The Runner's Physique

On Nov 2, 8:24 pm, "ATP*" wrote:
http://www.arthurdevany.com/2005/09/twins.html

Supposedly identical twins, one is a distance runner, the other trained in
field events.http://www.arthurdevany.com/webstuff/images/Twins.tiff


Very interesting!

Many thanks for the post. I was forever asking about why there
haven't been any studies of twins WRT physique and physical fitness.

On Nov 5, 3:23 pm, Prisoner at War wrote:
On Nov 2, 8:24 pm, "ATP*" wrote:

http://www.arthurdevany.com/2005/09/twins.html

Supposedly identical twins, one is a distance runner, the other trained in
field events.http://www.arthurdevany.com/webstuff/images/Twins.tiff

Very interesting!

Many thanks for the post. I was forever asking about why there
haven't been any studies of twins WRT physique and physical fitness.

But which is which?

jen

http://www.arthurdevany.com/2005/09/twins.html

Speaking of twins, I think noted web wackjob Devany and usenet anti
endurance ranter Kaz Kylheku might be. And like the twins linked
above, they're easy to tell apart. Kaz has trained his trollish
sarcasm while Devany's plainly given his all to cultivating a B cup:
http://www.arthurdevany.com/about.html

Nice rack, Art!

Kylheku & Devany: wits and tits.

On Nov 6, 1:39 am, Charlie Pendejo wrote:
http://www.arthurdevany.com/2005/09/twins.html

Speaking of twins, I think noted web wackjob Devany and usenet anti
endurance ranter Kaz Kylheku might be. And like the twins linked
above, they're easy to tell apart. Kaz has trained his trollish
sarcasm while Devany's plainly given his all to cultivating a B cup:http://www.arthurdevany.com/about.html


HOLY ****! Those are REAL man-tits! I bet Knebel will be "busy" with
that pic for a month or two.

On Nov 5, 10:39 pm, Charlie Pendejo wrote:
http://www.arthurdevany.com/2005/09/twins.html

Speaking of twins, I think noted web wackjob Devany and usenet anti
endurance ranter Kaz Kylheku might be.

Oversimplification. I run six days a week, and have run the Vancouver
Marathon for five years in a row as of this year. What I'm ``anti''
is doing a ****load of endurance exercise, and not having anything to
show for it, visually.

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.running.]
On 2007-11-06, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On Nov 5, 10:39 pm, Charlie Pendejo wrote:
http://www.arthurdevany.com/2005/09/twins.html

Speaking of twins, I think noted web wackjob Devany and usenet anti
endurance ranter Kaz Kylheku might be.

Oversimplification. I run six days a week, and have run the Vancouver
Marathon for five years in a row as of this year. What I'm ``anti''
is doing a ****load of endurance exercise, and not having anything to
show for it, visually.

I don't mean to downplay the importance of looking great naked -- certainly an
honourable goal. But people do run for other reasons as well. Perhaps setting
a world record is a less worthy goal than looking great naked, but I don't see
why one would be "against" it.

Cheers,
--
Elflord

Kaz:
What I'm ``anti'' is doing a ****load of endurance exercise, and
not having anything to show for it, visually.

Like race medals and trophies?

To the extent I could give a stinky nugget about "having anything to
show for it", I guess I perceive my audience to be female. Quoting
from _The Book Of Lists #2_, copyright 1979, pg 305-6:

11 physical attributes men imagine
women admire most about them

1. muscular chest and shoulders 21%
2. muscular arms 18
3. penis 15
4. tallness 13
5. flat stomach 9
6. slimness 7
7. hair (texture, not length) 4
7. buttocks 4
7. eye 4
10. long legs 3
11. neck 2

11 physical attributes women really
admire most about men

1. buttocks (usually described by women as "small and sexy") 39%
2. slimness 15
3. flat stomach 13
4. eyes 11
5. long legs 6
6. tallness 5
6. hair 5
8. neck 3
9. penis 2
10. muscular chest and shoulders 1
11. muscular arms 0

On Nov 6, 2:09 pm, Charlie Pendejo wrote:
Kaz:

What I'm ``anti'' is doing a ****load of endurance exercise, and
not having anything to show for it, visually.

Like race medals and trophies?

To the extent I could give a stinky nugget about "having anything to
show for it", I guess I perceive my audience to be female. Quoting
from _The Book Of Lists #2_, copyright 1979, pg 305-6:

11 physical attributes men imagine
women admire most about them

1. muscular chest and shoulders 21%
2. muscular arms 18
3. penis 15
4. tallness 13
5. flat stomach 9
6. slimness 7
7. hair (texture, not length) 4
7. buttocks 4
7. eye 4
10. long legs 3
11. neck 2

11 physical attributes women really
admire most about men

1. buttocks (usually described by women as "small and sexy") 39%
2. slimness 15
3. flat stomach 13
4. eyes 11
5. long legs 6
6. tallness 5
6. hair 5
8. neck 3
9. penis 2
10. muscular chest and shoulders 1
11. muscular arms 0



And then, of course, there is what women say, and what they actually
do.

My arms impresses all the girls. Then my chest. Then my abs. And
that's all after my smile! But to hear them tell it -- before they
really 'fess up after a few times of sex -- they liked my
"philosophy," what I had to say about something....

On Nov 6, 2:28 pm, Prisoner at War wrote:
before they
really 'fess up after a few times of sex -- they liked my
"philosophy," what I had to say about something

Did you ever wake up during one of these dreams?

On 2007-11-06, Charlie Pendejo wrote:
Kaz:
What I'm ``anti'' is doing a ****load of endurance exercise, and
not having anything to show for it, visually.

Like race medals and trophies?

To the extent I could give a stinky nugget about "having anything to
show for it", I guess I perceive my audience to be female. Quoting
from _The Book Of Lists #2_, copyright 1979, pg 305-6:

[snip]

As you point out, bodybuilding at least as practiced by the majority of gym
users is based on ones own delusions (and I might add insecurities) about
masculinity. Most of them have lost sight of how they are perceived by others.
In this sense, bodybuilding is somewhat auto-erotic.

Cheers,
--
Elflord