Consuming 5K Calories for 6 weeks

andyluvv wrote: »

neversummer589 wrote: »

I need about 4,000 calories a day to maintain.. So i aim for 4,250-4,500. Its not easy with clean calories but you can do it!! Eat big to get big!! (In a good way haha). 5,000 is do able.

I see you guys talking about maintaining on 3000/4000 calories and it just makes me want to cry haha
I freak out if I eat at around 3000 even though I think that's probably around what I need? Lately I've been having a non end constant hunger and my doctor said it might be due to the training + T therapy.

But I digress - that is a LOT of food and SO much training! I train about an hour 3/4 times a week and I find that a lot! Currently doing 5x5 and adding exercises here and there...did some lunges today, pull downs and push ups.

I feel SO tired, got home and ate the world XD
Let's get them muscles, yes!

SideSteel wrote: »

Greg Nuckols posted about this (I believe he coached this guy/oversaw the experiment) on facebook. Worth checking out the threads if you've seen them --- quite a bit of speculation about this.



"Lessons learned from sharing Alex Hormozi's before and afters, and the ongoing flak I'm still catching for it.

1) when in doubt, over-explain
I assumed people understood that 35lbs of scale weight did not mean 35 pounds of muscle, because of course that would be an insane amount to gain in 6 weeks. I assumed wrong.

I wish he would have gotten an estimate of muscle glycogen concentrations and total body water at the start and finish. Alas, he did not. But my hunch is that about 20 of the 35lbs were nothing but glycogen, water, and undigested food (the first 20lbs came within the first week or two, then his weight gain slowed down substantially for the rest of the 6 weeks). Powerlifters who've done a water cut for a meet with 24 hour weigh-ins know how easy it is to gain 15+ pounds in a very short period of time when you're started from a depleted state, and don't even get me started about bodybuilders rebounding after a show.

He also gained 2% body fat, or about 5lbs.

Then, we're only looking at about 10 total pounds of muscle, about half of which was regained, and about half of which was new. Yes, that's really, really good, but it's nothing earth-shattering, especially in someone coming back from a layoff.

I could have and should have been more explicit about all of that, but I assumed it would be pretty obvious to most people. Lesson learned.

2) a picture is worth more than 1000 words

If Alex didn't know how to manufacture such a damn good before-and-after shot (the original back pic especially) I don't think people would have been so upset. Lighting/getting a pump/angles/etc. are all hugely important. That's been documented enough times by enough people it's not worth getting into.

The visual was shocking. The visual was a little misleading too. Jarring images often cause people to make snap judgements before actually thinking through the numbers.

3) bodybuilders are leaner than most people realize

I've had people call *kitten* because "he's 20lbs bigger than any natural bodybuilder." That's simply not true.

He was 237 at his biggest, at 18% body fat. Getting stage lean would put him at around 206. But that would be a bloated, carb super loaded 206. Depleted, no food in his intestines, no bloat, you're probably looking at mid 190s. Assuming he lost some muscle getting that lean (as just about everyone does), he'd be stepping on stage at 5'10," 190lbs or so (around 180lbs of lean mass). That's about the same size as Layne Norton (a little lighter, but also a little shorter).

People who look huge and lean in day-to-day life are generally at least 30lbs over the weight they'd actually be on stage if they competed. Unless someone is in shredded, stage-ready condition, comparing their weight to a bodybuilder's stage weight is pretty idiotic.

4) when in doubt, play it safe

This is more a note for myself than for anyone else. I detest drama and I detest conflict, and this whole situation turned out to be a much larger headache than I anticipated. Back to boring, I suppose.
"

SideSteel wrote: »

Greg Nuckols posted about this (I believe he coached this guy/oversaw the experiment) on facebook. Worth checking out the threads if you've seen them --- quite a bit of speculation about this.



"Lessons learned from sharing Alex Hormozi's before and afters, and the ongoing flak I'm still catching for it.

1) when in doubt, over-explain
I assumed people understood that 35lbs of scale weight did not mean 35 pounds of muscle, because of course that would be an insane amount to gain in 6 weeks. I assumed wrong.

I wish he would have gotten an estimate of muscle glycogen concentrations and total body water at the start and finish. Alas, he did not. But my hunch is that about 20 of the 35lbs were nothing but glycogen, water, and undigested food (the first 20lbs came within the first week or two, then his weight gain slowed down substantially for the rest of the 6 weeks). Powerlifters who've done a water cut for a meet with 24 hour weigh-ins know how easy it is to gain 15+ pounds in a very short period of time when you're started from a depleted state, and don't even get me started about bodybuilders rebounding after a show.

He also gained 2% body fat, or about 5lbs.

Then, we're only looking at about 10 total pounds of muscle, about half of which was regained, and about half of which was new. Yes, that's really, really good, but it's nothing earth-shattering, especially in someone coming back from a layoff.

I could have and should have been more explicit about all of that, but I assumed it would be pretty obvious to most people. Lesson learned.

2) a picture is worth more than 1000 words

If Alex didn't know how to manufacture such a damn good before-and-after shot (the original back pic especially) I don't think people would have been so upset. Lighting/getting a pump/angles/etc. are all hugely important. That's been documented enough times by enough people it's not worth getting into.

The visual was shocking. The visual was a little misleading too. Jarring images often cause people to make snap judgements before actually thinking through the numbers.

3) bodybuilders are leaner than most people realize

I've had people call *kitten* because "he's 20lbs bigger than any natural bodybuilder." That's simply not true.

He was 237 at his biggest, at 18% body fat. Getting stage lean would put him at around 206. But that would be a bloated, carb super loaded 206. Depleted, no food in his intestines, no bloat, you're probably looking at mid 190s. Assuming he lost some muscle getting that lean (as just about everyone does), he'd be stepping on stage at 5'10," 190lbs or so (around 180lbs of lean mass). That's about the same size as Layne Norton (a little lighter, but also a little shorter).

People who look huge and lean in day-to-day life are generally at least 30lbs over the weight they'd actually be on stage if they competed. Unless someone is in shredded, stage-ready condition, comparing their weight to a bodybuilder's stage weight is pretty idiotic.

4) when in doubt, play it safe

This is more a note for myself than for anyone else. I detest drama and I detest conflict, and this whole situation turned out to be a much larger headache than I anticipated. Back to boring, I suppose.
"