trainers or professional bodybuilders opinion needed
Replies
-
0
-
The fact that your numbers are all over the place - from day to day - should tell you right away your method is utter crap
Seriously - look at the last entry for "Muscle lbs." You really think you gained 1.9 lbs of muscle overnight?
He seems to think LBM = muscle and place too much reliance on the accuracy of BIAs that are notoriously inaccurate.
Also, when returning to lifting, I can easily gain 5lb in water/glycogen and I have less muscle mass so someone with more could easily gain more.
0 -
Your friend (and his trainer) are lying, and they know it. No matter how many facts you throw at them, they're gonna keep lying, even if just to save face.0
-
This has been interesting. I hope the OP reverses his position. I've learned something.0
-
ScottJTyler wrote: »You're being assumptive and slanderous.
These two pictures were taken in June and then August last Year. Sadly I don't have the data to show you as I wasn't as meticulous then. For context: the first picture was at the end of a 3 month break from weights and the second was after going straight back into 2 hours a day training for around 10 weeks.
The guy who gained two stone was previously athletic but had been sedentary for about a year prior to starting. He was naturally lean and skinny but when I got him simply eating more his strength and size shot up. The weight gain is self-reported so can be treated with a little skepticism but the rapid gain in size is visually apparent.
Do people actually believe you usually when you show them these pictures?0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »You're being assumptive and slanderous.
These two pictures were taken in June and then August last Year. Sadly I don't have the data to show you as I wasn't as meticulous then. For context: the first picture was at the end of a 3 month break from weights and the second was after going straight back into 2 hours a day training for around 10 weeks.
The guy who gained two stone was previously athletic but had been sedentary for about a year prior to starting. He was naturally lean and skinny but when I got him simply eating more his strength and size shot up. The weight gain is self-reported so can be treated with a little skepticism but the rapid gain in size is visually apparent.
Do people actually believe you usually when you show them these pictures?
I believe his graphs...which show a .2kg muscle mass gain in 1 month.0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »You're being assumptive and slanderous.
These two pictures were taken in June and then August last Year. Sadly I don't have the data to show you as I wasn't as meticulous then. For context: the first picture was at the end of a 3 month break from weights and the second was after going straight back into 2 hours a day training for around 10 weeks.
The guy who gained two stone was previously athletic but had been sedentary for about a year prior to starting. He was naturally lean and skinny but when I got him simply eating more his strength and size shot up. The weight gain is self-reported so can be treated with a little skepticism but the rapid gain in size is visually apparent.
Do people actually believe you usually when you show them these pictures?
I believe his graphs...which show a .2kg muscle mass gain in 1 month.
I would be hesitant to do that (unless I read the graph wrong).
Look at the most recent 4 days.
Went from 84.8 -> 87.2 in 4 days.
2.4 lbs???
Would need to know how measurements are being done.0 -
Ah...those measurements are not the most accurate....0
-
ScottJTyler wrote: »You're being assumptive and slanderous.
These two pictures were taken in June and then August last Year. Sadly I don't have the data to show you as I wasn't as meticulous then. For context: the first picture was at the end of a 3 month break from weights and the second was after going straight back into 2 hours a day training for around 10 weeks.
The guy who gained two stone was previously athletic but had been sedentary for about a year prior to starting. He was naturally lean and skinny but when I got him simply eating more his strength and size shot up. The weight gain is self-reported so can be treated with a little skepticism but the rapid gain in size is visually apparent.
Do people actually believe you usually when you show them these pictures?
I believe his graphs...which show a .2kg muscle mass gain in 1 month.
I would be hesitant to do that (unless I read the graph wrong).
Look at the most recent 4 days.
Went from 84.8 -> 87.2 in 4 days.
2.4 lbs???
Would need to know how measurements are being done.
Oops, you're right. I just looked at the chart and not the spreadsheet.
Back to calling shenanigans.0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »You're being assumptive and slanderous.
These two pictures were taken in June and then August last Year. Sadly I don't have the data to show you as I wasn't as meticulous then. For context: the first picture was at the end of a 3 month break from weights and the second was after going straight back into 2 hours a day training for around 10 weeks.
The guy who gained two stone was previously athletic but had been sedentary for about a year prior to starting. He was naturally lean and skinny but when I got him simply eating more his strength and size shot up. The weight gain is self-reported so can be treated with a little skepticism but the rapid gain in size is visually apparent.
Do people actually believe you usually when you show them these pictures?
I believe his graphs...which show a .2kg muscle mass gain in 1 month.
His graphs are showing a different time period than he is claiming he gained all the muscle - which is even further confusing people.0 -
Just to back Scott up a bit....you look phenomenal so the actual numbers are of little importance in the overall scheme of things.
The calling of shenanigans is a necessity though so that other people don't come on here and think they could get results like you claim you have gotten as they will likely be disappointed.0 -
0
-
The fact that your numbers are all over the place - from day to day - should tell you right away your method is utter crap
Seriously - look at the last entry for "Muscle lbs." You really think you gained 1.9 lbs of muscle overnight?
That's why I said trends.EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Looking at the data your FFM has been going down. So no, you aren't building muscle over the deficit.
While "%Muscle" has been going up, you have been losing muscle. It's just that the muscle loss has been smaller than the fat loss.
The FFM is something I calculated myself by just taking the fat away from the total. Yes I have lost 3.9kg of FFM so I guess my bones and organs are lighter now.
The scales give you the muscle percentage and the mass can be found by simply multiplying by the total weight. This is in the 9th and 10th columns.
Your table implies that you have lost muscle mass. What's up with that?
Look at the graphs. Muscle mass is trending upwards for the most recent few weeks while fat mass has dropped over 1kg. The total loss at the bottom is going from 91kg to now, the older entries are cut off the screenshot.Last year, you have not been lifting for 3 months - you can have the impact similar to newbie gains when returning from a lay off. Plus water/glycogen increase. Your assertion that your gains were all muscle is fundamentally flawed and particularly the assertion that it is possible for someone who is experienced and not coming back from a lay off. It kind of impairs credibility.
Like I said, last year I gained 13.2lbs in 10 weeks and got leaner. The limit the article states is 0.5lb of actual muscle/week. I gained 1.32lbs/week. Can you gain 0.83lbs/week of just water and glycogen?
0 -
I agree with that. I think 0.5lbs/week is a reasonable limit for the average person going to the gym by themselves and following a program.The calling of shenanigans is a necessity though so that other people don't come on here and think they could get results like you claim you have gotten as they will likely be disappointed.
The original post was asked to trainers or bodybuilders and I put in my two pennies. For people who revolve their lives around training and have an aggressive, positive mindset for it there are a whole new set of rules and limits.
If you do 5 x 5 and train 3 hours a week, no you can't build muscle rapidly. If you train with brutally high intensity and as high volume as you have time in the day for, every day, you see results that are not yet in the realm of science.
Most people should take the time they spend furthering their internet education on bodyrecomposition.com and t-nation and spend it lifting.
0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »The fact that your numbers are all over the place - from day to day - should tell you right away your method is utter crap
Seriously - look at the last entry for "Muscle lbs." You really think you gained 1.9 lbs of muscle overnight?
That's why I said trends.EvgeniZyntx wrote: »Looking at the data your FFM has been going down. So no, you aren't building muscle over the deficit.
While "%Muscle" has been going up, you have been losing muscle. It's just that the muscle loss has been smaller than the fat loss.
The FFM is something I calculated myself by just taking the fat away from the total. Yes I have lost 3.9kg of FFM so I guess my bones and organs are lighter now.
The scales give you the muscle percentage and the mass can be found by simply multiplying by the total weight. This is in the 9th and 10th columns.
Your table implies that you have lost muscle mass. What's up with that?
Look at the graphs. Muscle mass is trending upwards for the most recent few weeks while fat mass has dropped over 1kg. The total loss at the bottom is going from 91kg to now, the older entries are cut off the screenshot.Last year, you have not been lifting for 3 months - you can have the impact similar to newbie gains when returning from a lay off. Plus water/glycogen increase. Your assertion that your gains were all muscle is fundamentally flawed and particularly the assertion that it is possible for someone who is experienced and not coming back from a lay off. It kind of impairs credibility.
Like I said, last year I gained 13.2lbs in 10 weeks and got leaner. The limit the article states is 0.5lb of actual muscle/week. I gained 1.32lbs/week. Can you gain 0.83lbs/week of just water and glycogen?
You are using a BIA device for your data - which is fundamentally flawed, and yes, I notice the uptick - but you are still down. What's up with that? You do not gain 0.3lb per week from just water/glycogen - you gain a bunch when you get back to lifting - which I said - not xkg per week. If you had actual data from last year it would be interesting to see.
You really do not seem to realize what FFM is. It includes water and food weight - its anything not fat. Your comment about bones and organs, unless you were being facetious is kind of adding to your lack of credibility.0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »Like I said, last year I gained 13.2lbs in 10 weeks and got leaner. The limit the article states is 0.5lb of actual muscle/week. I gained 1.32lbs/week. Can you gain 0.83lbs/week of just water and glycogen?
Nope. Water and glycogen aren't gradual gains. That's why people lose 5 pounds when they start dieting and gain 5 pounds when they stop. That's why one cheat meal puts people up 5 pounds. Even starting creatine would add a few pounds in the first week of loading, but no more after.0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »Like I said, last year I gained 13.2lbs in 10 weeks and got leaner. The limit the article states is 0.5lb of actual muscle/week. I gained 1.32lbs/week. Can you gain 0.83lbs/week of just water and glycogen?
Nope. Water and glycogen aren't gradual gains. That's why people lose 5 pounds when they start dieting and gain 5 pounds when they stop. That's why one cheat meal puts people up 5 pounds. Even starting creatine would add a few pounds in the first week of loading, but no more after.
I gained 5lb in less than a week when I started taking creatine. Which means I gained 5lb of muscle right? Right?0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »Like I said, last year I gained 13.2lbs in 10 weeks and got leaner. The limit the article states is 0.5lb of actual muscle/week. I gained 1.32lbs/week. Can you gain 0.83lbs/week of just water and glycogen?
Nope. Water and glycogen aren't gradual gains. That's why people lose 5 pounds when they start dieting and gain 5 pounds when they stop. That's why one cheat meal puts people up 5 pounds. Even starting creatine would add a few pounds in the first week of loading, but no more after.
I gained 5lb in less than a week when I started taking creatine. Which means I gained 5lb of muscle right? Right?
I did too! I also gained 7 pounds in the first 24 hours after my bodybuilding competition, must have been muscle.0 -
Come to think of it I'm a bit of a fat boy myself. Lmao. I eat over 3500 calorie a day and am 5 7 163. Your friend could be right if he was taking anabolic steroids and in the gym everyday along with a balanced diet that has an outrageous amount of protein in it. I'm not a professional though haha. So I wouldn't trust my opinion.0
-
You do not gain 0.3lb per week from just water/glycogen - you gain a bunch when you get back to lifting
Let's do some maths again. 13.2lbs in 10 weeks, 0.5lb/week max according to the article. So according to this limit I could only have gained 5lbs of muscle. This means I gained 8.3lbs of water and glycogen in one big hit? Not likely.You really do not seem to realize what FFM is. It includes water and food weight - its anything not fat. Your comment about bones and organs, unless you were being facetious is kind of adding to your lack of credibility.
I calculated FFM by subtracting the fat mass from the total weight, jusst for interest. It went down by 3.9kg over the data collection period. I took all measurements at the same time of day and in as similar conditions are possible (hydration, after toilet, clothes, placement of scales, temperature of room). So you think before I was carrying around 3.9kg of food and now I'm empty? What do you attribute the loss in FFM to?
I'm not confusing FFM and muscle as I have clearly given them separate columns.
0 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »
Hahahshaha! Omg.0 -
You are using a BIA device for your data - which is fundamentally flawed
Some people will never be happy. Yes the BIA method is not perfect but the rise in muscle correlated with my increase in training and the drops in body fat correlate with lower calorie periods (you can even cross check with my food diary if you're that bothered). I am aware of its limitations but when it gives you results you expect based on your calories and activity I am inclined to at least consider its validity.and yes, I notice the uptick - but you are still down. What's up with that?
Down over the total period. The most recent period I have gained muscle and lost fat, which the internet article said could not be done.
0 -
You should then go to BB.com or Getbig.com and sell your program to them. All them dudes looking to gain mounds of muscle would (especially the amateurs looking to get their pro card) gladly pay you rather than pay for gear.ScottJTyler wrote: »I tracked my weight and I was 77kg morning weight in the first and 83kg in the second. That's 6kg/13.2lbs in 10 weeks. The photo below is from August as well and in a similar stance. I didn't track anything other than weight or do proper before and after photos because I didn't expect such rapid results. I just trained my *kitten* off and this is what happened.
According to that article the limit is 0.5lb/week. So I must have gained 8.2lbs or more of just water and glycogen. Seems unlikely.
If you are so cynical and distrustful that only DEXA scan data will be sufficient evidence for you then you're going to be disappointed. Even if I did provide those you'd bring into question the accuracy of that method and highlight its prediction flaws.
The article says you can't build muscle in a calorie deficit which is nonsense and something I actually do have data for. These data are from a BIA scale.
This is from my current cut. My muscle mass was trending downwards initially because I lowered my volume and intensity because this is the common thing people say on the internet. Then right at the lowest point I decided to screw it and up my training again. Lo and behold, my muscle mass (actual muscle mass, not fat free mass) has been trending upwards while going from 11 to 9.5% bodyfat. And I'm not what you'd call 'untrained'.
Sounds obvious but if you increase the muscle building stimulus... you will build muscle, regardless of whether you’re in a calorie surplus or a deficit. Your body will find a way.
It doesn’t matter if you are in a ‘cut’ and/or you’re advanced, increase training volume and you’ll build muscle. Increase it rapidly and you will build muscle rapidly. Try it and prove me wrong.
Challenge someone like Layne Norton, or other pros in nutrition and hypertrophy instead of us novices here. We'll stick to science since we're still not convinced.
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
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
ScottJTyler wrote: »You are using a BIA device for your data - which is fundamentally flawed
Some people will never be happy. Yes the BIA method is not perfect but the rise in muscle correlated with my increase in training and the drops in body fat correlate with lower calorie periods (you can even cross check with my food diary if you're that bothered). I am aware of its limitations but when it gives you results you expect based on your calories and activity I am inclined to at least consider its validity.and yes, I notice the uptick - but you are still down. What's up with that?
Down over the total period. The most recent period I have gained muscle and lost fat, which the internet article said could not be done.
Your trends went up by half a pound over 4-ish weeks? While using a method that's notoriously inaccurate that gives you readings fluctuating by over 2 pounds on a day to day basis. And you think that can't possibly be water weight retention, because...0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »You are using a BIA device for your data - which is fundamentally flawed
Some people will never be happy. Yes the BIA method is not perfect but the rise in muscle correlated with my increase in training and the drops in body fat correlate with lower calorie periods (you can even cross check with my food diary if you're that bothered). I am aware of its limitations but when it gives you results you expect based on your calories and activity I am inclined to at least consider its validity.and yes, I notice the uptick - but you are still down. What's up with that?
Down over the total period. The most recent period I have gained muscle and lost fat, which the internet article said could not be done.
Its not a case of never being happy - BIA devices are wildly inaccurate - which you can read up about if you bother to click the link LolBro provided. It does not indicate an increase in muscle and trying to use a BIA in any event to show anything, especially over such a short time is futile. I am not sure how you are not understanding that LBM =/= muscle mass. I have raised this point before - quite a few times as have others.
Also, you did not answer the question regarding the decrease in your apparent muscle (other than implying you had a loss in bone density and your organs were smaller!!). You cannot argue both sides - one minute its representative of muscle and the next it is not (hint: it's the latter).0 -
I'm not doubting that there is some real change there- but the if you're taking "before and after" photos specifically to prove a point that's got an entire community gawfing with incredulity- do you think you would use something more standard- like two side by sides- not one cleared posed and dieted vs one not flexed and a bad angle?ScottJTyler wrote: »You're being assumptive and slanderous.
These two pictures were taken in June and then August last Year. Sadly I don't have the data to show you as I wasn't as meticulous then. For context: the first picture was at the end of a 3 month break from weights and the second was after going straight back into 2 hours a day training for around 10 weeks.
The guy who gained two stone was previously athletic but had been sedentary for about a year prior to starting. He was naturally lean and skinny but when I got him simply eating more his strength and size shot up. The weight gain is self-reported so can be treated with a little skepticism but the rapid gain in size is visually apparent.
Do people actually believe you usually when you show them these pictures?
I believe his graphs...which show a .2kg muscle mass gain in 1 month.
That's what I find laughable- it's not like someone going from a mere 350 to 150- no matter which way you stand- it's going to be damn obvious.
Those pictures- at his size- he should know better.
0 -
I'm not doubting that there is some real change there- but the if you're taking "before and after" photos specifically to prove a point that's got an entire community gawfing with incredulity- do you think you would use something more standard- like two side by sides- not one cleared posed and dieted vs one not flexed and a bad angle?
That's what I find laughable- it's not like someone going from a mere 350 to 150- no matter which way you stand- it's going to be damn obvious.
Those pictures- at his size- he should know better.
The second one I posted is a similar pose. Clearly leaner, clearly bigger, no matter what you say about angles, lighting, flexed, etc. I said I didn't take proper before and after pictures, these are the best I have from that time.
Also there was a big increase in leg size. I don't have a before picture for that but I must have put on a good few pounds on each quad.
I am not sure how you are not understanding that LBM =/= muscle mass. I have raised this point before - quite a few times as have others.
At no point did I say the 13.2lbs was all muscle. I said I gained that weight and got leaner. But it is too large a gain in weight to attribute it to water/food/glycogen in order to get it to fit into your absolute scientific certainty of 0.5lbs of muscle gain/week. Yes I gained weight partly in food/water/glycogen/bone density/whatever but not 8.2lbs worth or 62% of it. Seems like too much. I lost fat as well so my FFM most likely increased by more than 13.2lbs. But I thought I wouldn't even mention that.Its not a case of never being happy - BIA devices are wildly inaccurate - which you can read up about if you bother to click the link LolBro provided. It does not indicate an increase in muscle and trying to use a BIA in any event to show anything, especially over such a short time is futile.
If you don't believe the pictures and dismiss the BIA data then there's not much more I can do for you. Like I said, I'm aware that it can give crappy results sometimes but it seems to be showing what I expect it to for now so I'm convinced by it.
0 -
Even if we believe your BIA data, it clearly does NOT say you gained "a good few pounds" on your legs alone. It shows a half pound uptrend at the end over a whole month.
And no, your two pictures did not have similar poses at all. Check out the video I posted on how easily you can make yourself look bigger or smaller within a few hours.0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M957dACQyfU
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions