T Nation

Realistic Goals? How to Achieve Them?


#1


Sup, dudes. Just wondering if you think these goals are realistic. Stats listed below:

Ht: 6' 9"
Wt: 245-248 lbs
Bf%: 8%-12%?
Experience: Novice-Intermediate
- Began lifting 4 years ago, has been on/off. Probably have about 2-2.5 years of solid lifting experience.

Lifts:
Squat: 315x5, 365 x 1
Deadlift: 405x8, 495 x 1
Bench: 245x4, 275 x 1

Measurements:
Quads: 25"
L-Arm: 16.75"
R-Arm: 16.25"
L-Calf: 16.9"
R-Calf: 16.4"
Waist: 35"
Chest: 45"
Shoulders: ??

Goals for end of year:
Wt: 260 lbs (+12-15) (so ~4 lbs per month)
Quads: +1"
Arms: +.5"
Calves: +.5"
Waist: --
Chest: +2" (really, really, really want to grow my back)
Shoulders: ??

Squat: 405 x 1
Deadlift: 495 x 5
Bench: 275 x 3

Am I selling myself short or should I be shooting for less? My vehicle with which to reach my goals is listed below. It's a modified 5-day split from KingBeef's old thread:

Chest/Calves:
Incline DB Bench: 5x6-10
Flat BB Bench: 3x4-8
Incline BB Bench: 4x10
Decline BB Bench: 3x10
A1 Standing Calf Raises: 4x12
A2 Seated Calf Raises: 4x12

Back:
Wide Grip Pull Ups: 5x8
DB Rows: 4x6-10
Cable Lat Pull Downs: 3x6-8
Close-Neutral Grip Seated Rows: 3x6-8
Straight Arm Lat Pull Down Row Things (Cable Machine): 4x12
External Rotations: 3x20

Legs:
Squats (warmup+): 225x5, 275x3, 315x3
Deadlifts: 135x5, 225x5, 315x3, 405x3, 455x1-3
Glute Raises: 3x30
A1: Leg Extensions: 4x12
A2: Leg Curls: 4x12
Hobble back home

Arms:
A1 Pinwheel Curls: 4x10
A2 Tricep Pushdowns: 4x10
B1 Incline DB Curls: 3x8
B2 Skullcrushers: 3x8
C1 Standing Bicep Curls: 4x10
C2 French Presses: 4x10
D1 Cable Curls (wide grip): 3x20
D2 Cable Pushdowns: 3x20

Shoulders:
Shoulder Press: 5x6-10
Cable Lateral Flies: 3x8-12
DB Lateral Flies: 3x8-12
Rear Delt Flies: 3x12-15
Cable X's: 3x20-30
JM Rear Delt Destroyer Set: 50 reps with 45s, 50 reps with 20s
Shrugs: 4x12

From an aesthetics point of view, I would like to have larger traps, larger lats, and bigger delts. Sweepier quads would be cool, too. In terms of strength, I would like to maximize my deadlift. It may seem foolish, but as long as my deadlift keeps going up, I don't really care about squat/bench all that much.

End goal: I would like to step on stage in a few years after having dieted down from 280 lbs, 10% body fat.

I'm naturally ectomorphic, and seem to gain best when I'm shoving everything in sight down my face-hole, so I'm not too worried about diet right now (past getting as much as I need to remain in caloric excess).

How should I alter my training to reach my goals?


#2

Hopefully someone more experienced will chime in, but my guess is that gaining 12lbs of LEAN mass before the year is over will be close to impossible if you have been training properly for some time. 1lbs of lean mass/week is a very fast growth rate(at least unassisted). Now, if we’re talking about total weight gained, it becomes a different story.


#3

I was thinking in terms of total weight gained. I would be cool with ~2.5 lbs muscle, ~1.5 lbs fat gained per month. If possible, haha.


#4

Dorian Yates, admitedly well assisted as well as a genetic anomaly, always stressed that the human body - even with the best genetics in the world and PEDs - cannot build more than a lb or so of muscle in a month’s time.

Some of the best competitors I’ve known (older than you though) are seen as amazing as they step onstage 2-3 lbs heavier each year. a 5 lb gain of actual muscle (not BS/Gym bragging muscle) makes quite a profound difference to a physique.

My advice is to just do everything correctly, every day, and not get caught up with how much you MIGHT gain. If you’re lucky, you’ll be very happy when you realize that despite not packing on 20 lbs of lbm per year, you still made substantial improvements.

S


#5

I really appreciate your response, Stu. So the whole 3 lb/month thing that i’ve heard so many people talk about was a lie, then? Haha. I suppose it was just too good to be true. Thanks for giving me the reality check, though.

Does my lifting routine at least seem like it falls in line with the areas i would like to bring up?


#6

[quote]Zooguido wrote:
I really appreciate your response, Stu. So the whole 3 lb/month thing that i’ve heard so many people talk about was a lie, then? Haha. I suppose it was just too good to be true. Thanks for giving me the reality check, though.
[/quote]

I think that’s mainly a guideline for raw beginners.


#7

According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?


#8

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

I don’t think it’s unlikely that a completely untrained beginner has more growth potential than a very, very experienced and muscular bodybuilder who is juicing. Please note that I’m guessing here. If anyone wants to correct me, feel free to do so.


#9

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

One’s man opinion.

And so many factors to consider, it’s not even funny.

And when was the last time an olympia contender/winner came back the next year weighing at least 20lbs more?

and also, “Oh look, a dead horse…”


#10

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

Because beginners I am still gonna doubt actualky gain that much. I think they gain a ton of intramuscular and not intramuscular water. A lot of extra glycogen which is all increased from starting to workout. All adaptations to better do these new activities and that can add a ton of weight. What beginner has added 30lbs in a year where it actually looks like a dense muscle 30lbs. Like 3 10lbs roasts distributed on them. Weight just doesn’t matter. It’s how much muscle is added that is what changes the look. The density. Ect ect sorry I am in a rush


#11

Haha Ryan CXG I believe we had a disagreement on this in another thread. I was adamant that this sort of gain was possible. After my own journey/cut I have to admit you are 100% right. A new lifter could probably gain 10 lbs of muscle in a year maybe 15. It took me going from 205 to 175 to realize how much of the weight I was carrying was not muscle. It was shocking to me.

In regards to the op. Do your thing mang. Just stay consistent with the three pinnacles (training, Diet, Sleep) of the pursuit of gains and you shall succeed.

By the way to you play any sports op? It would be a shame for someone with your height and shape to not. Damn I would kill to be over six foot. You lucky bastard.

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]
Because beginners I am still gonna doubt actualky gain that much. I think they gain a ton of intramuscular and not intramuscular water. A lot of extra glycogen which is all increased from starting to workout. All adaptations to better do these new activities and that can add a ton of weight. What beginner has added 30lbs in a year where it actually looks like a dense muscle 30lbs. Like 3 10lbs roasts distributed on them. Weight just doesn’t matter. It’s how much muscle is added that is what changes the look. The density. Ect ect sorry I am in a rush [/quote]


#12

I used to be caught up in the weigh thing and that is honestly such a huge mistake. I’ve only relatively recently stopped being caught up with the scale number going up and I have to say these last 6 months I have not gained any weight. I would fluctuate from 175-182 but people say I look better then I ever have and my one buddy who lifts assumed I weighed around 195.

So the take away is that you should focus on the changes you see in the mirror and the changes you see in your performance in the gym. If you are not seeing what you like in terms of mirror and performance then you know adjustments need to be made. Honestly I would try avoiding weighing yourself for a couple weeks maybe even a couple months. I noticed weighing myself had cognitive effects on my workout. If I weighed myself and was lighter than the previous workout I would assume I lost some gains and I would feel weak in the gym and if I had gained I would feel strong even though I had likely not gained or lost anything from the previous workout.

[quote]Zooguido wrote:
I really appreciate your response, Stu. So the whole 3 lb/month thing that i’ve heard so many people talk about was a lie, then? Haha. I suppose it was just too good to be true. Thanks for giving me the reality check, though.

Does my lifting routine at least seem like it falls in line with the areas i would like to bring up?[/quote]


#13

[quote]JFG wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

One’s man opinion.

And so many factors to consider, it’s not even funny.

And when was the last time an olympia contender/winner came back the next year weighing at least 20lbs more?

and also, “Oh look, a dead horse…”[/quote]

You misunderstand. I am NOT saying Dorian Yates is completely WRONG.


#14

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

Because beginners I am still gonna doubt actualky gain that much. I think they gain a ton of intramuscular and not intramuscular water. A lot of extra glycogen which is all increased from starting to workout. All adaptations to better do these new activities and that can add a ton of weight. What beginner has added 30lbs in a year where it actually looks like a dense muscle 30lbs. Like 3 10lbs roasts distributed on them. Weight just doesn’t matter. It’s how much muscle is added that is what changes the look. The density. Ect ect sorry I am in a rush [/quote]

Appreciate the answer man.

What do you think of the often brought up study in which trainees on testosterone @ 600mg/week gained 7lbs of muscle without even working out?


#15

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

Because beginners I am still gonna doubt actualky gain that much. I think they gain a ton of intramuscular and not intramuscular water. A lot of extra glycogen which is all increased from starting to workout. All adaptations to better do these new activities and that can add a ton of weight. What beginner has added 30lbs in a year where it actually looks like a dense muscle 30lbs. Like 3 10lbs roasts distributed on them. Weight just doesn’t matter. It’s how much muscle is added that is what changes the look. The density. Ect ect sorry I am in a rush [/quote]

Appreciate the answer man.

What do you think of the often brought up study in which trainees on testosterone @ 600mg/week gained 7lbs of muscle without even working out?[/quote]

I hate that stupid study. It just doesn’t happen!


#16

[quote]Yogi wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

Because beginners I am still gonna doubt actualky gain that much. I think they gain a ton of intramuscular and not intramuscular water. A lot of extra glycogen which is all increased from starting to workout. All adaptations to better do these new activities and that can add a ton of weight. What beginner has added 30lbs in a year where it actually looks like a dense muscle 30lbs. Like 3 10lbs roasts distributed on them. Weight just doesn’t matter. It’s how much muscle is added that is what changes the look. The density. Ect ect sorry I am in a rush [/quote]

Appreciate the answer man.

What do you think of the often brought up study in which trainees on testosterone @ 600mg/week gained 7lbs of muscle without even working out?[/quote]

I hate that stupid study. It just doesn’t happen![/quote]

Yup lol. With so many kids in the steroid section (and quite a few that have spoken to me in real life) wanting to start cycles because of all the amazing gains in muscle they’re expecting because of stuff like this, I’m hoping some guys with in depth knowledge in this area can clear all this up.


#17

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

Because beginners I am still gonna doubt actualky gain that much. I think they gain a ton of intramuscular and not intramuscular water. A lot of extra glycogen which is all increased from starting to workout. All adaptations to better do these new activities and that can add a ton of weight. What beginner has added 30lbs in a year where it actually looks like a dense muscle 30lbs. Like 3 10lbs roasts distributed on them. Weight just doesn’t matter. It’s how much muscle is added that is what changes the look. The density. Ect ect sorry I am in a rush [/quote]

Appreciate the answer man.

What do you think of the often brought up study in which trainees on testosterone @ 600mg/week gained 7lbs of muscle without even working out?[/quote]
Gaining 7 lbs of lean body mass is not the same as gaining 7 lbs of muscle. LBM is everything but fat. I can eat a salty high carb meal and gain 4 lbs of “LBM” by the next day from extra fluid retention.


#18

[quote]Ecchastang wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]ryanbCXG wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

Because beginners I am still gonna doubt actualky gain that much. I think they gain a ton of intramuscular and not intramuscular water. A lot of extra glycogen which is all increased from starting to workout. All adaptations to better do these new activities and that can add a ton of weight. What beginner has added 30lbs in a year where it actually looks like a dense muscle 30lbs. Like 3 10lbs roasts distributed on them. Weight just doesn’t matter. It’s how much muscle is added that is what changes the look. The density. Ect ect sorry I am in a rush [/quote]

Appreciate the answer man.

What do you think of the often brought up study in which trainees on testosterone @ 600mg/week gained 7lbs of muscle without even working out?[/quote]
Gaining 7 lbs of lean body mass is not the same as gaining 7 lbs of muscle. LBM is everything but fat. I can eat a salty high carb meal and gain 4 lbs of “LBM” by the next day from extra fluid retention. [/quote]

Exactly.

The distinction between lbm and muscle has to be made clear.

Unfortunately, if a brief search for that study is done on google, we will find various articles from dubious authors with silly agendas claiming the 7lbs as muscle gain, followed by various posters claiming to have seen miraculous roid gains on people who don’t even know how to eat and train.

There are some dumb kids that read these articles and posts and believe they can gain 30lbs of “muscle” in 10 weeks to reach their natural genetic potential and then maintain it naturally (I am not making this up).

On the other hand, we have beginners not understanding the same distinction here telling other beginners not to gain more than 0.5lbs a week.


#19

[quote]dt79 wrote:

[quote]JFG wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:
According to Dorian Yates, that would mean an average bodybuilder using over 2g of anabolics, along with gh and insulin, would be still gaining less than a raw beginner.

Can anyone explain?[/quote]

One’s man opinion.

And so many factors to consider, it’s not even funny.

And when was the last time an olympia contender/winner came back the next year weighing at least 20lbs more?

and also, “Oh look, a dead horse…”[/quote]

You misunderstand. I am NOT saying Dorian Yates is completely WRONG.[/quote]

I did not misunderstood. I get it.

Lot’s of good answers so far, but as stated, it’s a lot more complex of an answer.

You are saying that kids get the wrong impression of gains these days. Was the same when I was young (almost 50). Charles Atlas was in the back of every comic book transforming a 90lbs getting sand kicked in face weakling, to a hulk of a man… Yeah, right.

Lots of people bought it though. He made a very good living.

Next thing you know someone will claim to have put on 64lbs of muscle in 4 weeks…