Hello. I've been spinning my wheels with bulk and cut cycles for a while. LBM goes up and down, up and down. Diet is virtually perfect, tons of sleep, using a modified HST program.

Perhaps a recomp is for me.

-I was considering a slight surplus, of 250. Or would maintenance do the job?

-I've never done a recomp before, and I was also wondering if it is equally as effective for those who are intermediate to advanced? (Those who are more likely to gain fat).

Recomp is for those who have succeeded in attaining a physique that they can accept which is very few of us.

Recomp is something people like to think will work but it just doesn't. People want to hear that they can gain muscle without gaining fat as well as losing fat without losing muscle but it doesn't work that way. Sadly people wish this to be true so they irrationally believe it.

Save heavy drug use or godly genetics- Recomp is for the birds.

Look not towards changing the idea of bulking and cutting all together but change the way you bulk and cut. Not to sound derogatory in any way but it's not bulking and cutting that is broken- it's your way of going about them.

Try shorter bulk and cut cycles. 4 weeks bulking 2 weeks cutting always worked alright for me. Just an example Many MANY factors are involved.

Look mainly at calories and your diet. You are not bulking and/or cutting OPTIMALLY if you are not making progress.

A surplus of about 1000-1500 a week, along with TP PT worked great for me.

I think it was 4 high carb, 2 no carb and 1 low carb a week, with most carbs structured around workouts.

I dropped a little fat and gained plenty of strength and muscle.

-My specific goal would be to add small ammount of muscle and maintain fat at about 10%.
-I have been travelling from 10% (at the begining of bulk) to 12% (at the end of bulk), then cut back down to 10%.

---This equates to about 2 months bulk one month cut.

I've been considering changing diet drastically. Maybe 2 weeks bulk one week cut? Lgoosey do you have any studies off hand to suggest that any given bulk/cut period is better (longer vs. shorter?)

Again, I agree with Gus for the most part.

----

I think there is hope yet, however.

(1) I believe, with caloric cycling, one might be able to achieve recomposition over long haul.

This is based on rat experiments. The one I have been thinking about involves constant caloric changes; the rats with cycling were much more muscular/leaner than those either starved or those that fed ad libitum.

Dissections showed physical changes in certain regions of their brain, indicating that the setpoint changes were semi-permanent ("hard-wired").

The optimal caloric cycling period for humans is likely to be about a week, which coincides with the cycle period of UD2.0.



(2) Caloric cycling is also associated with longevity experiments in mice. Yes, by cycling calories, rats live as long as those rats which were under caloric restriction diet. The difference was that the rats with caloric cycling were much more muscular.

I sort of agree with your basic point, but rats adapt metabolically at several times the speed humans do. What they're systems respond to in a single day, it takes at the very least three to five days to see hints of the same kind of signaling-induced metabolic shifts in humans--and they are never as pronounced.

Cyclical diets, however, are the way to go, long-term, regardless of ones goals.



My response would be the same as above.

I have always liked my 4 week bulk followed by 2 weeks of cutting. It has always worked well for me.

-Layne

Absurd.

Recomping works fine if you are patient, stick to the plan, and - obviously - are not already at your genetic max.

Try HST w/ cardio on the off days and +/- 200 Kcal relative to maintenance diet. It worked for me; others have reported significant lean mass gains (.25 - .5lb a week) while dropping significant bodyfat.

Another option is a UD2 cycle carefully managed to maximize anabolism. That might work better but is a very high maintenance option.

Do you just drop/ increase calories significantly or slowly settle into it?

nope, I just drop them in one day or ramp them up in a single day, I think that is part of the reason it works so well.

hey Layne

so when you bulk for 4 weeks, how much do you ramp up the cals? Also, do you reckon before one really wants to bulk up you should only do it at lower BF% levels, like 10%.

Reason I ask is that I'm about 15-17% BF, with most fat around the mid-section, and it's coming off (lost almost 6kg over the last 2 months) and LBM has not come down, it has actually gone up slightly. Thing is I'm 5'7 and 151.8lb's, if I lose anymore, despite the abdominal fat, I'll disappear!!!!!

you should probably keep cutting for a few more weeks. I wrote something about my way of dieting on this website a few years ago. Search in the diet forum for "my new approach" and search for any date. You should find it.

-Layne

thanks Layne, found it! Great thread.

Reading about your calorie intake on growth and cutting weeks, what were your maitenance cals? Also with this approach to cutting/bulking (growth), how do you find it affects your strength levels when training?

As to keep on cutting, just wondering how much weight I'll end up having to drop and when catabolism will kick in.

I think recomping fits best with human physiology.

Either via steady modest surplus or deficit (in the 250-500 cal range) or with a cyclical diet.

The body is too efficient at storing fat with a chronic significant excess of calories.

You want to have bodyfat and intake high enough that you do not illicit a stravation/stress response, but assuming that, you are going to increase fat storage more than muscle anabolism as you increase intake beyond what you need for normal energy needs + repair and growth of muscle.

And, if you have significant fat stores, they will provide much of the needed fuel for these energy needs (assuming leptin is not low)

I don't know if I would consider 500 calorie excess a recomposition. That's what I would bulk at. I assumed we were ignoring ignorant fools who get fat as shit.

A 500 calorie surplus a day is a pound a week and there is no way your gaining a pound of muscle per week. Thus fat gain- your bulking IMO.

500 is the high end, and that would be for ectomorphs. Likewise, a 500 cal deficit would be for endomorphs/fatter people.

I've been meaning to try out Layne's approach, but I was swayed when I read a lot of posts saying that immediate jumps from cutting to bulking or bulking to cutting would lead to rapid fat gain or muscle loss. It seems though, that this is a popular diet scheme that has worked for a lot of people. I read the "My New Approach" thread and I think I agree with the reasoning that an immediate jump/decline in calories would lead to beneficial results, not detrimental.

Additionally, I read a post by Christian Thib...(The canadian strength coach) and he recommended this scheme to lean bulk. He recommended anywhere between 3-6 weeks growth and 2 weeks cut.

Its not that cut and dry, Gus.

Most of us have a wide range of calories that are "maintenance level." There is no exact number from which you can say "I will add 250 calories a day" and thus gain 1/2 pound per week.

I honestly don't think this is much of a concern for most. It will be a concern if your body/metabolism are fucked from abuse (i.e. because you have been starving yourself for some time, or because you have overdone things like high fructose corn syrup, etc.)

No that is because you don't know your maintenance level each day. If you did you could add 250 calories per day and gain very close to a 1/2 pound- water glycogen etc etc aside.

That wasn't my point though.

A 200 surplus on (HST) workout days and a 200 defecit on cardio days? Is that what you are saying?