[quote]1 Man Island wrote:
I’m skeptical about you being 230 at 9 percent and asking this.[/quote]
I didn’t want to be the jerk that brought it up, but, yeah.
According to OP’s calculations he managed to lose 45 pounds of pure body fat with no loss in lean tissue.
OP is the greatest dieter of all time if that is the case.[/quote]
Listen Im not claiming to be the best dieter of all time, but thanks for the compliments. Im sure the caliper tests could have been off, especially in the beginning when I was over 20%. I had 2 different people do it when I was at my leanest and they both said I was btw 8-9%. If they were wrong so be it. That really wasnt the reason for my post to begin with. Being 6’4" losing 50lbs isnt the same as if I was 5’10". The pic below was when I started and was at my heaviest, followed by a loss of about 15lbs. The avatar pic was a few weeks ago[/quote]
That’s fair. Your transformation is impressive, no doubt, I shouldn’t have cast such a negative tone. I just think it’s important to have a realistic assessment of where you are when planning macros if you’re about to begin a bulk. 230 pounds at 9% is way, way bigger and leaner than most people realize.[/quote]
No worries, actually made me realize that I hadnt lost much good weight. I was always a big guy albeit a bit fat, but losing so much weight and constantly being told how skinny I look wasnt what I was hoping for. This is the exact reason Im now starting a bulk. The fact that most of the weight I lost was fat makes me optimistic I can add more muscle. Being such a noob at this its easy to lose confidence in what you are doing and the questioning of the legitimacy of my results definitely made me feel good about it. Must be doing something right if people arent sure its possible.