Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Tips on how to cut

Lord_Of_Iron said:
Good Nutrtition+Good Training+Cardio+Recovery= Beast

1.Good Nutrition
Look for Carb Cycling use it and if u don't happy with results after CarbCycling try Keto diet and u will see results.

2.Good Training
Light Weight>More Sets>More Reps Slit or Whole Body training.

3.Cardio
Do after weight training on Treadmil or Eliptical Machines, don't do on statick Bike!
When u don't training better go out and run or go in gym and do what i said before.

4.Recovery
Sleep alot *night sleeping*


*Suplements*
If u want u can use Whey protein and something that can boost ur Energy, maybe fat burner.

This is what i can said and soon I will use this same thing i've said to you. Wish you good luck and cut yourself like beast and F*CK all GIRLS :D
Click to expand...

You should explain that training a little more. Not sure how lighter weight =\= more sets
 
AdonisBelt said:
You should explain that training a little more. Not sure how lighter weight =\= more sets
Click to expand...

Getting Lean: More Reps, Less Weight

Here’s the other side of what Schenk was getting at earlier. He still recommends doing all the same fundamental exercises (squats, lunges, pulling/pushing exercises), but with the opposite spin. “Aim for a higher rep count with lighter weights, maybe 15 or so, with decreased rest time,” Schenk says. The more active and constant your workout regimen is, the better chance you have of achieving a body with a lot of lean muscle. In general, try to keep activity levels high during your workouts, without much rest time in between exercises. Of course, leaning your regimen more toward cardio than heavy weight training is also something you’ll want to do.
 
Eat clean, eat less. No need to modify your weight training protocol AT ALL. The high rep stuff for cutting is nonsense.

Diet, diet, diet.
 
Lord_Of_Iron said:
Getting Lean: More Reps, Less Weight

Here’s the other side of what Schenk was getting at earlier. He still recommends doing all the same fundamental exercises (squats, lunges, pulling/pushing exercises), but with the opposite spin. “Aim for a higher rep count with lighter weights, maybe 15 or so, with decreased rest time,” Schenk says. The more active and constant your workout regimen is, the better chance you have of achieving a body with a lot of lean muscle. In general, try to keep activity levels high during your workouts, without much rest time in between exercises. Of course, leaning your regimen more toward cardio than heavy weight training is also something you’ll want to do.
Click to expand...

No.

You get shredded by diet and quality muscle mass. You maintain muscle mass through lifting heavy.

That simple.
 
Lord_Of_Iron said:
Getting Lean: More Reps, Less Weight

Here’s the other side of what Schenk was getting at earlier. He still recommends doing all the same fundamental exercises (squats, lunges, pulling/pushing exercises), but with the opposite spin. “Aim for a higher rep count with lighter weights, maybe 15 or so, with decreased rest time,” Schenk says. The more active and constant your workout regimen is, the better chance you have of achieving a body with a lot of lean muscle. In general, try to keep activity levels high during your workouts, without much rest time in between exercises. Of course, leaning your regimen more toward cardio than heavy weight training is also something you’ll want to do.
Click to expand...
I did this, and I accidentally all my muscle.
 
Lord_Of_Iron said:
Good Nutrtition+Good Training+Cardio+Recovery= Beast

1.Good Nutrition
Look for Carb Cycling use it and if u don't happy with results after CarbCycling try Keto diet and u will see results.

2.Good Training
Light Weight>More Sets>More Reps Slit or Whole Body training.

3.Cardio
Do after weight training on Treadmil or Eliptical Machines, don't do on statick Bike!
When u don't training better go out and run or go in gym and do what i said before.

4.Recovery
Sleep alot *night sleeping*


*Suplements*
If u want u can use Whey protein and something that can boost ur Energy, maybe fat burner.

This is what i can said and soon I will use this same thing i've said to you. Wish you good luck and cut yourself like beast and F*CK all GIRLS :D
Click to expand...

i disagree with almost everything u have mentioned
 
JDog479 said:
No.

You get shredded by diet and quality muscle mass. You maintain muscle mass through lifting heavy.

That simple.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% I usually do a 5x5 themed upper lower split that goes 6 days a week (low volume)
 
Google this ****, if you really wanted to know you would have found a way to cut. If it doesn't work try something else you find on google, everyone's different.. Don't rely on other people to do it for you.
 
Pypp said:
Google this ****, if you really wanted to know you would have found a way to cut. If it doesn't work try something else you find on google, everyone's different.. Don't rely on other people to do it for you.
Click to expand...

everyones different? are we not all homo sapiens? do we not all have the same anatomy and therefore the same physiology?

how are we all different? how are the mechanisms different for everyone?

why is that doctors, who have to have a large in depth understanding of anatomy and physiology, only study one anatomy if we are all different? why do they only study one physiology if we are all different?

to be different, couldnt one say that we are all different. in that we have different anatomy and different physiology. if we are different there different species of humans? or does it go further up the chain, like genus or family.

and what is wrong about asking a question? why reinvent the wheel. why not learn from other have done, kind of like what happened when you went to school. you did go to school right?
 
hardwork25 said:
Nope. Law of thermo dynamics which has been explained in this thread by someone a lot smarter than myself.
Click to expand...


the law of thermodynamics is a theory, it is not a fact. as a fact, it has to be 100% accurate and science has shown that it is not. therefore, not a fact.

a theory is:

  1. A supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, esp. one based on general principles independent of the thing to be...: "Darwin's theory of evolution"
  2. A set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based: "a theory of education"; "music theory".
 
asooneyeonig said:
everyones different? are we not all homo sapiens? do we not all have the same anatomy and therefore the same physiology?

how are we all different? how are the mechanisms different for everyone?

why is that doctors, who have to have a large in depth understanding of anatomy and physiology, only study one anatomy if we are all different? why do they only study one physiology if we are all different?

to be different, couldnt one say that we are all different. in that we have different anatomy and different physiology. if we are different there different species of humans? or does it go further up the chain, like genus or family.

and what is wrong about asking a question? why reinvent the wheel. why not learn from other have done, kind of like what happened when you went to school. you did go to school right?
Click to expand...

If I'm an endomorph and he's a mesomorph then yes we're different smartass.
 
hardwork25 said:
Nope. Law of thermo dynamics which has been explained in this thread by someone a lot smarter than myself.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing, though-its more complicated because of variables dependent upon an individual's goals.

For straight weight loss with no regard for other performance, that's fine.

What about a recomp? What if I want to ADD muscle while losing fat? Are we talking straight weight loss or fat loss? That, IMO, is the caveat to all of this.
 
Swanson52 said:
Here's the thing, though-its more complicated because of variables dependent upon an individual's goals.

For straight weight loss with no regard for other performance, that's fine.

What about a recomp? What if I want to ADD muscle while losing fat? Are we talking straight weight loss or fat loss? That, IMO, is the caveat to all of this.
Click to expand...


I agree 100% and I understand there are a lot of variables but what I was simply saying is that if a person wants to lose weight they need to expend more than they consume. Simple as that. It's not more difficult than that, it's just not, no matter how many people try to talk about carbs, or fat, or any other macro nutrient.

Now in regards to a recomp, or Pre-contest, or some of the other examples you said you are correct. There's more than one way to skin a cat I was just using the KISS theory.
 
Here are some thoughts while trying to keep it simple.

One of the jobs of insulin is to transport excessive blood sugar into adipose tissue. while this mechanism is working you cannot pullout energy from adipose tissue, meaning its a one way street. This, imo is the big reasoning of low carb enthusiasts. Seeing as how carbs, especially refined sugars, increase blood sugar the fastest.

Here is where there can be a potential flaw in the calories on vs calories out theory, or the law of thermal dynamics. Blood sugar has to stay in a very tight range or bad things happen. Simply, nearly every time you eat you are going to increase blood sugar to a point that insulin is increased. If you are eating every few hours you are constantly causing high levels of insulin, therefore preventing the usage of adipose tissue as fuel. This is nearly irrelevant of energy expenditure. So you are storing much more than you expend. This imo is the reason why toouxh cardio can eat away at muscle and make you skinny fat.

So yes. Cal in vs cal out makes sense on a week to week scale and even over a few days but falls apart as you shorten the time frame.

I also believe this is the part of the mechanism behind why intermittent fasting works as well as carb cycling, carb back loading, etc.
 
I don't disagree with carb cycling, back loading, keto, IF, or anything really that works to help someone get to their goals.
 
Jiigzz said:
I have posted even just recently in other threads and in the pubmed research on the first page, that this is not entirely correct. It sounds good on paper but it doesn't transfer over.
The law of thermodynamics plays the biggest role in weight loss and whilst it may not apply directly to open and closed systems, it still holds relevant weighting. Consider this study (from previous page) Invalid Link Removed : if found that low carb or normal carb and high carb diets yielded the same fat loss results. If you had a high fat intake which met the demands of the body, then you will not lose weight. To lose weight implies a calorie deficit and to gain implies a calorie excess. The macronutrient compostition plays only a minor role in this regard.
You can see this by the conflicting evidence that low-carb diets are any more effective WRT weight loss than high-carb (again I have more studies) but the health implications are determinable.

Insulins primary is to remove excess carbohydrate into storage or to be metabolized. Carbohydrate balance infers that the body utilises glucose almost as rapidly as it receives it and only ever stores it as fat in times of abundance.
Click to expand...



Ill repost this just in case it wasn't read previously.
 
threeFs said:
OK guy, eat 2500 or whatever your calories are but all from candy and soda only. Then tell me about calories in & out.
You're an idiot.
Edit. Or you could even indulge in your beloved wheat bread or whatever. No matter.
Click to expand...



I don't respond to anyone under 5'10especially ones without common sense and feel the need to call someone an idiot on the Internet. Lol.

By the way people have lost weight wasting crap junk food. ie; the woman who lost weight on the Taco Bell diet. Yeah she lost weight eating nothing but Taco Bell. Do you know how? Because she took in less than she expended.

I'm looking forward to your response and anything else you can try to personally attack me on without knowing me.
 
hardwork25 said:
I don't respond to anyone under 5'10especially ones without common sense and feel the need to call someone an idiot on the Internet. Lol.

By the way people have lost weight wasting crap junk food. ie; the woman who lost weight on the Taco Bell diet. Yeah she lost weight eating nothing but Taco Bell. Do you know how? Because she took in less than she expended.

I'm looking forward to your response and anything else you can try to personally attack me on without knowing me.
Click to expand...

Your talking about personal attacks but in your first sentence of this post you call him out on being 5'10"...lol come on man. Who the fu*k cares how tall someone is, there are a lot of people shorter than me that I guarentee could beat the living piss out of both of us at the same time. At the end of the day, don't eat **** food, eat less than you take in for optimal body composition (fat loss wise). Lots of people have had success for just weight loss with both methods, some do cardio, some don't. We are all human, but there is no cookie cutter approach for every individual. It often comes down to what your are genetically given or not imo. Some have to work a lot harder than others.
 
jswain34 said:
Your talking about personal attacks but in your first sentence of this post you call him out on being 5'10"...lol come on man. Who the fu*k cares how tall someone is, there are a lot of people shorter than me that I guarentee could beat the living piss out of both of us at the same time. At the end of the day, don't eat **** food, eat less than you take in for optimal body composition (fat loss wise). Lots of people have had success for just weight loss with both methods, some do cardio, some don't. We are all human, but there is no cookie cutter approach for every individual. It often comes down to what your are genetically given or not imo. Some have to work a lot harder than others.
Click to expand...


Who's talking about beating someone's a$$?? Lol. Never did I say anything that correlated height to toughness. Lol furthermore there is always someone out there that's a bigger bada$$ than you or me.

And you're response about not being a cookie cutter approach and that you should eat less than you take in is exactly that point I was making and being called an idiot for.

So thanks for proving my point.
 
You said "I don't respond to anyone under 5'10" especially ones without common sense and call someone an idiot on the idiot...". Why does it matter that he is 5'10"? Does he not deserve the respect to get a proper response so you could possibly teach him something or, god forbid, you might be wrong and he could teach you something? Afterall, we are all here for discussion and to teach and learn from eachother are we not?
 
Well, this got heated awefully quick since I last stopped in. But to the guy saying the law of thermodynamics is a theory.... Erm... Isn't it called the LAW not the Theory of thermodynamics? I'm fairly certain they make distinctions like that on purpose.

Derp.

Regardless. The forums are meant to serve as a virtual community. It is meant to help people communicate and engage in discussions about topics, to educate and make others succeed in their goals better. To the man suggesting that he just looks for information, then this community isn't for you! We are here to help each other weed through bull**** not put down people for asking questions!
 
jswain34 said:
You said "I don't respond to anyone under 5'10" especially ones without common sense and call someone an idiot on the idiot...". Why does it matter that he is 5'10"? Does he not deserve the respect to get a proper response so you could possibly teach him something or, god forbid, you might be wrong and he could teach you something? Afterall, we are all here for discussion and to teach and learn from eachother are we not?
Click to expand...


It doesn't matter. I was being funny. To your point though when someone calls you an idiot they don't deserve much of a response if any.
 
And I'm absolutely not wrong about calories in versus calories out to lose weight. And if anyone can show me science saying if you consume 1000 calories but expend 1500 calories and gain weight i will shut the frack up.
 
threeFs said:
OK guy, eat 2500 or whatever your calories are but all from candy and soda only. Then tell me about calories in & out.
You're an idiot.
Edit. Or you could even indulge in your beloved wheat bread or whatever. No matter.
Click to expand...


I don't eat bread really as I don't subscribe to a high carb diet, and if instead of skimming through a few of my posts you might actually try and read them. Also after learning from other guys on here about wheat and gluten sensitivity I've changed a few of the things I choose to eat.

You see that's how it is supposed to work. Instead of calling those guys idiots they shared their knowledge and I learned something.

Anyways enough of that. Good luck on your journey man and your goals. No sarcasm either.
 
hardwork25 said:
And I'm absolutely not wrong about calories in versus calories out to lose weight. And if anyone can show me science saying if you consume 1000 calories but expend 1500 calories and gain weight i will shut the frack up.
Click to expand...

I suppose, but I am not personally concerned with weight loss composed of anything but adipose tissue, which your bunk theory would do almost exclusively.
My bad, go ahead and lose pounds big fella. Bulk than cut. Burn more than you eat, no matter what it is. You won the Internet today boss. Be proud.
 
hardwork25 said:
And I'm absolutely not wrong about calories in versus calories out to lose weight. And if anyone can show me science saying if you consume 1000 calories but expend 1500 calories and gain weight i will shut the frack up.
Click to expand...

Just tossing this out there but there was a professor who ate nothing but junk from 7-11 and lost weight because he would stick to something like 1500 cals a day and burn some where in the neighborhood off 2000. Now Im not sure if the original writer of this thread is still reading along but If I am correct his original question was not simply just how to loose weight but how to keep the optimal amount of muscle while getting his BF down from the 20% range. I am not going to argue against cutting carbs but I would recommend starting off by changing your carbs from simple to complex first and see how your body reacts. Cut your refined sugar intake soda ice cream and generally anything that is considered a dessert that does not come from a plant, and eliminate fast food/ processed food, also no booze. While sticking to a more natural diet may not yield quick losses you will retain better muscle mass and feel a lot better. I am guessing that if you are in the 20%range you are a regular consumer of many of the things I listed. You should notice a drop in weight after a couple of weeks simply from the water you are no longer retaining
.
 
threeFs said:
I suppose, but I am not personally concerned with weight loss composed of anything but adipose tissue, which your bunk theory would do almost exclusively.
My bad, go ahead and lose pounds big fella. Bulk than cut. Burn more than you eat, no matter what it is. You won the Internet today boss. Be proud.
Click to expand...


Are you the OP of this thread? Weird cuz if you were I could understand how what you were personally concerned with would matter.

And my "theory" is not a theory or bunk but again common sense and logic seemed to have escaped you and therefore I don't expect you to understand.

Saying I won the Internet battle, calling me boss, and telling me to be proud is cute but it still doesn't hide the fact that what I stated is not "lies" and not idiotic but relevant to the ORIGINAL OP....

Don't worry I'll high five myself or have one of the beautiful women I sleep with pat me on the ass. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top