[quote]jCaesar88 wrote:
I’m sorry but those pix look almost exactly alike, only the one on the right looks like it was taken from a closer distance.
#urdoingitwrong#justsaying[/quote]
Na it wasn’t closer distance man. Always take the shots from the same distance wall-wall distance. Lighting was better in the second pic but even so, I know I didn’t gain 25lbs of muscle but regardless lol I don’t think anyone can look the same with an extra 25lbs on their frame whether it’s muscle, fat, water or a combination of the 3.
I doubt I’m doing it that wrong either man, my cut may be a crap notion but it’s my first proper attempt at doing one. I still think if I gained size, strength and my muscles got bigger then I’ve done something right or am I on the wrong board here?
First, the idea of doing 1600kcals a day is hardly revolutionary or controversial. John Berardi and Ellington Darden are examples of two very different coaches who are both proponents of such low energy diets - and they haven’t done too badly out of it!
And from personal experience, after dropping 10lbs over the last 5-6 weeks, I can tell you having around 1600kcals a day while still making training progress and overall feeling well is a cake walk when using IF. So without yet another thread digression into the subject, suffice to say on IF nutrient timing plays a much greater role than gross macro consumption.
[quote]jCaesar88 wrote:
I’m sorry but those pix look almost exactly alike, only the one on the right looks like it was taken from a closer distance.
#urdoingitwrong#justsaying[/quote]
i’d have to agree. Plus, call me an asshole, but doling out advice at your level is not necessarily something people are going to take all that well. At least i sure as hell wouldn’t.[/quote]
Well the OP is not handling criticism the best way possible, but to be fair he did specify that his diet was for people at his level.
As others have argued, we can say that there are plenty of proven cutting plans out there - no need to re-invent the wheel.
I do see improvement between the images. Do you guys think that based on the images, he should not go on a cut?[/quote]
I’ve had mixed reception about it.
Some guys say I should others say to keep bulking. I personally am not happy how I am now, so either less fat or more muscle has to be better than that pic. I’m about 5lbs heavier than in that picture right now. Not much overall difference in physique though.[/quote]
When you gained the weight, did you make big gains on your lifts? Are you 20% stronger than before?
[quote]jCaesar88 wrote:
I’m sorry but those pix look almost exactly alike, only the one on the right looks like it was taken from a closer distance.
#urdoingitwrong#justsaying[/quote]
i’d have to agree. Plus, call me an asshole, but doling out advice at your level is not necessarily something people are going to take all that well. At least i sure as hell wouldn’t.[/quote]
Well the OP is not handling criticism the best way possible, but to be fair he did specify that his diet was for people at his level.
As others have argued, we can say that there are plenty of proven cutting plans out there - no need to re-invent the wheel.
I do see improvement between the images. Do you guys think that based on the images, he should not go on a cut?[/quote]
I’ve had mixed reception about it.
Some guys say I should others say to keep bulking. I personally am not happy how I am now, so either less fat or more muscle has to be better than that pic. I’m about 5lbs heavier than in that picture right now. Not much overall difference in physique though.[/quote]
When you gained the weight, did you make big gains on your lifts? Are you 20% stronger than before?
[/quote]
During the period of that picture my lifts went from the following:
Bench went from 110lbs - 200lbs
Incline Bench 80lbs - 180lbs
Close Grip 80lbs - 180lbs
Squat 160 - 240 which is all the weight I have at my home gym where I lift.
Deadlift 140 - 220 I suck at these
Bent Over Row 100 - 180
DB Bent Over Row 40lbs - 100lbs prefer these to the barbell version immensely
Barbell Curl 40lbs - 100lbs
Overhead Press 60lbs - 140lbs
All of the above were for reps not 1RM’s since I don’t work much above 80% because I have no spotter/catchers for stuff like bench and squats. I use full ROM as well so I’m not half repping anything.
Also this will probably get me flamed. But I hardly trained legs at all. Reason was simple enough for me. I had the tiniest upper body ever and my calves are 16inches and I’ve never trained the calves, the upper legs were about 24 inches before I’d ever even trained them. Same reason why my squat started so much better than my deadlifts I think. I’m fairly short at 5’8 as well. Basically I just didn’t want giant ass legs while my upper body looked like a pancake.
Thanks for the input. I’m considering using more calories since everyone is so adamant that I can’t do it this low.
Unrelated but curious. How do you gain size doing an upper/lower? Surely it’s hard to get enough exercises in to hit all the muscles efficiently?[/quote]
Depending on your progress, you may need to go close to 1600 for a short time. Just don’t start at 1600.
My body responds much better when muscle groups are trained more than once per week. I also prefer it. I shoot for 120 reps per week for large muscle groups (chest, back, legs) and 60 per week for smaller muscles (arms, shoulders, calves). I think it’s pretty difficult to truely isolate your chest on a “chest day” or your back on a “back day”. So many upper body muscles are involved in the compound lifts it just makes more sense to train all of them on one day. In nearly any training program, if you gradually increase the weight lifted, you are bound to build muscle (providing diet and recovery are optimised). Aside from that, my body has responded well to most of what’s been thrown at it over the past 4-5 years, despite the fact that for most of that time, both shoulders and both knees have been injured. My legs are my best bodypart, and I can barely do a bodyweight squat at the moment. I’m 22 now and could squat about 245 or so at 17. This just shows that you can build muscle using nearly any program, providing you find some way to make progress.
On a side note, why are some people debating whether or not he should cut? If he wants to, why not? Maybe he’s curious to see what lies beneath. If it works out, he’ll improve his physique significantly.
Thanks for the input. I’m considering using more calories since everyone is so adamant that I can’t do it this low.
Unrelated but curious. How do you gain size doing an upper/lower? Surely it’s hard to get enough exercises in to hit all the muscles efficiently?[/quote]
Depending on your progress, you may need to go close to 1600 for a short time. Just don’t start at 1600.
My body responds much better when muscle groups are trained more than once per week. I also prefer it. I shoot for 120 reps per week for large muscle groups (chest, back, legs) and 60 per week for smaller muscles (arms, shoulders, calves). I think it’s pretty difficult to truely isolate your chest on a “chest day” or your back on a “back day”. So many upper body muscles are involved in the compound lifts it just makes more sense to train all of them on one day. In nearly any training program, if you gradually increase the weight lifted, you are bound to build muscle (providing diet and recovery are optimised). Aside from that, my body has responded well to most of what’s been thrown at it over the past 4-5 years, despite the fact that for most of that time, both shoulders and both knees have been injured. My legs are my best bodypart, and I can barely do a bodyweight squat at the moment. I’m 22 now and could squat about 245 or so at 17. This just shows that you can build muscle using nearly any program, providing you find some way to make progress.
On a side note, why are some people debating whether or not he should cut? If he wants to, why not? Maybe he’s curious to see what lies beneath. If it works out, he’ll improve his physique significantly.[/quote]
I did a push/pull/legs split last year 2x a day 3 on 1 off. I loved the high frequency approach as well and made good progress in both size and lifts. I did consider the upper/lower approach. In a way it would have probably of worked better than push/pull/legs for a twice a day program. I might give it a go, I was contemplating doing a lower frequency program.
Maybe the high frequency is an English thing genetic wise. Would you mind PMing me a rough template that I could contemplate using which would keep my development growing fairly evenly?
[quote]jCaesar88 wrote:
I’m sorry but those pix look almost exactly alike, only the one on the right looks like it was taken from a closer distance.
#urdoingitwrong#justsaying[/quote]
Na it wasn’t closer distance man. Always take the shots from the same distance wall-wall distance. Lighting was better in the second pic but even so, I know I didn’t gain 25lbs of muscle but regardless lol I don’t think anyone can look the same with an extra 25lbs on their frame whether it’s muscle, fat, water or a combination of the 3.
I doubt I’m doing it that wrong either man, my cut may be a crap notion but it’s my first proper attempt at doing one. I still think if I gained size, strength and my muscles got bigger then I’ve done something right or am I on the wrong board here?[/quote]
All I’m saying is that you look just fatter. No aesthetic improvement. Call me a dick, doesn’t matter.
Give RFL a try
[quote]Anus Bleach wrote:
hey op, arent you bruceleefan?
I thought you killed yourself![/quote]
Lolllll, it is! Hahahaha, I remember when this guy said I look like shit. Classic! What type of loser has to make a new username just to post on an Internet forum. Grow some balls.