since at least the 70′s. They used to joke about how they’d sprinkle dianabol on their morning cereal: D-bol, the breakfast of champions.
So while the guy you mentioned isn’t staggeringly out of range, to think that there is no drug use in pro-sports would be pretty naive.
Lyle
“I’d only note in closing that the above calculations also has some real-world implications in terms of diet (e.g. what kind of weekly or daily surplus should be attempted to maximize muscle gain without excessive fat gains) but that will have to wait for a future article.”
Please write this article as your next one or very soon. I would love to hear what you have to say on this matter.
So a student goes to the dojo and asks the master how long it will take him to become a master himself. The master says “First, you must learn patience.” And the student asks “Yeah, yeah, how long is THAT going to take?”
I used the calculator and it seems I already reached my MAX in all measurements but weight.. This seems strange. All my measurements are almost as predicted (chest having few cm less and tights a few more) but my weight is far below the estimated value which should be 183lbs @ 5% BF. While currently I weight 182lbs at something above 15%. So if I dropped the 10% off of the value it’d be 164lbs @ 5%.
Could this be that my skeletal frame is too light?
i don’t see what all the fuss is about, if these numbers are accurate and my genetics fit in even fairly well with their prediction of prospective gains, i’m a very happy camper. but then again, i’m not aiming to be a pro bodybuilder or a muscular freak.
Because people want to believe that they can be as big as the monstro freaks in the magazines. And they can if they take enough drugs and have the right genetics. And can’t otherwise.
are these charts based on average training and diet without supplementation? such as creatine and such.?
I actually find these numbers to be motivating … I’m supposedly about 10 pounds away from my LBM max, and to me that says the past couple of years of serious training were well worth it.
BTW I am not a HIT fanatic, but I think it’s interesting that Mike Mentzer used to suggest a person who trained intensely for a year or two could reach their genetic potential and it seems he wasn’t too far wrong.
Maybe if I drink some HCG I’ll grow faster … yeah, that’s the ticket.
Really good article. I’m 30 years old and have been training since 18. I stand about 5’11 and weigh 220 and my bf right now is about 10-12%, putting me in that 195-200 lbm. I know what it took me to get that big, so when I see guys bigger and more ripped than me, that don’t know anything about nutrition and their training is sub-par I think to myself, WTF! I gotten to know a lot of the guys and it always comes out sooner or later…STEROIDS!!! I’m proud to have to done it naturally. I came across the Tnation I,bodybuilder program and I’ll do it just to prove that it’s going to be the same thing as everything else. It looks like a good program only because your switching everything up but when it comes down to it, I might be a couple lbs bigger but I would’ve gotten that way regardless.
with these genetic caculators based on the top preformers of a bodybuilding contests you looking at a calculator based on the genetics of natural champs. I go to the gym, eat right, lift hard and am very dedicated and constently see people pass me up in the gym. i come from a small framed family, i think some people have better genetic jean for building muscle than others witch allows some to build more muscle much faster then others. it doesnt mattter how much i eat or how hard i lift i just dont get any stronger anymore. i can take pro hormones, gain some weight, and after about 3-4 months ive lost it all and im back to the size i started at. I can not make gains and keep them anymore!
I believe that it’s the maximum muscular measurements, along with the corresponding body fat percentage, which matter much more than bodyweight, since bodyweight fluctuates periodically, and varies greatly from individual to individual due to different body frames and bone density.
this is pretty cool. ran the calc. I never really wanted to be super huge. Just fast, fit and able to lift huge weights.
cheers.
I believe this to be true. Hell Mike Tyson was a freak at only around 5’9-5’10max and in his prime he was around 215, sometimes 220…that’d definately put him around 200lbs LBM.
I think I can reach 200lb LBM, but that would more than likely be my potential.
Of course we all love to believe we can be more than what is expected (and with drugs it is possible to gain more).
By the way this is one of the best sites Lyle. Keep it up!
I know strength athletes who are 5.8 at 230 with what i would say is 12% bodyfat, who are definately natural. Tom Mutaffis, leightweight strongman comes to mind (2007 NAS champion). There are also football players, mma fighters etc that are truly freaky, i would assume that steroids would just be to diffulcult for these athletes to use. Brian Cushing (though he did get busted for HCG), Brian Orakpo, Ray lewis. Brock Lesnar, Shane Carwin, etc. Im pretty sure Brock Lesnar is around 6.4 at 265+ 10% bodyfat!
(in the end though it would not suprise me if all the above mentioned athletes were on steroids even though they are in tested regulations).
I am 17 years old, 202lbs on average, and 5’11″. I’ve been tested by my high school’s athletic trainer to be 11% body fat, and this seems correct as I have somewhat visible abdominal muscles.
According to the calculator, this would put my max genetic limit at around 187lbs (at 11% bodyfat). I have NEVER taken steroids in any way, shape or form.
So how can this calculator possibly be correct? I have exceeded the “genetic limit” by about 15lbs with only around 2 years of strength training (I am not a bodybuilder). Should I just cut down to 5% BF and win all the natural bodybuilding competitions?
@ Brandon
There are exceptions to everything. Don’t be ignorant and think the calculators are perfect and suited to all individuals. Obviously you must fall in the group to whom the calculators aren’t suited to.
@ Brandon
There’s a simple answer to your question. You’re not 11% bodyfat.
@Brandon
Also, you have water weight and such that needs to be accounted for. Calipers can be very innacurate.
Great Article. It’s good to get a realistic prognostic of how much dry muscle you can gain. I have a question regarding gaining Lean Body Mass . . . .
“How much water and glycogen does an individual gain in addition to muscle? Say someone gains 10 lbs of dry muscle. How much water and glycogen would go with that?”
When I am training and eating towards the goal of gaining muscle, I gain 1-2 lbs a week. I ask my question because I am curious about how much of my weight gain is actually LBM. So if you were to tell me that for every pound of muscle an individual gains, he gains 2 pounds of glycogen and water (along with a few pounds of fat), then I would definitely reconsider how much weight I am gaining. If that were the case, then I would aim towards gaining 4-5 pounds of weight each week (1 lb of muscle, 2 lbs of water and glycogen, and 1 or 2 lbs of fat) which is quite different from the 1-2 lbs.
note: I eat clean foods 90% of the time, consider myself intermediate and I weigh 170ish at sub 10% bf.
regarding my previous comment . . .
i also take 5g creatine postworkout (the only time I take it), and drink lots of water, about a liter a day.
I really enjoyed this article. From everything else I’ve read it seems completely realistic and down to earth. I don’t know what other peoples hopes might be but for myself the potential within these limits should be completely acceptable for anyone. I mean, it’s rather simple, you reap as you sow. To build a quality physique takes work but if you want more or faster you’ve got performance enhancers. It’s anybody’s choice.
At one point in the past I did gain 10kg (22lbs) in 3 months. But I was 20 years old, 6’2 and a malnourished 165lbs at the start. I had almost no fat to begin with and ate stacks and stacks of protein and creatine for those 3 months. I actually got minor stretch marks by my armpits from the rapid growth. However, I haven’t seen growth like that since and, 10 years later, am pretty sure I never will again.
What does make me curious though is where you talk about natural bodybuilders rarely coming in at over 200lbs. I know nothing about bodybuilding as a sport and have never followed it closely. Do they not compete in height divisions?
The reason I ask is because I recently got measured at my local gym as being 214lbs and 18.7% bodyfat (caliper test). This would give me a lean mass of 173lbs. Given that I haven’t worked out in 3 years (and never really all that hard before that) I would assume I figure into the beginner category of lifters. This sets me up for a pontential of 20lbs in a year if I do everything correctly. 173+20=193lbs which at 5% bf would add up to a total of 203lbs. According to Casey’s calculator I have a max muscular potential somewhere between 210 and 220lbs @ 5% so this figure seems completely plausible.
I guess that I just find it kinda surprising that given a year, a lot of hard work and some luck I could be among the heaviest naturals out there. I know I’m tall and that my frame is fairly big but somehow I’ve just always felt fairly avarage anyway. Maybe it’s all the roids floating around my gym that have given me that impression. But surely there must be a fair few taller and thus heavier (200lbs+) naturals out there?
Lyle:
you say:
” I would rather see people put their energy into their training and nutrition than worrying ahead of time about what they might or might not accomplish”
Do you think there is any value in setting realistic expectations? Personally, knowing (or at least believing) I can accomplish a specific goal goes a long way in keeping me motivated.
For example, I’d like to get a physique like the one Ryan Reynolds obtained recently. Knowing this is in my genetic wheelhouse would be very motivating to know as I set on the path to try and get there.
I’m trying to figure out what type of physique I can realistically aspire to so I don’t unnecessarily spin my wheels chasing a dream and end up frustrated and possibly end up ultimately in a worse place physically.
I wonder if there is anything in this for a powerlifter, like at X height you’d be best at Y bodyweight.
Or is it too complex to give even a vague idea…