any of y'all into working out?

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by blankall

My suggestion would be to see an Active Rehabilitation expert who can provide a workout routine that will allow you to work around your injuries. If you are looking to lose weight, eat fewer calories but maintain protein.

BORING, I wanted results NOW!! Isn't there a pill?

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by blankall

Depending on how tall he means by tall, 5000 is a pretty good estimate. Especially for someone new to weightlifting who is tall and a tough gainer. That'd be for someone 6'4''+ or so. Rippetoe recommends starting at 4000 a day for an average sized person. You have to remember that newbie gains are the next best thing to Cell Teching.

Maybe 5000 is excessive, but he's certainly going to need at least 4000. Also you can't just tell someone to calculate their TDEE. If he was capable of that kind of exact control, he wouldn't have trouble putting on mass in the first place.

Can you please explain the physiology behind "bulking" and provide some evidence that it accelerates stremgth gain and hypertrophy?

As far as I know, there is no evidence for it and all the physiology completely contrasts it. Calories are not a limiting factor for strength or hypertrophy unless youre in a significant catabolic state, ie starving.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

Can you please explain the physiology behind "bulking" and provide some evidence that it accelerates stremgth gain and hypertrophy?

As far as I know, there is no evidence for it and all the physiology completely contrasts it. Calories are not a limiting factor for strength or hypertrophy unless youre in a significant catabolic state, ie starving.

Oh boy...hoping you'd show up to this debate.

Listen, don't take it from me. Read Mark Rippetoe's book starting strength. Rippetoe is the expert on making people stronger and bigger. He states a starting point for a person of average height is 4000 calories. Go up or down from there based on weather you are not gaining/gaining too much fat.

[Flabbibulin]

Just a little personal thought on my experience with calories in vs calories out as it relates to bulking or cutting- I have consistently been counting calories for a number of years- I am always intentional with my diet in terms of whether I am trying to bulk or cut, and I know for sure what my caloric intake needs to be for both- and because of that, I can easily gain or lose weight. This initially came down to experimenting with different caloric levels to determine how my body would respond.

Anyway, for me, I have never been able to cut calories down to a deficit level, shed fat and weight, yet gain strength. By the same token, I am not sure I have been in a maintenance zone with no relative weight change, yet gain strength. I think the old adage after all is lean and weak or puffy and strong- I suppose this doesn't always have to be the case, but it certainly is for me. This isn't just a byproduct of the number of calories I am taking in, although certainly a big factor, but also a matter of weight loss being a loss of muscle and fat, with weight gain being an addition of those two (catabolic vs anabolic state). Certainly there are methods and supplements that maximizes one and minimizes the other, but for me strength will always increase or decrease relative to weight gain and weight loss. It is highly debatable how much you can manipulate the ratio of muscle loss:fat loss and conversely muscle gain:fat gain, but I believe, from experience, that high protein is key to both, with carbs being the main thing I manipulate when bulking or cutting.

Hope that isn't a bunch of blah blah blah... just what I have found, the summary being that strength has always been a correlation of my weight- directly or indirectly.

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by blankall

Oh boy...hoping you'd show up to this debate.

Listen, don't take it from me. Read Mark Rippetoe's book starting strength. Rippetoe is the expert on making people stronger and bigger. He states a starting point for a person of average height is 4000 calories. Go up or down from there based on weather you are not gaining/gaining too much fat.

Becuase no one can give me an answer that isn't "because some big dude said so".

Can you direct me to something of his online?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Esoteric

Sure, you're going to gain muscle, but you're going to pack on fat. A ton of fat. If you're a new lifter, you'll likely get discouraged since you're becoming fat, start to cut, and then just stall progress.

Depending on your size, around 3,000 calories would be an absolute maximum amount of calories someone should eat when they're starting out to gain strength and mass. That's a properly tracked, 3,000 calories. 5,000 calories is way too excessive, and it's a reckless bulk that will have you put on a ton of extra weight.

IIFYM has some good calculators that should be used as a benchmark for what to consume - http://iifym.com/iifym-calculator/

Looking at V's stats, 3,000 calories would be a perfect amount to start with.

This most discouraging thing is a lack of progress. He wants to be in a position where he is getting closer to a goal every time he goes back into the gym.

4000 calories would be a much better place to start. Obviously the best option would be to experiment. With an increased weight lifting load given a 6'3'' frame, that's not going to be enough to make efficient progress.

It's much better to pack on bulk at first, just don't let the fat get out of control. At 6'3'' a good goal would be 40lbs for a first bulk. Then cut down by 20lbs slowly. Just make sure you're lifting hard and consistently the whole way through.

Honestly, everyone is different, and you have to spend some time experimenting. Eventually you get a feel for your body and don't need to calorie count. However, I just don't think 3000 calories is enough for someone that tall. You'd be looking to gain at least a pound (probably 1.5) a week to make significant progress in either strength or size with that frame. His maintenance is probably 2500-3000 and then you have to factor in the energy burned from the workouts.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by TheSutterDynasty

Becuase no one can give me an answer that isn't "because some big dude said so".

Can you direct me to something of his online?

Google....he's he most famous strength coach in the world:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Rippetoe

[Drak]

Anyone here doing landmine exercises?

So far I'm doing standing landmine shoulder presses on each arm, two arm, as well as ab workouts (oblique landmine twist).

I've also started lumberjack landmine leg squats after my regular leg squats. A friend of mine does a dead lift/squat combo with the landmine and Olympic bar, but we had to build a box for him to stand on so he could squat down far enough.

Does anyone else have any good ones to share?

[TheSutterDynasty]

Originally Posted by blankall

Google....he's he most famous strength coach in the world:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Rippetoe

I know who he is, I meant an article on bulking or something of that nature.

[Esoteric]

Mark Rippentoe is a smart man for strength training, but he's an idiot when it comes to nutrition. His advice (he advises newbies to eat 6,000 calories a day), is just terrible.

http://scoobysworkshop.com/starting-...mark-rippetoe/

Info for eating;
http://scoobysworkshop.com/bodybuild...n-made-simple/
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showth...p?t=1563801833

Educate yourself before proceeding with a diet plan. Don't listen to bro-science. His caloric recommendations are terrible.

[Slava]

Is there a way to figure out whether you're an ecto,endo or mesomorph? Maybe a questionnaire or something?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Slava

Is there a way to figure out whether you're an ecto,endo or mesomorph? Maybe a questionnaire or something?

Ecto: You got sand kicked in your face at the beach.
Endo: You wore you T-Shirt at the beach.
Meso: You did neither of the above.

[Drak]

Originally Posted by Slava

Is there a way to figure out whether you're an ecto,endo or mesomorph? Maybe a questionnaire or something?

Check charts online. Maybe in google images.. Although it's not necessarily black and white.

I'm an ecto for some things, and I'd say meso for others. I have long arms and legs, with highish bicep insertion. As a kid I had a very high metabolism and was a stick. Couldn't gain weight if my life depended on it.

But my chest and shoulders gain fast, with my chest being, IMO, too large for the rest of me. I hate it. Makes my arms look small.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Slava

Is there a way to figure out whether you're an ecto,endo or mesomorph? Maybe a questionnaire or something?

They're made up categories that have no bearing in reality. If you're not gaining weight, eat more. If you're too fat, eat less.

[Drak]

Originally Posted by blankall

They're made up categories that have no bearing in reality. If you're not gaining weight, eat more. If you're too fat, eat less.

Genetics has a bearing on reality. There certainly are differences in body types.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Drak

Genetics has a bearing on reality. There certainly are differences in body types.

Body types exist along a spectrum. Arbitrarily making up 3 categories and then slotting yourself into them is unhelpful.

Like I said before, if you are having trouble gaining mass, eat more. If you are fat, eat less.

[Drak]

Originally Posted by blankall

Body types exist along a spectrum. Arbitrarily making up 3 categories and then slotting yourself into them is unhelpful.

Like I said before, if you are having trouble gaining mass, eat more. If you are fat, eat less.

Unhelpful in what sense? There are guys out there that are naturally muscular, that don't have to put in as much effort into gains. Then there are guys who are naturally very thin, and have a harder time making gains. Genetics is a reality that coincides with your diet suggestions of eating more and working harder if you need to.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Drak

Unhelpful in what sense? There are guys out there that are naturally muscular, that don't have to put in as much effort into gains. Then there are guys who are naturally very thin, and have a harder time making gains. Genetics is a reality that coincides with your diet suggestions of eating more and working harder if you need to.

How does it help to try and squeeze into one category. You have to experiment. Everyone is different and will require different amounts of food to see results. There are no strict categories of people.

[Drak]

Originally Posted by blankall

How does it help to try and squeeze into one category. You have to experiment. Everyone is different and will require different amounts of food to see results. There are no strict categories of people.

Which I've already stated as far as body types go, having a mix of types. But there are also folks that have the genetic makeup closer to one or the other, that require not only different food intakes but make gains based on varying exercise routines.

[Flabbibulin]

The problem is this way of categorizing the body doesn't differentiate between a body type based on behavior/environment and a body type based on genetics/natural. You can't just look at a big massive guy and automatically label endomorph, and make assumptions on how he should approach diet and fitness. Certainly doesn't do any harm to identify with one of the 3 categories (or blended categories), but I am not sure what benefit there is either. Two 250lb men with seemingly similar body types are not guaranteed to have the same BMR or metabolize/burn calories in the same way. Although a big mac for each of them is always 500 calories, the amount of work they need to put in to burn that 500 calories may be different- even though they have both been labelled as endomorphs.

The better way to determine your approach to fitness and diet is to determine your BMR as close as you can, add your additional caloric expenditures based on daily activities, and go from there based on goals. And in the same manner that body type categorizing is only moderately beneficial, I am not sure how much you can trust BMR calculators... especially when the healthy approach to losing or gaining weight is a moderate +/- 500 calories. Very easy to mess things up if your initial assumption about your BMR is way off. Best way is to take things slow and experiment with different caloric levels. I guess someone looking to lose or gain weight could just go extreme and get in a caloric deficit or surplus that is guaranteed to make them gain or lose weight, but I am not sure how sustainable or healthy that is.