What training are you doing/have you done today? Vol.2
Discussion
J4CKO said:
All this bulk and cut, is that for competition or a case of throwing loads of food in to fuel the building of muscle and then shed the fat it ineviatably brings ? 5000 calories ? how many can you actually burn doing an a hour and a bit of weights, the average bloke needs 2500 or so, do you need the other 2500 for the training or is it that combined with a heightened BMR due to higher muscle mass ?
I am trying to lose fat at the same time as building some muscle, can that actually work ?
I have had three scrambled eggs for breakfast (no toast), a chicken salad for lunch with no bread or any carbs, then Fillet steak for tea with a few oven chips and a pile of roasted veg, peppers, onions and tomatoes.
Will do 14 miles on the bike tomorrow (commute) then spend an hour or so pissing about with weights later, so will throw in a few more carbs.
Had a fairly lazy day today, just a 30 min walk.
According to my Fitbit app, an hour's hard exercise burns up around 530-600 calories, with the majority of that time being in the 'cardio zone' On longer sessions and when it's been how, I have burned over 1000 calories in a little under 2 hours. Again, according to my Fitbit app.I am trying to lose fat at the same time as building some muscle, can that actually work ?
I have had three scrambled eggs for breakfast (no toast), a chicken salad for lunch with no bread or any carbs, then Fillet steak for tea with a few oven chips and a pile of roasted veg, peppers, onions and tomatoes.
Will do 14 miles on the bike tomorrow (commute) then spend an hour or so pissing about with weights later, so will throw in a few more carbs.
Had a fairly lazy day today, just a 30 min walk.
Edited by J4CKO on Wednesday 7th September 23:35
I am not as heavy as others on here, 71.5kg this morning, so I think what you need to eat is dependant on your height, age and metabolism. I admit that I am quite lazy when it comes to what I eat, four 'meals' are usually protein shakes (a scoop of whey and a scoop of casein - 50g protein) mixed in almond or semi skimmed milk, and my tea is usually salmon fillets, baby spinach, tomatoes and whole grain rice with a glass of milk. This seems to work for me..
J4CKO said:
All this bulk and cut, is that for competition or a case of throwing loads of food in to fuel the building of muscle and then shed the fat it ineviatably brings ? 5000 calories ? how many can you actually burn doing an a hour and a bit of weights, the average bloke needs 2500 or so, do you need the other 2500 for the training or is it that combined with a heightened BMR due to higher muscle mass ?
I am trying to lose fat at the same time as building some muscle, can that actually work ?
My plan is to get as big as possible this year, with a view to competing again (bodybuilding) next April. The extra calories are to grow, I want to be eating more than I'm burning, but I've noticed the bigger I get, them more calories I need to add to keep growing. Extra fat is inevitable, but it's much easier to loose fat than it is to gain muscle. 100kg/220lbs stage weight is the plan, but it's looking unlikely.I am trying to lose fat at the same time as building some muscle, can that actually work ?
Regarding building muscle and loosing fat, some say it's doable, but I find it much more efficient/optimal to concentrate on one or the other. Fat can be lost fairly rapidly, but it takes time to build muscle.
I would agree with diddely here. In my experience, it's a very long and exceedingly difficult game to both lose fat and build muscle at the same time.
It's basically the holy grail, and for unassisted people (ie those not on gear) I would suggest that it's optimal to focus on one or the other.
There will be anomalies of course, but I'd say that's broadly the rule for most people - hence the existence of the bulk & cut concept.
It's basically the holy grail, and for unassisted people (ie those not on gear) I would suggest that it's optimal to focus on one or the other.
There will be anomalies of course, but I'd say that's broadly the rule for most people - hence the existence of the bulk & cut concept.
Edited by TheJimi on Thursday 8th September 09:37
TheJimi said:
I would agree with diddely here. In my experience, it's a very long and exceedingly difficult game to both lose fat and build muscle at the same time.
It's basically the holy grail, and for unassisted people (ie those not on gear) I would suggest that it's optimal to focus on one or the other.
There will be anomalies of course, but I'd say that's broadly the rule for most people - hence the existence of the bulk & cut concept.
This argument is broscience vs real science in a nutshell. The real science is quite straightforward and not difficult in any way: To burn fat you must be in a calorie deficit, and to gain lean mass your diet needs to be high enough in protein to create the best conditions for synthesis and a postive nitrogen balance. To do both at the same time it is therefore necessary to train in conditions where the body has just about surplus protein but a calorie deficit still exists.It's basically the holy grail, and for unassisted people (ie those not on gear) I would suggest that it's optimal to focus on one or the other.
There will be anomalies of course, but I'd say that's broadly the rule for most people - hence the existence of the bulk & cut concept.
The reasons bodybuilders don't like doing this is because rewards take a while to become obvious, it may be a number of weeks before you look more muscular and also look like you carry less fat. This isn't particularly motivating.
Bodybuilders on a cycle do almost exactly the same via a different pathway except the nitrogen is supplied by the androgens and the extra testosterone inhibits fat gain. If they then cut back on calories you have exactly the same situation: A positive nitrogen balance to ensure synthesis, and a calorie deficit.
The test will also improve strength, libido and recovery of course.
Bulk and cut works, it's the same process as the two I've mentioned above, just split into two parts. Psychologically much easier, but that's all.
Where have I argued anything?
We're both saying the same bloody thing; that doing both is a hard thing to do, which is why most people find it easier to either focus on one or the other, or do the cut/bulk thing.
The only difference between what I said and what you said, is that you're answering an argument that didn't exist, with a high dosage of pomposity into the bargain.
We're both saying the same bloody thing; that doing both is a hard thing to do, which is why most people find it easier to either focus on one or the other, or do the cut/bulk thing.
The only difference between what I said and what you said, is that you're answering an argument that didn't exist, with a high dosage of pomposity into the bargain.
Edited by TheJimi on Thursday 8th September 12:32
popeyewhite said:
This argument is broscience vs real science in a nutshell. The real science is quite straightforward and not difficult in any way: To burn fat you must be in a calorie deficit, and to gain lean mass your diet needs to be high enough in protein to create the best conditions for synthesis and a postive nitrogen balance. To do both at the same time it is therefore necessary to train in conditions where the body has just about surplus protein but a calorie deficit still exists.
The reasons bodybuilders don't like doing this is because rewards take a while to become obvious, it may be a number of weeks before you look more muscular and also look like you carry less fat. This isn't particularly motivating.
Being in a calorie deficit makes training harder and recovery harder, thus less intensity in the gym and gains (in strength and size) are not as great as they could have been when training in a surplus. The reasons bodybuilders don't like doing this is because rewards take a while to become obvious, it may be a number of weeks before you look more muscular and also look like you carry less fat. This isn't particularly motivating.
Training to lose fat and gain muscle isn't the most efficient way to do it.
edit to add - at lower BF levels, the best you could hope for is to maintain muscle mass whilst dropping fat. For fatter people, it's not so hard.
Edited by didelydoo on Thursday 8th September 12:55
I am just working on the assumption that if I cycle to work, do some weights and watch my diet I will look significantly better than I do now.
Aiming to get away next July and not be a fat blob, did ok last year but taking a longer run up, obviously it is not just for that and I am not a complete narcissist but it is a good thing to aim for and rather than a six week panic about having to take my shirt off I can do it in a more relaxed manner and not break anything in the process as that episode completely derailed my efforts, couldnt lift anything, was in a pretty bad way for a while, feel great now though.
Need not have worried about what I looked like, the bar in Mexico around the pool was set very low, I felt almost buff, it looked like loads of brown seals sunning themselves but really I dont want to feel affinity with the big fat buggers gorging themselves on three burgers at lunch and a constant stream of beer.
So, got approx 46 weeks to sort my s
t out, dissapear into that man shed all through winter and keep it up, might join my wifes gym but its £340 for the year.
Currently 17 st 8, 4 pounds off so far, aiming for a lean-ish 15 ish stone, got from 18 st 2 to 16.6 last year and felt and looked a hell of a lot better.
Aiming to get away next July and not be a fat blob, did ok last year but taking a longer run up, obviously it is not just for that and I am not a complete narcissist but it is a good thing to aim for and rather than a six week panic about having to take my shirt off I can do it in a more relaxed manner and not break anything in the process as that episode completely derailed my efforts, couldnt lift anything, was in a pretty bad way for a while, feel great now though.
Need not have worried about what I looked like, the bar in Mexico around the pool was set very low, I felt almost buff, it looked like loads of brown seals sunning themselves but really I dont want to feel affinity with the big fat buggers gorging themselves on three burgers at lunch and a constant stream of beer.
So, got approx 46 weeks to sort my s
t out, dissapear into that man shed all through winter and keep it up, might join my wifes gym but its £340 for the year.Currently 17 st 8, 4 pounds off so far, aiming for a lean-ish 15 ish stone, got from 18 st 2 to 16.6 last year and felt and looked a hell of a lot better.
didelydoo said:
Being in a calorie deficit makes training harder
This is subjective - yes? If you mean you're hungry in the gym that points to poor meal planning - you don't have to be hungry while you train.didelydoo said:
and recovery harder,
Recovery depends on rest and repair. Correct protein levels enable repair.didelydoo said:
thus less intensity in the gym and gains (in strength and size) are not as great as they could have been when training in a surplus.
See my previous comments.didelydoo said:
Training to lose fat and gain muscle isn't the most efficient way to do it.
It is THE most efficient way! That's precisely the point. It takes less time overall that bulk/cut, with the minimum wasted effort.didelydoo said:
edit to add - at lower BF levels, the best you could hope for is to maintain muscle mass whilst dropping fat. For fatter people, it's not so hard.
Do you mean it's easier to lose weight and increase muscle the more fat you have? The process is identical for everyone - fat or skinny the science is the same. I would say that if you're already at a low bf level you need to take care you're not making yourself ill - the body needs a certain amount of fat for other processes to occur.It seems that most of your concerns centre around lack of energy in the gym inhibiting performance/gains. It shouldn't be hard to configure a calorie restricted diet so that the individual has plenty of energy to train though.
J4CKO said:
I am just working on the assumption that if I cycle to work, do some weights and watch my diet I will look significantly better than I do now.
You will certainly be healthier! 
If you want to lose a few stone you'll need to do a bit more exercise (I don't know - you may cycle miles to work), and pay quite careful attention to what you eat. You're on the right track though.
popeyewhite said:
It is THE most efficient way! That's precisely the point. It takes less time overall that bulk/cut, with the minimum wasted effort.
....and that's why everyone does it. Except they don't, pretty much no one does. No one gets leaner year round, whilst getting bigger. You just don't see this happening.You can argue your point until you're blue in the face (which I'm sure you will, in your usual style) but the fact remains that lifters looking to gain muscle, don't start by jumping into a calorie deficit! They do the opposite.
didelydoo said:
....and that's why everyone does it. Except they don't, pretty much no one does. No one gets leaner year round, whilst getting bigger. You just don't see this happening.
Where did I say anyone does this year round? 
didelydoo said:
You can argue your point until you're blue in the face (which I'm sure you will, in your usual style)
Leave it out. didelydoo said:
but the fact remains that lifters looking to gain muscle, don't start by jumping into a calorie deficit! They do the opposite.
I don't think I've disagreed with you on that. Have you forgotten the subject under discussion? popeyewhite said:
The reasons bodybuilders don't like doing this is because rewards take a while to become obvious, it may be a number of weeks before you look more muscular and also look like you carry less fat. This isn't particularly motivating.
popeyewhite said:
Bulk and cut works, it's the same process as the two I've mentioned above, just split into two parts. Psychologically much easier, but that's all.
didelydoo said:
popeyewhite said:
the usual....
I'm not going to bother dissecting your previous posts to respond... better things to do, so I'll leave it there. 
didelydoo said:
popeyewhite said:
You haven't dissected any of my posts yet, because I suspect even you realise arguing against scientific fact is pointless.
More down to the fact that arguing against a tedious tt is pointless TBH; but there you go......Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff