By dirty bulk I don't mean eating junk. I simply mean eating more of a calorie surplus.
I wish to hear everyone's thoughts on which they prefer or which is better?
I have always done a dirty bulk
Eating clean high nutrient foods
But eating a 500-800 surplus because I like to see results faster
Here is my current journey:
I have done two bulks over four years and I am 5'6
My first bulk , Year and a half:
Age 15 (56KG/123lb) (8%BF) to Age 16.5 (70Kg/154lb) (20%BF)
4 Month Cut:
(70Kg/154lb)(20%BF) to (62KG/136lb) (10%BF)
My Second Bulk , Two year:
Age 17 (65Kg/143lb)(12%BF) to Age 19 (80Kg/176lb)(20%BF)
*This could be done in a year and half if not for the lockdowns
Cut....
|
Thread: Lean bulk or Dirty bulk
-
01-27-2022, 03:29 AM #1
Lean bulk or Dirty bulk
-
01-27-2022, 04:33 AM #2
Both.
Eat “clean” 5/6 meals per day.
Or whatever works.
If fat is too low, testosterone may drop and training suffers."A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. "By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."
Old Guy deadlifting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zMrim-0Dks
bench press https://youtu.be/GaRzfueJVJQ
Every workout is GAME DAY!
-
01-27-2022, 06:50 AM #3
-
01-27-2022, 09:26 AM #4
- Join Date: Mar 2006
- Location: Seattle, Washington, United States
- Posts: 26,115
- Rep Power: 128697
The amount of surplus, IMO, depends on how advanced you are.
When you're very new, a greater proportion of that surplus will go to muscle-building processes than it will when you're more advanced.
If you're already 5+ years into lifting and you've accumulated a large amount of muscle, it makes more sense to limit the surplus to 100-300 calories because you're not going to be able to gain much muscle over time no matter what you do.
So if you're brand-new to lifting, sure, a 500-600 calorie surplus probably is fine.... but in general as long as you're actually training right and growing the muscle tissue, after a few years, it won't really benefit you.
That being said, it's all personal choice... if you have no issues cutting fat, then go for it... just don't get TOO fat in the process that it negatively impacts your health."When I die, I hope it's early in the morning so I don't have to go to work that day for no reason"
-
-
01-28-2022, 06:34 PM #5
While I agree with you, I don't believe in a "100 calorie surplus". I don't think anybody's gonna be making real progress on anything less than 300 calories, provided they're not just trying to recomp. 1-200 calories of a surplus is too close to the margin of error for tracking and metabolic adaptations IMO.
-
01-28-2022, 07:28 PM #6
- Join Date: Mar 2006
- Location: Seattle, Washington, United States
- Posts: 26,115
- Rep Power: 128697
Right, what I really mean is a NET calorie surplus as it would play out on the scale, which in many cases ends up happening when people actually target a 300 calories surplus.
There’s a great deal of metabolic adjustments that happen which end up reducing the actual weight gain unless you really overdo it for many people.
Ultimately what I really mean is that if you’re actually someone who is 6 feet tall and holding 175lb of lean mass, you’re basically only gaining ounces of muscle in a year, so trying to shoot for 2-3lbs of scale weight per month isn’t really needed… although it probably will lead to more growth if you’re willing to diet off the weight for a really small amount of tissue.
Really all it translate to is trying to gain somewhere around 1lb a month if you’re super advanced, which is pretty close to a 100 calorie ‘real’ surplus."When I die, I hope it's early in the morning so I don't have to go to work that day for no reason"
Bookmarks