How do you know when it's time to bulk?

[JJanet]

Hi there.

I have a question that I feel silly for asking, but just like the title says, how do you know when it's time to bulk? I have been cutting for several months now. I am 5'4, 114 pounds, and ~17% bf. I would like to (just for once in my life!!) have all of my abs visible, so my instinct is to keep cutting until this happens, but today, I snapped a picture of myself, and it seems like the muscles that are visible are rather small and underdeveloped.

I would love to hear any advice from anyone on this topic. Thanks in advance!

[nicoledominique]

Well, usually you diet down (or cut) when you want to reveal the muscle that you have worked so hard to put on. If a person is simply just trying to "lose weight" it wouldn't be called dieting down or cutting because they are not really trying to reveal any muscle mass, but rather just trying to lose fat.

If you are unhappy with the amount of muscle you have, and would like to put on more, then I would recommend bulking up. Start by eating 200 calories above maintenance for a couple of weeks, if you are gaining great but if not, raise the calories by another 200. Remember that you also should be lifting heavy and getting in a TON of protein to ensure that you see maximum gains. You can bulk for as long as you want - but I would try to do it for two months minimum. The longer you bulk, the more muscle mass you will gain and then once you actually diet down, you'll have a lot more to show for it!

This is a quote I saw on here the other day that I really liked - it was something along the lines of:

"It's not called cutting if you don't intend on bulking up."

[JJanet]

Thanks, Nicole! I 'bulked' from September to November, (lifting nice and heavy!), eating so much protein I felt sick just looking at my egg whites and whey. I appreciate your advice as it's given me something to think about.

BTW - I used to live in Calgary!! THE FLAMES RULE!!!!

[nicoledominique]

Originally Posted by JJanet

Thanks, Nicole! I 'bulked' from September to November, (lifting nice and heavy!), eating so much protein I felt sick just looking at my egg whites and whey. I appreciate your advice as it's given me something to think about.

BTW - I used to live in Calgary!! THE FLAMES RULE!!!!

Awesome! I would definitely suggest doing a bulk - the more muscle you have the easier it will be to cut up...your muscles will be a lot more prominent too!

I am partial to the Oilers...

[coach Hale]

Which is more important to you at this time?

How much protein were you eating? There is certain level of protein required enhance skeletal muscle protein, but eating amounts above that do not speed up the process. Most bbers eat way more protein than necessary.

Refer to prominent Primary Researchers such as K Tipton, M Rennie and so on.

I know the typcial trainer or person writing for the popular mag will say you need to eat a boatload of protein. For the most part this is opinion that can not be supported by valid evidence.

Eat enough protein but consider that accreation of muscle protein can only be heightened to a degree. You must also consider your p-ratio when thinking about gains in weight and how they will be partioned.

thanks
Coach Hale
www.maxcondition.com

[JJanet]

Originally Posted by coach Hale

Which is more important to you at this time?

How much protein were you eating? There is certain level of protein required enhance skeletal muscle protein, but eating amounts above that do not speed up the process. Most bbers eat way more protein than necessary.

Refer to prominent Primary Researchers such as K Tipton, M Rennie and so on.

I know the typcial trainer or person writing for the popular mag will say you need to eat a boatload of protein. For the most part this is opinion that can not be supported by valid evidence.

Eat enough protein but consider that accreation of muscle protein can only be heightened to a degree. You must also consider your p-ratio when thinking about gains in weight and how they will be partioned.

thanks
Coach Hale
www.maxcondition.com

Hmmmmm... I am not sure what your question is asking! If you're asking whether I value muscle over being thin... I want them both! Nicely defined body and to be fairly slim. My protein intake is about 120 grams, so roughly 1 g/body weight (my macros are 40p/40c/20f). In your opinion, do you think this is too much? Thanks for your input.

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by coach Hale

Which is more important to you at this time?

How much protein were you eating? There is certain level of protein required enhance skeletal muscle protein, but eating amounts above that do not speed up the process. Most bbers eat way more protein than necessary.

Refer to prominent Primary Researchers such as K Tipton, M Rennie and so on.

I know the typcial trainer or person writing for the popular mag will say you need to eat a boatload of protein. For the most part this is opinion that can not be supported by valid evidence.

Eat enough protein but consider that accreation of muscle protein can only be heightened to a degree. You must also consider your p-ratio when thinking about gains in weight and how they will be partioned.

thanks
Coach Hale
www.maxcondition.com

So most of what I have read states 1-2g. of protein per lb. of body weight. Would you agree?

[gdogg75]

Originally Posted by JJanet

...I 'bulked' from September to November, (lifting nice and heavy!), eating so much protein I felt sick just looking at my egg whites and whey.

i was the same way... recently i started taking Black Hole by Controlled Labs... pretty interesting product. i did a review here...
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...hp?t=106483541

[Twerp]

Never,

There's never a good time to bulk. It really doesn't make any sense. Your body is more anabolic at a lower body fat % (for guys it's between 10-12%), and I don't understand adding fat to add muscle? It's an old school way of thinking, and not only that, you lose muscle during the cutting phase.

Why not eat properly all the time, maintain bf % (or even lower) and add muscle?

Originally Posted by JJanet

Hi there.

I have a question that I feel silly for asking, but just like the title says, how do you know when it's time to bulk? I have been cutting for several months now. I am 5'4, 114 pounds, and ~17% bf. I would like to (just for once in my life!!) have all of my abs visible, so my instinct is to keep cutting until this happens, but today, I snapped a picture of myself, and it seems like the muscles that are visible are rather small and underdeveloped.

I would love to hear any advice from anyone on this topic. Thanks in advance!

[2 D]

Originally Posted by nervesgone

Never,

There's never a good time to bulk. It really doesn't make any sense. Your body is more anabolic at a lower body fat % (for guys it's between 10-12%), and I don't understand adding fat to add muscle? It's an old school way of thinking, and not only that, you lose muscle during the cutting phase.

Why not eat properly all the time, maintain bf % (or even lower) and add muscle?

How do you go about doing that macro wise?

[Ladycole]

friendly bump--wanna hear more...

[LoveANurse]

whoa how can you cut for so long?? its so hard and i get really moody and bored. and its really not very healthy so cut for so long, it can be difficult on your kidneys and overall body. you dont need to cut for more than a month

[Twerp]

That doesn't make any sense at all? Why is harder to cut than it is to consume excess fat and carbs? I think maybe you're thinking about contest prep, which is somewhat unhealthy if done for a prolonged period of time. But, most importantly, a healthy diet where you're trying to cut involves higher water consumption, more veggies & fruit, less carbs and much less fats. It's actually healthier to eat this way all the time, much less for just a month of a time.

Macro wise, essentially it's about eating less than maintanence on your days off from the gym (days off from weights, I mean). No program should have you doing resistance training for more than 4 times a week. I see lots of people say they train 5-6 times a week, and that's actually counter-productive. You'll get much more out of your workouts with the rest, and equally most of your muscle gain/fat loss comes in the time when you're away from the gym. Your body responds to fatigue as it does to any other stressor! By essentially storing away fat! So, essentially the days where you require a higher caloric intake (legs, two training sessions, etc...) are the days when you increase your caloric intake (max 2 days a week), the other two days have moderate intake where you eat slightly above maintanance, and then on your days away from the gym you have a lower caloric intake. It's basically carb cycling, and there are lots of articles on it both here and on T-Nation.

But the idea of bulking is an old and tired one, and unless you have the pharmanceutical aids to help you with the process, it sort of defeats the purpose. Why you ask? Consider the two alternatives? If you gain 25lbs during a bulk phase, a lot of that is just fat - to lose that weight and cut back to a beach bod quickly, you'll need to reduce your caloric intake. When this happens, your body will also turn to muscle as an energy source! So great, you're losing fat but you're also losing muscle! Why? Isn't that counterproductive? Why not maintain body weight at a healthy (and sexy) level and still add muscle? But if y'all want to bulk, by all means go ahead!

Originally Posted by LoveANurse

whoa how can you cut for so long?? its so hard and i get really moody and bored. and its really not very healthy so cut for so long, it can be difficult on your kidneys and overall body. you dont need to cut for more than a month

[SexyChic]

^^That's a good point. Anybody disagrees? B/c I would love to hear the other side to the argument FOR bulking

**Edit** Oh wait I do disagree partly. Some people do 5 day splits and they work different muscle groups (never working sore ones especially) and I can't see how that is bad. The other muscle groups aren't technically being trained so it isn't Counter-productive.

As for some ectomorphs, like myself, cannot be on a calorie deficit (even on non training days) or I can kiss my hard earned muscles goodbye.

[Amanda76]

Argument for bulking: At some point, I would have had to eat above maintenance for a skinnyfat 110 lbs total bodyweight to end up with about 110 lbs lean mass, dontcha think? I honestly do not think my body would have changed as much as it has without eating like a champ. Obviously, the way you cut will influence how much of the muscle you gained will be lost during that cut...if you're doing it right, you should always come out ahead.

I have yet to read an article or study that has made me feel confident that a slender person can gain a significant amount of muscle without a little bit of fat gain. In fact, I don't even think "not bulking" is the point of the articles I've seen at T-Nation (I'm pretty sure I know of one of the ones that nervesgone is referencing). The term "bulk," itself seems to have lost it's meaning as a reason to cheat and overeat with no clear goal in mind. I think the point is that there's no point in blimping out in order to gain muscle. I agree with that train of thought. But I don't agree that there's never a good reason to do a reasonable bulk.

The need to bulk depends on where you're starting and how much change in lean mass you want to see, IMO.

[Amanda76]

Originally Posted by SexyChic

:

**Edit** Oh wait I do disagree partly. Some people do 5 day splits and they work different muscle groups (never working sore ones especially) and I can't see how that is bad. The other muscle groups aren't technically being trained so it isn't Counter-productive.

Different bodies respond to training in different ways. I don't think you can say you NEED to train 6 days a week any more than you can say you CAN'T train more than 4 days a week. In fact, people should vary the stimulus to continue growing...including making changes to their volume and frequency.

[SexyChic]

I agree

[Twerp]

My criticism of bulking relates to bulking in its traditional sense, eating excess calories in order to gain both muscle and fat. Do I think you have had to eat in excess of your maintenance level to lose fat and gain muscle? Somedays yes, somedays no. I'm a firm believer in carb cycling, so on days when more carbs are required, then yes, you're eating above maintenance. But I certainly wouldn't advocate eating above maintenance throughout the week. And like I said earlier, in the traditional sense (i.e. steady state cardio, caloric deficit) you will still lose muscle along with the fat. So my answer is... kinda! And my argument is only related to people that train naturally - if you're using gear, then "normal rules" don't apply to you.

A "healthy" bulk to me is gaining maybe 2-5lbs over a 3 month period. Even then, I try and fight that off with HIIT sessions on my off days. I think it depends on what theory you put your stock in. I've tried every different dieting strategy, and even the traditional bulk & cut, and I like carb cycling much more.

As for training frequency, a lot of trainers ignore the impact on your CNS when you train, so they think that 1-2 days off a week from weight training is adequate, whereas the science behind what I read and practice allows for no more than 4 working days (granted, you can get up to 8 workouts in those 4 days) in any given week. Off days are for some cardio, and mostly for rest. If you're doing a 5-6 day split, all I'd ask is who designed your program? If it was you, then maybe you should devote some time reading professional programs (and no, that doesn't mean the trainers at your gym) and seeing how they structure their workout plans. Most professional coaches put far more emphasis on rest than the people who still follow Arnold's encyclopedia of bodybuilding (which is outdated - case in point; ab exercises to spot reduce fat around your mid-section).

Here's an article from Thibs that talks about bulking. If you're also interested, he writes an interesting article on Carb Cycling. (The Carb Cycling Codex).

http://www.t-nation.com/article/body...ut_bulking&cr=

Originally Posted by Amanda76

Argument for bulking: At some point, I would have had to eat above maintenance for a skinnyfat 110 lbs total bodyweight to end up with about 110 lbs lean mass, dontcha think? I honestly do not think my body would have changed as much as it has without eating like a champ. Obviously, the way you cut will influence how much of the muscle you gained will be lost during that cut...if you're doing it right, you should always come out ahead.

I have yet to read an article or study that has made me feel confident that a slender person can gain a significant amount of muscle without a little bit of fat gain. In fact, I don't even think that's the point of the articles I've seen at T-Nation (I'm pretty sure I know of one of the ones that nervesgone is referencing). I think the point is that there's no point in blimping out in order to gain muscle. I agree with that train of thought. But I don't agree that there's never a good reason to do a reasonable bulk.

The need to bulk depends on where you're starting and how much change in lean mass you want to see, IMO.

[Twerp]

Really? I couldn't disagree more! The most important and often overlooked factor in training is the CNS, and by your logic someone can train 7 days a week if they believe it works for them?

Show me a professionally designed program that recommends training with weights 6 days/week. If you can find one, please attach a link so we can look at its credibility (or lack thereof).

I think you're using volume and frequency out of context. Volume typically refers to your set/rep ratio (i.e say hypertrophy has an ideal rep range of 18-30, so split over 5 sets you could do 5 sets of 4 reps = 20 reps overall), and frequency refers to training a particular muscle - high frequency training (which I've done in several different programs) refers to training a body part between 4 & 8 times/week, but limited to a 4 day routine using am/pm workouts. So when a trainer tells someone to mix up their training parameters, he could mean number of sets/reps, training frequency, rest periods, progression, etc..., but certainly that shouldn't mean lift weights on more days.

Originally Posted by Amanda76

Different bodies respond to training in different ways. I don't think you can say you NEED to train 6 days a week any more than you can say you CAN'T train more than 4 days a week. In fact, people should vary the stimulus to continue growing...including making changes to their volume and frequency.

[Amanda76]

Originally Posted by nervesgone

My criticism of bulking relates to bulking in its traditional sense, eating excess calories in order to gain both muscle and fat. Do I think you have had to eat in excess of your maintenance level to lose fat and gain muscle? Somedays yes, somedays no. I'm a firm believer in carb cycling, so on days when more carbs are required, then yes, you're eating above maintenance. But I certainly wouldn't advocate eating above maintenance throughout the week. And like I said earlier, in the traditional sense (i.e. steady state cardio, caloric deficit) you will still lose muscle along with the fat. So my answer is... kinda! And my argument is only related to people that train naturally - if you're using gear, then "normal rules" don't apply to you.

A "healthy" bulk to me is gaining maybe 2-5lbs over a 3 month period. Even then, I try and fight that off with HIIT sessions on my off days. I think it depends on what theory you put your stock in. I've tried every different dieting strategy, and even the traditional bulk & cut, and I like carb cycling much more.

As for training frequency, a lot of trainers ignore the impact on your CNS when you train, so they think that 1-2 days off a week from weight training is adequate, whereas the science behind what I read and practice allows for no more than 4 working days (granted, you can get up to 8 workouts in those 4 days) in any given week. Off days are for some cardio, and mostly for rest. If you're doing a 5-6 day split, all I'd ask is who designed your program? If it was you, then maybe you should devote some time reading professional programs (and no, that doesn't mean the trainers at your gym) and seeing how they structure their workout plans. Most professional coaches put far more emphasis on rest than the people who still follow Arnold's encyclopedia of bodybuilding (which is outdated - case in point; ab exercises to spot reduce fat around your mid-section).

Here's an article from Thibs that talks about bulking. If you're also interested, he writes an interesting article on Carb Cycling. (The Carb Cycling Codex).

http://www.t-nation.com/article/body...ut_bulking&cr=

I would say that we pretty much agree on bulking, then.

What are your qualifications for "professional coach?" Regardless, saying "most" implies that even among professional coaches there will be disagreement with how much rest is necessary in general...and I'm sure it varies based on how taxing to the CNS each individual workout is. I have yet to find that there are many absolutes in sport/fitness and health related industries.

[Twerp]

By professional coach I mean someone who makes a living writing and studying training programs. As examples - Poliquin, Waterbury, Thibs, Cosgrove. Even better, how about industry recognized? Published?

That's an interesting deflection technique - well done. I still think your comment on training 6 days a week is careless, even if you don't think there aren't any absolutes. I can list dozens of programs that recommend 4 day splits with 3 days rest (again, from lifting weights). I'm curious to see how many good programs there are with 6 day/week splits.

Why would you do a workout with weights that wasn't very taxing on the CNS? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose (unless you're pregnant or rehab'ing an injury)?

Originally Posted by Amanda76

I would say that we agree on bulking, then.

What are your qualifications for "professional coach?" Regardless, saying "most" implies that even among professional coaches there will be disagreement with how much rest is necessary in general...and I'm sure it varies based on how taxing to the CNS each individual workout is. I have yet to find that there are many absolutes in sport/fitness and health related industries.

[Amanda76]

Originally Posted by nervesgone

Really? I couldn't disagree more! The most important and often overlooked factor in training is the CNS, and by your logic someone can train 7 days a week if they believe it works for them?

Show me a professionally designed program that recommends training with weights 6 days/week. If you can find one, please attach a link so we can look at its credibility (or lack thereof).

I think you're using volume and frequency out of context. Volume typically refers to your set/rep ratio (i.e say hypertrophy has an ideal rep range of 18-30, so split over 5 sets you could do 5 sets of 4 reps = 20 reps overall), and frequency refers to training a particular muscle - high frequency training (which I've done in several different programs) refers to training a body part between 4 & 8 times/week, but limited to a 4 day routine using am/pm workouts. So when a trainer tells someone to mix up their training parameters, he could mean number of sets/reps, training frequency, rest periods, progression, etc..., but certainly that shouldn't mean lift weights on more days.

6 days was not the best example to make my point. I certainly wouldn't suggest people NOT have a rest day. But do you think all other splits that dance around 4 days or split them up differently are useless?

And I understand volume and frequency...maybe I should have left the "volume" part out of my original post. I suppose I'll have to read what you have suggested to understand why I absolutely can not spread that frequency out over more than 4 days (say, if I want to hit legs more than once every 7 days) and expect to get anywhere.

Originally Posted by nervesgone

By professional coach I mean someone who makes a living writing and studying training programs. As examples - Poliquin, Waterbury, Thibs, dos Remedios. Even better, how about industry recognized? Published?

That's an interesting deflection technique - well done. I still think your comment on training 6 days a week is careless, even if you don't think there aren't any absolutes. I can list dozens of programs that recommend 4 day splits with 3 days rest (again, from lifting weights). I'm curious to see how many good programs there are with 6 day/week splits.

Why would you do a workout with weights that wasn't very taxing on the CNS? Wouldn't that defeat the purpose (unless you're pregnant or rehab'ing an injury)?

I have read things from those people...but I don't study them the way you do, obviously. Definitely not to the point where I could compare. I am interested in reading more from them though, so thanks.

And what is it in particular you'd like for me to address that I deflected?

Doesn't all the things you mentioned above regarding periodization techniques change the effect on your CNS, making some times easier to recover from than others?

[Twerp]

Since we've officially hijacked this thread, why not keep going.

Do I think they're useless? Depends on the program, I guess. Do I think that the workouts could be structured more effectively/efficiently? There's a very good chance, yes! Do I think lifting weights 6-7 days a week is completely counterproductive? Absolutely!

You can train legs 8 times a week, just split over a 4 day cycle. There are all kinds of different training philosophies to try; push-pull splits (each bp gets trained 2x/week); Upper/Lower Split (ditto push-pull); Full Body Training (each bp gets trained 4x week); And then there's the traditional chest/back, legs/shoulders, biceps/triceps, or whatever split. Different people respond differently to different programs (I have the best results with full-body splits). So if you want to train your legs more than once a week, try one of the other programs! Try a push/pull split or a full body split, but why would you risk fatigue (commonly called over-training) by taking away a rest day? Instead change the way you work out.

Yes, some workouts are harder to recover from than others. No question, doing 8 sets of 3 with a 5rm back squat is significantly more taxing than doing 3 sets of 12 with a 14rm overhead tricep extension. The point is though, that every workout should be structured in a way where you are taxing your system, and that unless you're pharmaceutically gifted, you will not continue to see gains unless you rest. For example, for athletes training for just strength vs. a strength/hypertrophy hybrid, a lot of coaches would recommend training 3x/week and resting 4 days.

Also, why do people leave legs until later in the week, when they're probably already tired? That's a separate rant.....

Originally Posted by Amanda76

6 days was not the best example to make my point. I certainly wouldn't suggest people NOT have a rest day. But do you think all other splits that dance around 4 days or split them up differently are useless?

And I understand volume and frequency...maybe I should have left the "volume" part out of my original post. I suppose I'll have to read what you have suggested to understand why I absolutely can not spread that frequency out over more than 4 days (say, if I want to hit legs more than once every 7 days) and expect to get anywhere.



I have read things from those people...but I don't study them the way you do, obviously. Definitely not to the point where I could compare. I am interested in reading more from them though, so thanks.

And what is it in particular you'd like for me to address that I deflected?

Doesn't all the things you mentioned above regarding periodization techniques change the effect on your CNS, making some times easier for it to recover from than others?

[Amanda76]

Originally Posted by nervesgone

Since we've officially hijacked this thread, why not keep going.

Do I think they're useless? Depends on the program, I guess. Do I think that the workouts could be structured more effectively/efficiently? There's a very good chance, yes! Do I think lifting weights 6-7 days a week is completely counterproductive? Absolutely!

You can train legs 8 times a week, just split over a 4 day cycle. There are all kinds of different training philosophies to try; push-pull splits (each bp gets trained 2x/week); Upper/Lower Split (ditto push-pull); Full Body Training (each bp gets trained 4x week); And then there's the traditional chest/back, legs/shoulders, biceps/triceps, or whatever split. Different people respond differently to different programs (I have the best results with full-body splits). So if you want to train your legs more than once a week, try one of the other programs! Try a push/pull split or a full body split, but why would you risk fatigue (commonly called over-training) by taking away a rest day? Instead change the way you work out.

Yes, some workouts are harder to recover from than others. No question, doing 8 sets of 3 with a 5rm back squat is significantly more taxing than doing 3 sets of 12 with a 14rm overhead tricep extension. The point is though, that every workout should be structured in a way where you are taxing your system, and that unless you're pharmaceutically gifted, you will not continue to see gains unless you rest. For example, for athletes training for just strength vs. a strength/hypertrophy hybrid, a lot of coaches would recommend training 3x/week and resting 4 days.

Also, why do people leave legs until later in the week, when they're probably already tired? That's a separate rant.....

Pretty massive thread hijacking...well, sorta. So long as you're considering bulking, you might as well be training right, right?

I think we were talking past each other for a bit in there....I'm back to pretty much being in agreement with you again. Just not sold on needing exactly 3 days of rest in every situation. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I apparently need to be reading more of what you're reading to become convinced.

I hear you on legs...back is another body part I like to hit before the fatigue of the work week sets in.

[SexyChic]

So nerves how many days do you do cardio, weight train and then rest? Break it down for me

Cuz I have 2-3 rest days a week and then 2 days weights then 2-3 days of cardio (mostly 2)

[Twerp]

No problem.

I lift 4x/week right now, and I'm doing complexes which are primarily for fat loss (Higher volume, lighter weight).

I take 1 day a week to do nothing.

I do some form of cardio 4 days a week. My main form of cardio is soccer. So, a typical week looks like this;

Monday - Train @ lunch, Soccer @ night
Tuesday - Cardio at night
Wednesday - Train @ Lunch
Thursday - Train @ Lunch, Soccer @ night
Friday - Off
Saturday - Train
Sunday - Soccer

Originally Posted by SexyChic

So nerves how many days do you do cardio, weight train and then rest? Break it down for me

Cuz I have 2-3 rest days a week and then 2 days weights then 2-3 days of cardio (mostly 2)

[SexyChic]

Damn nice calves! And that's a lot of cardio. How many calories do you eat a day so that you don't burn up your muscle?

[Twerp]

I probably shouldn't say this, I might have some of the macro-gurus get onto me, but I've never really counted calories. I have a general idea on how much per serving I eat (probably somewhere in the 400-500 cal range), and I eat 6-8 times a day, depending on the activity level. At the moment, I'm actually trying to lose a little weight, and I'm not that worried about losing a little muscle either (soccer player - tough to run around carrying extra weight). I don't compete and I don't have much weight to lose, so I'm not as strict as I could be with macros.

[bambifox]

Me neither...I tried counting calories logging into thedailyplate for about a week and could not continue. I think I do a pretty good job of eating small portions (naturally) and snacking alot as well as gaging my calorie intake (I have a good estimate in mind). One week was all I needed (it did help my mental gage for portion sizes). To each his/her own I guess! I definately don't believe in a "one size fits all" because, for instance, I keep hearing that cardio doesn't build muscle...well with ME it does! I know for a fact that I have seen some obvious gains in my legs (hamstrings especially) doing straight cardio. Now, I'm not knocking lifting (I will add that soon), but to say that some things work for some and not for others.

Originally Posted by nervesgone

I probably shouldn't say this, I might have some of the macro-gurus get onto me, but I've never really counted calories. I have a general idea on how much per serving I eat (probably somewhere in the 400-500 cal range), and I eat 6-8 times a day, depending on the activity level. At the moment, I'm actually trying to lose a little weight, and I'm not that worried about losing a little muscle either (soccer player - tough to run around carrying extra weight). I don't compete and I don't have much weight to lose, so I'm not as strict as I could be with macros.

[Twerp]

It really depends on the cardio you're doing. If you're doing steady state cardio (i.e. 60 minutes on a treadmill), then the difference you're seeing could be related to overall fat loss as opposed to muscle gain (ever see a bodybuilder that looks bigger even though he's 15 lbs lighter?). You can probably see more muscle in your legs, and are equating that to muscle gain. Interval training certainly does build some muscle (i.e. sprinters), but again not as much as correct resistance training.

Originally Posted by bambifox

Me neither...I tried counting calories logging into thedailyplate for about a week and could not continue. I think I do a pretty good job of eating small portions (naturally) and snacking alot as well as gaging my calorie intake (I have a good estimate in mind). One week was all I needed (it did help my mental gage for portion sizes). To each his/her own I guess! I definately don't believe in a "one size fits all" because, for instance, I keep hearing that cardio doesn't build muscle...well with ME it does! I know for a fact that I have seen some obvious gains in my legs (hamstrings especially) doing straight cardio. Now, I'm not knocking lifting (I will add that soon), but to say that some things work for some and not for others.