The new paradigm in LL; no longer are we aiming for 10cm

Edit Post

Just play Rugby, no misunderstandings, problem solved 

Edit Post

Yeah, my plan is 7 cm on the tibias and 8 cm on the femurs. With that, I'll reach 184 cm, which might be slightly less than my goal, but is still alright.

Edit Post

I love how short dudes worry with proportions, I m 6 feet and I m not preocupied by those things hehe

Edit Post

Quote from: Bruno Mars on December 06, 2014, 12:14:01 PMTypical misunderstanding between football and American "football". Lol

im from Spain where the best football in the world is done

Edit Post

Quote from: KirP1 on December 06, 2014, 06:14:17 PMim from Spain where the best football in the world is done

was*

Edit Post

Quote from: endomorphisme on December 06, 2014, 04:41:40 PMI love how short dudes worry with proportions, I m 6 feet and I m not preocupied by those things hehe

You should be.

Edit Post

Quote from: Uppland on December 06, 2014, 07:37:09 PMYou should be.

the taller the more u can lemgthen

Edit Post

Quote from: ShortyMcShort on December 06, 2014, 12:19:26 PMJust play Rugby, no misunderstandings, problem solved 

Most people never even heard of Rugby in the U.S. we have a rugby team but don't know who it is.
But basically model height in America is 5'11.75-6'3" (was 6'2" but they upped it to 6'3" and have a select amount of men who are 6'4" but no one under 5'11" barefoot) baseball is 6'3", and  American football ideal is preferably 6'3.5-6'5" (with 6'4" being sweet spot).

Quote from: Uppland on December 06, 2014, 11:44:33 AMHe's american (notice how he says 6'3.5 instead of 192) so he means american football. Also I think CRonnie7 is 186CM not that I know much about sports.

CRonnie7 was measured at a hair over 6'1" so yes that's equal to 186 cm (6'1.25")

Edit Post

Quote from: Hallijah on December 06, 2014, 08:26:10 PMthe taller the more u can lemgthen

But the difference should be very slight no? 178/170=1,047 and 188/180=1,044

So there is a 4,4% increase in 188 from 180 compared to 4,7 in 178 from 170. The difference is less than half a percent not very significant.

Edit Post

Quote from: Uppland on December 06, 2014, 09:00:40 PMBut the difference should be very slight no? 178/170=1,047 and 188/180=1,044

So there is a 4,4% increase in 188 from 180 compared to 4,7 in 178 from 170. The difference is less than half a percent not very significant.

I don't think I can do more than 5cms each segment because I already have long legs. I will be just under %50 of my proportions for doing 10cms so I think I'll probably do "2 max on my tibias maybe even "1.5 to be even safer.