It’s not that complicated. Train your legs, period.
Training legs while bulking will lead to maximum muscle gains.
Training legs while cutting will help preserve your hard earned muscle.
Either way, why would you ever consider “holding off on training legs”?
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
If you haven’t ever trained legs, they’d still grow on a caloric deficit… You can expect newb gains. [/quote]
interesting
Are you saying that newb gains are more so isolated than systemic?
So a guy training only upper body for one year could then incorporate lower body training in his second year and experience newb gains all over again?
[quote]angus_beef wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
If you haven’t ever trained legs, they’d still grow on a caloric deficit… You can expect newb gains. [/quote]
interesting
Are you saying that newb gains are more so isolated than systemic?
So a guy training only upper body for one year could then incorporate lower body training in his second year and experience newb gains all over again?
[/quote]
Oh my sweet jesus. Shut the fuck up lol. Are you guys really having a conversation about this?
The best thing to do is train your body parts. My muscles are usually bigger after training them for a while.
[quote]angus_beef wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
If you haven’t ever trained legs, they’d still grow on a caloric deficit… You can expect newb gains. [/quote]
interesting
Are you saying that newb gains are more so isolated than systemic?
So a guy training only upper body for one year could then incorporate lower body training in his second year and experience newb gains all over again?
[/quote]
Yeah, newb gains in his legs. It’s still a horrible idea, all it does is put your leg development behind upper body development.
No such thing as wasted gains, only different horizons.
I cut down to 5.5% bf and lost about 3-4lb of lean mass. Post-contest I gained it all back in a month.
Don’t forget that lean mass isn’t just the force producing part of the muscle but water, fat, glucose, etc.
Also, why worry so much about numbers? What do you see in the mirror? I think lifters worry far too much about muscle lost during a cut. How are your lifting numbers? You can get pretty damn lean and still have huge increases in strength or at least maintenance.
As far as IBB during a cut…wasn’t Sebastian or whoever cutting for a contest during the IBB filming?
Alan
In terms of a hypothetical looking at this in a vacuum one could assume that taking two twins that have never trained their legs before
Twin A starts training legs during a diet phase, let’s say 4 months to get pretty lean.
Twin B waits 4 months during diet to “not waste gains”
And we look at leg progress of both at the end of 8 additional months(12 total for my non genius friends)
My thought is Twin B will make faster progress in terms of those first couple months of training legs(months 5-9) than Twin A did with 1-4, but in terms of OVERALL progress Twin B would be far and away ahead. Why this matters I’ve got no clue but thought I’d type out a rambling response to a silly question.
The great travesty of bodybuilding is the gym part is only 3-6 hours a week and it gives people way too long to ponder stuff that doesn’t effect them lol.
[quote]mr popular wrote:
This is the stupidest fucking thing I’ve read on here all week.[/quote]
[quote]waylanderxx wrote:
Oh my sweet jesus. Shut the fuck up lol. Are you guys really having a conversation about this?
[/quote]
This is why I like BBers so much, they’re so patient and kind when answering questions, makes everyone want to be like them! lol 
In all seriousness, I can’t post in the T-Cell but I saw your thread in there Waylander and wanted to say you are a fkn beast! Great work man
[quote]forlife wrote:
[quote]Loudog75 wrote:
Just a quick question,
If you are in a caloric deficit to lose weight wouldn’t your body begin to take the calories from itself, both muscle and fat? If you aren’t working the muscles, why would your body maintain the gains that you’ve made? I’m no expert, I’m just asking.[/quote]
In a caloric deficit, the body is going to take more calories from fat than from muscle if you are working those muscles and demanding that they grow. If instead you place no demand on the muscles by training them, your body has less reason to preserve them, and will take calories from both fat and muscle.[/quote]
I think we’re in agreement spartan!
[quote]AndrewG909 wrote:
[quote]mr popular wrote:
This is the stupidest fucking thing I’ve read on here all week.[/quote]
[quote]waylanderxx wrote:
Oh my sweet jesus. Shut the fuck up lol. Are you guys really having a conversation about this?
[/quote]
This is why I like BBers so much, they’re so patient and kind when answering questions, makes everyone want to be like them! lol
In all seriousness, I can’t post in the T-Cell but I saw your thread in there Waylander and wanted to say you are a fkn beast! Great work man[/quote]
lol thanks.
I’m patient and kind when answering a legitimate question, but this…this is the most retarded hypothetical situation I have ever seen posted here haha.
I got a new bench max and deadlift max on a diet.
[quote]Scott M wrote:
The great travesty of bodybuilding is the gym part is only 3-6 hours a week and it gives people way too long to ponder stuff that doesn’t effect them lol. [/quote]
Like ranch dressing.
[quote]austin_bicep wrote:
I got a new bench max and deadlift max on a diet.[/quote]
Ditto…
In fact, I didn’t see noticeable decreases in strength until the last month. And my post-contest rebound included a strength rebound as well. Something about the reduced training in the month or so post-show. I trained less and hit HUGE prs in the big three 2 months post-show.
Alan
Pumped strikes again. Another “hypothetical” winner thread.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Pumped strikes again. Another “hypothetical” winner thread. [/quote]
Talk about more shit like the behind the back cable raises.
I know your sneaky ass is holding out more on me
[quote]hungry4more wrote:
[quote]mr popular wrote:
This is the stupidest fucking thing I’ve read on here all week.[/quote]
x2[/quote]
[quote]pumped340 wrote:
I had thought about this in the past, and it probably wouldn’t change much in what I do, but what do you guys think about the idea that some gains would be wasted during a cut, and therefore you might put off training something?
For instance, lets say you never worked legs before and then after a few years you decided to take a few months to lean down. Would it make sense to hold off on training legs for that time since they likely wouldn’t grow much while losing weight but would probably grow pretty rapidly when you began gaining again?
I mean you might get some growth during the cut but obviously nowhere near if you were gaining. At some point strength is going to be limited so maybe it would be better to wait until you can gain the most leg size from that first 50-100lb increase in squats than just not really going anywhere for a few months.
On a similar note, Thibs has mentioned how people shouldn’t do IBB during a cut. Part of that is the recovery issue but also there’s the fact that you just wouldn’t see as good of results that way. What do you guys think??
[/quote]
This is the most bizarre post I’ve ever seen.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Like ranch dressing.
[/quote]
I prefer thousand island, ranch tastes too vinegary
Yeah, seriously. I’m on a cut right now and interestingly enough, I’m still getting stronger as I’m getting leaner. If you can’t gain strength while on a cut (obviously excluding being just a few weeks out from competition) then you’re probably doing something wrong.
I know this isn’t just all about legs, but if the trainee wasn’t doing legs on a diet like in the OP’s example (e.g. hip dominant movements like deadlifts, squats and their variations) then it’ll take “forever” to lose fat compared to if he did train them.
Those movements are the best for raising testosterone levels and metabolism (thus helping one preserve/build muscle and burn more fat even after the exercise, while dieting).
Trust me, I’ve been stupid enough to try it in the past - needless to say, I felt softer and fat loss was pretty much non existent until drastic calorie cuts were made, thereby risking more muscle loss…
