[quote]Blackaggar wrote:
Well wht do the natural pros no:p[/quote]
Stu knows a hell of a lot about this…and he’s a pro…so…?
[/quote]
I was just joking bro, if I was a competitive natural bb I would stay leaner year round then I do now and I stay 15% now, I agree with what you said, naturally your not going to gain many lbs I muscle a year unless your deferral snd even then so no point goin way over what you need. Now when I say this I mean after the initial base is already been built
Almost offended that you think that i am that big of a moron but it is the interwebz. I ran into this problem earlier in this thread. My sarcastic jokes just dont seem to have the punch they do in real life. Ppl keep thinking i am srs.
I make sarcastic jokes almost continually throughout the day all day every day. Damn internet screws with that [/quote]
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Interesting that we are finally having the discussion 2020Wellness supposedly so desperately wanted and he is nowhere to be found.[/quote]
!!!OMG<3
Just rolling through to see if 2020 got what he wanted… I’ve been on the fence so far but now it seems Obvi.
I read this thread off and on over the course of a work day, and can’t remember if it was discussed much, but what about diminishing returns when it comes to natty muscle gains? Every “serious lifter” that stays natty, even if relatively young (talking mid to late 20s), after hitting it hard for 3-4 years, experiences the gains coming excruciatingly slowly. The only real exceptions I see are the very, very genetically gifted, who are the exception, not the rule (and of course, you won’t know till you try!).
Some of these lifters try to stay leaner, some don’t care about the pudge and soften up, but in the end, the net muscle gain after YEARS of work is so little, it makes me question if it’s worth “sacrificing” looking good for a few more ounces of muscle. Some will say yes, but now that I’ve had a taste of what it’s like to be lean, I could never go back to my softer ways, even if I was stronger and filled out bigger shirts.
Prof X’s dogma works well for the first few years someone gets serious as they put on the initial size. A lot will be dependent on genetics as to how far you can take this… but after a certain point, if someone is serious about achieving the upper echelons of physique development, having a combination of high levels of muscularity and leanness, other methods pretty much have to be resorted to… IMO.
[quote]bugeishaAD wrote:
I read this thread off and on over the course of a work day, and can’t remember if it was discussed much, but what about diminishing returns when it comes to natty muscle gains? Every “serious lifter” that stays natty, even if relatively young (talking mid to late 20s), after hitting it hard for 3-4 years, experiences the gains coming excruciatingly slowly. The only real exceptions I see are the very, very genetically gifted, who are the exception, not the rule (and of course, you won’t know till you try!).
Some of these lifters try to stay leaner, some don’t care about the pudge and soften up, but in the end, the net muscle gain after YEARS of work is so little, it makes me question if it’s worth “sacrificing” looking good for a few more ounces of muscle. Some will say yes, but now that I’ve had a taste of what it’s like to be lean, I could never go back to my softer ways, even if I was stronger and filled out bigger shirts.
Prof X’s dogma works well for the first few years someone gets serious as they put on the initial size. A lot will be dependent on genetics as to how far you can take this… but after a certain point, if someone is serious about achieving the upper echelons of physique development, having a combination of high levels of muscularity and leanness, other methods pretty much have to be resorted to… IMO.
[/quote]
i guess it depends on how you want to look, but i think at that point theres not really a reason not to stay out of 15-30lbs above contest weight. Im carrying 35lbs of fat on my body right now period and i wouldnt want to be carrying much more then that at the point im at now but yes as you said in that initial phase, i carried a lot more then that at times lol
[quote]Blackaggar wrote:
Im carrying 35lbs of fat on my body right now period and i wouldnt want to be carrying much more then that at the point im at now but yes as you said in that initial phase, i carried a lot more then that at times lol[/quote]
[quote]bugeishaAD wrote:
I read this thread off and on over the course of a work day, and can’t remember if it was discussed much, but what about diminishing returns when it comes to natty muscle gains? Every “serious lifter” that stays natty, even if relatively young (talking mid to late 20s), after hitting it hard for 3-4 years, experiences the gains coming excruciatingly slowly. The only real exceptions I see are the very, very genetically gifted, who are the exception, not the rule (and of course, you won’t know till you try!).
Some of these lifters try to stay leaner, some don’t care about the pudge and soften up, but in the end, the net muscle gain after YEARS of work is so little, it makes me question if it’s worth “sacrificing” looking good for a few more ounces of muscle. Some will say yes, but now that I’ve had a taste of what it’s like to be lean, I could never go back to my softer ways, even if I was stronger and filled out bigger shirts.
Prof X’s dogma works well for the first few years someone gets serious as they put on the initial size. A lot will be dependent on genetics as to how far you can take this… but after a certain point, if someone is serious about achieving the upper echelons of physique development, having a combination of high levels of muscularity and leanness, other methods pretty much have to be resorted to… IMO.
[/quote]
Good post man. I think their is a happy medium between all out bulking and staying 6-pack lean year round for a natty though. I don’t think you have to sacrifice looking good to add ounces of muscle as you say. You can go on mini bulks once or twice a year, add 10-15 punds, and still look good in the process imo. All out bulking adding 35-40 pounds though I agree is unrealistic for nattys at the advanced stage when the base has already been built, maybe not for all though blackagger would disagree lol.
[quote]zraw wrote:
Here is what I think, in clear points
1)Yes you will gain the maximum muscle mass you can if you do accept the fat gains that come with gaining and dont try to stay lean
2)Yes you will retain almost all that muscle mass if you then diet down to STAGE READY LEANESS LEVELS while using gear
3)No you will not retain almost all that muscle mass if you then diet down to STAGE READY LEANESS LEVELS while staying natty
4)So yes HOORAY for Lee Priest and Dorian Yates and all those NPC superheavyweights
5)Find me some natty top pros that do/did the same stuff as Lee Priest and Dorian and etc etc
6)Guys that are natty and saying they are bigger now cause they did get softer but havent dieted down to near stage ready leaness levels shouldnt comment on this. Yes you will lose muscle mass[/quote]
Look, if your ultimate goal is to walk around at 12-15% bodyfat so you look big in a shirt and not completely out of shape without a shirt on (like most of the bigger lifters on here), instead of stepping on a stage like the OP’s friend, then that gives you much more room to get heavier and still hold most of your size gained – provided you started young enough!!!
If your ultimate goal is to walk around around 10% or slightly higher(like some of the bigger lifters and most of the posters who actually have a career and dont identify themselves 100% with this goddamn hobby like some of the wannabe physique competitors) then that still gives you some room to experiment and mess up – again provided you started young enough!
This does not in any way apply to how much size you can hold in stage condition if you do not intend to use gear. Ask yourself what you really want; if you fancy yourself a competitor then fucking take advice from other competitors in your gym or wherever and not random strangers on an internet forum.
And IF you’re one of the delusional fuckers who started lifting at age 35-40 and decided to permabulk your way to RogueVampire status and you STILL havent gotten down to low-normal bodyfat (~~15%) then:
you dont have nearly as much muscle as you think youre carrying, no matter how swole you ‘‘look’’ in those PX-inspired wifebeater shots with impeccable lighting and a flattering angle to hide your multiple chins.
you’re not EVER getting as lean as n3wb/meganewb no matter how frequently you cite him, stop being fucking delusional.
I hope you’re having periodic appointments with your fucking endocrinologist as those “weight set points” (that are intended as a guideline for YOUNGER listers trying to gain mass) are little more than nails in the coffin for your hormones.
[quote]bugeishaAD wrote:
I read this thread off and on over the course of a work day, and can’t remember if it was discussed much, but what about diminishing returns when it comes to natty muscle gains? Every “serious lifter” that stays natty, even if relatively young (talking mid to late 20s), after hitting it hard for 3-4 years, experiences the gains coming excruciatingly slowly. The only real exceptions I see are the very, very genetically gifted, who are the exception, not the rule (and of course, you won’t know till you try!).
Some of these lifters try to stay leaner, some don’t care about the pudge and soften up, but in the end, the net muscle gain after YEARS of work is so little, it makes me question if it’s worth “sacrificing” looking good for a few more ounces of muscle. Some will say yes, but now that I’ve had a taste of what it’s like to be lean, I could never go back to my softer ways, even if I was stronger and filled out bigger shirts.
Prof X’s dogma works well for the first few years someone gets serious as they put on the initial size. A lot will be dependent on genetics as to how far you can take this… but after a certain point, if someone is serious about achieving the upper echelons of physique development, having a combination of high levels of muscularity and leanness, other methods pretty much have to be resorted to… IMO.
[/quote]
Good post man. I think their is a happy medium between all out bulking and staying 6-pack lean year round for a natty though. I don’t think you have to sacrifice looking good to add ounces of muscle as you say. You can go on mini bulks once or twice a year, add 10-15 punds, and still look good in the process imo. All out bulking adding 35-40 pounds though I agree is unrealistic for nattys at the advanced stage when the base has already been built, maybe not for all though blackagger would disagree lol.
[/quote]
What lol? I don’t think I disagree with any of that
I’ll put it this way. I thoroughly enjoy Stu’s and Ebomb’s post. Great natural physiques from the both of them and I think they know a thing or two about staying lean and making progress.
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
I personally think that you don’t need to be super lean all year round, but I also don’t think that you need to put on excess fat in the offseason as a natural and expect that simply because you added a good deal of weight, some of it must be muscle because you are training hard.
IMO, you feed your body what it needs nutrient-wise, and you don’t need more than that. Too many guys justify eating boatloads of food and getting too soft (40-50 lb over their contest weights) and end up making just as much if not slightly less or marginally more progress than the guy that ate enough nutrients to grow on, but not much more than that.
[/quote]
Very well said!
I tell my clients men and women alike that it makes no sense to gain 20+lbs of weight thats mostly fat if its all going to be dieted right back off. How fun will a cut diet be if you have 20-30-40 pounds to loose in 12-16 weeks vs a very slow and steady 12-16 weeks (if you need all 16 weeks) with just 10-15lbs to loose.
Imagine how much more muscle you will hold onto since the diet is slower and less agressive compared to the prior situation.
When you break it down it just does not make logical since for the natty to really go buzzerk with bulking up.
Its an old school train of thought that had merit in its time but lets face it, the times have changed folks.
I would be very interested in what you specifically think that is…because I haven’t ever told someone with a solid base of size to gain 40+lbs for no reason or that there were not “diminishing returns”.
I also know my words can be very easily quoted so…if you could…what is it I believe exactly that is different from what you wrote?
I know I wouldn’t be this size without putting on the weight I did. I know most people who avoid it don’t ever get that impressively big. If you are arguing that most of the really big lifters you see got that way by never bulking up…I am all ears.
But I don’t think you even believe that.
This is a process that takes years.
My DOGMA is that the guy giving his body everything it needs to grow instead of dieting 2 or three times a year will build that solid base of mass faster than he guy who thinks how lean he is is top priority.
Arguments like the one above about losing the weight you gained are why we discuss set points…and why we keep saying let your body get adjusted to the weight before dieting.
But this has always been directed at the people who actually have the genetics for this…not guys who can’t get to 190lbs without being chubby after 5-10 years of lifting.
[quote]ebomb5522 wrote:
I personally think that you don’t need to be super lean all year round, but I also don’t think that you need to put on excess fat in the offseason as a natural and expect that simply because you added a good deal of weight, some of it must be muscle because you are training hard.
IMO, you feed your body what it needs nutrient-wise, and you don’t need more than that. Too many guys justify eating boatloads of food and getting too soft (40-50 lb over their contest weights) and end up making just as much if not slightly less or marginally more progress than the guy that ate enough nutrients to grow on, but not much more than that.
[/quote]
Very well said!
I tell my clients men and women alike that it makes no sense to gain 20+lbs of weight thats mostly fat if its all going to be dieted right back off. How fun will a cut diet be if you have 20-30-40 pounds to loose in 12-16 weeks vs a very slow and steady 12-16 weeks (if you need all 16 weeks) with just 10-15lbs to loose.
Imagine how much more muscle you will hold onto since the diet is slower and less agressive compared to the prior situation.
When you break it down it just does not make logical since for the natty to really go buzzerk with bulking up.
Its an old school train of thought that had merit in its time but lets face it, the times have changed folks.[/quote]
Imagine how much more muscle you would hold onto if those same people realized that most lifters will likely have to be at this for a good 3-5 years before they even build a decent base of mass.
Further…who here is telling people to gain 20lbs if most of it was fat?
Again missing the point that this discussion is about natty competitors
No one cares about your weight, you are not competing
You refered to Lee Priest and whoever the fuck superheavy npc competitors to validate your ideology of getting big big big to gain more muscle while these guys are not natty competitors.
Also, how can you KNOW you wouldnt be “this big” had you not put on this weight? You cant even know how much weight you would retain if you were leaning down to stage level leaness so im not sure how you can even comment on this
I think it has been stated more than one time, by more than one poster, that this was not about what you should do if you were happy with staying at 15% forever
My guess is you would end up smaller than KB if you were to diet down to his level of leaness.
Here’s a sort of related question about mass gain as it relates to bodybuilding:
For powerlifters, one of the biggest things people recommend is just signing up for a meet.
Bodybuilding is like marathon-running to me: it takes a number of years of building a base to really even compete (even if competing relatively poorly). So in a not-so-hypothetical hypothetical (i.e., my case), let’s say you have someone whose goal is to compete, but figures that it will probably take four years of putting on size and training very hard before being able to turn in a respectable performance.
With that sort of time-line in mind before doing an actual competition, what do you guys think of prospective bodybuilders doing annual (what I’ll call) “half-competitions”? What I mean by that is that each year, instead of full-on dieting down (to, say, 5% bodyfat or whatnot, which would possibly seriously detract from the overall goal of putting on mass and gaining strength), dieting down to the 8-10% range by a self-imposed “show date” or end-time. So, a trainee could do this annually for a few years, building up his (or her) base before ultimately competing.
Come to think of it, didn’t Synergy do this in years past? I feel like I’ve read something similar to that idea in his update thread from a while back.
As an additional question that does strike at what people on this thread are discussing: does anyone here actually know anyone who ate mostly clean foods (i.e., the usual bodybuilder competition-mode foods: chicken breasts, rice, potatoes, whey, blahblahblah), trained very hard, and still ended up getting “fat”?
I’m of course not saying that it’s impossible, but I just don’t know of anyone who ate a ton of what are typically labeled “clean” foods and didn’t ultimately have impressive results from it. I remember Accipiter had a pretty sloppy bulk like a year ago, but he also dirtied that bulk up quite a bit.
I would be very interested in what you specifically think that is…because I haven’t ever told someone with a solid base of size to gain 40+lbs for no reason [/quote]
Bug didn’t say you ever said that. The word he wrote after you quoted him said that gaining of 40+ lbs was GOOD for someone who HADN’T built that base yet. He said your strategy of putting on as much muscle as possible (and not let a little fat accumulation deter you from that goal) is good for those still building that “solid base”, not those who already have it.