i just started cutting this month seriously, last month i began to eat right but had little knowledge of dieting. I have been doing fasted cardio 45 min elliptical and i can already see some fat loss and a little toning. My question i was estimated to have about 17-18% BF two weeks ago and this is according to mybodycomp.com which i hear is sometimes inaccurate. When should one stop thier cutting phase and begin thier bulking, and after bulking when will i know its time to cut again?

It's entirely up to you.

If you are 17% bf, then I would I think you want to cut down into the low double digits before bulking, but again its up to you. Most people want to be cut at least until the low teens before a bulk.

When to get off the bulk? Again, up to you, but a 12 week bulk is pretty typical. It may also depend on how comfortable and flexible you are with your clothes. I have a range of waist sizes that I keep available to bulk into (hate getting fatter but it comes with the territory on a bulk)

. My question i was estimated to have about 17-18% BF two weeks ago and this is according to mybodycomp.com is inaccurate. When should one stop thier cutting phase and begin thier bulking, and after bulking when will i know its time to cut again?

When you can see your ab muscles without flexing.

When you can see your ab muscles without flexing.


Which it was that uniform- Some folks I know can be down to 8% and not get that.

But in general- I'd agree with 8-12% based on your abilities. The lower you go, the greater likelihood that your gains may be cleaner. Look at John Stone as a great example.

When you can see your ab muscles without flexing.
I like this approach as well.

I like this approach as well.

The reason I said that is that is what everyone wants. Now what is happening a lot is we are getting "skinny fat" results. The bodies are looking like 12 year olds and they keep waiting for a six pack to appear. So give them a point to call it off and get some calories and weight training going to get a body.

Think about this. A guy at 20 is in best shape of life, works out with weights he weights 170 with 12% fat, that is 20.4 lbs of fat and 149.6 lbs LBM. At age 38, he golfs and jogs, he has lost some muscle and weight, so at 162 lbs, he has 19.44lbs of fat and 142.5 lbs of LBM. At 40, he is held prisoner in a middle east country for a year and now he weights 130 lbs, as always he has 12% fat or 15.6 lbs and 114.4 lbs of LBM. Well he kept his BF% at 12% and lost weight of which 4.8 lbs of fat and 35.2 lbs of muscle, but he had a six pack.

Point: BF% goals are nice if you have balance. My days of a six pack are all over. I want a 32-34 inch waist and keep all my other measurements I don't care if my waist doesn't have a six pack just like Boyer Coe, who never had one.

Why didn't he have a visible set of abs on him anyway? I've never seen any writing about this. I realize obviously that genetics must play some sort of role, but doesn't EVERYONE have the abdominal MUSCLES there? I assume at his level he tried everything I might think of (heavy weight crunches for example to bring the ab size up).

I just always thought this was strange but never asked nor looked it up. What do you think/have you read Rtestes?

(sorry to derail thread, if this gets long I'll create a new thread)

The reason I said that is that is what everyone wants. Now what is happening a lot is we are getting "skinny fat" results. The bodies are looking like 12 year olds and they keep waiting for a six pack to appear. So give them a point to call it off and get some calories and weight training going to get a body.

Think about this. A guy at 20 is in best shape of life, works out with weights he weights 170 with 12% fat, that is 20.4 lbs of fat and 149.6 lbs LBM. At age 38, he golfs and jogs, he has lost some muscle and weight, so at 162 lbs, he has 19.44lbs of fat and 142.5 lbs of LBM. At 40, he held prisoner in a middle east country for a year and now he weights 130 lbs, as always he has 12% fat or 15.6 lbs and 114.4 lbs of LBM. Well he kept his BF% at 12% and lost weight of which 4.8 lbs of fat and 35.2 lbs of muscle, but he had a six pack.

Point: BF% goals are nice if you have balance. My days of a six pack are all over. I want a 32-34 inch waist and keep all my other measurements I don't care if my waist doesn't have a six pack just like Boyer Coe, who never had one.

Why didn't he have a visible set of abs on him anyway?


Genetics is only thing, I understand the the packs are formed by ligiments going over the ab muscles. Some have uneven ones or only 4 packs or three. Boyer always had a small flat waist. most people never know how many they have.

Genetics is only thing, I understand the the packs are formed by ligiments going over the ab muscles. Some have uneven ones or only 4 packs or three. Boyer always had a small flat waist. most people never know how many they have.

Wow, that is certainly new knowledge for me. Thanks :tu: I'm just getting frustrated because, despite my abs being visible they are not "cut up". So now I've just decided "screw it" and I'm trying to put on some weight :)

Genetics is only thing, I understand the the packs are formed by ligiments going over the ab muscles. Some have uneven ones or only 4 packs or three. Boyer always had a small flat waist. most people never know how many they have.

I seriously love everything this guy has to say, your cool man!

Thanks R, that may reflect on some of us here (me) :nod: