Finally, I read through this long post. The title grabbed me, as I want to get to a point of no bulking or cutting like I was doing before. I got too engaged in the fact that I wanted a 6 pack. I no longer want that, so I guess I won the body-image war against American society. However, I will want to be slim around the waist and not have a gut, so a 2 pack will be in order.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">However, I do cycle my training and I do SD. I found it to be key to my growing again after many years of being stalled.
</div>
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I do the same thing, at 250 cal over maintenance, but I emphasis the calories a little bit differently:
Protein
Good fats
complex carbs
simple carbs (sans sugar carbs)
bad fats
Of course the 250 cal is a guesstimate. I usually ending up putting on about 5 pounds per year now with bodyfat staying at 9%. So, I am probably, on average less than 100 cal daily over maintenance. </div>
Looks like I will keep quoting O&G, but his mindset was the one I followed to a T (minus the spring/summer cut of 06), and it worked as I slowly cut down bodyfat% and put on plenty of LBM (30 lbs) since June 05.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If you try to eat just a little more than maintenance, say just a few hundred cals over, how do you know that you are getting it consistantly right (maintenance is a guesstimate after all and it will vary everyday depending on requirements)?</div>
Lol makes a good point there. Maintenance/BMR/TDEE levels are all estimations from equations and sample statistics you can take every day from your body. The more observations you have, the more data you will get, and it will follow a normal distribution (BMR vs. body weight, fluctuations) and you can account for it. It's what I do in a not-so-simple Excel spreadsheet that a few of you have... but I enhanced it with standard deviations in the latest version!
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">To me, bulking is eating more calories than you are burning, and cutting is eating less calories than you are burning. You can't gain muscle mass while you are cutting, and can't lose fat while you're bulking (noobs need not apply). Your statements concerning bodyfat levels are very vague. You never specify certain percentages. </div>
SteveJones, I think it has been proved for many different subjects. We have enough here across the forum to show this. The power of losing fat while building muscle is based upon one's bodyfat percentage. The higher it is, the more efficient they will be able to lose fat and build muscle at the same time.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Right Im kind of confused over this thread. We all agree that to gain WEIGHT you've got to eat at a calorie surplus right? I have recently gone from 210--224 while gaining definition in my abs.
</div>
Also, take note of the fact that while one may not lose fat on a slight caloric surplus, their bodyfat% can still go down making them leaner. One's fat levels could stay the same or even go up and their bodyfat% could go down with the ample addition of LBM.
Case in point:
Weight: 200
bf%: 15
LBM: 170
fat: 30
After a slow bulk in some variable time..
Weight: 220
bf%: 14.54%
LBM: 188
fat: 32
Extremely efficient results... this just proves the math of it. The person put on weight through a bulk albeit slow. This person gained fat and muscle, and his bodyfat% went down by a bit slimming him down. More extreme examples could be used, but I will keep my own personal story out of this one as O&G already used his.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Seriously, after reading all this and many other discussions, most agree that it is very hard to put on LBM with a caloric deficit.</div>
This may be the other half of the argument. I think a slow cut of within 250 calories of your maintenance levels should have inverse effects of a slow bulk. Person may lose a good amount of fat over time, while losing a little bit of muscle. Unless their bodyfat% is greater than oh say 15%, they will not be able to lose fat, put on muscle on a CUTTING cycle or caloric deficit.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">What one guys may call a bulk might look like a cut to someone else.</div>
Joe, you must compare apples to apples. Therefore two people's differing maintenance levels must be relative to their caloric intake.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Start:
Weight 300lb
FFM - 120lb
FM - 180lb
BF - 60%
Post huge 2 year cut:
BW 170lb
FFM 160lb
FM 10lb
BF 7%
That's a net fat loss of 170lbs (and I thought all this time it was only 160lbs) OOPS. And a LBM gain of 40lbs using my body fat for fuel. (there is where the excess for muscle growth came from 9 big calories/gram of fat).</div>
That's insane, I commend you.
I couldn't really comment on the last couple pages as there was much karate talk and some science mumbo jumbo. There's my 14 cents.
-Colby