Bulk or cut, and to what weight?

Options

Replies

  • Dano74
    Dano74 Posts: 503 Member
    Options
    Ultimately, it's your decision based on your goals. You could go either way.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,404 MFP Moderator
    Options
    Dano74 wrote: »
    Ultimately, it's your decision based on your goals. You could go either way.

    I agree.
  • jolive7
    jolive7 Posts: 283 Member
    Options
    I would say bulk and then cut, you dont have that much bf and if you cut you are going to risk losing strength which will be harder to gain when you bulk. PLUS we all know muscle burns fat :smile:
  • 3_Stefan_3
    3_Stefan_3 Posts: 19 Member
    Options
    Agreed...bulk bud
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    edited September 2016
    Options
    I would also say go with bulk till about 18% or so as well then cut to whatever you want. Gaining muscle first is usually the better idea unless you have a lot to lose, which you don't.
  • 99JT
    99JT Posts: 59 Member
    Options
    Thanks looks like I will continue to bulk.
  • trigden1991
    trigden1991 Posts: 4,658 Member
    Options
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    I would also say go with bulk till about 18% or so as well then cut to whatever you want. Gaining muscle first is usually the better idea unless you have a lot to lose, which you don't.

    I wouldn't advise going much over 16% as that is the level of diminishing returns. Nutrient partitioning is significantly worse and estrogen/testosterone levels become unfavourable.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    edited September 2016
    Options
    trigden1991 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »
    I would also say go with bulk till about 18% or so as well then cut to whatever you want. Gaining muscle first is usually the better idea unless you have a lot to lose, which you don't.

    I wouldn't advise going much over 16% as that is the level of diminishing returns. Nutrient partitioning is significantly worse and estrogen/testosterone levels become unfavourable.


    Not sure where you information comes from on this but hormone levels start to optimize around 15% but don't become significantly less favourable for several percentage higher or lower. If you have some reference for what you are saying I would be interested in seeing it but going to 20% is not an issue while bulking and cutting to around 12% is also fine. Going below 10% is where you start getting hormone issue going the other way, but much of this depends on your genetics.

    I have no idea what you mean nutrient partitioning is significantly worse but would be interesting in hearing what this is and why it is so.
  • trigden1991
    trigden1991 Posts: 4,658 Member
    Options
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »


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

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/calorie-partitioning-part-1.html/

  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    Options
    trigden1991 wrote: »
    Wheelhouse15 wrote: »


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

    http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-gain/calorie-partitioning-part-1.html/

    Yes, I've read Lyle's works and he is very knowledgeable, but I do disagree on the sticking below 16% because what he is talking about is figure and strength competitors and not an issue with hormonal balance. The main reason to stick in the 10-15% range is because it keeps you in the optimal range and allows to you diet down to stage weight (or lifting comp weight) in a reasonable amount of time without too much stress. The OP likely doesn't have those issues.

    I also understand the p ratio (calorie not nutrient partitioning, which is why I wasn't sure what you meant), but again, it's not going to be a big issue for the OP to bulk now to 18-20%. My BF% tends to go between 8-12% these days and I'm happy with it but my recommendation would be to bulk first then cut for the OP.
  • HamsterManV2
    HamsterManV2 Posts: 449 Member
    Options
    You are skinny fat. I am the same weight but 5'7" but leaner and more muscular for reference.

    I would do a slow bulk: TDEE + 250 calories. You won't have a six pack, but by building muscle with minimal fat gains, you will look more aesthetic overall, then you can do a cut to get aesthetic. As a tall guy, you can gain tons more muscle which is why I prefer bulking before cutting for you.
  • 99JT
    99JT Posts: 59 Member
    Options
    Dose 15% seem like a good guess for my current bf?
  • HamsterManV2
    HamsterManV2 Posts: 449 Member
    Options
    Yes I would say that's a good ballpark - no abs but no excess fat either.

    Again I think you should slow bulk - as a novice you can gain muscle. For someone of your height, we can definitely add lots of lbs of muscle and still look lean. You will make strength and aesthetic gains.
  • rainbowbow
    rainbowbow Posts: 7,490 Member
    Options
    HamsterManV2 wrote: »
    Yes I would say that's a good ballpark - no abs but no excess fat either.

    Again I think you should slow bulk - as a novice you can gain muscle. For someone of your height, we can definitely add lots of lbs of muscle and still look lean. You will make strength and aesthetic gains.

    I would agree with this purely on the fact that OP seems skinny to me. Not skinny as in low body fat, but skinny as in you lack a significant amount of muscle mass.

    If i were you (and you could really go either way right now) I would rather intentionally bulk for a long time and do a few mini cuts here and there. In your current physique, depending on your goals, i'd say a solid year or two is in order.

Categories