What's Right for Me?

[quote]michaelmi5 wrote:
guys i will re-read all the comments again in the morning thanks

out of curiosity the SL 5x5 insists u do the squats first all the time no excuses, i like doing squats and never want to skip them, but is it possible to say on Deadlift day to do the deads first whilst my energy level is high? i shoulda added in my first post that it has been said to me on here before a few times that i’ll never get massive strong as im always on a calorie deficit, so maybe thats why my lifts arent as big as they should be

thanks again[/quote]

Take a look at Jim Wendlers site. Look for 5/3/1 for a Beginner.

Easy 5x195 to barely 1x205? That kind of thing has happened to me. Carb up and get back in there.

[quote]FlatsFarmer wrote:
The biggest problem is that it’s all “Heavy” days. 5x5 “heavy” 3 times per week in the squat, in my opinion, is a terrible terrible terrible idea. With all 5 sets done at the same weight, you’re never going heavy enough to really challenge your strength. [/quote]

5x5 is only the starting point, where the weight is purposely light. It moves to essentially Starting Strength (3x5) pretty quickly.

[quote]SevenDragons wrote:

You are under 200 lbs, and on a ‘calorie deficit’?

I think we have found why your DL is stalling at 205.
[/quote]

Being under 200lbs at 5’9" and eating at a calorie deficit does not account for stalling at 205lbs by a longshot, unless the calorie deficit is extreme.

[quote]SevenDragons wrote:

[quote]michaelmi5 wrote:
guys i will re-read all the comments again in the morning thanks

out of curiosity the SL 5x5 insists u do the squats first all the time no excuses, i like doing squats and never want to skip them, but is it possible to say on Deadlift day to do the deads first whilst my energy level is high? i shoulda added in my first post that it has been said to me on here before a few times that i’ll never get massive strong as im always on a calorie deficit, so maybe thats why my lifts arent as big as they should be

thanks again[/quote]

You are under 200 lbs, and on a ‘calorie deficit’?

I think we have found why your DL is stalling at 205.
[/quote]

He’s posting here with a sub 200lbs bw???

The nerve…

Go back to bb.com OP, and don’t come back until you hit 500lbs on DL.

[quote]Jarvan wrote:

[quote]SevenDragons wrote:

[quote]michaelmi5 wrote:
guys i will re-read all the comments again in the morning thanks

out of curiosity the SL 5x5 insists u do the squats first all the time no excuses, i like doing squats and never want to skip them, but is it possible to say on Deadlift day to do the deads first whilst my energy level is high? i shoulda added in my first post that it has been said to me on here before a few times that i’ll never get massive strong as im always on a calorie deficit, so maybe thats why my lifts arent as big as they should be

thanks again[/quote]

You are under 200 lbs, and on a ‘calorie deficit’?

I think we have found why your DL is stalling at 205.
[/quote]

He’s posting here with a sub 200lbs bw???

The nerve…

Go back to bb.com OP, and don’t come back until you hit 500lbs on DL.[/quote]

I hate it when those sub-200 stick insects like Ecchastang and Th3Pwnisher and Jarvan and Chris Collucci (still can’t spell it) post. It makes me want to throw my protein shake up.

[quote]dagill2 wrote:

I hate it when those sub-200 stick insects like Ecchastang and Th3Pwnisher and Jarvan and Chris Collucci (still can’t spell it) post. It makes me want to throw my protein shake up.
[/quote]

You mean a couple of those guys who are already real strong?

If they were wimps again and trying to grow stronger, I can assure that calorie deficits at sub-200 lbs on an average height male (5’ 9") is not going to help that. Unless strength isn’t the goal. In which case, the guy isn’t concerned at all about 205 lb DL stopping him in his tracks and making him quit.

Once you are already strong, then calorie deficits (if carefully managed) can be used to cut a few pounds while not sacrificing strength growth. On experienced lifters that know what they are doing. Not on a guy that is stalling on 205 lb DL.

Sounds like the guy needs to eat. At least try it and see if that 205 lb DL is a wall or a bump.

I actually think that 200lbs for a 5’9 male without a lot of muscle mass is really heavy.

[quote]SevenDragons wrote:

[quote]dagill2 wrote:

I hate it when those sub-200 stick insects like Ecchastang and Th3Pwnisher and Jarvan and Chris Collucci (still can’t spell it) post. It makes me want to throw my protein shake up.
[/quote]

You mean a couple of those guys who are already real strong?

If they were wimps again and trying to grow stronger, I can assure that calorie deficits at sub-200 lbs on an average height male (5’ 9") is not going to help that. Unless strength isn’t the goal. In which case, the guy isn’t concerned at all about 205 lb DL stopping him in his tracks and making him quit.

Once you are already strong, then calorie deficits (if carefully managed) can be used to cut a few pounds while not sacrificing strength growth. On experienced lifters that know what they are doing. Not on a guy that is stalling on 205 lb DL.

Sounds like the guy needs to eat. At least try it and see if that 205 lb DL is a wall or a bump.[/quote]

Can you post a picture (of anyone) of a beginner with very little muscle mass at 5’9" weighing more than 200lbs (more because you are still expecting them to gain weight.)

I just want to have a visual of what you are thinking about.

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I actually think that 200lbs for a 5’9 male without a lot of muscle mass is really heavy. [/quote]

It is! Only on the internet could it be considered otherwise. It’s a BMI of 29.5, and before someone complains about BMI not taking into account muscle mass, we know the OP doesn’t have much muscle.

Some real fucking ridiculous shit gets posted here sometimes.

Just find a program written by someone reputable and eat halfway decent most of the time. The program matters way less than your belief in the program.

[quote]dt79 wrote:

Can you post a picture (of anyone) of a beginner with very little muscle mass at 5’9" weighing more than 200lbs (more because you are still expecting them to gain weight.)

I just want to have a visual of what you are thinking about.[/quote]

At no point did I suggest that a weak man at 200 lbs is A-OK.

What I am saying is that an average height man at 200 lbs, being weak and trying to get STRONGER should NOT be on a calorie deficit while trying to do that.

THAT is why he stalls at 205 DL.

What is so difficult to understand about the concept that stressing the body with heavy weights demands more energy in repair? And that this is directly opposed to a fat-loss purpose of ‘deficit’ eating?

More advanced lifters, with some actual muscle and experience under their belt, can accomplish such things.

Weak beginners need to pick one or the other. And I personally do not care which he chooses. But this topic, and the zillions of others like them, seem to end up making it look like programs such as SL or SS are failing when it’s the person’s misplaced priorities that are at fault. I’m not here to change the OP’s choice, that’s his prerogative. But I like to present a viewpoint that eating surplus is necessary to growing stronger than you currently are. I can’t believe this even needs to be stated.

When an average height guy is actually strong, 200 lbs isn’t all that big of a deal. And they won’t look sloppy, they’ll look like a man.

[quote]SevenDragons wrote:

[quote]dt79 wrote:

Can you post a picture (of anyone) of a beginner with very little muscle mass at 5’9" weighing more than 200lbs (more because you are still expecting them to gain weight.)

I just want to have a visual of what you are thinking about.[/quote]

At no point did I suggest that a weak man at 200 lbs is A-OK.

What I am saying is that an average height man at 200 lbs, being weak and trying to get STRONGER should NOT be on a calorie deficit while trying to do that.

THAT is why he stalls at 205 DL.

What is so difficult to understand about the concept that stressing the body with heavy weights demands more energy in repair? And that this is directly opposed to a fat-loss purpose of ‘deficit’ eating?

More advanced lifters, with some actual muscle and experience under their belt, can accomplish such things.

Weak beginners need to pick one or the other. And I personally do not care which he chooses. But this topic, and the zillions of others like them, seem to end up making it look like programs such as SL or SS are failing when it’s the person’s misplaced priorities that are at fault. I’m not here to change the OP’s choice, that’s his prerogative. But I like to present a viewpoint that eating surplus is necessary to growing stronger than you currently are. I can’t believe this even needs to be stated.

When an average height guy is actually strong, 200 lbs isn’t all that big of a deal. And they won’t look sloppy, they’ll look like a man.[/quote]

I am not disagreeing with you. I get your point. The 200lbs just threw me off.

So if I told him to stop doing stronglifts, go diet to whatever bodyweight where he feels confident enough to really start eating big.

Then start gaining weight while running a 5x5 program to get as strong as possible in fastest amount of time, we would be in agreement?

[quote]SevenDragons wrote:
At no point did I suggest that a weak man at 200 lbs is A-OK.

What I am saying is that an average height man at 200 lbs, being weak and trying to get STRONGER should NOT be on a calorie deficit while trying to do that.

THAT is why he stalls at 205 DL.

What is so difficult to understand about the concept that stressing the body with heavy weights demands more energy in repair? And that this is directly opposed to a fat-loss purpose of ‘deficit’ eating?

More advanced lifters, with some actual muscle and experience under their belt, can accomplish such things.

Weak beginners need to pick one or the other. And I personally do not care which he chooses. But this topic, and the zillions of others like them, seem to end up making it look like programs such as SL or SS are failing when it’s the person’s misplaced priorities that are at fault. I’m not here to change the OP’s choice, that’s his prerogative. But I like to present a viewpoint that eating surplus is necessary to growing stronger than you currently are. I can’t believe this even needs to be stated.

When an average height guy is actually strong, 200 lbs isn’t all that big of a deal. And they won’t look sloppy, they’ll look like a man.[/quote]

I genuinely disagree with the idea that a caloric surplus is necessary for a beginner to grow stronger. I feel like this is one of those things that the internet has taken and run with, ignoring all the data we have on the contrary to this point. We have soliders in boot camps getting 4 hours of sleep a night and barely getting enough food that manage to get stronger while losing weight constantly.

I feel that, due to our fear of overtraining, we are now engaging in severe undertraining.

Personally, I feel like a 5’9 trainee who is 200lbs and weak would be better served losing fat.

Can we at least all agree that he would be better served by eating around maintenance, probably a little over, rather than in a deficit, if his goal is to get his strength up and stop stalling on the deadlift? It doesn’t mean he has to start “bulking”, just that he should eat for performance, which is difficult to do in a deficit.

The OP is 185, not 200. He probably isn’t “fat”, even if he’s not yet as lean as he’d like to be (eventually). Personally I think the best thing for such people to do (who want to get stronger and build muscle but don’t want to get fatter) is to eat in a slight surplus but eat very CLEAN.

I don’t think it’s great advice for him to “cut” down to his desired level of leanness and THEN work on strength, because for beginners it is very possible to gain strength and (slowly) lose bodyfat at the same time. The key is diet. And my guess is the OP’s diet could be improved.

[quote]michaelmi5 wrote:
at 39 yrs old now i think squatting 3 days a week and increasing the weight every workout might be a bit much for me (recovery wise) and if im honest lifting 200 or 500lb is not a goal of mine anymore.

My goal is to get lean and to hold some strength. Id like one day to have abs once in my life…

[/quote]

I’m operating off of this statement. I know he posted some things he’d like to do, but my impression is that leaness and having abs is the ultimate goal here.

I definitely support eating better. I like this plan myself

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:
I genuinely disagree with the idea that a caloric surplus is necessary for a beginner to grow stronger. I feel like this is one of those things that the internet has taken and run with, ignoring all the data we have on the contrary to this point. We have soliders in boot camps getting 4 hours of sleep a night and barely getting enough food that manage to get stronger while losing weight constantly.
[/quote]

I typically agree with you, but in this case I don’t at least based on my own experience in the area. Most of the guys I went to boot camp with were actually weaker at the end of training. More than likely this was because of the limitations put on recover (sleep) and/or the caloric restrictions. On a personal note I remember being fatigued to the point that it affected my performance. For example, we test pull-ups in the Corps. I was able to complete 18 during the personal fitness test (PFT) with a perfect score being 20. Fast forward a handful of months (post training) and I was easily hitting 25+. The only real changes where more sleep and more food. My BW was even slightly higher.

The problem I see with your example is that soldiers or in my case Marines aren’t, imo, actually getting stronger. It just so happens that BW exercises like the pull-up tend to be easier the lighter you are, which, again imo, just offers the illusion of strength gains.

That said someone who is almost completely untrained will likely get stronger to some degree in boot camp regardless.

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I typically agree with you, but in this case I don’t at least based on my own experience in the area. Most of the guys I went to boot camp with were actually weaker at the end of training. More than likely this was because of the limitations put on recover (sleep) and/or the caloric restrictions. On a personal note I remember being fatigued to the point that it affected my performance. For example, we test pull-ups in the Corps. I was able to complete 18 during the personal fitness test (PFT) with a perfect score being 20. Fast forward a handful of months (post training) and I was easily hitting 25+. The only real changes where more sleep and more food. My BW was even slightly higher.

The problem I see with your example is that soldiers or in my case Marines aren’t, imo, actually getting stronger. It just so happens that BW exercises like the pull-up tend to be easier the lighter you are, which, again imo, just offers the illusion of strength gains.

That said someone who is almost completely untrained will likely get stronger to some degree in boot camp regardless. [/quote]

You speaking of someone being completely untrained is more what I was trying to get at, but I can understand how it can appear that I meant it as a universal. I was addressing how much we emphasize that beginners need to eat this massive caloric surplus, when in reality a lot of times, due to the fact they are completely untrained the body is primed to grow.

[quote]T3hPwnisher wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
I typically agree with you, but in this case I don’t at least based on my own experience in the area. Most of the guys I went to boot camp with were actually weaker at the end of training. More than likely this was because of the limitations put on recover (sleep) and/or the caloric restrictions. On a personal note I remember being fatigued to the point that it affected my performance. For example, we test pull-ups in the Corps. I was able to complete 18 during the personal fitness test (PFT) with a perfect score being 20. Fast forward a handful of months (post training) and I was easily hitting 25+. The only real changes where more sleep and more food. My BW was even slightly higher.

The problem I see with your example is that soldiers or in my case Marines aren’t, imo, actually getting stronger. It just so happens that BW exercises like the pull-up tend to be easier the lighter you are, which, again imo, just offers the illusion of strength gains.

That said someone who is almost completely untrained will likely get stronger to some degree in boot camp regardless. [/quote]

You speaking of someone being completely untrained is more what I was trying to get at, but I can understand how it can appear that I meant it as a universal. I was addressing how much we emphasize that beginners need to eat this massive caloric surplus, when in reality a lot of times, due to the fact they are completely untrained the body is primed to grow.
[/quote]

That I can agree with. If what you say weren’t true, at least to some extent, I think we’d see less threads that start along the lines of, “Hey all, so I bulked up to XYZ weight and while I saw some good gains now it’s time to get rid of this spare tire.” It happened to me. It happens to a lot of people. This site is all about the intelligent pursuit of muscle after all.

[quote]dt79 wrote:

I am not disagreeing with you. I get your point. The 200lbs just threw me off.

So if I told him to stop doing stronglifts, go diet to whatever bodyweight where he feels confident enough to really start eating big.

Then start gaining weight while running a 5x5 program to get as strong as possible in fastest amount of time, we would be in agreement?[/quote]

In that case, he’s picking one or the other which at least has a point.

But I’d still say it’s effin ridiculous that a full grown man, at 5’9" 185, is concerned about fat when he’s pathetically weak. If he goes for strength, that little bit of fluff will take care of itself. But eating at a deficit while also putting a recovery strain on your CNS and muscles? Counterproductive.

Sometimes n00bs really need to up the calories simply because they need to put their body into a state of growth.

The only times I think a guy should choose to lose fat BEFORE working on strength is if he’s obese AND he wants to drop some fat because it is impeding his movement. But again, I’d still go for the strength (which is even easier as a fatty since you don’t have to shove food down your gullet) because greater strength can be used to more effectively shed fat.

As for military guys in boot camp; most get weaker DURING their time there. Now many can, and will grow because the military will feed them a lot and these are guys in their prime growth years (18-24) where just about any physical thing they do can get results. Witness college athletics where most trainers are incompetent yet still the genetic freaks that play their sports grow big and strong regardless of their quarter squats and humping DLs.