Bulking goals
se015
Posts: 583 Member
Hey everyone, I'm 5'7", currently weighing around 152-155 lbs with a bf % of 11-13 %. My goal for now is to be 160-163 lbs at 10% bf or lower. Right now I decided to bulk. My question to you all is for those who know a lot about doing this, is to what weight should I aim to bulk at. Ive been told 190 or even 200?? But idk. I've also heard "bulk until you feel you're too fat" I mean that's a good suggestion but I'm looking more for numbers here. Once I figure out much to bulk to, I plan on doing it slowly even if it takes me 6 months or a year to slowly gain that weight to avoid gaining too much fat, once I get to that point, I plan on cutting back down. Thoughts?
Thanks!
Thanks!
0
Replies
-
I believe many of the fitness pros out there suggest that men stop bulking around 16% body fat. After that insulin sensitivity drops and getting higher can have a negative impact on testosterone.3
-
Two great reads on bulking from a trainer who knows his stuff:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/general-philosophies-of-muscle-mass-gain.html/
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/muscle-gain-mistakes.html/0 -
Two great reads on bulking from a trainer who knows his stuff:
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/general-philosophies-of-muscle-mass-gain.html/
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/muscle-gain-mistakes.html/
That was really helpful, thank you!0 -
I believe many of the fitness pros out there suggest that men stop bulking around 16% body fat. After that insulin sensitivity drops and getting higher can have a negative impact on testosterone.
15% is the figure normally stated.
OP at 152lbs @ 13% you have 132lbs of lean body mass.
If you want to be 160lbs @ 10% you will need to get to 144lbs of lean body mass.
As a natural this would take anywhere from 2-3 years assuming that you are not a beginner. I would set your surplus at 250-300 per day and look to gain 0.5-0.75lbs per week. Then when you reach 15% bodyfat do a mini cut to get back down to 12%ish before recommencing your bulk.1 -
I find trying to work out my body fat a bit of a pain. There's plenty of comparison images but some days I just look leaner and when you're trying to figure the difference between 12% and 15% it's not easy.
I'm going to continue lean bulking during the Winter.
I have set an upper limit for my waist of 31.5" which will mark the start of my cut, taking my waist down to 30.5" before starting a lean bulk again.
Stats
Male, 5'6"
Current weight. 138lb, waist 31"
Goal weight. 140lb, waist 30"
1 -
I find trying to work out my body fat a bit of a pain. There's plenty of comparison images but some days I just look leaner and when you're trying to figure the difference between 12% and 15% it's not easy.
I'm going to continue lean bulking during the Winter.
I have set an upper limit for my waist of 31.5" which will mark the start of my cut, taking my waist down to 30.5" before starting a lean bulk again.
Stats
Male, 5'6"
Current weight. 138lb, waist 31"
Goal weight. 140lb, waist 30"
You can't use those images to measure bodyfat as everyone has different levels of muscularity and bodyfat distribution. The only 2 accurate ways to get a measure are calipers or DEXA scans.0 -
Really depends what you are looking for. If you want to stay more lean, than you can go through a few bulk/cut cycles or even recomp, or if you dont mind, bulk until you become uncomfortable with yourself. I personally don't get caught up in the specific weight (with either weight loss or bulk) as it can force you to make decisions not in your best interest.1
-
Not sure if you realize it but your ranges actually put you at gaining between 7 to 14 lbs of muscle if you take your lowest gain stats (155@11% to 160@10% vs 152@13% to 163@10%), which is a huge difference. If we take a 10lb gain as being reasonable, and assume you are not going to gain the max anymore due to age and training experience, I would estimate you could gain about 1/4 to 1/3 of a pound per week on a solid bulk of 1lb per week gain. If we go for the optimistic 1/3 then it would take you 3 weeks to gain a pound of muscle but about will gain 2 pounds of fat and you will need 30 weeks to gain 10lbs. This will mean you will be up 30lbs so 185lbs @ 20% BF but when you start to cut you'll lose some muscle as well.
So that's over 6 months and you still won't get to where you really want to be, and that's probably if everything is hitting on all cylinders. I would say you will have to do two or three bulk/cut cycles to get to where you want and probably about a year.0 -
Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-1850
-
Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
It doesn't have faster muscle growth. It's definitely faster at fat growth though.2 -
Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!2 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
+1 dirty bulk is only really recommended for those who have a good drug cycle for both anabolic and cutting phases. As mentioned above a few times, when you go above a certain BF% you start gaining more fat and less muscle and that trend continues as you go up.2 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
+1 dirty bulk is only really recommended for those who have a good drug cycle for both anabolic and cutting phases. As mentioned above a few times, when you go above a certain BF% you start gaining more fat and less muscle and that trend continues as you go up.
Even with "supplements" I don't think it is recommended. However that is for different reasons!0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
+1 dirty bulk is only really recommended for those who have a good drug cycle for both anabolic and cutting phases. As mentioned above a few times, when you go above a certain BF% you start gaining more fat and less muscle and that trend continues as you go up.
Even with "supplements" I don't think it is recommended. However that is for different reasons!
LOL no I wouldn't take the fat cutters, they are far worse than the anabolic agents!0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Not sure if you realize it but your ranges actually put you at gaining between 7 to 14 lbs of muscle if you take your lowest gain stats (155@11% to 160@10% vs 152@13% to 163@10%), which is a huge difference. If we take a 10lb gain as being reasonable, and assume you are not going to gain the max anymore due to age and training experience, I would estimate you could gain about 1/4 to 1/3 of a pound per week on a solid bulk of 1lb per week gain. If we go for the optimistic 1/3 then it would take you 3 weeks to gain a pound of muscle but about will gain 2 pounds of fat and you will need 30 weeks to gain 10lbs. This will mean you will be up 30lbs so 185lbs @ 20% BF but when you start to cut you'll lose some muscle as well.
So that's over 6 months and you still won't get to where you really want to be, and that's probably if everything is hitting on all cylinders. I would say you will have to do two or three bulk/cut cycles to get to where you want and probably about a year.
OKay so you seemed very informative, however I'm a little confused on reading your post. So all in all you're saying I need to do 2-3 week bulk and cutting cycles? How does that even work, that just seems to short of amount of time to see any changes in either phase, no?1 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Not sure if you realize it but your ranges actually put you at gaining between 7 to 14 lbs of muscle if you take your lowest gain stats (155@11% to 160@10% vs 152@13% to 163@10%), which is a huge difference. If we take a 10lb gain as being reasonable, and assume you are not going to gain the max anymore due to age and training experience, I would estimate you could gain about 1/4 to 1/3 of a pound per week on a solid bulk of 1lb per week gain. If we go for the optimistic 1/3 then it would take you 3 weeks to gain a pound of muscle but about will gain 2 pounds of fat and you will need 30 weeks to gain 10lbs. This will mean you will be up 30lbs so 185lbs @ 20% BF but when you start to cut you'll lose some muscle as well.
So that's over 6 months and you still won't get to where you really want to be, and that's probably if everything is hitting on all cylinders. I would say you will have to do two or three bulk/cut cycles to get to where you want and probably about a year.
OKay so you seemed very informative, however I'm a little confused on reading your post. So all in all you're saying I need to do 2-3 week bulk and cutting cycles? How does that even work, that just seems to short of amount of time to see any changes in either phase, no?
You have completely misinterpreted his point. Just eat more and keep lifting until you're too fat, then diet.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Not sure if you realize it but your ranges actually put you at gaining between 7 to 14 lbs of muscle if you take your lowest gain stats (155@11% to 160@10% vs 152@13% to 163@10%), which is a huge difference. If we take a 10lb gain as being reasonable, and assume you are not going to gain the max anymore due to age and training experience, I would estimate you could gain about 1/4 to 1/3 of a pound per week on a solid bulk of 1lb per week gain. If we go for the optimistic 1/3 then it would take you 3 weeks to gain a pound of muscle but about will gain 2 pounds of fat and you will need 30 weeks to gain 10lbs. This will mean you will be up 30lbs so 185lbs @ 20% BF but when you start to cut you'll lose some muscle as well.
So that's over 6 months and you still won't get to where you really want to be, and that's probably if everything is hitting on all cylinders. I would say you will have to do two or three bulk/cut cycles to get to where you want and probably about a year.
OKay so you seemed very informative, however I'm a little confused on reading your post. So all in all you're saying I need to do 2-3 week bulk and cutting cycles? How does that even work, that just seems to short of amount of time to see any changes in either phase, no?
I think he is suggestion that you should do a few cycles to gain the amount of mass that you want. Although, the amount of muscle gained per week is a bit questionable. If this is your first time bulk, then I don't see it being unreasonable to gain 1/2lb per week, considering adequate nutrition and progressive training.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Not sure if you realize it but your ranges actually put you at gaining between 7 to 14 lbs of muscle if you take your lowest gain stats (155@11% to 160@10% vs 152@13% to 163@10%), which is a huge difference. If we take a 10lb gain as being reasonable, and assume you are not going to gain the max anymore due to age and training experience, I would estimate you could gain about 1/4 to 1/3 of a pound per week on a solid bulk of 1lb per week gain. If we go for the optimistic 1/3 then it would take you 3 weeks to gain a pound of muscle but about will gain 2 pounds of fat and you will need 30 weeks to gain 10lbs. This will mean you will be up 30lbs so 185lbs @ 20% BF but when you start to cut you'll lose some muscle as well.
So that's over 6 months and you still won't get to where you really want to be, and that's probably if everything is hitting on all cylinders. I would say you will have to do two or three bulk/cut cycles to get to where you want and probably about a year.
OKay so you seemed very informative, however I'm a little confused on reading your post. So all in all you're saying I need to do 2-3 week bulk and cutting cycles? How does that even work, that just seems to short of amount of time to see any changes in either phase, no?
I think he is suggestion that you should do a few cycles to gain the amount of mass that you want. Although, the amount of muscle gained per week is a bit questionable. If this is your first time bulk, then I don't see it being unreasonable to gain 1/2lb per week, considering adequate nutrition and progressive training.
Yes, I'm suggesting about a year and a half to two years to get where he really wants. The 1/2 pound per week isn't likely to happen for him. It has little to do with bulking and more to do with lifting experience and prior muscle gains. The OP is obviously not a novice lifter so he has probably already gained over half of the muscle he will be able to already thus the 1/2lb per week is not going to happen. Also he is in his 30's, although barely, and this puts him beyond the prime gaining age range already; that ends around 26.1 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »Not sure if you realize it but your ranges actually put you at gaining between 7 to 14 lbs of muscle if you take your lowest gain stats (155@11% to 160@10% vs 152@13% to 163@10%), which is a huge difference. If we take a 10lb gain as being reasonable, and assume you are not going to gain the max anymore due to age and training experience, I would estimate you could gain about 1/4 to 1/3 of a pound per week on a solid bulk of 1lb per week gain. If we go for the optimistic 1/3 then it would take you 3 weeks to gain a pound of muscle but about will gain 2 pounds of fat and you will need 30 weeks to gain 10lbs. This will mean you will be up 30lbs so 185lbs @ 20% BF but when you start to cut you'll lose some muscle as well.
So that's over 6 months and you still won't get to where you really want to be, and that's probably if everything is hitting on all cylinders. I would say you will have to do two or three bulk/cut cycles to get to where you want and probably about a year.
OKay so you seemed very informative, however I'm a little confused on reading your post. So all in all you're saying I need to do 2-3 week bulk and cutting cycles? How does that even work, that just seems to short of amount of time to see any changes in either phase, no?
You have completely misinterpreted his point. Just eat more and keep lifting until you're too fat, then diet.
Yes, don't over complicate things lol. Although the calculations show he will need to bulk/cut two or three times it's not something you need to get too involved in. Just eat, lift, cut, repeat till you are where you want to be.0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.trigden1991 wrote: »[
Just eat more and keep lifting until you're too fat, then diet.
OP this ^^^
0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
No, I'm not referring to that.
I eat all types of food during cut or bulk.
I ate between 5-10 k daily in calories this last dirty bulk by guessing?!?
Did not pay attention to my food calories or calories burned. Hence dirty bulk.
Clean bulk is staying at a small surplus while dirty bulk is a no limit surplus regardless of types of food in either styles.. My definition is true I would hazard.
Majority of people gain alot of fat during a dirty bulk, but not everyone depending on how active they are, which is my point.
0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
As he replied above, he understands the concept of clean and dirty bulking very well. Dirty doesn't necessarily mean a lot of fat but does mean more than you would do in a smaller surplus. I really don't like the terms dirty and clean because they are really not good descriptors of the reality. You are either doing a lean bulk, minimizing fat gains, or a bulk where you gain more fat. I'm not sure what you would call the more fat gaining bulk in this case but, of course, there are a lot of ranges you can gain in fat to muscle ratios during a bulk so maybe a high and low fat bulk?
Also, the older and more experienced you are in lifting the more you will tend to a higher fat ratio in your bulks anyway.
0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
As he replied above, he understands the concept of clean and dirty bulking very well. Dirty doesn't necessarily mean a lot of fat but does mean more than you would do in a smaller surplus. I really don't like the terms dirty and clean because they are really not good descriptors of the reality. You are either doing a lean bulk, minimizing fat gains, or a bulk where you gain more fat. I'm not sure what you would call the more fat gaining bulk in this case but, of course, there are a lot of ranges you can gain in fat to muscle ratios during a bulk so maybe a high and low fat bulk?
Also, the older and more experienced you are in lifting the more you will tend to a higher fat ratio in your bulks anyway.
My interpretation of "dirt bulk" is obviously slightly different. As you correctly stated though, there is no quantifiable measure of how clean/dirty a bulk is.
I would add though, consuming 5-10k calories daily does not sound correct unless you are 300+ lbs. For reference I am 6'3" and 240lbs @ 16% and maintain around 3000cals.0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
As he replied above, he understands the concept of clean and dirty bulking very well. Dirty doesn't necessarily mean a lot of fat but does mean more than you would do in a smaller surplus. I really don't like the terms dirty and clean because they are really not good descriptors of the reality. You are either doing a lean bulk, minimizing fat gains, or a bulk where you gain more fat. I'm not sure what you would call the more fat gaining bulk in this case but, of course, there are a lot of ranges you can gain in fat to muscle ratios during a bulk so maybe a high and low fat bulk?
Also, the older and more experienced you are in lifting the more you will tend to a higher fat ratio in your bulks anyway.
My interpretation of "dirt bulk" is obviously slightly different. As you correctly stated though, there is no quantifiable measure of how clean/dirty a bulk is.
I would add though, consuming 5-10k calories daily does not sound correct unless you are 300+ lbs. For reference I am 6'3" and 240lbs @ 16% and maintain around 3000cals.
For most cases you would be right but Lanny works heavy construction so he does have far higher requirements than most.0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
As he replied above, he understands the concept of clean and dirty bulking very well. Dirty doesn't necessarily mean a lot of fat but does mean more than you would do in a smaller surplus. I really don't like the terms dirty and clean because they are really not good descriptors of the reality. You are either doing a lean bulk, minimizing fat gains, or a bulk where you gain more fat. I'm not sure what you would call the more fat gaining bulk in this case but, of course, there are a lot of ranges you can gain in fat to muscle ratios during a bulk so maybe a high and low fat bulk?
Also, the older and more experienced you are in lifting the more you will tend to a higher fat ratio in your bulks anyway.
My interpretation of "dirt bulk" is obviously slightly different. As you correctly stated though, there is no quantifiable measure of how clean/dirty a bulk is.
I would add though, consuming 5-10k calories daily does not sound correct unless you are 300+ lbs. For reference I am 6'3" and 240lbs @ 16% and maintain around 3000cals.
For most cases you would be right but Lanny works heavy construction so he does have far higher requirements than most.
Interesting. Still sounds a bit off to me.0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
As he replied above, he understands the concept of clean and dirty bulking very well. Dirty doesn't necessarily mean a lot of fat but does mean more than you would do in a smaller surplus. I really don't like the terms dirty and clean because they are really not good descriptors of the reality. You are either doing a lean bulk, minimizing fat gains, or a bulk where you gain more fat. I'm not sure what you would call the more fat gaining bulk in this case but, of course, there are a lot of ranges you can gain in fat to muscle ratios during a bulk so maybe a high and low fat bulk?
Also, the older and more experienced you are in lifting the more you will tend to a higher fat ratio in your bulks anyway.
My interpretation of "dirt bulk" is obviously slightly different. As you correctly stated though, there is no quantifiable measure of how clean/dirty a bulk is.
I would add though, consuming 5-10k calories daily does not sound correct unless you are 300+ lbs. For reference I am 6'3" and 240lbs @ 16% and maintain around 3000cals.
For most cases you would be right but Lanny works heavy construction so he does have far higher requirements than most.
Interesting. Still sounds a bit off to me.
It depends, I can maintain around 3200 at only 160lbs when I'm at my most active and I know people that maintain in the 4K to 5K range easily due to activity and size. When you are on your feet for 10+ hours a day you can really pound out the NEAT calories! http://www.lhsfna.org/index.cfm/lifelines/march-2005/burning-calories-on-the-job/
As an aside, when I was in training in the military I could easily consume 6K a day and lose around a pound a day or 3 pounds when water loss was added on top.3 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
As he replied above, he understands the concept of clean and dirty bulking very well. Dirty doesn't necessarily mean a lot of fat but does mean more than you would do in a smaller surplus. I really don't like the terms dirty and clean because they are really not good descriptors of the reality. You are either doing a lean bulk, minimizing fat gains, or a bulk where you gain more fat. I'm not sure what you would call the more fat gaining bulk in this case but, of course, there are a lot of ranges you can gain in fat to muscle ratios during a bulk so maybe a high and low fat bulk?
Also, the older and more experienced you are in lifting the more you will tend to a higher fat ratio in your bulks anyway.
My interpretation of "dirt bulk" is obviously slightly different. As you correctly stated though, there is no quantifiable measure of how clean/dirty a bulk is.
I would add though, consuming 5-10k calories daily does not sound correct unless you are 300+ lbs. For reference I am 6'3" and 240lbs @ 16% and maintain around 3000cals.
I am 6'3" 212lbs 12%bf at 47 years old and maintain in 4200-4500 range. I'm no where close to 300lbs
.
I'm retired, but like I said I'm extremely active which burns a lot of calories. Not to beat a dead horse, but this is why I mentioned as did David, not all dirty bulks mean extreme fat that takes forever to lose.
Example I catch double headers in the summertime for baseball. That activity for seven hours alone burns crazy numbers.0 -
trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
As he replied above, he understands the concept of clean and dirty bulking very well. Dirty doesn't necessarily mean a lot of fat but does mean more than you would do in a smaller surplus. I really don't like the terms dirty and clean because they are really not good descriptors of the reality. You are either doing a lean bulk, minimizing fat gains, or a bulk where you gain more fat. I'm not sure what you would call the more fat gaining bulk in this case but, of course, there are a lot of ranges you can gain in fat to muscle ratios during a bulk so maybe a high and low fat bulk?
Also, the older and more experienced you are in lifting the more you will tend to a higher fat ratio in your bulks anyway.
My interpretation of "dirt bulk" is obviously slightly different. As you correctly stated though, there is no quantifiable measure of how clean/dirty a bulk is.
I would add though, consuming 5-10k calories daily does not sound correct unless you are 300+ lbs. For reference I am 6'3" and 240lbs @ 16% and maintain around 3000cals.
I am 6'3" 212lbs 12%bf at 47 years old and maintain in 4200-4500 range. I'm no where close to 300lbs.
I'm retired, but like I said I'm extremely active which burns a lot of calories. Not to beat a dead horse, but this is why I mentioned as did David, not all dirty bulks mean extreme fat that takes forever to lose.
Example I catch double headers in the summertime for baseball. That activity for seven hours alone burns crazy numbers.
When did you retire? I hope it was because you wanted to and not medical reasons. Keep up the excellent work!0 -
Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Wheelhouse15 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »trigden1991 wrote: »Your 2 inches shorter than me but my starting weight was only 148 now I'm 169lbs. I'm not sure what my bf% is tbh I just posted a progress pic though. I'm dirty bulking bc it's faster and more convienent. I probably won't stop for a few more months trying to reach 185. So maybe you should shoot for 175-185
Enjoy your long drawn out diet to get lean. This is not the way to do it!
I know what you mean by stating this but its not entirely true.
I do dirty bulks mostly. I don't gain a ridiculous amount of fat because I'm a extremely active person. It might not be ideal for most, but it's relative to the individual and how many calories a person burns during the bulk and of course recovery for gaining muscle.
Your concept of a dirty bulk is wrong. As much as I hate the concept of dirty/clean bulk, a dirty bulk generally means you gained a lot of fat.
Or are you referring to your diet during your bulk incorporating "dirty" food?
As he replied above, he understands the concept of clean and dirty bulking very well. Dirty doesn't necessarily mean a lot of fat but does mean more than you would do in a smaller surplus. I really don't like the terms dirty and clean because they are really not good descriptors of the reality. You are either doing a lean bulk, minimizing fat gains, or a bulk where you gain more fat. I'm not sure what you would call the more fat gaining bulk in this case but, of course, there are a lot of ranges you can gain in fat to muscle ratios during a bulk so maybe a high and low fat bulk?
Also, the older and more experienced you are in lifting the more you will tend to a higher fat ratio in your bulks anyway.
My interpretation of "dirt bulk" is obviously slightly different. As you correctly stated though, there is no quantifiable measure of how clean/dirty a bulk is.
I would add though, consuming 5-10k calories daily does not sound correct unless you are 300+ lbs. For reference I am 6'3" and 240lbs @ 16% and maintain around 3000cals.
For most cases you would be right but Lanny works heavy construction so he does have far higher requirements than most.
Interesting. Still sounds a bit off to me.
It depends, I can maintain around 3200 at only 160lbs when I'm at my most active and I know people that maintain in the 4K to 5K range easily due to activity and size. When you are on your feet for 10+ hours a day you can really pound out the NEAT calories! http://www.lhsfna.org/index.cfm/lifelines/march-2005/burning-calories-on-the-job/
As an aside, when I was in training in the military I could easily consume 6K a day and lose around a pound a day or 3 pounds when water loss was added on top.
Hell, i have a desk job at 175 lbs and maintain at 3k and that is only with 5 to 6 hours of exercise a week.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions