At what % fat do you cut

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]no_name_narrator wrote:

How did you possibly extrapolate that from what I said. My SOLE point was Johnny Jackson wasn’t a good refutation to the claim that “if you don’t have abs, you aren’t a bodybuilder” because he wasn’t competing as a bodybuilder in the picture you posted. [/quote]

…and my sole point is I disagree because what happened in reality is it made him an even larger better bodybuilder.

One picture does not explain this man’s LIFE.

Everything he did contributed to how he looks now…not just the things that make your point look better.

So, once again, do you think the guy who builds giant muscles but lost his abs for a few months did it wrong vs the guy who stayed lean the whole time and gained less muscle?

Please answer this. Don’t the results matter most?[/quote]

Sure the results matter the most but Johnny Jackson wasn’t some untrained kid who gained some size and strength while not worrying about his abs. He’s a professional bodybuilder who’s been doing this for years, so it’s entirely possibly that had he focused purely on bodybuilding rather than taking time to specifically powerlift, which are quite different, he could have made more progress in his bodybuilding career.

There’s a reason that bodybuilders and powerlifters have different training philosphies, it’s because they tend to achieve very specfic goals. Who knows, maybe Johnny Jackson could have been better.

[quote]no_name_narrator wrote:

Sure the results matter the most but Johnny Jackson wasn’t some untrained kid who gained some size and strength while not worrying about his abs. He’s a professional bodybuilder who’s been doing this for years, so it’s entirely possibly that had he focused purely on bodybuilding rather than taking time to specifically powerlift, which are quite different, he could have made more progress in his bodybuilding career. [/quote]

But…he did great in his bodybuilding career.

better than most.

[quote]

There’s a reason that bodybuilders and powerlifters have different training philosphies, it’s because they tend to achieve very specfic goals. Who knows, maybe Johnny Jackson could have been better. [/quote]

Early on, the goals are nearly identical.

I asked that question about the guy who gained more muscle.

Why no answer?

How would heavy weight and lots of food hold back someone’s progress in bodybuilding?

Question, you see this pic as holding someone back with goals in bodybuilding…and not impressive?

I think it really just depends on the person… I remember when JM competed in the ohio in 09 he was a big light heavy weight, as in just meeting the limit, now he competes as a super heavy weight… and from knowing him and how he is, he doesn’t balloon up in weight anymore, so lean gains can be done… i’m sure the Biotest stack helped a lot too

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]no_name_narrator wrote:

Sure the results matter the most but Johnny Jackson wasn’t some untrained kid who gained some size and strength while not worrying about his abs. He’s a professional bodybuilder who’s been doing this for years, so it’s entirely possibly that had he focused purely on bodybuilding rather than taking time to specifically powerlift, which are quite different, he could have made more progress in his bodybuilding career. [/quote]

But…he did great in his bodybuilding career.

better than most.

Did you read my answer? My first sentence said yes I agreed with your example, but I didn’t think it was applicable to this situation. Further, Johnny Jackson wasn’t someone in early on in his career, he was a well-seasoned veteran. Sure he had a good career but maybe he could have made more progress focusing upon a singular goal, an idea you always talk about when bulking.

Regardless, I’m not arguing that it hurt or helped him, I’m simply saying that, in the picture, he was likely focusing upon powerlifting, a sport which doesn’t require any level of leanness in the super heavy division. Thus making him a poor refutation of the original claim.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]no_name_narrator wrote:

Sure the results matter the most but Johnny Jackson wasn’t some untrained kid who gained some size and strength while not worrying about his abs. He’s a professional bodybuilder who’s been doing this for years, so it’s entirely possibly that had he focused purely on bodybuilding rather than taking time to specifically powerlift, which are quite different, he could have made more progress in his bodybuilding career. [/quote]

But…he did great in his bodybuilding career.

better than most.

The OP’s topic was worded as “At what fat percentage do YOU cut?” To me, that means he is asking the posters on the site our opinions. I hate to speak for the others who have responded in this post, but I think they would agree with me on several points. Many of us are natural, and know that we will never make a living off of this sport. If you want to carry a high percentage of bodyfat for years at a time in the prime of your life because it “might help you build more muscle than if you stayed lean,” then that’s completely your right. However, I think that natty bb’ing should be about health as well, and that I should look leaner than the majority of the population in addition to building muscle year round, even if I’m not shredded. Staying respectably lean doesn’t mean you sacrifice building size. The possible slight increase in muscle gained by bulking to uncomfortable levels of BF will be negligible after the much longer prep and likely increased cardio that will be needed as a result

[quote]no_name_narrator wrote:

Did you read my answer? My first sentence said yes I agreed with your example, but I didn’t think it was applicable to this situation. Further, Johnny Jackson wasn’t someone in early on in his career, he was a well-seasoned veteran. [/quote]

That should lead you to the conclusion that he wouldn’t have done it if it HURT his bodybuilding.

[quote]

Regardless, I’m not arguing that it hurt or helped him, I’m simply saying that, in the picture, he was likely focusing upon powerlifting, a sport which doesn’t require any level of leanness in the super heavy division. Thus making him a poor refutation of the original claim. [/quote]

That isn’t much of a point. I may be focused on all out size and strength for a while…like many really big guys…just like he was focused on “powerlifting”.

Either way, these are not actions that go AGAINST bodybuilding. They can compliment it.

In other words, if someone is focusing on all out size and strength and they …GASP…can’t see all abs…doesn’t whether or not they did it wrong rely on the muscle that was built in the progress?

Please answer this directly.

…and props on being able to carry on a discussion without the personal attacks. You can state your train of thought well.

[quote]pwolves17 wrote:

The OP’s topic was worded as “At what fat percentage do YOU cut?” To me, that means he is asking the posters on the site our opinions. I hate to speak for the others who have responded in this post, but I think they would agree with me on several points. Many of us are natural, and know that we will never make a living off of this sport. If you want to carry a high percentage of bodyfat for years at a time in the prime of your life because it “might help you build more muscle than if you stayed lean,” then that’s completely your right. However, I think that natty bb’ing should be about health as well, and that I should look leaner than the majority of the population in addition to building muscle year round, even if I’m not shredded. Staying respectably lean doesn’t mean you sacrifice building size. The possible slight increase in muscle gained by bulking to uncomfortable levels of BF will be negligible after the much longer prep and likely increased cardio that will be needed as a result[/quote]

Basing your actions on your results stays the same whether you are natural or use steroids.

This isn’t about reaching a high bodyfat percentage.

It is about gaining the most muscle in the least time frame.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]no_name_narrator wrote:

Did you read my answer? My first sentence said yes I agreed with your example, but I didn’t think it was applicable to this situation. Further, Johnny Jackson wasn’t someone in early on in his career, he was a well-seasoned veteran. [/quote]

That should lead you to the conclusion that he wouldn’t have done it if it HURT his bodybuilding.

[quote]

Regardless, I’m not arguing that it hurt or helped him, I’m simply saying that, in the picture, he was likely focusing upon powerlifting, a sport which doesn’t require any level of leanness in the super heavy division. Thus making him a poor refutation of the original claim. [/quote]

That isn’t much of a point. I may be focused on all out size and strength for a while…like many really big guys…just like he was focused on “powerlifting”.

Either way, these are not actions that go AGAINST bodybuilding. They can compliment it.

In other words, if someone is focusing on all out size and strength and they …GASP…can’t see all abs…doesn’t whether or not they did it wrong rely on the muscle that was built in the progress?

Please answer this directly.

…and props on being able to carry on a discussion without the personal attacks. You can state your train of thought well.[/quote]

Right but I think there is a difference between focusing on all out size and strength and powerlifting. Certain powerlifting techniques are meant to allow for the best leverage to move the most weight regardless of the potential for hypertrophy. So it’s possible that he sacrificed training for size for awhile to focus on his total. Though you are probably right that this kind of powerlifting training did help him create that dense grainy look which could be beneficial to his bodybuilding career.

You know, I used to be against this whole “abs don’t matter” philosophy… but after seeing all these people who prioritize abs before size… I’m starting to agree with the basic sentiment of it.

Size, with abs, is great. Maintaining leanness while gaining weight, is fine. But trying to have six-pack abs without actually having any muscle at all… I don’t get it.

In the past couple weeks, I’ve seen more and more pictures in the media: 140lb guys posing with their abs, who look like maybe they’ve spent a month in the gym in their life.

I don’t get that any more than the idea that you’d want to get as big as possible without ever wanting to see your abs at all. I’m not talking about “contest condition”, just being able to see some definition.

Personally, I’ve always adhered to the ‘not being embarrassed taking my shirt off / still seeing abs’ rule of thumb.

Judging Johnnie Jackson (who I admit being a fan of) and his personal approach of chasing 2 goals at once and doing okay as a pro vs Lee Haney’s advice of focusing on one goal and being the absolute best in the entire world for 8 years in a row is silly. In fact, it’s just as silly as throwing up a photo of one single competitor to refute a a general guideline from an 8x Mr. Olympia that is also shared by two very well known, successful, and respected coaches (JM and SS and probably a heck of a lot more) which they have used with countless athletes, amateur and professional. I assume that’s why other posters attributed statements and approaches as such.

I’m wondering how quickly this is going to head downhill and turn into every other ridiculous thread about leanness vs force feeding growth for “really big gainz”.

S

[quote]Professor X wrote:
If a guy built giant muscles but lost his abs for a few months, you are saying he did a WORSE job than someone who didn’t build anywhere near that much size but stayed leaner the whole time?[/quote]

But can it be argued that guys like Haney, Meadows, Farah’s various top Olympia athletes (Jackson ain’t coming close to the top on his best day) all “didn’t build anywhere near” as much size as Jackson?

I know you love this argument when applying it to the average gym rat on the forums who in all likelihood is being held back by their diets (eating too clean and not enough is a widespread problem IMO), but when discussing more advanced folks, who do understand the role of each piece of the puzzle, I personally believe it’s a poor argument. Yes, I know that you honest to goodness believe that every top bodybuilder overate to build their foundation, but with each passing year, I think it’s fairly safe to say that many approaches of yesteryear’s bodybuilders are being abandoned without any negative effect on the size or condition of the top IFBB Pros.

S

Professor X arguing with the opinions of TOP bodybuilder’s. Classic. Dude, when are you going to admit that you just like to be fat, leave it at that, and stop trying to rationalize it?

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Personally, I’ve always adhered to the ‘not being embarrassed taking my shirt off / still seeing abs’ rule of thumb.

Judging Johnnie Jackson (who I admit being a fan of) and his personal approach of chasing 2 goals at once and doing okay as a pro vs Lee Haney’s advice of focusing on one goal and being the absolute best in the entire world for 8 years in a row is silly. In fact, it’s just as silly as throwing up a photo of one single competitor to refute a a general guideline from an 8x Mr. Olympia that is also shared by two very well known, successful, and respected coaches (JM and SS and probably a heck of a lot more) which they have used with countless athletes, amateur and professional. I assume that’s why other posters attributed statements and approaches as such.

I’m wondering how quickly this is going to head downhill and turn into every other ridiculous thread about leanness vs force feeding growth for “really big gainz”.

S
[/quote]

In all fairness, as much as JM and SS are very knowledgeable coaches, neither have probably been as successful in bodybuilding as Jackson. So i’m not sure your comparison works either.

Lee priest did okay with losing his abs. Perhaps both options work well?

[quote]JBL5 wrote:
In all fairness, as much as JM and SS are very knowledgeable coaches, neither have probably been as successful in bodybuilding as Jackson. So i’m not sure your comparison works either.

Lee priest did okay with losing his abs. Perhaps both options work well?
[/quote]

Well, in all fairness and respect to both coaches, genetics really dictate how far you go at that upper level. If you compare Meadows’ structure to Dennis Hopson (who beat him last year I believe), both very smart and hardworking bodybuilders (I’ve worked with Hopson in the past and he’s a true gentleman in every way) they look vastly different onstage, and all the latest training techniques will not alter their DNA.

However, The number of Pros that Meadows has worked with who seem more than happy to extol their results certainly speaks quite a bit about his methods and approaches. Shelby as well. I’m certainly not trying to be disrespectful to either man, but I think it’s safe to say that their success with clients may impress and garner more attention than their personal contest successes over the years.

Besides, I believe Jackson was brought up in attempt to argue a quote from the great Lee Haney. You’d be far pressed to find someone knowledgeable of the sport who wouldn’t place the Awesome one as perhaps the greatest bodybuilder ever.

Also, I don’t know it Lee Priest is the best example of any method to be emulated in regard to any of ‘this’. A lot of the approaches he used seemed to go against the grain, and even his constant position of very little PED usage seemed to suggest that he either possessed the greatest genetics ever, or was just full of crap. The guy admitted that he got paid to get as fat as he could for his “before” supplement ad photo (also that his Before pic was taken after!) so I certainly hope you’re not basing your information on some “6 page special ad-report”

S

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]JBL5 wrote:
In all fairness, as much as JM and SS are very knowledgeable coaches, neither have probably been as successful in bodybuilding as Jackson. So i’m not sure your comparison works either.

Lee priest did okay with losing his abs. Perhaps both options work well?
[/quote]

Well, in all fairness and respect to both coaches, genetics really dictate how far you go at that upper level. If you compare Meadows’ structure to Dennis Hopson (who beat him last year I believe), both very smart and hardworking bodybuilders (I’ve worked with Hopson in the past and he’s a true gentleman in every way) they look vastly different onstage, and all the latest training techniques will not alter their DNA.

However, The number of Pros that Meadows has worked with who seem more than happy to extol their results certainly speaks quite a bit about his methods and approaches. Shelby as well. I’m certainly not trying to be disrespectful to either man, but I think it’s safe to say that their success with clients may impress and garner more attention than their personal contest successes over the years.

Besides, I believe Jackson was brought up in attempt to argue a quote from the great Lee Haney. You’d be far pressed to find someone knowledgeable of the sport who wouldn’t place the Awesome one as perhaps the greatest bodybuilder ever.

Also, I don’t know it Lee Priest is the best example of any method to be emulated in regard to any of ‘this’. A lot of the approaches he used seemed to go against the grain, and even his constant position of very little PED usage seemed to suggest that he either possessed the greatest genetics ever, or was just full of crap. The guy admitted that he got paid to get as fat as he could for his “before” supplement ad photo (also that his Before pic was taken after!) so I certainly hope you’re not basing your information on some “6 page special ad-report”

S[/quote]

I’m more refuting the claim “that if you don’t have abs in the offseason, you aren’t a bodybuilder”. I’m just pointing out that Priest has been through phases where he lost his abs (no, not just one ad) and I wouldn’t dream of telling him that at those times he wasn’t a bodybuilder.

Don’t get me wrong, I think JM and SS are awesome, but you’ve contradicted yourself pretty badly in your post.
First of all, you explain how JM and SS are correct about keeping abs in the offseason and you attribute their struggle to get to the top of the sport as down to genetics. Fair enough.
But then you try to say that we shouldn’t refute what Haney says as he was the greatest bodybuilder ever (probably a fair claim). But you have already made it clear that getting to that level is a matter of genetics, so you’re kind of picking and choosing here.

You are basically saying we should listen to coaches if their genetics are average, listen to Haney as he was the best and had awesome genetics, yet ignore Lee Priest because he may have had the greatest genetics ever.

[quote]JBL5 wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
Personally, I’ve always adhered to the ‘not being embarrassed taking my shirt off / still seeing abs’ rule of thumb.

Judging Johnnie Jackson (who I admit being a fan of) and his personal approach of chasing 2 goals at once and doing okay as a pro vs Lee Haney’s advice of focusing on one goal and being the absolute best in the entire world for 8 years in a row is silly. In fact, it’s just as silly as throwing up a photo of one single competitor to refute a a general guideline from an 8x Mr. Olympia that is also shared by two very well known, successful, and respected coaches (JM and SS and probably a heck of a lot more) which they have used with countless athletes, amateur and professional. I assume that’s why other posters attributed statements and approaches as such.

I’m wondering how quickly this is going to head downhill and turn into every other ridiculous thread about leanness vs force feeding growth for “really big gainz”.

S
[/quote]

In all fairness, as much as JM and SS are very knowledgeable coaches, neither have probably been as successful in bodybuilding as Jackson. So i’m not sure your comparison works either.

Lee priest did okay with losing his abs. Perhaps both options work well?
[/quote]

Structure will dictate who is winning contests at the upper echelon of bbing. And if you follow shelby you will see he doesn’t not have amazing genetics but he makes improvments each and every year. It’s quite amazing to watch. John unfortunately has pretty bad structure for bbing. Which sucks because he is amazingly smart works insanely hard and just a downright nice guy.

How many guys has JJ and liar priest prepped? How many pros have they molded? Between JM and Shelby they have an extensive list of top guys that they continue to help improve. This to me shows their knowledge is quite a bit better than someone with freak genetics and I would rather listen to them than to emulate what someone did who obviously has 1 Ina million genetics

[quote]JBL5 wrote:

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]JBL5 wrote:
In all fairness, as much as JM and SS are very knowledgeable coaches, neither have probably been as successful in bodybuilding as Jackson. So i’m not sure your comparison works either.

Lee priest did okay with losing his abs. Perhaps both options work well?
[/quote]

Well, in all fairness and respect to both coaches, genetics really dictate how far you go at that upper level. If you compare Meadows’ structure to Dennis Hopson (who beat him last year I believe), both very smart and hardworking bodybuilders (I’ve worked with Hopson in the past and he’s a true gentleman in every way) they look vastly different onstage, and all the latest training techniques will not alter their DNA.

However, The number of Pros that Meadows has worked with who seem more than happy to extol their results certainly speaks quite a bit about his methods and approaches. Shelby as well. I’m certainly not trying to be disrespectful to either man, but I think it’s safe to say that their success with clients may impress and garner more attention than their personal contest successes over the years.

Besides, I believe Jackson was brought up in attempt to argue a quote from the great Lee Haney. You’d be far pressed to find someone knowledgeable of the sport who wouldn’t place the Awesome one as perhaps the greatest bodybuilder ever.

Also, I don’t know it Lee Priest is the best example of any method to be emulated in regard to any of ‘this’. A lot of the approaches he used seemed to go against the grain, and even his constant position of very little PED usage seemed to suggest that he either possessed the greatest genetics ever, or was just full of crap. The guy admitted that he got paid to get as fat as he could for his “before” supplement ad photo (also that his Before pic was taken after!) so I certainly hope you’re not basing your information on some “6 page special ad-report”

S[/quote]

I’m more refuting the claim “that if you don’t have abs in the offseason, you aren’t a bodybuilder”. I’m just pointing out that Priest has been through phases where he lost his abs (no, not just one ad) and I wouldn’t dream of telling him that at those times he wasn’t a bodybuilder.

Don’t get me wrong, I think JM and SS are awesome, but you’ve contradicted yourself pretty badly in your post.
First of all, you explain how JM and SS are correct about keeping abs in the offseason and you attribute their struggle to get to the top of the sport as down to genetics. Fair enough.
But then you try to say that we shouldn’t refute what Haney says as he was the greatest bodybuilder ever (probably a fair claim). But you have already made it clear that getting to that level is a matter of genetics, so you’re kind of picking and choosing here.

You are basically saying we should listen to coaches if their genetics are average, listen to Haney as he was the best and had awesome genetics, yet ignore Lee Priest because he may have had the greatest genetics ever.
[/quote]

OKay, point. I do sometimes just write stream of thinking, and don’t always plan out what I’m going to type.

I took offense to using Jackson to refute Haney simply because if you’re going to back up an argument with an IFBB Pro as an example, using it to dispute the very best IFBB Pro ever is just a poor choice, and I believe that anyone can see that.

My throwing in with JM and SS’s approach was simply my opinion that many old school beliefs such as bulking and cutting are falling by the wayside. If you look how Haney’s thinking was many years ahead of what is now almost commonplace (not becoming a big fatty), you see that he was of a similar school of thought.

Maybe my example of genetics was a little off base, but I was simply attempting to state that even if Meadows is 100% correct in every single approach he has with dietary and training methods, it still may not guarantee him an IFBB pro card, that’s all. All IFBB Pros have one in a million genetics.
While we can only reach the developmental point that our DNA dictates, obviously doing things in an optimal manner will allow us to reach that stage, instead of floundering and perhaps never achieving a worthwhile level at all.

S

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

OKay, point. I do sometimes just write stream of thinking, and don’t always plan out what I’m going to type.

I think all of us have been guilty of that at some point.

I took offense to using Jackson to refute Haney simply because if you’re going to back up an argument with an IFBB Pro as an example, using it to dispute the very best IFBB Pro ever is just a poor choice.

Not so sure I agree, think the point was being made that losing abs doesn’t mean you stop becoming a bodybuilder. But I accept that comparing Jackson to Haney isn’t really a contest.

My throwing in with JM and SS’s approach was simply my opinion that many old school beliefs such as bulking and cutting are falling by the wayside. If you look how Haney’s thinking was many years ahead of what is now almost commonplace (not becoming a big fatty), you see that he was of a similar school of thought.

Yep Meadows, Starnes and Haney are all awesome, just for different reasons.

All IFBB Pros have one in a million genetics.

I definitely agree with this statement.

While we can only reach the developmental point that our DNA dictates, obviously doing things in an optimal manner will allow us to reach that stage, instead of floundering and perhaps never achieving a worthwhile level at all.

Agreed.

S
[/quote]

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

Structure will dictate who is winning contests at the upper echelon of bbing. And if you follow shelby you will see he doesn’t not have amazing genetics but he makes improvments each and every year. It’s quite amazing to watch. John unfortunately has pretty bad structure for bbing. Which sucks because he is amazingly smart works insanely hard and just a downright nice guy. [/quote]
I totally agree on all these points.

While I would be inclined to agree, I could never bring myself to ignore the actions of what the best did, even if they are/were genetically gifted.

Getting away from the discussion of whether losing abs suddenly makes you a bodybuilder or not, I would like to point out something that I’m sure would be interesting to get some thoughts on.

Johnnie Jackson - competes as a bodybuilder and a powerlifter
Stan Efferding - competes as a bodybuilder and a powerlifter
(you can throw Ben White in here too if you want, although I know less about his background)

Both of these guys are strong as hell, and both are IFBB Pros. However, the level to which these men are accomplished among other IFBB Pros is quite different than the level to which they’re accomplished among other powerlifters.

While I personally am fans of both of these competitors, I will concede the fact that they have been constantly plagued with critiques of their less than great symmetry, and various weak bodyparts. Now that’s not to say that they don’t dwarf most people on this site, because that’s never the issue (comparing an IFBB Pro to a gym rat, no matter how serious he may be, is pointless).

So what I find myself wondering is whether or not their stronger bodyparts would still be pronounced simply due to genetics more than their powerlifting. I’ve known many people who don’t do anything special for their training, and yet they still possess standout muscle groups. Also, if you feel that the powerlifting is what contributed to Jakcson and Efferding’s stronger bodyparts, did that approach over the years negatively affect their possible success as bodybuilders? I don’t think I’m being disrespectful in stating that neither Pro is ever placing top 5 at an Olympia.

(yes I know this could have been a new thread, but I figured that since the discussion was heading this way anyway…)

S