PDA

View Full Version : Minimal surplus. Any Gains?



MalarsPlace
04-15-2014, 08:13 AM
So assume one reaches their desired leanness. Instead of maintaining, they choose to be in a 100-200 caloric surplus.

Would you see any noticeable muscle gains after 6-12 months or so? Or is that surplus so minimal that it wouldn't be noticeable?

Objective would be to stay around desired leanness while also progressing (whether it be strength or muscle gains) and not just maintaining.

Gxp23
04-15-2014, 08:18 AM
Minimal surplus will minimize weight gain. I cant say how much muscle/fat you will gain, but when you take into account that 1lb is ~3500 cals, think about it when you apply your surplus.

VmissileX
04-15-2014, 08:18 AM
Alot of people would have alot of different opinions.

Mines is that is going to be a quite slow bulk...probably too slow.

I'd follow aim for 3lbs a month gain until you are a substantial weight then cut again.

Fuk worrying about being fat.

Mrpb
04-15-2014, 08:22 AM
You'd still gain 1 or a little under 2 pounds per month and I would expect it to be mostly muscle, assuming progressive overload is made on a well balanced lifting program.

This thread goes into detail: http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=161018531&p=1226346841&viewfull=1#post1226346841

Personally I'd bulk a little faster, gaining 2-3 lb per month.

sonnydfrizzy
04-15-2014, 08:22 AM
So assume one reaches their desired leanness. Instead of maintaining, they choose to be in a 100-200 caloric surplus.

Would you see any noticeable muscle gains after 6-12 months or so? Or is that surplus so minimal that it wouldn't be noticeable?

Objective would be to stay around desired leanness while also progressing (whether it be strength or muscle gains) and not just maintaining.

This is absolutely true. If one were to reach their desired weight and leanness and ate in a minimal surplus or even maintained, they would still have a change in body composition, it is just a lot longer of a process. So over the course of a year, using the example of a 200 pound male at 14% body fat, he could increase his LBM and decrease his fat mass by say 3 pounds each, resulting in a net change of body fat percentage, but he would not have gained any "mass" since he did not put on weight. He did add LBM, just not overall mass. If one were to to this, their training would have to be on point and they would have to be very patient because gains are very slow this way. But body recomp is 100% possible. If OP is doing it, then take bi-monthly photos and I guarantee you will see a difference over the stretch of a year. Just focus on progressive overload and recovery, and you can still see significant changes in body composition, it would just take a lot longer than the traditional bulk/cut cycles and the changes are not as "visible."

Mrpb
04-15-2014, 08:30 AM
Seems like Frank Zane is a fan of even slower 'bulking'.


"If you want to get high definition and keep it for the rest of your life then DON'T BULK UP which entails gorging yourself with extra calories. Bulking up means to pack on a lot of body weight in a hurry. Is this productive or are you wasting your time? My advice base on my own experience is don't do it. Quality muscle takes time to develop-it's better to add not more then 5 lbs of solid muscle a year by training and eating right than to gain 30-40 lbs of surplus tissue, much of which is fat and water retention. When you train down and lose the excess bulk you will most likely find yourself in the same place where you started, a year later, a year wasted. You cannot improve your definition this way."

http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/professional-muscle-forum/57038-couple-quotes-frank-zane-about-big-calorie-eaters-swiss-balls.html

ironwill2008
04-15-2014, 08:57 AM
So assume one reaches their desired leanness. Instead of maintaining, they choose to be in a 100-200 caloric surplus.

Would you see any noticeable muscle gains after 6-12 months or so? Or is that surplus so minimal that it wouldn't be noticeable?

Objective would be to stay around desired leanness while also progressing (whether it be strength or muscle gains) and not just maintaining.

Such a small surplus would likely turn into maintenance or even a deficit simply due to accumulated errors in calorie counting during the day.


Result---- no change in body composition.

Mrpb
04-15-2014, 09:00 AM
Such a small surplus would likely turn into maintenance or even a deficit simply due to accumulated errors in calorie counting during the day.

That would be true if he is going to use a TDEE calculator and then add 100.

The other way to do it is to observe real weight gain and adjust calories accordingly. If he'd adjust calories so that he actually gains 2 pounds per month I think it would work.

DAaaMan64
04-15-2014, 10:22 AM
Seems like Frank Zane is a fan of even slower 'bulking'.
http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/professional-muscle-forum/57038-couple-quotes-frank-zane-about-big-calorie-eaters-swiss-balls.html

It sounds like he's implying two things:

1. Muscle tissue gained fast is not the same as muscle tissue gained slowly.
2. Fat cannot be burned off later.

Slow bulking is about guaranteeing muscle gain through micro. I want to avoid this:


Such a small surplus would likely turn into maintenance or even a deficit simply due to accumulated errors in calorie counting during the day.

Result---- no change in body composition.


Recall that fat tissue comes off a lot easier than muscle tissue goes on.