T Nation

Did Arnold Ever Bulk?

I think its not a matter if they bulked up but if they got fat. Going from 5% body fat to a 12% to gain muscle, with the added water weight, in the off season. That’s about right for most of them. Just not over broad, a 18%+ body fat just to add a few pounds more at the end.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
caneman wrote:
Good responses. I liked the one about Zane not bulking-makes sense since he was known for being lean. thanks guys.

But he did. Read better. That goes back to believing that very few guys have ever really gotten big without EVER bulking up. At some point, most of those guys did. They may stay leaner later, but to pretend as if they never did is ridiculous. If I stay leaner from this point forward, it would be a complete lie for me to act as if I NEVER bulked up before as if that didn’t help me gain the size I carry right now. Get it?[/quote]

Ah no, I disagree. He said he would go up 5% in weight in the offseason. He was about 200 lbs competition so that means 210 lbs in the offseason. Yeah ok he bulked at some point in his life to get to that weight, but what I was talking about in the original post was offseason bulking like the competitors today. 10 lbs in the offseason is NOT bulking.

[quote]caneman wrote:

Ah no, I disagree. He said he would go up 5% in weight in the offseason. [/quote]

That isn’t all he said. He wrote:

That means he once bulked up like everybody else even though he changed it later. That is exactly what I wrote.

[quote]
He was about 200 lbs competition so that means 210 lbs in the offseason. Yeah ok he bulked at some point in his life to get to that weight, but what I was talking about in the original post was offseason bulking like the competitors today. 10 lbs in the offseason is NOT bulking. [/quote]

Competitors today are also on a shit load more drugs than they were in 1965. With GH, thyroid hormone, and a few grams of vet steroids, I’m sure they can do many things normal humans can’t. You can’t leave that out and act as if it doesn’t matter. A natural trainer won’t see significant results by trying to stay that lean, at least none that match those who do go ahead and bulk up to some degree. We see it on this site all of the time. We still haven’t seen someone go from scrawny to gigantic while never letting their bf% go above 10-12%. If you are the one who has done this, please show us all.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
caneman wrote:

Ah no, I disagree. He said he would go up 5% in weight in the offseason.

That isn’t all he said. He wrote:
I’ve fallen into this trap myself several times … I learned that to make long term progress, my best strategy was not to gain more than 5%

That means he once bulked up like everybody else even though he changed it later. That is exactly what I wrote.

He was about 200 lbs competition so that means 210 lbs in the offseason. Yeah ok he bulked at some point in his life to get to that weight, but what I was talking about in the original post was offseason bulking like the competitors today. 10 lbs in the offseason is NOT bulking.

Competitors today are also on a shit load more drugs than they were in 1965. With GH, thyroid hormone, and a few grams of vet steroids, I’m sure they can do many things normal humans can’t. You can’t leave that out and act as if it doesn’t matter. A natural trainer won’t see significant results by trying to stay that lean, at least none that match those who do go ahead and bulk up to some degree. We see it on this site all of the time. We still haven’t seen someone go from scrawny to gigantic while never letting their bf% go above 10-12%. If you are the one who has done this, please show us all.[/quote]

Ok, but you didn’t read the rest of my post. I KNOW EVERYONE HAS TO BULK. I’m not trying to argue about that. My question was answered that bodybuilders in the 70s did not bulk in the offseason anywhere near the level of today. Thanks again for all the replies…

“Yeah ok he bulked at some point in his life to get to that weight, but what I was talking about in the original post was offseason bulking like the competitors today.”

Why do yall keep mentioning “water” weight when discussin bulking.Water weight plays no part during a bulk,never heard of anyone saying “yeah I put on 15lbs this year,10 of which was water…” .

And I have to agree with Prof.X on this one,anyone who has any size has bulked at some point.And no I doubt it isnt like the BBer’s today do,they have drugs coming out of their ass(going in them I mean)so yes they can probably take it to a more “extreme” level.And you should’ve worded your question better.

Quite honestly this topic is so rudimentary and been discussed so many times, I don’t know why this debate even comes up. To anyone that disagrees with what X and some of the others were saying, try a bulk for a year or two while keeping your bf under 10%.

If you want to go this route, and take 5 years to put on 20lbs fine by us, but don’t bitch to us that you aren’t getting results 6 months down the line.

Guys,

You’re arguing with a 6’ 190lb kid who has been lifting for a whole year now. You realize he must know all by this point.

I mean–bulking! Whoever heard of such a ridiculous concept. Arnold, Lou, Frank never bulked. I’ve seen all their pictures and never seen a one of them fat.

And better yet, he’s not even willing to concede the fact that he may be wrong and is willing to accept that there is a concept out there he can’t comprehend right now. But, he has been at this game a year now. X–you’ve been whammied here. I hope you take this message home and readjust all that has worked for you.

[quote]sasquatch wrote:
Guys,

You’re arguing with a 6’ 190lb kid who has been lifting for a whole year now. You realize he must know all by this point.

I mean–bulking! Whoever heard of such a ridiculous concept. Arnold, Lou, Frank never bulked. I’ve seen all their pictures and never seen a one of them fat.

And better yet, he’s not even willing to concede the fact that he may be wrong and is willing to accept that there is a concept out there he can’t comprehend right now. But, he has been at this game a year now. X–you’ve been whammied here. I hope you take this message home and readjust all that has worked for you.[/quote]

You’re right. How could I have been so wrong? There are guys just blowing the hell up and growing like freaking WEEDS in gyms all over the country while maintaining 6% body fat.

[quote]Kliplemet wrote:
Lou Ferrigno- “The Incredible Hulk” - Unfortunately, I weighed only 202 lbs [101kg], a trivial two pounds [one kilo], more than the previous year, despite all of the work! That experience convinced me that the process of bulking up and training down is worthless for serious bodybuilders."[/quote]

Wasn’t it Lou who erroneously coined the infamous, “Only 30g of protein can be absorbed at a time”?

No wonder then why he lost all his muscle gains, the guy probably didn’t eat enough protein while dieting.

1g per a lb of body weight per a day is very important while dieting, especially considering Lou had lost 100 lbs in only four months. That’s basically a fast.

[quote]Kailash wrote:
Kliplemet wrote:
Lou Ferrigno- “The Incredible Hulk” - Unfortunately, I weighed only 202 lbs [101kg], a trivial two pounds [one kilo], more than the previous year, despite all of the work! That experience convinced me that the process of bulking up and training down is worthless for serious bodybuilders."

Wasn’t it Lou who erroneously coined the infamous, “Only 30g of protein can be absorbed at a time”?

No wonder then why he lost all his muscle gains, the guy probably didn’t eat enough protein while dieting.

1g per a lb of body weight per a day is very important while dieting, especially considering Lou had lost 100 lbs in only four months. That’s basically a fast.
[/quote]

Along with that, to lose that much weight that fast and still make any gain at all shows bulking up worked for him and had he dieted down slower (and like you pointed out, taken more protein), he would have held onto more of it. Most people would lose EVERYTHING if they tried to drop 100lbs in only 4 months, the majority of their loss coming straight from muscle tissue. He actually made a gain at all and counts it as a failure?

He must have been eating air and lettuce to drop that much weight that fast. So why is it some guys seem to take that to mean that “bulking up” didn’t work instead of “Lou starved himself to death and still gained muscle mass due to his bulking up”?

[quote]Kailash wrote:
Kliplemet wrote:
Lou Ferrigno- “The Incredible Hulk” - Unfortunately, I weighed only 202 lbs [101kg], a trivial two pounds [one kilo], more than the previous year, despite all of the work! That experience convinced me that the process of bulking up and training down is worthless for serious bodybuilders."

Wasn’t it Lou who erroneously coined the infamous, “Only 30g of protein can be absorbed at a time”?

No wonder then why he lost all his muscle gains, the guy probably didn’t eat enough protein while dieting.

1g per a lb of body weight per a day is very important while dieting, especially considering Lou had lost 100 lbs in only four months. That’s basically a fast.
[/quote]

im fairly certain that i read that lou quote in a weider bodybuilding book about a year ago, and it didnt say he went down to 202lbs, it said something like 242 or 252lbs. at 6’5" 202lbs would look like a fucking waffe. and lets think about this, he says he ended up just 2lbs heavier than his previous contest weight.

so lets say previous contest he was 200lbs @5%, if he had gained 100lbs over that, and then dieted down to 202lbs @ ~5% bf, that would have meant he went over 30% bf-> he would have been “obese” and then lost over 30% bf, all in a year. that seems pretty ridiculous to me. i dont own the book that i first read it in, but im fairly certain he said he went up from 250lbs only to end up 252lbs.

the cover of the book is black and blue and i think has a guy curling on the front, if anyone owns that- its in there.

"There’s a range of bodyfat that each person carries where the endocrine factors such as testosterone level, growth hormone level, and insulin sensitivity are “optimal” for lean muscle mass gains. Get too thin and those endocrine factors start to go down the drain. If your testosterone levels are shot and your stress hormone levels are elevated, (like they are if you’re well below your bodyfat setpoint), putting on muscle will be a chore and putting on lean muscle without fat will REALLY be a chore. That’s why a severely dieted down bodybuilder (bodyfat 7% or less), finds it extremely difficult to gain good muscle while maintaining that ultra lean state.

If you get leaner then your body wants to be it will try very hard to put fat back on you.

However, get too fat and you start to become insulin resistant and the acquistion of pure lean gains becomes difficult as well. That doesn’t mean a fat person can’t continue to eat their bodyweight up and gain more muscle and strength but they also tend to gain more fat with that muscle then if they had maintained a semi-lean state.

The optimal range for most people for lean gains is around 10-17% bodyfat or thereabouts. "

Interesting excerpt from Kelley Bagget and I agree. I tried to stay lean (around 10% or so) for a while and have made better gains since letting my body fat creep up to the mid-teens. Of course, I’m still a beginner so I can’t really speak from much practical experience here, but I thought that what I copied and pasted above seemed to make logical sense.

[quote]MartinL wrote:
No pictures to support it, but it has been documented that when Arnold first arrived in Venice Beach, he went to Vince’s Gym and announced he was Mr. Universe. Gironda looked over and was quoted as saying,“you look like just another fat fuck to me”.[/quote]

Gotta’ love the Guru, Gironda never had a “politically correct” bone in his body, he turned being an a-hole into an art…

Look, the fact that people screw up and get in a hurry to lose weight - hence dumping a lot of muscle - does not mean they didn’t gain lots of muscle during their bulk either.

Ferrigno screwed up, and his problem wasn’t that he didn’t gain any muscle.

Argh. I get so tired of this little holy war some people have against ever allowing the body to have some fat on it. It doesn’t matter how many people you quote, some people are of the opinion you shouldn’t bulk wildly and others disagree.

There will be no end of material for quoting…

[quote]vroom wrote:
Look, the fact that people screw up and get in a hurry to lose weight - hence dumping a lot of muscle - does not mean they didn’t gain lots of muscle during their bulk either.

Ferrigno screwed up, and his problem wasn’t that he didn’t gain any muscle.

Argh. I get so tired of this little holy war some people have against ever allowing the body to have some fat on it. It doesn’t matter how many people you quote, some people are of the opinion you shouldn’t bulk wildly and others disagree.

There will be no end of material for quoting…[/quote]

What’s funny is that it would all be solved if most people related this to real world results instead of theory. Who here has gained 50+lbs of LEAN BODY MASS without ever letting their body fat get above 12% without that gain being related to growing in height?

Anyone?

Bueller?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
What’s funny is that it would all be solved if most people related this to real world results instead of theory. Who here has gained 50+lbs of LEAN BODY MASS without ever letting their body fat get above 12% without that gain being related to growing in height?

Anyone?

Bueller?

[/quote]

Raises hand

I’ve never been over 12% bf and have gone from 185 - 238 lbs albeit over many years. I usually hover around 8% at 230 lbs now.

I’m sure if I were to do it all over again, I could go from 185 - 235 in a matter of 6 months staying under 10% bf knowing what I know now.

When I was 17 I went from 185 - 220 in a matter of 3 months staying below 12% so it’s definitely possible. And that’s without knowing a lot about nutrition, just eating everything that wasn’t nailed down.

To be fair, I think I have better than average genetics in terms of my metabolism and ability to put on muscle. I have a classic “mesomorph” body type. I’ve never been fat my whole life and have never had to worry about eating too many calories. The majority of people wouldn’t be able to do this, but I’m definitely not unique.

I think we’re also missing the fact that “bulking” means something different now.

In Education of a Bodybuilder, Arnold talks about how he did the Olympia after filming a movie for which he had to be 210 pounds.

He describes how his plan was to “bulk up” to 240, then cut down to 235.

Big difference between that and, say, everyone’s favorite Michelin Man, Lee Priest.

[quote]Bri Hildebrandt wrote:
Professor X wrote:
What’s funny is that it would all be solved if most people related this to real world results instead of theory. Who here has gained 50+lbs of LEAN BODY MASS without ever letting their body fat get above 12% without that gain being related to growing in height?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Raises hand

I’ve never been over 12% bf and have gone from 185 - 238 lbs albeit over many years. I usually hover around 8% at 230 lbs now.

I’m sure if I were to do it all over again, I could go from 185 - 235 in a matter of 6 months staying under 10% bf knowing what I know now.

When I was 17 I went from 185 - 220 in a matter of 3 months staying below 12% so it’s definitely possible. And that’s without knowing a lot about nutrition, just eating everything that wasn’t nailed down.

To be fair, I think I have better than average genetics in terms of my metabolism and ability to put on muscle. I have a classic “mesomorph” body type. I’ve never been fat my whole life and have never had to worry about eating too many calories. The majority of people wouldn’t be able to do this, but I’m definitely not unique.[/quote]

To be specific, though I applaud your progress, I wrote “lean body mass”. That is a little different than body weight. For instance, I had my body fat tested before I ever got to college at about 150lbs. That means I could calculate the amount of lean body mass I’ve gained by comparing that to a reading now at my current weight.

Also, many guys do grow a little taller past the age of 17. The age given as the point for growth to stop in males is 21.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Bri Hildebrandt wrote:
Professor X wrote:
What’s funny is that it would all be solved if most people related this to real world results instead of theory. Who here has gained 50+lbs of LEAN BODY MASS without ever letting their body fat get above 12% without that gain being related to growing in height?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Raises hand

I’ve never been over 12% bf and have gone from 185 - 238 lbs albeit over many years. I usually hover around 8% at 230 lbs now.

I’m sure if I were to do it all over again, I could go from 185 - 235 in a matter of 6 months staying under 10% bf knowing what I know now.

When I was 17 I went from 185 - 220 in a matter of 3 months staying below 12% so it’s definitely possible. And that’s without knowing a lot about nutrition, just eating everything that wasn’t nailed down.

To be fair, I think I have better than average genetics in terms of my metabolism and ability to put on muscle. I have a classic “mesomorph” body type. I’ve never been fat my whole life and have never had to worry about eating too many calories. The majority of people wouldn’t be able to do this, but I’m definitely not unique.

To be specific, though I applaud your progress, I wrote “lean body mass”. That is a little different than body weight. For instance, I had my body fat tested before I ever got to college at about 150lbs. That means I could calculate the amount of lean body mass I’ve gained by comparing that to a reading now at my current weight.

Also, many guys do grow a little taller past the age of 17. The age given as the point for growth to stop in males is 21.[/quote]

Ok gotcha. I stopped growing at 15 but I know what you mean.