Strong Lifts 5x5 Program???

[anrk]

Hey, I’m starting my first bulk on the 11th and was planning on going with the strong lifts 5x5 program, I’ve heard that it’s good for overall strength and mass, I know from reading the nutmisc that a lot of guys here that follow a more power lifting template like 5x5,3x3,5/3/1. So I was hoping some might be able to help me here.
My question is because I’m going for a slow bulk (300 – 500 surplus) and not a GOMAD type diet will I be ok with such a program and can I expect to stall quickly? It also states just starting with the bar to halt stalling prematurely but everything I have seen in regards to diet on this program is to just eat,eat,eat which I am not to keen on lol.

Program

Workout A
Squat 5x5
Bench 5x5
Row 5x5

Workout B
Squat 5x5
Overhead Press 5x5
Deadlift 1x5

[anrk]

Slow bulk with a calorie ceiling of 500 Kcal. Does not compute at all.

300 - 500 calories my understanding was considered a slow bulk, I know nothing really lol

[Dexter3000]

Not sure what your question is, but: Yes it is a good program to bulk on. Yes you need extra calories to support muscle growth. Yes you can stall, anything can happen, only one way to find out. If you stall you can increase caloric intake or do a mini deload and try again after that.

[FitnessCPA]

I prefer a 3x5 program. 5x5 is a lot of volume and tougher to make progress on. But it's a good program for sure.

You will most likely need a calorie surplus to make continued progress. If you are afraid of gaining a little fat, you shouldn't be bulking.

[anrk]

I prefer a 3x5 program. 5x5 is a lot of volume and tougher to make progress on. But it's a good program for sure.

You will most likely need a calorie surplus to make continued progress. If you are afraid of gaining a little fat, you shouldn't be bulking.

Not worried about gaining fat comes with bulking I just don’t think eating like a beast and fulking is needed to bulk.
But on a program such as 5x5 they say you should be on a GOMAD type diet, I was only looking at going on a 300 – 500 calorie surplus I guess I’m wondering if that will be enough.

[deadpool9]

It depends on who you listen to.

Mark Rippetoe says you dont need to be conservative on calories on his programs, you just need to eat a ton and make progress.
Alan Aragon and Lyle McDonald say you should keep the surplus modest, enough to maximize muscle growth but low enough to minimize fat gain.

I have bulked on a 500 cal surplus and on a 250 cal surplus. I made just as good strength gains on the 250 as the 500, but spent a lot less time cutting afterwards.

[joelash302]

The combination is fine. Just keep in mind the increased caloric need due to the program, which means your baseline +500 calculation is probably a little off if you aren't at that volume / intensity level now. Stalling is a whole nother issue.

[Linzzz]

I'm not a fan of 5x5 programs. Prefer 3x5. Too much volume and stress.

If you are a total n00b to the lifts lifts, then I wouldn't recommend that program.

Then again, I'm a female with significantly less testosterone so maybe it's me.

*shrug*

[likeawashboard]

Slow is 250-300. Half the rate of weight gain per week of a normal bulk.

Should he not rather do it as a percentage?

OP, I'm doing stronglifts at the moment and I have to say I'm really enjoying it. I had a terrible workout today due to mental tiredness and lack of stretching over the last two days, but apart from that my strength has being improving every workout. Your squats should go through the roof as well as gaining upper body strength. Haven't stalled yet, and probably won't for a while. Make sure you stretch every single day would be my advice for keeping your squats good and ensuring more efficient progression.

[FitnessCPA]

What do you mean by percentages?

Percentage over maintenance.

[likeawashboard]

What do you mean by percentages?

I meant as a percentage of your total caloric intake as of now. Like instead of adding 500 calories to a 120lb persons diet and 500 calories to a 250lb persons diet, just get them to add say 10-20% like it says in the stickies? That's how I usually do it.

[Lvisaa2]

Should he not rather do it as a percentage? .

Unless a large variance of weight(or sex), I think one should look at caloric intake over percentages. If theoretically people can put on similar amounts of muscle then why should one bulk based on percentages and not solid numbers. That is one thing I never really agreed with in the stickies.

[FitnessCPA]

Unless a large variance of weight(or sex), I think one should look at caloric intake over percentages. If theoretically people can put on similar amounts of muscle then why should one bulk based on percentages and not solid numbers. That is one thing I never really agreed with in the stickies.

Once Emma posted some study showing that calories required to put on a pound of muscle were different based on amounts of muscle that you already have. Don't quote me on that but it was something to that effect, I think. Basically 3,500 calories =/= 1 pound of weight gain.

But like I said, don't hold me to that.

[likeawashboard]

Unless a large variance of weight(or sex), I think one should look at caloric intake over percentages. If theoretically people can put on similar amounts of muscle then why should one bulk based on percentages and not solid numbers. That is one thing I never really agreed with in the stickies.

I don't think it would make too much of a difference either way (unless, like you said a large variance), was just curious. Usually do percentages myself but as of late have just been adding an extra meal that can up my protein and calories by around 500 cals. It's really not as difficult as some people make it out to be.

[Lvisaa2]

Once Emma posted some study showing that calories required to put on a pound of muscle were different based on amounts of muscle that you already have. Don't quote me on that but it was something to that effect, I think. Basically 3,500 calories =/= 1 pound of weight gain.

But like I said, don't hold me to that.

IIRC, if we are talking about 1 pound of pure muscle then it is substantially less than 3,500, but people won't be putting on straight muscle. It seems a bit like overanalyzation at a certain point as I think most should focus on getting stronger/proper recovery when bulking rather than set caloric amounts(or percentages). In the end, it probably won't make a large difference either way, but I always think solid numbers are more reliable than percentages. I withhold any final statement until I see that study though

[FitnessCPA]

IIRC, if we are talking about 1 pound of pure muscle then it is substantially less than 3,500, but people won't be putting on straight muscle. It seems a bit like overanalyzation at a certain point as I think most should focus on getting stronger/proper recovery when bulking rather than set caloric amounts(or percentages). In the end, it probably won't make a large difference either way, but I always think solid numbers are more reliable than percentages. I withhold any final statement until I see that study though

I think when bulking you should just make sure you're eating enough and not think too much. Just lift and eat. No studies.

[FitnessCPA]

I recall a study like that, but it had nothing to do with muscle. Just weight gain. It was posted in the advanced fat loss section. Sometime between September and January.

I am thinking of a different one. This one was about muscle gain and I believe it said that > 3,500 calories was required.

Maybe if I really care I'll go in the macro/calorie sticky and ask her to post it.

[JasonDB]

I've never understood the benefit of the slow bulk process. It may look good on paper but generally people who bulk truely (500-1k surplus) seem to end up with more gains for it after their cut in the real world. Trimming away fat is far easier than gaining muscle mass. Unless you needed a heafty amount of tech to obtain your size, maintaining your muscle on a cut isn't particularly difficult if you know how to train.

I generally see people doing the 300 calorie surplus method spinning their wheels and the same size and strength 5 or 6 months later. These same people tend to hope on the tech faster than they really need to because they get so frustrated with their slow gains without realizing it isn't that they are near their natty limit, but that their fear of eating or gaining bodyfat menas it will take them 2 or 3 years to do what they should have done in one.

Also as to the program selected, I love SL5x5 for the novice... however if you have been lifting a little while you need accessory work... and some bodybuilding work (bicep work etc) unless you plan on being a powerlifter if you are using this program to build a base for future aesthetics.

[anrk]

I've never understood the benefit of the slow bulk process. It may look good on paper but generally people who bulk truely (500-1k surplus) seem to end up with more gains for it after their cut in the real world. Trimming away fat is far easier than gaining muscle mass. Unless you needed a heafty amount of tech to obtain your size, maintaining your muscle on a cut isn't particularly difficult if you know how to train.

I generally see people doing the 300 calorie surplus method spinning their wheels and the same size and strength 5 or 6 months later. These same people tend to hope on the tech faster than they really need to because they get so frustrated with their slow gains without realizing it isn't that they are near their natty limit, but that their fear of eating or gaining bodyfat menas it will take them 2 or 3 years to do what they should have done in one.

Also as to the program selected, I love SL5x5 for the novice... however if you have been lifting a little while you need accessory work... and some bodybuilding work (bicep work etc) unless you plan on being a powerlifter if you are using this program to build a base for future aesthetics.

I am a noob weak as sh*t looking to use SL5x5 as a base and then build ontop of that with a push/pull or upper/lower sometime down the track. I'm not going to lie I lift for the whole ''look good naked'' aspect, I do like powerlifting and have been to watch a few meets but it's not my thing but I do understand that to build towards aesthetics you need to build a base/strength. I was planning on throwing in the brocurls/tri work on oneday each, Would really love to have you in my log when I start it I value your input.

[Dexter3000]

I am a noob weak as sh*t looking to use SL5x5 as a base and then build ontop of that with a push/pull or upper/lower sometime down the track. I'm not going to lie I lift for the whole ''look good naked'' aspect, I do like powerlifting and have been to watch a few meets but it's not my thing but I do understand that to build towards aesthetics you need to build a base/strength. I was planning on throwing in the brocurls/tri work on oneday each, Would really love to have you in my log when I start it I value your input.

I think that is good you understand you need a base, if you focus on improving performance the rest will come according to most pro's out there. You can't put a roof on a building without walls... so to speak.

[anrk]

I've never understood the benefit of the slow bulk process. It may look good on paper but generally people who bulk truely (500-1k surplus) seem to end up with more gains for it after their cut in the real world. Trimming away fat is far easier than gaining muscle mass. Unless you needed a heafty amount of tech to obtain your size, maintaining your muscle on a cut isn't particularly difficult if you know how to train.

I generally see people doing the 300 calorie surplus method spinning their wheels and the same size and strength 5 or 6 months later. These same people tend to hope on the tech faster than they really need to because they get so frustrated with their slow gains without realizing it isn't that they are near their natty limit, but that their fear of eating or gaining bodyfat menas it will take them 2 or 3 years to do what they should have done in one.

Also as to the program selected, I love SL5x5 for the novice... however if you have been lifting a little while you need accessory work... and some bodybuilding work (bicep work etc) unless you plan on being a powerlifter if you are using this program to build a base for future aesthetics.

not sure SOJA

[joelash302]

I am a noob weak as sh*t looking to use SL5x5 as a base and then build ontop of that with a push/pull or upper/lower sometime down the track. I'm not going to lie I lift for the whole ''look good naked'' aspect, I do like powerlifting and have been to watch a few meets but it's not my thing but I do understand that to build towards aesthetics you need to build a base/strength. I was planning on throwing in the brocurls/tri work on oneday each, Would really love to have you in my log when I start it I value your input.

You can use SL for a very long time. There's a guy named Link in the PL section that's gotten some substantial numbers on it.

In agreement with what Jason is saying, +300 never seems to be enough because it's hard to accurately put yourself to +300. That's like a protein shake difference. A bigger perceived surplus will give a bit of fat gain and a guarantee of an actual surplus.

I would also go for a +number instead of a +%. Partially because if I said +20% I'd be looking at a nearly 800 cal surplus, f that.