Cutting after a Long Bulk Cycle

[HDH]

Personally, I prefer to cut slow and gain slow without letting BF get to high. As long as you are maxing muscle gains and having minimal loss for cuts, you can achieve the same results and look pretty good the whole year.

Although I do have to admit I let myself go and hit about 16.5 BF before I started to cut cals/carbs this go.

It's all a learning process and each one of us takes our own journey down this road. We fine tune over the years.

H

 

[Docd187123]

I find that hard to swallow. For most of us, our bodies don't want to carry more tissue than required to do the job.

It goes back to set points, p-ratio, and other hormones. The body will gain a certain amount of muscle relative to fat in a bulk and low a certain amount of muscle relative to fat during a cut. To minimize this make sure you train high intensities while cutting back volume slightly and get adequate protein. Intake. Being on gear obviously helps too .

It works bc when you run so low calories or such an aggressive deficit the body will ramp up GNG to create glucose to use as fuel for the tissues that cannot use fat for fuel. Since calories are so low there is no other way to get this glucose besides GNG. Where does this come from? Amino acids, pyruvate, lactate, and glycerol. The body mainly stores protein/amino acids in organs and muscle tissue. Thus you end up losing a great deal of lbm. But when you take in enough dietary protein the body has enough amino acids from your diet that it doesn't need to catabolize muscle tissue to get the aminos it needs.

edit* I admit this is not a diet that's sustainable for long periods of time and you will require refeeds like any other diet. It is very effective though at shedding a great deal of fat in a shirt period of time. Also not many ppl can handle this diet psychologically so which type of dieting is best for you depends on which one you can be most consistent with.

 

[shortz]

There really isn't much of a difference in muscle loss when dieting with a more or less agressive deficit. Ppl do PSMF diets and don't lose significantly more muscle than on less agressive diets.

Well sure, with the assistance of various types of drugs. Do some reading on "metabolic damage" and you will start seeing why dieting too hard will bite you in the ass. A lot of the people going in to a huge deficit end up needing a tremendous amount of time recovering from that sort of dieting. On a last thought, most people using an extreme deficit also have refeed days. Honestly though, refeed days should be calculated, and many just don't know how to calculate them or just use them as yet another reason to eat like a pig for a day.

I find that hard to swallow. For most of us, our bodies don't want to carry more tissue than required to do the job.

Agreed

 

[MissMonsterr]

There are a few schools of thought on this. I Personally don't feel that bulking to a high BF is any more advantageous than bulking to a moderate level. This is purely for the sake of BBIng, keep in mind. The reasons why...

1. There is a point when all you're adding is fat and the muscle gains in hypertrophy are too minimal
2. Having to cut down from a high BF can lead to more mistakes, longer cutting period, decrease in motivation, etc, all for what? To reach the same exact body fat, regardless of your starting point.

I just don't see the advantage of reaching 20% when 14-15% will give you pretty much the same exact gains by the time you cut back down.

JMO

We actually checked his bf today and it's 13%...apparently he just holds weight less aesthetically than I'm accustomed to! (Btw, super offended I ever guessed 20%)

Anyways, he eats super clean normally and his cut is mostly reducing carbs (no more peanut butter apples).
I know when I eat more/less carbs my water weight drastically is effected. If that's typical, he might just be losing water after all.

 

[MissMonsterr]

It goes back to set points, p-ratio, and other hormones. The body will gain a certain amount of muscle relative to fat in a bulk and low a certain amount of muscle relative to fat during a cut. To minimize this make sure you train high intensities while cutting back volume slightly and get adequate protein. Intake. Being on gear obviously helps too .

It works bc when you run so low calories or such an aggressive deficit the body will ramp up GNG to create glucose to use as fuel for the tissues that cannot use fat for fuel. Since calories are so low there is no other way to get this glucose besides GNG. Where does this come from? Amino acids, pyruvate, lactate, and glycerol. The body mainly stores protein/amino acids in organs and muscle tissue. Thus you end up losing a great deal of lbm. But when you take in enough dietary protein the body has enough amino acids from your diet that it doesn't need to catabolize muscle tissue to get the aminos it needs.

edit* I admit this is not a diet that's sustainable for long periods of time and you will require refeeds like any other diet. It is very effective though at shedding a great deal of fat in a shirt period of time. Also not many ppl can handle this diet psychologically so which type of dieting is best for you depends on which one you can be most consistent with.

I'm confused here.... you're saying with high protein consumption your body won't turn to your stored resources of proteins in a deficit? I thought your body's stored protein was the first to be used and that's why you eat protein spread throughout day to replenish and add more than what was taken? Protein isn't usable until the small intestines, I'm pretty sure, when it's already split into aminos and collagen and whatever... so it isn't usable until stored. No matter what, it's taken from your muscle/skin/hair and no amount in your stomach prevents that....just replenished it.

I think.... that class was a couple semesters ago and I might remember wrong.

 

[Docd187123]

I'm confused here.... you're saying with high protein consumption your body won't turn to your stored resources of proteins in a deficit? I thought your body's stored protein was the first to be used and that's why you eat protein spread throughout day to replenish and add more than what was taken? Protein isn't usable until the small intestines, I'm pretty sure, when it's already split into aminos and collagen and whatever... so it isn't usable until stored. No matter what, it's taken from your muscle/skin/hair and no amount in your stomach prevents that....just replenished it.

I think.... that class was a couple semesters ago and I might remember wrong.

Protein hydrolyzation begins in the mouth and ends in the small intestine you are correct. Specific enzymes in the stomach and especially the small intestine are required to break proteins down to amino acids. It is usable though once it's broken down into the amino acids. It doesn't have to be stored to be used bc once it's broken down to amino acids the liver can use those free aminos to create glucose, during an aggressive cut or times of fasting and/or starvation and doesn't need to tap into stored aminos from organs or muscle tissue IF the protein intake is high enough like it does when protein intake is inadequate.

Lyle Mcdonald has an excellent book that covers this called The Rapid Fatloss Handbook. But at 13% BF this guy probably won't need to do such an aggressive cut since he's pretty mean already unless he is masochistic and/or needs to lose this fat in a short period of time like getting ready for a show that's only a few weeks out or soemthing. It's not something I usually recommend to ppl but it is a good tool in certain circumstances.

Also ill add that it's inevitable to lose some lbm on a cut even with a high protein intake. Whether it be water, glycogen, or actual muscle tissue some will be lost no matter what but getting enough protein, and gear, will keep this as minimal as possible.

 

[macgyver]

Sounds like he's got decent genetics for this.

Actually I dont think you can make that statement without seeing a pic. 210lbs is not always a good 210lbs. Personally I think it is moronic that a guy who is 140lbs jumps on AAS. As stupid a thing as anyone can do. He has never leaned to train and EAT and live without anabolics to support any kind of physique. He needs to put a good 2-3 years MINIMUM of training in naturally. That is of course unless he will just go on and stay on forever. In that case...he'll be fine....(until he ends up suffering health issues). I am surprised no one thinks this is off..... Maybe it is just me, but building a proper foundation is important for MANY reasons.

We actually checked his bf today and it's 13%...apparently he just holds weight less aesthetically than I'm accustomed to! (Btw, super offended I ever guessed 20%)

Anyways, he eats super clean normally and his cut is mostly reducing carbs (no more peanut butter apples).
I know when I eat more/less carbs my water weight drastically is effected. If that's typical, he might just be losing water after all.

Depending upon the method you used, bf% estimations vary WIDELY. If you used a bio-electric (think where you hold handles or step on metal conductors) just throw those results out. Calipers can be off 4-5% and that is what a person measuring them who knows what they are doing. Hydro, is slightly better, but some people have more/less residual air when they exhale. 4-5% too. Bod pod is interesting but several recent findings show it may vary signifigantly too. Only truly accurate is a DEXA scan. (that can be swayed with hydration rates as well). With a dexa, if you drink a gal of water, you instantly gain 8lbs LBM and you bf% goes down.

If he is 12% and 200+lbs he should have decent abs and also mild vascularity. I could tell you more with his height. But me as an example, I have full abs at 12% with fully seperated quads, bis/tris, just dont have ab veins which start to come in below 10%. If that does not resemble him....he probably is not 12%

As for the clean eating thing....there is no such thing really. Have him start to learn about proper nutrition and caloric surpluses and deficits, along with proper macro ratios to meet his goals.

 

[MissMonsterr]

Actually I dont think you can make that statement without seeing a pic. 210lbs is not always a good 210lbs. Personally I think it is moronic that a guy who is 140lbs jumps on AAS. As stupid a thing as anyone can do. He has never leaned to train and EAT and live without anabolics to support any kind of physique. He needs to put a good 2-3 years MINIMUM of training in naturally. That is of course unless he will just go on and stay on forever. In that case...he'll be fine....(until he ends up suffering health issues). I am surprised no one thinks this is off..... Maybe it is just me, but building a proper foundation is important .

I in no way agree with his process and way of bb but I'm telling you about his background. It's what he did, not what I support. He's an addict by nature and when he put on the first 30-40 lbs of muscle he's ever seen on himself he got excited but also impatient (he was like 180 I think by the time he started)...and if you know anything about addicts they don't have patience and love quick results.
He found a couple forums when he got out and guys on them quickly encouraged gear and he hit it full force.
As much as I belittle his results, trust me he regrets not getting farther natty.but too late, you know?

Anyways, I agree it was a stupid and impractical way to get long term results but he has something less dangerous to do that I love and grew up around so I don't mind much that he's the epitome of the sort of bodybuilders I grew up looking down on.

The point of this is cut and bulk results and what is typical of others in hopes of me learning more about something I don't know much about because I was raised by a natty, old-fashioned, health focused competitive lifter and have no exposure to these new age ways lol. The point is not his less than respectable or responsible anabolic use. Granted, relevant to why he's getting results he is but let's not get stuck on his stupidity because trust me it's easy to.


As for how we got his bf% he had a multi spot skin caliper test. Done properly they're fairly accurate. It's no hydro machine or Dexa lol but it beats guessing.

 

[HDH]

Actually I dont think you can make that statement without seeing a pic. 210lbs is not always a good 210lbs. Personally I think it is moronic that a guy who is 140lbs jumps on AAS. As stupid a thing as anyone can do. He has never leaned to train and EAT and live without anabolics to support any kind of physique. He needs to put a good 2-3 years MINIMUM of training in naturally. That is of course unless he will just go on and stay on forever. In that case...he'll be fine....(until he ends up suffering health issues). I am surprised no one thinks this is off..... Maybe it is just me, but building a proper foundation is important for MANY reasons.


Depending upon the method you used, bf% estimations vary WIDELY. If you used a bio-electric (think where you hold handles or step on metal conductors) just throw those results out. Calipers can be off 4-5% and that is what a person measuring them who knows what they are doing. Hydro, is slightly better, but some people have more/less residual air when they exhale. 4-5% too. Bod pod is interesting but several recent findings show it may vary signifigantly too. Only truly accurate is a DEXA scan. (that can be swayed with hydration rates as well). With a dexa, if you drink a gal of water, you instantly gain 8lbs LBM and you bf% goes down.

If he is 12% and 200+lbs he should have decent abs and also mild vascularity. I could tell you more with his height. But me as an example, I have full abs at 12% with fully seperated quads, bis/tris, just dont have ab veins which start to come in below 10%. If that does not resemble him....he probably is not 12%

As for the clean eating thing....there is no such thing really. Have him start to learn about proper nutrition and caloric surpluses and deficits, along with proper macro ratios to meet his goals.

It's unfortunate that that's the only thing you got out of my post. Yes, 210 isn't always good, goes without saying. He put on 70lbs in a year and even though you think it's moronic that he started using aas at 140lbs, he didn't. If you go back and read, he started at 180 for a cycle and put on 30 more lbs. Someone that puts on 70lbs in a year, mostly natty, and has visible striations and an ab outline probably has decent genetics.

As far as training natty vs un natty early or late in the game, honestly, I don't think to much about it anymore. It's not like someone is going to quit cycling because a couple guys say he shouldn't do it. More that likely, the person will go elsewhere for help or go on their own blindly. I prefer to help.

Another way of looking at things. It's been my experience around these boards that someone that takes a few years natty before starting aas thinks that's how it should be for everyone.

Now, looking at things from that perspective, A natty builder thinks that no one should use aas. Does that make you wrong for using them?

A step further, a 500mg a week test user thinks 1000mg is to much. A gram a week person thinks 2 grams is to much, a 2 gram a week person thinks 3 is to much, a 3 gram a week person thinks slin and Gh are just to much and not necessary.

Who is right and who is wrong?

I don't always agree with what people do, the risk is on them but I also don't condemn because we are all using drugs, except for the true natty, that get us ahead of where our natural limits are or much faster to and past our limits.

I have hand held bio-electric BF testers. I've had good success with them over the years. There are plenty of pics on the net with a google search that show what people look like at what BF%. A quick comparison will show accuracy.

H

 

[macgyver]

I in no way agree with his process and way of bb but I'm telling you about his background. It's what he did, not what I support. He's an addict by nature and when he put on the first 30-40 lbs of muscle he's ever seen on himself he got excited but also impatient (he was like 180 I think by the time he started)...and if you know anything about addicts they don't have patience and love quick results.
He found a couple forums when he got out and guys on them quickly encouraged gear and he hit it full force.
As much as I belittle his results, trust me he regrets not getting farther natty.but too late, you know?

Anyways, I agree it was a stupid and impractical way to get long term results but he has something less dangerous to do that I love and grew up around so I don't mind much that he's the epitome of the sort of bodybuilders I grew up looking down on.

The point of this is cut and bulk results and what is typical of others in hopes of me learning more about something I don't know much about because I was raised by a natty, old-fashioned, health focused competitive lifter and have no exposure to these new age ways lol. The point is not his less than respectable or responsible anabolic use. Granted, relevant to why he's getting results he is but let's not get stuck on his stupidity because trust me it's easy to.


As for how we got his bf% he had a multi spot skin caliper test. Done properly they're fairly accurate. It's no hydro machine or Dexa lol but it beats guessing.

Sounds like he is doing well then. I misunderstood thinking he started at 140. Sorry bout that!

As for bulk/cut, it is my experience to never let myself get too fat even in a surplus period. (But it all depends on what his goals are). It also depends on how reliant upon drugs he wants to be. (not passing judgement either).

If he does not care what he looks like and just trains for power....eat away for sure. If he want to be a bodybuilder type physique then cutting will come into play. If you let yourself get fat (say above 15% with 20% being the top end) your cut back to sub-10% will be more "expensive" from an LBM standpoint unless you rely heavily upon external compounds.

For a guy that wants to be in it for the long haul, I am a fan of not relying heavily on AAS. (just my views as a father approaching my mid 40-s) I personally dont "bulk" beyond the stage where I no longer have full abs. (they may not be pretty, but they are still there and easily seen). I just came off a 4 month surplus where I peaked at 230lbs (5'9, 18.5" arms, 49" chest, 33" waist, and 25" quads bulked) That to me where where I pulled back cals. I have now been cutting for 4 months (without AAS) which is why I am cutting slow. I am down 30lbs right at 200. Arms still 18" + chest same, waist 2" smaller and well below 10% bf.

It all goes down to what he wants to do and how he wants to do it.... You can by all means get a lot "sloppier" if you want to rely on compounds to support more in the stripping of fat. At the end of the day you can have almost the same results without AAS (cutting) if he wants to take longer doing it....(This hold less true the further he is past his "natural" limits.

It's unfortunate that that's the only thing you got out of my post. Yes, 210 isn't always good, goes without saying. He put on 70lbs in a year and even though you think it's moronic that he started using aas at 140lbs, he didn't. If you go back and read, he started at 180 for a cycle and put on 30 more lbs. Someone that puts on 70lbs in a year, mostly natty, and has visible striations and an ab outline probably has decent genetics.

As far as training natty vs un natty early or late in the game, honestly, I don't think to much about it anymore. It's not like someone is going to quit cycling because a couple guys say he shouldn't do it. More that likely, the person will go elsewhere for help or go on their own blindly. I prefer to help.

Another way of looking at things. It's been my experience around these boards that someone that takes a few years natty before starting aas thinks that's how it should be for everyone.

Now, looking at things from that perspective, A natty builder thinks that no one should use aas. Does that make you wrong for using them?

A step further, a 500mg a week test user thinks 1000mg is to much. A gram a week person thinks 2 grams is to much, a 2 gram a week person thinks 3 is to much, a 3 gram a week person thinks slin and Gh are just to much and not necessary.

Who is right and who is wrong?

I don't always agree with what people do, the risk is on them but I also don't condemn because we are all using drugs, except for the true natty, that get us ahead of where our natural limits are or much faster to and past our limits.

I have hand held bio-electric BF testers. I've had good success with them over the years. There are plenty of pics on the net with a google search that show what people look like at what BF%. A quick comparison will show accuracy.

H

Great post and I appreciate it. I did misunderstand on his starting point. I think many of your points are valid.... True that most are going to what they want in the end. However I also know the I have learned and listened to those with more experience than I along the way and it helped me GREATLY. We are all in the uninformed state at one time or another and pointing out things that look "off" about something is something we can all do in hopes of looking out for each other. In the end though, you are right....many will do what they want in the end...

 

[MissMonsterr]

Sounds like he is doing well then. I misunderstood thinking he started at 140. Sorry bout that!

As for bulk/cut, it is my experience to never let myself get too fat even in a surplus period. (But it all depends on what his goals are). It also depends on how reliant upon drugs he wants to be. (not passing judgement either).

If he does not care what he looks like and just trains for power....eat away for sure. If he want to be a bodybuilder type physique then cutting will come into play. If you let yourself get fat (say above 15% with 20% being the top end) your cut back to sub-10% will be more "expensive" from an LBM standpoint unless you rely heavily upon external compounds.

For a guy that wants to be in it for the long haul, I am a fan of not relying heavily on AAS. (just my views as a father approaching my mid 40-s) I personally dont "bulk" beyond the stage where I no longer have full abs. (they may not be pretty, but they are still there and easily seen). I just came off a 4 month surplus where I peaked at 230lbs (5'9, 18.5" arms, 49" chest, 33" waist, and 25" quads bulked) That to me where where I pulled back cals. I have now been cutting for 4 months (without AAS) which is why I am cutting slow. I am down 30lbs right at 200. Arms still 18" + chest same, waist 2" smaller and well below 10% bf.

It all goes down to what he wants to do and how he wants to do it.... You can by all means get a lot "sloppier" if you want to rely on compounds to support more in the stripping of fat. At the end of the day you can have almost the same results without AAS (cutting) if he wants to take longer doing it....(This hold less true the further he is past his "natural" limits.




Great post and I appreciate it. I did misunderstand on his starting point. I think many of your points are valid.... True that most are going to what they want in the end. However I also know the I have learned and listened to those with more experience than I along the way and it helped me GREATLY. We are all in the uninformed state at one time or another and pointing out things that look "off" about something is something we can all do in hopes of looking out for each other. In the end though, you are right....many will do what they want in the end...

This was actually super helpful. When I hear all these guys at school and the gym talk about bulking and eat 20 pancakes like "girl, I'm bulking it's cool" I had this really warped sense what a successful one was lol.
I'm also glad to read many of you don't train the gross way guys I'm around do ha because it bothers me how so many just eat ridiculously "for the gainz" and just load on stack after stack of gear. (I'm in college so I'm around college athletes and frat bros just abusing chicken breasts and anabolic) I thought everyone did it like that and I knew very outdated ways!

 

[ketsugo]

I'm 49 , I've lifted weights since age 12 , martial arts since 5 so exercise is my life . Never at any point in time have I ever prescribed to the bulk theory . Seeing guys all puffy and fat to me looks horrible and unhealthy . I trained natty for almost 15 years . I'm now 49 265 pounds , 32 inch waiste never fat ...ever . To me we train for the long haul , patience and intelligence paves the way