Cutting to Bulking
Options
Replies
-
Because of the afterburn effect of HIT compared to LISS. With those 60 minute treadmill sessions you may be burning fat for a few hours after your workout but with HIT and metabolic conditioning training you're going to burn fat for up to 38 hours post. The OP still has body fat to lose.. This is the most effeicient way, and it's fun
EPOC is highly overstated and only accounts for 6 to 15% of total calories burned. Also, if they are bulking that will already be taken that into consideration and adjusting accordingly. Meaning whether they do HIIT or LISS, the target surplus will be 250 or 10% over tdee.
HIIT is superior for metabolic conditioning/ fat loss when trying to gain muscle. Yes, he wants to bulk but he has specifically stated he has fat to lose. Also, HIIT is going to improve your actual FITNESS 10 folds over LISS, which IMO has no impact on your fitness levels. I personally want to train like a beast whether it be cardio or weights, and my HIIT sessions definitely meet that requirement ;-) BUT if your goal is to be aesthetic with no actual fitness then yeah go for LISS, each to their own! I personally have dropped 10% bf and gained 6kg lean mass in the past 8 months without doing a bulk/cut because I incorporate HIIT. Prior to this I was lifting and doing 4 sessions of LISS for YEARS. Personally, I think most lifters are scared of HIIT... https://www.biolayne.com/articles/training/guest-post-the-science-of-hiit-cardio-by-chris-eric-martinez-the-dynamic-duo/1 -
Because of the afterburn effect of HIT compared to LISS. With those 60 minute treadmill sessions you may be burning fat for a few hours after your workout but with HIT and metabolic conditioning training you're going to burn fat for up to 38 hours post. The OP still has body fat to lose.. This is the most effeicient way, and it's fun
I don't disagree that HIIT is a good thing for lifting because it avoids the issues of interference with muscle building that LISS cardio can but as a weight loss vehicle it's highly overstated. Of course, fun is a matter of taste but I've done Tabatas the way they were meant to be done and "fun" would probably be the last thing I would call them lol.2 -
Because of the afterburn effect of HIT compared to LISS. With those 60 minute treadmill sessions you may be burning fat for a few hours after your workout but with HIT and metabolic conditioning training you're going to burn fat for up to 38 hours post. The OP still has body fat to lose.. This is the most effeicient way, and it's fun
EPOC is highly overstated and only accounts for 6 to 15% of total calories burned. Also, if they are bulking that will already be taken that into consideration and adjusting accordingly. Meaning whether they do HIIT or LISS, the target surplus will be 250 or 10% over tdee.
HIIT is superior for metabolic conditioning/ fat loss when trying to gain muscle. Yes, he wants to bulk but he has specifically stated he has fat to lose. Also, HIIT is going to improve your actual FITNESS 10 folds over LISS, which IMO has no impact on your fitness levels. I personally want to train like a beast whether it be cardio or weights, and my HIIT sessions definitely meet that requirement ;-) BUT if your goal is to be aesthetic with no actual fitness then yeah go for LISS, each to their own! I personally have dropped 10% bf and gained 6kg lean mass in the past 8 months without doing a bulk/cut because I incorporate HIIT. Prior to this I was lifting and doing 4 sessions of LISS for YEARS. Personally, I think most lifters are scared of HIIT... https://www.biolayne.com/articles/training/guest-post-the-science-of-hiit-cardio-by-chris-eric-martinez-the-dynamic-duo/
The biggest problem with that research is that the LISS is not the way you should be training cardio anyway. If you want to drop weight and train endurance then you need to have a good training programming in running, cycling, skiing or whatever you are interested in. Doing LISS the way they researchers do it in the HIIT vs LISS studies is like going in to the gym and picking up a couple light dumbbells and doing half-hearted movements then saying that weight training doesn't do anything for you.
BTW congrats to both you and the OP for you achievements and keep up the good work!3 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
Because of the afterburn effect of HIT compared to LISS. With those 60 minute treadmill sessions you may be burning fat for a few hours after your workout but with HIT and metabolic conditioning training you're going to burn fat for up to 38 hours post. The OP still has body fat to lose.. This is the most effeicient way, and it's fun
EPOC is highly overstated and only accounts for 6 to 15% of total calories burned. Also, if they are bulking that will already be taken that into consideration and adjusting accordingly. Meaning whether they do HIIT or LISS, the target surplus will be 250 or 10% over tdee.
HIIT is superior for metabolic conditioning/ fat loss when trying to gain muscle. Yes, he wants to bulk but he has specifically stated he has fat to lose. Also, HIIT is going to improve your actual FITNESS 10 folds over LISS, which IMO has no impact on your fitness levels. I personally want to train like a beast whether it be cardio or weights, and my HIIT sessions definitely meet that requirement ;-) BUT if your goal is to be aesthetic with no actual fitness then yeah go for LISS, each to their own! I personally have dropped 10% bf and gained 6kg lean mass in the past 8 months without doing a bulk/cut because I incorporate HIIT. Prior to this I was lifting and doing 4 sessions of LISS for YEARS. Personally, I think most lifters are scared of HIIT... https://www.biolayne.com/articles/training/guest-post-the-science-of-hiit-cardio-by-chris-eric-martinez-the-dynamic-duo/
The biggest problem with that research is that the LISS is not the way you should be training cardio anyway. If you want to drop weight and train endurance then you need to have a good training programming in running, cycling, skiing or whatever you are interested in. Doing LISS the way they researchers do it in the HIIT vs LISS studies is like going in to the gym and picking up a couple light dumbbells and doing half-hearted movements then saying that weight training doesn't do anything for you.
BTW congrats to both you and the OP for you achievements and keep up the good work!
Totally agree that you should be doing what you enjoy, it does drive me mad though when I hear people who aren't willing to put any more effort in than LISS but complain they plateau.. thanks :-) it's been slow and steady and I am happy with that!!1 -
GregStone2 wrote: »its eating the right carbs with fiber and protein and fat before and after the workout that maximizes the resultsof your workout and the timeing of your workout and the timing after the workout that helps boost protein synthesis and helps you recover faster and better that helps with your goals and I eat a high fiber diet
This is typical bro-science!
Caloric Surplus > Macronutrients > Meal timing2 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
Because of the afterburn effect of HIT compared to LISS. With those 60 minute treadmill sessions you may be burning fat for a few hours after your workout but with HIT and metabolic conditioning training you're going to burn fat for up to 38 hours post. The OP still has body fat to lose.. This is the most effeicient way, and it's fun
EPOC is highly overstated and only accounts for 6 to 15% of total calories burned. Also, if they are bulking that will already be taken that into consideration and adjusting accordingly. Meaning whether they do HIIT or LISS, the target surplus will be 250 or 10% over tdee.
HIIT is superior for metabolic conditioning/ fat loss when trying to gain muscle. Yes, he wants to bulk but he has specifically stated he has fat to lose. Also, HIIT is going to improve your actual FITNESS 10 folds over LISS, which IMO has no impact on your fitness levels. I personally want to train like a beast whether it be cardio or weights, and my HIIT sessions definitely meet that requirement ;-) BUT if your goal is to be aesthetic with no actual fitness then yeah go for LISS, each to their own! I personally have dropped 10% bf and gained 6kg lean mass in the past 8 months without doing a bulk/cut because I incorporate HIIT. Prior to this I was lifting and doing 4 sessions of LISS for YEARS. Personally, I think most lifters are scared of HIIT... https://www.biolayne.com/articles/training/guest-post-the-science-of-hiit-cardio-by-chris-eric-martinez-the-dynamic-duo/
The biggest problem with that research is that the LISS is not the way you should be training cardio anyway. If you want to drop weight and train endurance then you need to have a good training programming in running, cycling, skiing or whatever you are interested in. Doing LISS the way they researchers do it in the HIIT vs LISS studies is like going in to the gym and picking up a couple light dumbbells and doing half-hearted movements then saying that weight training doesn't do anything for you.
BTW congrats to both you and the OP for you achievements and keep up the good work!
Totally agree that you should be doing what you enjoy, it does drive me mad though when I hear people who aren't willing to put any more effort in than LISS but complain they plateau.. thanks :-) it's been slow and steady and I am happy with that!!
It has nothing to do with effort, but rather goals and enjoyment. I only do HIIT because I can't stand cardio, but if you are a cyclist or a long distance runner, HIIT is not going to be a priority. And adding HIIT may or may not be effective for someone based on their ability to recover, especially if you are already doing a very leg intensive program. Cardio some compliment your lifting, not take away from it. It's like the debate if you should do squat and DL on the same day or do 3 full body vs splits? It comes down to how your body responses to the stimuli.2 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
Because of the afterburn effect of HIT compared to LISS. With those 60 minute treadmill sessions you may be burning fat for a few hours after your workout but with HIT and metabolic conditioning training you're going to burn fat for up to 38 hours post. The OP still has body fat to lose.. This is the most effeicient way, and it's fun
EPOC is highly overstated and only accounts for 6 to 15% of total calories burned. Also, if they are bulking that will already be taken that into consideration and adjusting accordingly. Meaning whether they do HIIT or LISS, the target surplus will be 250 or 10% over tdee.
HIIT is superior for metabolic conditioning/ fat loss when trying to gain muscle. Yes, he wants to bulk but he has specifically stated he has fat to lose. Also, HIIT is going to improve your actual FITNESS 10 folds over LISS, which IMO has no impact on your fitness levels. I personally want to train like a beast whether it be cardio or weights, and my HIIT sessions definitely meet that requirement ;-) BUT if your goal is to be aesthetic with no actual fitness then yeah go for LISS, each to their own! I personally have dropped 10% bf and gained 6kg lean mass in the past 8 months without doing a bulk/cut because I incorporate HIIT. Prior to this I was lifting and doing 4 sessions of LISS for YEARS. Personally, I think most lifters are scared of HIIT... https://www.biolayne.com/articles/training/guest-post-the-science-of-hiit-cardio-by-chris-eric-martinez-the-dynamic-duo/
The biggest problem with that research is that the LISS is not the way you should be training cardio anyway. If you want to drop weight and train endurance then you need to have a good training programming in running, cycling, skiing or whatever you are interested in. Doing LISS the way they researchers do it in the HIIT vs LISS studies is like going in to the gym and picking up a couple light dumbbells and doing half-hearted movements then saying that weight training doesn't do anything for you.
BTW congrats to both you and the OP for you achievements and keep up the good work!
Totally agree that you should be doing what you enjoy, it does drive me mad though when I hear people who aren't willing to put any more effort in than LISS but complain they plateau.. thanks :-) it's been slow and steady and I am happy with that!!
It has nothing to do with effort, but rather goals and enjoyment. I only do HIIT because I can't stand cardio, but if you are a cyclist or a long distance runner, HIIT is not going to be a priority. And adding HIIT may or may not be effective for someone based on their ability to recover, especially if you are already doing a very leg intensive program. Cardio some compliment your lifting, not take away from it. It's like the debate if you should do squat and DL on the same day or do 3 full body vs splits? It comes down to how your body responses to the stimuli.
I didn't really come here to debate as you say, came to give my advice on dropping bf as that is what the OP asked for re his challenges... but there is always someone who wants to disagree and today that someone is you
0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
Because of the afterburn effect of HIT compared to LISS. With those 60 minute treadmill sessions you may be burning fat for a few hours after your workout but with HIT and metabolic conditioning training you're going to burn fat for up to 38 hours post. The OP still has body fat to lose.. This is the most effeicient way, and it's fun
EPOC is highly overstated and only accounts for 6 to 15% of total calories burned. Also, if they are bulking that will already be taken that into consideration and adjusting accordingly. Meaning whether they do HIIT or LISS, the target surplus will be 250 or 10% over tdee.
HIIT is superior for metabolic conditioning/ fat loss when trying to gain muscle. Yes, he wants to bulk but he has specifically stated he has fat to lose. Also, HIIT is going to improve your actual FITNESS 10 folds over LISS, which IMO has no impact on your fitness levels. I personally want to train like a beast whether it be cardio or weights, and my HIIT sessions definitely meet that requirement ;-) BUT if your goal is to be aesthetic with no actual fitness then yeah go for LISS, each to their own! I personally have dropped 10% bf and gained 6kg lean mass in the past 8 months without doing a bulk/cut because I incorporate HIIT. Prior to this I was lifting and doing 4 sessions of LISS for YEARS. Personally, I think most lifters are scared of HIIT... https://www.biolayne.com/articles/training/guest-post-the-science-of-hiit-cardio-by-chris-eric-martinez-the-dynamic-duo/
The biggest problem with that research is that the LISS is not the way you should be training cardio anyway. If you want to drop weight and train endurance then you need to have a good training programming in running, cycling, skiing or whatever you are interested in. Doing LISS the way they researchers do it in the HIIT vs LISS studies is like going in to the gym and picking up a couple light dumbbells and doing half-hearted movements then saying that weight training doesn't do anything for you.
BTW congrats to both you and the OP for you achievements and keep up the good work!
Totally agree that you should be doing what you enjoy, it does drive me mad though when I hear people who aren't willing to put any more effort in than LISS but complain they plateau.. thanks :-) it's been slow and steady and I am happy with that!!
It has nothing to do with effort, but rather goals and enjoyment. I only do HIIT because I can't stand cardio, but if you are a cyclist or a long distance runner, HIIT is not going to be a priority. And adding HIIT may or may not be effective for someone based on their ability to recover, especially if you are already doing a very leg intensive program. Cardio some compliment your lifting, not take away from it. It's like the debate if you should do squat and DL on the same day or do 3 full body vs splits? It comes down to how your body responses to the stimuli.
I didn't really come here to debate as you say, came to give my advice on dropping bf as that is what the OP asked for re his challenges... but there is always someone who wants to disagree and today that someone is you
I am not debating. I am letting you know there is more to the equation.1 -
Thanks everyone for the great discussion. I appreciate everyone's input as I think that everyone here has made some valid points. I really don't believe that there is one set path to reach your fitness goals as each person needs to find what works best for them. I can glean bits of wisdom from each person here.
I started walking on the treadmill to get myself used to doing some kind of cardio activity but that quickly morphed into the Elliptical and I have steadily increased my endurance and intensity. I have knee problems from an injury sustained while in the Air Force so I can no longer run like I used too but I found the elliptical to be a low impact and intense workout. When I started I was exhausted after only 5 min now my typical workout is 45-60 with a 10 min treadmill warm up and 5 min cool down.
I set a goal for myself to lose another 20-25lbs and be 160 by the first of the year... this would be on track with my average weight loss of 8lbs a month Hopefully that will be enough to get the cut body I am looking for like in my avatar.. Below is where I started and where I am at now.. as you can see I have made great gains but still have the annoying pudge around my stomach and on my chest..
2 -
Awesome job @Tsartele!
Keep checking in with updates.
If I were to leave a suggestion, reassess after you've shed the next 10lbs of fat. From the pictures and your avatar goal, it looks like you could be ready for a legit bulk at that point.
All the best.1 -
dreamsignals wrote: »Awesome job @Tsartele!
Keep checking in with updates.
If I were to leave a suggestion, reassess after you've shed the next 10lbs of fat. From the pictures and your avatar goal, it looks like you could be ready for a legit bulk at that point.
All the best.
You might be correct..I know that I am not far away from my bulking phase... I don't care about the scale number as much as I do about being ripped...and overall body composition. The 160 number was just a guess because I don't know what it's going to actually take to reach my goal.1 -
dreamsignals wrote: »Awesome job @Tsartele!
Keep checking in with updates.
If I were to leave a suggestion, reassess after you've shed the next 10lbs of fat. From the pictures and your avatar goal, it looks like you could be ready for a legit bulk at that point.
All the best.
You might be correct..I know that I am not far away from my bulking phase... I don't care about the scale number as much as I do about being ripped...and overall body composition. The 160 number was just a guess because I don't know what it's going to actually take to reach my goal.
Please don't take this in a negative way but I would get considerably leaner before you consider bulking. When you eat in a surplus you gain lean body mass AND fat, there is no way to avoid it. Gaining 5lbs and 5lbs of fat over 3-4 months will not leave you with the physique you desire and you'll have to cut again.
The best practise is reduce bodyfat to under 15% (as close to 10) as possible and then aim to gain 2-3lbs a month to ensure the least fat gains.0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »dreamsignals wrote: »Awesome job @Tsartele!
Keep checking in with updates.
If I were to leave a suggestion, reassess after you've shed the next 10lbs of fat. From the pictures and your avatar goal, it looks like you could be ready for a legit bulk at that point.
All the best.
You might be correct..I know that I am not far away from my bulking phase... I don't care about the scale number as much as I do about being ripped...and overall body composition. The 160 number was just a guess because I don't know what it's going to actually take to reach my goal.
Please don't take this in a negative way but I would get considerably leaner before you consider bulking. When you eat in a surplus you gain lean body mass AND fat, there is no way to avoid it. Gaining 5lbs and 5lbs of fat over 3-4 months will not leave you with the physique you desire and you'll have to cut again.
The best practise is reduce bodyfat to under 15% (as close to 10) as possible and then aim to gain 2-3lbs a month to ensure the least fat gains.
^^I agree.
There is a mental game you play when you bulk and cut. When bulking you need to accept (and be able to handle) the gain in fat. for this reason I recommend you're very happy with your %BF before a bulk - If you want 6 pack abs and there not present at the start of a bulk, they sure as hell ain't going to be visible after a bulk.
Also, I was skeptical of the bro-science, body partitioning concept which says that "the more fat you have at the start of a bulk, the more fat you will gain during that bulk" but I recently saw this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27604771
Which indicates that leaner individuals will gain more muscle on a bulk than overweight peers.
So, in your instance, I would (as @Hornsby recommends) hit maintenance (or as close to it as possible) for a couple of weeks as a break then return to cutting for a while to get to a %BF you're happy with before your cut.
0 -
StealthHealth wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »dreamsignals wrote: »Awesome job @Tsartele!
Keep checking in with updates.
If I were to leave a suggestion, reassess after you've shed the next 10lbs of fat. From the pictures and your avatar goal, it looks like you could be ready for a legit bulk at that point.
All the best.
You might be correct..I know that I am not far away from my bulking phase... I don't care about the scale number as much as I do about being ripped...and overall body composition. The 160 number was just a guess because I don't know what it's going to actually take to reach my goal.
Please don't take this in a negative way but I would get considerably leaner before you consider bulking. When you eat in a surplus you gain lean body mass AND fat, there is no way to avoid it. Gaining 5lbs and 5lbs of fat over 3-4 months will not leave you with the physique you desire and you'll have to cut again.
The best practise is reduce bodyfat to under 15% (as close to 10) as possible and then aim to gain 2-3lbs a month to ensure the least fat gains.
^^I agree.
There is a mental game you play when you bulk and cut. When bulking you need to accept (and be able to handle) the gain in fat. for this reason I recommend you're very happy with your %BF before a bulk - If you want 6 pack abs and there not present at the start of a bulk, they sure as hell ain't going to be visible after a bulk.
Also, I was skeptical of the bro-science, body partitioning concept which says that "the more fat you have at the start of a bulk, the more fat you will gain during that bulk" but I recently saw this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27604771
Which indicates that leaner individuals will gain more muscle on a bulk than overweight peers.
So, in your instance, I would (as @Hornsby recommends) hit maintenance (or as close to it as possible) for a couple of weeks as a break then return to cutting for a while to get to a %BF you're happy with before your cut.
The p-ratio was known for a while, Lyle McDonald never pushes broscience.
0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »dreamsignals wrote: »Awesome job @Tsartele!
Keep checking in with updates.
If I were to leave a suggestion, reassess after you've shed the next 10lbs of fat. From the pictures and your avatar goal, it looks like you could be ready for a legit bulk at that point.
All the best.
You might be correct..I know that I am not far away from my bulking phase... I don't care about the scale number as much as I do about being ripped...and overall body composition. The 160 number was just a guess because I don't know what it's going to actually take to reach my goal.
Please don't take this in a negative way but I would get considerably leaner before you consider bulking. When you eat in a surplus you gain lean body mass AND fat, there is no way to avoid it. Gaining 5lbs and 5lbs of fat over 3-4 months will not leave you with the physique you desire and you'll have to cut again.
The best practise is reduce bodyfat to under 15% (as close to 10) as possible and then aim to gain 2-3lbs a month to ensure the least fat gains.
^^I agree.
There is a mental game you play when you bulk and cut. When bulking you need to accept (and be able to handle) the gain in fat. for this reason I recommend you're very happy with your %BF before a bulk - If you want 6 pack abs and there not present at the start of a bulk, they sure as hell ain't going to be visible after a bulk.
Also, I was skeptical of the bro-science, body partitioning concept which says that "the more fat you have at the start of a bulk, the more fat you will gain during that bulk" but I recently saw this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27604771
Which indicates that leaner individuals will gain more muscle on a bulk than overweight peers.
So, in your instance, I would (as @Hornsby recommends) hit maintenance (or as close to it as possible) for a couple of weeks as a break then return to cutting for a while to get to a %BF you're happy with before your cut.
The p-ratio was known for a while, Lyle McDonald never pushes broscience.
I guess I called it bro science because, due to my exceptionally poor google scholar skills, I couldn't find any studies in it (I generally find that unless you know the correct terms to search on you can search and search but not find the type of studies you need) only people on this and other forums talking about fat/muscle partitioning as if it were a given.
The linked study was one which was mentioned in a blog I read least week.0 -
StealthHealth wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »dreamsignals wrote: »Awesome job @Tsartele!
Keep checking in with updates.
If I were to leave a suggestion, reassess after you've shed the next 10lbs of fat. From the pictures and your avatar goal, it looks like you could be ready for a legit bulk at that point.
All the best.
You might be correct..I know that I am not far away from my bulking phase... I don't care about the scale number as much as I do about being ripped...and overall body composition. The 160 number was just a guess because I don't know what it's going to actually take to reach my goal.
Please don't take this in a negative way but I would get considerably leaner before you consider bulking. When you eat in a surplus you gain lean body mass AND fat, there is no way to avoid it. Gaining 5lbs and 5lbs of fat over 3-4 months will not leave you with the physique you desire and you'll have to cut again.
The best practise is reduce bodyfat to under 15% (as close to 10) as possible and then aim to gain 2-3lbs a month to ensure the least fat gains.
^^I agree.
There is a mental game you play when you bulk and cut. When bulking you need to accept (and be able to handle) the gain in fat. for this reason I recommend you're very happy with your %BF before a bulk - If you want 6 pack abs and there not present at the start of a bulk, they sure as hell ain't going to be visible after a bulk.
Also, I was skeptical of the bro-science, body partitioning concept which says that "the more fat you have at the start of a bulk, the more fat you will gain during that bulk" but I recently saw this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27604771
Which indicates that leaner individuals will gain more muscle on a bulk than overweight peers.
So, in your instance, I would (as @Hornsby recommends) hit maintenance (or as close to it as possible) for a couple of weeks as a break then return to cutting for a while to get to a %BF you're happy with before your cut.
The p-ratio was known for a while, Lyle McDonald never pushes broscience.
I guess I called it bro science because, due to my exceptionally poor google scholar skills, I couldn't find any studies in it (I generally find that unless you know the correct terms to search on you can search and search but not find the type of studies you need) only people on this and other forums talking about fat/muscle partitioning as if it were a given.
The linked study was one which was mentioned in a blog I read least week.
I understand, I'm always skeptical of claims that aren't presented with the proper data. I had to do some research into it as well. I think p-ratio and calorie partitioning are vernacular terms.0 -
StealthHealth wrote: »
There is a mental game you play when you bulk and cut. When bulking you need to accept (and be able to handle) the gain in fat. for this reason I recommend you're very happy with your %BF before a bulk - If you want 6 pack abs and there not present at the start of a bulk, they sure as hell ain't going to be visible after a bulk.
@Wheelhouse15 and @StealthHealth bring very good points (not that you need my corroboration
).
My comment was trying to target another mental game, which is the waiting until you've reached the generally-recommended low levels of body fat before a bulk, which can be long and put a dent in your motivation, especially that last stretch of 10-15 BF%. I guess that's what I assumed @Tsartele was getting at with this thread.
There is certainly established knowledge on best and fastest ways to cut/bulk. But after many months of calorie deficit and significant fat loss, I consider it a morale boost to see some extra muscles popping through, even if not super cut and defined.
This is why, in my original comment, I suggested experimenting with upping you caloric intake, very protein-focused. You'll still be at a deficit, but getting close to recomposition levels, and start getting a feel of what the bulking phase will look like. Correct me if I'm wrong, but recomposition muscle gain is widely accepted as real, among beginners and advanced athletes alike, right?
I recommend this article, which is kind of a literature review on the topic: http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/gain-muscle-and-lose-fat-at-the-same-time/
0 -
dreamsignals wrote: »StealthHealth wrote: »
There is a mental game you play when you bulk and cut. When bulking you need to accept (and be able to handle) the gain in fat. for this reason I recommend you're very happy with your %BF before a bulk - If you want 6 pack abs and there not present at the start of a bulk, they sure as hell ain't going to be visible after a bulk.
@Wheelhouse15 and @StealthHealth bring very good points (not that you need my corroboration).
My comment was trying to target another mental game, which is the waiting until you've reached the generally-recommended low levels of body fat before a bulk, which can be long and put a dent in your motivation, especially that last stretch of 10-15 BF%. I guess that's what I assumed @Tsartele was getting at with this thread.
There is certainly established knowledge on best and fastest ways to cut/bulk. But after many months of calorie deficit and significant fat loss, I consider it a morale boost to see some extra muscles popping through, even if not super cut and defined.
This is why, in my original comment, I suggested experimenting with upping you caloric intake, very protein-focused. You'll still be at a deficit, but getting close to recomposition levels, and start getting a feel of what the bulking phase will look like. Correct me if I'm wrong, but recomposition muscle gain is widely accepted as real, among beginners and advanced athletes alike, right?
I recommend this article, which is kind of a literature review on the topic: http://bayesianbodybuilding.com/gain-muscle-and-lose-fat-at-the-same-time/
It depends by what you mean by recomp. Recomp generally means sticking to a maintenance diet while training. Essentially you will be hitting small surpluses and small deficits continually so you will sometimes be gaining a bit of muscle and sometimes losing a bit of fat. As for being in a deficit and gaining muscle while losing fat, that's still debatable and if at all possible it's likely only novice lifters who would benefit much from it since they have a lot of advantages in quick muscle gain.
I would love to see an actual study with metabolic ward and/or double labeled water along with DEXA and muscle biopsy that shows you can gain muscle while losing fat. That would really show what going on but to my knowledge such an in-depth study has not been done so we are left speculating as to what is really going on. Biochemically we know that going into a deficit will trigger processes that make gaining muscle much more difficult if not impossible (and the larger the deficit the more these process will block muscle synthesis) but how it works out in practice is still not settled.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
It depends by what you mean by recomp. Recomp generally means sticking to a maintenance diet while training.
That is what I meant, which I think is the widely accepted definition. Thanks for writing it out when I failed to do it. I'm also working under the assumption that OP would indeed make "newbie gains" by reducing his caloric deficit to near maintenance (he's at 1000cal daily deficit right now).
I do share some of you skepticism, as most of the evidence is indeed anecdotal. I confess, though, I can't help but feel compelled by the studies that tracked groups of pro athletes and seen recomp work for them (granted, small groups, no control and treatment, very short timeframes, focused on weight and BF measuring, etc).
With all that good knowledge in hand to guide you toward established best practices, I'm all for experimenting and seeing how your own body responds.1 -
dreamsignals wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
It depends by what you mean by recomp. Recomp generally means sticking to a maintenance diet while training.
That is what I meant, which I think is the widely accepted definition. Thanks for writing it out when I failed to do it. I'm also working under the assumption that OP would indeed make "newbie gains" by reducing his caloric deficit to near maintenance (he's at 1000cal daily deficit right now).
I do share some of you skepticism, as most of the evidence is indeed anecdotal. I confess, though, I can't help but feel compelled by the studies that tracked groups of pro athletes and seen recomp work for them (granted, small groups, no control and treatment, very short timeframes, focused on weight and BF measuring, etc).
With all that good knowledge in hand to guide you toward established best practices, I'm all for experimenting and seeing how your own body responds.
Good luck on your recomp!
I wouldn't really take the research on pro athletes with a grain of salt because of the likelihood of drug use but recomp certainly does work for many although slowly.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.7K 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
- 394 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
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 944 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions