Lol u gota little body dysmorphia like the rest of us. Ur carrying a solid ass amount of muscle for ur height. We all know it's not as easy when ur over 5"11 I'd say, its not like ur 5'6-5'8 Like most guys, arnold says hes 6'2 I'd doubt he was over 6'0 most athletes hype that up.
Oh yeah I'm definitely carrying more than your average gym bros amount of muscle.
But from a competitive perspective I'm not really up there, and I'm around a lot of high level amateurs and early pros frequently.
So I'm for sure the small fish in the pond.
I'm 6'3 with around a 80" wing span its always been hard for me to fill out. And by my 30's my natty t was sub 300 it took me 200mg test just to reach my previous build from my football days and plateaued at that, possibly my training is particularly responsible because I cant do hit or dc anymore due to injuries.
I was the same way. Pushed hard into my late 20s and best I could manage was test in the low 400s with my average being low 300s/high 200s. Going on my first cycle at 28 was eye opening to how badly my low t had fucked up my mental well-being and how hard I was beating my head against my own limitations in that regard in the gym.
I scraped and struggled for every ounce of muscle pre trt.
But I get what u mean individual responses. Do u really think non responder or poor responder to gear is a real.thing, like mabe some of ur have less receptors?
I think I would be stupid to claim that there ISNT high responders and low responders.
The top Olympia guys are walking proof that high responders do exist (high responders not only meaning that they grow muscle well, but that they are resistant to health issues and sides from high doses as well)
And there are definitely some guys that get BP problems and bloodwork issues off of only a moderate dose of test.
All that being said, I've never once seen someone, claim they are "low responders" or "no responder" without one of the following also being true.
1) not taking real gear/under dosed gear/mystery sources from their buddy
2) training incredibly subpar in both programming methodology and effort
3) doesn't track meals/doesn't know nutrition at all.
Every single "non responder" I've seen very clearly lacked on their training or nutrition.
So I believe "low responders" exist in the sense that some people get way more sides on much lower doses. But I don't believe "non responders" exist in the sense that AAS don't make them grow or makes them grow significantly less than that which would be expected.