- This topic has 9 voices and 33 replies.
-
Posts
-
Keep in mind that recomping at a higher weight takes a long time unless you are previously untrained.
Indeed. I'm hoping to see some newbie gains, just because for the last 8 months (when I've been working out) I've pretty much only been squatting, snatching, and clean and jerking. And prior to that I was doing "strength biased crossfit." So I'm a bit "untrained" in the body part splits and isolation movements.That being said, I'm not hoping for anything drastic, mostly just some noticeable progress in my 3mo experiment using CBL-SA and SWHD.
Good luck to you! Just stick to the book and adjust as necessary.
Keep in mind that recomping at a higher weight takes a long time unless you are previously untrained.
Indeed. I'm hoping to see some newbie gains, just because for the last 8 months (when I've been working out) I've pretty much only been squatting, snatching, and clean and jerking. And prior to that I was doing "strength biased crossfit." So I'm a bit "untrained" in the body part splits and isolation movements.That being said, I'm not hoping for anything drastic, mostly just some noticeable progress in my 3mo experiment using CBL-SA and SWHD.
I actually exchanged a couple messages with Darryll on this. Assuming you have been training for a year, I estimated that achieving a weight of 190 lbs with a body fat percentage of 15% (a 3% reduction) would take about a year. The fat loss required isn't too much, I calculated it out to be about 4 lbs. The problem is you would have to gain nearly 10 lbs of muscle, which takes about a year. However, if you are truly a newb, it could be done much quicker.I'm not sure if I can call you a newb though. Strength based crossfit is still a weight training program and your body might have adapted already to weight training. You might get a little bump if you switch over to a program more designed for hypertrophy (like bodybuilding), but will be over really quick.So keep all of this mind. It's a fine goal to strive for, but don't be one of those people that claim the diet doesn't work because you don't reach your goal in two months.
Keep in mind that recomping at a higher weight takes a long time unless you are previously untrained.
Indeed. I'm hoping to see some newbie gains, just because for the last 8 months (when I've been working out) I've pretty much only been squatting, snatching, and clean and jerking. And prior to that I was doing "strength biased crossfit." So I'm a bit "untrained" in the body part splits and isolation movements.That being said, I'm not hoping for anything drastic, mostly just some noticeable progress in my 3mo experiment using CBL-SA and SWHD.
I actually exchanged a couple messages with Darryll on this. Assuming you have been training for a year, I estimated that achieving a weight of 190 lbs with a body fat percentage of 15% (a 3% reduction) would take about a year. The fat loss required isn't too much, I calculated it out to be about 4 lbs. The problem is you would have to gain nearly 10 lbs of muscle, which takes about a year. However, if you are truly a newb, it could be done much quicker.I'm not sure if I can call you a newb though. Strength based crossfit is still a weight training program and your body might have adapted already to weight training. You might get a little bump if you switch over to a program more designed for hypertrophy (like bodybuilding), but will be over really quick.So keep all of this mind. It's a fine goal to strive for, but don't be one of those people that claim the diet doesn't work because you don't reach your goal in two months.
Interesting.. I never really thought about a total time it would take, ha.As for the bolded: I'm with you. Like I said, I'm more just hoping to see some progress in the right direction. I'll keep doing whatever I'm doing as long as I'm seeing progress. Unless I go ADD and I see something I want to experiment with just for the pure fun of experimenting, ha.
Keep in mind that recomping at a higher weight takes a long time unless you are previously untrained.
Indeed. I'm hoping to see some newbie gains, just because for the last 8 months (when I've been working out) I've pretty much only been squatting, snatching, and clean and jerking. And prior to that I was doing "strength biased crossfit." So I'm a bit "untrained" in the body part splits and isolation movements.That being said, I'm not hoping for anything drastic, mostly just some noticeable progress in my 3mo experiment using CBL-SA and SWHD.
I actually exchanged a couple messages with Darryll on this. Assuming you have been training for a year, I estimated that achieving a weight of 190 lbs with a body fat percentage of 15% (a 3% reduction) would take about a year. The fat loss required isn't too much, I calculated it out to be about 4 lbs. The problem is you would have to gain nearly 10 lbs of muscle, which takes about a year. However, if you are truly a newb, it could be done much quicker.I'm not sure if I can call you a newb though. Strength based crossfit is still a weight training program and your body might have adapted already to weight training. You might get a little bump if you switch over to a program more designed for hypertrophy (like bodybuilding), but will be over really quick.So keep all of this mind. It's a fine goal to strive for, but don't be one of those people that claim the diet doesn't work because you don't reach your goal in two months.
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Keep in mind that recomping at a higher weight takes a long time unless you are previously untrained.
Indeed. I'm hoping to see some newbie gains, just because for the last 8 months (when I've been working out) I've pretty much only been squatting, snatching, and clean and jerking. And prior to that I was doing "strength biased crossfit." So I'm a bit "untrained" in the body part splits and isolation movements.That being said, I'm not hoping for anything drastic, mostly just some noticeable progress in my 3mo experiment using CBL-SA and SWHD.
I actually exchanged a couple messages with Darryll on this. Assuming you have been training for a year, I estimated that achieving a weight of 190 lbs with a body fat percentage of 15% (a 3% reduction) would take about a year. The fat loss required isn't too much, I calculated it out to be about 4 lbs. The problem is you would have to gain nearly 10 lbs of muscle, which takes about a year. However, if you are truly a newb, it could be done much quicker.I'm not sure if I can call you a newb though. Strength based crossfit is still a weight training program and your body might have adapted already to weight training. You might get a little bump if you switch over to a program more designed for hypertrophy (like bodybuilding), but will be over really quick.So keep all of this mind. It's a fine goal to strive for, but don't be one of those people that claim the diet doesn't work because you don't reach your goal in two months.
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
"And steroids" is correct! It is definately the hormonal state which promotes or limits muscle growth. It just so happens when you are dieting (restricting calories) that the hormonal state is disrupted and down regulated. Makes perfect biological and evolutionary sense too.
Just did my first actual backload last night and was just looking for some quick feedback regarding food choice/timing etc.. Too early to notice anything good/bad really, just making sure I'm going down the right path.6'1" ~185# ~18% BF.Goal to lean out, but gain about 5lbs over 3+ months. Doing CBL-HD.3:45-5:00 Work out5:00- PWO w/ creatine, whey iso, leucine, dextrose6:30- Sticky rice with chicken breast and sweet and sour sauce, rice flour based gingersnap cookies, rice chex8:30- One serving of Ben&Jerrys w/ 2tbsp almond butter mixed in.Final macros for the whole day: 193Pro, 195Carb, 152Fat @ 2850 calories.
What are you doing for your training? The carbs are a bit on the low side. Other than that everything looks good.
thats low for cbl heavy duty? i thought u had to lower it because of the eccentric loading? i been trying to cap it no higher than 150g, trying to recomp but more emphasis on fat loss
Just did my first actual backload last night and was just looking for some quick feedback regarding food choice/timing etc.. Too early to notice anything good/bad really, just making sure I'm going down the right path.6'1" ~185# ~18% BF.Goal to lean out, but gain about 5lbs over 3+ months. Doing CBL-HD.3:45-5:00 Work out5:00- PWO w/ creatine, whey iso, leucine, dextrose6:30- Sticky rice with chicken breast and sweet and sour sauce, rice flour based gingersnap cookies, rice chex8:30- One serving of Ben&Jerrys w/ 2tbsp almond butter mixed in.Final macros for the whole day: 193Pro, 195Carb, 152Fat @ 2850 calories.
What are you doing for your training? The carbs are a bit on the low side. Other than that everything looks good.
thats low for cbl heavy duty? i thought u had to lower it because of the eccentric loading? i been trying to cap it no higher than 150g, trying to recomp but more emphasis on fat loss
You do compared to a program of similar volume, but that is a pretty high volume program, so make sure you are eating enough. If you aren't having issues finishing the workouts, then don't worry about it.
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
"And steroids" is correct! It is definately the hormonal state which promotes or limits muscle growth. It just so happens when you are dieting (restricting calories) that the hormonal state is disrupted and down regulated. Makes perfect biological and evolutionary sense too.
Ha, "and steroids." Although, they could almost be lumped into the category of training hard and recovering, given that a huge function of steroids is the increased work and recovery capacity..
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
"And steroids" is correct! It is definately the hormonal state which promotes or limits muscle growth. It just so happens when you are dieting (restricting calories) that the hormonal state is disrupted and down regulated. Makes perfect biological and evolutionary sense too.
Ha, "and steroids." Although, they could almost be lumped into the category of training hard and recovering, given that a huge function of steroids is the increased work and recovery capacity..
Yea you don't get big from just taking steroids that's what these anti-steroid morons don't understand. They think they can just drug themselves to be Ronnie Coleman. While Ronnie does a shitload of drugs, he also works his ass off and has awesome genetics.I just added steroids on there because if you do take steroids you will get a slight increase in muscle mass even if you don't change your training at all.
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
"And steroids" is correct! It is definately the hormonal state which promotes or limits muscle growth. It just so happens when you are dieting (restricting calories) that the hormonal state is disrupted and down regulated. Makes perfect biological and evolutionary sense too.
Ha, "and steroids." Although, they could almost be lumped into the category of training hard and recovering, given that a huge function of steroids is the increased work and recovery capacity..
Yea you don't get big from just taking steroids that's what these anti-steroid morons don't understand. They think they can just drug themselves to be Ronnie Coleman. While Ronnie does a shitload of drugs, he also works his ass off and has awesome genetics.I just added steroids on there because if you do take steroids you will get a slight increase in muscle mass even if you don't change your training at all.
Too true.
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
"And steroids" is correct! It is definately the hormonal state which promotes or limits muscle growth. It just so happens when you are dieting (restricting calories) that the hormonal state is disrupted and down regulated. Makes perfect biological and evolutionary sense too.
Ha, "and steroids." Although, they could almost be lumped into the category of training hard and recovering, given that a huge function of steroids is the increased work and recovery capacity..
Yea you don't get big from just taking steroids that's what these anti-steroid morons don't understand. They think they can just drug themselves to be Ronnie Coleman. While Ronnie does a shitload of drugs, he also works his ass off and has awesome genetics.I just added steroids on there because if you do take steroids you will get a slight increase in muscle mass even if you don't change your training at all.
Agreed. I just had this conversation with a friend the other day where I basically told him that just because someone is on steroids, doesn't mean they didn't work. In fact, they almost definitely put in MORE work in a shorter amount of time than a clean guy.But let's be real here.. If steroids weren't illegal in the US, as they aren't in like the Eastern Bloc countries, who wouldn't really take them? Their dangers are so incredibly overblown, it's ridiculous. I believe I've heard something like having health issues from PROPER use of steroids is less likely than your chance of being struck by lightning.. or something similar. If I were able to go to my doctor and tell him what I wanted to do and he could write me a scrip, I'd do them. That's my biggest hesitation; when something is illegal (or legal, but more so when illegal) you can't really trust sources. And I'm not going to be shoving some watered down, or laced, crap into my body, ha. Hmm.. was than an over share? :-X 😮
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
"And steroids" is correct! It is definately the hormonal state which promotes or limits muscle growth. It just so happens when you are dieting (restricting calories) that the hormonal state is disrupted and down regulated. Makes perfect biological and evolutionary sense too.
Ha, "and steroids." Although, they could almost be lumped into the category of training hard and recovering, given that a huge function of steroids is the increased work and recovery capacity..
Yea you don't get big from just taking steroids that's what these anti-steroid morons don't understand. They think they can just drug themselves to be Ronnie Coleman. While Ronnie does a shitload of drugs, he also works his ass off and has awesome genetics.I just added steroids on there because if you do take steroids you will get a slight increase in muscle mass even if you don't change your training at all.
Agreed. I just had this conversation with a friend the other day where I basically told him that just because someone is on steroids, doesn't mean they didn't work. In fact, they almost definitely put in MORE work in a shorter amount of time than a clean guy.But let's be real here.. If steroids weren't illegal in the US, as they aren't in like the Eastern Bloc countries, who wouldn't really take them? Their dangers are so incredibly overblown, it's ridiculous. I believe I've heard something like having health issues from PROPER use of steroids is less likely than your chance of being struck by lightning.. or something similar. If I were able to go to my doctor and tell him what I wanted to do and he could write me a scrip, I'd do them. That's my biggest hesitation; when something is illegal (or legal, but more so when illegal) you can't really trust sources. And I'm not going to be shoving some watered down, or laced, crap into my body, ha. Hmm.. was than an over share? :-X 😮
Well actually the reality is there has never been any long term studies on steroids that are taken at supraphysiological dosages, so the long term effects are largely unknown. Additionally there aren't very many short term studies on supraphysiological dosages.While steroids have benefits and I think done smartly their side effects can be minimized, the truth is I still think most people have no business taking them. I'm not saying they should be illegal, but if you are just training for physique (not competing in bodybuilding) and taking them I think you are an idiot for risking your health for no reason. I really think only professional athletes should take steroids at supraphysiological dosages. By professional I mean anyone who competes at the highest level of their sport.
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
"And steroids" is correct! It is definately the hormonal state which promotes or limits muscle growth. It just so happens when you are dieting (restricting calories) that the hormonal state is disrupted and down regulated. Makes perfect biological and evolutionary sense too.
Ha, "and steroids." Although, they could almost be lumped into the category of training hard and recovering, given that a huge function of steroids is the increased work and recovery capacity..
Yea you don't get big from just taking steroids that's what these anti-steroid morons don't understand. They think they can just drug themselves to be Ronnie Coleman. While Ronnie does a shitload of drugs, he also works his ass off and has awesome genetics.I just added steroids on there because if you do take steroids you will get a slight increase in muscle mass even if you don't change your training at all.
Agreed. I just had this conversation with a friend the other day where I basically told him that just because someone is on steroids, doesn't mean they didn't work. In fact, they almost definitely put in MORE work in a shorter amount of time than a clean guy.But let's be real here.. If steroids weren't illegal in the US, as they aren't in like the Eastern Bloc countries, who wouldn't really take them? Their dangers are so incredibly overblown, it's ridiculous. I believe I've heard something like having health issues from PROPER use of steroids is less likely than your chance of being struck by lightning.. or something similar. If I were able to go to my doctor and tell him what I wanted to do and he could write me a scrip, I'd do them. That's my biggest hesitation; when something is illegal (or legal, but more so when illegal) you can't really trust sources. And I'm not going to be shoving some watered down, or laced, crap into my body, ha. Hmm.. was than an over share? :-X 😮
Well actually the reality is there has never been any long term studies on steroids that are taken at supraphysiological dosages, so the long term effects are largely unknown. Additionally there aren't very many short term studies on supraphysiological dosages.While steroids have benefits and I think done smartly their side effects can be minimized, the truth is I still think most people have no business taking them. I'm not saying they should be illegal, but if you are just training for physique (not competing in bodybuilding) and taking them I think you are an idiot for risking your health for no reason. I really think only professional athletes should take steroids at supraphysiological dosages. By professional I mean anyone who competes at the highest level of their sport.
I dunno. I can't necessarily agree with the risking your health just to look better and feel better about yourself. We can't really say if the potential risks to health could outweigh the potential benefits to health for some people. Perhaps those with negative body image, suffering from depression or something. I'm reaching, here, I know, but still. Driving a car is a huge risk to our health, but we all still do it for silly reasons.Maybe I'm in the weeds, but were there trusted sources, GOOD advice for PROPER usage, and no legal tape, I'd happily experiment with a year here and there of hard training and usage to get me more setup for where I'd like to be (physically) for the rest of my life. But it's all a moot point, because the policies are certainly not going to change anytime soon. And I sure as shit am not moving to Bulgaria.And I love how far afield this topic has gone! Ha. Since we're off topic, but it's my thread anyway, on the CBL-HD Leg day there are leg presses.. Leg presses kill my lower back because of the forced posterior pelvic tilt, anything y'all could suggest to swap them with for the same effect?
Thats why Ive always found it strange that most diets are based around fatloss. Muscle building is by far the hardest and most lengthy part of any real change in body comp. I had a female friend who posted up some stats she wanted to achieve. Turned out she planned on gaining like 5kg of muscle and losing 10kg of fat. and she thought that the fatloss would be the hard part! LOL
Because you can't make muscle grow by dieting. A poor diet can limit muscle gorwth. At best a diet can tweak muscle growth to be slightly better, but in the end of the day, muscle growth comes from training hard and recovering. And steroids.
"And steroids" is correct! It is definately the hormonal state which promotes or limits muscle growth. It just so happens when you are dieting (restricting calories) that the hormonal state is disrupted and down regulated. Makes perfect biological and evolutionary sense too.
Ha, "and steroids." Although, they could almost be lumped into the category of training hard and recovering, given that a huge function of steroids is the increased work and recovery capacity..
Yea you don't get big from just taking steroids that's what these anti-steroid morons don't understand. They think they can just drug themselves to be Ronnie Coleman. While Ronnie does a shitload of drugs, he also works his ass off and has awesome genetics.I just added steroids on there because if you do take steroids you will get a slight increase in muscle mass even if you don't change your training at all.
Agreed. I just had this conversation with a friend the other day where I basically told him that just because someone is on steroids, doesn't mean they didn't work. In fact, they almost definitely put in MORE work in a shorter amount of time than a clean guy.But let's be real here.. If steroids weren't illegal in the US, as they aren't in like the Eastern Bloc countries, who wouldn't really take them? Their dangers are so incredibly overblown, it's ridiculous. I believe I've heard something like having health issues from PROPER use of steroids is less likely than your chance of being struck by lightning.. or something similar. If I were able to go to my doctor and tell him what I wanted to do and he could write me a scrip, I'd do them. That's my biggest hesitation; when something is illegal (or legal, but more so when illegal) you can't really trust sources. And I'm not going to be shoving some watered down, or laced, crap into my body, ha. Hmm.. was than an over share? :-X 😮
Well actually the reality is there has never been any long term studies on steroids that are taken at supraphysiological dosages, so the long term effects are largely unknown. Additionally there aren't very many short term studies on supraphysiological dosages.While steroids have benefits and I think done smartly their side effects can be minimized, the truth is I still think most people have no business taking them. I'm not saying they should be illegal, but if you are just training for physique (not competing in bodybuilding) and taking them I think you are an idiot for risking your health for no reason. I really think only professional athletes should take steroids at supraphysiological dosages. By professional I mean anyone who competes at the highest level of their sport.
I dunno. I can't necessarily agree with the risking your health just to look better and feel better about yourself. We can't really say if the potential risks to health could outweigh the potential benefits to health for some people. Perhaps those with negative body image, suffering from depression or something. I'm reaching, here, I know, but still. Driving a car is a huge risk to our health, but we all still do it for silly reasons.Maybe I'm in the weeds, but were there trusted sources, GOOD advice for PROPER usage, and no legal tape, I'd happily experiment with a year here and there of hard training and usage to get me more setup for where I'd like to be (physically) for the rest of my life. But it's all a moot point, because the policies are certainly not going to change anytime soon. And I sure as shit am not moving to Bulgaria.And I love how far afield this topic has gone! Ha. Since we're off topic, but it's my thread anyway, on the CBL-HD Leg day there are leg presses.. Leg presses kill my lower back because of the forced posterior pelvic tilt, anything y'all could suggest to swap them with for the same effect?
Front Squats.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.