Abs?
Replies
-
I heard someone somewhere else say it's kind of the ultimate sign of being lean. For me personally, it's one reason why I don't want to do a fast bulk and end up gaining excess body fat.JovanValor wrote: »Whats with all this collateral information on just one muscle group
0 -
weighted inverted crunches, planks, and run sprints- and no sugar or diet soda or alcohol0
-
-
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I heard someone somewhere else say it's kind of the ultimate sign of being lean. For me personally, it's one reason why I don't want to do a fast bulk and end up gaining excess body fat.JovanValor wrote: »Whats with all this collateral information on just one muscle group
Depends on your definition of "lean".
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I'm not doubting that I could put on a good bit of muscle if I could get my training and calorie intake up to optimal levels. But do you really think 60 pounds is reasonable?? I remember some of you telling me a couple months ago that because I don't have experience bulking, I was making it out to be easier than it really is. In other words, I was downplaying what it takes to gain 20 pounds of muscle, much less 3X that amount. And from what I've read, 50 pounds is pushing the limit for most people.
Yes you do. You just don't eat enough. We have gone through this already. Not going there again. And chances are your training is sub part as well.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'm doubtful that I even have the genetic ability to naturally put on 60 pounds of LBM (unless my weight gain was stunted during my growing years).
We all have abs. We just have to be lean enough to see them. The reason you could see yours automatically is because you are underweight. Anyone can accomplish that. Go gain 50 or 60 lbs which is what you need and having strong visible abs, then we can talk.ForecasterJason wrote: »Also, there's a difference between simply seeing abs and having them defined. I was lucky enough to get abs automatically as my growing years ended--no training whatsoever. But they weren't exactly "defined", as no muscle had been built.0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'm not doubting that I could put on a good bit of muscle if I could get my training and calorie intake up to optimal levels. But do you really think 60 pounds is reasonable?? I remember some of you telling me a couple months ago that because I don't have experience bulking, I was making it out to be easier than it really is. In other words, I was downplaying what it takes to gain 20 pounds of muscle, much less 3X that amount. And from what I've read, 50 pounds is pushing the limit for most people.
Yes you do. You just don't eat enough. We have gone through this already. Not going there again. And chances are your training is sub part as well.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'm doubtful that I even have the genetic ability to naturally put on 60 pounds of LBM (unless my weight gain was stunted during my growing years).
We all have abs. We just have to be lean enough to see them. The reason you could see yours automatically is because you are underweight. Anyone can accomplish that. Go gain 50 or 60 lbs which is what you need and having strong visible abs, then we can talk.ForecasterJason wrote: »Also, there's a difference between simply seeing abs and having them defined. I was lucky enough to get abs automatically as my growing years ended--no training whatsoever. But they weren't exactly "defined", as no muscle had been built.
http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html
http://www.naturalphysiques.com/28/fat-free-mass-index-ffmi
I forget who in particular recommended these resources ( I think Lyle and maybe Brad S., but I may be mistaken )
I found the first one to be more interesting tbh0 -
This content has been removed.
-
LolBroScience wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'm not doubting that I could put on a good bit of muscle if I could get my training and calorie intake up to optimal levels. But do you really think 60 pounds is reasonable?? I remember some of you telling me a couple months ago that because I don't have experience bulking, I was making it out to be easier than it really is. In other words, I was downplaying what it takes to gain 20 pounds of muscle, much less 3X that amount. And from what I've read, 50 pounds is pushing the limit for most people.
Yes you do. You just don't eat enough. We have gone through this already. Not going there again. And chances are your training is sub part as well.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'm doubtful that I even have the genetic ability to naturally put on 60 pounds of LBM (unless my weight gain was stunted during my growing years).
We all have abs. We just have to be lean enough to see them. The reason you could see yours automatically is because you are underweight. Anyone can accomplish that. Go gain 50 or 60 lbs which is what you need and having strong visible abs, then we can talk.ForecasterJason wrote: »Also, there's a difference between simply seeing abs and having them defined. I was lucky enough to get abs automatically as my growing years ended--no training whatsoever. But they weren't exactly "defined", as no muscle had been built.
http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html
http://www.naturalphysiques.com/28/fat-free-mass-index-ffmi
I forget who in particular recommended these resources ( I think Lyle and maybe Brad S., but I may be mistaken )
I found the first one to be more interesting tbh
Lyle looks at a couple of them here (his own, Alan A's, Martin Berkhan's and Casey Butt's):
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html/0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'm not doubting that I could put on a good bit of muscle if I could get my training and calorie intake up to optimal levels. But do you really think 60 pounds is reasonable?? I remember some of you telling me a couple months ago that because I don't have experience bulking, I was making it out to be easier than it really is. In other words, I was downplaying what it takes to gain 20 pounds of muscle, much less 3X that amount. And from what I've read, 50 pounds is pushing the limit for most people.
Yes you do. You just don't eat enough. We have gone through this already. Not going there again. And chances are your training is sub part as well.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'm doubtful that I even have the genetic ability to naturally put on 60 pounds of LBM (unless my weight gain was stunted during my growing years).
We all have abs. We just have to be lean enough to see them. The reason you could see yours automatically is because you are underweight. Anyone can accomplish that. Go gain 50 or 60 lbs which is what you need and having strong visible abs, then we can talk.ForecasterJason wrote: »Also, there's a difference between simply seeing abs and having them defined. I was lucky enough to get abs automatically as my growing years ended--no training whatsoever. But they weren't exactly "defined", as no muscle had been built.
http://www.weightrainer.net/bodypred.html
http://www.naturalphysiques.com/28/fat-free-mass-index-ffmi
I forget who in particular recommended these resources ( I think Lyle and maybe Brad S., but I may be mistaken )
I found the first one to be more interesting tbh
Lyle looks at a couple of them here (his own, Alan A's, Martin Berkhan's and Casey Butt's):
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html/
Dat der comprehensive list.0 -
you need to reduce fat % in your body to make them visible and exercise abs 1-2 times a week (that is enough as abs work when you do other exercises)0
-
OK, how about some specific, non joke advice. Planks are awesome for your abs without straining your back. Crunches never really got me there no matter how many I did, but planks do it and take much less time. On youtube are tutorials for front and side planks. If you do planks on a regular basis, your abdominal muscles will develop over time. It doesn't turn into a manly 6 pack but you see the softly defined outlines of your abs by doing these. Say, do them every other day.
i am just going to copy your profile picture advice.
NO0 -
op - you have already got some solid advice…
I would say that you do not need to train your abs every day. I usually train mine once a week for about 30-40 minutes with weighted crunches, decline weighted crunches, weighted side twists etc…
Other than that, when lifting I utilize a lot of compound movements which help work your whole body and core area.
How many calories a day do you currently eat? Are you currently maintaining, in a deficit, etc?
From your profile picture you look like you are pretty lean, so it sounds like you need to start lifting a little heavy and do a bulk (or eat at maintenance and recomp) and this will help you add some mass and get more defined abs….
0 -
OK, how about some specific, non joke advice. Planks are awesome for your abs without straining your back. Crunches never really got me there no matter how many I did, but planks do it and take much less time. On youtube are tutorials for front and side planks. If you do planks on a regular basis, your abdominal muscles will develop over time. It doesn't turn into a manly 6 pack but you see the softly defined outlines of your abs by doing these. Say, do them every other day.
i am just going to copy your profile picture advice.
NO
lol - missed this and the 'manly 6 pack comment'
"Softly defined abs" = more fat covering the abs and/or less developed muscles and/or not having the genetics for ab separation.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
having defined abs is just as much a matter of body fat content as it is having them worked at all.
And I would say there is difference between a soft six- where you can see them flexed- but not so much unflexed- or a hard size- that you can see unflexed- and they are insanely popped when they are flexed.
All of which have more to do with body fat content then ab work.
Most people I know with crazy hard defined abs- do SOME ab work- but it's not a primal or even necessary focus.
As USMCMP points out- you can absolutely have ab's without doing ab work.
soft six…ummmmm really?0 -
Lol, it's true though. I would fall into the category of a soft six due to underdeveloped muscle mass there.having defined abs is just as much a matter of body fat content as it is having them worked at all.
And I would say there is difference between a soft six- where you can see them flexed- but not so much unflexed- or a hard size- that you can see unflexed- and they are insanely popped when they are flexed.
All of which have more to do with body fat content then ab work.
Most people I know with crazy hard defined abs- do SOME ab work- but it's not a primal or even necessary focus.
As USMCMP points out- you can absolutely have ab's without doing ab work.
soft six…ummmmm really?
0 -
-
This content has been removed.
-
More relevant is the implication that no one who eats sugar or drinks diet soda or drinks alcohol has abs. Pretty sure I can name quite a few on this site, and a bunch of competitive bb'ers that do all of those things.0 -
I'd rather not do so on an Internet forum.ForecasterJason wrote: »
Lol, it's true though. I would fall into the category of a soft six due to underdeveloped muscle mass there.having defined abs is just as much a matter of body fat content as it is having them worked at all.
And I would say there is difference between a soft six- where you can see them flexed- but not so much unflexed- or a hard size- that you can see unflexed- and they are insanely popped when they are flexed.
All of which have more to do with body fat content then ab work.
Most people I know with crazy hard defined abs- do SOME ab work- but it's not a primal or even necessary focus.
As USMCMP points out- you can absolutely have ab's without doing ab work.
soft six…ummmmm really?
I think it's time for you to post a picture.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I don't get what you mean. I realize the solution to getting more defined abs (in my case) would probably be to increase my muscle mass. (Though I do think it's cool to naturally be lean enough to see them without having to work for it). The other things I've asked about in other threads people have been able to give me advice/feedback without needing to see a picture.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'd rather not do so on an Internet forum.ForecasterJason wrote: »
Lol, it's true though. I would fall into the category of a soft six due to underdeveloped muscle mass there.having defined abs is just as much a matter of body fat content as it is having them worked at all.
And I would say there is difference between a soft six- where you can see them flexed- but not so much unflexed- or a hard size- that you can see unflexed- and they are insanely popped when they are flexed.
All of which have more to do with body fat content then ab work.
Most people I know with crazy hard defined abs- do SOME ab work- but it's not a primal or even necessary focus.
As USMCMP points out- you can absolutely have ab's without doing ab work.
soft six…ummmmm really?
I think it's time for you to post a picture.
Then maybe consider it's time to realize that the bulking section may not be for you.
How will anyone know it's you if you block out your face?
0 -
More relevant is the implication that no one who eats sugar or drinks diet soda or drinks alcohol has abs. Pretty sure I can name quite a few on this site, and a bunch of competitive bb'ers that do all of those things.
yea, that was going to be my "flip side argument" …..
welcome to new year 2015 on MFP forums...0 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »
Lol, it's true though. I would fall into the category of a soft six due to underdeveloped muscle mass there.having defined abs is just as much a matter of body fat content as it is having them worked at all.
And I would say there is difference between a soft six- where you can see them flexed- but not so much unflexed- or a hard size- that you can see unflexed- and they are insanely popped when they are flexed.
All of which have more to do with body fat content then ab work.
Most people I know with crazy hard defined abs- do SOME ab work- but it's not a primal or even necessary focus.
As USMCMP points out- you can absolutely have ab's without doing ab work.
soft six…ummmmm really?
I was actually subliminally referring to something else to mess with jo rocka...0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought being lean was about having a low body fat percentage, which I do have. I do have a good bit of definition on my arms and legs, even though I don't have much muscle (did actually get a comment from someone I know on the muscularity of my arms). I know there are plenty of skinny people who don't have a low enough body fat percentage to see abs.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I don't get what you mean. I realize the solution to getting more defined abs (in my case) would probably be to increase my muscle mass. (Though I do think it's cool to naturally be lean enough to see them without having to work for it). The other things I've asked about in other threads people have been able to give me advice/feedback without needing to see a picture.ForecasterJason wrote: »
I'd rather not do so on an Internet forum.ForecasterJason wrote: »
Lol, it's true though. I would fall into the category of a soft six due to underdeveloped muscle mass there.having defined abs is just as much a matter of body fat content as it is having them worked at all.
And I would say there is difference between a soft six- where you can see them flexed- but not so much unflexed- or a hard size- that you can see unflexed- and they are insanely popped when they are flexed.
All of which have more to do with body fat content then ab work.
Most people I know with crazy hard defined abs- do SOME ab work- but it's not a primal or even necessary focus.
As USMCMP points out- you can absolutely have ab's without doing ab work.
soft six…ummmmm really?
I think it's time for you to post a picture.
Then maybe consider it's time to realize that the bulking section may not be for you.
How will anyone know it's you if you block out your face?
There is a difference between being lean and skinny. You're skinny. And in your case would call the general abdominal muscles not thosee defined abs people search. What you see is muscle tissue and ribs. You have basically decided you're not going to gain weight so why keep circling the topic.
0 -
This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions