How much REAL muscle gain from a bulk cycle?

Options
2

Replies

  • mustgetmuscles1
    mustgetmuscles1 Posts: 3,346 Member
    Options
    Lifting at .5 pounds gain per week and over the.course of 10 months (40 weeks)
    He puts on 20 pounds.
    You're telling me that its not going to be almost all muscle?
    That doesn't make sense or else everyone would constantly be wasting time in a Continuous

    Required reading...

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html

    The article says 1 year lifting 2 pounds a month is possible yet you dismiss
    The guy above when he claimed 16 pounds in 8 months,which IS 2 pounds per month.
    So if you disagree with the article why are you referencing it?

    The article is talking about 2 pounds of "muscle" gain per month. My example was 2 pound total with equal fat and muscle.

    My example was just trying to work with a realistic average. I think the link above is pretty accurate but I also think that would require a bulk with proper training and diet for the entire year to accomplish. I would guess most people dont start out really lean and dont bulk for an entire year. I dont think it is realistic to expect those results if you spend anytime cutting body fat.

    My guess (please correct me if I am wrong) is that the possible muscle gain is determined by how much you have already gained and not by how much time it took to put it on. If you dont gain 20 lbs the first year I dont think you are just out of luck. You will simply be able to put more on for longer than that chart says. One guy might add 20lbs in year one and 10lbs in year 2. The next guy might add 10lbs three years in a row.

    In my example, and what I am hoping for myself, is that a 5-6 pound per year can be sustained for a few years in a row while staying pretty lean.
  • Lifting at .5 pounds gain per week and over the.course of 10 months (40 weeks)
    He puts on 20 pounds.
    You're telling me that its not going to be almost all muscle?
    That doesn't make sense or else everyone would constantly be wasting time in a Continuous

    Required reading...

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html

    The article says 1 year lifting 2 pounds a month is possible yet you dismiss
    The guy above when he claimed 16 pounds in 8 months,which IS 2 pounds per month.
    So if you disagree with the article why are you referencing it?

    The article is talking about 2 pounds of "muscle" gain per month. My example was 2 pound total with equal fat and muscle.

    My example was just trying to work with a realistic average. I think the link above is pretty accurate but I also think that would require a bulk with proper training and diet for the entire year to accomplish. I would guess most people dont start out really lean and dont bulk for an entire year. I dont think it is realistic to expect those results if you spend anytime cutting body fat.

    My guess (please correct me if I am wrong) is that the possible muscle gain is determined by how much you have already gained and not by how much time it took to put it on. If you dont gain 20 lbs the first year I dont think you are just out of luck. You will simply be able to put more on for longer than that chart says. One guy might add 20lbs in year one and 10lbs in year 2. The next guy might add 10lbs three years in a row.

    In my example, and what I am hoping for myself, is that a 5-6 pound per year can be sustained for a few years in a row while staying pretty lean.
    Awesome thanks for explaining. What you're saying makes more sense now
    Because obviously most people don't bulk for a year straight.
    Thanks
  • ninerbuff
    ninerbuff Posts: 48,695 Member
    Options
    The article says 1 year lifting 2 pounds a month is possible yet you dismiss
    The guy above when he claimed 16 pounds in 8 months,which IS 2 pounds per month.
    So if you disagree with the article why are you referencing it?
    16lbs of muscle or 16lbs of muscle and fat in that time? He mentioned 2lbs per month and based on his gain in 7-8 months, that would be 16lbs ALL muscle. So all the surplus didn't result in any fat gain at all? Have NEVER seen it happen except with anecdotes.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
  • mrdexter1
    mrdexter1 Posts: 356 Member
    Options
    Lifting at .5 pounds gain per week and over the.course of 10 months (40 weeks)
    He puts on 20 pounds.
    You're telling me that its not going to be almost all muscle?
    That doesn't make sense or else everyone would constantly be wasting time in a Continuous

    Required reading...

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html

    The article says 1 year lifting 2 pounds a month is possible yet you dismiss
    The guy above when he claimed 16 pounds in 8 months,which IS 2 pounds per month.
    So if you disagree with the article why are you referencing it?

    The article is talking about 2 pounds of "muscle" gain per month. My example was 2 pound total with equal fat and muscle.

    My example was just trying to work with a realistic average. I think the link above is pretty accurate but I also think that would require a bulk with proper training and diet for the entire year to accomplish. I would guess most people dont start out really lean and dont bulk for an entire year. I dont think it is realistic to expect those results if you spend anytime cutting body fat.

    My guess (please correct me if I am wrong) is that the possible muscle gain is determined by how much you have already gained and not by how much time it took to put it on. If you dont gain 20 lbs the first year I dont think you are just out of luck. You will simply be able to put more on for longer than that chart says. One guy might add 20lbs in year one and 10lbs in year 2. The next guy might add 10lbs three years in a row.

    In my example, and what I am hoping for myself, is that a 5-6 pound per year can be sustained for a few years in a row while staying pretty lean.
    Awesome thanks for explaining. What you're saying makes more sense now
    Because obviously most people don't bulk for a year straight.
    Thanks

    Speaking as someone who has bulked for a year and a half in the past and gone from 2x 35lb dumbbell press to 2x110lb for 8 reps in that time - I d say you can put quite a lot of usefull muscle on in that short period if you put everything in place to do so.
  • V0lver
    V0lver Posts: 915 Member
    Options
    bump
  • krissenior
    krissenior Posts: 68 Member
    Options
    bump
  • NRBreit
    NRBreit Posts: 319 Member
    Options
    It seems like a small change, but if you take an average 170 lb. guy who has been lifting for a year or two with 12-13% body fat, these small changes still make a difference. You can see how doing this a few times might get you to where you want to be. And if you are fortunate enough to not lose much muscle during the cut, the results can be much more dramatic.

    Before:

    Body Weight: 170 lbs.
    LBM: 149 lbs.
    Fat: 21 lbs.
    BF%: 12.35%

    After (3 lbs. muscle loss during cut):

    Body Weight: 170 lbs.
    LBM: 151 lbs.
    Fat: 19 lbs.
    BF%: 11.18%

    After (1 lbs. muscle loss during cut):

    Body Weight: 170 lbs.
    LBM: 153 lbs.
    Fat: 17 lbs.
    BF%: 10.00%
  • koing
    koing Posts: 179 Member
    Options
    It's all 'fluff' unless you have a somewhat accurate ways to quantify actual muscle/ fat loses/ gains.

    I had a BodPod test done 8 weeks ago pre holiday. I know my exact weight to 3 decimals places and how much fat I have. I have another 3/4 weeks of cutting to go. I'll know how much fat/ muscle I have lost/ gained. It'll be very interesting to see how much I actually lose. It's the next best accurate way to measure yourself unless you want to pay £300 for a dexia scanner which I'm not.

    I'm coaching a complete beginner at the moment. He was up 2kg in the past 4 weeks. He is training 3-4x a week and eating like a BEAST. He is 17 and had about 4/5months tops of unfocused training with no legs or back. He did not eat anywhere as much food and admits that he is training with A LOT more intensity and same with his eating.

    27/08/2013, 64.1kg, weeks average was 64.59
    14/10/2013, 67.7kg, weeks average 66.97

    The average 170lb guy is no where near a *real* 12-13% imo. They are much more likely to be 15-17%.

    When I start to bulk I'll get another BodPod done at some point, and then I can see exactly how much muscle/ fat i have gained. The difference is I'll probably be able to gain it much faster than someone else who has never weighed 99kg before. 2012 I weighed 99kg and my bf% was 22-24% at a guess. I looked pretty solid still though!

    Koing
  • agggie550
    agggie550 Posts: 281 Member
    Options
    http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/how-much-muscle-can-you-gain/


    This is a good article, i mean the science is there but everyone's different. For the guy that talks about how he went from benching 35lb dumbbells to benching 110lb dumbbells, building muscle and gaining strength aren't the same thing.
  • koing
    koing Posts: 179 Member
    Options
    http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/how-much-muscle-can-you-gain/


    This is a good article, i mean the science is there but everyone's different. For the guy that talks about how he went from benching 35lb dumbbells to benching 110lb dumbbells, building muscle and gaining strength aren't the same thing.

    Exactly. Unless you have Dexia/BodPod/Water tank test you do not know how much muscle you have gained. The callipers aren't that great either.

    Koing
  • TheEffort
    TheEffort Posts: 1,028 Member
    Options
    BUMP.
  • Mr_Knight
    Mr_Knight Posts: 9,532 Member
    Options
    Unfortunately, BodyPod and DXA are also +/- 5%. And hydrostatic can have issues if not adjusted for ethnicity-related bone density differences.

    The only truly reliable test is the whistle test.
  • Tricep_A_Tops_
    Tricep_A_Tops_ Posts: 51 Member
    Options
    I might have spent 7-8 months buliking since i reached my goal weight of 203 lbs and now weigh 219 lbs.

    That 16 pounds isn't "muscle".
    Then what is it?? My arms are bigger, my shoulders are bigger, my chest is bigger, my legs are bigger, my traps are bigger and my neck is bigger. But my waist is smaller.
  • Tricep_A_Tops_
    Tricep_A_Tops_ Posts: 51 Member
    Options
    The article says 1 year lifting 2 pounds a month is possible yet you dismiss
    The guy above when he claimed 16 pounds in 8 months,which IS 2 pounds per month.
    So if you disagree with the article why are you referencing it?
    16lbs of muscle or 16lbs of muscle and fat in that time? He mentioned 2lbs per month and based on his gain in 7-8 months, that would be 16lbs ALL muscle. So all the surplus didn't result in any fat gain at all? Have NEVER seen it happen except with anecdotes.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    I never said I didnt gain any fat, I bulked, maintained then cut.
  • Tricep_A_Tops_
    Tricep_A_Tops_ Posts: 51 Member
    Options
    How Much Muscle Can You Gain & How Fast Can You Build It?
    If I had to guess, I’d say that the 3 most common questions people have about building muscle (besides just how to actually build some) are:

    1.How much muscle can you gain?
    2.How long does it take to build it?
    3.How fast can it REALLY be done?
    Now, I’ve seen people ask these questions and get answers like “Stop worrying about how long it will take or how fast it will happen… just shut up and lift!” I kinda see the point to that type of response, but I mostly see why it’s completely wrong.

    These Answers Are More Important Than You Think
    For starters, knowing the TRUTH about the legitimate rates and limits of muscle growth allows you to know when you’re being lied to by a product, program, supplement, or fitness guru claiming to allow you to build muscle faster than you actually can.

    Seeing as this is something that probably 95% of all products/programs/supplements/gurus do every single day, these answers are the key to preventing yourself from falling for false promises and bull**** claims.

    And just as important, knowing the true rates and limits of muscle growth allows you to have realistic expectations for your own progress and set realistic goals. You see, most people (men and women) expect to gain MUCH more muscle at a MUCH faster rate than they actually can.

    With men, these unrealistic expectations cause them to jump from stupid program to even stupider program seeking the type of so-called “lightning fast muscle growth” they couldn’t achieve even with steroids/drugs.

    So when they aren’t building 12 pounds of muscle per week like they thought they would, they blame their diet or their workout and change something that probably didn’t need to be changed (usually in a way that makes it 100 times worse… “My arms aren’t growing fast enough, I must need more biceps exercises!!!!”).

    And with women, it’s the opposite. They also greatly overestimate how much muscle they can gain and how fast they can build it, BUT they do everything they can to avoid it because they don’t want to get “too big and bulky” like a guy. Which is why 50 new completely useless “Toning Workout Routines For Women” come out every other hour.

    So, be it man or woman, your results suffer as a result of not truly knowing how much muscle you can gain or how long it truly takes to build it. Which is why we’re going to change that right now.

    How Much Muscle Can You Gain… REALLY?
    I’ve heard a lot of very smart people discuss the rate and limits of muscle growth over the years. I’ve also seen a couple of studies that looked at this as well, and of course, I have my own 10+ years of first hand experience and real world observation to pull from, too.

    Based on all of this, here’s how much muscle you can expect to gain on average over your entire lifespan:

    •Average Natural MAN: a total of about 40-50 pounds of muscle in their life.
    •Average Natural WOMAN: a total of about 20-25 pounds of muscle in their life.
    Please note that we’re talking strictly about MUSCLE here, not WEIGHT. You could obviously gain a whole lot more weight than muscle in your life time.

    Also note that these numbers are averages. There are always rare exceptions that might either exceed or never come close to reaching these amounts, and there’s a handful of factors that influence what these numbers will be for you specifically (all of which I’ll tell you about in a minute).

    But for most of the people, most of the time… this is the total maximum amount of muscle you can expect to gain naturally .

    How Fast Can You Build Muscle… REALLY?
    So, that’s how much you can gain total. The question now is, how long does it take to build it and how fast can it be done?

    Well, once again, I’m going by various trainers/coaches I’ve heard discuss the true rate of muscle growth among their clients, the few studies that have looked at this as well, and my own 10+ years of first hand experience and observation.

    Based on all of this, here’s how fast you can expect to build muscle on average:

    •Average Natural MAN: between 0.25 and 0.5 pounds of muscle per week (or about 1-2 pounds of muscle gained per month).
    •Average Natural WOMAN: between 0.12 – 0.25 pounds of muscle per week (or about 0.5-1 pound of muscle gained per month).
  • Tricep_A_Tops_
    Tricep_A_Tops_ Posts: 51 Member
    Options
    Ninerbuff. Why try to be a smart *kitten*? I agree to a point if i was an advanced bodybuilder that was close to reaching his genetic potential. But i am far from being considered " advanced " or anywhere close to my gentic potential. I have been lifting for 2 + plus years with the majority of that time eating at a deficit or maintaining. I might have spent 7-8 months buliking since i reached my goal weight of 203 lbs and now weigh 219 lbs.
    7-8 months and a 16lb gain with NO FAT gained? Stating you gain 2lbs a month at 43 years old (without peak test levels), that adds up to 14-16lbs. Sorry not believing it unless you're on gear. Bulking results in fat gain as well as muscle gain. Not trying to be a smart *kitten*, just following the guidelines of physiology.

    A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
    IDEA Fitness member
    Kickboxing Certified Instructor
    Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
    Like I said I gained plenty of fat but cut to get rid of it, and I would never do Steriods, you would have to be brain dead to do that.
  • GymTennis
    GymTennis Posts: 133 Member
    Options
    For the sake of discussion, let's assume the target weight gain is 15 lbs. over 4 months (approx. 1 lb per week). Of those 15 lbs., assume 5 lbs. comes from water/glycogen. Of the remaining 10 lbs.gained, assume a 1:1 partitioning ratio where 5 lbs. is actual muscle gain and 5 lbs. is fat. So, assume 5 lbs. actual muscle gain in 4 months.

    Nice thread.. However, let's keep this 4 months for the sake of discussion, cause if someone is a newbie, he should bulk for at least 18 months, if not 2 years at the minimum before the first cut... Or not exactly bulk ...for the first 6 six months, just stay at maintenance and lift cause you build a lot of muscle anyway ...Then slowly up your calories like 300+ not to get fat and then cut easily after year and a half... You'll look great ..(This goes for a guy who is not overweight or anything, but more like an average guy)
  • yopeeps025
    yopeeps025 Posts: 8,680 Member
    Options
    bump
  • KseRz
    KseRz Posts: 980 Member
    Options
    For the sake of discussion, let's assume the target weight gain is 15 lbs. over 4 months (approx. 1 lb per week). Of those 15 lbs., assume 5 lbs. comes from water/glycogen. Of the remaining 10 lbs.gained, assume a 1:1 partitioning ratio where 5 lbs. is actual muscle gain and 5 lbs. is fat. So, assume 5 lbs. actual muscle gain in 4 months.

    Now let's move to the cut phase. Assume a target weight loss of 15 lbs. over 4 months (approx. 1 lb per week). Again, assume 5 of those lbs. are water glycogen depletion. Now, for the remaining 10 lbs. lost, assume a 30% muscle loss. So, a 7 lb. fat loss and a 3 lb. muscle loss.

    So, over a 7-8 month period, the net body recomposiiton would be +2 lbs. of muscle and -2 lbs. of fat. at the same before/after weight.

    Assuming a solid training plan and consistent eating with plenty of protein, are these results what someone should expect? Any flaws in the logic above?

    Total opinion at this point:

    I would find a 30% loss of muscle on a cut to be quite high unless you're cutting quite low.

    Lots and lots of cardio. lol


    Where I get lost in the math is when people start talking about water loss / retention. If a muscle is approx 80% water how much of the water loss is attributed to the loss of muscle and how much of the water loss is from other tissue in the body?
  • 212019156
    212019156 Posts: 341 Member
    Options
    DEXA is way better than +/- 5%.
    Unfortunately, BodyPod and DXA are also +/- 5%. And hydrostatic can have issues if not adjusted for ethnicity-related bone density differences.

    The only truly reliable test is the whistle test.