Best way to change my body without losing weight?

armydreamers
armydreamers Posts: 175 Member
edited November 23 in Fitness and Exercise
Probably a dumb question but here goes. I don’t necessarily care about the number on the scale because I’m in a normal weight range for my height, age etc. I hate how my body looks though. I’m flabby. :/ What’s the best way to change my body shape but not lose actual weight? Can weight training get rid of some of the flab (ie fat) on me without cutting calories? Or do I have to actually lose pounds by cutting calories to get rid of any fat?

Hope this makes sense! Thanks guys...

Replies

  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    armydreamers wrote: »
    Probably a dumb question but here goes. I don’t necessarily care about the number on the scale because I’m in a normal weight range for my height, age etc. I hate how my body looks though. I’m flabby. :/ What’s the best way to change my body shape but not lose actual weight? Can weight training get rid of some of the flab (ie fat) on me without cutting calories? Or do I have to actually lose pounds by cutting calories to get rid of any fat?

    Hope this makes sense! Thanks guys...

    Yep, recomp
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    There is only one answer for how you asked.

    If you want to lose fat and not lose weight, you can only recomp.

    Though its more efficient to just cut calories while strength training and then go from there IMHO in most cases.
  • sardelsa
    sardelsa Posts: 9,812 Member
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    There is only one answer for how you asked.

    If you want to lose fat and not lose weight, you can only recomp.

    Though its more efficient to just cut calories while strength training and then go from there IMHO in most cases.

    I'm always curious because that is how I did it. However not sure how efficient it was.. I basically kept lowering my weight while lifting and shrunk down to nothing. Then I became almost underweight so I bulked. I wonder if it would have been better and taken the same amount of time/work to recomp from the start and how it would have affected my results. What are your thoughts @Chieflrg ?
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    sardelsa wrote: »
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    There is only one answer for how you asked.

    If you want to lose fat and not lose weight, you can only recomp.

    Though its more efficient to just cut calories while strength training and then go from there IMHO in most cases.

    I'm always curious because that is how I did it. However not sure how efficient it was.. I basically kept lowering my weight while lifting and shrunk down to nothing. Then I became almost underweight so I bulked. I wonder if it would have been better and taken the same amount of time/work to recomp from the start and how it would have affected my results. What are your thoughts @Chieflrg ?

    It would depend on the individual...how much weight to lose, programming, etc. Hard to tell from the info I know exactly what you did. Have you ever tried barbell strength training exclusively?

    In general I'm not a fan of recomps for an efficiency standpoint for a person unless they are experienced lifters utilizing barbell training and had sucessful cuts/bulks. They understand the fluctuations and understand it's virtually impossible to maintain a weight by definition.

    This doesn't mean recomp style can't be successful, I just wouldn't generally recommend without knowing more info of the individual and go from there.
  • sardelsa
    sardelsa Posts: 9,812 Member
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    sardelsa wrote: »
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    There is only one answer for how you asked.

    If you want to lose fat and not lose weight, you can only recomp.

    Though its more efficient to just cut calories while strength training and then go from there IMHO in most cases.

    I'm always curious because that is how I did it. However not sure how efficient it was.. I basically kept lowering my weight while lifting and shrunk down to nothing. Then I became almost underweight so I bulked. I wonder if it would have been better and taken the same amount of time/work to recomp from the start and how it would have affected my results. What are your thoughts @Chieflrg ?

    It would depend on the individual...how much weight to lose, programming, etc. Hard to tell from the info I know exactly what you did. Have you ever tried barbell strength training exclusively?

    In general I'm not a fan of recomps for an efficiency standpoint for a person unless they are experienced lifters utilizing barbell training and had sucessful cuts/bulks. They understand the fluctuations and understand it's virtually impossible to maintain a weight by definition.

    This doesn't mean recomp style can't be successful, I just wouldn't generally recommend without knowing more info of the individual and go from there.

    Ahh I see. My programming was/is a mix of barbell, dumbbell, bodyweight and band work. Exclusive barbell training would not work as well as I don't have a rack or bench setup, also my interest/adherence would not be great.
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    edited December 2017
    I feel doing two things concurrently is more efficient than doing them consecutively, for some people it may not be quicker but that's a different word with a different meaning. :)

    Do agree that recomp and cut/bulk cycles suit different people for a variety of reasons including their end goal.

    I would be more inclined to go recomp for beginners when rapid progress will happen almost by default and consider cut/bulk when, or if, progress stalls on the way to their desired goal.
    Cut/bulk would as a generalisation be more suited to people with more extreme physique goals and a tolerance for having to be constantly on point with their diet and training.
  • ccruz985
    ccruz985 Posts: 646 Member
    Recomp/resistance training. For reals. It WORKS.
  • armydreamers
    armydreamers Posts: 175 Member
    ccruz985 wrote: »
    Recomp/resistance training. For reals. It WORKS.

    So would that mean I just continue to eat at maintenance and start lifting?
  • TavistockToad
    TavistockToad Posts: 35,719 Member
    armydreamers wrote: »
    ccruz985 wrote: »
    Recomp/resistance training. For reals. It WORKS.

    So would that mean I just continue to eat at maintenance and start lifting?

    Yes. Make sure you're getting adequate protein too.
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    sardelsa wrote: »
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    sardelsa wrote: »
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    There is only one answer for how you asked.

    If you want to lose fat and not lose weight, you can only recomp.

    Though its more efficient to just cut calories while strength training and then go from there IMHO in most cases.

    I'm always curious because that is how I did it. However not sure how efficient it was.. I basically kept lowering my weight while lifting and shrunk down to nothing. Then I became almost underweight so I bulked. I wonder if it would have been better and taken the same amount of time/work to recomp from the start and how it would have affected my results. What are your thoughts @Chieflrg ?

    It would depend on the individual...how much weight to lose, programming, etc. Hard to tell from the info I know exactly what you did. Have you ever tried barbell strength training exclusively?

    In general I'm not a fan of recomps for an efficiency standpoint for a person unless they are experienced lifters utilizing barbell training and had sucessful cuts/bulks. They understand the fluctuations and understand it's virtually impossible to maintain a weight by definition.

    This doesn't mean recomp style can't be successful, I just wouldn't generally recommend without knowing more info of the individual and go from there.

    Ahh I see. My programming was/is a mix of barbell, dumbbell, bodyweight and band work. Exclusive barbell training would not work as well as I don't have a rack or bench setup, also my interest/adherence would not be great.

    Yes, I understand you Stef. I just never asked you and was unsure. As far as programming I actually mean frequency, intensity, volume, recovery, if adaptation is optimal, what are deficit goals, is there a sport involved. I prefer quite a bit of background before I can give "thoughts" on a individual. :)
  • brendanwhite84
    brendanwhite84 Posts: 219 Member
    I'd just add a suggestion that you lift heavy, whatever heavy is for you, with a goal of progressively adding more weight. I only bring it up because I not-so-long-ago saw someone on these forums suggest another person start deadlifting with 5 lb dumbbells and I still have nightmares about that, haha. :smile:
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    sijomial wrote: »
    I feel doing two things concurrently is more efficient than doing them consecutively, for some people it may not be quicker but that's a different word with a different meaning. :)

    Do agree that recomp and cut/bulk cycles suit different people for a variety of reasons including their end goal.

    would be more inclined to go recomp for beginners when rapid progress will happen almost by default and consider cut/bulk when, or if, progress stalls on the way to their desired goal.
    Cut/bulk would as a generalisation be more suited to people with more extreme physique goals and a tolerance for having to be constantly on point with their diet and training.
    Agree, but I think as a beginner one has to determine what the weightloss goal is. I wouldn't be inclined to recommend a recomp nor would I consider it efficient for Stef if she needed to lose +20% bf. Maybe we differ on the side of the fence :).
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    I feel doing two things concurrently is more efficient than doing them consecutively, for some people it may not be quicker but that's a different word with a different meaning. :)

    Do agree that recomp and cut/bulk cycles suit different people for a variety of reasons including their end goal.

    would be more inclined to go recomp for beginners when rapid progress will happen almost by default and consider cut/bulk when, or if, progress stalls on the way to their desired goal.
    Cut/bulk would as a generalisation be more suited to people with more extreme physique goals and a tolerance for having to be constantly on point with their diet and training.
    Agree, but I think as a beginner one has to determine what the weightloss goal is. I wouldn't be inclined to recommend a recomp nor would I consider it efficient for Stef if she needed to lose +20% bf. Maybe we differ on the side of the fence :).

    I've not met someone at their goal weight who needs to lose +20% body fat so, sorry but not sure I understand your point.

    Most people at goal weight are seeking to fine tune their physique so on that basis recomp is very suitable - or as it used to be simply called "getting in shape" before it was given the name recomp. Of course not everyone falls into the most category. That's where goals and individual circumstances need to determine methods, definitely agree on that.
  • armydreamers
    armydreamers Posts: 175 Member
    Ok, so theoretically I can lose some inches without losing weight by lifting heavy? I would love to lose a few inches off my waist. Any program suggestions? Can I do this at home with dumbbells or kettlebells? Best lifts for the waist area?
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,809 Member
    armydreamers wrote: »
    Ok, so theoretically I can lose some inches without losing weight by lifting heavy? I would love to lose a few inches off my waist. Any program suggestions? Can I do this at home with dumbbells or kettlebells? Best lifts for the waist area?

    Here's a list of programs....
    http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10332083/which-lifting-program-is-the-best-for-you/p1

    Best lifts for waist area?
    Do you mean to gain strength or muscle size? Because you can't target where fat comes from.

    Honestly most people are better off picking and following an established program rather than working on individual body parts.
  • Chieflrg
    Chieflrg Posts: 9,097 Member
    edited December 2017
    sijomial wrote: »
    Chieflrg wrote: »
    sijomial wrote: »
    I feel doing two things concurrently is more efficient than doing them consecutively, for some people it may not be quicker but that's a different word with a different meaning. :)

    Do agree that recomp and cut/bulk cycles suit different people for a variety of reasons including their end goal.

    would be more inclined to go recomp for beginners when rapid progress will happen almost by default and consider cut/bulk when, or if, progress stalls on the way to their desired goal.
    Cut/bulk would as a generalisation be more suited to people with more extreme physique goals and a tolerance for having to be constantly on point with their diet and training.
    Agree, but I think as a beginner one has to determine what the weightloss goal is. I wouldn't be inclined to recommend a recomp nor would I consider it efficient for Stef if she needed to lose +20% bf. Maybe we differ on the side of the fence :).

    I've not met someone at their goal weight who needs to lose +20% body fat so, sorry but not sure I understand your point.

    Yeah I can understand why you are confused....lol.

    Stef asked me my thoughts on "if she recomped from the start" verses a bulk/cut that she actually did. I answered I couldn't answer not knowing her info was before. Such as programming, stats, etc.

    My example was if she "had" +20% to lose I wouldn't recommend a recomp. I have no idea what she weighed before she lost all her weight. She obviously wouldn't be at her goal weight before she started to cut weight.

    In other words, we probably should discuss her question outside of this post.

    My appoligies for any derail in answering her question here.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories