Most Helpful Guy
Wow. That is rear :P. But the physic trait is much attainable.
You have strong, defined abdominal muscles, but still fat accumulations within your stomach tissues. Not the muscles of course, there below the fat, which is under your skin.
But we all have abdominal muscles. Some bigger and denser than others, dependent on bodily tissue structure of the muscles, and also impacted by our activity levels, for example whether we exercise working those muscles specifically, or our lifestyle activities incorporate use of them muscles. Hence they get stronger, and denser, and grow in mass; this being from the tearing of tiny muscle fibers when used in excess. During rest, these muscle fibers then repair themselves, thickening and becoming denser, increasing the mass/ size of the muscle as well as strengthening it. This is called 'hypo-trophy'.
I hope you don't bash me for going into that much depth, but I just wanted to share some knowledge and allow you to understand how this may be genetically or due to the effects of exercise or activity.
But anyway, so fat and muscle size are non correlated in that respect. But when your talking about 'muscle definition', the two usually correlate in respect to the ''muscle definition'' a person appears to depict. As when you have a lower fat accumulation around the muscle, this allows the muscular shape and size to appear more obvious to the eye. As less 'blobby stuff' is pasted over it. The shape and size can be identified more distinctly.
Now you can identify a guy with a reasonably average fat content, in relation to his size, and a large muscular mass, because of his physic. I'm sure your depicting him now as the 'hefty, goon like bulked figure'. Not a depiction of a athletic guy, but a bulky proportioned guy.
As well as a guy with very low fat content, and yet low muscle mass too. This guy you probably have already visualized, would appear to have 'muscle definition' because of his low fat content covering his muscles, so there shape appears more defiant. Even though he doesn't have much muscle mass! So he could have a six pack, but we all do... its just a scaled down version (in comparison to body builders abdominal muscle sizes) buried beneath a larger layer of fat.
Burning that fat would reveal the definition of your abdominal muscles. Or else where.
So you just have a larger mass of muscle within your abdominal region. :P ... which is good!
Well I would see it that way.
But if you've accumulated it through exercises or activity, and not genetics, then its because working a certain region of muscles increases the muscle mass and strength from resulting 'muscle hypertrophy', but does not necessarily burn fat around that region. You can't control what fat is used as energy to fuel your body when your body needs that fat for energy through lacking sources left in the body.
This is the miss understanding that causes the miss-conception that sit ups will 'flatten' your stomach.
- Show AllShow Less