4 Years Persistant Training (Pics)

Training Bodybuilding
101

[quote]CaliforniaLaw wrote:
wfifer wrote:
The problem with this is not that his progress is unlikely over four years, it’s that all of the progress seems to have occurred within very small time frames. The rest of the time he’s basically fluctuating body fat levels while making either no progress or below average progress.

That is how you progress. This is why people who have built a decent foundation always laugh when people talking about gaining .5 lbs. of muscle a week. You might not gain for six months, and then in two weeks gain 5 pounds of muscle.

You are another one who has not made any progress. You have been on this site for a while, what is your excuse for not making any progress?[/quote]

This is a fine argument. I gained around 10 lbs over winter break by loosening up my diet and cutting back to 2x a week full body.

It could be a matter of seeing his progress monthly versus my own daily, but I still find something odd about it.

And please don’t attack me. I work as hard as anyone. After being an unhealthy fatass for half my life, last year I went from 200 lbs at over 20% body fat to 200 at 13% (and more recently 193 at 10%). I’ve replaced 20 lbs of fat with lean mass.

Unless you’ve been stalking my profile (which is not even up to date), I don’t know where you get off saying I haven’t made progress.

102

John just got done with his 2008 bulk. He made Great progress this years bulk. Here are some pictures from it johnstonefitness.com/php/pictures.php

And here is his breakdown about his 17week bulk
johnstonefitness.com/news/jan_2009_news_archive.php#01252009

6years of Persistent training and counting

103

good he’s still making progress after 6 years, he must feel so good looking at all those pics.

wonder what would have happened if he cleanly ate until now but never cut just had maintenance periods??

104

[quote]pro-a-ggression wrote:
good he’s still making progress after 6 years, he must feel so good looking at all those pics.

wonder what would have happened if he cleanly ate until now but never cut just had maintenance periods??[/quote]

He would be smaller. There is a reason you don’t see really big guys who “gained slowly” because they feared any and all fat gain. Instead you see tons of guys wanting praise for how clean they ate in spite of the fact that they still look like newbies or weekend warriors.

105

I want to know what he did in 2006.

He put on some serious mass to me anyway, rest of the time beofre that he got lean and stayed what looks like a statis period or +/- 5lbs for a year or 2

106

[quote]300andabove wrote:
I want to know what he did in 2006.

He put on some serious mass to me anyway, rest of the time beofre that he got lean and stayed what looks like a statis period or +/- 5lbs for a year or 2[/quote]

He didn’t have to do anything differently…other than possibly eat more. Your body doesn’t grow linearly. It grows in spurts. I have written here that I have gained muscle very quickly followed by a lull…only to be told by several posters that this is impossible.

Care to guess what the people who think this is impossible look like?

107

[quote]Professor X wrote:
300andabove wrote:
I want to know what he did in 2006.

He put on some serious mass to me anyway, rest of the time beofre that he got lean and stayed what looks like a statis period or +/- 5lbs for a year or 2

He didn’t have to do anything differently…other than possibly eat more. Your body doesn’t grow linearly. It grows in spurts. I have written here that I have gained muscle very quickly followed by a lull…only to be told by several posters that this is impossible.

Care to guess what the people who think this is impossible look like?[/quote]

People who do the V-Diets to get ripped and swole ?

^^

108

[quote]Professor X wrote:
300andabove wrote:
I want to know what he did in 2006.

He put on some serious mass to me anyway, rest of the time beofre that he got lean and stayed what looks like a statis period or +/- 5lbs for a year or 2

He didn’t have to do anything differently…other than possibly eat more. Your body doesn’t grow linearly. It grows in spurts. I have written here that I have gained muscle very quickly followed by a lull…only to be told by several posters that this is impossible.

Care to guess what the people who think this is impossible look like?[/quote]

Also just read CT’s new article he touched on it too weirdly enough

109

[quote]Professor X wrote:

He didn’t have to do anything differently…other than possibly eat more. Your body doesn’t grow linearly. It grows in spurts. I have written here that I have gained muscle very quickly followed by a lull…only to be told by several posters that this is impossible.

[/quote]

Ive been wondering about this lately. Although we are always told that you can only gain .5-1 lb a week, and you shouldn’t aim for more, it seems a heck of a lot easier in the long run to train and eat for growth in spurts. Also this seems to be applicable for fat loss as well. So my question is, what are the reasons for this phenomenon, and how might you maximize gains or losses during these spurts?

Some ideas might be:

*Better training/diet adherence in the short term
*Physiological reasons, like recovery, energy, and joint health
*Psychological issues like motivation and dedication
*etc.

What time periods have you guys found to be best for leaps in gains. (is it the common 4-6 weeks and then adjust, or shorter)

I’d like to hear what others think, because it just seems unlikely that slow and steady works for everyone, or even the majority for that matter. It may work for some, but we all know that adding .5-1 lb a week of muscle with little to no fat gain for 52 weeks out of the year is HIGHLY UNLIKELY. You are much more likely to aim for a 10lb gain in 1-2 months, with about 7-8 of that being muscle, then maintain, and later on down the road, aim for a weight loss of 10 lbs in about 2 months with about 7-8 of that being fat. The math might work out to about the same if all goes well, but the bulk/cut is probably more likely to happen for anyone other than a beginner.

110

[quote]300andabove wrote:
Professor X wrote:
300andabove wrote:
I want to know what he did in 2006.

He put on some serious mass to me anyway, rest of the time beofre that he got lean and stayed what looks like a statis period or +/- 5lbs for a year or 2

He didn’t have to do anything differently…other than possibly eat more. Your body doesn’t grow linearly. It grows in spurts. I have written here that I have gained muscle very quickly followed by a lull…only to be told by several posters that this is impossible.

Care to guess what the people who think this is impossible look like?

Also just read CT’s new article he touched on it too weirdly enough
[/quote]

Noticed that too. I’ve only ever read heard people quote him (or misquote him out of context, more likely) that you can only gain so-and-so much muscle per week etc.
First time I noticed him saying something like this (not that I’ve read all of his previous articles).

So yeah, go CT :slight_smile:

111

[quote]dankid wrote:
Professor X wrote:

He didn’t have to do anything differently…other than possibly eat more. Your body doesn’t grow linearly. It grows in spurts. I have written here that I have gained muscle very quickly followed by a lull…only to be told by several posters that this is impossible.

Ive been wondering about this lately. Although we are always told that you can only gain .5-1 lb a week, and you shouldn’t aim for more, it seems a heck of a lot easier in the long run to train and eat for growth in spurts. Also this seems to be applicable for fat loss as well. So my question is, what are the reasons for this phenomenon, and how might you maximize gains or losses during these spurts?

Some ideas might be:

*Better training/diet adherence in the short term
*Physiological reasons, like recovery, energy, and joint health
*Psychological issues like motivation and dedication
*etc.

What time periods have you guys found to be best for leaps in gains. (is it the common 4-6 weeks and then adjust, or shorter)

I’d like to hear what others think, because it just seems unlikely that slow and steady works for everyone, or even the majority for that matter. It may work for some, but we all know that adding .5-1 lb a week of muscle with little to no fat gain for 52 weeks out of the year is HIGHLY UNLIKELY. You are much more likely to aim for a 10lb gain in 1-2 months, with about 7-8 of that being muscle, then maintain, and later on down the road, aim for a weight loss of 10 lbs in about 2 months with about 7-8 of that being fat. The math might work out to about the same if all goes well, but the bulk/cut is probably more likely to happen for anyone other than a beginner.
[/quote]

You maximize gains by ALWAYS making sure there is a caloric surplus and that you are lifting heavy enough to promote the wanted muscle growth. That is why those who become overly concerned with their body fat percentage will no doubt make less overall progress than the guy who accepts that he may gain some body fat and simply makes sure that he eats enough to gain the most muscle mass possible.

Gee, basically the same shit I’ve been saying on this site since I was only 210lbs.

112

[quote]Professor X wrote:
You maximize gains by ALWAYS making sure there is a caloric surplus and that you are lifting heavy enough to promote the wanted muscle growth. That is why those who become overly concerned with their body fat percentage will no doubt make less overall progress than the guy who accepts that he may gain some body fat and simply makes sure that he eats enough to gain the most muscle mass possible.

Gee, basically the same shit I’ve been saying on this site since I was only 210lbs.[/quote]

I’ll hazard a wild guess that those who’ve been opposing that opinion all this time still haven’t even reached 210 yet in most cases.

113

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Professor X wrote:
You maximize gains by ALWAYS making sure there is a caloric surplus and that you are lifting heavy enough to promote the wanted muscle growth. That is why those who become overly concerned with their body fat percentage will no doubt make less overall progress than the guy who accepts that he may gain some body fat and simply makes sure that he eats enough to gain the most muscle mass possible.

Gee, basically the same shit I’ve been saying on this site since I was only 210lbs.

I’ll hazard a wild guess that those who’ve been opposing that opinion all this time still haven’t even reached 210 yet in most cases.
[/quote]

But they will argue that we shouldn’t pay attention to that because THEORY and their ability to quote authors word for word is more important than the fact that they’ve been on this site for 8 years but no one would even think they lift weights.

That one aspect is what I am truly tired of. Little dudes with 14" arms telling other newbs to avoid training arms directly…and then the newbs listening to it because little authors wrote the same.

WTF happened to experience and why is there no balance between that and true knowledge on this site?

114

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
Professor X wrote:
You maximize gains by ALWAYS making sure there is a caloric surplus and that you are lifting heavy enough to promote the wanted muscle growth. That is why those who become overly concerned with their body fat percentage will no doubt make less overall progress than the guy who accepts that he may gain some body fat and simply makes sure that he eats enough to gain the most muscle mass possible.

Gee, basically the same shit I’ve been saying on this site since I was only 210lbs.

I’ll hazard a wild guess that those who’ve been opposing that opinion all this time still haven’t even reached 210 yet in most cases.

But they will argue that we shouldn’t pay attention to that because THEORY and their ability to quote authors word for word is more important than the fact that they’ve been on this site for 8 years but no one would even think they lift weights.

That one aspect is what I am truly tired of. Little dudes with 14" arms telling other newbs to avoid training arms directly…and then the newbs listening to it because little authors wrote the same.

WTF happened to experience and why is there no balance between that and true knowledge on this site?[/quote]

Or in the world!

115

X, I wish this site would let you write a weekly rant article for us. Not only would it be hilarious but everything you say is essentially true, and it’s all stuff newbs and intermediates alike need to hear.

Yesterday some kid was asking about bulking and there were some of us saying eat decently clean but don’t be afraid to have burgers, pizzas, whole milk or w/e to get the cals in. Then some no name guy comes in and sites a Chris Shugart article, yah…which essentially said eat 95% clean and make slower but more quality gains or eat hamburgers, grab a bottle of test, and get fat. Thats pretty much word for word.

People are soooo dumb.

I remember when I first joined this site I said that I thought it was stupid to go over 12% BF when bulking. Needless to say you jumped on my ass about it and I decided to change my view on that. I’ve been here less than a year and I’ve made the best gains of my life while I’ve been a member here.

You, CC, Tribunal, Sento and some of the other big fellas can be harsh at times, but the pussies who get pissed off about it and basically say Fuck you are the ones who stay small. Those who can take the hit to their ego and implement the advice are those who will grow.

I hope most of the younger guys here will fall in the latter category.

116

PX and C_C, if you were working as a personal trainer, and that guy came to you wanting the end result from the last picture as soon as possible(looking like he did in the very first picture):

  • How would you tell him to train?

  • What would you tell him to eat?

4 day split and 2-3 cardio sessions? High protein and low carbs? Build size and strength first, while keeping bodyfat in check? All out fat loss for 12-16 weeks first? Just tossing things out there. I’d like to hear how you guys would approach it.

117

[quote]Mr.Purple wrote:
PX and C_C, if you were working as a personal trainer, and that guy came to you wanting the end result from the last picture as soon as possible(looking like he did in the very first picture):

  • How would you tell him to train?

  • What would you tell him to eat?

4 day split and 2-3 cardio sessions? High protein and low carbs? Build size and strength first, while keeping bodyfat in check? All out fat loss for 12-16 weeks first? Just tossing things out there. I’d like to hear how you guys would approach it.

[/quote]

This guy didn’t do a bad job at all. As far as he personally is concerned, I wouldn’t recommend he changes much at all because he is happy with his progress. However, I know that dieting down like he did (because he was taking photos and posting them) has the potential to hold back progress.

That does NOT mean I don’t diet down. I do and there are periods of time where I will increase cardio to lose some extra body fat, however, if I had started out dieting down to less than 10% each and every time I doubt I would have made the same progress.

Therefore, yes, my recommendation is that if someone truly has to goal of standing out and making people say, “damn” when they see them, they need to spend a good 3-4 years initially just working on size and “cleaning up rough edges” if they gain too much body fat in the process.

Minimum of 5 days a week in the gym, six meals a day.

Anything beyond that (as far as cardio or what have you) should be taken on an individual basis. There shouldn’t be some blanket flat approach that all people must do. Everyone doesn’t see more progress by doing several cardio sessions every week.

118

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Mr.Purple wrote:
PX and C_C, if you were working as a personal trainer, and that guy came to you wanting the end result from the last picture as soon as possible(looking like he did in the very first picture):

  • How would you tell him to train?

  • What would you tell him to eat?

4 day split and 2-3 cardio sessions? High protein and low carbs? Build size and strength first, while keeping bodyfat in check? All out fat loss for 12-16 weeks first? Just tossing things out there. I’d like to hear how you guys would approach it.

This guy didn’t do a bad job at all. As far as he personally is concerned, I wouldn’t recommend he changes much at all because he is happy with his progress. However, I know that dieting down like he did (because he was taking photos and posting them) has the potential to hold back progress.

That does NOT mean I don’t diet down. I do and there are periods of time where I will increase cardio to lose some extra body fat, however, if I had started out dieting down to less than 10% each and every time I doubt I would have made the same progress.

Therefore, yes, my recommendation is that if someone truly has to goal of standing out and making people say, “damn” when they see them, they need to spend a good 3-4 years initially just working on size and “cleaning up rough edges” if they gain too much body fat in the process.

Minimum of 5 days a week in the gym, six meals a day.

Anything beyond that (as far as cardio or what have you) should be taken on an individual basis. There shouldn’t be some blanket flat approach that all people must do. Everyone doesn’t see more progress by doing several cardio sessions every week.[/quote]

Agreed. I’d just drill “get strong for reps on everything” into his head and if you look at how he trained and switched routines, there seems to be quite some room for improvement if he wanted to get big as fast as possible.

Nothing we haven’t mentioned about 300 times already, though.

119

[quote]Professor X wrote:

This guy didn’t do a bad job at all. As far as he personally is concerned, I wouldn’t recommend he changes much at all because he is happy with his progress. However, I know that dieting down like he did (because he was taking photos and posting them) has the potential to hold back progress.

That does NOT mean I don’t diet down. I do and there are periods of time where I will increase cardio to lose some extra body fat, however, if I had started out dieting down to less than 10% each and every time I doubt I would have made the same progress.

Therefore, yes, my recommendation is that if someone truly has to goal of standing out and making people say, “damn” when they see them, they need to spend a good 3-4 years initially just working on size and “cleaning up rough edges” if they gain too much body fat in the process.

Minimum of 5 days a week in the gym, six meals a day.

Anything beyond that (as far as cardio or what have you) should be taken on an individual basis. There shouldn’t be some blanket flat approach that all people must do. Everyone doesn’t see more progress by doing several cardio sessions every week.[/quote]

Ok, so if I’m understanding you correctly, even though he started out at 30% BF, you wouldn’t change the approach you normally recommend. I’m thinking that as long as you get on the treadmill, say 3-4 times a week, you can eat a lot and gain muscle without putting on fat. I’d also keep carbs to post workout, and eat pretty “clean.”

It’s hard to lose the gut when you don’t have any muscle mass. I should know, I dropped 63 lbs and that fucker was still there. (230 to 167 at 5’9") Even did a V-diet in there somewhere…

Man am I tired of being hungry.

Funny thing is, my goal is to get “holy shit” big, but what I’ve always read on this site (except for your posts), is that you should get lean first, then bulk.

120

[quote]Mr.Purple wrote:

Ok, so if I’m understanding you correctly, even though he started out at 30% BF, you wouldn’t change the approach you normally recommend. I’m thinking that as long as you get on the treadmill, say 3-4 times a week, you can eat a lot and gain muscle without putting on fat. I’d also keep carbs to post workout, and eat pretty “clean.”[/quote]

How can you say that all people need to do cardio 3-4 times a week? It is these blanket statements I am trying to get you to avoid. I am also speaking OUTSIDE of this one guy because his approach OBVIOUSLY got him to where he is.

What if someone was a 160lbs football player who loses weight faster than he can gain it. Still 2-3 cardio sessions a week?

What if all of that cardio is preventing significant growth in muscle mass? Still cardio 2-3 times a week?

Why would you be more concerned about fat gain than whether you are gaining any muscle mass? That muscle should be top priority unless we are speaking of someone who is truly obese. You make changes from there.

LOOK AT THE PEOPLE GIVING SAID ADVICE. If they never got big or even approached your own personal goals, why listen to what they write as if it is the gospel truth.