15.8% Body fat need advice
Options
Replies
-
I thought so thanksIt's going to vary from person to person but I don't think it's a good idea for most males to begin a bulk at 15% body-fat.
It's very likely that if you do this, 4 weeks into the bulk you are going to not be happy with how you look and you'll turn around and start cutting again.
For most people I think 10-12% body-fat is about right.
0 -
itsflaccoi wrote: »
I thought so thanksIt's going to vary from person to person but I don't think it's a good idea for most males to begin a bulk at 15% body-fat.
It's very likely that if you do this, 4 weeks into the bulk you are going to not be happy with how you look and you'll turn around and start cutting again.
For most people I think 10-12% body-fat is about right.
I'll add, if you are underweight, overfat, and new to resistance training, that could be a potential scenario where, at least for a short time, eating in a small caloric surplus could be reasonable.0 -
Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really huge bulk, and it's easier to maintain. Never said don't bulk at all.. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
0 -
Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really considered a bulk. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
Its hard to believe that asking for clarification would produce such an ill response. I read it twice and couldnt make sense out of it, so it may have not been as clear as you would have liked it. If i couldnt understand that its possible that others didnt either.
And last i checked eating above maintenance is considered a bulk. Additionally, recomping at his current body fat and based on his goals is, IMO, probably not in his best interest as those plans can take years and in many cases will lead to spinning your wheels. Since his ultimate goals was lean and then stay lean, a small deficit is a better plan as it will allow him to reach his goals of being lean. He then could transition to maintenance and reassessed his goals based on that outcome.
But hey what do i know.
0 -
Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really considered a bulk. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
Its hard to believe that asking for clarification would produce such an ill response. I read it twice and couldnt make sense out of it, so it may have not been as clear as you would have liked it. If i couldnt understand that its possible that others didnt either.
And last i checked eating above maintenance is considered a bulk. Additionally, recomping at his current body fat and based on his goals is, IMO, probably not in his best interest as those plans can take years and in many cases will lead to spinning your wheels. Since his ultimate goals was lean and then stay lean, a small deficit is a better plan as it will allow him to reach his goals of being lean. He then could transition to maintenance and reassessed his goals based on that outcome.
But hey what do i know.
Well the OP added me as a friend, looks like he understood it pretty well to me.0 -
Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really considered a bulk. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
Its hard to believe that asking for clarification would produce such an ill response. I read it twice and couldnt make sense out of it, so it may have not been as clear as you would have liked it. If i couldnt understand that its possible that others didnt either.
And last i checked eating above maintenance is considered a bulk. Additionally, recomping at his current body fat and based on his goals is, IMO, probably not in his best interest as those plans can take years and in many cases will lead to spinning your wheels. Since his ultimate goals was lean and then stay lean, a small deficit is a better plan as it will allow him to reach his goals of being lean. He then could transition to maintenance and reassessed his goals based on that outcome.
But hey what do i know.
But it's so simple. Maintain using cardio to cut. You know, cut and maintain at the same time, because then you still get all your nutrition!
Just use twisted math, remove all actual logic, and somehow conclude that if your maintenance is at 2000 calories, you can do 500 calories of cardio, and still not be eating on a deficit. It's the alternate reality of what the rest of us would call cutting. Well not even that really, since the deficit would be even larger to account for whatever muscle maintaining exercise was being done. But that shouldn't matter, because the same magic that allows for cardio not counting as additional calorie deficit will also adjust itself for the protein needs as well as the calories.
Old (real) math = 2000 calories - 500 calories burned doing cardio = 1500 net calories
New (alternate reality) math = 2000 calories - 500 burned during cardio - lifting to maintain muscle = 2000
0 -
Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really huge bulk, and it's easier to maintain. Never said don't bulk at all.. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
So your option 2... is to cut, not to maintain, just to be clear. (note, this is not a question, this is a statement)
0 -
blankiefinder wrote: »Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really huge bulk, and it's easier to maintain. Never said don't bulk at all.. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
So your option 2... is to cut, not to maintain, just to be clear. (note, this is not a question, this is a statement)
Current0 -
itsflaccoi wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really huge bulk, and it's easier to maintain. Never said don't bulk at all.. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
So your option 2... is to cut, not to maintain, just to be clear. (note, this is not a question, this is a statement)
Current
I think most of us would agree at your current body fat percentage, that would be the most beneficial plan based on your goal of being lean.0 -
itsflaccoi wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really huge bulk, and it's easier to maintain. Never said don't bulk at all.. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
So your option 2... is to cut, not to maintain, just to be clear. (note, this is not a question, this is a statement)
Current
I think most of us would agree at your current body fat percentage, that would be the most beneficial plan based on your goal of being lean.
do we know if OP is a male of female?????????0 -
itsflaccoi wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really huge bulk, and it's easier to maintain. Never said don't bulk at all.. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
So your option 2... is to cut, not to maintain, just to be clear. (note, this is not a question, this is a statement)
Current
I think most of us would agree at your current body fat percentage, that would be the most beneficial plan based on your goal of being lean.
do we know if OP is a male of female?????????
Male???? Although, I don't get the female avatar.0 -
itsflaccoi wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really huge bulk, and it's easier to maintain. Never said don't bulk at all.. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
So your option 2... is to cut, not to maintain, just to be clear. (note, this is not a question, this is a statement)
Current
I think most of us would agree at your current body fat percentage, that would be the most beneficial plan based on your goal of being lean.
do we know if OP is a male of female?????????
Male???? Although, I don't get the female avatar.
that threw me off too ...0 -
itsflaccoi wrote: »blankiefinder wrote: »Bulking in reality is a body building process, that was meant for people that go on stage, and are very close to their genetic potential. If you have only been lifting for 1-3 years it's really not recommended to bulk, it's better to "recomp" or stay at maintenance while building a good foundation of muscle, while learning the proper movements in exercise.
A person making a house wouldn't build a house with no foundation. So, OP with the greatest respect, stop worrying about insignificant numbers that represent nothing. A lot of people have unrealistic expectations of how much muscle they can really achieve naturally, just eating more isn't even close to the right answer, the body can only synthesise so much protein to build muscle, and everyone is different.
A "bulk" is no guarantee of how muscle you will gain and it's easy to be like, " I want to gain 30 pounds." Then that person needs to realise they don't know how much of the 30 pounds is actual muscle, 6 -8 months to bulk, then 10 months to cut, is not worth the time and day if it''s done wrong, statsicly most people do it wrong, by over eating or cutting calories too much!
Yes, there is no guarantee of how muscle you will lose with fat loss trying to achieve a number, and if you didn't have much muscle to begin with, it was a huge waste of time.
I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200.
Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program.
If you're "skinny fat" with minimal muscle, and are not patient, try a slow caloric increase 15%- 20% of your total calories, that's it. It takes a lot time to build muscle. It's years with consistency, not months!
So to reiterate, If you have no muscle and bulk, you will most likely gain the same on a slight caloric increase. Cutting although will help with fat loss, doesn't guarantee how much muscle loss happens. Most people fail at both cutting and bulking, everyone is different.
Honestly, this post confuses me...
You say it's worthless to bulk and that we should recomp, but then later on recommend increasing calories if skinny fat 15% to 20% (which means bulk even though you don't want to call it that).
There really are 3 options, cut, recomp/maintain, bulk. Which are you saying based on the OP's criteria?
It's hard to believe you're a mod. I'm pretty sure I gave advice based on the OP's criteria not YOUR criteria ! . I'll quote them again so you can "make sense of it, be unconfused". I also took in consideration his believes and what he wrote on being fat from bulking, so my advice and the advice should be based on that, not some bias information. So with the little knowledge he left, there is only two options. Maintain using cardio to cut, or a slight caloric increase.
The two best options for him, not everyone. (Strange how you came to the conclusion it was about you, and your friends.)
Quote 1. "I recommend that you continue lifting, keep counting macros/micros, and overall progress in the gym with a journal some tracking method slight caloric increase, like 100-200." (SideSteel recommended this also)
I recommend this because there was mention of a bulk after a lower body fat percentage. And adding 100-200 calories is no really huge bulk, and it's easier to maintain. Never said don't bulk at all.. When it comes to the time to gain more muscle/mass he would still super lean from slow progression by only adding 10-20% of total calories. Since most people maintain at around 2000, 200 is plenty.
Quite 2 "Or, you can stay at maintenance, keep doing cardio and add more sessions to help burn the storage fat, while on a program."
I wrote this one, because it's better for him to be at maintance at whatever his calories are. If he was 2000 calories at maintenance instead of cutting 300-600 through food/calories, (which most people do and is wrong in my opinion) which makes him eat less, giving his body less nutrients and the fuel he needs to keep his lean muscle. Instead he could stay at 2000 calories and cut 300-600 calories through cardio, while still getting all his nutrients. All he would have to do is like 30-60 minutes of burpees/plyometrics , HIT and he would burn enough calories too.
Also, I never recommended him not to bulk, I recommended if he has no foundation of muscle not to bulk. He should get the foundation first. Of course he has no real picture so it's hard to really judge with just words.
So your option 2... is to cut, not to maintain, just to be clear. (note, this is not a question, this is a statement)
Current
I think most of us would agree at your current body fat percentage, that would be the most beneficial plan based on your goal of being lean.
do we know if OP is a male of female?????????
Pretty sure male, as that is what the OP says, as well as his profile. It threw me off at first as well.0 -
If your goal is to build a lean and significantly muscular body, you should aim to be at least 12% body fat before you embark on a serious muscle building or bulking phase. Remember, any time you try to add a significant amount of muscle to your body, you’re also going to gain some fat with it. This is an inevitable byproduct of a calorie surplus, which is a mandatory prerequisite for muscle growth. There’s simply no way to divert 100% of those calories to your muscle tissue, and you’re always going to gain some fat with it.
If your body fat is already high to begin with (16% right now as you mentioned), and you commit to six months or more of bulking, you’re likely going to be carrying an excessive amount of fat by the time that phase is over. So as a general guideline, look to be about 12% body fat before you start a bulking phase.
12% body is the stage where you certainly don’t have a ripped six pack, but are still carrying a decent amount of muscle definition. You probably have what could be called a “blurry 4-pack” – you can see your abs when you flex, but nothing too serious. So if you’re above 12% body fat, start with a cutting phase, and if you’re already at 12% or lower and you want to build muscle, start with a bulking phase. Simple as that.
0 -
Also keep in mind the some people want to be bigger and more muscular while others would prefer to be leaner and more athletic looking. So, the question of whether to bulk then cut, or cut then bulk, is really up to you and just depends on what kind of look you want to achieve. No one can really give you a definite answer since everyone has different physique goals.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 391 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions