[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]digitalairair wrote:
I still read this site from time to time but stopped posting for about 3-4 years and just started posting here again and getting mostly positive reposes during my recent bulk phase.
What did I miss ? [/quote]
just the usual. PX became a vegetarian. the new head guru of the site is this guy roguevampire. Thibadeau gave up lifting and switched to chess. [/quote]
I retract my previous post mocking you, you are funny as shit!
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
T-Tards: “YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG!!!”[/quote]
Noone said that Frank Yang is doing it wrong.
People said that gaining unnecessary fat is wrong. Noone said that Frank gained unnecessary fat.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
[quote]digitalairair wrote:
If I can gain 50 pounds in a year, and half of it is fat, I still have 25 pounds of muscles.
vs. someone who progresses slowly, with the mentality of 1 pound of muscle a month…and stay leaned through out and added about 15 pounds of muscles, I still have more muslces than he does.
And then you say, now you need to cut 25 pounds of fat, and the other guy can just keep going and by gaining more lean muscle mass without having to cut.
Well, if can lose 25 pounds of fat in the next 5 months, then I would probably still end up with more muscles than the other guy. Plus the fact that after you cut and restrict calories, your body would bounce right up and make the next bulking phase that much easier in the first few months.
Kelly Baggett mentioned a study where a person who just does nothing but sit on his couch and eat still gained muscles underneath the fat.
PLus, it’s more fun doing it this wa
I think I’ll keep doing it this way. It’s more fun too because you get to make more exiting videos this way.
[/quote]
Frank Yang: “This is working for me, I’m training hard, I’m making incredible gains, I’m comfortable with some fat if it justifies my muscular gains, I have a plan, and I’m having fun”
T-Tards: “YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG!!!”[/quote]
I hope that last part is not going to people like Ebomb and Bug who stay lean and gain. I would say those are two very large and acomplilshed memeber of the stay leaner and gain slower group. Ebomb rocked his show and will dominate the next one and Bug is…well bug. 
If this works for Frank, he should keep doing it
Great vid man - wish I could eat like you…
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
i get what ebomb is getting at. if im interpreting his posts correctly, hes saying to monitor caloric intake and gains on the scale/mirror until youre gaining at an appropriate rate, that YOU are comfortable with. lets say youre consuming 3500 calories and only gaining 0.5lbs a week and you want to gain 1lbs. try upping calories to 4000 a day and see where that gets you on scale weight. and keep adjusting up and down until youre gaining at the rate you want.
amiright?[/quote]
This.
What I don’t agree with is the ‘eat a ton’ or ‘eat everything in site’ mantra where the only goal is to gain weight (and muscle). I’d personally rather, and it has been effective for me, to do this. Slowly increase as you are gaining while mitigating unnecessary gains.
[/quote]
was this always your route, or did you start out with a huge bulk to add your initial size? it makes sense if you are near your goal weight to not go on all out bulks anymore, and just continue adding a few lbs here and there at a slower rate. but for initial size you cant argue an all out bulk.[/quote]
I think like PX said, it depends where you’re starting from.
I was lucky. I have a pretty big frame and didn’t need to go on an all out bulk. When I first got into bodybuilding, I ‘bulked up’ to 235 which was my heaviest and when I competed, I was 196 on contest day. Since then, the heaviest I have gotten is around 225, and am significantly leaner than I was last time at this weight. Now, I prefer to stay at a leaner bodyweight. That might change, but I’m making progress and don’t know if I would be making more progress at a higher bodyfat.
I think bulking works. I never said it didn’t. But once you get to a point where you’re putting more more fat than muscle, I don’t see the point of gaining more weight. It is hard to determine this, but most experienced guys can probably tell this if they’re being honest with themselves.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
I hope that last part is not going to people like Ebomb and Bug who stay lean and gain. I would say those are two very large and acomplilshed memeber of the stay leaner and gain slower group. Ebomb rocked his show and will dominate the next one and Bug is…well bug. :)[/quote]
I totally have teh ghey for Ebomb and Bug, so, no, not directed toward those freaks.
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Way to use 2 generational athletes as an example. These guys train 3-4+ hours everyday, harder than most of us have ever trained. 1-2 hours weight lifting isn’t even comparable.
But sure, if by “active young male” you mean 2 of the greatest athletes in their sports than I guess that statement isn’t as poorly thought-out as it seems.
Most of us lift 4-5x a week, maybe a couple hours of cardio if our heart is so lucky. Why would you relate this to the training of an Olympic athlete? “Jesus christ indeed” indeed.[/quote]
so, just because those two happen to be the most famous and successful examples I can give, it means that their examples couldn’t possibly apply to other human beings not named Phelps or Pacquiao?
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
i get what ebomb is getting at. if im interpreting his posts correctly, hes saying to monitor caloric intake and gains on the scale/mirror until youre gaining at an appropriate rate, that YOU are comfortable with. lets say youre consuming 3500 calories and only gaining 0.5lbs a week and you want to gain 1lbs. try upping calories to 4000 a day and see where that gets you on scale weight. and keep adjusting up and down until youre gaining at the rate you want.
amiright?[/quote]
This.
What I don’t agree with is the ‘eat a ton’ or ‘eat everything in site’ mantra where the only goal is to gain weight (and muscle). I’d personally rather, and it has been effective for me, to do this. Slowly increase as you are gaining while mitigating unnecessary gains.
[/quote]
was this always your route, or did you start out with a huge bulk to add your initial size? it makes sense if you are near your goal weight to not go on all out bulks anymore, and just continue adding a few lbs here and there at a slower rate. but for initial size you cant argue an all out bulk.[/quote]
I think like PX said, it depends where you’re starting from.
I was lucky. I have a pretty big frame and didn’t need to go on an all out bulk. When I first got into bodybuilding, I ‘bulked up’ to 235 which was my heaviest and when I competed, I was 196 on contest day. Since then, the heaviest I have gotten is around 225, and am significantly leaner than I was last time at this weight. Now, I prefer to stay at a leaner bodyweight. That might change, but I’m making progress and don’t know if I would be making more progress at a higher bodyfat.
I think bulking works. I never said it didn’t. But once you get to a point where you’re putting more more fat than muscle, I don’t see the point of gaining more weight. It is hard to determine this, but most experienced guys can probably tell this if they’re being honest with themselves.
[/quote]
i see exactly what you mean now with your approach to adding size. makes sense.
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
i get what ebomb is getting at. if im interpreting his posts correctly, hes saying to monitor caloric intake and gains on the scale/mirror until youre gaining at an appropriate rate, that YOU are comfortable with. lets say youre consuming 3500 calories and only gaining 0.5lbs a week and you want to gain 1lbs. try upping calories to 4000 a day and see where that gets you on scale weight. and keep adjusting up and down until youre gaining at the rate you want.
amiright?[/quote]
This.
What I don’t agree with is the ‘eat a ton’ or ‘eat everything in site’ mantra where the only goal is to gain weight (and muscle). I’d personally rather, and it has been effective for me, to do this. Slowly increase as you are gaining while mitigating unnecessary gains.
[/quote]
was this always your route, or did you start out with a huge bulk to add your initial size? it makes sense if you are near your goal weight to not go on all out bulks anymore, and just continue adding a few lbs here and there at a slower rate. but for initial size you cant argue an all out bulk.[/quote]
I think like PX said, it depends where you’re starting from.
I was lucky. I have a pretty big frame and didn’t need to go on an all out bulk. When I first got into bodybuilding, I ‘bulked up’ to 235 which was my heaviest and when I competed, I was 196 on contest day. Since then, the heaviest I have gotten is around 225, and am significantly leaner than I was last time at this weight. Now, I prefer to stay at a leaner bodyweight. That might change, but I’m making progress and don’t know if I would be making more progress at a higher bodyfat.
I think bulking works. I never said it didn’t. But once you get to a point where you’re putting more more fat than muscle, I don’t see the point of gaining more weight. It is hard to determine this, but most experienced guys can probably tell this if they’re being honest with themselves.
[/quote]
Alternately, I had a very small frame and was not one of those who just blew up from touching a weight the first time. I didn’t gain much muscle at all until college and that was because I jacked my calories way the hell up and stayed in the gym everyday it was open. I hate giving numbers of total calories but Frank isn’t doing anything I didn’t do on a very limited budget. The result was, I got way bigger than anyone thought my frame would allow but it took a lot of pushing those weight barriers…because it wasn’t some easy climb from 200lbs to where I am right now.
The take home point is that we are not all the same…and the guy who learns to work WITH his genetics instead of against them will be the one to make the most progress.
The current trend of worrying about how ripped you are all year long will no doubt hold some back while allowing those who can gain while leaner to rush ahead…I really don’t get that.
Why are a bunch of little guys trying to tell the big guys they know what to do better in a thread with “bulking diet” in the title?
I just started reading only what Ebomb and ProfX are saying
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
i get what ebomb is getting at. if im interpreting his posts correctly, hes saying to monitor caloric intake and gains on the scale/mirror until youre gaining at an appropriate rate, that YOU are comfortable with. lets say youre consuming 3500 calories and only gaining 0.5lbs a week and you want to gain 1lbs. try upping calories to 4000 a day and see where that gets you on scale weight. and keep adjusting up and down until youre gaining at the rate you want.
amiright?[/quote]
This.
What I don’t agree with is the ‘eat a ton’ or ‘eat everything in site’ mantra where the only goal is to gain weight (and muscle). I’d personally rather, and it has been effective for me, to do this. Slowly increase as you are gaining while mitigating unnecessary gains.
[/quote]
was this always your route, or did you start out with a huge bulk to add your initial size? it makes sense if you are near your goal weight to not go on all out bulks anymore, and just continue adding a few lbs here and there at a slower rate. but for initial size you cant argue an all out bulk.[/quote]
I think like PX said, it depends where you’re starting from.
I was lucky. I have a pretty big frame and didn’t need to go on an all out bulk. When I first got into bodybuilding, I ‘bulked up’ to 235 which was my heaviest and when I competed, I was 196 on contest day. Since then, the heaviest I have gotten is around 225, and am significantly leaner than I was last time at this weight. Now, I prefer to stay at a leaner bodyweight. That might change, but I’m making progress and don’t know if I would be making more progress at a higher bodyfat.
I think bulking works. I never said it didn’t. But once you get to a point where you’re putting more more fat than muscle, I don’t see the point of gaining more weight. It is hard to determine this, but most experienced guys can probably tell this if they’re being honest with themselves.
[/quote]
The current trend of worrying about how ripped you are all year long will no doubt hold some back while allowing those who can gain while leaner to rush ahead…I really don’t get that.[/quote]
because it seems like most of them are already close to their goal weight now. they dont want to add significant amounts to their frame. only 5-10lbs here and there. i get what they mean by gaining while remaining lean, when its only a few more lbs of mass they want, there isnt a point to gain 25lbs, lose their abs, and cut 15 of those pounds for the net goal of 10lbs when they couldve stayed lean throughout the whole process.
[quote]digitalairair wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Never claimed to…I don’t know the details thats why I like to discuss this stuff. All I know is I’m living what I say. Tried it both ways, eating as little as you can is the way to go for many reasons.
That is, if looking like a bodybuilder is at all a concern…if you are just concerned with scale weight & strength, then this would of course not apply.[/quote]
I agree with this.
To simply consume a ton of calories without determining how many you need to gain weight or just eating so many that you have no choice but to gain weight isn’t IMO a great way for someone that is past the beginner stage.
Find what you need, but I don’t see the practical need to eat more than you need to slowly gain weight if that’s your goal. If your preference is to get heavier, that’s a different issue. [/quote]
I think the point being lost is that there is no way in hell for you to predict even daily “what you need” exactly to only gain muscle mass with no extra body fat. What you can do is estimate based on your rate of weight gain and strength gain. There were many stages where I went through periods of making SURE my body was getting what it NEEDED when it needed it so that there would be no question. That is all bulking up is.
Purposely gaining “slower” instead of gaining at whatever rate allows the most muscle gain can’t logically produce the same amount of muscle mass over the same period of time.
Your gains are what should dictate your approach…just like Frank is apparently eating more than some here think he should yet has gained way more than the “exactly .8lbs of muscle a month” as a result. Doing anything other than feeding the machine as long as most of those gains are muscle mass can do nothing but decrease the rate of progress, not increase it.[/quote]
See, that’s where we just disagree.
For example, take someone that gained 30 lb over a specific time interval because they over-ate vs. someone that progressively ate a little more, just enough to keep adding weight and gained 10-15 lb. Just because you are training hard and adding weight on the scale doesn’t at all mean that that weight is muscle. Obviously you know this, but what I mean to say is that I don’t personally see the point of gaining significantly more fat than necessary vs. gaining slower and gaining primarily muscle mass. I’m also not referring to a ‘95 lb kid that is just starting out.’
You’re right, we don’t truly know at what caloric intake we gain muscle, but we also don’t know how much of that weight gained will be fat vs. muscle. So, when the time comes to finally strip off that excess fat, having less vs. more will put you in a better position.
I really think it comes down to personal preference. If you’d rather be heavier, be heavier. If a bit leaner, be leaner. Either way, I don’t see the rate of muscle growth being much different unless someone’s trying to stay super lean in which case it’s probably hindering muscle growth. [/quote]
If I can gain 50 pounds in a year, and half of it is fat, I still have 25 pounds of muscles.
vs. someone who progresses slowly, with the mentality of 1 pound of muscle a month…and stay leaned through out and added about 15 pounds of muscles, I still have more muslces than he does.
And then you say, now you need to cut 25 pounds of fat, and the other guy can just keep going and by gaining more lean muscle mass without having to cut.
Well, if can lose 25 pounds of fat in the next 5 months, then I would probably still end up with more muscles than the other guy. Plus the fact that after you cut and restrict calories, your body would bounce right up and make the next bulking phase that much easier in the first few months.
Kelly Baggett mentioned a study where a person who just does nothing but sit on his couch and eat still gained muscles underneath the fat.
PLus, it’s more fun doing it this wa
I think I’ll keep doing it this way. It’s more fun too because you get to make more exiting videos this way.
[/quote]
If all you care about is muscle then yes gaining 50lbs while possibly gaining an extra oz of muscle is fine, but all things being equal, you will not gain 5 more pounds of muscle because you went 5000 calories over maintenance and somebody else went only 2000 over. You will gain the 25lbs more fat though since that’s what the body uses as storage. This is not that important for an average person who wants a decent build, but if your looking to compete or be optimal lean muscle mass, you’ve put yourself in a deep hole.
Minus steroids fat cells hardly every go away, while creating new fat cells happens all the time. This is far more verified in biology then exactly how many calories you need for muscle. When losing weight, the body extracts the fat from fat cells, but for the most part does not destroy them. It would take extreme starvation to kill them, not calorie deficit but starvation where you lose muscle mass.
On top of that you have to worry about the fat gain around organs which provides a much more blocky appearance, and is causes more unnecessary issues. This is the reason most extreme calorie bulkers can hardly ever come into a show with the conditioning of people that grow into shows. I’m only talking Natty. If your argument was true bulkers would destroy everyone else at natural bodybuilding shows. ALL they would have to do is lose 25lbs of fat since they have this amazing 25lbs of muscle over everybody else.
This is negligible if you you don’t care too much about fat gain and want to look larger for pictures here and there.
[quote]SteelyD wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
I hope that last part is not going to people like Ebomb and Bug who stay lean and gain. I would say those are two very large and acomplilshed memeber of the stay leaner and gain slower group. Ebomb rocked his show and will dominate the next one and Bug is…well bug. :)[/quote]
I totally have teh ghey for Ebomb and Bug, so, no, not directed toward those freaks.[/quote]
Lol I figured but wanted to make sure no one else could misinterpret it that way.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
i get what ebomb is getting at. if im interpreting his posts correctly, hes saying to monitor caloric intake and gains on the scale/mirror until youre gaining at an appropriate rate, that YOU are comfortable with. lets say youre consuming 3500 calories and only gaining 0.5lbs a week and you want to gain 1lbs. try upping calories to 4000 a day and see where that gets you on scale weight. and keep adjusting up and down until youre gaining at the rate you want.
amiright?[/quote]
This.
What I don’t agree with is the ‘eat a ton’ or ‘eat everything in site’ mantra where the only goal is to gain weight (and muscle). I’d personally rather, and it has been effective for me, to do this. Slowly increase as you are gaining while mitigating unnecessary gains.
[/quote]
was this always your route, or did you start out with a huge bulk to add your initial size? it makes sense if you are near your goal weight to not go on all out bulks anymore, and just continue adding a few lbs here and there at a slower rate. but for initial size you cant argue an all out bulk.[/quote]
I think like PX said, it depends where you’re starting from.
I was lucky. I have a pretty big frame and didn’t need to go on an all out bulk. When I first got into bodybuilding, I ‘bulked up’ to 235 which was my heaviest and when I competed, I was 196 on contest day. Since then, the heaviest I have gotten is around 225, and am significantly leaner than I was last time at this weight. Now, I prefer to stay at a leaner bodyweight. That might change, but I’m making progress and don’t know if I would be making more progress at a higher bodyfat.
I think bulking works. I never said it didn’t. But once you get to a point where you’re putting more more fat than muscle, I don’t see the point of gaining more weight. It is hard to determine this, but most experienced guys can probably tell this if they’re being honest with themselves.
[/quote]
Alternately, I had a very small frame and was not one of those who just blew up from touching a weight the first time. I didn’t gain much muscle at all until college and that was because I jacked my calories way the hell up and stayed in the gym everyday it was open. I hate giving numbers of total calories but Frank isn’t doing anything I didn’t do on a very limited budget. The result was, I got way bigger than anyone thought my frame would allow but it took a lot of pushing those weight barriers…because it wasn’t some easy climb from 200lbs to where I am right now.
The take home point is that we are not all the same…and the guy who learns to work WITH his genetics instead of against them will be the one to make the most progress.
The current trend of worrying about how ripped you are all year long will no doubt hold some back while allowing those who can gain while leaner to rush ahead…I really don’t get that.[/quote]
Ya, I agree.
If you are trying to gain, regardless of whether or not your method is ‘slow’ or ‘all-out’ you will gain some fat, and that’s how it should be. The difference lies in the amount gained and then cut when revealing the muscle built.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
If all you care about is muscle then yes gaining 50lbs while possibly gaining an extra oz of muscle is fine, but all things being equal, you will not gain 5 more pounds of muscle because you went 5000 calories over maintenance and somebody else went only 2000 over. You will gain the 25lbs more fat though since that’s what the body uses as storage. This is not that important for an average person who wants a decent build, but if your looking to compete or be optimal lean muscle mass, you’ve put yourself in a deep hole.
[/quote]
Just a heads up…it isn’t that simple. First, you will not have the exact same metabolism if you gain 50lbs no matter what it is fat or muscle…so this scenario you all play where you always gain the same amount of muscle over time no matter the scenario is flawed on a basic biological level. Even aside from the benefit of extra leverage in weight training meaning more weight used and more muscle gained, you are putting your body in a position where it now has to get used to supporting that extra weight as far as training and food intake.
Bottom line, the body you would have 50lbs heavier wouldn’t even function exactly the same nor would simply walking around provide the same stress…so they can’t possibly come to the exact same conclusion as far as results in your scenario.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
[quote]digitalairair wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
[quote]Proud_Virgin wrote:
Never claimed to…I don’t know the details thats why I like to discuss this stuff. All I know is I’m living what I say. Tried it both ways, eating as little as you can is the way to go for many reasons.
That is, if looking like a bodybuilder is at all a concern…if you are just concerned with scale weight & strength, then this would of course not apply.[/quote]
I agree with this.
To simply consume a ton of calories without determining how many you need to gain weight or just eating so many that you have no choice but to gain weight isn’t IMO a great way for someone that is past the beginner stage.
Find what you need, but I don’t see the practical need to eat more than you need to slowly gain weight if that’s your goal. If your preference is to get heavier, that’s a different issue. [/quote]
I think the point being lost is that there is no way in hell for you to predict even daily “what you need” exactly to only gain muscle mass with no extra body fat. What you can do is estimate based on your rate of weight gain and strength gain. There were many stages where I went through periods of making SURE my body was getting what it NEEDED when it needed it so that there would be no question. That is all bulking up is.
Purposely gaining “slower” instead of gaining at whatever rate allows the most muscle gain can’t logically produce the same amount of muscle mass over the same period of time.
Your gains are what should dictate your approach…just like Frank is apparently eating more than some here think he should yet has gained way more than the “exactly .8lbs of muscle a month” as a result. Doing anything other than feeding the machine as long as most of those gains are muscle mass can do nothing but decrease the rate of progress, not increase it.[/quote]
See, that’s where we just disagree.
For example, take someone that gained 30 lb over a specific time interval because they over-ate vs. someone that progressively ate a little more, just enough to keep adding weight and gained 10-15 lb. Just because you are training hard and adding weight on the scale doesn’t at all mean that that weight is muscle. Obviously you know this, but what I mean to say is that I don’t personally see the point of gaining significantly more fat than necessary vs. gaining slower and gaining primarily muscle mass. I’m also not referring to a ‘95 lb kid that is just starting out.’
You’re right, we don’t truly know at what caloric intake we gain muscle, but we also don’t know how much of that weight gained will be fat vs. muscle. So, when the time comes to finally strip off that excess fat, having less vs. more will put you in a better position.
I really think it comes down to personal preference. If you’d rather be heavier, be heavier. If a bit leaner, be leaner. Either way, I don’t see the rate of muscle growth being much different unless someone’s trying to stay super lean in which case it’s probably hindering muscle growth. [/quote]
If I can gain 50 pounds in a year, and half of it is fat, I still have 25 pounds of muscles.
vs. someone who progresses slowly, with the mentality of 1 pound of muscle a month…and stay leaned through out and added about 15 pounds of muscles, I still have more muslces than he does.
And then you say, now you need to cut 25 pounds of fat, and the other guy can just keep going and by gaining more lean muscle mass without having to cut.
Well, if can lose 25 pounds of fat in the next 5 months, then I would probably still end up with more muscles than the other guy. Plus the fact that after you cut and restrict calories, your body would bounce right up and make the next bulking phase that much easier in the first few months.
Kelly Baggett mentioned a study where a person who just does nothing but sit on his couch and eat still gained muscles underneath the fat.
PLus, it’s more fun doing it this wa
I think I’ll keep doing it this way. It’s more fun too because you get to make more exiting videos this way.
[/quote]
If all you care about is muscle then yes gaining 50lbs while possibly gaining an extra oz of muscle is fine, but all things being equal, you will not gain 5 more pounds of muscle because you went 5000 calories over maintenance and somebody else went only 2000 over. You will gain the 25lbs more fat though since that’s what the body uses as storage. This is not that important for an average person who wants a decent build, but if your looking to compete or be optimal lean muscle mass, you’ve put yourself in a deep hole.
Minus steroids fat cells hardly every go away, while creating new fat cells happens all the time. This is far more verified in biology then exactly how many calories you need for muscle. When losing weight, the body extracts the fat from fat cells, but for the most part does not destroy them. It would take extreme starvation to kill them, not calorie deficit but starvation where you lose muscle mass.
On top of that you have to worry about the fat gain around organs which provides a much more blocky appearance, and is causes more unnecessary issues. This is the reason most extreme calorie bulkers can hardly ever come into a show with the conditioning of people that grow into shows. I’m only talking Natty. If your argument was true bulkers would destroy everyone else at natural bodybuilding shows. ALL they would have to do is lose 25lbs of fat since they have this amazing 25lbs of muscle over everybody else.
This is negligible if you you don’t care too much about fat gain and want to look larger for pictures here and there. [/quote]
So would you consider MODOK to have that blocky physique? I would not think so. He is the only one on this site that i can think of that has really leaned out. But he was at 300lbs and a bit soft. But in his old avatar and pics he looked pretty damn good. New fat cells arent going to just start popping up out of no where. You need to be carrying a lot of fat. Think over 20%. Really who is going over 20% that workouts hard 4+ days a week. and lives an active life. I dont see fat cell hyperplasia being a problem unless you push fat gain way past want anyone should
It takes far more than just 20% body fat to gain more fat cells like that. Past childhood and pre-pubescence, you pretty much have all of the fat cells in general number that you will have for life unless you become one of those bed ridden people.
[quote]CrewPierce wrote:
Why are a bunch of little guys trying to tell the big guys they know what to do better in a thread with “bulking diet” in the title?
I just started reading only what Ebomb and ProfX are saying[/quote]
HEY! Where the hell have you been?
[quote]wannabebig250 wrote:
because it seems like most of them are already close to their goal weight now. they dont want to add significant amounts to their frame. only 5-10lbs here and there. i get what they mean by gaining while remaining lean, when its only a few more lbs of mass they want, there isnt a point to gain 25lbs, lose their abs, and cut 15 of those pounds for the net goal of 10lbs when they couldve stayed lean throughout the whole process.[/quote]
This is absolutely right, but the problem is that this has now become the dominant advice to EVERYONE no matter what the goals are. I mean, honestly at this point, I am betting there are guys out there finding it damned hard to see all abs and gain much muscle so they give up on any further goals as a result.
Unless the advice is “find what works for you” it is probably wrong for someone.
Mind you, we have guys right here, some way smaller, who still think that anyone who made progress and didn’t stay under 10% is obese.
I think a lot of this bullshit comes from the fact that people don’t have the ability to get beyond binary thought. It’s either 1 or 0. Yes or no. Left or right.
To my knowledge, FY never said he’s going to step on a stage anytime soon. That doesn’t mean he can’t be ‘bodybuilding’.
Speaking for myself, I have a hybrid goal of getting bigger AND stronger. I don’t plan on stepping on a BB stage and single digit leanness isn’t important to me. Growing and hitting numbers is. That doesn’t mean I don’t care about not putting on too much weight (as defined by me and people I confide in-- not anonymous T-Tard Interwebz Analysts).
Not being 20 means I have to optimize my growth environment. If that means fat along the way, fine. I already know I can drop weight easily-- I’ve done it, and if I don’t get the food I need during the weak, I start to lean out. What that tells me is I have wiggle room for ‘physique’ when the time comes. What if my goal is to step on stage when I’m 50? Well, I’m gonna be the baddest assed goddammed 50 y.o. on the stage-- I don’t need to see abs for another 10 years or so.
I think some people have a hard time with long term goals and projects and can’t see big picture past their own worlds.