How to 'Bulk' For Naturals

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Pt. 2

re: tracking food macros. When I was dropping weight some years ago, I tracked my food religiously. It was a great exercise to learn portions and what PFC they contained. I encourage everyone to do that for at least some months and memorize certain things.

For fun, I’ve started recording what I eat. To be sure, I’m not giving myself macros, then fitting meals to it, I’m just recording what I eat.

Guess what? I’ve essentially been maintaining the same weight for many months, actually slightly losing scale weight just eating what I naturally want to eat. I’m hitting about the same macro/calorie breakdown all week, except for a little extra here, a little less there (usually less when I’m traveling for work).

I know naturally (after having gone through the exercise of visually learning portion sizes and macro breakdowns) that all I need to do is add another slab of meat during the day and another potato, and I’m going to gain. Up the cardio and drop the cream in my coffee and a serving of rice and I’ll lose. It’s that simple.

I know if I buy 0.6 lb strip steak, it’s going to grill down to 1/2 lb (close enough amongst friends). Quick-- anyone-- withough googling-- Calories/Fat/Protein in 1/2 lb of steak… Anyone? If you can’t answer that, or at least know that at the end of the day approximately what 2 lbs of steak, 2 cups of rice, 6 eggs, and, I don’t know, 2 Tbs of PB comes to, then maybe you should track your macros. If you can’t do that, but know whether you will generally lose or gain on that, you’re probably experienced enough to pull it off. If you’re getting close to contest day for BB, then you’re already doing something similar on paper or in your head.

Some guys need a list. Some don’t. Some guys need a program. Some don’t. Sometimes the ones that do, don’t. And sometimes the ones that don’t, do. This is only shit you learn by doing.

My first couple years lifting, I used published templates. I learned what works for me and what doesn’t. I’m still learning that. It’s the same with diet.

The real crux of the buscuit is you have to be honest with yourself. You know if you pussied out on that last rep. You know if you justified that donut. You know if you had another set. If you’re not happy seeing the abs smooth over or you really shouldn’t go down that path, because you will become miserable then start blaming your failure on other people (That fucking SteelyD said just fucking eat and I’d get HYOOGE but I just got fat. He ruined my life..). You know what? Fuck you, dumbass.

If you don’t mind it go as far as you can. Own it. Just have a plan and be honest. Weigh your options.

Goals:

  • 405 bench by the end of the year and you’re at 365 BP? Then do what it takes.
  • 405 bench at 220 by the end of the year and you’re at 365 BP and you’re at 220 BW? Well, that’s a MUCH different path, diet wise.

The goal sets the approach (IMO). Period. You can’t serve to masters. Well, you can, but none will be optimal. I’ve said before, my pure lifting numbers have suffered because I’m NOT willing to just pile food in my pie hole. My physique isn’t contest condition because I am, in fact, racing the clock and I mentally am not hindered by “looking like a powerlifter” (TN code for ‘fatass’).

TL;DR – Mmmm. Cheeseburger.[/quote]
I don’t disagree with most of this Steely.
You used to track things meticulously and now you know.
THAT is what many have advocated here, I even remember Brick giving examples of learning portioning based on eyeballing size “handful of veggie” “palm sized price of meat” etc. etc.
You can do this because you are not a beginner and are know what you are doing because you DID track and built that base.
I honestly would be surprised if 1/4 of te people reading this thread knew the answer to your macro question with looking it up.

Although most probably wouldn’t admit it, I doubt many know how many calories are in a gram of protein/carb/fat much less how many grams of protein are in specific foods.
This is based on personal experience but I whole heartedly believe that most people think they know but really don’t.

The key thing I think you said in your post was “own it.”
I see a lot of people, not you, making excuses for the extra weight they carry around.
Just own it, don’t force it down others throats and share your experiences like you do.
This place would be much better off.
I’m hungry now after reading that steak and rice part.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently. That’s where I think people break down. The ‘habit’ of snacking versus ‘the exception’ of snacking.[/quote]
Snacking can be a dangerous thing.
It’s like flirting with the Dark Side if you ask me.

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently. That’s where I think people break down. The ‘habit’ of snacking versus ‘the exception’ of snacking.[/quote]
Snacking can be a dangerous thing.
It’s like flirting with the Dark Side if you ask me.[/quote]

Que up the Death Star music.

[quote]Waittz wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently. That’s where I think people break down. The ‘habit’ of snacking versus ‘the exception’ of snacking.[/quote]
Snacking can be a dangerous thing.
It’s like flirting with the Dark Side if you ask me.[/quote]

Que up the Death Star music. [/quote]
It’s too late for you now.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently.[/quote]

Like your personal finances: LBM = Asset / Bodyfat = Debt

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently.[/quote]

Like your personal finances: LBM = Asset / Bodyfat = Debt
[/quote]

BlueCollatrTr8n - What’s your take on all this crazy talk?

I’m especially interested in hearing your perspective. I’ve gone against ‘status quo’ by not eating pristinely in my 30s/40s to chase some numbers.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently.[/quote]

Like your personal finances: LBM = Asset / Bodyfat = Debt
[/quote]

‘status quo’ [/quote]

I don’t think it’s the status quo per say.

I just think that people realized that they could put a lot of muscle (170-225 myself) while staying lean.

Now granted, perhaps I could have bulked to 280 and cut to 225…but I preferred the slow and steady method, because it allowed me the lifestyle I wanted.

Different strokes for different folks…I believe the rub is when one side tells the other that they are stupid…as in anything else in life, that causes conflict.

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently.[/quote]

Like your personal finances: LBM = Asset / Bodyfat = Debt
[/quote]

‘status quo’ [/quote]

I don’t think it’s the status quo per say.

I just think that people realized that they could put a lot of muscle (170-225 myself) while staying lean.

Now granted, perhaps I could have bulked to 280 and cut to 225…but I preferred the slow and steady method, because it allowed me the lifestyle I wanted.

Different strokes for different folks…I believe the rub is when one side tells the other that they are stupid…as in anything else in life, that causes conflict.[/quote]

No one has ever said you can’t put on a lot of size while staying lean.

No one is telling you that you are stupid for trying to stay leaner. This has been written NOWHERE on this site.

Whether you could gain as much muscle as those who make sure they are always in an anabolic state? That is the question.

You are also over 6 feet tall. You at 220lbs is WAAAAAAY different than someone under six feet.

Please respond without the usual negative comments and we can see if a discussion can actually take place with you.

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

But like I said, I think we are basically on the same page.
The issue is with what some people see as “acceptable” levels of bodyfat.
Different people have different approaches and if people wouldn’t try to shove their views down other people’s throats as THE way then this wouldn’t be an issue.
Mmmmmmm pop tarts[/quote]

How is that an issue? Could you explain how it is an “issue” that some people have different acceptances for body fat levels they personally are ok with?

Also, who is trying to shove their view down your throat? There is no “the” way…and I haven’t seen anyone say that there was.

Could you explain this…without the usual negative comments?

[quote]LoRez wrote:

[quote]LoRez wrote:
A few other questions then

  1. What did you do for breakfast?

  2. How did you approach post-workout nutrition? Pre-workout? During the workout?

  3. Did you eat before bed, or was your last meal a few hours before bed?

  4. I’m assuming your metabolism has slowed down over the years, so how has your approach changed?[/quote][/quote]

You would have to specify at what stage of my training you are talking about.

  1. When I was trying to put on the most size, I have had “breakfast” that was 8-10 whole eggs and two biscuits…and then I would eat again in about 2 hours.

  2. When I was training for all out size, I would make sure I ate about 2 hours before I lifted and then just made sure I got some carbs in me after the workout. There was much less discussion about how effective the “peri-workout” nutrition may actually be. There is a difference between IDEAL and “adequate enough to still allow optimal progress”. If I were shooting for “ideal” now, I would just make sure I had one of those peri-workout drinks with me. I won’t go into brand names here and am not comfortable discussing all “facts” supporting this so if you want to discuss studies we can.

  3. When I was trying to gain, I never went to bed hungry. I personally think that “don’t eat after 8pm” thing is dumb unsupported.

  4. Not sure what you mean here. I was very young when I first started posting here so I am in my late 30’s now. I am not that old to experience such huge changes. I eat less overall now because I am trying to maintain a lower body fat percentage as a priority even if it limits some muscle gains. I simply understand that.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Whether you could gain as much muscle as those who make sure they are always in an anabolic state? That is the question.
[/quote]

OK, this is the phrase that started a thousand wars.

I think it’s all good.

Personally, I know my body. I know I have a ‘sluggish metabolism’ for what it’s worth. I also know that if I am trying to gain size/stregnth while staying as lean as some folks here suggest, it just doesn’t work for me mentally. I set aggressive goals and that means aggressive means. I know from my own personal experience, for me, if I limit myself to a box diet, when I plateau, that shit is going out the door. Again, that’s just me.

Some people are blessed with genetics like OsamaUtahLlllammaYoMama that they can grow and stay lean. Add that to being patient and you have “WIN”. Utah did it right- for him. I think that’s where experience and experimentation comes in.

I compare this to the whole “this protein is better than that”. Sure the latest and greatest hyrolyzed rhino sperm supplement works 50% faster in Olympic Spider Monkeys, but you know what? Good old “whey” STILL works great. If whey gives you the shits, then you know what? CHICKEN STILL WORKS (probably better, honestly).

Maybe the ‘safe anabolic state’ PX writes about keeps him in 100% anabolic state. But like BlueCollarTr8n says, he’s accruing ‘fat debt’. He knows he may have to pay that down. So what? Some guys enjoy the challenge. Some guys don’t like holding fat debt. That’s cool, too.

Bauber has accumulated some debt. So fucking what? He’s got a plan. Who cares if it takes 20+ weeks or 12 weeks? Let him enjoy his training.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently.[/quote]

Like your personal finances: LBM = Asset / Bodyfat = Debt
[/quote]

‘status quo’ [/quote]

I don’t think it’s the status quo per say.

I just think that people realized that they could put a lot of muscle (170-225 myself) while staying lean.

Now granted, perhaps I could have bulked to 280 and cut to 225…but I preferred the slow and steady method, because it allowed me the lifestyle I wanted.

Different strokes for different folks…I believe the rub is when one side tells the other that they are stupid…as in anything else in life, that causes conflict.[/quote]

Please respond without the usual negative comments and we can see if a discussion can actually take place with you.[/quote]

I was responding to Steely because I wanted a respectful discussion…Please see his comments below.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

Maybe the ‘safe anabolic state’ PX writes about keeps him in 100% anabolic state. But like BlueCollarTr8n says, he’s accruing ‘fat debt’. He knows he may have to pay that down. So what? Some guys enjoy the challenge. Some guys don’t like holding fat debt. That’s cool, too.

Bauber has accumulated some debt. So fucking what? He’s got a plan. Who cares if it takes 20+ weeks or 12 weeks? Let him enjoy his training.

[/quote]

This one million times over. I tried to MAKE ABSOLUTE SURE my body was always fed enough to gain muscle optimally. I did not have the luxury of trying to walk a tightrope between gains and losses just for the sake of vanity alone…when I knew what my end goal was…and was seeing a lot of progress that I never saw when avoiding the fork.

That is how my personal metabolism worked…and I know for a fact I am not alone in that.

I look like this…because of my approach. It allowed me to make sure I was making progress…and that anabolic state also made up for shortcomings in sleep or stress considering what I was involved with at the time.

This “balancing the stress equation” aspect is one thing I have tried to discuss before.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
OsamaUtahLlllammaYoMama
[/quote]

DOOD.

No using my secret nickname over here.

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

You might think it’s an extra couple hundred calories and we are really talking 1,000+!!
[/quote]

HAAAAAA!!! Just saw this after my “Pt.2” post. Exactly.

I think the danger, besides not knowing how much is going in, is doing it consistently.[/quote]

Like your personal finances: LBM = Asset / Bodyfat = Debt
[/quote]

‘status quo’ [/quote]

I don’t think it’s the status quo per say.

I just think that people realized that they could put a lot of muscle (170-225 myself) while staying lean.

Now granted, perhaps I could have bulked to 280 and cut to 225…but I preferred the slow and steady method, because it allowed me the lifestyle I wanted.

Different strokes for different folks…I believe the rub is when one side tells the other that they are stupid…as in anything else in life, that causes conflict.[/quote]

Please respond without the usual negative comments and we can see if a discussion can actually take place with you.[/quote]

I was responding to Steely because I wanted a respectful discussion…Please see his comments above.
[/quote]

?

So you ignored each response…to where you made wrong statements?

So those wrong statements are ideas you still stand by?

No offense, but you don’t seem to be adding anything of any importance to this discussion.

For the record, I have accrued fat debt in my late 30’s early 40’s — LOL

If I could go back 6 years I would do it very similar. Besides a nasty back blowout that set me back a year, the biggest thing I would do differently is more consistent conditioning. Diet wise, I’d do very similar, although I would have absolutely cut gluten earlier than I did.

I am a firm believer in that while you can’t out train a bad diet, if you’re good 6 out of 7 days a week, then generally DOING MORE rather than eating less keeps things pretty well sorted out (while still adjusting where needed).

That’s just my “Can’t Prove But Believe” entry for the day.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
For the record, I have accrued fat debt in my late 30’s early 40’s — LOL

If I could go back 6 years I would do it very similar. Besides a nasty back blowout that set me back a year, the biggest thing I would do differently is more consistent conditioning. Diet wise, I’d do very similar, although I would have absolutely cut gluten earlier than I did.

I am a firm believer in that while you can’t out train a bad diet, if you’re good 6 out of 7 days a week, then generally DOING MORE rather than eating less keeps things pretty well sorted out (while still adjusting where needed).

That’s just my “Can’t Prove But Believe” entry for the day.
[/quote]

I think your point on conditioning is spot on.

Wendler, Pegg, Paul Carter and others are big fans of hill running and pushing the Prowler while gaining weight.

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
For the record, I have accrued fat debt in my late 30’s early 40’s — LOL

If I could go back 6 years I would do it very similar. Besides a nasty back blowout that set me back a year, the biggest thing I would do differently is more consistent conditioning. Diet wise, I’d do very similar, although I would have absolutely cut gluten earlier than I did.

I am a firm believer in that while you can’t out train a bad diet, if you’re good 6 out of 7 days a week, then generally DOING MORE rather than eating less keeps things pretty well sorted out (while still adjusting where needed).

That’s just my “Can’t Prove But Believe” entry for the day.
[/quote]
I’m a big fan of doing more instead of eating less.
Working out is fun.
Not eating food sucks.
Easy choice for me

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
For the record, I have accrued fat debt in my late 30’s early 40’s — LOL

If I could go back 6 years I would do it very similar. Besides a nasty back blowout that set me back a year, the biggest thing I would do differently is more consistent conditioning. Diet wise, I’d do very similar, although I would have absolutely cut gluten earlier than I did.

I am a firm believer in that while you can’t out train a bad diet, if you’re good 6 out of 7 days a week, then generally DOING MORE rather than eating less keeps things pretty well sorted out (while still adjusting where needed).

That’s just my “Can’t Prove But Believe” entry for the day.
[/quote]

Also, I can not stress enough how much of a benefit I think it is to make sure that heavy training done in youth…is NOT stressing joints to any significant degree. That is one benefit of not being “extremely lean”…joint lubrication.

No one does this for 20 years without some injuries. You also won’t be able to progress in strength as fast when you get older due to how much longer it takes for tendons to heal from stress and joints to recover.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Smashingweights wrote:

But like I said, I think we are basically on the same page.
The issue is with what some people see as “acceptable” levels of bodyfat.
Different people have different approaches and if people wouldn’t try to shove their views down other people’s throats as THE way then this wouldn’t be an issue.
Mmmmmmm pop tarts[/quote]

How is that an issue? Could you explain how it is an “issue” that some people have different acceptances for body fat levels they personally are ok with?

Also, who is trying to shove their view down your throat? There is no “the” way…and I haven’t seen anyone say that there was.

Could you explain this…without the usual negative comments?[/quote]
I prefer not to have another debate with you.
We all know how this will go.
I think my conversation with Steely accurately explains my stance.