Bigger, stronger, leaner.

Training
41

[quote]browndisaster wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:
I think I figured out what this forum is. It’s for beginners who don’t want to admit they’re beginners because they’ve been lifting somewhere between 6 months and 2 years. (a la LoRez, Browndisaster, et al.) Kind of like a transitional forum. Like a cocoon for the beginner caterpillar that may eventually become a BB forum butterfly.

Sounds good to me.[/quote]

bp: 305
ohp: 185
squat: 335
deadlift: 445
loll won’t take me long to beat these, hopefully you’ve made more progress since then. come at me bro[/quote]

Look at the dates on those lifts, ‘bro.’ I don’t log on this site anymore.

And you can ‘come at me’ when you can actually perform all those lifts. I love the “I can’t do that now but I promise I will soon!!!” Sure you will.

42

[quote]jp_dubya wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

The idea of maintaining a weight that’s predominantly been fat gain (even with some muscle gained as well) doesn’t suddenly make the body build new muscle tissue faster.

S[/quote]

That isn’t why we say hold a new weight. No, you can not FORCE muscle gains. What you can do is make sure your body has what it needs when it is ready to grow after you do all you need to instigate growth.

What you just wrote refers to weight set points, and yes, I do see MUCH value in understanding that as a theory especially since so many see similar results.[/quote]
bodyweight set points are a fascinating topic. Read something recently about a benefit of losing bodyweight in stages. Lower body weight a bunch, maintain for at least two weeks or so, etc. The maintain time increasing as one gets closer to optimal weight. I think I remember 6 months of a static weight or a small range as being the time needed to classify it as a set point.
Similarly was strength set points. Those being the load one can lift even after an extended time off.
Interesting to me at least…[/quote]

Agreed. I lost a lot of body fat in the last two years. This current weight is now easy to maintain and I don’t gain weight back easily as fat after holding that lower weight for a few months.

The same goes with reaching a higher weight. I was a small kid. I value that concept with helping my body learn to carry that much more size without so much strain that it is difficult.

It is about adaptation.

43

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]jp_dubya wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

The idea of maintaining a weight that’s predominantly been fat gain (even with some muscle gained as well) doesn’t suddenly make the body build new muscle tissue faster.

S[/quote]

That isn’t why we say hold a new weight. No, you can not FORCE muscle gains. What you can do is make sure your body has what it needs when it is ready to grow after you do all you need to instigate growth.

What you just wrote refers to weight set points, and yes, I do see MUCH value in understanding that as a theory especially since so many see similar results.[/quote]
bodyweight set points are a fascinating topic. Read something recently about a benefit of losing bodyweight in stages. Lower body weight a bunch, maintain for at least two weeks or so, etc. The maintain time increasing as one gets closer to optimal weight. I think I remember 6 months of a static weight or a small range as being the time needed to classify it as a set point.
Similarly was strength set points. Those being the load one can lift even after an extended time off.
Interesting to me at least…[/quote]

Agreed. I lost a lot of body fat in the last two years. This current weight is now easy to maintain and I don’t gain weight back easily as fat after holding that lower weight for a few months.

The same goes with reaching a higher weight. I was a small kid. I value that concept with helping my body learn to carry that much more size without so much strain that it is difficult.

It is about adaptation.[/quote]

Thanks guys, So the body cannot gain any muscle faster regardless of how much fat you have so its better to gain the muscle slower to limit the amount of fat you gain? Now if the added mass being fat or not allow you to lift more weight, and if it does would lifting more total weight allow your body to build muscle faster or is it still under a certain limitation of muscle growth (in a natural state of course)?

44

[quote]combatreadyss wrote:

Thanks guys, So the body cannot gain any muscle faster regardless of how much fat you have so its better to gain the muscle slower to limit the amount of fat you gain? [/quote]

?? Uh, no, I do not agree with that. Your body is going to grow at whatever rate it can with so many variables that count into it it is almost useless to work them all out. All you can do is help it to do the best it can. trying to literally “go slow” means you are not listening to your own body and are trying to make it grow at a certain rate to avoid fat gain.

That is backwards. If you gain too much fat, cut back a little on calories…but you can’t “take it slow” and assume you will gain more muscle in relation to body fat.

[quote]

Now if the added mass being fat or not allow you to lift more weight, and if it does would lifting more total weight allow your body to build muscle faster or is it still under a certain limitation of muscle growth (in a natural state of course)?[/quote]

First, many do believe in leverage helping with lifts…so anyone saying body weight has no factor at all in strength is a little off. Body fat isn’t muscle, but it isn’t like simply working on getting your body weight up while lifting hasn’t built most of the really big guys walking around.

Your goal is to avoid obesity…but much of the talk outside of that is coming from pure preference as long as you understand basic biology.

45

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]combatreadyss wrote:

Thanks guys, So the body cannot gain any muscle faster regardless of how much fat you have so its better to gain the muscle slower to limit the amount of fat you gain? [/quote]

?? Uh, no, I do not agree with that. Your body is going to grow at whatever rate it can with so many variables that count into it it is almost useless to work them all out. All you can do is help it to do the best it can. trying to literally “go slow” means you are not listening to your own body and are trying to make it grow at a certain rate to avoid fat gain.

That is backwards. If you gain too much fat, cut back a little on calories…but you can’t “take it slow” and assume you will gain more muscle in relation to body fat.

[quote]

Now if the added mass being fat or not allow you to lift more weight, and if it does would lifting more total weight allow your body to build muscle faster or is it still under a certain limitation of muscle growth (in a natural state of course)?[/quote]

First, many do believe in leverage helping with lifts…so anyone saying body weight has no factor at all in strength is a little off. Body fat isn’t muscle, but it isn’t like simply working on getting your body weight while lifting hasn’t built most of the really big guys walking around.

Your goal is to avoid obesity…but much of the talk outside of that is coming from pure preference as long as you understand basic biology.[/quote]

I completely agree with you on the body weight vs Strength idea, 300lbs of body weight is going to generally move more than 200lbs. Again I said generally, obviously there are examples of the 200lb person lifting far more than the 300lb person.

My question is, if you have worked your way up to the higher weight, thus potentially enabling you to perform greater lifts will this also allow you to build more muscle since you are lifting more overall weight. If then you build more muscle would this then allow you to burn more body fat in the long run? So over all you end up bigger, stronger and leaner.

I really do not have specific examples to use other than myself when it comes to this, so that is why I am posing the question to you guys. Thanks again for your feed back.

46

Appreciating all the great responses here, thanks.

The takeaway I am getting is that there is a point where getting leaner becomes counterproductive, and where adding muscle at the expense of gaining more fat becomes counterproductive, and somewhere within that fairly large continuum is each individual’s own optimal point for maximum efficiency which can really only be determined through experience and experimentation.

Unless that’s wrong.

And then you have one coach saying ‘you need to get HUGE before you have anything worth cutting down to!’ while the next says ‘you gotta get LEAN before you even think about adding any more mass!’ and the skinny dude and the fat dude both follow the wrong advice and end up getting even more fucked without realizing it.

47

[quote]combatreadyss wrote:

My question is, if you have worked your way up to the higher weight, thus potentially enabling you to perform greater lifts will this also allow you to build more muscle since you are lifting more overall weight. [/quote]

This is where we start discussing “theory” and “experience”. Yes, if you are lifting more weight (like I noticed I was when I was really heavy), this should equate to more muscle mass built. Not only that, but I also believe that if you have the genetics to get really big, holding that heavier weight will help your body get back to that weight with more muscle mass simply because of general adaptation and the fact that the body has had enough time to learn to use those calories with more efficiency.

[quote]
If then you build more muscle would this then allow you to burn more body fat in the long run? So over all you end up bigger, stronger and leaner.[/quote]

That is why people who bulk up do so. Yes, that is what I believe and what I have seen in myself.

[quote]
I really do not have specific examples to use other than myself when it comes to this, so that is why I am posing the question to you guys. Thanks again for your feed back.[/quote]

I only have myself and people I have trained as well and those who I have spoken to over the years. Personally, not much is going to beat what you hear from the experience of really built guys who are heavier. Bodybuilding is an activity that has not been studied very well.

There are very few studies and really none directly related to seeing how much muscle someone can build over the years. That is why you need to be skeptical of people discussing “hormone efficiency” as if bulking up somehow means you are now insulin resistant. They are using info from studies done on OBESE PEOPLE and relating that to “anyone who gains any body fat at all”…which is incorrect.

48

[quote]Furyguy wrote:
Appreciating all the great responses here, thanks.

The takeaway I am getting is that there is a point where getting leaner becomes counterproductive, and where adding muscle at the expense of gaining more fat becomes counterproductive, and somewhere within that fairly large continuum is each individual’s own optimal point for maximum efficiency which can really only be determined through experience and experimentation.[/quote]

*Sniff…I have something in my eye.

[quote]
h saying ‘you need to get HUGE before you have anything worth cutting down to!’ while the next says ‘you gotta get LEAN before you even think about adding any more mass!’ and the skinny dude and the fat dude both follow the wrong advice and end up getting even more fucked without realizing it. [/quote]

Honestly, the only people who will get “fucked” by that are the guys not really training that hard or are ignoring the actual progress being made.

Have I gone overboard? Hell yeah. That sophomore year in college was filled with way too many cheeseburgers, french fries and chicken wings. I got fat. I also LEARNED SOMETHING FROM IT…like now knowing I can get away with a shit load of junk before it really starts showing…but too many days of that and I’ll be showing it too.

That’s a part of that “learn through experience” thing. This is trial and error. The guys who can work harder and think more clearly without getting caught up in “overanalyzation” will make the most progress.

49

[quote]Furyguy wrote:
Appreciating all the great responses here, thanks.

The takeaway I am getting is that there is a point where getting leaner becomes counterproductive, and where adding muscle at the expense of gaining more fat becomes counterproductive, and somewhere within that fairly large continuum is each individual’s own optimal point for maximum efficiency which can really only be determined through experience and experimentation.

Unless that’s wrong.

And then you have one coach saying ‘you need to get HUGE before you have anything worth cutting down to!’ while the next says ‘you gotta get LEAN before you even think about adding any more mass!’ and the skinny dude and the fat dude both follow the wrong advice and end up getting even more fucked without realizing it. [/quote]
Yeah I agree with your post completely. I started tracking my macros in the last few weeks and it’s really helped me stay in that sweet spot. I wish I had started doing that earlier.

50

Or misinterpreting their progress, again due to ignorance? I thought it was awesome when I pulled 425 for the first time ever… not realizing that such a feat, in the long run, was not worth (to me) nearly the amount of fat I gained in order to do it. Without any real concept of how difficult it would be for me to get rid of that fat, I couldn’t have made that distinction.

But you’re right, it was a learning experience and therefore worth it in the long run.

What do you guys think are some rough boundaries for that continuum so rookies can know when they’re straying into ‘retarded’ territory without needing to ask ‘should I bulk or cut???’ every single time? The Starnes article above did this to some extent but I’m curious as other people’s thoughts.

51

[quote]combatreadyss wrote:
My question is, if you have worked your way up to the higher weight, thus potentially enabling you to perform greater lifts will this also allow you to build more muscle since you are lifting more overall weight. If then you build more muscle would this then allow you to burn more body fat in the long run? So over all you end up bigger, stronger and leaner. [/quote]

It’s not really that simple. Achieving a higher bodyweight, despite possible added leverage or stronger connective tissue,isn’t a guarantee of being able to lift heavier weights (lighter weight class powerlifters routinely outlift the really heavy dudes). Just as lifting heavier weights isn’t a guarantee of building more muscle. Thinking this way is a gross over simplification.

There’s a reason why even though really old school thinking may believe this approach, most modern day competitors and coaches favor a smarter approach that limits excessive fat gain. Our very own Coach Thibaudeau has written about his realization of this in recent years.

And the possibility of burning extra fat comes from muscle gain, not fat gain. Sure you’ll have to eat everyday to maintain added fat mass, but muscle mass is more ‘costly’, and that’s what really drives your metabolism into higher gears.

[quote]
I really do not have specific examples to use other than myself when it comes to this, so that is why I am posing the question to you guys. Thanks again for your feed back.[/quote]

All you need to do is look around at today’s competitors (except for the odd King Kamali -lol), or even guys on this board who compete. Gains are made year after year, and despite the lack of desire to force scale readings excessively upward, strength levels increase, muscle sizes increase, and no one seems to regret the approach.

The only time the issue of ‘holding back’ becomes a problem, is when someone isn’t even eating enough to support their current body composition. If you can’t maintain what you’ve got, how can you expect the body to build new tissue? What’s it gonna use? :slight_smile:

S

52

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]combatreadyss wrote:
My question is, if you have worked your way up to the higher weight, thus potentially enabling you to perform greater lifts will this also allow you to build more muscle since you are lifting more overall weight. If then you build more muscle would this then allow you to burn more body fat in the long run? So over all you end up bigger, stronger and leaner. [/quote]

It’s not really that simple. Achieving a higher bodyweight, despite possible added leverage or stronger connective tissue,isn’t a guarantee of being able to lift heavier weights (lighter weight class powerlifters routinely outlift the really heavy dudes). Just as lifting heavier weights isn’t a guarantee of building more muscle. Thinking this way is a gross over simplification.

There’s a reason why even though really old school thinking may believe this approach, most modern day competitors and coaches favor a smarter approach that limits excessive fat gain. Our very own Coach Thibaudeau has written about his realization of this in recent years.

And the possibility of burning extra fat comes from muscle gain, not fat gain. Sure you’ll have to eat everyday to maintain added fat mass, but muscle mass is more ‘costly’, and that’s what really drives your metabolism into higher gears.

[quote]
I really do not have specific examples to use other than myself when it comes to this, so that is why I am posing the question to you guys. Thanks again for your feed back.[/quote]

All you need to do is look around at today’s competitors (except for the odd King Kamali -lol), or even guys on this board who compete. Gains are made year after year, and despite the lack of desire to force scale readings excessively upward, strength levels increase, muscle sizes increase, and no one seems to regret the approach.

The only time the issue of ‘holding back’ becomes a problem, is when someone isn’t even eating enough to support their current body composition. If you can’t maintain what you’ve got, how can you expect the body to build new tissue? What’s it gonna use? :slight_smile:

S[/quote]

Now in my case I sit around 200lbs, If I were to eat more or less calories in a clean way to maintain the current weight concentrating on increasing performance on the lifts (Bench, squat, dead lift, row, OHP)? Wouldnt this be another way of possibly improving your overall physique?

I am aware there are many factors to think about, I tend to put things in general / simplified terms since it makes it easier for me to stay focused, lol. I am also sure this approach is not going to get somebody stage ready, however would it work for the intermediate Gym goer who wants overall improvement?

53

That’s funny Stu, I remember looking at offseason pictures of guys like Lee Priest and Johnnie Jackson and drawing the exact opposite conclusion.

I guess foolishly following the ‘if some is good, then more is better’ mentality. And then winding up increasing my waist size twice as much as my arm size. Not trying to contradict anything you said, just noting how it’s easy to draw flawed conclusions when you’re coming from a place of ignorance.

54

[quote]Furyguy wrote:

What do you guys think are some rough boundaries for that continuum so rookies can know when they’re straying into ‘retarded’ territory without needing to ask ‘should I bulk or cut???’ every single time? The Starnes article above did this to some extent but I’m curious as other people’s thoughts.[/quote]

I would say avoid all out “gut and love handles”. Have I done so…yep. So that makes me a huge fucking hypocrite.

Obviously I think that not all people grow efficiently at some leaner level.

55

Good post Stu. You have to be wary of proper hormone balance and insulin sensitivity when you start to get sloppy. Your body is generally primed for better muscle gain at a lower BF%. How low is individual. I think 10-15% is about right in general. Thibs and Shelby I think recommend 10-12%.

The problem is when skinny guys become too concerned about maintaining abs; they tend to back off bulking too quickly and don’t create enough of a surplus to build significant muscle.

There are pitfalls on both sides of the argument. I personally err on the side of eating too much than not enough. You can strip the fat quicker than you can make up for lost muscle.

56

[quote]Furyguy wrote:

That’s funny Stu, I remember looking at offseason pictures of guys like Lee Priest and Johnnie Jackson and drawing the exact opposite conclusion.

I guess foolishly following the ‘if some is good, then more is better’ mentality. And then winding up increasing my waist size twice as much as my arm size. Not trying to contradict anything you said, just noting how it’s easy to draw flawed conclusions when you’re coming from a place of ignorance.
[/quote]

Not everyone agrees with Stu on this though…which is what should be the take home point.

Johnnie Jackson’s gains when powerlifting are what many lifters used to get up to in the off season, including guys like Nasser and even Dorian early on.

57

[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Good post Stu. You have to be wary of proper hormone balance and insulin sensitivity when you start to get sloppy. Your body is generally primed for better muscle gain at a lower BF%. How low is individual. I think 10-15% is about right in general. Thibs and Shelby I think recommend 10-12%.
.[/quote]

Your body does not get thrown out of “hormone balance” because you are 15% body fat. You are relating studies done on obese people to this topic.

58

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Good post Stu. You have to be wary of proper hormone balance and insulin sensitivity when you start to get sloppy. Your body is generally primed for better muscle gain at a lower BF%. How low is individual. I think 10-15% is about right in general. Thibs and Shelby I think recommend 10-12%.
.[/quote]

Your body does not get thrown out of “hormone balance” because you are 15% body fat. You are relating studies done on obese people to this topic.[/quote]

I didn’t say it does.

59

[quote]combatreadyss wrote:

Now in my case I sit around 200lbs, If I were to eat more or less calories in a clean way to maintain the current weight concentrating on increasing performance on the lifts (Bench, squat, dead lift, row, OHP)? Wouldnt this be another way of possibly improving your overall physique?
[/quote]

That is what some of us do with “recomp”…but it is a VERY slow process unless using steroids.

It is a great way to hold that higher weight though and is what I am usually referring to. Still working on “performance” but keeping calories at a level to maintain that body weight for a while.

60

[quote]super saiyan wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]super saiyan wrote:
Good post Stu. You have to be wary of proper hormone balance and insulin sensitivity when you start to get sloppy. Your body is generally primed for better muscle gain at a lower BF%. How low is individual. I think 10-15% is about right in general. Thibs and Shelby I think recommend 10-12%.
.[/quote]

Your body does not get thrown out of “hormone balance” because you are 15% body fat. You are relating studies done on obese people to this topic.[/quote]

I didn’t say it does.[/quote]

Saiyan actually said the opposite. In what you quoted. That “10-15 percent is about right in general”. He said this can happen “when you get sloppy”, which is a pretty general statement. He could have meant 25+ by this.

<3 Saiyan