PDA

View Full Version : Lean bulk at .5lb / wk for 2 yrs or shorter bulk/cut cycles at 1 lb / wk?



stevie2007
03-17-2018, 05:21 PM
I hear a lot about the advantages of shorter bulk/cut cycles but I'm new to these boards and don't prefer broscience...

So my question says it all. To take better advantage of hormonal lag and growth hormones, which choice is better?

Lean bulk at .5lb / wk for straight 2 yrs or shorter bulk/cut cycles gaining at 1 lb / wk? If the latter, I'd bulk for 12 weeks and cut for 6 weeks and repeat. I'm a newbie and want to take advantage of my noob gains. I'm a 32 year old male.

Thanks in advance.

dipatel13
03-17-2018, 06:11 PM
Considering there's only so much muscle you gain, I would go with the slow/lean bulk. If you bulk too fast, that's just more fat you have to cut later on. Doing a faster bulk doesn't mean you're going to gain more muscle compared to bulking slower.

smokinal
03-17-2018, 06:12 PM
I think this is all personal opinion. I think it will come down to whether a person wants the large weight fluctuations; bulk to higher BF % and then have to cut longer to get back down; different look during the different stages.
VS
it's healthier to not have such a big fluctuation in bodyweight; looks stay more even during a longer time period; easier to cut from 14% down to 10 than it is from 18 to 10.

I have always done the higher surplus bulk at a minimum of 1 lb per week gain, some weeks 2 lbs. That being said, I think my next bulk, after my 2 shows coming up, will be a slow bulk at .5 lb per week. I felt unhealthy and sluggish letting myself get up to 18% and heavy on a big bulk. Stronger than I've ever been but winded bending over to tie my shoes.

stevie2007
03-17-2018, 07:41 PM
Considering there's only so much muscle you gain, I would go with the slow/lean bulk. If you bulk too fast, that's just more fat you have to cut later on. Doing a faster bulk doesn't mean you're going to gain more muscle compared to bulking slower.

Thanks. But I've heard hormonal wise, the body adapts to being on a caloric surplus after awhile even on .5lb per week gain and the net muscle gain isn't much. Is this true or just broscience? This is why I was opting for 1 lb a week gain i.e. 12 week bulk, 6 week cut and repeat as necessary so the body doesn't get used to being in a surplus or deficit for long periods. What do you say?

ErikTheElectric
03-17-2018, 07:44 PM
Thanks. But I've heard hormonal wise, the body adapts to being on a caloric surplus after awhile even on .5lb per week gain and the net muscle gain isn't much. Is this true or just broscience?

Please elaborate on what you mean by "hormonal wise" because that's pretty broad.

Mikeez0
03-18-2018, 09:05 AM
Thanks. But I've heard hormonal wise, the body adapts to being on a caloric surplus after awhile even on .5lb per week gain and the net muscle gain isn't much. Is this true or just broscience? This is why I was opting for 1 lb a week gain i.e. 12 week bulk, 6 week cut and repeat as necessary so the body doesn't get used to being in a surplus or deficit for long periods. What do you say?It is worse, while cutting you are losing LBM. So bulking slower would be better idea. 2) Strength won't fall down 3) You aren't in a catabolic state 4) You can enjoy good amount of foods longer.