Taking a crack at 80% Diet and 20% Training

[jtmass]

I am sure everyone has heard this one liner. Is there any truth or science behind this? Do we have any new numbers and percentages floating now? I see people still talking about this and I'm like :wtf:

What I follow is; be on a good diet 90% of the time and give my 100% in training.

Please share your views.

 

[DonutsNDeads]

I am sure everyone has heard this one liner. Is there any truth or science behind this? Do we have any new numbers and percentages floating now? I see people still talking about this and I'm like :wtf:

What I follow is; be on a good diet 90% of the time and give my 100% in training.

Please share your views.

Training is the catalyst for the change in the body if your trying to make gains. Otherwise there would be no muscle growth.

 

[john.patterson]

I am sure everyone has heard this one liner. Is there any truth or science behind this? Do we have any new numbers and percentages floating now? I see people still talking about this and I'm like wtf

What I follow is; be on a good diet 90% of the time and give my 100% in training.

Please share your views.

The only issue I see with your calculation is that you end up with 190%....

I think as a general statement for average health and wellness, the 80% diet and 20% training is a reasonable split. If you eat garbage and train your *ss off - you'll get strong but you'll still be overweight and you won't look too great IMO.

You can't overcome poor diet (whether you're undereating, overeating, or eating the wrong foods) with perfect training. However, you would still see improvements in body composition and health/fitness markers with a half-ass training program and a perfect diet.

 

[jtmass]

The only issue I see with your calculation is that you end up with 190%....

I think as a general statement for average health and wellness, the 80% diet and 20% training is a reasonable split. If you eat garbage and train your *ss off - you'll get strong but you'll still be overweight and you won't look too great IMO.

You can't overcome poor diet (whether you're undereating, overeating, or eating the wrong foods) with perfect training. However, you would still see improvements in body composition and health/fitness markers with a half-ass training program and a perfect diet.

My calculation is not to get it to 100%. But to give my perspective that when I stuck to my diet most of the time and trained hard everyday I had good gains. What I am questioning is how do we know 80% is diet and 20% is training? Just an assumption?

 

[john.patterson]

My calculation is not to get it to 100%. But to give my perspective that when I stuck to my diet most of the time and trained hard everyday I had good gains. What I am questioning is how do we know 80% is diet and 20% is training? Just an assumption?

Now I understand. I would agree with what you're saying. Always go 100% and give it everything in the gym, and keep your diet on point 80-90% of the time. That's a good approach.

I think the 80/20 is just an assumption. There isn't any true way to calculate what percentage does what, but eating the right amount of calories and protein plays a huge role in overall progress and success with how you look

 

[Whisky]

Yeah imo the 80/20 saying is just a nice way to highlight the importance of nutrition, it’s not the specific number, just the fact that it’s the more important part of the ‘look good’ equation. It’s impact is down to most people thinking it’s the other way.

You can look ‘ok’ I.e not fat, with great nutrition and no training, doesn’t work the other way though......

 

[jtmass]

Yeah imo the 80/20 saying is just a nice way to highlight the importance of nutrition, it’s not the specific number, just the fact that it’s the more important part of the ‘look good’ equation. It’s impact is down to most people thinking it’s the other way.

You can look ‘ok’ I.e not fat, with great nutrition and no training, doesn’t work the other way though......

I have always heard this from so called Fitness Gurus all around. When you question them about the ratio; nada. They just say, that’s the way it is.

 

[booneman77]

My calculation is not to get it to 100%. But to give my perspective that when I stuck to my diet most of the time and trained hard everyday I had good gains. What I am questioning is how do we know 80% is diet and 20% is training? Just an assumption?

i'd say 80/20 is a good breakdown for this reason:

you can train halfway decent and still make good progress when your diet is on point, but if you eat only halfway decent and train perfect, you will still only see average at best progress. Thus making the diet portion that much more impactful out of the 100% equation. ]

Basically, if you put the same effort into both, you will see significantly more impact from the diet aspect than from the training one. If I had to get somebody into shape, and they said "I have limited capability to train and eat right" I would tell them to make 100% sure they eat right FIRST and then train with what time is left.

 

[jtmass]

i'd say 80/20 is a good breakdown for this reason:

you can train halfway decent and still make good progress when your diet is on point, but if you eat only halfway decent and train perfect, you will still only see average at best progress. Thus making the diet portion that much more impactful out of the 100% equation. ]

Basically, if you put the same effort into both, you will see significantly more impact from the diet aspect than from the training one. If I had to get somebody into shape, and they said "I have limited capability to train and eat right" I would tell them to make 100% sure they eat right FIRST and then train with what time is left.

Why not 70/30? There is no logic behind saying 80/20. Yes, diet is the most important factor to bring changes in your body.

What I tell people is exactly the same. Eat right first and train hard. There isn’t a ratio.

 

[booneman77]

Why not 70/30? There is no logic behind saying 80/20. Yes, diet is the most important factor to bring changes in your body.

What I tell people is exactly the same. Eat right first and train hard. There isn’t a ratio.

70/30 would be fine ha. I think the point of the adage is just to express how MUCH more important diet is.

 

[scherbs]

Why not 70/30? There is no logic behind saying 80/20. Yes, diet is the most important factor to bring changes in your body.

What I tell people is exactly the same. Eat right first and train hard. There isn’t a ratio.

Serious question-
Are you looking to pick a meaningless fight? I think most would agree both diet and training are important and most (hopefully) would agree diet is the more important of the two, but whether it is 80/20, 75/25, 70/30, 55/45 or whatever-the difference is immaterial.
You can’t measure ones focus on diet or on training-it is they are intangible qualities (not quantities).
I sorely doubt the “fitness gurus” you seem to be gunning for truly mean that one should focus exactly 80% on diet and 20% on training.
Sometimes a saying is just a saying

 

[jtmass]

Serious question-
Are you looking to pick a meaningless fight? I think most would agree both diet and training are important and most (hopefully) would agree diet is the more important of the two, but whether it is 80/20, 75/25, 70/30, 55/45 or whatever-the difference is immaterial.
You can’t measure ones focus on diet or on training-it is they are intangible qualities (not quantities).
I sorely doubt the “fitness gurus” you seem to be gunning for truly mean that one should focus exactly 80% on diet and 20% on training.
Sometimes a saying is just a saying

I don't fight, brother. Man of peace..

Seriously though.. You can’t measure ones focus on diet or on training-it is they are intangible qualities (not quantities).. I agree 100%

But, isn't it just plain stupid to say (and I don't argue with them) 80% of your fitness depends on diet and 20% depends on training when there is no such ratio.
Sometimes a saying is just a saying. When we look for proof or corroboration these days in everything, why not this.

Anyway.. Just wanted to get a view if people still talk about 80/20.

 

[booneman77]

I don't fight, brother. Man of peace..

Seriously though.. You can’t measure ones focus on diet or on training-it is they are intangible qualities (not quantities).. I agree 100%

But, isn't it just plain stupid to say (and I don't argue with them) 80% of your fitness depends on diet and 20% depends on training when there is no such ratio.
Sometimes a saying is just a saying. When we look for proof or corroboration these days in everything, why not this.

Anyway.. Just wanted to get a view if people still talk about 80/20.

The 80/20 is actually used because of the Pareto principal. It’s a common term to describe that fact that “roughly” 80% of the results come from 20% of the effort. In this case 80% of the results come from the diet while the final 20% come from training.

The values came from a guy who was growing peas in Italy and found that 80% of the peas came from only 20% of the total beans harvested. Basically a few had tons and most had just a few.

 

[ironkill]

I prefer what Dorian Yates said: "Nutrition is 100%. Training is 100%. Recovery is 100%."

 

[jtmass]

I prefer what Dorian Yates said: "Nutrition is 100%. Training is 100%. Recovery is 100%."

100% Nutrition is tough. I mean you have to have fun meal once a while

 

[Whisky]

100% Nutrition is tough. I mean you have to have fun meal once a while

If you don’t see eating good nutritious foods as ‘fun’ or ‘enjoyable’ then personally I think the fitness lifestyle will be harder than it needs to be.

I get everyone loves pizza and donuts and stuff but personally I put a shed load of effort into making sure I enjoy my ‘clean’ meals as much.

Can honestly say because of that I don’t crave the traditional ‘fun’ foods so I never eat them.

Don’t wish to sound like a pious **** and my point isn’t that no one should eat ‘fun’ foods but rather that if you get as much enjoyment from your ‘good’ foods you stop seeing ‘fun’ foods as that thus removing the desire to eat them anyway (without any feeling of missing out).

 

[jtmass]

If you don’t see eating good nutritious foods as ‘fun’ or ‘enjoyable’ then personally I think the fitness lifestyle will be harder than it needs to be.

I get everyone loves pizza and donuts and stuff but personally I put a shed load of effort into making sure I enjoy my ‘clean’ meals as much.

Can honestly say because of that I don’t crave the traditional ‘fun’ foods so I never eat them.

Don’t wish to sound like a pious **** and my point isn’t that no one should eat ‘fun’ foods but rather that if you get as much enjoyment from your ‘good’ foods you stop seeing ‘fun’ foods as that thus removing the desire to eat them anyway (without any feeling of missing out).

You can put whatever effort into your nutritional meal and it may have worked for you. But, majority of people would eat a meal which may be not entirely be good for their Macros and that’s fine. Fitness lifestyle doesn’t get harder if you have a meal once a while. It gets harder for people who cannot control the urge.

 

[Whisky]

You can put whatever effort into your nutritional meal and it may have worked for you. But, majority of people would eat a meal which may be not entirely be good for their Macros and that’s fine. Fitness lifestyle doesn’t get harder if you have a meal once a while. It gets harder for people who cannot control the urge.

Yeah I agree with that, it was more the inference that certain foods are seen as ‘treats’ or massive rewards I think that makes things harder - like if you see the stuff you eat 90% of the time as less enjoyable.

I probably have a slightly different view because I historically had a terrible relationship with food and was very overweight for a long time.....