Generally, if you gain weight at a slow pace compared to a fast pace (assuming training is the same in both cases), does it mean you will put less fat than if you were bulking fast? I hear people putting on double digit numbers in a little over a month, and some cases where peolpe have gone from mid 100s to low 200s in under around a year. These numbers are nothing like the progress I've been making. I have been gaining weight and getting stronger, but not nearly as fast as some other people. So I was just wondering if slower bulking means less fat.
Age: 23 - Weight: 237 lbs - Height: 6'1''
S(atg) - B - DL
375 - 335 - 515
"Gaining weight and having bigger body will make you look great on any clothing. Men with strong body are very attractive to women. General people tend to admire big muscle too." -mbijay
Well, you have to ask yourself, the genetic gods like dorian yates put on 60lb of pure muscle tissue in 10+ years. According to his DVD Blood & Guts. Same for Arnold. Takes about 7-9 years for their physqiue to mature into top shape.
Im like you here in my first year of training i gained 10lbs. Some others say 35lb+ but i seriously doubt this is mostly muscle. But hey who knows! I ate clean all year round. I could of eaten 5000 calories a day, but I wouldnt have magically gained 20lbs of pure muscle tissue I dont think. Maybe 20lbs of fat and **** down the toilet..I eat around 2000-2500 a day just like when i first started except more carbs now, my deadlift increased 55lbs[and I didnt even do deadlifts until 6 months ago] and used to struggle curling 50lb barbell. Of course i am not a bighead but I use more than 50lb for warmups easily now...results! Even more with a good pump...So I see everyone is different, but i cant fathom if someone could gain 35lb+ of muscle in 12months..considering the likes of Dorian Yates et al Anyway my genetics gave me 10lbs. I'll probably get around 4-5lb in the coming months but who knows. I could of eaten 5000 caliories a day and I reckon i wouldnt have gained much more if anything..maybe more fat!
I speak to ppl who exclaim they gained 30-40lb in one year. Of course, im willing to be even the top athletes, the supposed 1 in a millions don't gain that much. Think about it, 40lb of pure muscle with about 1-2lb fat. Doesnt sound right to me!
I think a lot of good bodybuilders are also really patient because they know the important of mass and just plain fat. This is why it generally takes even the genetically blessed to fill out into their top shape[which is a standard above mine, so won't take as long].
SO, in conclusion I say slow and steady is the best way!
Last edited by Steven.Gaskell; 02-06-2007 at 10:25 PM.
Actually, I think he started using gear when he was in his early teens.Same for Arnold.
"The only easy day was yesterday."
Well OK maybe Arnold, look at him in his encyclopaedia. He shows pictures of himself younger. He doesnt look the best thing on 2 legs but look at him four years later @ 19. Even 3 years he probably looked just as remarkable but we only have this comparison. Either way, he was a changed person from then on! A true beast @ 19. A perfect amatuer bodybuilder. And, supposedly this is using steroids..or maybe, like he said he only used them precontest, in conjunction with his diet
Last edited by Steven.Gaskell; 02-06-2007 at 10:29 PM.
Yeah. You should read all his other claims as well.like he said he only used them precontest, in conjunction with his diet
"The only easy day was yesterday."
Slow bulk might as well no bulk. Your just minimizing muscle gain, and your still gonna gain fat anyway it's inevitable. At the same time don't super bulk where your gaining 3 pounds a week, find that happy medium.
One thing i dont understand with these guys who bodybuild from the 70s is how they never seemed to get any real noticeable side effects like acne, bloat, hair loss..gyno...nothing!
Last edited by Steven.Gaskell; 02-06-2007 at 10:37 PM.
Yeah but how fat is the main thing..i guess you got to remember about sustainability. if you eat a lot, and gain more, you'll have to sustain that with x amount. if you take it away, you'll lose something, in time if you dont keep it up. if you eat moderately then you'll get moderate gains in proportion..its not linear but you'll get something which is do able but it'll take a heck of a lot longer..its not hard to realise theres a cost, drawback and advantage to doing something...whether it be eating more per meal, ****ting more, gaining more, gaining more fat, spending more, saving time etc..imo which is why i say slow but steady. everyones lifestyle is different so i dont know
I think it's best to go slow and carefully monitor results and make adjustments as necessary. A fast bulk means a longer diet afterwards, which keeps you from going back to bulking sooner.
A good place to start would be maintenance + 10%. Measure after 2 weeks.
That's a picture of Scarlett Johansson.
I've gained 40 pounds in about 7.5 months. Estimates of LBM gainwould be:
If I was 10% at 172 and I'm 20% now at 215: 17 pounds LBM
If I was 13%/now 18% (BEST ESTIMATE): 27 pounds LBM
If I was at 15%/now 16% (Seems too generous): 34 pounds LBM
Realistically, I would say I've gained 24-30 pounds of LBM in 9 months, with my diet being pretty good but not perfect. 10 seems very low. For me to be at only 10 pounds in even 7.5 months my body fat would have had to have gone from something like 12% to 25% - see my pics in my sig - I know I'm not thin anymore, but I don't think I'm 25%.
Point of all this - for a a newbie, there is no reason not to shoot for 20-30 pounds of LBM gain in the first year. (I'm natuaral too - which is obvious by the lack of definition in my pictures )