Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Fat Loss/Cutting' started by dms2425, Nov 16, 2004.
Amen to that!
That poster actually recommended high weight/low reps during cutting, not the other way around. The theory being that if you aren't getting adequate calories to gain mass, you need to increase the load on each set to give you the best chance of holding onto mass.
I would assume that if you switch from eating 3,000 calories/day to 2,000 calories/day then you won't be able to put in the same effort in the weight room without overtraining. Whether you do cardio or not is a function of how important keeping your lean muscle is. If you desperately want to hang on to your muscle, I would go with a diet-induced cut with some HIT cardio. If you're really gung ho about cutting fat ASAP I would eat slightly more and do HIT cardio 5x/week.
The trainer who said to do 35 minutes of cardio wasn't necessarily wrong or being lazy. It's perfectly legit advice but they may not know anything about HIT so they're giving the same advice they'd give to the average couch potato who hasn't exercised in years. The old-school way to lose weight has always been aerobic exercise at moderate intensity, but that school of thought is giving way to the concept of high intensity interval training over a shorter period of time(to avoid burning muscle). It's one thing to want to lose weight, quite another to want to burn fat while maintaining muscle mass.
I've never bulked or cut but I'm realizing now that it's very hard to add mass without adding some fat and it's very hard to lose fat without losing some mass, so the people who take the job of bodysculpting most seriously separate the tasks into bulking and cutting. After watching John successfully bulk I am now a believer in the theory that your caloric intake plays the largest role in whether you add mass. He had already demonstrated an insane dedication to cutting so I knew he was capable of that.
As to AMR's comments, I think everyone has different goals, and perhaps vanity is more shallow to you than speed in the mile or mountain climbing ability, but they're all legitimate goals. What's wrong with wanting your body to look as good as it can from a purely asthetic point of view i.e. the Greek ideal? If you look at my goals I'd like to be able to increase speed and endurance as well as lift more and be more fit, but I wouldn't say my running goals are more noble than my physique goals and it's somewhat insulting to those who are pure bodybuilders. It comes off as a holier-than-thou attitude-like somehow endurance athletes are superior to people who want to improve their physique.
I say it's all based on the individual-just don't pursue a goal that is someone else's projected onto yourself and you will be gratified with your achievements.
Didnt we already have this discussion in the beach thread? Your priorities all depend on where you are in life. At this point looking good "with my shirt off" is important, but its not the only reason I run and workout. The main reason I do it is that it lifts me up and helps me forget about all the BS of daily life. I dont have a problem with people who workout only for appearances sake. Whatever makes them feel good. Wasnt this thread supposed to be about cutting?