New Look at Building and Cutting?

Training Bodybuilding
21

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
dankid wrote:
<<<<<
The only thing you can blame is diet. I also dont think diet is as important as people on here claim it to be.

I’m tempted to say that this statement pretty much cancels out every intelligent statement you’ve made in this thread.

[/quote]

I’m tempted to also say that it explains why you’ve “been training for quite a while with mediocre results at best”

Think about what you said.

  1. I’ve been training quite a while

  2. Mediocre results

  3. This is what I’ve learned

In what other area of life would this fly? What do you think would happen if I told my customers “I’ve been working on computers for a long time and every so often I get one to work right”

22

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
I see lots of people in the gym lifting day in and day out, some even progressing from time to time in terms of weight. What separates the guys who grow from the guys who don’t is food. Lightweight power lifters/olympic lifters progress on their lifts yet never get very big. Why? Because they structure their diets to keep them in their weight class.

Diet is as important (if not even more) than progressive overload when it comes to building muscle.[/quote]

There is some truth what your saying about the powerlifters, but most of them also, aren’t using enough volume to get big. Theres also a difference between trying to not gain weight, and eating “enough” to make progress.

Im not saying that you can eat like a girl and get big, im just saying if you eat reasonably with the goal of increasing the numbers in the gym, the muscle will result as well.

Which really sums up my beliefs on training now, which I will stick to until I see a good argument against them.

1.) Train to get stronger.
2.) Increase Work per session, or keep work the same, and decrease session duration.

Its as simple as that, if you raise your strength 10%, and are able to do 10% more reps than you were the previous month, your body is going to show it. (Unless you no absolutely nothing about diet, or purposely try to abuse your diet.)

23

[quote]dankid wrote:
There is some truth what your saying about the powerlifters, but most of them also, aren’t using enough volume to get big. Theres also a difference between trying to not gain weight, and eating “enough” to make progress.

Im not saying that you can eat like a girl and get big, im just saying if you eat reasonably with the goal of increasing the numbers in the gym, the muscle will result as well.

Which really sums up my beliefs on training now, which I will stick to until I see a good argument against them.

1.) Train to get stronger.
2.) Increase Work per session, or keep work the same, and decrease session duration.

Its as simple as that, if you raise your strength 10%, and are able to do 10% more reps than you were the previous month, your body is going to show it. (Unless you no absolutely nothing about diet, or purposely try to abuse your diet.)
[/quote]

Good luck with that.

24

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
dankid wrote:

I guess you could say that, but then in that case we should listen to all pro bodybuilders who are juicing, cause theyve made better results than most.

Probably not a bad idea. Though yes, one wouldn’t want to listen to everything they say (a lot of them get paid to say certain things). What is a good idea though is to try to find the similarities between the big strong guys and use those to formulate what is effective. >>>[/quote]

Ya know what this comes to? And this is not aimed at this guy at all.

Someone who’s developed meaningful discernment in this game can afford to at least hear everybody and somebody who hasn’t almost can’t afford to listen anybody.

25

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Someone who’s developed meaningful discernment in this game can afford to at least hear everybody and somebody who hasn’t almost can’t afford to listen anybody.
[/quote]

You should take your own advice. I offered a simple and accurate method of monitoring progress, but instead of looking at reasons why it might be flawed, everyone is just attacking my credibility, because im not huge. Just because someone is big, that doesnt mean they know what they are talking about. And just because someone isn’t huge, doesn’t mean they know nothing.

A lot of people become coaches, because they were not very good at their sport, but they know the sport well. A lot of athletes are good at their sport, not because they know a lot, but because theyve had good coaches, hard work, and genetics.

I would bet that bodybuilding and powerlifting are much like other sports, in that the athletes that are good at the sport started because they were cut out for it. Sure not every athlete is genetically gifted, and there are some that were always the underdog, but most had extreme advantages.

I do belief that theres a serious cloudiness of knowledge in the health and fitness/performance industries. Sure the correct information is out there, much of it is theoretical or has no data backing it up, but it works for many. All of this is clouded by the commercial gym personal training philosophy and infomercial gurus trying to get rich quick.

Along with the fact that most individuals are looking for the “miracle pill” it is very hard to find what “works”. Im a firm believer that every trainee is different, and what works extremely well for even the majority, just might not work for a specific individual.

But there are general principals that everyone should follow regardless of goals, regardless of being a beginner or advanced, and regardless of genetics.

I am not trying to claim that every other principal out there on bodybuilding or strength training is incorrect, but most of those are actually methods, and not principals. People forget the principals and focus on methods, but the problem with methods, is they have to fit the situation and the individual, and can be applied incorrectly.

Principals, are much more important to learn, because they allow individuals to discern whether different programs might be useful for them or whether it might be geared toward someone different. Im sure there are many other principals, but these two that im mentioning IMO are the most important.

The other day I was telling my friend about the program I wanted him to do, and I told him the main goal is to increase strength. His response was “I dont want to get stronger, I want to lose fat”. See to me thats a complete misunderstanding of the principals.

This misunderstanding would lead him, and the majority of others to “toning” sets of 30+ reps, and long slow paced sessions on the treadmill. Sure this may work for a few, but for most this is a big mistake. Its really simple, follow the principals.

  1. get stronger
  2. do more

If your continously doing the above two, your diet is correct, you are sleeping enough, and your training is good. But of course im sure you’ll all find a reason why nothing i could say would be accurate.

26

[quote]dankid wrote:
You should take your own advice. I offered a simple and accurate method of monitoring progress, but instead of looking at reasons why it might be flawed, everyone is just attacking my credibility, because im not huge. Just because someone is big, that doesnt mean they know what they are talking about. And just because someone isn’t huge, doesn’t mean they know nothing.[/quote]

Put it this way, has everybody who has ever increased their performance made gains? Has everyone who has made gains made gains? Based on the answers to these questions which would be the better way to monitor gains?

After all, if performance was so directly correlated with gains then the increase between the 2 would be linear and monitoring gains would be equally as accurate at the very least (it’s possible to monitor both BTW).

Nobody is saying that progressive overload isn’t important but you judge the effectiveness of something based on whether it works, unless the goal was performance why would that be used to judge effectiveness?

How would you tell someone to monitor fat loss, Squat PR’s?

How can someone post that up until now they have failed and then proceed to preach the road to success? It doesn’t sound like you’ve learnt anything from your failure due to your ego. You’ll never learn anything until you accept that you don’t know everything.

[quote]
The other day I was telling my friend about the program I wanted him to do, and I told him the main goal is to increase strength. His response was “I dont want to get stronger, I want to lose fat”. See to me thats a complete misunderstanding of the principals. This misunderstanding would lead him, and the majority of others to “toning” sets of 30+ reps, and long slow paced sessions on the treadmill. Sure this may work for a few, but for most this is a big mistake. Its really simple, follow the principals.

  1. get stronger
  2. do more

If your continously doing the above two, your diet is correct, you are sleeping enough, and your training is good. But of course im sure you’ll all find a reason why nothing i could say would be accurate.[/quote]

If your friend is trying to lose fat then HIS main goal is to lose fat. If you knew what you were doing instead of just regurgitating information you would have been able to explain how someone loses fat and why a program based on building muscle could help achieve that goal (depending on the individual).

Your principles seem to be getting more and more vague, you might as well cut it down to 1:

  1. Do stuff right.
27

[quote]dankid wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Someone who’s developed meaningful discernment in this game can afford to at least hear everybody and somebody who hasn’t almost can’t afford to listen anybody.

You should take your own advice. I offered a simple and accurate method of monitoring progress, but instead of looking at reasons why it might be flawed, everyone is just attacking my credibility, because im not huge. Just because someone is big, that doesnt mean they know what they are talking about. And just because someone isn’t huge, doesn’t mean they know nothing.
[/quote]

But people have offered reasons why it might be flawed (at least the points that they disagreed with). Also, everyone lacks credibility until they have some proof of credibility. Your lack of size actually discredits your claims to know how to get big (or at least you lack proof).

Regardless of what anyone says, the huge guys have physical proof that they know how to get huge. Sure, there are some guys who aren’t huge themselves that are also successful BB’ing coaches. But their proof is in the trainees they’ve helped reach hugeness.

Yes, much of what you say above is true. But coaches are successful based on whether or not their trainees achieve success. If a coach can’t personally compete at the highest level, but can successfully get their athletes to be able to do so, then they are a good coach. If not, then regardless of how much theoretical knowledge they have, they are not a good coach.

“The proof is in the pudding” as the saying goes.

This is absolutely untrue. The correct information is backed up by huge amounts of anecdotal evidence (and many times scientific evidence as well). The gym/weightroom/lifting platform/BB’ing stage is in my opinion the single most relevant laboratory for gathering results as to what works and what doesn’t.

Can’t argue with you about the infomercial gurus and ignorant personal trainers though.

To be perfectly honest I don’t really buy into this idea to the extent that some do. Yes, we do have some individual differences (basal metabolic rates, nervous system efficiency, etc…), but I honestly believe that the vast majority of trainees could potentially follow the same well planned out routines and all get results from it. The ones that respond really well are gonna respond really well to anything (probably more serious/dedicated and possibly genetically predisposed for being successful at BB’ing) and the ones that don’t respond well (probably less serious/dedicated and possibly less genetically gifted) aren’t gonna respond amazingly well to any program.

That said I really don’t want to turn this into a discussion about genetics. Yes, they do play a role, but IMO the vast, vast majority of trainees are going to sink or swim depending on their level of commitment, dedication and intensity.

I know some will disagree, but that’s my personal opinion.

Yes, principles are important. Methods are simply ways to teach principles. Therefore methods are not bad either.

Hopefully you were able to explain to him how he was misunderstanding the principles of fat loss and to tell him why your suggestion would help him in doing so.

Well, that misunderstanding wouldn’t lead him to do “toning” sets of 30+ reps. That blame would fall to uneducated people telling him to do so.

[quote]

  1. get stronger
  2. do more

If your continously doing the above two, your diet is correct, you are sleeping enough, and your training is good. But of course im sure you’ll all find a reason why nothing i could say would be accurate.[/quote]

You honestly don’t even need the second principle. I don’t increase the amount of reps/sets that I do each workout and yet I continue to get bigger and stronger. As long as you expose your muscles to an overload and provide them with the nutrition necessary to make the needed adaptations you will continue to progress.

I don’t think that nothing you said was accurate. I disagree with some and agreed with some. Things are rarely so black and white as you make them seem though.

28

[quote]dankid wrote:

There is some truth what your saying about the powerlifters, but most of them also, aren’t using enough volume to get big. Theres also a difference between trying to not gain weight, and eating “enough” to make progress.
[/quote]

And how much volume is necessary to get big? Are you talking about total volume (warm-up sets + work sets) or just working volume (only work sets)? What if I told you that one of the most successful BB’ing programs has it’s trainees doing 11-15 total work reps for most bodyparts per session? Are you suggesting that the powerlifters aren’t doing at least 11 work reps per workout?

Whether or not the opponent is purposely manipulating their diet to illicit specific adaptations doesn’t change the fact that diet is of crucial importance, which was the point of the example.

“Reasonably” is a subjective term though. One needs to make diet a priority (meaning that you need to be consistent with it and make adjustments as necessary) of equal importance to resistance training and rest. I’m not saying that you need to be super strict with your diet all the time (that’s really only necessary if you plan on competing), but it does need to be a priority. That was all I was trying to say.

Do NOT overlook the importance of diet or it will forever limit your progress.

First, you don’t need to do more work (I assume you mean reps/sets) per session or decrease session duration to build muscle. Simply increasing your weights will do so (if you diet is in order). Not saying it won’t work, just that it’s not absolutely necessary.

It also takes more than knowing more than “absolutely nothing” about diet, or purposely trying to abuse it. Lots of people know that diet is important, they might even know that they need a caloric surplus. But it’s only the people who make it a priority and actually stick with it, and make adjustments as needed who make continued progress.

In other words, lot of people don’t purposely try to abuse their diet, yet don’t make progress because they didn’t place enough importance on it.

29

Sentoguy:

I agree with almost everything you said. I haven’t had the chance to train many athletes, since im still young, but im hoping that my years of learning as well training will make me successful in doing so.

I guess the two principals of lifting more weight, and lifting more reps are a little vague.

If your training smart for strength, your doing a lot of repetition work already so all you gotta do is focus on overload.

Unless someone is trying to not gain weight, I would suspect their coach would have them training for both strength and hypertrophy.

But if you were purely training for strength, and doing mainly sets of 1-3 with long rest breaks, you’d probably benefit a lot from the second principal.

As for the nutrition statement, it really depends on the person. I myself can control what I eat day in and day out. I was also a hardgainer, but belief I have overcome that. When I started working out seriously I was 150-160 lbs and in 1-2 years time, I was peaking at 195lbs. The main problem was that I wasn’t much stronger, and I couldn’t maintain the amount of food I was eating.

Now that I focus more on training and making progress, and dont focus on nutrition but am still conscious of it, im steadily gaining 2-4 lbs a month and am at 185. Also im much stronger than before, and capable of faster recovery, and am leaner. I dont really have a goal of surpassing 195 anymore. I would like to reach 200 just to say ive been above 200, but more importantly to me is getting stronger, and leaner @ around 180-190.

But, if your the person that has low self control, then a planned out diet is probably necessary, and my belief on nutrition is a bad idea.

It was probably a bad idea posting this in the bodybuilding forum, because if you are BB’ing to compete, these statements dont directly apply to you. You would likely have different training philosophies, and benefit from carefully planned nutrition plans. But for a lot of guys that just want to get bigger and leaner, I still hold that they should simply focus on getting stronger, and doing more reps, and not worry too much about diet. Most guys need stop following the bodybuilding routines, and train like a powerlifter.

If your not huge, and or not gaining weight continuously, high rep sets of tricep pushdowns are just wasting your time. Yet I see guys in the gym all the time doing similar things. Im not saying that these type of people should ditch bodybuilding routines all together, but they need to at least cycle periods of increased strength with increased volume. Its pretty unanimous now that people like this should switch to complex movements and raise the intensity, and lower the reps, but I still feel during this period they should switch their emphasis to increasing strength in a number of lifts.

I dont think any of you have pointed out clear flaws in thinking this way, instead youve focused on how I couldnt possibly say something that is correct. But my credibility aside, it makes clear sense.

I also still think monitoring performance is better than monitoring phsique changes. Sure you could monitor both, but let me explain.

Physique changes, either increases in muscle, or deacreases in fat, are both hard to test, and do not change very rapidly. If your testing your body fat each week, you can only change your bf% a small amount each week maybe 1% a week, but even the best methods of testing bf have a larger error than 1%. Thus you could actually gain 1-2% bf, but show a loss of 1% and think your doing everything right. After learning and using almost all methods of testing for body fat, including skinfold, bioelectrical impedence, hydrostatic weighing, and bod pod, i truly believe that for almost all trainees, the best method of testing progress would be photos and a mirror.

As for monitoring muscle gains, you have the same problems. You cant just look at weight, and increases in muscle size are not going to be noticeably different weekly. You can get an accurate tape measure, and get decent results with this.

Which brings us back to my theory. Changes in performance are clear. You either did more weight or less weight. And you either did more reps/set or less reps/sets. Other than that, the only thing you might have to look at is how long your rest breaks were, or how long the total workout was.

EX:

January:

Deadlift 225 — 30 times in 15 minutes

February:

Deadlift 235 — 30 times in 15 minutes.

Sure this isn’t necessarily conductive of an increase in muscle mass, or decrease in fat, but your doing more work, thus putting a greater stimulus for those changes.

If you monitored performance week to week, and made continous progress, and monitored physique changes monthly, if you werent making progress in your physique, then you can almost be certain that your diet is the problem. Because you already know your making progress in the gym.

I truly belief this is a good way to monitor progress, and dont think there is any proof to it. Im gonna stick with this method for me, and any of my friends im training and see what happens. If i continue to make progress with this method, i will post my results, and before and after pictures, if i do not, I will gladly post that I was wrong, or where I went wrong.

Thanks for the arguments and opinions guys, it was what I was looking for, as well as trying to share my opinions with others.

30

[quote]dankid wrote:
<<< But, if your the person that has low self control, then a planned out diet is probably necessary, and my belief on nutrition is a bad idea.>>>[/quote]

You miss his point. I know Sentoguy’s views to a large degree and feel confident that he is not talking about close planning, but the fact that what and how much you eat is every bit as important as what and how much you lift. The most planned out diets I’ve read posted in these forums wouldn’t support a 13 year old female gymnast. It now appears that you may not have been denying this at all, but simply weren’t clear on what you meant.

[quote]dankid wrote:
<<< I dont think any of you have pointed out clear flaws in thinking this way, instead youve focused on how I couldnt possibly say something that is correct. >>>[/quote]

Who said you couldn’t possibly say anything that was correct? You sound like a smart and decent feller, but what are we to think when someone says what they’ve been doing for quite a while hasn’t really worked and here’s what they think does work?

31

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
<<< That said I really don’t want to turn this into a discussion about genetics. Yes, they do play a role, but IMO the vast, vast majority of trainees are going to sink or swim depending on their level of commitment, dedication and intensity.

I know some will disagree, but that’s my personal opinion. >>>[/quote]

I do not disagree and will go so far as to say that for the training aspect this is THE key to everything.

The person who shows up here saying that they’ve been eating like a champ and training like an animal with little results does not know what those things mean. ANYBODY, barring pathological issues, will make progress if they’re eating enough and training hard enough. ANYBODY.

32

I agree tribulus, but what constitutes eating enough, and training hard enough. Its different for everyone, and a lot of people arent capable of determining what enough is. If a person said they have been eating enough and training hard, then that just proves this point.

But if that person said, Ive been eating enough, and training hard, and have increased “xyz” lifts, then it would be CLEAR that its nutrition related.

I know a lot of people who workout hard, but have been lifting the same weight for months even years. And they wonder why they aren’t making changes.

Your right when I say you cant completely neglect nutrition, but I disagree with those that try to amplify the importance of nutrition. Ive heard people say nutrition is 80% and training is only 20%. Not only is this impossible to quantify, but it just takes away from the fact that you gotta progress in the gym to make gains.

This is just an observation ive made from seeing people around me saying “I cant get big. Ive tried different programs, and I eat a ton, but I dont grow.” Then i look at what theyve been doing, and their strength. They only bench, can do decent weight in bench, but dont squat, and dont deadlift. Then I have them work deadlifts, and see how much they can do, and theyre maxing at 150. Well its clear to me, that although nutrition may be part of the problem, they haven’t been “training hard” in the gym. Or maybe theyve been training too hard, or training really hard, but not working toward progression.

I my thoughts aren’t always clear when i post on here, but my argument wasn’t that nutrition doesn’t matter, or that you can gain weight while eating nothing. It was that MOST people need to focus more on progression of their lifts, than on nutrition, BF, Body weight, feeling the burn, muscle soreness, or anything else that is hard to measure and is very subjective.

Cause in the end, if my friend that can currently deadlift 225 and bench 300, works to the point where he can bench 350, and deadlift 450, hes either gonna be much bigger, or i’ll simply tell him eat more, and he’ll grow.

Even though his goals are not to get stronger, but to get bigger, he’s not going to change much if he continues to bench 300, and neglect the rest of his body.

33

I’ll post from the perspective of a new guy who’s “learned a thing or two:”

I was where you are now, OP. Not to say I’m “further along,” but I had this realization not too long ago. I thought I could progress in the gym through sheer power of will. Unfortunately, that was me simply learning how to recruit the muscles I already had, and I was physically incapable of getting stronger after a point.

What I’ve personally found is that nutrition is the fuel you need to grow and get stronger (duh). If you’re going 100% in the gym (which a lot of us do), your only limiting factor is what sits on your plate.

Its like trying to build a building without enough cement. No amount of “will to power” will help you develop bigger traps or lats from thin air.

34

[quote]dankid wrote:
I agree tribulus, but what constitutes eating enough, and training hard enough. Its different for everyone, and a lot of people arent capable of determining what enough is. If a person said they have been eating enough and training hard, then that just proves this point.
[/quote]

Progress. If you aren’t gaining weight on at least a monthly basis then you aren’t eating enough. If the weight you are gaining is the wrong kind of weight, then you probably aren’t training hard enough (if the goal is muscle gain of course).

9 out of 10 times the culprit is diet, whether they say they’ve gained strength or not.

Hyper (from the greek meaning “in excess”)
trophy (from the greek meaning “to nourish”)

Therefore, hypertrophy can be loosely translated to an excess of nutrients. Fat can hypertrophy and muscle can hypertrophy (I believe there are a couple other tissues that hypertrophy as well, but can’t remember for certain atm). Both occur as the result of a surplus of calories.

You are right. But, I don’t think that any of us have suggested that progressive overload isn’t important.

I’d say that the two are equally as important (if muscle gain is the goal). But, people tend to prioritize training and neglect diet (I see this much more frequently than the other way around), so in many cases you have to get them to focus more on diet, at least until it becomes habit.

In most examples that I’ve seen “I eat a ton” is a hyooge over statement. They have no idea how much they are actually eating, and when they realize how much they actually need to eat to gain they are dumbfounded.

Once again, if the person isn’t gaining weight, then they aren’t eating enough. Yes, increasing their strength and incorporating the big lifts will help stimulate protein synthesis, but without the nutritional building blocks to actually allow the body to do this, it’s just not gonna happen, no matter how hard they train.

Both are important and neither can/should be neglected, that’s all I am trying to say.

Wholeheartedly disagree, at least in the majority of cases. Most people need to focus as much (if not more, since it is actually takes much more commitment, and dedication to eat well all day 7 days a week than it does to go to the gym 3-5 times a week for 1-2 hours) on nutrition as they do on progression of their lifts.

If you are trying to gain weight, then body weight is a very effective measuring stick. I don’t really agree with weighing yourself obsessively, but periodic weight checks will let you know if you need to make adjustments. BF would also be very important if your goal was fat loss.

[quote]
Cause in the end, if my friend that can currently deadlift 225 and bench 300, works to the point where he can bench 350, and deadlift 450, hes either gonna be much bigger, or i’ll simply tell him eat more, and he’ll grow.

Even though his goals are not to get stronger, but to get bigger, he’s not going to change much if he continues to bench 300, and neglect the rest of his body. [/quote]

I don’t think anyone is saying that one shouldn’t train their whole body. And yes, if progressive overload is combined with enough food to allow him to grow he will get bigger.

One other thing to consider is that you seem to be under the impression that contractile tissue accounts for the majority of muscle size. In fact it doesn’t. It accounts for only about 30% of a muscle’s cross sectional area. The other 70% is comprised of connective tissue, blood vessels, water, and other cellular materials. This other 70% is primarily dictated by nutrition.

In other words, with a good understanding of nutritional principles you could potentially take someone and, without changing their muscles ability to generate force, increase their muscle cross sectional area significantly through only the use of food. Powerlifters, wrestlers/combat athletes, and other athletes who participate in weight class sports do this quite often.

35

I agree with a lot of what your saying, and much of what we are arguing is a difference of opinions. I doubt theres a clear answer, as all trainees are different, and thus focus on diet and training is going to be different for everyone. Im just stating my personal experience and the experience Ive seen of those around me.

I dont really understand the last part of what your saying. Are you saying that in sports with weight classes, athletes try to increase muscle size without adding strength. I think you meant to say it the otherway.

Yes this does happen, to an extent, but your still better off increasing the 30% as well as the 70%.

I should have been more clear in that my thoughts were geared at the average guy thats looking to get big and strong, and be able to maintain and progress overtime. A bodybuilder is much different, and can build and cut the traditional ways, and doesn’t have to focus as much on “performance”

36

[quote]dankid wrote:

I dont really understand the last part of what your saying. Are you saying that in sports with weight classes, athletes try to increase muscle size without adding strength. I think you meant to say it the otherway.
[/quote]

No, yet they do that sometimes as well. What I’m saying is that many times athletes who compete in sports that contain weight classes will “cut” down to reach their weight class, while doing their best to maintain their strength (for instance many wrestlers/combat athletes will normally walk around at 185-200 lbs and cut down to 170 to fight).

Then after they’ve made weight, they’ll adjust their diet and add back just about everything that they’ve lost (many times within the course of a 24 hour period). These fluctuations in weight/muscle mass have nothing to do with their progressing in terms of their weights lifted (though it does have a profound affect on their ability to generate force, due to improved leverage, improved glycogen stores, etc…).

To my knowledge BB’ers also do this (during their contest prep), though their method is slightly different as their goals aren’t necessarily the same.

Not arguing with you there.

[quote]
I should have been more clear in that my thoughts were geared at the average guy thats looking to get big and strong, and be able to maintain and progress overtime. A bodybuilder is much different, and can build and cut the traditional ways, and doesn’t have to focus as much on “performance”[/quote]

This I absolutely don’t agree with. The same methods that are going to get a bodybuilder to his maximal potential fastest is also going to get the average guy to his goal of being big and strong fastest.

The whole “bulking” and “cutting” topic, though it does get some bad press, has some reasoning behind it as well. When you “cut” (probably most pronounced when one actually prepares for a BB’ing contest) the body becomes extremely insulin sensitive. Once the contest is over, if the BB’er goes right back into an off season diet the body will be extremely efficient at storing those excess nutrients (meaning muscle will be gained rather quickly). If they then do a sort of mini diet for a couple weeks most of the fat that they’ve gained during this re-feeding period will be burned and the BB’er can often wind up being 15 lbs heavier at nearly the same BF as they were while on stage.

This is known as the “anabolic rebound” effect. I know of at least 1 of the leading performance nutritional coaches, Justin Harris (who is the one I got the above information from) believes that it is during this anabolic rebound that competing BB’ers make the majority of their muscular gains during the year.

Now, I’m not saying that everyone has to compete, but the average lifter could still potentially take advantage of this phenomenon through the use of “bulking” and “cutting”.

Disclaimer while I believe in the above information, I don’t want to be responsible for telling people who have no business cutting to start worrying about the anabolic rebound, or people to start eating a steady diet of fast food in an attempt to bulk.

If you are reading this and are 150lbs soaking wet, then you have no business cutting. You need to build a muscular base before you worry about cutting the fat in order to see it.

Likewise, if you want to gain muscle it’s still a good idea to eat a diet that is as clean as possible and to try to at least minimize fat gain. Yes, you’ll gain weight faster if you eat a whole bunch of junk, but it won’t necessarily mean that you’ll be reaching your muscular goals any faster.

37

[quote]Sentoguy wrote:
dankid wrote:
I agree tribulus, but what constitutes eating enough, and training hard enough. Its different for everyone, and a lot of people arent capable of determining what enough is. If a person said they have been eating enough and training hard, then that just proves this point.

Progress. If you aren’t gaining weight on at least a monthly basis then you aren’t eating enough. If the weight you are gaining is the wrong kind of weight, then you probably aren’t training hard enough (if the goal is muscle gain of course). >>>[/quote]

I just went through this myself.

I started noticing that my gains were slowing down more than I thought they should be at that stage. I had no doubt that I was training hard enough and made the revolutionary decision to eat some more. My lean gains picked up again. BTW, I started getting a bit leaner too before the decision to eat more.

38

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Sentoguy wrote:
dankid wrote:
I agree tribulus, but what constitutes eating enough, and training hard enough. Its different for everyone, and a lot of people arent capable of determining what enough is. If a person said they have been eating enough and training hard, then that just proves this point.

Progress. If you aren’t gaining weight on at least a monthly basis then you aren’t eating enough. If the weight you are gaining is the wrong kind of weight, then you probably aren’t training hard enough (if the goal is muscle gain of course). >>>

I just went through this myself.

I started noticing that my gains were slowing down more than I thought they should be at that stage. I had no doubt that I was training hard enough and made the revolutionary decision to eat some more. My lean gains picked up again. BTW, I started getting a bit leaner too before the decision to eat more.[/quote]

Right. You aren’t going to be able to eat the same amount of calories indefinitely and continue to gain at the same rate (not directed at you Tirib, I know you know this). You are going to have to progress with the food just as you would with the weights. More muscle means more calories to sustain it, and therefore more calories needed to continue to add additional muscle.

I do think some people are a little too obsessive compulsive with weighing themselves though. You should not weigh yourself every day (or multiple times a day) as some people do. Your weight is going to vary from day to day (and even hour to hour) depending on diet, physical exertion, weather (a hot day will mean you’ll sweat more and thus lose liquid through that sweat), hydration, etc…

If you are constantly stepping on the scale it can confuse you and cause you to think that what you are doing isn’t working (physical changes aren’t noticeable on a day to day basis). It’s much better to check monthly (or at least bi-weekly) as that will be a more accurate measure of whether what you are doing is working or not. Also, make sure that you weigh yourself at the same time of day (preferably right when you wake up), wearing the same clothing.

One last thing to consider is that even a 1 lb increase in muscle every month would mean that in 10 years you’d have added 120 lbs of solid muscle to your frame. In 15 years you’d have added 180 lbs of muscle! The truth is that even something like 10 lbs a year (which is less than 1 lb of muscle per month) would add up to huge amounts of muscle over the course of a lifting career.

Now I’m not suggesting that people not try to gain more than that, just that people are often unrealistic with how quickly they want to reach their muscle mass goal.