T Nation

Gaining Strength Properly on a Leaner Bulk


#1

Anyone tried this?
I normally don't give a crap about weight gain but this time around I'm thinking of doing it differently.

Normally i Generously bulk as i want to get strong as possible.. not as concerned for size gains right now. i would class myself as intermediate with just under 2 years lifting.

Does eating a smaller surplus, effect strength gains on most programming? Right now i gain about 1-1.5lbs a week.


#2

[quote]Superh1 wrote:
Anyone tried this?
I normally don’t give a crap about weight gain but this time around I’m thinking of doing it differently.

Normally i Generously bulk as i want to get strong as possible… not as concerned for size gains right now. i would class myself as intermediate with just under 2 years lifting.

Does eating a smaller surplus, effect strength gains on most programming? Right now i gain about 1-1.5lbs a week.[/quote]

yeah dont do that


#3

I could be brosciencing, I could be right, I could get slaughtered here by hardened veterans or true scientists, I don’t care. Just my 2 cents:

Strength could be put as this:
the ability to
-use muscular
-contractions to
-perform a given movement

Strength as displayable in any movement that is, but let’s focus lifting.

Muscle moves weight. Or to be more precise, the contractile elements of a muscle (is that myofibrilar hypertrophy?) move the weight in the end. Nutritients ,mainly protein and fats, are the “building blocks” of muscles. Their is a point where getting more nutritiens in wouldn’t help because your body can’t build more in given time. That’s the gist of this far better formulated and more elaborate article right here: http://www.T-Nation.com/article/bodybuilding/the_truth_about_bulking.
In this part of the equation I would say that a leaner bulk would be fine, enough is enough. And you have to shed all the fat afterwards, if you don’t plan on staying that fat.

The contractions are all about intermuscular coordination. Being able to turn your muscles on. This is where +90% lifting has it’s most prominent place. I can’t really see why a leaner bulk would make this less effective. Just be sure you have the carbs to work out this hard and the protein and fats to manage your recovery (also neurally).

The last part is about skill. Can you do the move as efficiently as possible. This is where intramuscular gets into play. Being able to turn on and off the right muscle at the right time. Why would a leaner bulk hinder this? As above, make sure you get enough nutritients.

So from a strength standpoint, I see no reason to bulk up more than strictly needed. You may get a little chubbier, but getting really fat doesn’t do much good.

Well, something can be said for getting fatter. A bigger belly can help your squat, and getting fatter around your your chest and shoulders can help stability and some decrease some range for the bench.

Hope it helps a bit


#4

[quote]Panopticum wrote:
I could be brosciencing, I could be right, I could get slaughtered here by hardened veterans or true scientists, I don’t care. Just my 2 cents:

Strength could be put as this:
the ability to
-use muscular
-contractions to
-perform a given movement

Strength as displayable in any movement that is, but let’s focus lifting.

Muscle moves weight. Or to be more precise, the contractile elements of a muscle (is that myofibrilar hypertrophy?) move the weight in the end. Nutritients ,mainly protein and fats, are the “building blocks” of muscles. Their is a point where getting more nutritiens in wouldn’t help because your body can’t build more in given time. That’s the gist of this far better formulated and more elaborate article right here: http://www.T-Nation.com/article/bodybuilding/the_truth_about_bulking.
In this part of the equation I would say that a leaner bulk would be fine, enough is enough. And you have to shed all the fat afterwards, if you don’t plan on staying that fat.

The contractions are all about intermuscular coordination. Being able to turn your muscles on. This is where +90% lifting has it’s most prominent place. I can’t really see why a leaner bulk would make this less effective. Just be sure you have the carbs to work out this hard and the protein and fats to manage your recovery (also neurally).

The last part is about skill. Can you do the move as efficiently as possible. This is where intramuscular gets into play. Being able to turn on and off the right muscle at the right time. Why would a leaner bulk hinder this? As above, make sure you get enough nutritients.

So from a strength standpoint, I see no reason to bulk up more than strictly needed. You may get a little chubbier, but getting really fat doesn’t do much good.

Well, something can be said for getting fatter. A bigger belly can help your squat, and getting fatter around your your chest and shoulders can help stability and some decrease some range for the bench.

Hope it helps a bit[/quote]

thanks.
could you go into why a bigger belly helps the squat? I’ve often heard that and i would like to understand the physical leverages behind that a little better.
I know with the bench, bigger/fatter chest, arms and shoulders make your angles better.


#5

What I have found to work for me is to align my weight gain phases with higher volume and frequency work; and weight loss with low frequency heavy work. The high volume is where most of the muscle building occurs and the caloric excess is necessary to perform well. The higher intensity work helps me take a break from all the volume and it’s where I see the work turn into maximal strength gains.

You’ll have to experiment for yourself. A place to start is caloric excess for doing a lot of work and caloric deficit for doing a little work.


#6

Great question! I’m not 100% sure but this is what I understood:

  1. It ‘cushions’ your body when you squat down, and gives back a little bounce when it decompresses. It stores a bit elastic energy, I assume.
    This also leaves clues why low bar squatters seem to get more out of being of being superheavy weight then high bar squatters.
  2. It gives a wider base. A pilar with a diameter of 2 feet can take less blunt force than a pilar with a 3 foot diameter.

#7

Also, for the deadlift, although I heard a lot of people say it was the least effected of the big 3 affected, Andy Bolton claims it gets a game of leverages at one point. If you start moving into deadlifting 900’s or more, it might be not really about getting “stronger” then you was deadlifting 50 pounds ago, but more about getting enough weight behind the lever arm…and not dying .