Bryson DeChambeau - Oy

[ChetlovesMer]

11 hours ago, Bonvivant said:

The way he played this week, I think that he has a shot. I'm curious to see what the odds makers will put him at to win (and at to top 10). Just looked up a futures....Rory at +1100, Rahm and BDC at +1200, Koepka and JT at +1400.....out of that bunch and with those odds JT and BDC are a tight call for me. Not a gambler here, but I do pay attention to that stuff because it gives an idea of what we can expect (most of the time)

I really don't care if he wins or somebody else does. In a year where I truly thought there would be no Masters, I am just totally jacked that they are actually going to play the event! 

[Bonvivant]

Just now, boogielicious said:

Absolutely. He played great in areas other than driving including great short game recovery. I am just pointing out that his driving was not miles longer than anyone else the way the announcers were.

He wasn't the longest driver of the week. I think he was something like 7th or 8th. Interesting that he backed off honestly, because I think if he wants to be the long driver on any given week, no one can stop him.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, boogielicious said:

Absolutely. He played great in areas other than driving including great short game recovery. I am just pointing out that his driving was not miles longer than anyone else the way the announcers were.

You said "the Masters isn't just about power," I point out that he gained a shot a round in ALL four areas of the game, and you come back with "he wasn't even the longest."

What are we doing here?

[boogielicious]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

You said "the Masters isn't just about power," I point out that he gained a shot a round in ALL four areas of the game, and you come back with "he wasn't even the longest."

What are we doing here?

I think if he uses the approach shots, short game and putting performance here, he certainly has a chance. But some folks are thinking that power is the only key. 
 

I’m curious to see how different the course plays in November too. 

[RFKFREAK]

I wonder with this win whether there will be more scrutiny on his bulking up.  The first year of properly weight trains will yield a max of about 16 pounds of muscle and he put on what, 40 pounds in a few weeks?  I know the PGA is supposed to test these guys, and I'm not the best at estimating how much muscle a person puts on in changing their frame but it doesn't look to me like he's put on 30+ pounds of fat.

[MiuraMan]

1 hour ago, RFKFREAK said:

I wonder with this win whether there will be more scrutiny on his bulking up.  The first year of properly weight trains will yield a max of about 16 pounds of muscle and he put on what, 40 pounds in a few weeks?  I know the PGA is supposed to test these guys, and I'm not the best at estimating how much muscle a person puts on in changing their frame but it doesn't look to me like he's put on 30+ pounds of fat.

Bryson DeChambeau has gained size. He estimates that he's put on about 40 pounds since he left college in 2015, and about 20 pounds over the PGA Tour's recently ended three-month hiatus. 

[RFKFREAK]

14 hours ago, MiuraMan said:

Bryson DeChambeau has gained size. He estimates that he's put on about 40 pounds since he left college in 2015, and about 20 pounds over the PGA Tour's recently ended three-month hiatus. 

This was on his IG:

He also said on his IG that he was 195 in the beginning of 2018, same as the graphic above.  

The article below from June of this year says, "Since we last saw him March, Bryson DeChambeau hit the gym and gained about 20 pounds," and goes on to say, "DeChambeau, who said he now weighs around 240 pounds (up more than 40 pounds from last September)," so if the article is accurate (and it can be called into question because I did see in Bryson's IG page he said he was at 220 in Oct. 2019) we can safely conclude that he looked about as he did in that comparison pic in September 2019.

Bryson added another 20 pounds in the gym

---

Bryson DeChambeau's weight gain comes from a continuation of the intense workout regimen he added during last offseason, with an eye on gaining speed.

If we believe the article, then in the 6 month period from September 2019 to March 2020, Bryson put on 20 pounds and in the 3 month period from March 2020 to when this article was published in June 2020, he put on an additional 20 pounds.  I'm saying that if he did it naturally, the max he'd gain for the 6 month period would be about 6-8 pounds and the followup 3 month period another 3-4 pounds and even that's unlikely given that I'm sure he's been working out since he's been a kid.  But, let's say that he didn't and he's a genetic freak and put it on 12 pounds of muscle in 9 months.  That means he put on 28 pounds of fat.  Looking at his frame, he's def put on a bunch of fat but for him to improve on the numbers he had like he has, I call into question some of either his statements or whether he took any substances to help him in gaining his size because I don't see a 2.5:1 gain of fat to lean mass. 

[ncates00]

30 minutes ago, RFKFREAK said:

This was on his IG:

He also said on his IG that he was 195 in the beginning of 2018, same as the graphic above.  

The article below from June of this year says, "Since we last saw him March, Bryson DeChambeau hit the gym and gained about 20 pounds," and goes on to say, "DeChambeau, who said he now weighs around 240 pounds (up more than 40 pounds from last September)," so if the article is accurate (and it can be called into question because I did see in Bryson's IG page he said he was at 220 in Oct. 2019) we can safely conclude that he looked about as he did in that comparison pic in September 2019.

Bryson added another 20 pounds in the gym

---

Bryson DeChambeau's weight gain comes from a continuation of the intense...

If we believe the article, then in the 6 month period from September 2019 to March 2020, Bryson put on 20 pounds and in the 3 month period from March 2020 to when this article was published in June 2020, he put on an additional 20 pounds.  I'm saying that if he did it naturally, the max he'd gain for the 6 month period would be about 6-8 pounds and the followup 3 month period another 3-4 pounds and even that's unlikely given that I'm sure he's been working out since he's been a kid.  But, let's say that he didn't and he's a genetic freak and put it on 12 pounds of muscle in 9 months.  That means he put on 28 pounds of fat.  Looking at his frame, he's def put on a bunch of fat but for him to improve on the numbers he had like he has, I call into question some of either his statements or whether he took any substances to help him in gaining his size because I don't see a 2.5:1 gain of fat to lean mass. 

You’ve not worked out consistently on a regimented program before have you? You gain a lot of weight, muscle and fat, when you begin lifting. It happens all the time. Noob gains, some call it. It’s entirely possible—actually, likely. Take any reasonably dedicated high school football player, they’re almost unrecognizable and not just due to getting older and more mature. I gained a lot of weight when I began my powerlifting routine years ago and still do to this day. I don’t see the same kind of gains now as I did when I began, but I do lift heavier. 
 

Get in the gym consistently, doing some squats, deadlifts, presses, cleans, jerks, snatches, and the like, you’ll change your thinking. 

Edited September 22, 2020 by ncates00

[Grizvok]

5 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

You’ve not worked out consistently on a regimented program before have you? You gain a lot of weight, muscle and fat, when you begin lifting. It happens all the time. Noob gains, some call it. It’s entirely possible—actually, likely. Take any reasonably dedicated high school football player, they’re almost unrecognizable and not just due to getting older and more mature. I gained a lot of weight when I began my powerlifting routine years ago and still do to this day. I don’t see the same kind of gains now as I did when I began, but I do lift heavier. 
 

Get in the gym consistently, doing some “big 4 lifts,” cleans, jerks, snatched, etc. and you’ll change your thinking. 

There is absolutely nothing inherent about lifting weights that makes you automatically gain weight.

[ncates00]

4 minutes ago, Grizvok said:

There is absolutely nothing inherent about lifting weights that makes you automatically gain weight.

Pretty sure most of the literature out there disagrees with you.  Muscle weighs more than fat.  So when you lift weights, you gain muscle.  That makes you weigh more.  You add in eating more to support your muscle growth and you also add fat.  I know this is all unscientific and rather anecdotal, but the science is there.  Go look up what we have known for a long time.  

Also, go to the gym and find out yourself.

Edited September 22, 2020 by ncates00

[RFKFREAK]

1 minute ago, ncates00 said:

You’ve not worked out consistently on a regimented program before have you?  

You could not be more inaccurate with this statement if you tried.  I've have a whole thread where I document my learning experiencing in losing weight and since then have been on a regiment of body recomp - build muscle, lose fat, build muscle, lose fat - rinse, repeat.  I track my macros, monitor my weight daily, and go to the gym 5-6 times a week to weight train and where I log each exercise I do.

1 minute ago, ncates00 said:

You gain a lot of weight, muscle and fat, when you begin lifting. It happens all the time. Noob gains, some call it. It’s entirely possible—actually, likely. Take any reasonably dedicated high school football player, they’re almost unrecognizable and not just due to getting older and more mature. I gained a lot of weight when I began my powerlifting routine years ago and still do to this day. I don’t see the same kind of gains now as I did when I began, but I do lift heavier. 

Yes, there are noob gains, however, I'm going to presume that when he was in high school and college, as an athlete, that he's not new to lifting given his manner of being and the potential he no doubt showed growing up. 

This pic is from June 2016 and it's obvious that he's done some weight training as you can see some definition in his chest and core.  He's obviously built a foundation by this point and I'd estimate that his BF% is somewhere in the mid-teens.  So, I conclude there are no noobie gains to be had here.  

Lyle McDonald is a health and fitness researcher and writer and this chart provides what he estimates as the potential for muscle gain:

With each year of training naturally, there are diminished returns.  There may be people who believe that Bryson hadn't trained prior to his bulk, but I think the evidence demonstrates otherwise.  

[ncates00]

3 minutes ago, RFKFREAK said:

You could not be more inaccurate with this statement if you tried.  I've have a whole thread where I document my learning experiencing in losing weight and since then have been on a regiment of body recomp - build muscle, lose fat, build muscle, lose fat - rinse, repeat.  I track my macros, monitor my weight daily, and go to the gym 5-6 times a week to weight train and where I log each exercise I do.

Yes, there are noob gains, however, I'm going to presume that when he was in high school and college, as an athlete, that he's not new to lifting given his manner of being and the potential he no doubt showed growing up. 

This pic is from June 2016 and it's obvious that he's done some weight training as you can see some definition in his chest and core.  He's obviously built a foundation by this point and I'd estimate that his BF% is somewhere in the mid-teens.  So, I conclude there are no noobie gains to be had here.  

Lyle McDonald is a health and fitness researcher and writer and this chart provides what he estimates as the potential for muscle gain:

With each year of training naturally, there are diminished returns.  There may be people who believe that Bryson hadn't trained prior to his bulk, but I think the evidence demonstrates otherwise.  

Even assuming arguendo that what you say is true (which I still do not agree that he was a serious lifter because of one picture of a healthy, younger Bryson), you only mentioned muscle gain in pounds.  You neglected to account for his fat gain as well.  

[Grizvok]

20 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Pretty sure most of the literature out there disagrees with you.  Muscle weighs more than fat.  So when you lift weights, you gain muscle.  That makes you weigh more.  You add in eating more to support your muscle growth and you also add fat.  I know this is all unscientific and rather anecdotal, but the science is there.  Go look up what we have known for a long time.  

Also, go to the gym and find out yourself.

Please stop. Thermodynamics is king.

[RFKFREAK]

11 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

Even assuming arguendo that what you say is true (which I still do not agree that he was a serious lifter because of one picture of a healthy, younger Bryson)

Dude, the pictures are out there - not that hard to find.

10 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

 you only mentioned muscle gain in pounds.  You neglected to account for his fat gain as well.  

Did you miss this earlier?  

1 hour ago, RFKFREAK said:

If we believe the article, then in the 6 month period from September 2019 to March 2020, Bryson put on 20 pounds and in the 3 month period from March 2020 to when this article was published in June 2020, he put on an additional 20 pounds.  I'm saying that if he did it naturally, the max he'd gain for the 6 month period would be about 6-8 pounds and the followup 3 month period another 3-4 pounds and even that's unlikely given that I'm sure he's been working out since he's been a kid.  But, let's say that he didn't and he's a genetic freak and put it on 12 pounds of muscle in 9 months.  That means he put on 28 pounds of fat.  Looking at his frame, he's def put on a bunch of fat but for him to improve on the numbers he had like he has, I call into question some of either his statements or whether he took any substances to help him in gaining his size because I don't see a 2.5:1 gain of fat to lean mass. 

[ChetlovesMer]

1 hour ago, RFKFREAK said:

You could not be more inaccurate with this statement if you tried.  I've have a whole thread where I document my learning experiencing in losing weight and since then have been on a regiment of body recomp - build muscle, lose fat, build muscle, lose fat - rinse, repeat.  I track my macros, monitor my weight daily, and go to the gym 5-6 times a week to weight train and where I log each exercise I do.

Yes, there are noob gains, however, I'm going to presume that when he was in high school and college, as an athlete, that he's not new to lifting given his manner of being and the potential he no doubt showed growing up. 

This pic is from June 2016 and it's obvious that he's done some weight training as you can see some definition in his chest and core.  He's obviously built a foundation by this point and I'd estimate that his BF% is somewhere in the mid-teens.  So, I conclude there are no noobie gains to be had here.  

Lyle McDonald is a health and fitness researcher and writer and this chart provides what he estimates as the potential for muscle gain:

With each year of training naturally, there are diminished returns.  There may be people who believe that Bryson hadn't trained prior to his bulk, but I think the evidence demonstrates otherwise.  

Hey @RFKFREAK I love you, brother. And it is clear to me, after meeting you, that you know your way around a gym. Bryson DeChambeau wishes he was built like you. 

But I think you are making two assumptions which may or may not be true. I don't think the 2016 picture is proof that Bryson lifted weights before. I used to have definition in my chest and especially my core way before I started lifting weights. Although, I agree with you. It's likely BDC did some sort of fitness regimen. Especially since he played college golf and I'm guessing even at SMU the college golf coach would have requested that his players at least spend some time working out. 

The second thing, and the more important one, is Lyle McDonald's muscle gains estimates. I've read a lot (I mean A LOT) of folks who have bashed Lyle's work stating that his research is only accurate if you do the exact same type of training over and over again. It is possible to dramatically beat Lyle's estimates by radically changing up the way you train. I think I've even heard Lyle himself say that. I remember him countering the criticism of his work by stating that he put together his research not so much to say that these are the maximums you can gain, but instead Lyle was trying to tell everyone that you need to mix up your routines on a regular basis to continue making gains. 

I don't know what all of that means with regard to the discussion you were having, but there you go. Have a great day. 

[RFKFREAK]

20 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Hey @RFKFREAK I love you, brother. And it is clear to me, after meeting you, that you know your way around a gym. Bryson DeChambeau wishes he was built like you. 

But I think you are making two assumptions which may or may not be true.

20 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

I don't think the 2016 picture is proof that Bryson lifted weights before. I used to have definition in my chest and especially my core way before I started lifting weights. Although, I agree with you. It's likely BDC did some sort of fitness regimen. Especially since he played college golf and I'm guessing even at SMU the college golf coach would have requested that his players at least spend some time working out. 

It absolutely is an assumption and thirty years ago I would say that he could have gone through school playing golf with his talent without training but in today's day and age, I'm presuming it's a requirement that these guys hit the gym and weight train.  I think it's a given Bryson demonstrated an extraordinary amount of talent growing up and can't imagine his coaches wouldn't have had that be part of the program for not only him, but for the other student athletes. Given how important the legs and core are for generating power, I have to think his coaches ensured that those areas in particular were properly trained. 

You used yourself as an example and are absolutely correct that some people genetically can build muscle quicker in certain areas than others with minimal work; my calves have always been fairly big even before I trained them.  But when I mentioned the definition we see in the picture of Bryson's core (which is only visible because of what his body fat percentage) and his chest, it because to me it's obvious he had done some core and chest work, even if it weren't prioritized. 

20 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

The second thing, and the more important one, is Lyle McDonald's muscle gains estimates. I've read a lot (I mean A LOT) of folks who have bashed Lyle's work stating that his research is only accurate if you do the exact same type of training over and over again. It is possible to dramatically beat Lyle's estimates by radically changing up the way you train. I think I've even heard Lyle himself say that. I remember him countering the criticism of his work by stating that he put together his research not so much to say that these are the maximums you can gain, but instead Lyle was trying to tell everyone that you need to mix up your routines on a regular basis to continue making gains. 

I don't know what all of that means with regard to the discussion you were having, but there you go. Have a great day. 

There's def some differing view on changing up routines and whether or not there are benefits to it but there are other things to consider.  Alan Aragon estimates that in the first year a man can gain 1%-1.5% of body weight per month of muscle and that in year 3 and beyond, it diminishes to 0.25%- 0.5%.  At 200 pounds, to get to 240 pounds in a 9 month period, presuming his muscle to fat gaining ratio was 1:1, he would have had to gain an average of 1% of body weight per month of muscle which is what we'd expect from someone in year 1 of training.  If we put his fat to muscle ratio at 3:1, then he gets to 40 pounds in 9 months then his muscle gain ratio is at 0.5% of body weight per month of muscle but at that point, he's gaining 10 pounds of muscle and 30 pounds of fat and that I just don't see.  Could he be an outlier, sure, he obviously is one with respect to golfing talent.

I was also curious about his Fat Free Mass Index (FFMI).  There was a study conducted on FFMI and steroid use which concluded that every single natural athlete in the study had a normalized FFMI of 24.9% or less whereas half of the steroid users were above 25 and half were below.  So, if an athlete's normalized FFMI is above 25, it's safe to presume that they’re taking or have taken steroids.  Bryson is 6'2" and at 240, his normalized FFMI at 25 would put him at about 18% body fat.  At 21% BF, his normalized FFMI would be about 24 and at 14% BF his normalized FFMI would be roughly 26, so, as you can see, it's an inverse relationship.  I would say the dude is swole and has an FFMI of less than 25% so, based on this, I can't say he's been using any substances, but there's a lot of things that you can point to that call into question whether he did this naturally or not and I was just wondering if his winning a Major would scrutinize how he went about his bulk like I am.

[ChetlovesMer]

43 minutes ago, RFKFREAK said:

I was also curious about his Fat Free Mass Index (FFMI).  There was a study conducted on FFMI and steroid use which concluded that every single natural athlete in the study had a normalized FFMI of 24.9% or less whereas half of the steroid users were above 25 and half were below.  So, if an athlete's normalized FFMI is above 25, it's safe to presume that they’re taking or have taken steroids.  Bryson is 6'2" and at 240, his normalized FFMI at 25 would put him at about 18% body fat.  At 21% BF, his normalized FFMI would be about 24 and at 14% BF his normalized FFMI would be roughly 26, so, as you can see, it's an inverse relationship.  I would say the dude is swole and has an FFMI of less than 25% so, based on this, I can't say he's been using any substances, but there's a lot of things that you can point to that call into question whether he did this naturally or not and I was just wondering if his winning a Major would scrutinize how he went about his bulk like I am.

I concede to your knowledge. 

I do know the PGA has an anti-doping policy which I believe includes random blood tests. My guess is that if BDC did use something less than kosher to gain muscle, he may get away with it for a while, but eventually he will get caught. ... at least I hope so. Until then, I'll have to take him at his word. 

Having never used steroids myself. (I know, shocking right.) I'm not sure, does "Roid-Rage" cause you to berate unsuspecting cameramen who are just trying to do their job? (That's a joke, not an accusation.) 

[ncates00]

49 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

I concede to your knowledge. 

I do know the PGA has an anti-doping policy which I believe includes random blood tests. My guess is that if BDC did use something less than kosher to gain muscle, he may get away with it for a while, but eventually he will get caught. ... at least I hope so. Until then, I'll have to take him at his word. 

Having never used steroids myself. (I know, shocking right.) I'm not sure, does "Roid-Rage" cause you to berate unsuspecting cameramen who are just trying to do their job? (That's a joke, not an accusation.) 

and @RFKFREAK, given the circumstances, wouldn't he be a prime target for testing?