[quote]greystoke wrote:
If you err and overeat you will. You may end up at 11% and “fat” but you will gain muscle.
When did 11% become fat?[/quote]
Pretty sure it was sarcasm.
Culking you fucking nitwits, its the answer to this stupid problem.
[quote]Airtruth wrote:
mr popular wrote:
I don’t quite get what your arguing for here? That he should’ve ate and gained more? or that you can stay lean and bulk ?
[/quote]
I don’t think it’s really appropriate for anyone to tell any other person what they SHOULD do, you obviously have to decide for yourself what the best approach is and tailor your plan to your personal goals.
Nobody is going to tell JoeSchmo he SHOULD have eaten more, because he did exactly what he wanted to do and fulfilled his exact goals and is a prime example of what hard work and dedication can do.
It’s also an example of how you CAN stay lean and gain muscle, but he also has great genetics, is young and has a great metabolism, has a great deal of resources, and doesn’t gain very much year to year. So for a lot of people looking to gain a lot of muscle mass quickly there is simply a more effective route, and that just means gaining more bodyweight.
There is no reason a person should get FAT while bulking, and the truth is you can probably remain at a decent level of definition (maybe some abs depending on your own body type) by training and eating in a reasonable way. If you can stay active and either play a sport or do regular cardio, eat a healthy diet avoiding sugar and trans fats, but still eat enough to support gains in bodyweight and recovery levels while training at an intensity that forces muscle growth, then you aren’t going to gain a whole lot of fat when bulking.
But that doesn’t mean you’re going to be able to stay at 8% bodyfat or gain exactly 2lbs of muscle every 4 weeks or any retarded shit like that. The general consensus is that at too low a level of bodyfat (for your own physiology and body type) your levels of anabolic hormones drop significantly, and at too high a level of bodyfat your sensitivity to those hormones will drop. That is why a lot of people notice they build muscle best in a more moderate 12-15% bodyfat range, but obviously this is highly individual.
As with everything in bodybuilding you simply need to find out what works best FOR YOU.
[quote] Brook wrote:
Arioch wrote:
greystoke wrote:
If you err and overeat you will. You may end up at 11% and “fat” but you will gain muscle.
When did 11% become fat?
I think this is where the problem comes from. Too many people think that if you are over 10% you are fat.
I have to admit, I got suckered into that line of thinking and spent some time losing out on valuable muscle building time. Now, I at least have my head on straight and am working on adding muscle while forgetting about my abs. It is amazing to see how quickly I am getting past my sticking points (regarding strength) now that I’m not trying to stay at a certain bodyfat %. It is like night and day.
This is where the lines blur… this is all well and good, but if you stop paying attention to the fat for too long… you’ll become a fat guy with calves and forearms. It happens so often.
What is your bodyfat at now then, reasonable or out of control?[/quote]
For me, it is in control and reasonable. I won’t let it get out of control. Like you, I can just slow down and go to maintenance levels (where I’m at now). In the past, I was stopping the bulk when my stomach got soft. It was really hurting my progress. Now, I’ve added a few more pounds, and holding steady with the weight and am still moving heavy iron (at least for me). When I’m wearing clothing, I still look good and get compliments.
I think you said it well when you posted above that you don’t want it to get out of control and need to watch what is going on with your body. Plus, like you mentioned, you don’t have to ‘cut’ to reduce the fat on your body. You can keep working hard and just go to what should be maintenance. If you are still hitting it hard you are going to burn some calories and drop some fat. It may not be a lot, but it will be some.
[quote]GetSwole wrote:
Culking you fucking nitwits, its the answer to this stupid problem.[/quote]
I’m not so sure about that. I’ve thought about this a lot, and aside from the usual anecdotal evidence that it is a less than an ideal solution, here’s my issue with it:
When can one pinpoint when recovery is more or less complete? Think about this, and I’ll use myself as an example. I train at night, using a 3 day on, 2 day off type split. “Culking” would have me keep cals up on lifting days, and drop them the other 2. But we know elevated protein synthesis can occur for up to 24 hours, maybe more, after a training session (there is a Dave Barr article from this very site published a few years back that confirms this, you can dig around for it if you want). And we know we need cals above maintenance during this time to maximize said synthesis.
So - if I suddenly drop below maintenance on the morning of day 4, a mere 10-12 hours or so after the previous night’s workout, how can I be maximizing muscle growth?
I’ve even thought about waiting for 24 hours after the last workout, THEN dropping cals, and keeping them low until my pre-workout meal when training starts again. This sounds like it might work the best, but even then, how do I KNOW I’m not inhibiting muscle growth? I can’t.
Remember, I’m approaching this debate from the perspective of MAXIMAL growth. I think “culking” can work, maybe even relatively well, but not for maximal growth. That being said, I do wonder what kind of results one could get with it.
I may have to give it a shot and report back. (Muses thoughtfully)
I was joking lol. But, interesting post nonetheless.
[quote]GetSwole wrote:
I was joking lol. But, interesting post nonetheless.[/quote]
Damn, could have saved me some typing. 