Heavy weights vs more reps

SezxyStef

I like my heavy lifting.

I do a 5x5 compound lift program.

My goals are maintaining as much of my LBM while losing the fat and continue to gain Strenght.

rondaj05

Bump

sijomial

Not 100% on the muscle must require a surplus.

If you are gaining weight you are in a calorie surplus.

It is possible to gain muscle at a calorie deficit, it just depends on few variables such as total protein load, bf%, testosterone load, training history, etc. In general it is less than optimized but it does happen. You can't gain lots o moosels this way so, like the forest and trees thing, it is generally better to be at a (small) surplus during hypertrophy.

An individual having large stores of fat, training hard and eating close to maintenance with a diet providing the necessary amino acids will develop strength and muscle gains as long as training and metabolic needs do not exceed energy mobilization from lipids rates.

As far as rep ranges go. There is significant overlap - strength ranges will create hypertrophy and vice versa but a good program includes both over time. Also, if you are training for the first time from a high rep range to low, it is actually more important to take the time to build up ability to allow for joint adaptation, neuromuscular adaptation and get form very right. All this avoids injury.

Edit - fixed quotes, rep range note.

Well said - it does get tiresome all the people saying it's "impossible" to gain LBM at a small deficit. (Remember impossible is an absolute term please!)
Funny enough for many of those saying it's impossible it probably is impossible for them - if they are already lean and training at or near their peak..

However, many people on here are well placed to make some slow muscle gains at a small deficit or maintenance (not confusing muscle size, strength or muscle definition BTW). If you are "overfat" (as Lyle McDonald quaintly puts it) or some way from either your training peak or potential peak you can make gains.

So a relatively fat person, either new to lifting or returning from a lay off, eating at a small deficit with adequate protein is entirely likely to make some slow gains.
On the other hand a lean person already well into a good training regime would be much better off going for bulk/cut cycles if their priority is muscle gain.

sijomial

It's totally possible. But, it's not really as common as, "oh I'm a 180 lb. 6' male eating 1400 calories and working out 6 days a week. I'm getting huge." Ya know? For the most part, while there are people who can do it, even lean athletes can do it on a deficit, however, it's not really hugely common. If you leak this little bit of info out, every noob in town is going to think they're all bulky on a deficit losing 5lbs a week.

I get what you are saying but the flip side is that a lot of lurkers are also likely to get discouraged from lifting while losing weight as they think it's a "waste of time" or "pointless" if they can't add muscle - completely unaware the major benefit is the retention of existing muscle mass. Not everyone understands the differences between muscle mass, strength and muscle definition so saying adding muscle is "impossible" makes people question why they should bother. Hence the far too common trend of cardio all the way while losing and then trying to regain lost muscle once at goal.

Personally I think small gains are more common than realised but hard to quantify. My own experience was a loss of roughly a pound of fat and a gain of half a pound of LBM a month and I've been strength training for about 40 years!

cmeiron

It's totally possible. But, it's not really as common as, "oh I'm a 180 lb. 6' male eating 1400 calories and working out 6 days a week. I'm getting huge." Ya know? For the most part, while there are people who can do it, even lean athletes can do it on a deficit, however, it's not really hugely common. If you leak this little bit of info out, every noob in town is going to think they're all bulky on a deficit losing 5lbs a week.

I get what you are saying but the flip side is that a lot of lurkers are also likely to get discouraged from lifting while losing weight as they think it's a "waste of time" or "pointless" if they can't add muscle - completely unaware the major benefit is the retention of existing muscle mass. Not everyone understands the differences between muscle mass, strength and muscle definition so saying adding muscle is "impossible" makes people question why they should bother. Hence the far too common trend of cardio all the way while losing and then trying to regain lost muscle once at goal.

Personally I think small gains are more common than realised but hard to quantify. My own experience was a loss of roughly a pound of fat and a gain of half a pound of LBM a month and I've been strength training for about 40 years!

Personally, I think it's better to help newbies/lurkers develop realistic goals and expectations, rather than try to sugar-coat reality. The reality for most is that lifting at a deficit will not add appreciable muscle mass. Strength, yes. Muscle retention, yes. Muscle definition, yes, as long as there's fat loss as well. Those are all awesome, admirable reasons to strength train at a deficit, and it seems to me that we should be touting them instead of pretend muscle gains. Perhaps the message needs to be conveyed more clearly, that's all.

rondaj05

It's totally possible. But, it's not really as common as, "oh I'm a 180 lb. 6' male eating 1400 calories and working out 6 days a week. I'm getting huge." Ya know? For the most part, while there are people who can do it, even lean athletes can do it on a deficit, however, it's not really hugely common. If you leak this little bit of info out, every noob in town is going to think they're all bulky on a deficit losing 5lbs a week.

I get what you are saying but the flip side is that a lot of lurkers are also likely to get discouraged from lifting while losing weight as they think it's a "waste of time" or "pointless" if they can't add muscle - completely unaware the major benefit is the retention of existing muscle mass. Not everyone understands the differences between muscle mass, strength and muscle definition so saying adding muscle is "impossible" makes people question why they should bother. Hence the far too common trend of cardio all the way while losing and then trying to regain lost muscle once at goal.

Personally I think small gains are more common than realised but hard to quantify. My own experience was a loss of roughly a pound of fat and a gain of half a pound of LBM a month and I've been strength training for about 40 years!

Personally, I think it's better to help newbies/lurkers develop realistic goals and expectations, rather than try to sugar-coat reality. The reality for most is that lifting at a deficit will not add appreciable muscle mass. Strength, yes. Muscle retention, yes. Muscle definition, yes, as long as there's fat loss as well. Those are all awesome, admirable reasons to strength train at a deficit, and it seems to me that we should be touting them instead of pretend muscle gains. Perhaps the message needs to be conveyed more clearly, that's all.

Thank you! (from a newbie) :flowerforyou:

Huffdogg

"Her ability to gain muscle or anyone for that matter, would be dependent upon the calorie intake specifically a surplus in addition to progressive training. Toning doesn't exist and a woman's training isn't any different than a mans in that aspect."

Not all bodies & metabolism are the same so I wouldn't say gaining muscle is "dependent" on a caloric surplus. This may be true in some cases, but I know I eat around 1800-2000 calories(probably a little lower than most males) on a typical day and have no problem gaining muscle. And of course toning exists! hah. Doing more reps with less weight, but still enough weight to be challenging, might not pack on a ton of muscle but it'll sure give you some definition!

No. Losing fat is what is happening.

Will_Thrust_For_Candy

It's totally possible. But, it's not really as common as, "oh I'm a 180 lb. 6' male eating 1400 calories and working out 6 days a week. I'm getting huge." Ya know? For the most part, while there are people who can do it, even lean athletes can do it on a deficit, however, it's not really hugely common. If you leak this little bit of info out, every noob in town is going to think they're all bulky on a deficit losing 5lbs a week.

I get what you are saying but the flip side is that a lot of lurkers are also likely to get discouraged from lifting while losing weight as they think it's a "waste of time" or "pointless" if they can't add muscle - completely unaware the major benefit is the retention of existing muscle mass. Not everyone understands the differences between muscle mass, strength and muscle definition so saying adding muscle is "impossible" makes people question why they should bother. Hence the far too common trend of cardio all the way while losing and then trying to regain lost muscle once at goal.

Personally I think small gains are more common than realised but hard to quantify. My own experience was a loss of roughly a pound of fat and a gain of half a pound of LBM a month and I've been strength training for about 40 years!

Personally, I think it's better to help newbies/lurkers develop realistic goals and expectations, rather than try to sugar-coat reality. The reality for most is that lifting at a deficit will not add appreciable muscle mass. Strength, yes. Muscle retention, yes. Muscle definition, yes, as long as there's fat loss as well. Those are all awesome, admirable reasons to strength train at a deficit, and it seems to me that we should be touting them instead of pretend muscle gains. Perhaps the message needs to be conveyed more clearly, that's all.

Very well said :drinker: