# bulking/cutting



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

can u do 1 month bulk and then 1 month cut? or maybe  2 month or 3 month?


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

No.

Only one month of bulking and switching to cutting and the calorie surplus police will hunt you down and take you out.


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> can u do 1 month bulk and then 1 month cut? or maybe  2 month or 3 month?



Yes, but you would probably lose most of the muscle from the bulk month during the cut month.


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

i had once read an article with a 2 week bulk followed by a 2 week cut. for the bulk,u eat 2 times the amount of maintence calories and on cut ,half the calories


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> i had once read an article with a 2 week bulk followed by a 2 week cut. for the bulk,u eat 2 times the amount of maintence calories and on cut ,half the calories



You can do anything you want, but my trainer is against it because newly acquired muscle is the first to go. It sounds to me like you would go nowhere. Bulk for a year and then cut for three months, or bulk for two years and cut for three months.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> Yes, but you would probably lose most of the muscle from the bulk month during the cut month.




Er...Not true.


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

daddy- can u explain?


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy *_
> Er...Not true.




Well, you would definately lose some muscle during the cut, so which muscle would be lost first.  

Oh, by the way TCD, my IQ is 164


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

say u gain 5 pounds,how much of would be lost?


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> daddy- can u explain?





With good dieting strategy there's no reason to consider any muscle loss, depending upon the length of the diet and what bodyfat you're at and aiming to hit.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> Well, you would definately lose some muscle during the cut, so which muscle would be lost first.




Yeah, usually as a natural you stand to drop _some_ muscle. Usually, not always.

In fact, given regular refeeds around training it is very possible to add muscle periodically.

But it is quite dependant upon the "good dieting strategy" i referred to in the previous post.



> Oh, by the way TCD, my IQ is 164



Out of a possible?

I got a 128 out of a possible 157, which is well above average.


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

instead of bulking for 7-8 months ang cutting thereafter for 4 months, does it make any for bulking 1-2 months and cutting for a month? like that u dont get too fat?


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> say u gain 5 pounds,how much of would be lost?




Depends whether you're referring to 5lbs muscle gain or 5lbs bodyweight gain.

And even then there's not gonna be a universal result for everyone.


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy *_
> Yeah, usually as a natural you stand to drop _some_ muscle. Usually, not always.
> 
> In fact, given regular refeeds around training it is very possible to add muscle periodically.
> ...



Average: 85 - 115
   Above average: 116 - 125
   Gifted Borderline Genius: 126 - 135
   Highly gifted and appearing to be a Genius to most others: 136 - 145
   Genius: 146 - 165
   High Genius: 166 - 180
   Highest Genius: 181 - 200
   Beyond being measurable Genius: Over 200


I guess that is why yours is only 128


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> instead of bulking for 7-8 months ang cutting thereafter for 4 months, does it make any for bulking 1-2 months and cutting for a month? like that u dont get too fat?




Go for it.

I tend to do them in patterns of 16 weeks each myself, but that's just me.


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

i was talking about 5 pound muscle gain


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy *_
> Go for it.
> 
> I tend to do them in patterns of 16 weeks each myself, but that's just me. [/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> Average: 85 - 115
> Above average: 116 - 125
> Gifted Borderline Genius: 126 - 135
> ...




Ummm....did you miss the "out of a possible 157" part of my post?

Of the test i did, the maxmimum score available for anyone was 157.


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

Due to his amazing IQ, I agree with TCD.

In fact, I have recently let go of the bulk/cut approach long term.  I will do this occassionally, as it is quite effective, but I am not on to a continual "recomposition" where my bulk and/or cut may last a day, or a few weeks.


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy *_
> Ummm....did you miss the "out of a possible 157" part of my post?
> 
> Of the test i did, the maxmimum score available for anyone was 157.




Well then what is your real IQ, mine is 164  

Oh and I think you have to get out of your head about putting some fat on, it is going to happen


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

so , i should give it a try ( 2 month bulk, 1 month cut)? im on a cut right now.


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> Well then what is your real IQ, mine is 164
> 
> Oh and I think you have to get out of your head about putting some fat on, it is going to happen



Typically yes, but with the proper repartitioning agents, it is not necessary any more.

I have been dieting for 11 weeks.

Have dropped 20 lbs.

Have lost 4 1/2 inches on my waist.

Have gained strength.  And,

Have added muscle.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> 
> 
> > _*Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy *_
> ...




I most certainly do.

Just try keep your bulks controlled as far as calories go to keep fat accumulation minimal - refer to it more as a "gaining phase". During this time, expect anything from 5-7lbs weight gain from retaining food (which you'll drop most of when you start eating less when dieting) and of the rest, aim for about 8-10lbs of quality mass. You should manage this by aiming to add like 0.5lbs a week. So control calories to do so.

And for your cutting, control weight loss to ensure minimal muscle loss, so amend calories so you lose about 1.5lbs per week max. 1lb is right about on the money, but as you get leaner don't expect this to keep up. And do regular refeeds - about once a week if you're around the 12-15% region, and more frequently if you're leaner - you decide how frequent depending on when you need them. Keep them clean and do them around training - but before training don't gorge on carbs or you may feel heavy and lethargic and end up having a mediocre workout. Gorge aftwards if anything.

Oh, and don't diet for more than about ten weeks at a time. After ten weeks, take a week "off" where you gradually increase calories to about 200kcals over maintenance and sit there for a few days before beginning to adjust calories back into deficit. This should allow some metabolic reset (to some degree).

And, um...Yeah.


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

> proper repartitioning agents



Well, I will show my ignorance on this. What the heck are those


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

Tricks and supplements that cause more calories to go to muscle and less to fat.


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> Well, I will show my ignorance on this. What the heck are those



Secret Stuff.TM 

Also, what works best, differs across phenotypes.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

Well actually, partitioning is "where the calories go", basically.

Positive partioning means more to muscle, less to fat.

Negative is obviously the opposite.


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy *_
> Tricks and supplements that cause more calories to go to muscle and less to fat.



The definition of Secret Stuff.TM


----------



## DaMayor (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by Twin Peak *_
> Typically yes, but with the proper repartitioning agents, it is not necessary any more.
> 
> I have been dieting for 11 weeks.
> ...


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

tcd-what do u mean by refeeds?


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by Twin Peak *_
> phenotypes.




Craig, i'll save you a post.

He's refering to ecto, meso and endomorphs.


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bulking/cutting*



> _*Originally posted by DaMayor *_



You are such a jackass.  But in a good way.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> tcd-what do u mean by refeeds?



Controlled overfeeding on carbohydrates in order to spill over into fat cells to tell the body to signal leptin expression.

Basically to keep the engine ticking along.


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

what do u mean"do not diet for more than 10 weeks in a row"?


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy *_
> Craig, i'll save you a post.
> 
> He's refering to ecto, meso and endomorphs.



Ha Ha you are the funny one aren't you


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> what do u mean"do not diet for more than 10 weeks in a row"?




Are you gonna do this for every sentence in my post? lol.

Just kidding.

I mean take a week where you essentially go above your maintenance level of calories to allow your body to "reset" somewhat so you can ensure further fat loss.

And the ten weeks was just a general mark. Not a rule.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> Ha Ha you are the funny one aren't you



Well, be truthful now - would you have realised he was refering to this when he said "phenotypes"?


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

10 weeks of bulking or cutting or both?


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

This thread has becoming very funny.


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by The_Chicken_Daddy *_
> Well, be truthful now - would you have realised he was refering to this when he said "phenotypes"?



Yes, I will be truthful I new exactly what he meant.   


and I would love to be 100% meso


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by Twin Peak *_
> This thread has becoming very funny.




This is why TPs is lower than TCDs


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> This is why TPs is lower than TCDs



Actually I just noticed the title now.  Rob is just jealous because I am better looking.  And funnier.

Still craig, you have to admit at least slight amusement with this thread.  I have now literally laughed out loud three times.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> 10 weeks of bulking or cutting or both?



I was refering to dieting at the time.

You can do as many weeks of bulking as you desire - your body isn't gonna do _that_ much to prevent you, besides making food appear repulsive and killing your appetite and hunger if you get too fat (in order to maintain homeostasis - which, in this case, is keeping your bodyfat level around about the place it wants it at, depending on your setpoint).


With dieting, after a while, your body tries to prevent you getting leaner and has a whole host of methods it employs to get you to eat (cause it starts to think there's a famine and you may die).

This ranges from increased appetite, less satiety after eating, upregulation of fat storage enzymes, decreased thyroid output to slow your RMR, muscle catobolism to further reduce your RMR (muscle is a lot more metabolically active than fat is) and to burn for calories in order to spare what fat you have left and a lot more other stuff that ain't too pretty.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> This is why TPs is lower than TCDs




That is/was fuckin' priceless.


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by Twin Peak *_
> Actually I just noticed the title now.  Rob is just jealous because I am better looking.  And funnier.
> 
> Still craig, you have to admit at least slight amusement with this thread.  I have now literally laughed out loud three times.




Yes, I will agree it is amusing. 

I was referring to your grammar


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by Twin Peak *_
> And funnier.



Yeah - even FoS says so, therefore it must be true.


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by craig777 *_
> Yes, I will agree it is amusing.
> 
> I was referring to your grammar



Ah, yes.  Missed that.  Details are not my strength.

See, you have added to  the humor here as well.

And Rob, if FOS says so, it must be true.


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

tcd- how does this sound? 
8 weeks bulking followed by 4 weeks of cutting.
once a week eat more carbs.


----------



## DaMayor (May 20, 2003)

Okay...._The Great Minds_ have addressed phenotypes. However, what about this guy's metabolism? Shouldn't this be a factor in determining the duration of his bulk/cut cycles?

Note: The above reference to "The Great Minds" was made as a tongue in cheek/humorous sort of comment, and was not intended to offend or otherwise belittle those to which it was directed, as we greatly appreciate any knowledge these individuals have to offer. Any interpretation contrary to that detailed above is inaccurate and unacceptable.


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

That, of course, is part of ones phenotype.

And yes, it is important in determining length of cuts and bulks, as well as his goals, and other important items

Which is why we have thusfar refrained from telling him what he should do, rather than provide options.

DM, if I didn't know you better, I'd think you were lumping some of us into a category that we neither wish, nor deserve, to be in.


----------



## craig777 (May 20, 2003)

You guys crack me up   

I am 43, well will be in a few months, I lifted for 20 years going to the gym 6 days a week, doing my cardio almost everyday, 1-2 hours a day working out, my workouts were always the same. In 20 years I went from 180 to 184 lbs. 

In the last two years with probably half the testosterone I used to have at 20, I workout 3 times a week, 1 hour or less each workout, no cardio at all, my workouts are never ever the same from week to week, I lift very intense and heavy. In two years I went from 184 to 234.

Now my waist did go from 32 to 36, and that is without watching what I eat. I make sure I get lots of protein and I let the rest figure itself out.

If you want to get big, eat big, and lift big. I know it is a very corny saying but it is the truth.


----------



## raider6969 (May 20, 2003)

im on a cut now eating 2100 cals per day.if i wanna start a bulk tomorrow, how many i calculate the cals for the bulk?


----------



## DaMayor (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by Twin Peak *_
> That, of course, is part of ones phenotype.
> 
> And yes, it is important in determining length of cuts and bulks, as well as his goals, and other important items
> ...



What? Categorize you? And/or TCD? Never would I do such a thing!  
I was attempting to get you to loosen your informational grip for the poor guy. 
As for the phenotype comment.....my bad.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by raider6969 *_
> im on a cut now eating 2100 cals per day.if i wanna start a bulk tomorrow, how many i calculate the cals for the bulk?




Begin with 15kcals per lb of bodyweight. This is theoretically your maintenance level of calories (a loose rule of thumb).

Amend weight gain like i mentioned in the other thread you started.


----------



## Robboe (May 20, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by DaMayor *_
> I was attempting to get you to loosen your informational grip for the poor guy.




I actually think this thread has been a very informative and yet amusing one.


----------



## MatthewO (May 20, 2003)

Lol people and their hybrid IQ tests.

The established norm for IQ tests is 100.  The established number per deviation is 15.

Gifted is considered 2 standard deviations above the norm, or 130+ IQ.  Mental retardation is considered 2 standard deviations below, or < 70. 

Most generalized tests are capped at 160, or 4 standard deviations.  Which makes an initial derivation of an IQ of 164 highly suspect.  Generally those ratings are offered as 160+, and the individual is invited to take a more applicable test.  

So the previous individual may have been correct in stating that the test capped at 157...or more factually at 157+.  Often this is done to say an individual is within the top .1% of the population, at a minimum.   Genius is a term that is individual to the test; it ranges from 3 S.D. to 4 S.D., with many lying somewhere in between. 


Any test throwing around 164 I.Q. scores from one test that is not administered by a psychologist is probably useless in determining your intelligence quotient.


----------



## Twin Peak (May 20, 2003)

The test TCD refers to is clearly useless in determining IQ.  Aside from other things, it was a British test, with questions using fact patterns with British places, and such.

Proof that it is not valid is that Rob scored better than me.  Not that I am particularly smart, just that he is particularly dumb.


----------



## ZECH (May 20, 2003)

TP you are right. This is funny!


----------



## Robboe (May 21, 2003)

> _*Originally posted by Twin Peak *_
> The test TCD refers to is clearly useless in determining IQ.  Aside from other things, it was a British test, with questions using fact patterns with British places, and such.
> 
> Proof that it is not valid is that Rob scored better than me.  Not that I am particularly smart, just that he is particularly dumb.




The one i (and TP) did is a mensa organised test.

I've also done a more american based one (it had a question on dollars cents and nickels, whatever the hell the last one is) and i scored 127 on that one. However, that one wasn't timed, unlike the test the nation test which was.


----------

