How many pounds of muscle could I really put on?

As a beginners, you could realistically put on 7-10 pounds in a year. After a year or so, you would taper off and be lucky to put on 3-5 in a year. That is the advice I have been given by several of my bodybuilding trainers.

And this is for a MALE. Females much less unless "enhanced".


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

A male can put on upwards of 20-25 lbs in their first year, females about half that.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html

That lines up with my experience thus far as a first year gainer.

The effect referenced in this thread, that is not losing inches but not weight, is not cause by muscle gain, it is because of water gain in the muscles, for both the creatine-phosphate energy system and the glycogen energy system.

The effect mentioned is real. If you're not doing strength training and start a program your muscles will soak up some extra water. Let's say that you pick up 2-3 pounds which isn't unreasonable. That accounts for the stagnant number on the scale for perhaps a month but after that point you will start losing again if you're hitting your calorie goals correctly. There's only so much water your muscles can hold. The water volume won't keep increasing forever and you should see the scale moving.

I'm doing a pretty intense strength routine and I even started taking Creatine as a supplement last month which really loads up your muscles with even more water. I've still lost a couple pounds since then and you should too if you're at a negative calorie intake. Some days after eating lots of carbs I can gain 2-3 pounds back but that always drops off when I eat clean and it's pretty easy to see that the trend is downward.

For me calorie intake is what controls the weight on the scale. If I'm not losing the obviously I'm eating too much. It could be that women have a harder time with this since their TDEE to BRM window is so much smaller but I would think that it would work the same.

The average male would LUCKY to put on 1lb a month even in surplus. A female in calorie deficit? They'd be lucky to put on 0.5lb in 6 months.
It's practically improbable to gain muscle on calorie deficit. Not impossible, but genetics, experience (newbie), past activity (former athlete) and being obese/very overweight would have the be the category you'd have to be in to gain doing it. And even then it's not as much as everyone thinks.


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

Ninerbuff,

sorry to hijack the thread a bit here but you seem to know your stuff and I have a quick question...
I get my body fat measured on a big scanner at the gym and get a print out with my results.
Last month it said my bf% was down 2.5%, overall weight loss was 2kg, but my fat loss was 3kg which would suggest I had put on a kg of muscle in a month.
I thought this seemed ridiculous, is it even possible? I do seem to have lost a lot of inches lately but not much weight.
I eat 2100 cals (p30 / f30 / c40), and would class myself as very active, I do 3 spin classes, 4 boxercise classes and 2 hours of heavy weights per week. TDEE is around 2600-2800 so am in 500-700ish cal deficit.

Thanks :-)

If you were a newbie to actual lifting and/or a very overweight/obese person, or a returning athlete after a long layoff, a kg of muscle wouldn't be unheard of.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

As a beginners, you could realistically put on 7-10 pounds in a year. After a year or so, you would taper off and be lucky to put on 3-5 in a year. That is the advice I have been given by several of my bodybuilding trainers.

And this is for a MALE. Females much less unless "enhanced".


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

A male can put on upwards of 20-25 lbs in their first year, females about half that.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html

That lines up with my experience thus far as a first year gainer.

Sorry but that much in actual muscle? Fat and muscle yes. What if that male is 40 years old? Age makes a total difference. Not saying it can't be done, but you're speaking of people who are calorie surplus and not deficit with a direct goal of muscle gain.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

No, actual muscle. Did you even read the article? As a trainer you should know of the person that wrote the article and the people who created the models referenced in it, if not you really need to study up a bit more. And yes they are very much referring to muscle gain, not muscle plus fat.

As a beginners, you could realistically put on 7-10 pounds in a year. After a year or so, you would taper off and be lucky to put on 3-5 in a year. That is the advice I have been given by several of my bodybuilding trainers.

And this is for a MALE. Females much less unless "enhanced".


A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

A male can put on upwards of 20-25 lbs in their first year, females about half that.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/whats-my-genetic-muscular-potential.html

That lines up with my experience thus far as a first year gainer.

Sorry but that much in actual muscle? Fat and muscle yes. What if that male is 40 years old? Age makes a total difference. Not saying it can't be done, but you're speaking of people who are calorie surplus and not deficit with a direct goal of muscle gain.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

No, actual muscle. Did you even read the article? As a trainer you should know of the person that wrote the article and the people who created the models referenced in it, if not you really need to study up a bit more. And yes they are very much referring to muscle gain, not muscle plus fat.

From the first reference model:

Please note that these are averages and make a few assumptions about proper training and nutrition and such. As well, age will interact with this; older individuals won’t gain as quickly and younger individuals may gain more quickly. For example, it’s not unheard of for underweight high school kids to gain muscle very rapidly. But they are usually starting out very underweight and have the natural anabolic steroid cycle called puberty working for them.

Amateur and Pro bodybuilders who juice are able to put on 30-50lbs of muscle in the BEGINNING and much less after. Juiced. The article even states that the Natural bodybuilders "muscle potential" is much more conservative than McDonald's. Or did you miss that in the article?
Don't correlate POTENTIAL with ACTUAL. Training, nutrition, discipline all play factors. The average male doesn't train as hard or dedicated as the competitive natural bodybuilder, so the numbers that were mentioned (7-10lbs) are well within reach compared to McDonald's projection. Impossible? No. Personally for all the years I've competed and still intermingling with the "meatheads" in the gym, I have yet to see a "natural" put on 20-25lbs of pure muscle in their first year of training. Skeptic yes.

And you're telling me you put on 20-25lbs of muscle so far? Show me where it is cause I don't see it.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

average women can gain a maximum of 1/2 lb of muscle every 2 weeks

In deficit?

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition

And you're telling me you put on 20-25lbs of muscle so far? Show me where it is cause I don't see it.

No. Haven't been at it a year.

But I've put on your 7-10 lbs in 3 months. And yes it is lean weight, if anything I've lost a little fat, ab definition is getting sharper.

http://i726.photobucket.com/albums/ww269/Waldo56/Self/Collage731.jpg

I don't expect to sustain this rate, but surely I'm not going to spend the next 9 months gaining nothing. That projection of 20 or so pounds for beginner males seems very reasonable and attainable.

The article even states that the Natural bodybuilders "muscle potential" is much more conservative than McDonald's. Or did you miss that in the article?
Don't correlate POTENTIAL with ACTUAL. Training, nutrition, discipline all play factors. The average male doesn't train as hard or dedicated as the competitive natural bodybuilder, so the numbers that were mentioned (7-10lbs) are well within reach compared to McDonald's projection. Impossible? No. Personally for all the years I've competed and still intermingling with the "meatheads" in the gym, I have yet to see a "natural" put on 20-25lbs of pure muscle in their first year of training. Skeptic yes.

The article wasn't talking about steriod fueled potential at all. Reading comprehension failure FTW!!! He was comparing a frame size model to his and another's general models, commenting that the frame size model for maximum muscle potiential (not maximum growth rate, there is a difference) was conservative compared to his and the other model, but this is highly frame size dependant. With a larger frame the models all line up.'

The article clearly states that the models are for those under optimal (non-steriod) conditions, and that they are models of the peak gain rate and maximum mass are for average males. And that the values should be halved for females. I took the OP's question to be precisely what this article addresses. How much can you gain if you do everything right (without enhancement).

Would these be YOUR clients failing to put on mass at this rate? LOL.

To put on muscle you need caloric surplus in most cases, that means gaining a little fat, if you want to keep the fat minimal then probably about a 1lb of pure muscle every week n a half is most accurate, hope this helps!

Jesse Short
ISSA Certified Personal Trainer

I'm surprised how low the numbers others are posting are. In Mark Rippetoe's book Starting Strength (basic barbell training), Rippetoe advises his readers how to get stronger. Since strength requires additional muscle mass, the result of using a barbell for strength training will be a gain in body weight due to larger muscles.

He advises that following his exercise program and nutrition recommendations for maximum muscle growth will result in an average person who's never lifted weights for strength before will gain 5-10 lb in the first week (water weight) and about a pound a week for up to 6 months. Following that, additional weight will likely be more difficult to gain -- nutrition must be monitored more and workouts become more complex.

I followed this guidance for about 6 months and had approximately the same results. I've lifted weights before, but never with a focus on the barbell. I went from 170 lb to 195 lb and increased my squat weight from 3 sets of 5 reps at 135 lb to 235 lb.

Rippetoe's basic program requires about 90 minutes at the gym 3 times a week, with alternating workouts: squats, deadlifts, and bench press one workout and squats, shoulder press, and power cleans the next workout. He also advises a calorie surplus and downplays the importance of aerobic exercise. The result is that additional body fat will likely be gained with muscle. I wouldn't expect to lose fat, but with some effort, you may maintain your body fat % as you gain weight. This is the opposite of a 6-pack for the beach workout and he doesn't deny that.

Is something like that for you? The best way to decide is to try it, I think.

And you're telling me you put on 20-25lbs of muscle so far? Show me where it is cause I don't see it.

No. Haven't been at it a year.

But I've put on your 7-10 lbs in 3 months. And yes it is lean weight, if anything I've lost a little fat, ab definition is getting sharper.

http://i726.photobucket.com/albums/ww269/Waldo56/Self/Collage731.jpg

I don't expect to sustain this rate, but surely I'm not going to spend the next 9 months gaining nothing. That projection of 20 or so pounds for beginner males seems very reasonable and attainable.

So how did you measure the actual muscle gain? Just subtracting your body fat percentage and getting a lean weight isn't the indication that "pure muscle" was attained. I wouldn't be surprised that more than half of that was glycogen and water storage. Even bone density increases when you lift.

The article even states that the Natural bodybuilders "muscle potential" is much more conservative than McDonald's. Or did you miss that in the article?
Don't correlate POTENTIAL with ACTUAL. Training, nutrition, discipline all play factors. The average male doesn't train as hard or dedicated as the competitive natural bodybuilder, so the numbers that were mentioned (7-10lbs) are well within reach compared to McDonald's projection. Impossible? No. Personally for all the years I've competed and still intermingling with the "meatheads" in the gym, I have yet to see a "natural" put on 20-25lbs of pure muscle in their first year of training. Skeptic yes.

The article wasn't talking about steriod fueled potential at all. Reading comprehension failure FTW!!! He was comparing a frame size model to his and another's general models, commenting that the frame size model for maximum muscle potiential (not maximum growth rate, there is a difference) was conservative compared to his and the other model, but this is highly frame size dependant. With a larger frame the models all line up.

I referred to the NATURAL gaining of muscle when quoting the more "conservative" projections from the natural bodybuilder. Or is the Natural bodybuilders research (someone who actually LIVES the lifestyle) worthless? Reread it again. The reason I made the reference to JUICED bodybuilders is because if it's tough for them to put on 20-25lbs, how in the hell will a natural new lifter do the same?

The article clearly states that the models are for those under optimal (non-steriod) conditions, and that they are models of the peak gain rate and maximum mass are for average males. And that the values should be halved for females. I took the OP's question to be precisely what this article addresses. How much can you gain if you do everything right (without enhancement).

Would these be YOUR clients failing to put on mass at this rate? LOL.

Don't try to make a strawman argument, stick to the topic. While I respect the authors of the article and agree spot on with a lot of their methods, I am skeptical of how they arrive to the conclusion that a male new to lifting could put on that much "pure" muscle without any experience in training, knowing how to "contract" muscles correctly, switching to a nutritional program that they've never done before, etc.
POTENTIAL is probable. Anyone in the US has the potential to be the President of the US. Even if they did everything right, what is the probability? My point is that for ALL the years that I've done this and personally competed myself, and having been part of the "muscle" community for 30 years now, I have yet to witness a natural new lifter gain 20-25lbs of pure muscle in a year's time. I'm more than sure there are other serious lifters on this site who have witnessed it either.
Now 7-10lbs of pure muscle, sure I've seen that lots of times.

A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 28+ years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition