[quote]Alex Good wrote:
I agree with the op. I’m gaining muscle with a calorie deficit.[/quote]
Yes, quite easy.
When you’re making beginner gains.
Try doing the same thing when you get to a respectable size.
[quote]Alex Good wrote:
I should be beyond the newbie gains (I started seriously training almost three years ago), but I’m beginning to wonder.[/quote]
Strength gains could also occur do to technique improvement… or heck you could be resting more between sets and thus not seeing as substantial a drop off in weights lifted later in the workout… etc. etc.
Regardless the basic logic is sound and simple: Long term If you’re running at a calorie deficit your body doesn’t have the “spare materials” if you will to build. Rippetoe and Dan John have gone even further (as have almost all other major writers and almost all big guys in their own personal experience) and said that if you’re not consuming significantly over maintenance calories you’re certainly not building optimally if you’re building at all. You can give up your hawt abbz for a few months and gain more muscle (even post cutting) than you could in perhaps years of trying to remain ripped and gain; not that you should aim to become Jabba the Hutt on a dirty bulk or shoot for 15k calories a day but… waaaaay more than maintenance plus 200.
Lifters can argue over exercises, sets, reps, workouts, periodization, supps, gear, whatever… but the constant is eating a lot of food (specifically protein)… I’m not sure why this is being challenged here on AnorexiaNation.
Why guys under 170lbs wish to take a position in a “getting big” debate is beyond me…
The cow diet as articulated in this thread is incomplete though, it neglects policy as to breeding, being tipped, etc.
[quote]rearden wrote:
The cow diet as articulated in this thread is incomplete though, it neglects policy as to breeding, being tipped, etc.[/quote]
But as we both know, that’s only for the pros. Once you’ve gotten to 450 pounds you can start worrying about breeding, being tipped, and the like, and these guys are nowhere near that.
I see so many kids try to master getting tipped before they’ve even hit 375. I see these “jacked” 120 pound idiots come up to me and go “hey man, what’s the best way to get tipped?” And I go “how many feet of grass do you eat in a day?” They’re never sure. “AROUND a square foot.” They say! AROUND! AROUND ISN’T GOOD ENOUGH. WE’RE NOT FUCKING PHYSICISTS, WE’RE BODYBUILDERS DAMMIT.
Don’t talk to me about getting tipped, until you know how to graze. You wont need to start learning tip mastery until you’ve got your bodyweight up, otherwise you’re just going to overcomplicate things.
I was young and skinny (160 pounds at 6 foot 1 at age 21)and wanted to gain muscle without gaining fat. If I had been told to inrease my calorie intake by 250 cals a day whilst managing the protein/carb etc ratio, I would have overanalysed the situation and failed in putting on muscle.
If I had been advised to eat 5000 cals a day, I would have found it impossible to micro-manage. I would have had to focus on the single dietary issue-eating 5000 cals of reasonably clean food. Whether the real number of cals I needed was 3557 a day or 4102 a day or 2543 a day becomes neither here nor there. Eat 5000 and you dont have to over analyse it. And you will grow.
[quote]BruceLeeFan wrote:
Yeah scaling it up is fine, natural, logical. But why does Rippetoe who mostly writes articles geared to beginners advise such an excess of calories?
[/quote]
Why don’t you just ask him in the comments section …?
[quote]JaX Un wrote:
[quote]Alex Good wrote:
[quote]JaX Un wrote:
[quote]Alex Good wrote:
I agree with the op. I’m gaining muscle with a calorie deficit.[/quote]
how are you measuring muscle gain?[/quote]
By strength.[/quote]
meh. strength gains do not always mean hypertrophy(muscle) gains. I think many people here have dieted down and were able to add more weight on certain movements, it won’t last though as long as you are in a calorie deficit. And when incorporating a new movement into your routine, you will always be able to consistently add weight until your body adapts to the new movement.
I am assuming you are beyond the “newbie gains”.[/quote]
Alex, gains in strength do not mean you are gaining muscle. I’m just speculating, but you could be getting more efficient at an exercise. Say, by improving form.
[quote]TheDudeAbides wrote:
[quote]BruceLeeFan wrote:
Yeah scaling it up is fine, natural, logical. But why does Rippetoe who mostly writes articles geared to beginners advise such an excess of calories?
[/quote]
Why don’t you just ask him in the comments section …?[/quote]
I can’t comment in that section for some bizarre reason.
I do agree that a cookie cutter caloric intake is probably a bad idea, but if you’ve never broken 200lbs (at average height) you should try to get up there pretty quick. If you want to stay as lean as possible you can be anal about your daily macros but you should still gain fast.
I will say that I didn’t need 5000 cals to get to 200 for the first time, but I gain weight fairly easily WHICH IS WHY THAT ARTICLE IS NOT DIRECTED AT ME, BUT AT SKINNY FUCKERS (like OP).
It’s impossible to gain muscle without gaining weight! Fucking gain weight!
OK…so the guy repeated what most of us have been saying about bulking up for over a decade but puts a number on it and it causes questions like this?
No, you may not need 5,000cals…but you can bet anyone who has arms over 19" has eaten that much and more many times over in the process of getting that big.
Either way, one thing is really fucking clear…there are far LESS really built people around since lifters started being this analytical about every little issue.
You would think that would stand out to people.
[quote]trav123456 wrote:
I do agree that a cookie cutter caloric intake is probably a bad idea, but if you’ve never broken 200lbs (at average height) you should try to get up there pretty quick. If you want to stay as lean as possible you can be anal about your daily macros but you should still gain fast.
I will say that I didn’t need 5000 cals to get to 200 for the first time, but I gain weight fairly easily WHICH IS WHY THAT ARTICLE IS NOT DIRECTED AT ME, BUT AT SKINNY FUCKERS (like OP).
It’s impossible to gain muscle without gaining weight! Fucking gain weight! [/quote]
I could make a lot of assumptions about you as well.
Yeah I’m not over 200lbs, yet. So that makes me skinny? No it doesn’t. I’m 5’6 and 170lbs I haven’t looked ‘skinny’ since I was 130lbs. With a frame this small a little amount of weight does go a really long way.
Also whoever said you can gain muscle without gaining weight? I’m sure some of you people don’t or can’t read properly.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
there are far LESS really built people around since lifters started being this analytical about every little issue[/quote]
Makes me wonder if we have the driving magazine sales and supplement industry to thank for this. I know I will pick up an occasional muscle rag to follow contests and see pics (even though the internet makes it a hell of a lot easier), but how many times can you write the samne article about eating and training? Supplements as well, I can’t tell you the number of times a young kid at the gym asks me about some new supplement he’s going to take, but has no idea how many cals or grams of protein he’s eating each day.
I’m going to obviously express my own opinion with this, but… I think that the basics for gaining size, are a hell of a lot easier to follow than those necessary to (properly!) cut while maintaining maximum muscle.
S
[quote]Professor X wrote:
OK…so the guy repeated what most of us have been saying about bulking up for over a decade but puts a number on it and it causes questions like this?
No, you may not need 5,000cals…but you can bet anyone who has arms over 19" has eaten that much and more many times over in the process of getting that big.
Either way, one thing is really fucking clear…there are far LESS really built people around since lifters started being this analytical about every little issue.
You would think that would stand out to people.[/quote]
I very much agree with you X.
As for being over analytical, I don’t know if you aimed that at me? But I would say I’m trying to get across a point that people should stop worrying about getting over this or that amount of calories and what exercises they should or should not do… Just train often and train with as much intensity as the possible.
It is a totally different ball game in for people who are well developed compared to a beginner.
I just can’t understand why a beginner should eat SO many calories. Yeah it stops you worrying about macro-nutrients and all that crap but anyone with a decent understanding of what they’re eating doesn’t need to be that as you say analytical with their food. I can understand why people do record macronutrients but you can bet Arnold never did it to the extent people do today.
Get your ass up in the morning eat a big breakfast and then eat regular meals full of protein day round and pay attention to post and peri workout nutrition, sleep and train as much as you can. That is as complicated as it gets. Why someone who wasn’t already advanced would need to eat so much is beyond me.
That is what I think would stand out to people.
Also I have read mostly all of your posts regarding gaining size. I agree with it. I don’t disagree, but I just don’t think the advice Rippetoe is giving out is responsible advice.
It’s like you say anyone with over 19 inch arms eats like that regularly, but the fact that they are that big obviously changes their metabolic rate as well as what they need to eat just for maintenance let alone to gain size.
But a beginner should be more focused on learning form and learning how to diet properly. Not just stuffing their face and not understand why they’re doing it.
[quote]BruceLeeFan wrote:
Secondly training 3 days a week just isn’t going to cut it if you want more size. Frequency and volume really is needed in higher amounts.
[/quote]
in my own personal opinion, i believe that beginners can progress for at least 6 months or more working out only 3 times a week before they have to add more volume to continue growing. i did a 5x5 full body (ya, ya flame away) 3 times a week for over 1.5 years before i switched to split routines 5 days a week. took me from 170lbs up to 200lbs quite well.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
there are far LESS really built people around since lifters started being this analytical about every little issue[/quote]
Makes me wonder if we have the driving magazine sales and supplement industry to thank for this. I know I will pick up an occasional muscle rag to follow contests and see pics (even though the internet makes it a hell of a lot easier), but how many times can you write the samne article about eating and training? Supplements as well, I can’t tell you the number of times a young kid at the gym asks me about some new supplement he’s going to take, but has no idea how many cals or grams of protein he’s eating each day.
I’m going to obviously express my own opinion with this, but… I think that the basics for gaining size, are a hell of a lot easier to follow than those necessary to (properly!) cut while maintaining maximum muscle.
S[/quote]
I have no way near the same experience as you or X.
But I have to agree the whole supplement thing is absurd.
Sports nutrition is one thing, some stuff works. But it’s a facet. A tool.
Articles get done and re-done and some coaches can make money for writing crap we all know anyway. Some times for the sake of putting something new out there they put down something stupid or unnecessary…
As a relative beginner I can still remember when I first started coming to this site. I constantly read that you should train 3-4 days a week. Now I don’t think anyone on this site, bar an exceptional few probably train as infrequently as 3 days a week.
I understand some people train very little and can grow training twice a week or whatever but that’s them and the majority of us respond to more frequency > more stress > more growth.
I really did wonder for a while whether a lot of coaches and supplement companies recommend training so little just so they’re not out of a job. It would be too easy wouldn’t it if all you had to do was eat, lift and rest.
Well that’s just what you need to do.
[quote]wannabebig25 wrote:
[quote]BruceLeeFan wrote:
Secondly training 3 days a week just isn’t going to cut it if you want more size. Frequency and volume really is needed in higher amounts.
[/quote]
in my own personal opinion, i believe that beginners can progress for at least 6 months or more working out only 3 times a week before they have to add more volume to continue growing. i did a 5x5 full body (ya, ya flame away) 3 times a week for over 1.5 years before i switched to split routines 5 days a week. took me from 170lbs up to 200lbs quite well.[/quote]
Doing TBT 3 times a week for a beginner is fine.
We all know anything will work for a beginner. But the best routine for a beginner? Imho TBT they wont be stressing their muscles long enough in order for them to have to rest for long enough in order to merit a split.
[quote]BruceLeeFan wrote:
Get your ass up in the morning eat a big breakfast and then eat regular meals full of protein day round and pay attention to post and peri workout nutrition, sleep and train as much as you can. That is as complicated as it gets. Why someone who wasn’t already advanced would need to eat so much is beyond me.
[/quote]
The vast majority of people who think they are doing this really aren’t getting enough calories. That is why you can’t just say that.
When I feel like I “eat big” for a day, it’s a safe bet I’m over 4,000calories. When my brother feels like he “eats big”, it may not even be 2,000 because he has the stomach capacity of a 9yr old (and he knows this). WAY more people trying to add muscle undereat than overeat.
The fact you ate so much that your body didn’t digest half the food is irrelevant to how MOST beginners take their training.
[quote]BruceLeeFan wrote:
[quote]trav123456 wrote:
I do agree that a cookie cutter caloric intake is probably a bad idea, but if you’ve never broken 200lbs (at average height) you should try to get up there pretty quick. If you want to stay as lean as possible you can be anal about your daily macros but you should still gain fast.
I will say that I didn’t need 5000 cals to get to 200 for the first time, but I gain weight fairly easily WHICH IS WHY THAT ARTICLE IS NOT DIRECTED AT ME, BUT AT SKINNY FUCKERS (like OP).
It’s impossible to gain muscle without gaining weight! Fucking gain weight! [/quote]
I could make a lot of assumptions about you as well.
Yeah I’m not over 200lbs, yet. So that makes me skinny? No it doesn’t. I’m 5’6 and 170lbs I haven’t looked ‘skinny’ since I was 130lbs. With a frame this small a little amount of weight does go a really long way.
Also whoever said you can gain muscle without gaining weight? I’m sure some of you people don’t or can’t read properly.[/quote]
Sorry didn’t know you were 5’6.
My point was that the main message of the article was to inspire little guys to gain weight, not to promote a certain amount of calories to reach that end, and you seem to be focusing on that insignificant detail.
Dude, I needed 5,000cals to gain weight as a newb weighing about 150lbs. I was very active in school, walked to all of my classes because I had no car…on a campus that was basically its own city. On top of that, I had a fast metabolism and lifted any time the gym was open which was mostly 5 days a week for the first two years.
In fact, I would say that if someone really has the genetics to get big, then they will need more calories than most do especially if they start off real skinny.
I really think some of you are looking at EVERYTHING through the eyes of someone who really isn’t gaining much to start with and doesn’t really want to be that big.
I was over 190lbs by my second year. You don’t make a gain like that with chicken breasts and rice or 3,000cals or less.
Yes, to get big, you have to eat big…and I think the problem most of you are having is that you really don’t have the drive for this long term to push that hard with food and training to make that sort of gain.
I am going to ask how many people on this forum have gained 100lbs in the process of gaining muscle?
80?
It is EASY to put on 20lbs of muscle. It takes way more food and way more time to gain way more than that.
Most of the people here weren’t even making progress for YEARS until some of the newer guys showed up.
What is it they have… that the rest of you don’t?
This isn’t really an activity for someone scared to eat more and scared to see what happens and THEN make changes.
[quote]BruceLeeFan wrote:
[quote]wannabebig25 wrote:
[quote]BruceLeeFan wrote:
Secondly training 3 days a week just isn’t going to cut it if you want more size. Frequency and volume really is needed in higher amounts.
[/quote]
in my own personal opinion, i believe that beginners can progress for at least 6 months or more working out only 3 times a week before they have to add more volume to continue growing. i did a 5x5 full body (ya, ya flame away) 3 times a week for over 1.5 years before i switched to split routines 5 days a week. took me from 170lbs up to 200lbs quite well.[/quote]
Doing TBT 3 times a week for a beginner is fine.
We all know anything will work for a beginner. But the best routine for a beginner? Imho TBT they wont be stressing their muscles long enough in order for them to have to rest for long enough in order to merit a split.[/quote]
well, if a beginner starts squatting 95lbs and benching 65lbs he can recover from the workouts and manage 3 times a week. what happens once he is squatting 315+ and benching 265? its going to be harder to recover isnt it? and if he has to still hit deadlifts, bench, military press, etc. after giving all hes got to do those squats (and no direct arm work in those programs). he wont be able to dedicate enough volume and energy to other bodyparts in that workout and thats why he doesnt get big. i find alot of these guys following 5x5, starting strength, rippetoe, etc. have decent sized (sized, not aesthetically pleasing) legs, but their upper body looks like that of a prepubescent girl. thats where i personally believe splitting up bodyparts comes in, maybe im wrong…
[quote]Alex Good wrote:
I agree with the op. I’m gaining muscle with a calorie deficit.[/quote]
No…you are not!