Yet no futuristic athletic man can resist a bullet in the head, or have a 6 foot vertical leap, or make a homerun with a metal bat and a cannonball.
Peds gives you a boost, and makes you look better because all that fake ripped muscle is full of water but won´t make you a super human with ultra-advanced genetics, if they are so advanced these genetic freaks should have at least 3 foot schlongs too.
You're dumb if you think otherwise.
Folks back then played at a stupidly slow pace, teams played with 4 or 5 forwards and they would never track back. You don't understand this game if you think any average team from today with current physical and tactical preparation doesn't win is said scenario.
omg
The thought of Mehdi Lacen and Co taking on Pelé and Tostao is just
His peak would likely be longer.
How does it feel to be so mistaken?
The thought of Mehdi Lacen and Co taking on Pelé and Tostao is just
Only you can answer that
like the 70s Brazil need all that to beat Getafe
Tbh, (assuming this is povertyball) it would probably be a boring, ty 0-0 tie no matter what.
I don't get that argument at all about 70s Brazil. Mexicans in the third world playing poorball would still be using 1970s medicine anyways tbh.
For the most part nutrition is a group of fads going back and forth that evolve over time and are at best based on soft science. Comparing that or psychology to our understanding of the EM force is fun I guess but is bull . The studies conflict each other and there is no 'right' answer. Steroids and speed are nothing new and the atkins diet is not avante garde.
Wilt was bigger stronger and faster than players today and has been demonstrated objectively. What you are presenting is technology worship and little more. I bet you are an Apple fan too.
lmao
And assists are meaningless. Top 3 team cancer all time, Kobe Bryant, has averaged a ton of assists too. Tbh the only time Wilt really won a le was because he stopped being a fuccboi and actually played team basketball. Every other year? Cancer.
>2014
>being this ignorant
You have no excuse. You have the sum of human knowledge at your fingertips but you still think nutrition is at best a soft science?
This is why you're skinnyfat. (or just plain fat, just taking a stab in the dark right now)
This is pretty ignorant. When he went crazy from 61-63 and put up all those points that was at his coach's behest because the talent level on the squad was .
lmao
And assists are meaningless. Top 3 team cancer all time, Kobe Bryant, has averaged a ton of assists too. Tbh the only time Wilt really won a le was because he stopped being a fuccboi and actually played team basketball. Every other year? Cancer.
Ad hominem. Nice. I work out 4 days a week and don't drink my sugar.>2014
>being this ignorant
You have no excuse. You have the sum of human knowledge at your fingertips but you still think nutrition is at best a soft science?
This is why you're skinnyfat. (or just plain fat, just taking a stab in the dark right now)
Yes soft science. I know some molecular nutritionists but they don't get much play in the overall. Even they admit that there is only a cursory understanding of the systems at play here. Looking at the debate over artificial sweeteners goes to show how ty the 'science' is.
I said technology worship but it seems more like a hipster's celebration of the new or different than actual technology.
Sporting News article from 1955
"The Stilt is most effective simply because of his physical qualities. He stands 7-feet in his sweat socks. Over this frame are spread 225 sinewy pounds. He is almost as agile as a 5-11 playmaker. He can jump 24 inches straight up."
I'll give Wilt credit, he was definitely ahead of his time, and a lot more impressive than the other players of his era..
However, it must have been nice playing against such awful, unathletic compe ion
ty talent level
"Get on my ing back Wilt"
Rofl it's really not surprising that someone who thinks nutrition is a soft science would boil their positive nutritional habits down to "don't drink my sugar."
And like I give a if you know some molecular nutritionists. If you're not even saying where they do their research at it's a meaningless statement.
What really happens:Even they admit that there is only a cursory understanding of the systems at play here.
"Oh FuzzyLumpkins is babbling on again with his soft science bull , let's just say we don't know so he'll stop harassing us"
It's pretty much like when you tell a homeless guy you don't got any money on you cause you want em to leave you alone.
And in all of that you do not discuss the science of nutrition. This is especially delicious in light of you claiming that I cannot talk about it.Rofl it's really not surprising that someone who thinks nutrition is a soft science would boil their positive nutritional habits down to "don't drink my sugar."
And like I give a if you know some molecular nutritionists. If you're not even saying where they do their research at it's a meaningless statement.
What really happens:
"Oh FuzzyLumpkins is babbling on again with his soft science bull , let's just say we don't know so he'll stop harassing us"
It's pretty much like when you tell a homeless guy you don't got any money on you cause you want em to leave you alone.
Milk is good, milk is bad, carbs are good carbs are bad. Saccharine causes cancer, no it doesn't it reduces caloric intake, no it effects metabolism. There are so many conflicting reports out there coming from the 'science' of nutrition. Add into that the impact of advertising and all I can do is smh.
The vast majority of it doesn't deal with the actual metabolizing of things and deals with overarching guesses using ty categorization. That is the very definition of soft science. Most of psychology uses the same approach.
and
Bluster is not compelling.
To believe that it hasn't had an impact is just asinine, tbh..
Hundreds of pro players and coaches have discussed the impact training and nutrition has had on their careers/bodies..anybody that knows anything about training/lifting knows that there has been a huge progression in acquiring knowledge, just like most other fields..
So now you resort to the incredulity argument. You cannot articulate or quantify a damn thing. I am not saying that it has not had an impact. I am saying that we cannot know what that impact has been.
To believe that it hasn't had an impact is just asinine, tbh..
Hundreds of pro players and coaches have discussed the impact training and nutrition has had on their careers/bodies..anybody that knows anything about training/lifting knows that there has been a huge progression in acquiring knowledge, just like most other fields..
At the end of the day Wilt Chamberlain was still bigger, faster, and stronger than modern NBA players despite your supposed advances. I can quantify and articulate how.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
