[quote]SKELAC wrote:
As losing fat is about 10 times faster than building muscle,why not get lean first and get to building muscle later? [/quote]
I agree with this .
Losing fat all you have to do is go to the gym and do a bunch of stuff to get tired and sweaty, and eat less carbs.
Gaining strength & muscle without getting blubbery actually takes some planning and thinking.
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
As losing fat is about 10 times faster than building muscle,why not get lean first and get to building muscle later? [/quote]
Why would someone work on how lean they are before they build any muscle at all unless they are actually fat/obese?
How is that really working out for people?
Hey Professor,
May I PM You a question? I have PM’d you knowing you previously said that you don’t check PM’s (probably due to high volume).
Eq
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
As losing fat is about 10 times faster than building muscle,why not get lean first and get to building muscle later? [/quote]
Why would someone work on how lean they are before they build any muscle at all unless they are actually fat/obese?
How is that really working out for people?[/quote]
1.ITS ABOUT MUSCLE BUILDING-ITS NOT ABOUT FAT BUILDING
2.ITS ABOUT MUSCLE BUILDING-NOT FAT BUILDING
3.ITS ABOUT MUSCLE BUILDING-NOT FAT BUILDING
It works out for people like this:
they get lean.
then they slowly build muscle without gaining much fat in the process and thats by progressing
with weight and reps,eating quality food and using cardio to manage body-fat gain.
How not to do it:
Starting at higher body-fat percentage and bulking up from there.
Because youre bulking you give yourself excusse to overeat and eat all you want.
Measure progress of bulking by scale weight instead of looking training weights increase.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
As losing fat is about 10 times faster than building muscle,why not get lean first and get to building muscle later? [/quote]
Why would someone work on how lean they are before they build any muscle at all unless they are actually fat/obese?
How is that really working out for people?[/quote]
If Shelby Starness,a professional nutrition expert who gets paid by elite bodybuilders for providing RESULTS says-
-These dietary approaches assume that you re relatively lean to begin with ( VISIBLE ABS and a LEAN LOWER BACK).If youre still on the softer side of things,proritize fat loss BEFORE using one of these approaches .
When youre leaner you have better nutrient partitioning and are less likely to store extra calories as fat.
You ll always have the genetic hand youre dealt (i.e. insulin sensitive or not,more endomorph than ectomorph,etc.) but you ll se yourself up for much better success by getting LEAN FIRST.
http://www.T-Nation.com/free_online_article/most_recent/controlledcarb_bulking_strategy
Anti-bulking facts presented by Charles Poliquin
Opinion of Christian Thibaudeau
Discussion with CT that goes beyond that article that MANY newbs misunderstood.
That is why just handing out articles isn’t always enough.
I think deciding whether to jump right into a bulk or trim down a bit first is a pretty simple matter. Obviously you’ll look like a skinny’fat piece of shit if you invest too heavily in weight loss before building a layer of muscle beneath the fat.
At the same time, lifting requires some extent of athleticism. If you are obese (using that to mean so fat that your athleticism is impaired by the level of fat) or at risk for becoming obese after initiating the bulk, it makes sense to trim down a little bit first. I’m not talking about getting shredded, just getting to the point where your fat doesn’t negatively impact performance.
IMHO, holding some BF to keep the muscle gains coming and take advantage of improved leverages on the big lifts is productive (especially on an initial bulk when starting out). Throwing those potential benefits out there to justify a performance-decreasing level of BF is not.
This is coming from someone who started the whole physique-building game at 235 at 5’3" or so, BTW.
I’m 6’6’ and 340lbs. I’d say I’m 30%BF+ (maybe++). I started out at 337lbs (was just a fat ass without working out) thinking I could eat a lot and still gain the strength I need. I ended up losing weight and went down to 325lbs. All of my lifts stalled. I wasn’t eating enough. So I started eating more and in the last month and a half, I’m up to 340lbs and I’ve gained a lot in my squats.
So, I’m still a fat ass but, I’m a stronger (maybe healthier) fat ass. I plan to start dropping weight soon, hope to get to 300lbs or so. Then I will prolly try to bulk up again.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Discussion with CT that goes beyond that article that MANY newbs misunderstood.
That is why just handing out articles isn’t always enough. [/quote]
Thibideau published that articel and theres nothing not clearly stated there.He is obviously against bulking with high body-fat.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Generally speaking, having a very high bodyfat can make it “easier” to add more fat than muscle when gaining. Long-term, this could make it even more difficult to get lean again. There’s also the idea of “rebound”, when it’s “easier” to make big muscular gains when you start bulking from a very lean condition (like when a bodybuilder gets back to training immediately after a contest).
In any case, I usually recommend forgetting you ever heard about “bodyfat percentage” and base progress on how you’re doing in the gym and how you’re looking in the mirror and/or in clothes. If all of those boxes are checked and you feel you’re going in the right direction (headed towards your long-term goal), keep doing what you’re doing. If not, make the necessary adjustments.[/quote]
For the record, none of that makes much biological sense. If a person starts gaining at 15% or 21%, why would the rate of muscle gained change? That is a genetic issue. I mean, MAYBE you could argue a fatter person would have less conditioning and function in less capacity…but even that ignores the possible benefits that powerlifters seek as far as leverages.
Other than that, I agree that if he is 160lbs this should be no concern…but nothing irks me more lately than seeing people repeat “being minimally fatter means you gain less muscle”…when it makes no sense.[/quote]
It’s not an issue of gaining less muscle because you’re starting off at a higher bodyfat. It’s an issue of, being more fat at the start makes it that much more likely you’ll add more fat in addition to muscle as you go along, because it’s trickier to walk the line of taking in surplus calories (even while training hard) without “spilling over” into whatever you consider unacceptable for yourself.
Also, most people have a tendency to see what they want to see or rationalize “all bodyweight gain is good”, which is why regular progress checks (comparing gym progress to clothes/measurements) is crucial when bulking.
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Generally speaking, having a very high bodyfat can make it “easier” to add more fat than muscle when gaining. Long-term, this could make it even more difficult to get lean again. There’s also the idea of “rebound”, when it’s “easier” to make big muscular gains when you start bulking from a very lean condition (like when a bodybuilder gets back to training immediately after a contest).
In any case, I usually recommend forgetting you ever heard about “bodyfat percentage” and base progress on how you’re doing in the gym and how you’re looking in the mirror and/or in clothes. If all of those boxes are checked and you feel you’re going in the right direction (headed towards your long-term goal), keep doing what you’re doing. If not, make the necessary adjustments.[/quote]
For the record, none of that makes much biological sense. If a person starts gaining at 15% or 21%, why would the rate of muscle gained change? That is a genetic issue. I mean, MAYBE you could argue a fatter person would have less conditioning and function in less capacity…but even that ignores the possible benefits that powerlifters seek as far as leverages.
Other than that, I agree that if he is 160lbs this should be no concern…but nothing irks me more lately than seeing people repeat “being minimally fatter means you gain less muscle”…when it makes no sense.[/quote]
It’s not an issue of gaining less muscle because you’re starting off at a higher bodyfat. It’s an issue of, being more fat at the start makes it that much more likely you’ll add more fat in addition to muscle as you go along, because it’s trickier to walk the line of taking in surplus calories (even while training hard) without “spilling over” into whatever you consider unacceptable for yourself.
Also, most people have a tendency to see what they want to see or rationalize “all bodyweight gain is good”, which is why regular progress checks (comparing gym progress to clothes/measurements) is crucial when bulking.[/quote]
…so is the realization that this isn’t about being perfect. Most beginners will likely go through phases where they aren’t looking their best if their goal is to really push that comfort zone out of the way. It seems many are preaching that you should try to get as lean as a cover model…and then stay that way and also expect optimum gains in muscle mass. That is pure fantasy.
That is why people are telling other skinny newbs to lean up before they ever gain a pound of muscle…which is ass backwards from what built most of the huge people the newbs today look up to.
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Discussion with CT that goes beyond that article that MANY newbs misunderstood.
That is why just handing out articles isn’t always enough. [/quote]
Thibideau published that articel and theres nothing not clearly stated there.He is obviously against bulking with high body-fat.[/quote]
?? Did you read his responses in that link I posted?
What I see as a crucial element in all of these is comparison of speed of losing fat compared to speed of building muscle.
You can lose 10 lb. of fat in 2 months easily,but it would take a whole year to build that amount of muscle at leat (unless youre a total beginner).
So,why not get lean first,bulk up a bit,get lean again and never get fat.
Carrying excess fat is neither healthy,estethic or comfortable.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Discussion with CT that goes beyond that article that MANY newbs misunderstood.
That is why just handing out articles isn’t always enough. [/quote]
Thibideau published that articel and theres nothing not clearly stated there.He is obviously against bulking with high body-fat.[/quote]
?? Did you read his responses in that link I posted?[/quote]
Yes,I did.
He disagreed with your views.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
How high? If gaining more body fat is going to put you in a position where it takes longer than 4 months or so to rip back off, you are moving in the wrong direction.
Anything else is largely preference. If someone has great genetics and can drop fat like a stone, then they can get away with being more loose in condition.
If you have a slow metabolism, it would be dumb to gain more extra weight that could take forever to get off.[/quote]
Why is the whole concept of gaining size and losing fat completely not talked about. Why do guys here seem to think, that to gain muscle, you must gain fat. If you eat enough to gain muscle, you will gain muscle. if you are eating more than you need to just gain muscle, you will gain fat on top of that. its that simple. If you eat to maintain, you can and will gain muscle, but as you gain muscle, that will in turn, burn more fat.
The old belief that you have to pick one or the other is false. So, if your bodyfat is high, and you don’t want to get any fatter, you have to lose the fat before you can start gaining muscle? Thats a terrible back and forth way of living, isn’t it? It does take more calories to gain weight, but only so much more. If your gaining fat on top of the muscle, your eating to much. simply cut back, so your only gaining muscle. As you gain muscle, in turn, you will burn more fat. I have done this myself, and have seen it done numerous times with guys i know at my gym.
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Discussion with CT that goes beyond that article that MANY newbs misunderstood.
That is why just handing out articles isn’t always enough. [/quote]
Thibideau published that articel and theres nothing not clearly stated there.He is obviously against bulking with high body-fat.[/quote]
?? Did you read his responses in that link I posted?[/quote]
Yes,I did.
He disagreed with your views.[/quote]
No, he didn’t.
If you even think that, you didn’t read it.
[quote]SKELAC wrote:
So,why not get lean first,bulk up a bit,get lean again and never get fat.
[/quote]
How about you focus on size for about 2 to 3 years and maintain your course making corrections as needed so you can optimally gain that base of muscle mass without gaining so much fat you become obese?
Do you know what happens to guys who “bulk up a little and then diet” before they build that solid base? They run in circles for years and rarely get that big.
No one here is telling people to get fat. You seem confused.
The only people who can get away with gaining a lot of muscle while being very lean are those with cheater genetix (kingbeef/titan/gerdy,etc). The average individual will have to become a lot softer (BUT FAR FROM OBESE) in order to gain muscle optimally.
So if you dont have top tier genetics and you try to “lean gain” your way to hugeness then you’ll just end up staying small forever. So far, I havent seen proof of anything that contradicts that (drug use aside)