[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Hasn’t this specific conversation occurred enough already? Any other gems for newbs? I thinking genie pants, work boots and shades are a gym no no and sometimes you need to dish out aLittle tough love.
S
[/quote]
Wasn’t that the look of the 90s’? lol!
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
I still have yet to see an argument for tracking calories beng a bad thing[/quote]
Well, it is a good thing no one said don’t track calories then, huh?
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I don’t think anyone has suggested that fat gain denotes failure, simply that your usual argument that a degree if fat gain coupled with your routinely using yourself as example isn’t an approach most younger trainers would want to employ in the look-better-now mindset often seen,nor is it Always the best approach. (See all and every example of this ‘discussion’ over the last few years).
Hasn’t this specific conversation occurred enough already? Any other gems for newbs? I thinking genie pants, work boots and shades are a gym no no and sometimes you need to dish out aLittle tough love.
S
[/quote]
Uh, I didn’t use myself as an example at all.
What exactly are you disagreeing with that was written here?
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Any other gems for newbs?
[/quote]
It would be nice to hear how you advanced guys’ programming changed from beginner to intermediate to advanced. I’ve been stuck in the “intermediate” stage for a while (as in 2xbw squat, bw bench for reps, weighted chins/dips for reps, etc. or at least that’s how I define intermediate, lol) and it’s painfully obvious that the protocols that I used to get from beginner to intermediate are no longer working and I’ve been stuck in a loop. Is it just a matter of eating more?
[quote]flch95 wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Any other gems for newbs?
[/quote]
It would be nice to hear how you advanced guys’ programming changed from beginner to intermediate to advanced. I’ve been stuck in the “intermediate” stage for a while (as in 2xbw squat, bw bench for reps, weighted chins/dips for reps, etc. or at least that’s how I define intermediate, lol) and it’s painfully obvious that the protocols that I used to get from beginner to intermediate are no longer working and I’ve been stuck in a loop. Is it just a matter of eating more?[/quote]
Maybe you can makle a new thread about that.
This thread isn’t about intermediate trainers…and it seems that people are reading it the way it is.
I don’t know why some people treat noobs with kid gloves or as if every teenager can’t compute some basic things. People capable of serving in the armed forces or taking calculus in high school are capable of measuring or estimating a cup of rice or learning it contains ~45 grams of carbs and ~240 calories.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
since nattys gain muscle very very slowly[/quote]
Just wanted to comment on this…because it is a little off in its premise.
If someone has great genetics for this, you can bet that as a newb, they will NOT be gaining muscle “very very slowly”…whether they are natural or not.
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
I don’t know why some people treat noobs with kid gloves or as if every teenager can’t compute some basic things. People capable of serving in the armed forces or taking calculus in high school are capable of measuring or estimating a cup of rice or learning it contains ~45 grams of carbs and ~240 calories. [/quote]
Computing basic things is actually the goal of what I am saying…KEEP IT SIMPLE.
Telling a newb they need to use 200 calorie ranges to vary within when they are at a stage to grow the most that they ever will naturally in their lives has the potential to keep someone from eating as much as they could need to grow.
I don’t believe it was written anywhere that a newb shouldn’t try to gauge what they are eating or how much.
This isn’t calculus…this is biology…and the fact that your body has a variable state of being is a fact of nature.
You don’t it a range you have macros you hit eat day. Evaluate in two weeks the progress and adjust. Where did this 200csl range come from?
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Where did this 200csl range come from?[/quote]
From Stu.
Me confused.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Where did this 200csl range come from?[/quote]
From Stu.[/quote]
Never saw a post that said anything like that originally form stu
[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Me confused. [/quote]
Sometimes it helps to read more slowly when that happens.
That is why God gave us two ears and one…wait…this is the internet.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Where did this 200csl range come from?[/quote]
From Stu.[/quote]
Never saw a post that said anything like that originally form stu[/quote]
[quote]200 cals of the right macros a day will come to half a pound each week. I know what I’m about to say might derail the thread, but a steady 1/2 lb of quality muscle a week is 2 lbs a month. A very optimistically yet realistic figure no matter your genetics (PEDs withstanding of course).
Also, while contest BBers are rightfully considered not the norm for sale of discussions, 200 cals is certainly enough to make a difference in terms of growth or fat loss. Saying the body doesn’t register that much is just ridiculous. Obviously if you’re carrying so much girth that you can’t really tell, that’s one thing, but even then it still doesn’t mean the nutrients weren’t used.
Yes, I realize this thread started off as advice for newbs, but putting myself in the mindset of just starting out, going from skinny to fat wouldn’t seem like progress to me. However actually learning how “it’s done” and seeing my body transform while still sporting visible musculature (not girth) would.
[/quote]
He was talking about adding 200cals each day of the week when progress stalls.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
He was talking about adding 200cals each day of the week when progress stalls. [/quote]
The rest of us were discussing giving calorie ranges that small to newbs. He then wrote this.
Speaking of only “when progress stalls” when it comes to where a newb should start manipulating calories seems off.
This shouldn’t just be based on “when progress stalls” because a newb shouldn’t be stalling that much.
If they do stall, I still wouldn’t have them adjust calories in that narrow a window.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
He was talking about adding 200cals each day of the week when progress stalls. [/quote]
The rest of us were discussing giving calorie ranges that small to newbs. He then wrote this.
Speaking of only “when progress stalls” when it comes to where a newb should start manipulating calories seems off.
This shouldn’t just be based on “when progress stalls” because a newb shouldn’t be stalling that much.[/quote]
Umm I believe he was replying to ppl discussing how much to bump cals. 200-500 seemed to be the consensus though I think 500 a day is too much
And yes their progress will stall.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
He was talking about adding 200cals each day of the week when progress stalls. [/quote]
The rest of us were discussing giving calorie ranges that small to newbs. He then wrote this.
Speaking of only “when progress stalls” when it comes to where a newb should start manipulating calories seems off.
This shouldn’t just be based on “when progress stalls” because a newb shouldn’t be stalling that much.[/quote]
Umm I believe he was replying to ppl discussing how much to bump cals. 200-500 seemed to be the consensus though I think 500 a day is too much
And yes their progress will stall. [/quote]
Uhm, you asked who mentioned a 200cal range.
I told you.
Yes, 200calorie adjustments would be too small for most newbs especially those with great genetics for this.
I guess now you can go back and read what has been written in the proper context.
Umm no a 200cal adjust ED is not a small bump
If no progress is made then another 200 Ed.
This way your body can ramp its metabolism up slowly and then you cut with higher cals and less bf than just randomly jumping large amounts in cals.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
Umm no a 200cal adjust ED is not a small bump
If no progress is made then another 200 Ed.
This way your body can ramp its metabolism up slowly and then you cut with higher cals and less bf than just randomly jumping large amounts in cals. [/quote]
Why would someone increase calories every day?
I assume that is what “ED” stands for?
Why would you tell a newb to do this?
Also, whether someone’s metabolism “ramps up” is individual and more related to whether they gain more muscle along with the increase. Someone’s metabolism doesn’t increase just because they slowly start eating more calories over time.