Do any search on muscle gains and people will tell you that you should never cut weight unless you have something to trim down to.

Put on muscle first, even if you get a bit fat, so at least you can have a firm base when you finally lose your fat.

This is the idea, and the one I've followed for some time.

I've found this to be an inefficient way of improving your body composition over the long run.

I've been told by some guys very experienced in the field that I went to personally that you should only seek to add muscle if you have a very lean base to start from. Think 10-12% body fat, where you can see the outlines of all your abs.

I was stubborn. After having lost some weight at the time already and after summer was over, I just wanted to add weight. I wanted to eat at a surplus, I wanted more muscle. Despite being mid-high teens body fat, I thought I could still make the most of it if I trained hard and didn't let my nutrition go to shit.

I did do a few things right. I didn't do a traditional bulk - I added weight on quite slowly. For a period of 6 months, I added on an average of 2-3 pounds per month. At the end of this period I had added on 15 pounds.

Since I am past beginner gains, my results were less than I expected. I trained very hard in the gym, my best workouts ever were during these 6 months. I ate a lot of protein, did cardio, juiced, and despite this maybe only 5 pounds or so of the weight I gained was muscle.

It may sound reasonable, but not when I am not too muscular to begin with. In other words, I still believe I am far from reaching my natural potential, even though I've trained for more than a few years.

I feel I have this potential I have not yet reached, because I've never started from a very lean base.

***

The idea when you start lean, as opposed to moderately high on body fat % when adding muscle:

- Your testosterone is higher, and your estrogen is lower. The former promotes muscle growth, the latter fat storage. Having said that my hormones are pretty good, but they could be better.

- Insulin and nutrient partitioning.. at lower body fat percentages insulin is more likely to shuttle your surplus of nutrients in order to build muscle in relation to fat storage.. at higher percentages, less muscle, more nutrients stored as fat.

Also insulin sensitivity. At higher body fat %, your pancreas needs to release more insulin to achieve the same effect, due to decreased sensitivity. When insulin circulates it inhibits fat breakdown, and promotes its storage. More fat = increased propensity to store more fat.

***

The two factors above (and maybe something else I could be missing) combine to create a stronger muscle gain effect when you start very lean, as opposed to somewhat lean.

To illustrate, an example. Person A and Person B train the exact same, with very similar nutrition, and let's suppose genetic factors are disregarded, and also previous training history.

Person A starts at 10% body fat, Person B starts at 16%. For 8 months, both train hard and add weight, a total of 20 pounds each.

Person A might add 10-12 pounds of muscle, Person B might add 4-7. The rest of course is fat.

Of course all of this is to a certain extent. There is only so much you can add muscle wise without using drugs. But if you have only ever achieved beginner gains (that don't require much from you) there is probably much progress you could be making still that you haven't yet discovered..

Especially because you add 10 pounds, lose 10 pounds every 6 months or so (as I have done for god knows how long), without ever getting really lean to optimize your body for muscle gain and fat loss.

What have your experiences been like?

I'm actually glad I went through with this. Even though now I have some leaning out to do, I have learned more about my body through personal experience that tells more than anything on the internet ever will.

Now I have to follow up and see what it's like to add muscle when I'm very lean to start with.

The basic reality is very simple. It is this:

Any man, whether lean, fat, or in between, can benefit massively from lifting weights. Any guy who isn't lifting weights should start doing so. There is no need to wait to achieve any specific body fat percentage, or anything else.

There is simply nothing better for the male body and brain than doing hard weight training with emphasis on the major compound motions, squats, deads, pullups, dips, overhead press. Doing these exercises hard and with correct form is maybe the single most effective way for a man to raise his test, keep his libido high, and be generally healthier, happier and hungrier for life.

Otherwise, a guy who is overweight should reduce his calorie consumption (best way to do that is by cutting portion size) and gradually lose the excess weight; and a guy who is too thin might want to consume more calories, especially high quality proteins and fats. But there is never a wrong time to start lifting weights and adding muscle!

Let's not get so distracted by all the considerations of body fat and other discussions that dudes love to get into that we forget the basics.

Lizard, I'm all ears, and I definitely agree.

You need to start with the basics, absolutely.

But once you get the basics down, you can't be complacent if you really want to improve and maximize your potential.

I believe there is much to benefit from when going no training > training with the fundamentals. Of course! Lifting weights will benefit you no matter what... Just look at feedback from the experienced guys on the thread I started here: http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-43508.html

But there is also much more to benefit from taking it that step further, that proves to be a lot more difficult than just training 3 times a week with compounds while drinking protein shakes post-workout.

Nascimento, of course there is plenty beyond the basics... I just wouldn't want anyone to take the phrase "be very lean before you even consider adding muscle" literally and come away with the idea that they need to hit any sort of body fat target before starting to train hard with weights -- because that would be a pity.

Good point, I should have probably clarified that in the OP.

In all cases you should be training hard with weights regardless.

This has more to do with your nutrition, evidently.

You won't have peak testosterone levels if you're carrying around excess body fat so bulking in a fatty state is inefficient. I think the general rule of thumb is don't bulk if you're above 12% body fat - though the exact number probably varies a bit across individuals. For peak gains cut to 8-10% body fat then bulk until you get to 12% then cut again etc.

Quote: (03-14-2015 08:59 AM)The Lizard of Oz Wrote:  

Doing these exercises hard and with correct form is maybe the single most effective way for a man to raise his test, keep his libido high, and be generally healthier, happier and hungrier for life.

I have tons of body fat to lose, but also tons of muscle to tone so I go for 3 sets of 12-15 reps for each exercise.

Whenever I think I'm ready to go up in weight, I ask myself, "But how is my form?"

When I do another set and just focus on form I often realize there is still much work to do at the current weight.

Quote: (03-14-2015 08:05 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

- Your testosterone is higher, and your estrogen is lower. The former promotes muscle growth, the latter fat storage. Having said that my hormones are pretty good, but they could be better.

Different body fat percentages do influence the hormonal levels but there isn't a big difference in test/estrogen levels at 9% BF as opposed to 13%. If you go too lean as a natural, the body will lower the hormone production.

Quote: (03-14-2015 08:05 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

- Insulin and nutrient partitioning.. at lower body fat percentages insulin is more likely to shuttle your surplus of nutrients in order to build muscle in relation to fat storage.. at higher percentages, less muscle, more nutrients stored as fat.

Where did you get that? Physiologically, this doesn't make any sense. The body is evolutionary designed to survive. The best way to do that was to store energy for times of hunger, not to look aesthetic. Below a certain BF percentage (which varies between individuals), the lower your BF the more the body tries to counter that by storing fat, not accumulate muscle.

Quote: (03-14-2015 08:05 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

Also insulin sensitivity. At higher body fat %, your pancreas needs to release more insulin to achieve the same effect, due to decreased sensitivity. When insulin circulates it inhibits fat breakdown, and promotes its storage. More fat = increased propensity to store more fat.

Again, we are not talking about fat people here. Just because you don't have a visible six pack does not mean your insulin sensitivity is diminished.

Quote: (03-14-2015 08:05 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

To illustrate, an example. Person A and Person B train the exact same, with very similar nutrition, and let's suppose genetic factors are disregarded, and also previous training history.

Person A starts at 10% body fat, Person B starts at 16%. For 8 months, both train hard and add weight, a total of 20 pounds each.

Person A might add 10-12 pounds of muscle, Person B might add 4-7. The rest of course is fat.

How did you calculate those numbers?

Quote: (03-14-2015 08:05 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

I have learned more about my body through personal experience that tells more than anything on the internet ever will.

If you tried this out and you finally broke a plateau or have other successes that make you feel like this method is superior to what you did before, then more power to you. Do what works best for you and thanks for sharing your findings. A lot of it might be psychological though since from a physiological stand point, your theory doesn't add up (considering we are discussing the differences within somewhat normal BF ranges). Just how did you come to your conclusion? Do you look more muscular or can you lift more?

Doc you seem to be thinking I am talking about extremes.

How well do you know the function of insulin?

Those numbers are an example. Start adding weight yourself when you are 16% body fat. Add 20 pounds, take bodpod measurements before and after. You will have gained more fat as opposed to muscle than if you had added 20 pounds while you started at 10%. That is the idea of the original post.

I'm not sure I understand your final question. I've added more muscle aesthetically and strength, sure, but not as much as I would have expected with the gain in weight and time (particularly muscle). I feel results would have been more significant had I started off from a leaner base.

I am far from an expert on this topic. Take a look at this here it will essentially answer all your questions: http://www.dangerandplay.com/2014/04/21/...t-bulking/

^ Also a relevant link to the thread topic.

I agree with the OP and believe I have posted some comments to that effect in the Starting Strength thread. I believe Rippetoe's dietary advice is wrong where he claims you will lean out if you are a bit "fluffy" following his plan.

"Clean bulking" is a myth because even if the surplus is small/minimal, you count calories, and the food is healthy food, the ratio/amount of fat/muscle gained in a bulk is determined by your current body composition.

I found this out the hard way following some advice in the Starting Strength thread. I am now halfway through what may turn out to be a nearly yearlong cut (diet with deficit). I hope it is shorter...

8-10% might be unrealistic for many...I'd say get down to 12% and don't ever go higher than 17%. Then cut down again.

On the plus side, you can use the ratios to your advantage. If you have a fair amount of fat you can be in a deficit and won't lose much muscle at all with good diet and training. The whole "losing your gains" issue doesn't kick in until much lower body fat levels.

Quote: (03-14-2015 10:48 AM)RexImperator Wrote:  

I agree with the OP and believe I have posted some comments to that effect in the Starting Strength thread. I believe Rippetoe's dietary advice is wrong where he claims you will lean out if you are a bit "fluffy" following his plan.

"Clean bulking" is a myth because even if the surplus is small/minimal, you count calories, and the food is healthy food, the ratio/amount of fat/muscle gained in a bulk is determined by your current body composition.

I found this out the hard way following some advice in the Starting Strength thread. I am now halfway through what may turn out to be a nearly yearlong cut (diet with deficit). I hope it is shorter...

8-10% might be unrealistic for many...I'd say get down to 12% and don't ever go higher than 17%. Then cut down again.

On the plus side, you can use the ratios to your advantage. If you have a fair amount of fat you can be in a deficit and won't lose much muscle at all with good diet and training. The whole "losing your gains" issue doesn't kick in until much lower body fat levels.

My thoughts and experiences exactly.

There is a lot of propaganda about just eating and lifting, disregarding your starting point.

Lift weights at all times, but the eating has to be made appropriate.

In my OP you can see I feel I have limited my success by always starting my weight gains around the 17% mark. I've always swung around the upper teens to low 20's without significant progress. It's a gigantic waste of time, though you do learn some lessons (such as this one) along the way.

Also of special note is all of this only seems to apply to guys who aren't the leanest by nature to begin with. Those that are inherently lean have the best starting point, though they struggle with what comes easy to the rest of us, which is gaining weight.

I've seen this written about on TNation, maybe by Christian Thibaudeau. By leaning out before starting a bulking phase, you get the benefit of a rebound effect--the period of calorie restriction somehow makes your body more receptive. Never tried it myself.

I watched this video last night. Granted, the anabolic rebound he talks about here probably applies a lot more to active bodybuilders, especially since they go into very low digit body fat, but is definitely the same idea.

When you are very lean, your body is more likely to add muscle than it is to add fat with those extra calories, if you have been training hard.

I agree with the Lizard of Oz, there is absolutely no bad time to pick up a barbell, but I will add that if a guy starts out naturally lean and decides to start lifting, motivation will be very high to keep lifting compared to a fatass doing the same, because every little muscle gain will be easy to see. For some reason guys are more concerned with looking prettier than getting stronger.

Another advantage posed by getting lean first is that the lifter will already know a diet that works and how he responds to different food choices as opposed to somebody on the see-food diet.

I'm not terribly concerned with the science behind getting lean first because muscle and strength gain will happen irrespective of leanness, and claims to the contrary could easily be due to the motivation discrepancy I illustrated earlier.

Probably a more psychological standpoint than a physical one.

Its harder to keep at something if you have never seen the results. Being lean in the past tells you that you could become more ripped if you put the effort in.

Here's my post in the Starting Strength thread:

Quote: (12-29-2014 01:51 PM)RexImperator Wrote:  

Guys, if you are skinny fat or in that 20% + body fat range, and are not in a hurry to make the high school football team tryouts, be very careful about some of the dietary advice associated with this program. I've found it a bit off, personally. Even considering the revisions by Rippetoe ("A Clarification") and the recommendations by his nutrition coach Jordan. You should read this article first:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-...nges.html/

TL;DR: Muscle/fat gain ratio is primarily a result of hormones determined by your initial body fat levels, so you should reduce your body fat levels as much as possible (get down around 12%) before proceeding to bulk up.

Otherwise, yes, you can get bigger and stronger but also end up much too fat. Even if you do it "slow", eat "clean", count calories, and have only a moderate caloric surplus.

From Lyle's article:

Quote:Quote:

So, when you diet, the fatter you are, the less LBM (and more fat) you will lose. Conversely, the leaner you are, the more LBM and less fat you will tend to lose when you diet. This makes sense in evolutionary terms, the more fat you have to lose, the more your body can lose without having to burn off muscle tissue; the leaner you get, the less fat you have and the more muscle you end up losing. Anyone who’s dieted naturally to sub 10% body fat levels knows this to be true: the leaner you get, the more muscle mass you tend to lose.

One thing he mentions is that if you have just completed a cutting phase you should spend a few weeks at maintenance before switching to a surplus. If you are dieting (in a caloric deficit) your body is actually primed to add more fat when it can.

This is an age old question, one that I've struggled with for the last 2 years that I've been lifting, having the atrocious skinny-fat hormonal profile & metabolism that I do. I still haven't come down on the side of one answer over the other. Gains have come at a snail's pace for me, with a lot of 2 steps forward, 1 step back action going on.

I'm gonna throw out an extreme hypothetical, to gauge what everybody thinks.

- A man is 22% bodyfat and can only bench 1 plate for 1 rep.
- His body is completely unable to build strength/muscle on any deficit or on maintenance. Only on a surplus can he make gains.

What should he do? Bulk or cut?

@Nascimento: read Lyle's article that was also posted by RexImperator (http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/muscle-...nges.html/ ). It it specifically about your topic. If you read the whole article and understand it, that will also make you understand what I meant. Or rather, what I said doesn't matter anymore because Lyle explains everything very good.

Quote: (03-14-2015 10:44 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

How well do you know the function of insulin?

Pretty well.

Quote: (03-14-2015 10:44 AM)Nascimento Wrote:  

I'm not sure I understand your final question. I've added more muscle aesthetically and strength, sure, but not as much as I would have expected with the gain in weight and time (particularly muscle). I feel results would have been more significant had I started off from a leaner base.

Because you started this thread I assumed you had already tried it out by now and had subjectively better results. I was curious as to how those better results showed themselves. Had you said you reached new PRs while stalling before the diet, I would have been surprised. Had you said your muscles look better, I would have attributed that to the fact that you are more defined now. Since you say you feel results would have been more significant, you have not tried it out yet, thus my question becomes irrelevant.


@chivpro: also read the article. Lyle is love. Lyle is lyfe. In Lyle we trust.
A guy with 22% BF will most definitely be able to build strength/muscle mass at maintenance or else his metabolism is f'ed up for some reason. Regardless, as stated in the article, it would be wise to diet down, then start a reasonable bulk. Not because he will gain more muscle by doing that but because he won't end up as a fat ass after the bulk.

It makes sense that fat people have no business bulking to begin with.

Last summer, I experimented with my diet and my lifting because I had put on a lot of bellyfat. What I did was do a variation of Stronglifts 5x5 and went on intermittent fasting.

My Stronglifts variation: 5x5, but it started with a warm up of low weight, ramped up to the most I could lift for 5 reps, then backed off the weight for each set. Each set, I was lifting the maximum I possibly could for 5 reps. I did it this way out of ignorance, because I didn't read all of the information on Stronglifts. That was a mistake, however. When I plateaued, I started cranking on low volume and high weight while watching my form on a warm up. Went from ~225lbs max squat to over 300lbs max squat. Same with deads. Bench barely improved, but I did move it up. And I only ate in an 8 hour window, trying to stay low carb, but being really forgiving for mistakes.

And I lost 1.5-2" of my waistline and my love handles were almost totally gone. My stomach got flat.

I wonder what would've happened if I ate cleaner, stuck to the real 5x5 routine, and added some accessory lifts. I would've had bigger arms/shoulders/calves and probably would have dropped body fat even more.

I'm running the Madcow stronglifts workout right now, with decent progress. My eating and sleeping, however, needs improvement. Point is, my body fat dropped significantly by lifting heavy weight and moving to intermittent fasting. I also dropped Zinc and ZMA into the equation, and a few other supplements. Even a 30 minute stronglift style workout 3x a week made me sweat and got my heart rate pounding. Especially on the heavy sets. Throw in some social cardio (dancing) and other outdoor activity, and the fat melts off.

I think all of this requires experimentation. But, it would drive me absolutely insane to try to drop body fat slowly without weight training. I've tried dropping body fat below without significant heavy weight training (doing much lighter weight stuff), and never got close to the results as when I was squatting over 200. All of that exertion requires calorie expenditure. All of that muscle you are building increases your Basal Metabolic Rate. Maybe your macro breakdown needs to change for different body fat percentage? That, I would believe more than strength training somehow being a barrier for fat loss.

Nascimento - the experienced guys you spoke with gave you the best advice. Get a nice lean body as a foundation and build from that.
I have been at it for almost twenty years, to get a good body takes time and lots of dedication. The hardest part is diet and finding which one is right for you. I did the tuna thing when i started but the thought of eating tuna from a can makes me sick.
For me a person is in shape if you can see their abs, not by the size of their arms.

I'm trying to lose some fat and gain some muscle (but don't need to go far with either), so I have opted for this routine: http://skinnyfattransformation.com/bodyw...inny-fat/. The one modification I've done is that I do 5x5 squats routine instead of the suggested pistol squats (bodyweight squats). I just don't have the patience to do so many squats and 5x5 is just so straightforward. But I've had pretty decent results so far. It's amazing how you end up having to lose some fat in order to be able to do increasing reps of chinups. And the more fat you lose, even just several pounds, the easier it is to lift yourself, of course.

Quote: (03-14-2015 05:53 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  

Nascimento - the experienced guys you spoke with gave you the best advice. Get a nice lean body as a foundation and build from that.
I have been at it for almost twenty years, to get a good body takes time and lots of dedication. The hardest part is diet and finding which one is right for you. I did the tuna thing when i started but the thought of eating tuna from a can makes me sick.
For me a person is in shape if you can see their abs, not by the size of their arms.

Rudebwoy, if eating tuna from a can makes you want to puke, try blending it with water instead and chugging that. You can throw some pineapple in to help with the taste.

Moma my friend - I prefer fresh tuna over that can crap. The idea of mixing it with water is revolting.

Very interesting thread - quick side question...how are you guys measuring your body fat %'s?

Quote: (03-15-2015 07:50 AM)slubu Wrote:  

Very interesting thread - quick side question...how are you guys measuring your body fat %'s?

I measure my body fat very roughly by looking at my belly. By and large, most men begin to store fat in their gut. The smaller your gut, the lower your body fat.