Is it time for recomp?

2»

Replies

  • everher
    everher Posts: 909 Member
    edited January 2017
    OP, I will try to give advice on the one thing I feel I can.

    Have you ever been this small as an adult before? I ask because it seems it's your lower body you don't like, but even if you lose more weight much of it may not come from there depending on your 'shape' or overall build.

    I'm trying to explain this is clearly as I can, but not sure I am. For example, I'm an hourglass shape. No matter how much weight I lose my measurements stay the same in proportion. I would like to be more of a banana (can't stand my thighs and hips) but it's just not going to happen. Not the way my body is shaped or holds weight or whatever you want to call it.
  • trudie_b
    trudie_b Posts: 230 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    a) Flip the question around - do you still need to be at a deficit? (No, you're looking great!)

    b) You look more like the 20 - 22% picture on Builtlean. http://www.builtlean.com/2012/09/24/body-fat-percentage-men-women/
    You are far slimmer than the 25% picture on there.

    Really? Thanks.

  • trudie_b
    trudie_b Posts: 230 Member
    everher wrote: »
    Have you ever been this small as an adult before? I ask because it seems it's your lower body you don't like, but even if you lose more weight much of it may not come from there depending on your 'shape' or overall build.

    No, I haven't. I was a very skinny teenager, but my weight battles started in my 20s. This is the leanest I've been. I mean, I know I'm always going to be bottom heavy - even as a super skinny teen (people were always asking if I was anorexic), my measurements were 32/24/37. But I can still see a good bit of visible fat over my hips & thighs, and I'd really like that to go. It would be nice to be confident enough to wear shorts, y'know? I haven't been able to for my whole adult life.

  • GottaBurnEmAll
    GottaBurnEmAll Posts: 7,722 Member
    I think you look fantastic and was going to guess 20-22% too. You're most definitely NOT 25%.
  • trudie_b
    trudie_b Posts: 230 Member
    Thank you!
  • kkress92
    kkress92 Posts: 118 Member
    GottaBurnEmAll wrote: »
    I think you look fantastic and was going to guess 20-22% too. You're most definitely NOT 25%.

    I second this! You look amazing! If you *can't* wear shorts, no one can. Go buy yourself the most awesome pair of shorts and wear them with pride, girl!
  • cnbbnc
    cnbbnc Posts: 1,267 Member
    You look amazing! Im smaller than you as far as stats (im a shorty...), but I also carry all my weight on the bottom. I chose to push my weight pretty low to get as much fat off as I could stand to, but I did get to where I looked skeletal on top and overall I felt like total crap. My opinion...it just ain't worth it to make the thighs a little smaller. I put a few pounds back on now and feel a million times better.

    Good luck with the recomp. You're ready! :wink:

  • trudie_b
    trudie_b Posts: 230 Member
    Thanks everyone! It's a bit scary to switch to maintenance, but I'll give it a try. If it helps my lifting, then it's worth it, I need to focus on that goal.
  • trigden1991
    trigden1991 Posts: 4,658 Member
    trudie_b wrote: »
    Thanks everyone! It's a bit scary to switch to maintenance, but I'll give it a try. If it helps my lifting, then it's worth it, I need to focus on that goal.

    There is no rush getting to maintenance. Work out roughly what calories you think it is and take a few weeks introducing more calories each week. The scale may jump up due to water and glycogen but its not fat. Use pictures as well as the scale for optimal monitoring.
  • trudie_b
    trudie_b Posts: 230 Member
    That's a good idea, I will, thanks. That should help me adjust mentally too.
  • AnvilHead
    AnvilHead Posts: 18,343 Member
    trudie_b wrote: »
    Interesting!!! I think the one size fits all model is not generally accurate in fields that concerns the human body. It's tempting in its simplicity, but we are all so different, and our bodies respond in their own unique ways to how we feed and train them.

    I read/follow several very knowledgeable trainers (Alan Aragon, Eric Helms, Lyle McDonald, James Krieger, Brad Schoenfeld, Patrick Umphrey, etc.) and one commonality I notice between them is that they rarely speak in absolute "one size fits all" terms regarding training/nutrition.

    On the flip side of the coin, there are also many who take the "speshul snowflake" thing too far with the "we're all different!" claims - because when it comes right down to it, we're all remarkably similar in many regards. There is most certainly a basic framework which we all fall into, with some wiggle room inside that framework for individual variations. There's no denying that there are genetic outliers on both ends of the bell curve, but the true outliers are a lot less common than many people think.
  • trudie_b
    trudie_b Posts: 230 Member
    I'd agree with that!
This discussion has been closed.

Categories