PDA

View Full Version : do these cals seem low?



rapidride3
12-15-2006, 12:06 AM
I have been on a cut for 2 1/2 months now. I have been very patient. I started at 214lbs and am now at 200lbs. My strength is actually increased slightly with more energetic workouts. I am 32 and 5' 9'' this is my first "cut" so to speak. I got down to 202lbs. on 2,250 cals with no cardio as of yet. For the last week i've dropped again to 2,050 cals according to fitday 56g of fat 168 g of carbs and 219g of protein. I have been weight training for 5-6 years now off and on with a background in wrestling,,, however I am kind of dissappointed,,,, at least so far. I just seem like a smaller version of my previous love-handeled self. Is this mental???? I am not seeing too much vascularity, or leaness I guess i have a ways to go SORRY NO PHOTOS. Does there come a time when everything falls together as far as optical illusions that a smaller waist does for people??? I have noticed so far that when i first cut cals my body seems smooth,,, however after 2-3 weeks i feel better and see better development and muscularity on the same caloric intake. Is there such a thing as body stabilization . Also should i try to do this cut with minimal cardio (if the calorie is king than can't most of a cut be done with caloric intake alone??) At what point should i consider my calories too low,,, are there men who are consuming around 1500- cals a day on a cut???? I hope my body doesn't do this to me,,,, oh well i cannot look back now until i see some abs for summer. I plan on doing a clean bulk in late summer. At the recommended 1-1.5 lb per week i won't see 175 lbs. for another 4 months??? at least i cannot say i haven't been patient with the SLOOOW results. Any replies or advice is appreciated,, thanks for reading this babble.

Anthony
12-15-2006, 05:45 AM
Seems a bit low, especially your fat.

I'll see if I can explain this easily.

Let's say you ate 5000 calories and burned 5500 calories. You'd be in a deficit by 500.

Let's say you ate 2000 calories and burned 2500 calories. You'd be in a deficit by 500 calories.

Same deficit, but one method will produce better results.

Care to guess which one? ;)

Lean-N-Mean
12-15-2006, 06:13 AM
Seems a bit low, especially your fat.

I'll see if I can explain this easily.

Let's say you ate 5000 calories and burned 5500 calories. You'd be in a deficit by 500.

Let's say you ate 2000 calories and burned 2500 calories. You'd be in a deficit by 500 calories.

Same deficit, but one method will produce better results.

Care to guess which one? ;)

Excuse me, I am sort of noob here, I just want to make sure I am understanding you correct. Is the first one because you are doing more work with more fuel , as opposed to less work with less fuel. I f so I had never heard that before, that might have saved me some problems when I did a cut about a year ago. I was at 165 and wanted to get realy lean, so I kept my workouts the same but my cals were about 1750-2000/day. By the time i finished I was 150 and my abs were great , but I had 0 muscle mass every where else, it was ugly. I have been bulking eversince then and up to almost 178, a lot less lean, but with better mass.
*Ps*Sorry rapidride3 not trying to hijack thread.

Anthony
12-15-2006, 06:30 AM
Yeah, the first is better (although an extreme example) because it increases your metabolism, improves your nutrient partitioning (you burn more fat and build more muscle), improves your ability to recover, and a bunch of other good stuff.

RedSpikeyThing
12-15-2006, 09:08 AM
So yay to cardio on a cut? Just not as the primary means to get a caloric deficit?

Anthony
12-15-2006, 09:14 AM
Well, anything you do to elevate your heart rate is "cardio" ... including weightlifting. So technically YES!! ;)

I know you mean aerobic activity ... in that case, you're right, spend most of your time using glycolytic and phosphagen energy systems and you'll get all the performance benefits of oxidative, and none of the drawbacks. Although long boring aerobic work is good for creating a deficit without taxing your cns, helps with active recovery, etc. For long distance athletes it's also important to get accustom to the repetitive pounding (runners knees, ankles, back, etc). So it has a role, I just wouldn't make it the primary role.

ArchAngel777
12-15-2006, 10:59 AM
Yeah, the first is better (although an extreme example) because it increases your metabolism, improves your nutrient partitioning (you burn more fat and build more muscle), improves your ability to recover, and a bunch of other good stuff.


Tom Venuto would agree with you... I sort of mentioned this to Built, she said that it causes burnout in some people. I agree though, it can cause burnout. Eating more and burning more can be much more difficult that kicking back and eating less. Both can work and probably should be applied at different times during a cut.

Anthony
12-15-2006, 11:05 AM
Yep, you have to be careful not to increase your energy flux too high/too fast or your CNS will get fried. But, just like strength, your work capacity can/will improve if you increase the workload gradually.

rapidride3
12-15-2006, 11:48 AM
As far as keeping my metab up,,, i am trying. I actually thought about having some cardio cycles. Like say a good hard week of cardio then laying off for a week???? Would this work???? I am eating 6-meals a day. To be honest,,,,,,, i was in much better (looking) shape when i was wrestling my a$$ off for 2.5 hours a day on about 1000 cals a day(if that some days),,,, not even paying attention to my macros or lifting weights at all during the season. I am beginning to wonder if this "cutting" isn't overrated??? only since i am not having good luck as of yet..lol
With wrestling as my background i am the king of losing weight,,,although it's the improper way as far as bodybuilding goes.


Question: I am sure this is breaking all the bodybuilding rules but,,, would it be as effective to lose all the weight (fat&muscle) and start doing a disciplined slow bulk to regain muscle?????

Question to ponder: I know for a fact that some collegiate wrestlers are taking in 600-1200cals on top of a 3-hour brutal practice. My friend at Central Michigan had a 6-mile 'run' just before most practices,,,, yet all of these guys are shredded and muscular???? p.s. on 1-2 days before weigh-ins i know guys are taking in 200-600 cals. I also know not many were worried about macros and some weren't lifting a weight during the latter part of the season. I am not trying to argue the facts,, i am just questioning things????

rapidride3
12-16-2006, 09:32 PM
As far as keeping my metab up,,, i am trying. I actually thought about having some cardio cycles. Like say a good hard week of cardio then laying off for a week???? Would this work???? I am eating 6-meals a day. To be honest,,,,,,, i was in much better (looking) shape when i was wrestling my a$$ off for 2.5 hours a day on about 1000 cals a day(if that some days),,,, not even paying attention to my macros or lifting weights at all during the season. I am beginning to wonder if this "cutting" isn't overrated??? only since i am not having good luck as of yet..lol
With wrestling as my background i am the king of losing weight,,,although it's the improper way as far as bodybuilding goes.


Question: I am sure this is breaking all the bodybuilding rules but,,, would it be as effective to lose all the weight (fat&muscle) and start doing a disciplined slow bulk to regain muscle?????

Question to ponder: I know for a fact that some collegiate wrestlers are taking in 600-1200cals on top of a 3-hour brutal practice. My friend at Central Michigan had a 6-mile 'run' just before most practices,,,, yet all of these guys are shredded and muscular???? p.s. on 1-2 days before weigh-ins i know guys are taking in 200-600 cals. I also know not many were worried about macros and some weren't lifting a weight during the latter part of the season. I am not trying to argue the facts,, i am just questioning things???? Any thoughts on this????

Anthony
12-17-2006, 08:21 AM
Slow and steady wins the race. The cutting methods you mentioned are stupid.

1. meat, veggies, nuts at every meal.
2. lift heavy things frequently
3. do some conditioning work (hiit, etc) frequently
4. play a sport

Stick with that and you'll do well. Just be patient.

Stumprrp
12-17-2006, 08:49 AM
anthony you say meat nuts and vegys at every meal, ok im going to try this, but, you have absolutly no carb such as a potato, pasta, oatmeal, or bread? could you sub eggs for the meats or a shake?

just wondering since u know im cutting hardcore jan 1st

Anthony
12-17-2006, 09:18 AM
Yeah, you can have potato, pasta, oatmeal, etc. Some would say time them around your workouts, others say it doesn't matter as much if you aren't carb sensitive. My suggestion is to limit those types of foods to 2-3 meals per day and really increase the veggies to make up most of your carbs.

And you can definitely sub eggs or protein powder for meat. I consider eggs baby chickens, so technically they are meat. :D

Good luck with the cut. If you are looking for more info, recipes, guidance, etc ... check out John Berardi's Precision Nutrition ... EXCELLENT resource for all your nutrition needs. It's the same kit used by elite athletes in the Olympics, NHL, CFL, etc.

Stumprrp
12-17-2006, 08:24 PM
Cool man im stocking up on books for Xmas, this is a book right?

stepto180
12-17-2006, 11:44 PM
As far as keeping my metab up,,, i am trying. I actually thought about having some cardio cycles. Like say a good hard week of cardio then laying off for a week???? Would this work???? I am eating 6-meals a day. To be honest,,,,,,, i was in much better (looking) shape when i was wrestling my a$$ off for 2.5 hours a day on about 1000 cals a day(if that some days),,,, not even paying attention to my macros or lifting weights at all during the season. I am beginning to wonder if this "cutting" isn't overrated??? only since i am not having good luck as of yet..lol
With wrestling as my background i am the king of losing weight,,,although it's the improper way as far as bodybuilding goes.


Question: I am sure this is breaking all the bodybuilding rules but,,, would it be as effective to lose all the weight (fat&muscle) and start doing a disciplined slow bulk to regain muscle?????

Question to ponder: I know for a fact that some collegiate wrestlers are taking in 600-1200cals on top of a 3-hour brutal practice. My friend at Central Michigan had a 6-mile 'run' just before most practices,,,, yet all of these guys are shredded and muscular???? p.s. on 1-2 days before weigh-ins i know guys are taking in 200-600 cals. I also know not many were worried about macros and some weren't lifting a weight during the latter part of the season. I am not trying to argue the facts,, i am just questioning things????

in my opnion this is a completly different area all together... these atheltes may have results but when they are cutting like this I have seen the side effects they are extremly tired and almos completly useless untill they get to carb up after weigh in's they are sacrificing strength and lean muscle mass for weight

and also they llook muscular and ripped most likely because of the off season they have a good base and can loose some muscle with out looking horrible

just my opnion by why would you want to put your body thru something like that if it wasnt nesacassy for what you are trying to do ...they way you are doing it may be slow but its works...theres a possibility you diet could just need some tweaking to see better improvements to

Anthony
12-18-2006, 07:12 PM
Cool man im stocking up on books for Xmas, this is a book right?

Yeah, it's a "kit" with about 6 books, 2 dvds, and 2 cds ... great stuff.