Recomp Math

2

Replies

  • JoRocka
    JoRocka Posts: 17,525 Member
    pwwwwwonnnneeeedddddddd
  • CrusaderSam
    CrusaderSam Posts: 180 Member
    What everyone does say is that it is difficult to find the perfect balance and takes far far longer than a standard bulk and cut.

    Again - you've basically written a load of nonsense to try to prove something that was not disputed in the first place.

    I tried to put something it to layman's terms so you just want to call it nonsense. You don't seem to get that there is a difference in a pure energy standpoint and a biological one.

    Also how do you know its more difficult? You have a study? You have a biological reason that a bulk/cut is faster?
  • mustgetmuscles1
    mustgetmuscles1 Posts: 3,346 Member
    Recomp is code for I suck at cutting. :glasses:

    :tongue:

    Guess that's why I'm recomping!

    Me too. :happy:
  • jimmmer
    jimmmer Posts: 3,515 Member
    Recomp is code for I suck at cutting. :glasses:

    :tongue:

    Guess that's why I'm recomping!

    Me too. :happy:

    :laugh:
  • Iron_Feline
    Iron_Feline Posts: 10,750 Member
    What everyone does say is that it is difficult to find the perfect balance and takes far far longer than a standard bulk and cut.

    Again - you've basically written a load of nonsense to try to prove something that was not disputed in the first place.

    I tried to put something it to layman's terms so you just want to call it nonsense. You don't seem to get that there is a difference in a pure energy standpoint and a biological one.

    Also how do you know its more difficult? You have a study? You have a biological reason that a bulk/cut is faster?



    Laymans terms?

    I do not think that word means what you think it means. :laugh:



    I'm currently on my phone so the best I can give you at the moment is this excellent article from lyle on the subject of muscle gain.

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/general-philosophies-of-muscle-mass-gain.html

    And while not a study it's a far more relevant that the study you posted to try to back up your claims. Feel free to try to learn from an expert in the field.

    Edit: here he addresses it directly.

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/adding-muscle-while-losing-fat-qa.html
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Iron_Feline
    Iron_Feline Posts: 10,750 Member
    What everyone does say is that it is difficult to find the perfect balance and takes far far longer than a standard bulk and cut.

    Again - you've basically written a load of nonsense to try to prove something that was not disputed in the first place.

    I tried to put something it to layman's terms so you just want to call it nonsense. You don't seem to get that there is a difference in a pure energy standpoint and a biological one.

    Also how do you know its more difficult? You have a study? You have a biological reason that a bulk/cut is faster?
    Do you realize that if you take information that you have wrong and put it in layman's terms it will still provide wrong information. All you did was make it easier for people to understand that you didn't know what you were talking about.

    Next time keep it really really intelligent and complicated and the masses will get confused and many will just say "Man, this guy must know what he's talking about. Look at all that science".

    Womp womp womp.

    :laugh: :drinker:
  • yopeeps025
    yopeeps025 Posts: 8,680 Member
    I stop reading once I saw 1g= 9 fat and g=4 protein.
  • Iron_Feline
    Iron_Feline Posts: 10,750 Member
    I stop reading once I saw 1g= 9 fat and g=4 protein.

    Good decision. :drinker:
  • LAT1963
    LAT1963 Posts: 1,375 Member
    Title first misread as "Recomp Meth" :noway: :laugh:
  • jimmmer
    jimmmer Posts: 3,515 Member
    Title first misread as "Recomp Meth" :noway: :laugh:

    Yeah. That'll probably give you some body recomp alright...
  • yopeeps025
    yopeeps025 Posts: 8,680 Member
    I stop reading once I saw 1g= 9 fat and g=4 protein.

    Good decision. :drinker:

    Would you like to summarize whatever the OP tried to say?
  • W31RD0
    W31RD0 Posts: 173 Member
    So... if a train carrying 1,000 gallons of fat leaves Los Angeles at 8am and passes a train from New York carrying 1,000 pounds of muscle, leaving an hour later, the previous day, before either of them reaches St. Louis MO, and neither of them has any Grey Poupon, I can lose fat and gain muscle at the same time? 1.21 gigawatts? WHO WILL SAVE THE CLOCK TOWER?!

    This made me spit my protein shake. Good job.
  • Iron_Feline
    Iron_Feline Posts: 10,750 Member
    I stop reading once I saw 1g= 9 fat and g=4 protein.

    Good decision. :drinker:

    Would you like to summarize whatever the OP tried to say?

    I think his theory is that because muscle is 75% water and fat isn't and because protein = 4 cals and fat = 9 cals it is easier to build muscle than fat and so everyone should recomp because maths.

    :huh:

    Honestly I'm still not sure. :laugh:
  • yopeeps025
    yopeeps025 Posts: 8,680 Member
    I stop reading once I saw 1g= 9 fat and g=4 protein.

    Good decision. :drinker:

    Would you like to summarize whatever the OP tried to say?

    I think his theory is that because muscle is 75% water and fat isn't and because protein = 4 cals and fat = 9 cals it is easier to build muscle than fat and so everyone should recomp because maths.

    :huh:

    Honestly I'm still not sure. :laugh:

    Umm well I actually am doing body recomp too myself. 1) there is no set calories increase for a one pound of muscle. If there is I have not found it. As for building muscle easier than just eating to gain fat. I have to disagree with that. If that was the case than I would not be on this site because I be at my goal years ago. I would be a very strong fellow.
  • Iron_Feline
    Iron_Feline Posts: 10,750 Member
    I stop reading once I saw 1g= 9 fat and g=4 protein.

    Good decision. :drinker:

    Would you like to summarize whatever the OP tried to say?

    I think his theory is that because muscle is 75% water and fat isn't and because protein = 4 cals and fat = 9 cals it is easier to build muscle than fat and so everyone should recomp because maths.

    :huh:

    Honestly I'm still not sure. :laugh:

    Umm well I actually am doing body recomp too myself. 1) there is no set calories increase for a one pound of muscle. If there is I have not found it. As for building muscle easier than just eating to gain fat. I have to disagree with that. If that was the case than I would not be on this site because I be at my goal years ago. I would be a very strong fellow.

    Nothing wrong with a recomp - good luck with your goals :drinker:

    The issue was with his thinking that it is easier to build muscle than fat - based on maths :noway: :laugh:

    Mind you - I could be wrong about his reasoning. I found his post very hard to follow. Possibly because it is all based on faulty logic
  • yopeeps025
    yopeeps025 Posts: 8,680 Member
    I stop reading once I saw 1g= 9 fat and g=4 protein.

    Good decision. :drinker:

    Would you like to summarize whatever the OP tried to say?

    I think his theory is that because muscle is 75% water and fat isn't and because protein = 4 cals and fat = 9 cals it is easier to build muscle than fat and so everyone should recomp because maths.

    :huh:

    Honestly I'm still not sure. :laugh:

    Umm well I actually am doing body recomp too myself. 1) there is no set calories increase for a one pound of muscle. If there is I have not found it. As for building muscle easier than just eating to gain fat. I have to disagree with that. If that was the case than I would not be on this site because I be at my goal years ago. I would be a very strong fellow.

    Nothing wrong with a recomp - good luck with your goals :drinker:

    The issue was with his thinking that it is easier to build muscle than fat - based on maths :noway: :laugh:

    Mind you - I could be wrong about his reasoning. I found his post very hard to follow. Possibly because it is all based on faulty logic

    It seems to be working even when there was no scale drop for months before I got I here I was still losing fat. Even now when I see the scale not drop I know for a fact that something is dropping. Hoping it is more fat than muscle loss though.
  • KseRz
    KseRz Posts: 980 Member
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3733343

    Protein Synthesis =/= Energy Expenditure

    "The energy cost of protein synthesis is estimated to be a small but significant contributor to total energy expenditure. The increase in energy expenditure with food intake does not appear to result from an increase in protein synthesis."
  • Hornsby
    Hornsby Posts: 10,322 Member
    I've been recomping since December. This was the first time I had lifted weight since HS (I'm 36th). I am about 6.5 months in now and I have seen plenty of improvement/gains. Not sure what the time line is for recomping, but it seems to be "fast" enough for me to be satisfied. As long as my arms/legs/chest inches keep rising, my waist keeps losing, and my weight stays the same, I'm happy.
  • TR0berts
    TR0berts Posts: 7,739 Member
    What everyone does say is that it is difficult to find the perfect balance and takes far far longer than a standard bulk and cut.

    Again - you've basically written a load of nonsense to try to prove something that was not disputed in the first place.

    I tried to put something it to layman's terms so you just want to call it nonsense. You don't seem to get that there is a difference in a pure energy standpoint and a biological one.

    Also how do you know its more difficult? You have a study? You have a biological reason that a bulk/cut is faster?
    Do you realize that if you take information that you have wrong and put it in layman's terms it will still provide wrong information. All you did was make it easier for people to understand that you didn't know what you were talking about.

    Next time keep it really really intelligent and complicated and the masses will get confused and many will just say "Man, this guy must know what he's talking about. Look at all that science".

    Womp womp womp.


    Especially when the study OP presented obviously has nothing to do with recomposition. I give you exhibit A:

    "The percentage of body fat did not change significantly in any group (data not shown). "


    Do you know what that means? That means that if the people under study gained muscle, and the BF% didn't change (significantly) - they also gained body fat. Ergo, not a recomp. All the study showed was, eat foodz, put on weight; use roidz, put on more muscle.
  • trojan_bb
    trojan_bb Posts: 699 Member
    But they do because that's how the body works. Or you are you saying the wiki is wrong? See I can twist stuff around too.


    That is the problem no one likes to read. Maybe you should read more wikis. Then you would have a basic understanding of how how things work.

    If you want to look it up you can see in the 3 decade study it only takes a very small amount of energy to build a lb of muscle, but dont take my word for it look it up and then tell everyone. It doesn't take a lot of cals to put on lean body mass, the math backs it up and so does the science. Just read the wikis and learn.

    You're right, it doesn't take a lot of energy to build a lb of muscle.

    But that building does not happen at anything other than a VERY SLOW rate unless under a state of major surplus energy.
  • alighterday
    alighterday Posts: 28
    Do what now?

    hqdefault.jpg

    THERE you go - Meatwad, I understand you!
  • alighterday
    alighterday Posts: 28
    This sure is a fun post! I love the funny responses
  • W31RD0
    W31RD0 Posts: 173 Member
    but the op said

    " This is why so many people can both gain muscle and lose fat at the same time because, lets stress the fact ,muscle is almost all water and fat has a lot of cal's in it. "

    :laugh:

    Yeah the "I'm estimating that muscle is 75% water, had me rather incredulous.
  • mank32
    mank32 Posts: 1,323 Member
    :creeps:
  • EvgeniZyntx
    EvgeniZyntx Posts: 24,208 Member
    Not even wrong, OP. Not even wrong.
  • likitisplit
    likitisplit Posts: 9,420 Member
    Recomp is code for I suck at cutting. :glasses:

    :tongue:

    I actually use it in place of "I suck at bulking"
  • MireyGal76
    MireyGal76 Posts: 7,334 Member
    680bb618-c1d9-43ea-bde7-860a8c4c3bc0_zpsaf815461.jpg
  • mantium999
    mantium999 Posts: 1,490 Member
    Recomp is code for I suck at cutting. :glasses:

    :tongue:

    I actually use it in place of "I suck at bulking"

    I'll join this club
  • _Terrapin_
    _Terrapin_ Posts: 4,301 Member
    OP- - - "I just don't have the time to retype what I had before but most people dont know or care to learn how muscle works from a biological stand point and will make very poor choices on how to best gain lean body mass and the setting of their goals. All the math was to prove just how little energy it takes to build a lb of muscle next to a lb of fat because of all the water."

    OP--what are the 'good' choices on how to best gain LBM and setting goals?

Categories