Personally think a 20% bump is cals is too high. 10% is about as high as I would bump then reevaluate in 2 weeks.
I like Chris’ idea of a ‘food day’ buying and prepping focused on food choices and building experience slowly
A newb reading this thread might think its all diet and macros etc
What lifts would folk recommend they practice? Not a split just the exercise selection. The big Traditional barbell compounds? Is it paramount at this early stage?
[quote]gswork wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Why would a newb who maintains their weight with 1,500 calories need to bump things up by 500 cals minimum?
That’s a 33% increase (yep, I’m good at simple math)
That isn’t needed.
Everyone is different and should adjust their calories differently.[/quote]
That’s really low, add in the demands of training and its difficult to think of someone in that bracket, maybe a very slight and small man or small woman (or someone with impaired metabolism), but yes if that was maintenance then maybe step to 300ish, maybe
At a guess I’d imagine an adult with such low maintenance cals to be a rare exception though, is the avg something like 2500 for men? (Is that inc an idea of average activity, not sure what that would be) ? So I guess if its like a bell curve there must be a few out there
Another point lets say mr newb starts training then his old maintenance may not be right, should they check over a few weeks before do you think or dive in and try to establish that further down the line?[/quote]
The thread, AFAICT, is about brand new lifters or “newbs” if you will.
Newbs generally are very slight and young, look at the picture in the OP.
You think those guys are eating 2,500+ cals a day?
Doubt it.
I don’t see what is so wrong with a somewhat conservative approach to bumping up calories?
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]gswork wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Why would a newb who maintains their weight with 1,500 calories need to bump things up by 500 cals minimum?
That’s a 33% increase (yep, I’m good at simple math)
That isn’t needed.
Everyone is different and should adjust their calories differently.[/quote]
That’s really low, add in the demands of training and its difficult to think of someone in that bracket, maybe a very slight and small man or small woman (or someone with impaired metabolism), but yes if that was maintenance then maybe step to 300ish, maybe
At a guess I’d imagine an adult with such low maintenance cals to be a rare exception though, is the avg something like 2500 for men? (Is that inc an idea of average activity, not sure what that would be) ? So I guess if its like a bell curve there must be a few out there
Another point lets say mr newb starts training then his old maintenance may not be right, should they check over a few weeks before do you think or dive in and try to establish that further down the line?[/quote]
The thread, AFAICT, is about brand new lifters or “newbs” if you will.
Newbs generally are very slight and young, look at the picture in the OP.
You think those guys are eating 2,500+ cals a day?
Doubt it.
I don’t see what is so wrong with a somewhat conservative approach to bumping up calories?[/quote]
Not to be too much of a naysayer here, but I was losing weight… at 135 lbs… with 2500+ calories a day and an almost completely sedentary lifestyle. I had to bump it to about 3000 just to maintain. It takes me 3500+ just to put on weight.
Everyone really is different.
[quote]gswork wrote:
I like Chris’ idea of a ‘food day’ buying and prepping focused on food choices and building experience slowly
A newb reading this thread might think its all diet and macros etc
What lifts would folk recommend they practice? Not a split just the exercise selection. The big Traditional barbell compounds? Is it paramount at this early stage?[/quote]
IMO, a new lifter should focus on the basics.
They don’t need a million mechanical drop super blast cluster sets of one armed incline cable flys (negatives only)
Although that is one of my personal favorites I wouldn’t reccomend it to newbs.
Preferably a newb would have a vet to show them the ropes and make sure they are doing it right,
Focus on compound BB/DB movements and their variations:
Bench
Squats
Deadlifts
Rows
OHP
Pull ups
Curls
Push downs
Personally, I would program a newb to hit 3-4 working sets and keep them in the 6-8 rep range for big muscles and 8-12 range for smaller ones.
That would be my personal reccomendation. I would pick 2-3 exercises for big muscles and 2 for smaller muscle groups.
This is what I would start with and go from there.
[quote]LoRez wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]gswork wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Why would a newb who maintains their weight with 1,500 calories need to bump things up by 500 cals minimum?
That’s a 33% increase (yep, I’m good at simple math)
That isn’t needed.
Everyone is different and should adjust their calories differently.[/quote]
That’s really low, add in the demands of training and its difficult to think of someone in that bracket, maybe a very slight and small man or small woman (or someone with impaired metabolism), but yes if that was maintenance then maybe step to 300ish, maybe
At a guess I’d imagine an adult with such low maintenance cals to be a rare exception though, is the avg something like 2500 for men? (Is that inc an idea of average activity, not sure what that would be) ? So I guess if its like a bell curve there must be a few out there
Another point lets say mr newb starts training then his old maintenance may not be right, should they check over a few weeks before do you think or dive in and try to establish that further down the line?[/quote]
The thread, AFAICT, is about brand new lifters or “newbs” if you will.
Newbs generally are very slight and young, look at the picture in the OP.
You think those guys are eating 2,500+ cals a day?
Doubt it.
I don’t see what is so wrong with a somewhat conservative approach to bumping up calories?[/quote]
Not to be too much of a naysayer here, but I was losing weight… at 135 lbs… with 2500+ calories a day and an almost completely sedentary lifestyle. I had to bump it to about 3000 just to maintain. It takes me 3500+ just to put on weight.
Everyone really is different.[/quote]
Some gain on 3,000 and some lose on 3,000.
Everyone’s different.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]gswork wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Why would a newb who maintains their weight with 1,500 calories need to bump things up by 500 cals minimum?
That’s a 33% increase (yep, I’m good at simple math)
That isn’t needed.
Everyone is different and should adjust their calories differently.[/quote]
That’s really low, add in the demands of training and its difficult to think of someone in that bracket, maybe a very slight and small man or small woman (or someone with impaired metabolism), but yes if that was maintenance then maybe step to 300ish, maybe
At a guess I’d imagine an adult with such low maintenance cals to be a rare exception though, is the avg something like 2500 for men? (Is that inc an idea of average activity, not sure what that would be) ? So I guess if its like a bell curve there must be a few out there
Another point lets say mr newb starts training then his old maintenance may not be right, should they check over a few weeks before do you think or dive in and try to establish that further down the line?[/quote]
The thread, AFAICT, is about brand new lifters or “newbs” if you will.
Newbs generally are very slight and young, look at the picture in the OP.
You think those guys are eating 2,500+ cals a day?
Doubt it.
I don’t see what is so wrong with a somewhat conservative approach to bumping up calories?[/quote]
I remember being that age and skinny. I ate 2000+ and should have eaten much much more. Shame it doesn’t work later on in life the same way!
I also remember being very taken with Menzter articles in Flex I think, one was about diet and I’m pretty sure he said that if you are at maintenance then try small increments like an extra apple a day! Most ppl don’t eat exactly the same each day (for their sake I hope not) but I was convinced by the apparent logic, didn’t do a thing of course, maybe a big burger would have been better!
But anyway, sure there must be some slow metabolisms out there too and no one is saying its bad to cal count but I’d suggest small increments wouldn’t be a great starting point for the kids in that pic would you?
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]gswork wrote:
I like Chris’ idea of a ‘food day’ buying and prepping focused on food choices and building experience slowly
A newb reading this thread might think its all diet and macros etc
What lifts would folk recommend they practice? Not a split just the exercise selection. The big Traditional barbell compounds? Is it paramount at this early stage?[/quote]
IMO, a new lifter should focus on the basics.
They don’t need a million mechanical drop super blast cluster sets of one armed incline cable flys (negatives only)
Although that is one of my personal favorites I wouldn’t reccomend it to newbs.
Preferably a newb would have a vet to show them the ropes and make sure they are doing it right,
Focus on compound BB/DB movements and their variations:
Bench
Squats
Deadlifts
Rows
OHP
Pull ups
Curls
Push downs
Personally, I would program a newb to hit 3-4 working sets and keep them in the 6-8 rep range for big muscles and 8-12 range for smaller ones.
That would be my personal reccomendation. I would pick 2-3 exercises for big muscles and 2 for smaller muscle groups.
This is what I would start with and go from there.
[/quote]
Good choices lots of variations too, it would last years
Theyd have to resist adding the preacher bench curls to the variations though - always remind me of silly photos in the mags way back!
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]gswork wrote:
I like Chris’ idea of a ‘food day’ buying and prepping focused on food choices and building experience slowly
A newb reading this thread might think its all diet and macros etc
What lifts would folk recommend they practice? Not a split just the exercise selection. The big Traditional barbell compounds? Is it paramount at this early stage?[/quote]
IMO, a new lifter should focus on the basics.
They don’t need a million mechanical drop super blast cluster sets of one armed incline cable flys (negatives only)
Although that is one of my personal favorites I wouldn’t reccomend it to newbs.
Preferably a newb would have a vet to show them the ropes and make sure they are doing it right,
Focus on compound BB/DB movements and their variations:
Bench
Squats
Deadlifts
Rows
OHP
Pull ups
Curls
Push downs
Personally, I would program a newb to hit 3-4 working sets and keep them in the 6-8 rep range for big muscles and 8-12 range for smaller ones.
That would be my personal reccomendation. I would pick 2-3 exercises for big muscles and 2 for smaller muscle groups.
This is what I would start with and go from there.
[/quote]
I would have to add laterals and some exercise for rear delts like face pulls to work on shoulders.
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
[quote]gswork wrote:
I like Chris’ idea of a ‘food day’ buying and prepping focused on food choices and building experience slowly
A newb reading this thread might think its all diet and macros etc
What lifts would folk recommend they practice? Not a split just the exercise selection. The big Traditional barbell compounds? Is it paramount at this early stage?[/quote]
IMO, a new lifter should focus on the basics.
They don’t need a million mechanical drop super blast cluster sets of one armed incline cable flys (negatives only)
Although that is one of my personal favorites I wouldn’t reccomend it to newbs.
Preferably a newb would have a vet to show them the ropes and make sure they are doing it right,
Focus on compound BB/DB movements and their variations:
Bench
Squats
Deadlifts
Rows
OHP
Pull ups
Curls
Push downs
Personally, I would program a newb to hit 3-4 working sets and keep them in the 6-8 rep range for big muscles and 8-12 range for smaller ones.
That would be my personal reccomendation. I would pick 2-3 exercises for big muscles and 2 for smaller muscle groups.
This is what I would start with and go from there.
[/quote]
I would have to add laterals and some exercise for rear delts like face pulls to work on shoulders. [/quote]
Agreed.
I would focus on this big lifts but would obviously need some shrugs, rear delt work and abs.
Good call.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I never believed there was any real special split beginner, intermediates, or even advanced trainees should follow. I think any split will work well provided:
1-You are consistent and it fits within the rest of your life’s schedule
2-You diet allows for gains to be made
3-You recovery fits with your chosen degree of volume
Now obviously going to the gym twice a week isn’t exactly going to yield much (if any) in the way of gains IMO, but I think most will see where I’m going with my thinking. Too little won’t work, just as for most, too much either.
S[/quote]
I don’t know if we should be so quick to dismiss twice a week training. Jon Cole, who has held powerlifting records in the 110kg class for over 30 years (just recently broken by Dan Green) trained only twice a week. And he, by all accounts, had a great physique.
I personally know a 74kg lifter who deadlifts 285kg and benches 170kg raw. He trains twice a week. On Tuesday he squats and benches. On Saturday he deadlifts and benches. He builds up to a heavy set in each lift each session. No assistance work at all.
Another friend who has power cleaned 150kg at 90kg bodyweight swears by training twice a week.
I’ve had my best training results from twice a week training. Does it work for everyone? No. Is it a great way to train for some? Definitely.
[quote]DonM wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I never believed there was any real special split beginner, intermediates, or even advanced trainees should follow. I think any split will work well provided:
1-You are consistent and it fits within the rest of your life’s schedule
2-You diet allows for gains to be made
3-You recovery fits with your chosen degree of volume
Now obviously going to the gym twice a week isn’t exactly going to yield much (if any) in the way of gains IMO, but I think most will see where I’m going with my thinking. Too little won’t work, just as for most, too much either.
S[/quote]
I don’t know if we should be so quick to dismiss twice a week training. Jon Cole, who has held powerlifting records in the 110kg class for over 30 years (just recently broken by Dan Green) trained only twice a week. And he, by all accounts, had a great physique.
I personally know a 74kg lifter who deadlifts 285kg and benches 170kg raw. He trains twice a week. On Tuesday he squats and benches. On Saturday he deadlifts and benches. He builds up to a heavy set in each lift each session. No assistance work at all.
Another friend who has power cleaned 150kg at 90kg bodyweight swears by training twice a week.
I’ve had my best training results from twice a week training. Does it work for everyone? No. Is it a great way to train for some? Definitely.[/quote]
Did they do that their whole training career? Initially or inbetween did they have other systems?
[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:
[quote]DonM wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I never believed there was any real special split beginner, intermediates, or even advanced trainees should follow. I think any split will work well provided:
1-You are consistent and it fits within the rest of your life’s schedule
2-You diet allows for gains to be made
3-You recovery fits with your chosen degree of volume
Now obviously going to the gym twice a week isn’t exactly going to yield much (if any) in the way of gains IMO, but I think most will see where I’m going with my thinking. Too little won’t work, just as for most, too much either.
S[/quote]
I don’t know if we should be so quick to dismiss twice a week training. Jon Cole, who has held powerlifting records in the 110kg class for over 30 years (just recently broken by Dan Green) trained only twice a week. And he, by all accounts, had a great physique.
I personally know a 74kg lifter who deadlifts 285kg and benches 170kg raw. He trains twice a week. On Tuesday he squats and benches. On Saturday he deadlifts and benches. He builds up to a heavy set in each lift each session. No assistance work at all.
Another friend who has power cleaned 150kg at 90kg bodyweight swears by training twice a week.
I’ve had my best training results from twice a week training. Does it work for everyone? No. Is it a great way to train for some? Definitely.[/quote]
Did they do that their whole training career? Initially or inbetween did they have other systems? [/quote]
The powerlifter has trained twice a week his whole lifting career (which has only been 4-5 years) as far as I know. Certainly for the past couple of years. He used to do some assistance work (shoulder press, rows, etc) but progressed better when he cut it out.
The guy with the 150kg power clean trained 3x per week for some of his career, but his best lifts came when he cut back to 2. He used very low volume, often working up to a heavy single in two exercises, twice a week. I think he would have benefitted from slightly more volume personally.
Jon Cole, I’m not sure. The only accounts I’ve heard of his training had him doing two monster sessions per week.
[quote]Smashingweights wrote:
Why would a newb who maintains their weight with 1,500 calories need to bump things up by 500 cals minimum?
That’s a 33% increase (yep, I’m good at simple math)
That isn’t needed.
Everyone is different and should adjust their calories differently.[/quote]
I just think that most newbs will have a much harder time eating enough calories for their bodies (considering most newbs will be teenage boys with lightning fast metabolisms) when they start learning to eat clean food. You fill full on 500 calories of chicken far quicker than 500 calories of pop-tarts, snickers, or M&M’s.
It seems to me that when most people start training there bodies will handle a lot more calories than they are used to and I don’t think you are taking full advantage of that if you only feed it a couple hundred extra calories every couple weeks. I think you actually stand a chance of cheating yourself by only adjusting by 500 if you set your starting cals to low.
I teach 6 fitness courses every year at the high school level and I find 90% of them under eat and complain they are not gaining weight. Within those 6 courses, I train on average 120-150 students across 6 years of work so I have a pretty good sample size (in the neighborhood of 1000 total students).
I have them track their cals for 2 weeks and they are shocked at their findings. Its the best thing I have found to get them to move up the scale, track their cals. Even if only for a short period.
[quote]cally wrote:
I teach 6 fitness courses every year at the high school level and I find 90% of them under eat and complain they are not gaining weight. Within those 6 courses, I train on average 120-150 students across 6 years of work so I have a pretty good sample size (in the neighborhood of 1000 total students).
I have them track their cals for 2 weeks and they are shocked at their findings. Its the best thing I have found to get them to move up the scale, track their cals. Even if only for a short period. [/quote]
It is also why increases of around 500cals makes more sense as a new trainer rather than wasting time trying to nail it down within 100-200 calorie increases. Newbs need a sawed off, not a sniper rifle. The human body is too variable.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
The human body can not be “predicted” in all its actions especially as far as “super-recovery”.
That is why it really still comes down to trial and error…[/quote]
While it can’t be predicted in a certain sense, charting your daily macros and how your unique body responds to higher and lower carb days, as well as guesstimating until you find the number of calories that produces a result is not only fairly common, but an approach that I have yet to see any successful coach not make use of in at least some manner.[/quote]
That would be why I said to track calories and protein in priority with an understanding of carbs and fats.
The problem would be “guesstimating” within ranges too small to allow proper assessment of growth for a newb sometimes due to sheer fear of any and all fat gain.
That is what trial and error is…making small adjustments once extremes are understood.
[quote]
Playing the “human body is unpredictable” card eliminates the need to actually pay careful attention, and in my opinion (I’ll repeat that, in my opinion, people can disagree with me all they want, my feelings will be just fine) learning to pay attention to how your own body reacts to specific variables, that you should take the time to understand in at least a rudimentary manner, is one of the first things I wish I had learned when I first started spending time in the gym. I have no doubt I would have made much better progress much quicker.
S[/quote]
Well, I didn’t write that “the human body is unpredictable”. I wrote that there are many variables that most people will not be aware of without intense training and education on the subject.
It is important to not gain “static” misconcepts of nutrition and the human body based on hear-say or fads…which is way too easy to fall into as a newb due to the amount of misinformation available.
Once again, it has already been written that one should track calories and make small changes.
Srs question, how do you track calories without tracking macros? The two have always gone hand in hand for me.
MACRONTRIENT:
Definition: CARBS, FATS, PROTEIN.
Statement: Track calories, proteins in priority with an understanding of carbs and fats.
After keeping up with mine religiously for a couple weeks, I found out that if I eat clean and eat enough to get my 3500 cals a day, I typically eat a little more protein than I need, but it is about a 40c-40p-20f balance. That’s just me keeping a basic meal structure of every meal being protein, cup of starchy carbs, two cups of veggies.
Mix and match the exact items. Then allow myself a protein shake, some cottage cheese, a few almonds, couple pieces of fruit and some yogurt for snacks. Its simple and every thing kind of balances out. I have measured out enough portions (which you have to learn to do at first) that I have a pretty good idea of how much would constitute a good serving.