Those with experience LEAN BULKING vs. BULKING

[highiso]

Those with experience only please.

• Since the start of my transformation almost 4 years ago I've bulked the past 2 years and gained 20+ lbs. each of those past 2 years.

• I've gone into both bulks with the best intentions only to have them turn dirty after a month or so.

• I would still hit my protein goals but add garbage on top.

• I feel I've made some decent gains in doing so, BUT...

• I'm VERY tired of cutting 20+ lbs. each spring/summer and want to stay at or below 10-12% this winter.

Realistically, can I make the same gains I've made over the past 2 years by staying within 3-4 lbs. of my current weight of 190-193 lbs?

[ironwill2008]

Realistically, can I make the same gains I've made over the past 2 years by staying within 3-4 lbs. of my current weight of 190-193 lbs?

Genetics is going to play a large part in someone's ability to add muscle while remaining at a relatively low % of body fat. I don't have any clinical data to back this up, only empirical evidence from RL as well as the experiences of several other long-term journalers here.

Generally, those who try to remain very lean while adding muscle have a much harder time of doing so, and usually wind up spinning their wheels. A few guys are able to pull it off, but they seem to be in the minority. The body likes to see a fairly substantial and consistent calorie surplus before it will invest the large amount of energy and resources required to add even more metabolically 'expensive' tissue (muscle).




You possess a good handle on what works for you. Do some experimenting with the parameters you've already found to be effective.

[cnh57811]

Genetics is going to play a large part in someone's ability to add muscle while remaining at a relatively low % of body fat. I don't have any clinical data to back this up, only empirical evidence from RL as well as the experiences of several other long-term journalers here.

Generally, those who try to remain very lean while adding muscle have a much harder time of doing so, and usually wind up spinning their wheels. A few guys are able to pull it off, but they seem to be in the minority. The body likes to see a fairly substantial and consistent calorie surplus before it will invest the large amount of energy and resources required to add even more metabolically 'expensive' tissue (muscle).

Interesting. Could you elaborate on 'fairly substantial'?

[highiso]

Genetics is going to play a large part in someone's ability to add muscle while remaining at a relatively low % of body fat. I don't have any clinical data to back this up, only empirical evidence from RL as well as the experiences of several other long-term journalers here.

Generally, those who try to remain very lean while adding muscle have a much harder time of doing so, and usually wind up spinning their wheels. A few guys are able to pull it off, but they seem to be in the minority. The body likes to see a fairly substantial and consistent calorie surplus before it will invest the large amount of energy and resources required to add even more metabolically 'expensive' tissue (muscle).

You possess a good handle on what works for you. Do some experimenting with the parameters you've already found to be effective.

My intuition was right on with this then unfortunately. Maybe I'll try gaining ONLY HALF as much this year and stay at or just under 200 lbs. Thank you.

[azstrengthcoach]

Those with experience only please.

• Since the start of my transformation almost 4 years ago I've bulked the past 2 years and gained 20+ lbs. each of those past 2 years.

• I've gone into both bulks with the best intentions only to have them turn dirty after a month or so.

• I would still hit my protein goals but add garbage on top.

• I feel I've made some decent gains in doing so, BUT...

• I'm VERY tired of cutting 20+ lbs. each spring/summer and want to stay at or below 10-12% this winter.

Realistically, can I make the same gains I've made over the past 2 years by staying within 3-4 lbs. of my current weight of 190-193 lbs?

There's only one way to find out

[ironwill2008]

Interesting. Could you elaborate on 'fairly substantial'?

A good guideline for building mass is to eat at a 20% calorie surplus. Providing that it includes adequate protein and fat, that's a good starting point from which to evaluate after 3-4 weeks of consistency.

[azstrengthcoach]

A good guideline for building mass is to eat at a 20% calorie surplus. Providing that it includes adequate protein and fat, that's a good starting point from which to evaluate after 3-4 weeks of consistency.

Do you have any data that you're basing these guidelines off of?

[ironwill2008]

Do you have any data that you're basing these guidelines off of?

Nothing other than what I stated in post #2. It seems to be a good starting point from which to proceed.

[azstrengthcoach]

Nothing other than what I stated in post #2. It seems to be a good starting point from which to proceed.

I'm referring to your general hypothesis in general. From where have you deduced your theories?

[ironwill2008]

I'm referring to your general hypothesis in general. From where have you deduced your theories?

My experience and that of others, tempered by what I've learned from Alan Aragon's Research Review, as well as Lyle McDonald's and Jamie Hale's sites.

[acrawlingchaos]

I have gone "full retard" on my bulk before, and I pushed myself from 152 to 196 in a very short time. Second time around, it wasn't as bad, but there was still a lot of fat gain.

In both the above instances, I was counting and at many times, force feeding myself.

Since May, I have decided to let go of counting. For me, I have found that if I eat to appetite, and consume adequate protein (which I estimate), I seem to be growing at a much better pace, with little to no fat gain. I would even argue I am leaner now at 162 than I was in May @ 156.

IMO... if you are training correctly, your appetite will adjust to the new activity. As long as I see increases in strength and occasion increases in weight, I will not count while bulking (I'll save that for the deficits).

[NorwichGrad]

I'm referring to your general hypothesis in general. From where have you deduced your theories?

20% as a starting guideline makes perfect mathematical sense..



My cousin Alan Aragon confirmed 20% is great starting point.

[ironwill2008]

20% as a starting guideline makes perfect mathematical sense..



My cousin Alan Aragon confirmed 20% is great starting point.

Your cousin is a good man.

[bubbathudd]

Those with experience only please.

• Since the start of my transformation almost 4 years ago I've bulked the past 2 years and gained 20+ lbs. each of those past 2 years.

• I've gone into both bulks with the best intentions only to have them turn dirty after a month or so.

• I would still hit my protein goals but add garbage on top.

• I feel I've made some decent gains in doing so, BUT...

• I'm VERY tired of cutting 20+ lbs. each spring/summer and want to stay at or below 10-12% this winter.

Realistically, can I make the same gains I've made over the past 2 years by staying within 3-4 lbs. of my current weight of 190-193 lbs?

Why limit yourself to within 3-4 lbs of current weight? Just curious. If you are lean bulking (say 1.5-3 lbs/month) you shouldn't be putting on that much fat. You could run that up to 10 pounds over current weight and then run a few weeks modest cut. Rinse and repeat. I have seen Layne Norton propose running something like that for a 4 weeks bulk, 2 week cut.

[azstrengthcoach]

My experience and that of others, tempered by what I've learned from Alan Aragon's Research Review, as well as Lyle McDonald's and Jamie Hale's sites.

But why 20% specifically? I'm not necessarily arguing I'm just asking why that number

[NorwichGrad]

Your cousin is a good man.

Thanks for humoring me, Will.

Alan and Manny Pacman are not really my blood cousins.. Just wanted to jump in the e-stat band wagon..But they really are good men..

[azstrengthcoach]

http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_..._ultimate_body

[dbwade]

Very helpful thread, because I am wavering between whether or not to start my 1st bulk phase ever (intentionally that is). I do want a bit more muscle mass, but I don't want to get out of the 10% BF range...

[EjnarKolinkar]

Seems test a smaller surplus and see if you are one of the chosen that can gain on it, or run the larger surplus for a shorter duration are the options. I see people succeed with those.

I empathize with "stomach is a bottomless pit" syndrome, option one is like a full time job for me some days. Still have no idea if it will produce.

[brucedelaney]

Very helpful thread, because I am wavering between whether or not to start my 1st bulk phase ever (intentionally that is). I do want a bit more muscle mass, but I don't want to get out of the 10% BF range...

LOL Love this... I've never thought of this way before...

In the past, I've told people I've never done anything besides cut but based on this logic I've done quite a few un-intentional bulks... LOL

[ironwill2008]

But why 20% specifically? I'm not necessarily arguing I'm just asking why that number

I used to advocate a "500 calorie daily surplus" to anyone asking how much to eat to "gain muscle."

Until I eventually realized that for a physically small person (maybe a small female), that would be way too much of an increase, likely to cause excess fat gain. For a much larger guy, someone possibly engaged in a very physical daily job (as I was before I retired), 500 cals wouldn't be enough to provide much gain at all.

A percentage offers a sliding scale to any one of any size, and provides a reasonable starting point. IMO, an ideal rate of weight gain for a natty is about a pound a week. A 20% surplus should provide that, or at least close enough to it to allow some adjustment after several weeks for the trainee to see where he's at compared to where he wants to go.

[ironwill2008]

Thanks for humoring me, Will.

Alan and Manny Pacman are not really my blood cousins.. Just wanted to jump in the e-stat band wagon..But they really are good men..

Alan practically single-handedly dragged me, kicking and screaming, out of the state of nutrition/supplement bro-dom I was in when I first joined this site and discovered his Research Review.

[induced_drag]

ISO,

My experience, (from trying many different ways) is bulk/cut is the best way to make progress mass wise. It changes though as you progress closer to your genetic limit. While we may never truly know where that point is, it is pretty easy to have a general idea.

In my opinion, large surpluses (500+cals) are best saved for newbs or novices or those taking other supplements. Guys very far below they genetic limit can put on muscle very fast. After 2-3 years of training, your ability to put on muscle will have slowed tremendously.

At this point is where you get into the 200-250 cal surplus. Which in my opinion is the bread and butter "bulk" for a guy with experience. You will see continual strength gains and can run the surplus a long time. (most of my bulks like this ran 4-5 months) The key is to watch how your body picks up fat. Waist dia is the key as it will change much quicker then skinfolds. VAT generally comes on quicker then sub-q. If you track your weight, cals, and fat measurements, you will see that in the initial time coming off the cut, you can eat a little more. Over time, your ability to make progress and not start laying down too much bodyfat will change. This is why I believe in the bulk/cut principle as well. Layne Norton does a great job of explaining the process, but the "cut" is just as important as the 'bulk" in priming the body to grow.

Anyway, track, track, track... But for me 250 cal surplus was and is awesome. Cmoore shared with me that his magic number was between 150 and 200 to make great gains without bodyfat. But obviously, the smaller your surplus the closer you are coming to the inherent errors in tracking.


One last note.....I believe that when leaner, carb timing can produce different results. Layne Norton also advises this. I really try to use carbs to my advantage and shift my intake to when it is most favorable to intake them. Some guys get up in arms about this....and say it does not matter. They are partially right and for most, it will mean nothing. But there comes a point where it matters and if even only a small amount, I try to take advantage of it.

[azstrengthcoach]

I've done well over the years doing low calorie slow bulks. But I know plenty who do dirty bulks and do well also

[ironwill2008]

Cmoore shared with me that his magic number was between 150 and 200 to make great gains without bodyfat.

He's the most dialed-in guy I've ever seen posting here. Shredded to the freaking bone and still lifting big numbers in the gym.

But obviously, the smaller your surplus the closer you are coming to the inherent errors in tracking.

^^^^A critical point.

To be able to run such a tight calorie surplus requires more precision and discipline than most trainees can deal with consistently. A 150 calorie difference can be brought about by only, say, two slices of plain bread or their equivalent. Such a small margin of error can leave a less-precise trainee stuck at maintenance, or worse, a deficit.

One last note.....I believe that when leaner, carb timing can produce different results. Layne Norton also advises this. I really try to use carbs to my advantage and shift my intake to when it is most favorable to intake them. Some guys get up in arms about this....and say it does not matter. They are partially right and for most, it will mean nothing. But there comes a point where it matters and if even only a small amount, I try to take advantage of it.

One place where carb timing may be important is in fueling a heavy workout. Some guys have to eat some carbs pre-training in order to get through a session. Other guys, maybe not so much.

[EjnarKolinkar]

He's the most dialed-in guy I've ever seen posting here. Shredded to the freaking bone and still lifting big numbers in the gym.

Alan, DCA, sticky topics could not get through to me, too stubborn. I figured it out reading Cmoore's Myfitnesspal log, which he was nice enough to leave public for some time and link in his log. That's what changed my mind about bro-science.

[highiso]

Lots of good advice in here. At my current weight 190-193, my maintenance is about 2900. I'll start at 3300 and see where that takes me over a few weeks. I've been riding a couple hundred cals under maintenance for the better part of summer now. A surplus will be nice. My low weight was about 188 lbs. at the end of August this year so I would like to stay under 198 lbs. this winter. Time will tell.

[acrawlingchaos]

Question?

Do you ever see yourself not counting calories in the future?

[highiso]

Question?

Do you ever see yourself not counting calories in the future?

Haha, NO. I did not count closely at all on my 2 previous bulks, usually just guesstimated my protein and then just shoveled the junk in. I will have to count closely this time if I want to do it right. But yes, I ALWAYS count when cutting, I have to. I am after all a recovering obese dude.

As far as the pics go, post away. I've never cared about anyone posting pics in my threads, showing off your gains is what this site is about, especially if they're helpful and from the sounds of you you put on some nice mass without gaining fat. I'm very curious to see them. Thanks again!

Also, inb4 FLEX and his damn Weight Watchers sig.

[-=FLEX=-]

Also, inb4 FLEX and his damn Weight Watchers sig.

You rang?