Pics: I'm down 98lbs, to 183. Was planning to bulk at 175, not sure now

[hockeytownfan]

So, I'm almost to that century mark in my weight loss. I'm 6'0 183. Any estimates on bodyfat? I was going start a bulk at 175, any advice?

Yes, I'm a hairy mothafuka, it's all the French blood.

[nlite2000]

17-19%

I think you'd be best off eating at maintenance for 2-3 months than bulking or cutting.

[DarthInvadeHer]

Maybe go for another 5 pound loss then bulk.

[nosaj7]

under 20%. You need to hit Chest and Shoulders heavy now. Solid back though. GJDM

[cyco85]

19.556756734%, I concur with maintenance for a few months.

[cyco85]

And the logical reason behind maintaining for a few months is...

Learning how to maintain a body weight is pretty important. It's something that people who have been 100+ lbs overweight in their life need to be successful long term. Bulking isn't ideal IMO after losing nearly 100 lbs, he should ease into it if anything (e.g. maintenance). He could cut a bit more if he likes but if OP is in it for the long haul, then he'll look a lot better if he cuts after he puts on some muscle.

[nlite2000]

And the logical reason behind maintaining for a few months is...

He's too fat bulk and too weak to cut, and at a "normal" weight. Eating ~maintenance ought to make him stronger and leaner. It's not like bad things are going to happen.

[nlite2000]

Reverse diet protocol. You slowly up calories and macros to bulk levels over the course of many weeks. You shift from cutting to maintenance to bulking over say 12-14 weeks. I don't think anyone would consider going from bulk to cutting overnight or vice-versa overnight. People don't magically become obese, which is why I have a hard time taking the first post seriously. No offense, but people become obese or overweight because they exceeded the number of calories they needed over a lengthy period of time. If you have self-control at this point, and honestly you should, you won't become a blimp if you're on top of your macros. I've read both your posts for months, I'm in awe at what I'm reading. He could maintain for 5 months, screw up and gain weight in the form of fat again. Treading off the path of success really depends on how focused you are with your goals. I don't think a single soul on this site would even dare stop the good habits they've developed along their journey only to see all their hard work go away.

For the record, I lost a sh!t ton of weight in HS and went into a direct and very successful bulk. I was a huge bro back then as well. If there's a will, there's a way. Nothing bad can happen if you're on top of your game. During my current cut I maintained for weeks at a time. No big deal.

Tangential to that I was reading something by lyle about how 12 weeks of recomping would probably have the same effect as 8 weeks of bulking and 4 weeks of cutting, provided it were done right.

Also that the more successful recomp programs (leangains, ud2) switch the goals from day to day.

My thinking is that if you're at a "normal" weight for your height but undermuscled and overfat, you look good in clothes, which is huge coming down from fat, and kind of get the best of both worlds----you're eating enough to get stronger but losing fat. But, what I had read by lyle on the subject changes my thoughts on that a tad. Easier to pick one goal at a time.



My general thoughts on recomping are shaped by having had quick and fairly success with it as a beginner. If OP has been lifting throughout the entire 100lb loss, he's not a beginner.

[hockeytownfan]

I know which article you're referring to, I posted it weeks ago. Fat loss is in a great number but the gain of muscle exhibited isn't much. Speaking frankly, the concept of recomping is complex if you think about how it's almost impossible to know our accurate maintenance level and hit that amount each day, so there might be enough energy each day to create minimal amounts of muscle which results in fat burn from the added muscle? Being blunt, the entire concept ****s with my brain too much to think in depth about it. With what I proposed it just makes more sense. It's a 3 month process, which isn't bad, but that's on the lengthy end. Obviously the protocol would have to be adjusted depending on the person. If the OP lifted during his cut, I'm under the presumption he'll experience noob gains when he starts bulking or recover muscle within an unspecified time frame as a result of muscle memory. In a way, we're both trying to say that while people being snowflakes is a joke, it's slightly true when it comes to stuff like this. Most of the reverse process deals with allowing the body's metabolic functions to increase to normal levels, which are higher than what they were when he was cutting and prevent water weight from being packed on at excessive rates. I plan on reversing from January until late February or mid March and then I'll be bulking at 300-500 over maintenance. I dunno if this is what you were trying to say in your post since I went off on some random tangent.

I have decided to do a reverse diet and slow bulk. Upping calories by 100 every monday. So, Monday I'll start 3300 then the following Monday I'll bump to 3400. My maint. is ~4000 daily. I think 10-12 week reverse to bulking cals should be good.

[cyco85]

I don't think a single soul on this site would even dare stop the good habits they've developed along their journey only to see all their hard work go away.

I've seen several threads where people have lost the weight and have gained it back. Yeah, you don't become a blimp overnight but I personally think that learning how to maintain a weight and focus on strength training is very important especially if the person's only experience with body recomposition is cutting and/or they lack significant muscle. IMO, it's easy to cut and it's easy to bulk/fulk, maintaining is a very targeted and specific skill to acquire. Also, even guys who otherwise have their **** together are eating way too much on their bulk. I look at maintenance for the OP as the default given the 3 options: cut, bulk, maintain. Bulk is definitely crossed off cuz he's currently too fat. Cut is a possibility but he lacks muscle, IMO so cut is (half-way) crossed out. Leaves my suggestion to maintain.

[JJRKnights]

Tangential to that I was reading something by lyle about how 12 weeks of recomping would probably have the same effect as 8 weeks of bulking and 4 weeks of cutting, provided it were done right.

Also that the more successful recomp programs (leangains, ud2) switch the goals from day to day.

My thinking is that if you're at a "normal" weight for your height but undermuscled and overfat, you look good in clothes, which is huge coming down from fat, and kind of get the best of both worlds----you're eating enough to get stronger but losing fat. But, what I had read by lyle on the subject changes my thoughts on that a tad. Easier to pick one goal at a time.



My general thoughts on recomping are shaped by having had quick and fairly success with it as a beginner. If OP has been lifting throughout the entire 100lb loss, he's not a beginner.

Interesting, it feels like my body has been recomping while i've been eating about 500-300 under a day. For the past 2 weeks, my muscles are getting the pump they had 2 years ago, just a nice increase in volume, but my fat is visibly slowly going away. My weight is staying near the same, but goes lower every week. I really want size and to get leaner, would this be a good option for people with heavy lifting backgrounds?

[sjohn23]

def maintenance

[cyco85]

Show me these threads. Tell me, how does one maintain their body weight? How does one cut their body weight? And how does one increase their body weight when bulking? Do you understand the major difference between a bulk and a fulk? Your reply is nothing but a poor excuse for being on top of your game. Going on a bulk doesn't give someone an excuse to eat like a horse. People fulk because they don't track their food intake and over-estimate how much lean mass they can put on. Someone can easily fulk after maintaining for 6 months, a year, a decade, and the list goes on. Guys who "have their **** together" won't fulk, because if they do have their "**** together" they wouldn't be overeating in the first place. He'll neither lose nor gain muscle on maintenance. You over exaggerate possible strength gains. All you're conveying with your post is a bunch of half-sensed gibberish. 12-14 weeks of reverse dieting is plenty enough of time to switch from cut, to maintenance, to bulk.

Wouldn't even know where to begin the search, I dgaf if you haven't seen them or not but I've seen plenty of people say "got down from 250 to 170 a year ago and now I'm back up to 240". Maybe the thread wasn't centered around it, but it was definitely in a post.

Fine, OP... Listen to SOJA. He's a genius. No one, especially me, know anything.

[hockeytownfan]

Wouldn't even know where to begin the search, I dgaf if you haven't seen them or not but I've seen plenty of people say "got down from 250 to 170 a year ago and now I'm back up to 240". Maybe the thread wasn't centered around it, but it was definitely in a post.

Fine, OP... Listen to SOJA. He's a genius. No one, especially me, know anything.

Little touchy are we? Soja is just one person that gave me this advise. My decision is based on the total body of advice I got through posts and PMs. Some very knowledgable people made cases for both sides, I picked based on those arguments and the fact that I'm just mentally prepared to put on some muscle. I've done this 100lb loss in a very slow and controlled manner, where I took diet breaks and maintained regularly. I know my caloric needs, and I've become adept at adjusting them when it's needed. I'm not going back up to 281. I'm doing a mini bulk to 200lbs. Should be about 5 months or so, then cutting back to 180 again.