Bulking & Cutting in your 50's: Perspectives Wanted

[tkdnj]

Hello all - I am believer in bulking and cutting, but wondering about it's value for the advanced over 50 natural lifter. I believe a calorie surplus is OPTIMAL for muscle growth, and then a cut following a bulk is usually necessary to get rid of the fat that accompanies the muscle gain. That said, natural guys in their 50's that have been training many years can really realistically only expect to add a few pounds of lean muscle each year (if that wasn't true we would all be walking around with 300 pounds of lean muscle). So, my question is this:
- Let's assume the natural 50 year old advanced lifter I mentioned above can gain 5 pounds of muscle per year (which is probably overstated). That would equate to less than 1/2 a pound per month
- a simple 500 calorie surplus per day (a 20% surplus for a 150 pound man) would roughly add 1 pound of WEIGHT per week, 4 pounds per month
- this would mean at least 3 1/2 pounds of fat added in that month (if it's true that we can only expect 5 pounds of muscle growth FOR AN ENTIRE YEAR, we can't expect more than 1/2 pound of muscle growth per month)
- that is about a 7:1 fat to muscle increase
- so, consider if in this example the lifter stayed on his bulk for 12 weeks: he would gain 12 pounds, maybe 1.5 pounds of muscle and 10.5 pounds of fat
- now to lose that 10.5 pounds of fat he'll need to go on a 500 calorie daily DEFICIT for 10.5 weeks (a 20% deficit, a more severe deficit puts muscle loss at risk)
- therefor, after 22.5 weeks (5 months) the net gain is 1.5 pounds of muscle IF (BIG IF) NO MUSCLE IS LOST DURING THE CUT

so, my question to the other natural over 50 lifters, is the 7:1 ratio of fat to muscle gain in a bulk / cut setting what you would expect? And if so, does it make more sense to hang just SLIGHTLY above maintenance (like 100 daily surplus)

By the way: I have NOTHING against non-naturals; but I believe regarding this topic it makes a significant difference. Hence me asking specifically about nattys

Thanks!

[tblodg15]

IMO and experience the surplus needs to be way less than 500c per day. More like 150-200 per day which can be difficult to manage but avoids unnecessary fat gain.

[tkdnj]

IMO and experience the surplus needs to be way less than 500c per day. More like 150-200 per day which can be difficult to manage but avoids unnecessary fat gain.

good point... I'm curious if a 100-200 calorie surplus has worked for others on the board

[Oleg1975K]

How old have you been training? 20, 25?
Then what ... mass gain? ))) You have long been at the stage of the genetic limit. At the age of 50 years, it is much more important to maintain already trained muscles and a healthy percentage of body fat than to engage in pig-building.

[grubman]

good point... I'm curious if a 100-200 calorie surplus has worked for others on the board

Can only speak from personal experience (but I don’t consider myself “advanced”), but for me, it was.

That said, I’ve gained approximately 25 pounds of muscle. About 90% of that happened in the first couple years, while the other 10% happened in the next 2 or 3 years.

Since then (9 years total now), gaining more mass via bulk/cut has been an exercise in futility.

I’ve made quality aesthetic improvements, but more size just isn’t going to happen anymore...even a pound or two a year (which would actually be a more dramatic change than most people realize).

So it’s pretty much come down to “maintenance” (which can fluctuate) at the weight and BF% I feel comfortable at these days.

Different people have different xperiences and opinion I’m sure.

[kimm4]

IMO and experience the surplus needs to be way less than 500c per day. More like 150-200 per day which can be difficult to manage but avoids unnecessary fat gain.

Agreed and this is the way I've always done it. I'm a female though, so I don't need as many calories as a male. I think when it comes to men some can go a tad higher and get away with it.

[Oleg1975K]

For example, a natural athlete with extensive experience can potentially grow 1 kg of muscle tissue in 1 year. 80% of this will be water, and directly the protein residue- 200 grams. Scatter these 200 grams for 365 days a year.
Question: What caloric surplus is needed to additionally synthesize 0.55 grams of protein per day? )))

[tkdnj]

Can only speak from personal experience (but I don’t consider myself “advanced”), but for me, it was.

That said, I’ve gained approximately 25 pounds of muscle. About 90% of that happened in the first couple years, while the other 10% happened in the next 2 or 3 years.

Since then (9 years total now), gaining more mass via bulk/cut has been an exercise in futility.

I’ve made quality aesthetic improvements, but more size just isn’t going to happen anymore...even a pound or two a year (which would actually be a more dramatic change than most people realize).

So it’s pretty much come down to “maintenance” (which can fluctuate) at the weight and BF% I feel comfortable at these days.

Different people have different xperiences and opinion I’m sure.

I would consider you advanced since you have been at it longer than a few years (and have put on 25 pounds of muscle!). I agree with your perspective

[tkdnj]

How old have you been training? 20, 25?
Then what ... mass gain? ))) You have long been at the stage of the genetic limit. At the age of 50 years, it is much more important to maintain already trained muscles and a healthy percentage of body fat than to engage in pig-building.

I agree, no "pig" building, but of course would like to maximize my results (gaining lean muscle)

[tkdnj]

For example, a natural athlete with extensive experience can potentially grow 1 kg of muscle tissue in 1 year. 80% of this will be water, and directly the protein residue- 200 grams. Scatter these 200 grams for 365 days a year.
Question: What caloric surplus is needed to additionally synthesize 0.55 grams of protein per day? )))

good way to put it... seems like a slight surplus (100 or so calories, assuming you can accurately achieve that) is the way to go

[tkdnj]

Agreed and this is the way I've always done it. I'm a female though, so I don't need as many calories as a male. I think when it comes to men some can go a tad higher and get away with it.

seems like the way to go at our stage of the game

[induced_drag]

I responded in the other thread:

After 2 years of REAL training and eating, if you are training naturally, I think most would want to drop to a 250 +/- surplus. As I mentioned above, trying to run much less puts you in the margin of error of tracking to where some days you might not actually be in surplus. (eg, impossible to run a 50 cal surplus and expect to do it accurately).


The caloric surplus has to adjust depending on how underweight one is. There are some guys who can eat 750+ cal surpluses and use every cal because they are starting at such a low point. I gained over 25lbs lean my first year of training. (almost 50lbs in 3 years) I did not track food back then, but I was eating anything I could put my hands on. I also had almost no fat gain over the process. My body was just waiting to grow. I never had to stop along the way and cut back.

Bulk/cut is the second step, the first being eat your face off (if you are underweight) and train like there is no tomorrow. Bulk / cut then has to get tighter and tighter. The line you walk between mass gain and extra fat gain starts out as a road, becomes a path, then a tight-rope, and finishes off with walking a razor's edge. If you have been doing this properly, you should be able to tell when it is no longer effective.

The latter results of a 7 month bulk/cut I was happy to net 2 or 3 lbs. Then you arrive on a point where you cant tell if you gained anything. That is when I changed strategies.

[tkdnj]

I responded in the other thread:

After 2 years of REAL training and eating, if you are training naturally, I think most would want to drop to a 250 +/- surplus. As I mentioned above, trying to run much less puts you in the margin of error of tracking to where some days you might not actually be in surplus. (eg, impossible to run a 50 cal surplus and expect to do it accurately).


The caloric surplus has to adjust depending on how underweight one is. There are some guys who can eat 750+ cal surpluses and use every cal because they are starting at such a low point. I gained over 25lbs lean my first year of training. (almost 50lbs in 3 years) I did not track food back then, but I was eating anything I could put my hands on. I also had almost no fat gain over the process. My body was just waiting to grow. I never had to stop along the way and cut back.

Bulk/cut is the second step, the first being eat your face off (if you are underweight) and train like there is no tomorrow. Bulk / cut then has to get tighter and tighter. The line you walk between mass gain and extra fat gain starts out as a road, becomes a path, then a tight-rope, and finishes off with walking a razor's edge. If you have been doing this properly, you should be able to tell when it is no longer effective.

The latter results of a 7 month bulk/cut I was happy to net 2 or 3 lbs. Then you arrive on a point where you cant tell if you gained anything. That is when I changed strategies.

Thanks Induced...I believe I am at the same stage you are at regarding the effectiveness of STRUCTURED bulking & cutting, hence my original post. I wasn't blessed with great genetics, but I recently competed as a 54 year old natty. What I have seen over the last few years preparing for the competition was that after a structured bulk and cut I end up pretty much at the same weight and BF%. (I know my macros were spot on since I weighed/measured EVERYTHING I consumed, plus I have a degree in Nutrition, so I am pretty adept in the nutrition area and tracking). So, I think I am going to just stay on a very slight surplus (approximately 150 daily caloric surplus) to support my weight training, and cut back when I see too much fat accumulation. In other words, less severe, and more unplanned (unplanned from a timing perspective) cycles of surpluses and deficits, recognizing that the days of significant hypertrophy are in the past