Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

"Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

    the last two weeks have been flat.

    start of diet in May: 331
    start of log here at PD last week of August: 298.5
    after week 1: 295.5
    after week 2: 296.5
    after week 3: 293.5
    after week 4: 295
    after week 5: 294

    I need to focus more-- to many late-night cravings/snackings and too much giving in to a convenient fast-food run.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

    Comment


    • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

      Today there is an interesting Boston Globe article describing the complex ways your body tries to scuttle a diet:

      http://www.boston.com/yourlife/healt...gin/?page=full

      Let the post-diet era begin
      By Judy Foreman | October 1, 2007

      Is permanent, significant weight loss really possible?

      If you're talking merely 10 to 20 pounds - and nobody knows the actual figure - you probably can diet and exercise your way to a svelter self and stay there, provided you stick with your weight control program rigorously. Forever.

      But if you're among the two-thirds of adult Americans who are overweight or obese, permanent, substantial weight loss appears to be almost impossible by diet and exercise alone.

      Only about 1 to 2 percent of obese people can permanently lose weight through diet and exercise alone, said Dr. Lee Kaplan , director of the weight center at Massachusetts General Hospital.

      "Dieting is like holding your breath," he said. "You can do it, but not for long. Your body is stronger than your willpower."

      In other words, Americans have probably wasted way too much time, money, and hope on diet programs that don't help enough. It still makes sense, however, to eat as healthily as you can and to do whatever you can to avoid gaining any more weight.

      One famous study conducted at the University of Minnesota during World War II illustrates the ineffectiveness of severe dieting. The researchers put 36 physically and emotionally healthy young men of normal weight on a strict diet, allowing them only half the calories they were used to. The men lost weight, but became psychological wrecks, obsessing about food, bingeing, and, even after the diet was over, eating way too much, often 8,000 to 10,000 calories a day until they regained the weight, recounted New York Times science writer Gina Kolata in her recent book, "Re-thinking Thin."

      In another classic study in the 1950s, researchers at Rockefeller University in New York City recruited obese people who were so desperate to lose weight that they agreed to live in the hospital for eight months, including a four-month period in which they subsisted on only 600 calories a day of liquid formula. They lost weight, Kolata noted. But, to the dismay of subjects and researchers, they all quickly regained the weight.

      That's because the basic biochemistry of the body's weight management system can work against even highly motivated dieters.

      When a very fat person loses a lot of weight by diet and exercise, the brain goes into panic mode, reading a complex array of chemical signals as proof of impending starvation. Metabolism slows. The body hangs on to every calorie it can get. The chemical signals that trigger appetite soar, creating a drive to eat so powerful you can't resist. From the standpoint of evolution, this makes sense: Our DNA was built when we were hunter-gatherers to protect us against starvation, not obesity.

      Consider one of the best-studied weight control hormones, leptin, which is made in fat cells and is designed to tell the brain: "Stop eating. I'm full."

      "Obese people usually have high levels of leptin because they have so many fat cells making it," said Dr. Eleftheria Maratos-Flier, an obesity researcher and associate professor of medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. "The heavier you are, the higher the circulating leptin." In theory, being fat should mean that the brain would be flooded with "stop eating" signals.

      But when people go on severe diets, "they lose more leptin than you would expect. So the brain thinks there is less fat than there ought to be," which makes people eat more, she said.

      And leptin is just one of many hormones involved in weight control. "In the stomach and intestines alone," Kaplan said, "there are 36 hormones that regulate weight, and another 30 in the brain. The end result of all these chemicals is to keep our energy stores, that is, fat, in balance."

      Put differently, some researchers believe that one reason weight loss programs ultimately fail is that diet and exercise do not change the body's "set point," the thermostat-like mechanism in the hypothalamus and other parts of the brain that keep weight fairly constant.

      Dr. David Heber, director of the UCLA Center for Human Nutrition, is more optimistic about the effectiveness of dieting. "The set point can be changed. Yes, there are signals to eat and to hoard fat, but having said that, humans do adapt to starvation and do change," he said. While the hormones that control appetite and satiety do tilt the equation toward regaining lost weight, "psychology trumps physiology. I see people every day who have overcome their genes and kept their excess weight off for decades."

      Many researchers do agree that one weight loss strategy does seem to change the set point - bariatric surgery, the stomach-stapling procedure. Doctors used to think it worked by simply reducing the size of the stomach, preventing people from eating much. Now, they think it works because, with less stomach tissue pumping out hormones such as ghrelin, which stimulates appetite, a person's appetite and satiety signals may be altered to help them eat less.

      So if dieting sets up a battle between our free will and our hormones, are America's fat masses wasting their time desperately trying to lose weight?

      To some, including the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance, a civil rights organization that is fighting discrimination against fat people, all this suggests not so much a hopeless message as a liberating one. "Most people do not choose to be fat," said the group spokeswoman, Peggy Howell. "But once people are fat, it is next to impossible to change that. It's far healthier to accept who you are and get on with your life than to be obsessed with what goes into your mouth."

      That makes a lot of sense to me, though I resist the idea that our genes are the big culprits because we have basically the same genes today that our skinnier grandparents had. What's changed is our lifestyles - more sitting around eating Twinkies, less walking to and from daily activities.

      So, here's my take. Because of the body's complex biochemistry, it's very difficult to lose weight once you gain it. So, exercise as much as you can - for general health, in addition to weight control. Eat right - fewer refined carbs, more fruits and veggies - again, for general health. If you're fat, don't just blame your genes and let yourself get fatter and fatter.

      At the same time, be gentle with yourself, and with fat people you see.
      The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

      Comment


      • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

        Sorry I haven't wieghed in the last two weeks guys. Actually I did weigh, but haven't been very active on the net for the past week due to work and travel.

        I am now back down to 243.5 So back at my starting weight.

        Looks like Brichard has got a huge lead on us so far. Great job!

        Gonna have to ramp up my efforts.

        Comment


        • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

          235.8 Week 1
          233.8 Week 2
          232.0 Week 3
          230.0 Week 4
          229.6 Week 5
          224.4 Week 6
          223.2 Week 7


          I dropped another 1.2 when I weighed in yesterday. Last night wasn't a great night for me as it was the first time I felt like I overdid the night snacking thing in a long time.

          My morning workouts have been down as I have been studying for my Realtor license tests. I am going to IU's Homecoming a week from Saturday, and I really hope to be at 220 or below for that event. So, I'm going to try to use that for motivation for the rest of the week.
          “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
          motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
          Reggie Miller

          Comment


          • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

            I admit it, I gave up for a week or so and ate nothing but crap.

            But today was my first day back in the water, and I am IN IT TO WIN IT!

            I'll weigh in tomorrow morning.
            “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

            “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

            Comment


            • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

              Just lost 3 pounds on the can.

              Comment


              • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                congrats btown.

                I set a record in that department too. A "5-flusher".

                It's a good thing that it happened at work wher they have the industrial plumbing. The pipes at home might not have handled it.
                The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                Comment


                • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                  Here are my anemic efforts so far:

                  Week 1: 243
                  Week 2: 244
                  Week 3: 244.8
                  Week 4: Did not weigh
                  Week 5: 244
                  Week 6: 242.2
                  Week 7: 241.4

                  I am sadly only 1.6 down from when I started this thing...but at least I have been headed in the right direction, all be it slowly, the last few weeks. I am usually rock solid for most of the week, but then a couple of bad days kill me. I have been working out on a regular basis for the first time in years though, and although I don't see all of the results on the scales, I am definitely getting stronger, and I feel better.

                  I will keep cranking, and hopefully I will see some better results. I never thought I would be happy to just get to the 230's, but getting there will be something at least.
                  Last edited by brich; 10-11-2007, 10:09 AM.
                  When you're playing against a stacked deck, compete even harder. Show the world how much you'll fight for the winners circle. If you do, someday the cellophane will crackle off a fresh pack, one that belongs to you, and the cards will be stacked in your favor.
                  -Pat Riley

                  Comment


                  • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                    maybe I have finally gotten off an extended "plateau" where I could no longer lose any weight.

                    start of diet in May: 331
                    start of log here at PD last week of August: 298.5
                    after week 1: 295.5
                    after week 2: 296.5
                    after week 3: 293.5
                    after week 4: 295
                    after week 5: 294
                    after week 6: 293.5
                    after week 7: 291.5

                    total lost since May: 39.5 lbs.
                    total lost in the last 7 weeks: 7 lbs.

                    Dang, I need to step it up.
                    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

                    Comment


                    • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                      174.8

                      And my back is still killing me ... hard to lose wieght when you can't exercise much.
                      “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” - Winston Churchill

                      “If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to serve as a horrible warning.” - Catherine Aird

                      Comment


                      • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                        I'm at 189 today, down fromt he original 195, which is decent considering how much I've lost. I'm now running 3 miles about 3 times per week, and keeping my calorie intake between 1600-1900 whenever possible.

                        As for that article on the page before this one, it's got some good information, but it's also got a lot of crap. The truth, which is proven in those studies, is that you can't "starve" yourself skinny. Those diets will always fail, no matter what your genetic makeup, because indeed, your willpower isn't nearly as strong as your instincts. But if you make conscious choices about increasing your intake of fiber, vegetables, fruits, and lean meat, and reducing your intake of empty calories that spike your blood sugar like High Fructose Corn Syrup, potatoes, and Wonder Bread, along with a small amount of exercise, even walking a mile three times per week, you will lose weight. When I started my weight loss, one thing I did that worked pretty well is pretty simple portion control, and I'll describe it in the next paragraph.

                        The first thing is never wait till you are starving to eat. If you feel yourself getting hungry, go ahead and eat. When you do eat, take about half the portion that you would usually take and eat it. Wait 20 minutes. This is part of the reason you don't want to starve yourself, because it makes that waiting period much tougher. After 20 minutes, your body will have fully realized how much food you put in. If you're comfortable (not stuffed), great, you just cut your calorie intake in half. If you're still a little hungry, go back for 25% more of that meal. Wait another 20 minutes. I can almost guarantee that for most people, this system will work in keeping them feeling satisfied while also reducing their calorie intake. People get fat because they run around all day without eating, then are so starved that they feel like they're going to die, so they stop off at McDonalds because they can't wait to get home. Then, everything looks so good, they have the Big Mac, a fry, and a coke, and all of a sudden, they've eaten 1200 calories in one meal. If you don't drink pop and you put yourself on some portion control, 1200 calories in one sitting is almost impossible at home unless you're eating out of a can of frosting.

                        The real key, I think, is finding something that works for you. Don't like grapefruit? Don't eat it! But make sure you substitute what you don't like with something you do that is roughly as healthy. Don't substitute the grapefruit for 5 cookies, for instance, eat some grapes instead

                        Comment


                        • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                          I weighed in on Friday, it wasn't pretty. I am at 246, I went back up.

                          I'm gonna start walking with my wife again this week. She's continuing to drop weight, but I have been hovering and see sawing. I've been cheating too much.

                          She's dropped over 40 lbs this year. For the year, I'm down about 10. I need to drop about 50.

                          I have only myself to blame. I've got to get better.

                          Comment


                          • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                            235.8 Week 1
                            233.8 Week 2
                            232.0 Week 3
                            230.0 Week 4
                            229.6 Week 5
                            224.4 Week 6
                            223.2 Week 7
                            221.4 Week 8


                            Only 1.4 pounds away from 220, which will be a big mark for me. I've started to increase my running. I am running 2 miles and walking one mile 3 days a week, and the other days I'm trying to walk a couple of miles, do the bike, or elliptical.

                            2 sets of 10 at 200 lbs. is also one of my strength goals. I did 1 set of 10 and 1 set of 7 or 8 last week... so getting closer there too. I actually just slid in to some of my larger fitting 38 inch waist pants. I've got to wash them b/c they have such awful hanger marks from sitting in my closet for so long. Just got 2 altered suits back in... feeling good about my progress, but a long way to go yet.
                            “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                            motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                            Reggie Miller

                            Comment


                            • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                              235.8 Week 1
                              233.8 Week 2
                              232.0 Week 3
                              230.0 Week 4
                              229.6 Week 5
                              224.4 Week 6
                              223.2 Week 7
                              221.4 Week 8
                              222.8 Week 9


                              I actually went up about a pound and a half, but I actually felt pretty good about since I tailgated all weekend. I'm not jaded, but even going off the wagon for one little weekend makes it tough to get back in the game.

                              But... I'm back in! I am now jogging about 25 minutes 3 times a week, and I am hoping to be at 220 Monday.
                              “Seventy percent of me talking on the court is personally for me to get me
                              motivated and going. Thirty percent is to see if I can get into the opponent’s head.”
                              Reggie Miller

                              Comment


                              • Re: "Biggest Loser" PD Edition ... WHO WANTS TO PLAY?

                                I forgot I weighed in last Friday and forgot to post. I was at 245, so down one lbs from the week before.

                                I'll weigh in again tomorrow. I know I have no chance at winning this round, but my money is in and I'm still gonna continue to participate.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X