It just seems the more ideal way to measure games would be to use a tape measure than the body weight scale.
If I were expecting to pack on 10lbs of lean mass what could I expect to gain on the tape?
Ideally, (long term, NOT with only a 10lb weight gain) I’d like to put on 2-3" on my thighs, 2" on my calves, 1-1/2" on my arms…roughly how much weight would I need to put on to make those gains?
I’m 5’ 9" 185lbs @ (15ish % bf)
I’m thinking if I got up to 195lbs at less than 10% bf I’d be close to that
Yeah, taping is a good idea, but remember it’s a noisy signal due to fat and water accumulations. A simple and robust approach to measure progress during a bulk I think is to keep track of bw together with waist changes.
I’m thinking if I got up to 195lbs at less than 10% bf I’d be close to that[/quote]
You would have to gain 17 lbs of LBM and lose 7 lbs of fat to hit those numbers. At the same time, your body would only be be slightly bigger, since muscle takes up less space than fat per unit of weight. If you are just worried about the size of your arms and legs, then gaining any body weight (lean or fat) would help.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Didn’t Poliquin say you needed to gain 10lbs to put 1" on your arms?[/quote]
Pretty much. For the average lifter, 15 pounds of total bodyweight for an inch on the arms was his rule of thumb, with even larger bodyweight gains needed to get ginormous (20+) arms. http://www.T-Nation.com/article/most_recent/poliquins_top_20_tips
But any consistent measurements should be fine as long as you’re not just tracking one or two “favorite” bodyparts. Around the neck, shoulder width, around both arms, around the nip line, around the belly button, near the hip bones, both thighs, and both calves are common tracking points. Might seems like a lot, but it takes just a minute or two once a week.
[quote]ToolManSam wrote:
I’d like to put on 2-3" on my thighs, 2" on my calves, 1-1/2" on my arms…roughly how much weight would I need to put on to make those gains? [/quote]
Putting three inches of mostly muscle on your thighs is a huge deal. Two inches on your calves even more so.
I like the old concept of looking at 1/4-pound raw hamburger patty and imagining wearing 20 of them all over your body - on your delts, bis, tris, chest, back, legs, glutes, everywhere. That’s you with 5 pounds more lean muscle.
How many 1/4 pound patties will it take to measure as big as you want to get? And remember they’re going to be dispersed relatively-evenly over your entire body. It’s definitely not a perfect idea, but it gets the point across roundabout.
Like ecch said you would have to gain 18.25 lbs of muscle and lose 8.25 lbs of fat. I would think you would see around 1 inch increase of body part measurements with this increase? At ~15% bf currently you are probably not carrying much fat in your legs and arms. You could assume that most fat loss would be from your midsection. So your arms would probably be close and legs needing to catch up, but you would for sure look and feel better.
I go by the tape measure and scale. I want the scale moving upwards and want to size increase to be in the right places with the tape measure.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Yeah, taping is a good idea, but remember it’s a noisy signal due to fat and water accumulations. A simple and robust approach to measure progress during a bulk I think is to keep track of bw together with waist changes.[/quote]
I’m thinking if I got up to 195lbs at less than 10% bf I’d be close to that[/quote]
You would have to gain 17 lbs of LBM and lose 7 lbs of fat to hit those numbers. At the same time, your body would only be be slightly bigger, since muscle takes up less space than fat per unit of weight. If you are just worried about the size of your arms and legs, then gaining any body weight (lean or fat) would help. [/quote]
Thanks for the reply. I am most concerned with LBM. I have NO idea what I’ll end up taping as most people refer to mass gains related to the scale
I have become VERY aware that 3" on the quads would be quite a considerable size gain now, lol.
[quote]infinite_shore wrote:
Yeah, taping is a good idea, but remember it’s a noisy signal due to fat and water accumulations. A simple and robust approach to measure progress during a bulk I think is to keep track of bw together with waist changes.[/quote]
Yes. I am currently really focused on this approach.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
Didn’t Poliquin say you needed to gain 10lbs to put 1" on your arms?[/quote]
Pretty much. For the average lifter, 15 pounds of total bodyweight for an inch on the arms was his rule of thumb, with even larger bodyweight gains needed to get ginormous (20+) arms. http://www.T-Nation.com/article/most_recent/poliquins_top_20_tips
But any consistent measurements should be fine as long as you’re not just tracking one or two “favorite” bodyparts. Around the neck, shoulder width, around both arms, around the nip line, around the belly button, near the hip bones, both thighs, and both calves are common tracking points. Might seems like a lot, but it takes just a minute or two once a week.
[quote]ToolManSam wrote:
I’d like to put on 2-3" on my thighs, 2" on my calves, 1-1/2" on my arms…roughly how much weight would I need to put on to make those gains? [/quote]
Putting three inches of mostly muscle on your thighs is a huge deal. Two inches on your calves even more so.
I like the old concept of looking at 1/4-pound raw hamburger patty and imagining wearing 20 of them all over your body - on your delts, bis, tris, chest, back, legs, glutes, everywhere. That’s you with 5 pounds more lean muscle.
How many 1/4 pound patties will it take to measure as big as you want to get? And remember they’re going to be dispersed relatively-evenly over your entire body. It’s definitely not a perfect idea, but it gets the point across roundabout.[/quote]
Thank you
Obviously 3" on the quads is more than I have imagined.
I like the analogy of the burger patties. Were those lean or extra lean patties? Lol. All kidding aside I think muscle gains would be more dense but nonetheless I get your point