If you've heard "70% diet, 30% training".....

mud7urtle

^ no one specified weight loss. Once again

but good job.

My avi is proper nutrition and training as hard as I can in the gym.

refuseresist

I always took it to be related to weight loss, not training as an athlete. If we are talking about athletic training, I'd say it's 90% training and 10% diet.

That doesn't make much sense, then why when I was playing football did our nutritionist ride our *kitten* so much? You can't put it into % when you are talking about athletic training. You just have to buckle down and give 100% to both. No compromise.

But that's 200%!

Mind. Blown.

DVaughan1975

70% of the time you train 30% of your body.........no wait..........you eat 70% of your calories & train 30% of your heart rate.

no no no, I got this :mad: You are 70% water & 30% creatine.............wait that can't be right. I know I will post it in a forum and get
the answer from a certified trainer :bigsmile:

And you're officially my new best friend.

To me it's about a good balance. Do your best to stay within your macros, don't cry over it if you don't, and go to the gym to sweat out the stress and other crap we put into out bodies.

Rhino_X

I would say 80% training, 20% diet. At 41 years of age I lost 83 lbs in 13 months stopping at 8% BF and added plenty of LM. in the process by training hard and an average diet. I keep reading on mfp that abs are built in the kitchen, which drives me nuts because that is total BS.

WendyTerry420

^I can't see imgur photos.

Everyone here is DOING. You can do both. If if wasn't for thinking I'd still be low carbing and doing Barbie exercises at the gym. There is nothing wrong with information, discussion and even a little debate. That's how people learn.

Oh absolutely. Proper research goes along with maximizing results

But research/information does not equal silly thrown together ratios that promote laziness in one aspect.

I've seen your responses, we're on the same page trust me. Just others are literally putting words in my mouth (or posts?) when I never specified the ratio for anyhting, and even if I did I still was trying to stress that it wouldn't matter. Why lose out on any benefits to accompany a good diet? Just my opinion. I'm allowing others to have theirs.. if you want to follow ratios (notice how much it keeps changing already too, it's now at 90/10 - see my point) then OK. But there is another way of looking at it, and that is what I am trying to promote.

Where have you ever seen this or any similar ratio used in relation to training? I agree that diet has less to do with training, but that's like saying "cake DOES NOT improve your chess skills." No one has ever attempted to make that correlation.

But...but...but...caaaaaaaake........ because science...

d2footballJRC

I always took it to be related to weight loss, not training as an athlete. If we are talking about athletic training, I'd say it's 90% training and 10% diet.

That doesn't make much sense, then why when I was playing football did our nutritionist ride our *kitten* so much? You can't put it into % when you are talking about athletic training. You just have to buckle down and give 100% to both. No compromise.

But that's 200%!

Mind. Blown.

IF that blew you mind.... check this out....... Magic School Bus kids are the kids from Captain Planet!!

d2footballJRC

^I can't see imgur photos.

Everyone here is DOING. You can do both. If if wasn't for thinking I'd still be low carbing and doing Barbie exercises at the gym. There is nothing wrong with information, discussion and even a little debate. That's how people learn.

Oh absolutely. Proper research goes along with maximizing results

But research/information does not equal silly thrown together ratios that promote laziness in one aspect.

I've seen your responses, we're on the same page trust me. Just others are literally putting words in my mouth (or posts?) when I never specified the ratio for anyhting, and even if I did I still was trying to stress that it wouldn't matter. Why lose out on any benefits to accompany a good diet? Just my opinion. I'm allowing others to have theirs.. if you want to follow ratios (notice how much it keeps changing already too, it's now at 90/10 - see my point) then OK. But there is another way of looking at it, and that is what I am trying to promote.

Where have you ever seen this or any similar ratio used in relation to training? I agree that diet has less to do with training, but that's like saying "cake DOES NOT improve your chess skills." No one has ever attempted to make that correlation.

But...but...but...caaaaaaaake........ because science...

What if the cake is made with Almond Flour and IGF-1?

WendyTerry420

^I can't see imgur photos.

Everyone here is DOING. You can do both. If if wasn't for thinking I'd still be low carbing and doing Barbie exercises at the gym. There is nothing wrong with information, discussion and even a little debate. That's how people learn.

Oh absolutely. Proper research goes along with maximizing results

But research/information does not equal silly thrown together ratios that promote laziness in one aspect.

I've seen your responses, we're on the same page trust me. Just others are literally putting words in my mouth (or posts?) when I never specified the ratio for anyhting, and even if I did I still was trying to stress that it wouldn't matter. Why lose out on any benefits to accompany a good diet? Just my opinion. I'm allowing others to have theirs.. if you want to follow ratios (notice how much it keeps changing already too, it's now at 90/10 - see my point) then OK. But there is another way of looking at it, and that is what I am trying to promote.

Where have you ever seen this or any similar ratio used in relation to training? I agree that diet has less to do with training, but that's like saying "cake DOES NOT improve your chess skills." No one has ever attempted to make that correlation.

But...but...but...caaaaaaaake........ because science...

What if the cake is made with Almond Flour and IGF-1?

rjmudlax13

Well, I just think it is far more effective educating a noob about BMR and TDEE. Those are more concrete numbers than arbitrary and vague ratios.

If I were a trainer, dietician, etc. that is the very first thing I would talk about and not go any further until I felt it was completely understood. That would have orders of magnitudes more effectiveness than saying 70/30 or 80/20 or 100/100. Maybe that's not what they teach in the training and nutrition schools, but that is my opinion.

Alanhalil

10% of some people's weight loss has been through arguing on web forums

highervibes

Well, I just think it is far more effective educating a noob about BMR and TDEE. Those are more concrete numbers than arbitrary and vague ratios.

If I were a trainer, dietician, etc. that is the very first thing I would talk about and not go any further until I felt it was completely understood. That would have orders of magnitudes more effectiveness than saying 70/30 or 80/20 or 100/100. Maybe that's not what they teach in the training and nutrition schools, but that is my opinion.

YES. That would be a solid start, I agree. I remember studying the Canada Food Guide in one my high school classes, BMR and TDEE would have been a champ addition looking back now.

sweetchildomine

This thread makes me laugh.

itsjustdawn

I lost 50lbs in a year on Weight Watchers and NEVER once exercised. Not saying that's the way to do it, but weight loss is possible without exercise (I went from 190-140).

mud7urtle

I lost 50lbs in a year on Weight Watchers and NEVER once exercised. Not saying that's the way to do it, but weight loss is possible without exercise (I went from 190-140).

Its
not
specified
to
weight
loss