When a Bulk Become a Recomp
keithcw_the_first
Posts: 382 Member
So I'm weighing, checking numbers, all that, and something occurs to me.
Suppose you miss your goal for the day, or you've got the wrong surplus dialed in for a week. The scale stalls. Does that mean your "bulk" has turned into either the leanest cleanest slowest bulk ever or you've basically downgraded briefly to a recomp?
I understand putting such a fine point on these things is... not useless but maybe overthinking it.
Still it seems to me if one is progressing their training and their caloric surplus wavers and occasionally falls to maintenance, then it's still a net positive.
Is that accurate?
Suppose you miss your goal for the day, or you've got the wrong surplus dialed in for a week. The scale stalls. Does that mean your "bulk" has turned into either the leanest cleanest slowest bulk ever or you've basically downgraded briefly to a recomp?
I understand putting such a fine point on these things is... not useless but maybe overthinking it.
Still it seems to me if one is progressing their training and their caloric surplus wavers and occasionally falls to maintenance, then it's still a net positive.
Is that accurate?
0
Replies
-
keithcw_the_first wrote: »So I'm weighing, checking numbers, all that, and something occurs to me.
Suppose you miss your goal for the day, or you've got the wrong surplus dialed in for a week. The scale stalls. Does that mean your "bulk" has turned into either the leanest cleanest slowest bulk ever or you've basically downgraded briefly to a recomp?
I understand putting such a fine point on these things is... not useless but maybe overthinking it.
Still it seems to me if one is progressing their training and their caloric surplus wavers and occasionally falls to maintenance, then it's still a net positive.
Is that accurate?
No, it is not accurate because a recomp takes longer than a week.
0 -
So it's just... nothing? No progress is made in either direction?
Edit: That seems unlikely. If the body is in a constant state of tearing down and rebuilding and burning calories and parceling out ingested calories then certainly something occurs, even if we're talking about fractions of ounces.0 -
How long have you been at it? Your maintenance could be catching up with you - if you stay the same after another week or two, I'd up cals again.
Just remember, it's the same as losing, you get fluctuations.
Edit: sorry just read your post properly :$ what ndj said. A week isn't long enough to recomp, you're just wasting your gains, not hitting your surplus. And your argument doesn't matter, if you don't have enough energy to shuttle amino acids where they need to be then you're not going to gain muscle, just spin your wheels.0 -
@3laine75 Been about three and a half weeks. I'm running a 14 day average on the weight, which is trending upwards but sloooowly flattening out. I actually decreased my surplus by about 100 calories a few days ago because I was looking at a little over a pound a week of gain.
A lot of people advocate .5 pounds a week or less. What's your take?0 -
keithcw_the_first wrote: »@3laine75 Been about three and a half weeks. I'm running a 14 day average on the weight, which is trending upwards but sloooowly flattening out. I actually decreased my surplus by about 100 calories a few days ago because I was looking at a little over a pound a week of gain.
A lot of people advocate .5 pounds a week or less. What's your take?
what are your goals?
if it has been three weeks and you are not gaining then you need to increase calories, not decrease them.
if your goal is to build muscle then you need to eat a 250 or 500 calorie surplus...
people advocate a half pound a week gain because it minimizes fat gain ...0 -
keithcw_the_first wrote: »So it's just... nothing? No progress is made in either direction?
Edit: That seems unlikely. If the body is in a constant state of tearing down and rebuilding and burning calories and parceling out ingested calories then certainly something occurs, even if we're talking about fractions of ounces.
yes, it is nothing no progress in either direction.
A recomp takes anywhere from six months to a year < that is my understanding.
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
My goal is to hit a 225 1RM on the bench. Or, realistically, when I get back above 200-205.
That's my charted weight with the dotted line as a 14 day average. The arrow is where I cut my surplus by 100. My goal was to just slow it down a little bit. It looked like I was heading closer to a pound, pound and a half a week. I want to get more out of this bulk before I hit the point where I need to cut down and try again.
Oh, and the green diamond is when I switched from "I need to keep losing weight" to "There's no muscle under here; I need to put some on" and started bulking.
And yes, I committed the sin of not labeling the Y axis. Each line is one pound.
0 -
You are over thinking it. I you come up short 1 week just continue on to the next week like you were supposed to. If you we at maintenance and and trained like normal and you gained or lose and oz of muscle of lost or whatever what difference does it make? You need to not look to get definitions to label the non completion of your goal and just do it right the next week.
1 week is not a recomp. 1 week is nothing in the grand scheme.
Okay -- I value your advice because you always seem to have the right answer.
I thought I was coming in too hot. I'll add the 100 calories back to the surplus and continue evaluating. I guess the way the trend is going I'm on target for three pounds in April, which would be about right.0 -
keithcw_the_first wrote: »You are over thinking it. I you come up short 1 week just continue on to the next week like you were supposed to. If you we at maintenance and and trained like normal and you gained or lose and oz of muscle of lost or whatever what difference does it make? You need to not look to get definitions to label the non completion of your goal and just do it right the next week.
1 week is not a recomp. 1 week is nothing in the grand scheme.
Okay -- I value your advice because you always seem to have the right answer.
I thought I was coming in too hot. I'll add the 100 calories back to the surplus and continue evaluating. I guess the way the trend is going I'm on target for three pounds in April, which would be about right.
three pounds would be a hair over .5 gain per week so that is just about where you want to be. I don't think it is possible to ever have the number be exactly. 5 gain per week....
Keep eating, lifting, and taking measurements....0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Thanks!0
-
You spent a week at maintenance.
no problem really. Just adjust whatever needs adjusting and continue with your program. 0 -
You see how your graph - when you were losing weight - wasn't linear?
Guess what - it's the same for gaining. Just going the opposite way.
0 -
-
keithcw_the_first wrote: »So it's just... nothing? No progress is made in either direction?
Edit: That seems unlikely. If the body is in a constant state of tearing down and rebuilding and burning calories and parceling out ingested calories then certainly something occurs, even if we're talking about fractions of ounces.
Whatever progress would be very minimal and no, it's not something you'd be able to tell.
You are overthinking this and focusing on the wrong things.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I've had to adjust calories a few times in the 7 weeks I've been bulking. No biggie. You are keeping track, so you can adjust as necessary. I second the 225 bench. Mine has always sucked. However, like MrM27, my true love is Deadlifts 0
-
I have a tendency to overthink things.
Bulking is actually a nice exercise in overcoming anxiety. Or attempting to.0 -
-
keithcw_the_first wrote: »So it's just... nothing? No progress is made in either direction?
Edit: That seems unlikely. If the body is in a constant state of tearing down and rebuilding and burning calories and parceling out ingested calories then certainly something occurs, even if we're talking about fractions of ounces.
No reason you will not be making progress (assuming training is dialed in) - just slower than in a surplus. A week however is neither here nor there in the scheme of things.
Maintenance is not static - look at the longer term trends.
I think you are over-thinking it.0 -
Thanks again guys.0
-
keithcw_the_first wrote: »@3laine75 Been about three and a half weeks. I'm running a 14 day average on the weight, which is trending upwards but sloooowly flattening out. I actually decreased my surplus by about 100 calories a few days ago because I was looking at a little over a pound a week of gain.
A lot of people advocate .5 pounds a week or less. What's your take?
I'd advise a 0.5 gain for females not a guy. You can build approx double the muscle I can if your intake is optimal - which I'd say, although I am far from an expert, was a 500 surplus for a 1lb a week gain.
Regardless if your going for 0.5 or 1 lb, your not going to get it if you don't hit your goals - eat up man!
0 -
keithcw_the_first wrote: »@3laine75 Been about three and a half weeks. I'm running a 14 day average on the weight, which is trending upwards but sloooowly flattening out. I actually decreased my surplus by about 100 calories a few days ago because I was looking at a little over a pound a week of gain.
A lot of people advocate .5 pounds a week or less. What's your take?
I'd advise a 0.5 gain for females not a guy. You can build approx double the muscle I can if your intake is optimal - which I'd say, although I am far from an expert, was a 500 surplus for a 1lb a week gain.
Regardless if your going for 0.5 or 1 lb, your not going to get it if you don't hit your goals - eat up man!
A pound! Yes. That explains why this half pound goal is killing me. I'll bump it up gradually. I have noticed my energy levels seem to be rising to meet the extra food. That makes it even trickier.0 -
keithcw_the_first wrote: »@3laine75 Been about three and a half weeks. I'm running a 14 day average on the weight, which is trending upwards but sloooowly flattening out. I actually decreased my surplus by about 100 calories a few days ago because I was looking at a little over a pound a week of gain.
A lot of people advocate .5 pounds a week or less. What's your take?
I'd advise a 0.5 gain for females not a guy. You can build approx double the muscle I can if your intake is optimal - which I'd say, although I am far from an expert, was a 500 surplus for a 1lb a week gain.
Regardless if your going for 0.5 or 1 lb, your not going to get it if you don't hit your goals - eat up man!
At 0.5lb a week - that's 24lb a year - that is the max (on average) a guy can gain in muscle over the first year - females half that. Obviously, not all you gain is muscle, but that's leaving too much for fat gain (unless it's a guy who is in their late teens/early 20's where they can possibly capitalize on higher test). 1lb a week is too quick imo - he would be gaining more fat than necessary.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
keithcw_the_first wrote: »@3laine75 Been about three and a half weeks. I'm running a 14 day average on the weight, which is trending upwards but sloooowly flattening out. I actually decreased my surplus by about 100 calories a few days ago because I was looking at a little over a pound a week of gain.
A lot of people advocate .5 pounds a week or less. What's your take?
I'd advise a 0.5 gain for females not a guy. You can build approx double the muscle I can if your intake is optimal - which I'd say, although I am far from an expert, was a 500 surplus for a 1lb a week gain.
Regardless if your going for 0.5 or 1 lb, your not going to get it if you don't hit your goals - eat up man!
At 0.5lb a week - that's 24lb a year - that is the max (on average) a guy can gain in muscle over the first year - females half that. Obviously, not all you gain is muscle, but that's leaving too much for fat gain (unless it's a guy who is in their late teens/early 20's where they can possibly capitalize on higher test). 1lb a week is too quick imo - he would be gaining more fat than necessary.
I'm going off the gain 50:50 muscle to fat thing. My assumption is, you'd need damn great genetics (or a lot of discipline) to gain mostly muscle. I'm also assuming that if you want the optimum muscle growth you can accept the fat gain and deal with it later.
On a first bulk, me personally, I'd accept the extra fat because of diminishing returns on later bulks. In saying that, your physique kind of sh!ts all over my thinking, considering the great results you get at maintenance or slightly above (?!)
0 -
keithcw_the_first wrote: »@3laine75 Been about three and a half weeks. I'm running a 14 day average on the weight, which is trending upwards but sloooowly flattening out. I actually decreased my surplus by about 100 calories a few days ago because I was looking at a little over a pound a week of gain.
A lot of people advocate .5 pounds a week or less. What's your take?
I'd advise a 0.5 gain for females not a guy. You can build approx double the muscle I can if your intake is optimal - which I'd say, although I am far from an expert, was a 500 surplus for a 1lb a week gain.
Regardless if your going for 0.5 or 1 lb, your not going to get it if you don't hit your goals - eat up man!
At 0.5lb a week - that's 24lb a year - that is the max (on average) a guy can gain in muscle over the first year - females half that. Obviously, not all you gain is muscle, but that's leaving too much for fat gain (unless it's a guy who is in their late teens/early 20's where they can possibly capitalize on higher test). 1lb a week is too quick imo - he would be gaining more fat than necessary.
I'm going off the gain 50:50 muscle to fat thing. My assumption is, you'd need damn great genetics (or a lot of discipline) to gain mostly muscle. I'm also assuming that if you want the optimum muscle growth you can accept the fat gain and deal with it later.
[...]
This was my initial assumption as well
0 -
keithcw_the_first wrote: »So it's just... nothing? No progress is made in either direction?
Edit: That seems unlikely. If the body is in a constant state of tearing down and rebuilding and burning calories and parceling out ingested calories then certainly something occurs, even if we're talking about fractions of ounces.
No reason you will not be making progress (assuming training is dialed in) - just slower than in a surplus. A week however is neither here nor there in the scheme of things.
Maintenance is not static - look at the longer term trends.
I think you are over-thinking it.
^^^^ exactly
0 -
keithcw_the_first wrote: »@3laine75 Been about three and a half weeks. I'm running a 14 day average on the weight, which is trending upwards but sloooowly flattening out. I actually decreased my surplus by about 100 calories a few days ago because I was looking at a little over a pound a week of gain.
A lot of people advocate .5 pounds a week or less. What's your take?
I'd advise a 0.5 gain for females not a guy. You can build approx double the muscle I can if your intake is optimal - which I'd say, although I am far from an expert, was a 500 surplus for a 1lb a week gain.
Regardless if your going for 0.5 or 1 lb, your not going to get it if you don't hit your goals - eat up man!
At 0.5lb a week - that's 24lb a year - that is the max (on average) a guy can gain in muscle over the first year - females half that. Obviously, not all you gain is muscle, but that's leaving too much for fat gain (unless it's a guy who is in their late teens/early 20's where they can possibly capitalize on higher test). 1lb a week is too quick imo - he would be gaining more fat than necessary.
I'm going off the gain 50:50 muscle to fat thing. My assumption is, you'd need damn great genetics (or a lot of discipline) to gain mostly muscle. I'm also assuming that if you want the optimum muscle growth you can accept the fat gain and deal with it later.
On a first bulk, me personally, I'd accept the extra fat because of diminishing returns on later bulks. In saying that, your physique kind of sh!ts all over my thinking, considering the great results you get at maintenance or slightly above (?!)
Where are you getting the 50:50 muscle to fat ratio?
I agree that you need to accept some fat, but I just think that its too high of a ratio - it also assumes that someone will be gaining approx. 26lb a year of muscle.
:flowerforyou: re the physique comment. Someone's physique does not =/= knowledge necessarily. There are more than one way to go about things - some work better than others and some work better for the individual than others (and some ways are just bro, as we know from the forums lol). Genetics also do matter. I am lucky in that I seem to respond well to stimulus so have an easier time than some women gaining muscle. I did bulk the first time round after I cut down to a pretty lean BF%, since then I have hovered around maintenance - at a higher BF%, but that's for performance reasons.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.5K 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
- 427 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