As an experienced lifter are we shortchanging progress at all by doing a little cut to a 'beach leanness' each year?

[jamierite74]

Its commonly said to maximize long term growth potential you need to spend very long periods of time bulking or being heavy at unfavorable body compositions. Many take 2-4 years between BB comps.

Now that Ive been lifting for 13-14 years my LBM added each year is very minimal. While I want to maximize progress I also want to enjoy the fruits of my labor and not spend 99% of my time heavy at 15-20% BF.

Now if an experienced lifter does an 8-9 month bulk, and a 3-4 month cut each year. Not to a contest leanness but say 9% at the lowest. Do you think this will sacrifice long term growth? In theory I see no difference between this and a 2 year bulk and 10 month cut, its just a scaled down version.

 

[benferr2136]

@jamierite74 I mean, are you a competitive bodybuilder? What are your goals? I like balance between looking good and being strong. Those don’t always have to overlap though and it’s all relative. Right now I’m strong but I’m growing out of all my clothes. The fruits of my labor will be PRs but then a several months down the line it will be a six pack with more muscle mass then I’ve ever held onto. I’ve done 6 month bulks and I’m currently on like 18 months of bulk. I’ve seen results either way.

Optimization after 14 years of lifting is going to be deeply personal, not something you’re going to get from this tiny subreddit. Just figure out what you’re willing to sacrifice to reach your goals, both long term and short term.

 

[johnlxyz]

@jamierite74 Is there really evidence that long bulk:cut cycles are more efficient than short ones?

I can see some reasons why it might be true (for example there may be lower productivity at the start of a bulk because you may be somewhat detrained for strength which may reduce your ability to apply a hypertrophic stimulus to your muscles). But I haven't really seen any evidence for this.

 

[tristatervrepair]

@johnlxyz In my experience, smaller bulking/cutting cycles are better healthier wise, and you will look good almost at any point, since your bf will not get very high (unless you want/don't care about that)

4-6 months bulking

1-2 months cutting

 

[jidalbc]

@tristatervrepair Basically what I do. Roughly I just need a week of cut for each month of bulk

 

[losteve19]

@tristatervrepair That is basically what has been scientifically proven to be correct. At a certain point in a bulk, (6 month or so range) fat becomes even easier to gain compared to muscle, and cutting much longer than around 16 weeks, muscle loss becomes more and more inevitable and accelerated. Cutting cycles are also beneficial as they basically reset the body, or re-prime, for muscle growth.

 

[mella]

@losteve19 Isn’t the pe-ratio debunked? I think bodyfat gain is highly individual. If someones set point is 15-20% they probably will be comfortable in that range. If they go above their appetite goes down and they have to force feed. Meaning the body does NOT want to put on any more fat. Same goes for low body fat. If the said person goes under 15 their appetite goes up and their body gladly gains body fat.

 

[jamierite74]

@losteve19 Same as what the other guy said, I heard P-ratio (fat to muscle gain proportion) is a myth. It only appears that way to be true b/c youre getting fatter. Idk the specifics behind it b/c I havent looked into it very much but this is the general conclusion Ive seen more than once.

 

[mella]

@losteve19 This whole idea of ”re-sensitizing” muscles just seems like bro sciense to me. If it was the case it would mean that we could go do ultra low volume just to maintain for like 5 years and then reintroduce volume and get noobie gains again? I dont think so, at least for someone who has trained for years. Would compare with ”you have to shock the muscles”.

 

[losteve19]

@mella I mean, people with PHD’s are telling me it’s real science not bro science, so I’m trusting what they say. This is what renaissance periodization’s Dr. mike israetel says in his videos on bulking and cutting.

But it also seems like you’re misunderstanding it. You won’t get noob gains again. Your body just gets to a point in a bulk where the muscle gain slows in comparison to fat gain. I don’t know the science behind it, you’d have to watch one of RP’s videos on bulking and cutting.

 

[johnlxyz]

@losteve19 Imo Israetel is a little too fond of tidily constructed and seemingly logical programs (diets or workout routines) that are not particularly well grounded in research.

SBS imo does a much better job of not pretending the science is less ambiguous than it is.

 

[mella]

@losteve19 Yea, his whole ide of cycling volume does not get a lot of support from other ”science based” people.

 

[jamierite74]

@tristatervrepair In theory this makes sense, especially for your health. But what about for maximizing muscular potential? I could be wrong but anecdotally it seems like the bigger extended bulks are what truly level up a natural physique. And that doing shorter bulks/cuts will never let you reach those next levels. Over the years Ive done varying rates of weight gain during bulks but Im always striving to find that perfect middle ground which is trying to maximize progress while still looking good. Right now its a ~8 month bulk and ~3.5 month cut. Rinse and repeat. Rate of weight gain is small-ish but more importantly measurable. Ive done the 1lb/month bulks but theres too much room for error for many reasons. Anyways, Im lean in the summer for parties, vacations, etc. But its always on the back of my mind if Im shortchanging myself.

 

[tristatervrepair]

@jamierite74 When I do long bulks, there is a point that in my perception I am gaining mostly fat.

And I mean, health is important to maximize muscle potential. In my case, when I bulk for too long, I always get some temporary stomach/intestine problem (I do eat healthy 95% of the time).

Long bulks makes me do longer cuts, and when I do longer cuts I suffer from hair loss.

One of my top priorities is aesthetics, so I don't think It would be worth getting on higher BF, loose some amount of hair temporary, and get irritated stomach just for some tiny extra amount of muscle, that I will probably get either way, it will take just some more time

But yeah, I do agree when you are on high level of fitness, longer bulks may be necessary to surpass a plateau

 

[jidalbc]

@tristatervrepair Basically what I do. Roughly I just need a week of cut for each month of bulk. 4-6 month bulks and 4-6 week cuts

 

[jamierite74]

@johnlxyz I just rely on anecdotal evidence and the trends Ive seen over the years closely following this sport. I like the quote "success leaves clues". Many believe you need to get a little heavy and stay up there for an extended period of time to truly level up a late intermediate/advanced natural physique. I always strive to find the perfect middle ground while still attempting to maximize my muscular potential. Currently this is an ~8 month bulk and ~3.5 month cut. Rinse and repeat. Im lean in the summer months for parties, vacations, general quality of life, etc. Rate of weight gain on the bulk is small-ish but more importantly measurable. Ive done the 1lb/month bulks but theres too much room for error for many reasons. But its always on the back of my mind if Im shortchanging my progress and never allowing myself to truly level up.

 

[johnlxyz]

@jamierite74 I agree with the success leaves clues notion but at the same time it's hard to say here when there's a natural tendency for people to prefer long bulks anyway.

 

[rainn]

@johnlxyz

Is there really evidence that long bulk:cut cycles are more efficient than short ones?

Is there any evidence that bulking and cutting is efficient at all?

 

[johnlxyz]

@rainn Compared to very slow bulking without cutting or compared to neither bulking nor cutting?

Because the latter possibility is easily refuted for hypertrophy.

 

[rainn]

@johnlxyz

Because the latter possibility is easily refuted for hypertrophy.

Please do so