Revealing Abs

dpr73

sgt1372 wrote: »

dpr73 wrote: »

How many calories does one typically do to recomp? I have been keeping at maintenance for 4 years pretty much now but have not revealed them yet. This is why I am considering the surplus.

Recomp is generally done at or just below your TDEE. This will vary for everyone. The TDEE I used to start my recomp effort was 1800 but this increased over time to 2100, where it stands now.

I have no idea why I my TDEE increased while still maintaining my weight at/or about 158, which is my current weight +/-3#. I "think" it's due to the increased muscle mass and the thermogenic nature of my high protein and high carb (but mainly low GI) diet but have no proof of that. It's simply a fact based on the data that I've recorded.

dpr73 wrote: »

Also with a waist size at 27-28 I am not sure where the fat is hiding if I am somehow above 15% BF, I honestly don't think I have fat to take off of me (I also have very skinny legs, not pictured). My opinion is that my abs are underdeveloped so they don't pop through the skin, which may require a bulk/cut type deal, but I feel I am currently in a holding pattern where my abs cannot get any bigger and push up into the abdominal wall more until I put weight on to grow them. But I am obviously no expert at this.

If you have been working on your abs doing isolation or compound exercises or weight lifting weekly, as you said you have been doing, there's no reason to believe that your abs are not sufficiently developed already to show if your BF level is low enough and the fat layer above them is thin enough to reveal them.

In fact, you've already said they are visible when you tighten your belly skin over them. If that's the case, I just have to repeat that the problem is the fat layer above your abs, not loose skin. You may just be skinny fat.

At 5'7 & 138, your BMI is 21.6 which is at the low end of the normal range. You would not be considered underweight until you dropped below 119 w/a BMI below 18.6. By comparison, at 5'8" & 158, my BMI is 24.0, which is at the extreme high end of the normal range and only 1 point away from being considered overweight.

The difference between us is certainly due to my higher than normal LBM to BF ratio (91/9) and the fact that BMI is admittedly not a good measure of health for body builders or senior citizens (I qualify as both) because of the difference in their LBM/BF ratios from the mathematical model upon which BMI calculations are based; bodybuilders have lower BF than expected and seniors higher BF than expected.

Given your relatively low BMI and weight for your size, you certainly could do well to bulk up BUT you said that you want to be able to see your abs -- presumably sooner rather than later.

If this is so, then recomp at your current weight would be the way to go. This will result in decreasing your BF level while at the same time increasing your LBM, while maintaining the same weight. So, just assuming that you are at 15% BF now, your LBM is 117# and your BF is 21#. If you can recomp 8# of LBM/BF over the next 6-8 months (which is a reasonable goal because I was able to do it and I have no special expertise in this area either), your BF% would rise to 125# or 90% and your BF would drop to 13# or less than 10% and your abs should be clearly visible then, unless you actually had more than 15% BF to begin with.

If bulking up is more important to you, then do that instead. You just have to realize that if you go on a surplus diet to bulk up, you will also be gaining fat (as well as LBM and muscle if you exercise properly) and that your abs will continue to be hidden while you are doing this and will not become visible later until you cut and drop your BF sufficiently to reveal them.

However, before you do anything else, I strongly suggest that you get a DXA scan and/or hydrostatic test done in order to establish a precise baseline measurement for your LBM and BF level. You may be surprised with the results.

If you can only find a BodPod, use it but be aware that it is the less accurate than DXA or hydro and tends to under report the amount of fat, which would just be more confusing for you. DXA tends to run higher in terms of BF than hydro but it also provides more detailed info like the amount of BF in VAT (visceral adipose tissue) which sits in the organs right behind your belly and is a good indication of how much fat you hold in that area.

FYI, my VAT dropped from 41.5 cu in/1.41# at 20% BF down to 12.2 cu in/0.42# at 13% as measured by DXA over the past year, which indicates my very low level of abdominal fat. However, my hydro results (which do not measure VAT) over the same period dropped from 16.9% to 8.7% BF, which was consistently 3-5% less than the overall BF level measured by DXA. That's why I do them both.

If you cannot find or afford such tests, you can try calipers but you need to find someone to take your BF measurements who is experienced and qualified to use them. Not everyone is qualified to use them accurately and it's really not possible to do that yourself. Don't even bother with bio-electrical devices.

Calling around to gyms and/or trainers in your area should point you towards someone qualified to do a caliper measurement on you BUT the $ you pay that person may be the same or even more than just paying for a DXA scan or hydrostatic test.

Good luck!

Thanks for the feedback. I have to disagree that I am skinny fat because of my own comparison to pictures online of BF% and because of the very nutrient dense diet and exercise regiment I follow day to day. I do think I need to increase muscle mass but I need to get over the fear of getting "fat" again. I think I am at a good enough place this time to succeed in that regard

PPumpItUp

You are not skinny fat, you look to have a pretty low body fat %

Causalien

Hmmm. Well, my own abs didn't show up until I started training it every day. It was always there..., but it wasn't defined. I think that's what you are getting at.

I also started focusing on the surface of the abs instead of the core abs to make them pop out more. The first time I try to do the ab exercise properlt, I managed to do 1 rep. And this is when I was able to do 160lb on the ab crunch machines.

erickirb

dpr73 wrote: »

So I have done a few tiny bulk and cuts over the years l. I normally am at 138lbs and will bulk to just over 146 with a slight surplus (2500-2700) for around 5 months and then will naturally come back down to 138 over a few months after decreasing the deficit down to a reasonable number of calories (about 2200-2300).
I am largely pleased with where my body is, but I am sick of not having abs. I work them out weekly with weights and various exercises but they don't seem to come. People have told me that they don't work nearly as hard as I on lifting and nutrition yet they have abs and I can't get them to show.

A little background: I was once on the pudgy side (205 at 5'7) when I was younger. After getting to college I lost the weight to around 138 and maintained for four years since, with the only exception being these planned mini bulks. As a result, I do have loose skin. It is nothing crazy but I can pull my skin very far and if I pull the skin down I can see all of my abs. Most people find it so freaky haha.

So long story short, I expect I am around 10% BF cause there really isn't much fat on me and I am quite vascular in my arms. I also do not have fat in the abdominal region. I believe the culprit to my invisible abs is my slightly looser skin which keeps the abs from showing. For this reason,my initial guess is that I need to grow my abs to get them, but whenever I search everyone says revealing abs is all about low body fat; however, is my situation sort of an exception? Due to my slightly lose skin, will a well planned bulk period with a small surplus reveal abs for me as the bulk will grow my abs enough to push against my body wall? Or will a serious bulk then cut be required for me as well?

I have trouble justifying a huge bulk and cut because I like my physique but do not see my abs whatsoever so I don't want to ruin what I currently have only to find that my abs simply won't show. But on the other hand, I am sick of being dissatisfied with working really hard with nutrition and the gym but not getting the final coveted result of abs.

So any opinions? I am currently 5'7 138 at 22 eating approximately 2400-2500 to try to build a bit more on my frame. My lifting schedule is five days a week: Chest/Tri, Back/Bi, Abs, Legs, Shoulders. I emphasize compound lifts like deadlifts, bench press, squats, dumbbell rows. However, I just moved so my squatting has changed from barbell squats (both back and front) to front dumbbell squats because my complimentary gym has no squat rack. I lift for about 45 mins and have a 5 minute cardio warmup. I have current pics attached--both flexing, just after eating, no gym pump.

Based on those pics I would say you are closer to 14% BF%. Look at my profile pic. That is me at 5'6" 142 lbs at what I estimate to be 12% BF%, This pic below, would be me at 136 what I estimate to be 10% BF%.


Whatappears to me is that you don't have a large amount of muscle on your frame, and still some body fat. I agree with bulking up to 155, then when you cut down to low 140's you may be closer to what you want.

Morgenholt

I don't know man, I think your standards are very high, I see those abs. If you want those craters and valleys to show the actual 4-6 pack you need more work contracting your abs against heavy loads. Get stronger on lifts such as overhead press, squats, bent over rows and deadlifts, this will hypertrophy your core. Then spend a bunch of time in front of the mirror contracting your abs and pulling vacuums. I don't believe you're underweight or too fat, look at your damn serratus muscles. Your abdominal muscles just aren't large enough and cannot contract hard enough.

dpr73

Morgenholt wrote: »

I don't know man, I think your standards are very high, I see those abs. If you want those craters and valleys to show the actual 4-6 pack you need more work contracting your abs against heavy loads. Get stronger on lifts such as overhead press, squats, bent over rows and deadlifts, this will hypertrophy your core. Then spend a bunch of time in front of the mirror contracting your abs and pulling vacuums. I don't believe you're underweight or too fat, look at your damn serratus muscles. Your abdominal muscles just aren't large enough and cannot contract hard enough.

Thanks man! I agree. I am totally happy with my physique but I do tend to hold high standards and am ready to push myself a bit further. I think I am gonna go on one more slow and steady bulk/cut and see if that reveals them and go from there. If I can't get what I am looking for though I may just switch to maintaining.