The Official Hype Fitness Thread 6.0 - Part 8

[ComicChick]

i'm going through that now lol

 

[Iceman]

Haha. That first session back and you think the day after - that wasn't so bad.

 

[TheGuy]

Haha. That first session back and you think the day after - that wasn't so bad.

The pain came 3 days after, continued now to the 4th, and will probably continue for the next 1-2 days. I deadlifted 170 lbs, but I really should have started at 140 lbs. Deadlifts are insanely stressful to the body.

 

[Iceman]

The pain came 3 days after, continued now to the 4th, and will probably continue for the next 1-2 days. I deadlifted 170 lbs, but I really should have started at 140 lbs. Deadlifts are insanely stressful to the body.

That’s hardcore haha. The longer it stays away, the worse it is when it does come.

I’ve always liked deadlifts. Actually I just prefer most back exercises (lower and upper) to chest.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Restarting my fitness program at high 160s-170 lbs at 5'6". Wishing my eating and diet cooperates. I'd like to crack 150 lbs bench press, 200 lbs squat, and 230-240 lbs deadlift in 2 months while at the same time reducing my mass to 150 lbs.

Hmm, so you want to build strength, while also on a cut, or caloric deficit? Seems like you're going to make things harder on yourself while doing so? Also why two months? Any specific reason? What happens if you can't make it there in two months? What if in doing so you gain weight? Seems like either doing one say losing the weight first, and then the other, gaining the strength, or vice versa, seem like more efficient ways to go? Also, for most people, strength gains in the squat, and dead lift are going to happen faster than in the bench.


Lastly, why deadlift? It seems like most research these days has shown that DLs put too much strain on the entire body (various systems) in terms of the trade off for strength, that the recover takes. You'd probably be better off doing straight legged deadlifts/romanian deadlifts, or cleans.

@TheGuy


That doesn't seem right... You want a mass of 150lbs yet able to squat 200lbs? It puts things into a strange perspective when I weigh in at 175lbs and generally squat 110lbs.


How many reps and sets are you aiming for, cause that may be where we differ; I usually aim for six sets of 8-12 reps, so if you're matching that, one of us is doing something wrong, but if you're going for the small numbers (or reps/sets) then I suppose it's relative.

I’m not sure why you’re asking why that doesn’t seem right? Are you saying because his numbers seem high? Please don’t take offense, but you’re numbers would be considered below average, even for just recreational lifters. But it all depends on your goals.

Yes. I do sets of 5 reps. I exclusively do compound lifts like the aforementioned movements plus overhead presses, and barbell rowing because I train for strength. Those numbers I used to left a few years back when I weighed around 140 lbs, so those target weights are realistic based upon previous experience. Strength can be somewhat measured when divided over the body weight. A decent baseline strength for recreational lifters are 1.5x BW for bench presses, 1.75x BW for squats, and 2x BW for deadlifts. At those weights, I aim to do 3 sets of 5 reps.

I suppose it depends on what definition you’re using, but you did say recreational so those lifts and numbers would be moderate/modest. Usually the way you can accurately place yourself is by looking at it in terms of lifting experience (or years). When training properly people up to about one year will fall into the “Beginner” category, then Novice, Intermediate, Advanced, and Super Advanced. It also of course depends on how you’re doing the comparisons, as you mentioned.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

The pain came 3 days after, continued now to the 4th, and will probably continue for the next 1-2 days. I deadlifted 170 lbs, but I really should have started at 140 lbs. Deadlifts are insanely stressful to the body.

They are, and people are starting to trend away from them. Doing more than your body is ready for isn't just foolish, it's asking to be injured. Be careful. Take it slow.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

i'm going through that now lol

From what I remember, it seems like you always work too much!

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

hey hey!
spoons and devil don't check in as much anymore. i wish they would. i miss their commentary

today makes 2 months since i've had a soda UNLESS you count the one-day Ginger Ale snafu. If so, I'm on 2 weeks then.

Also, I have not been sleeping much and as of yesterday, had already put in 50 hours at work. I fell asleep about 530 yesterday morning, and work up about 915 today i remember waking up for about 20 minutes around midnight, but that's it. needless to say, i think i really needed it.

also, i stepped on the scale, and if it's accurate, which i think it will fluctuate a little, then i've lost 4-7 pounds this year already. and i've hit my 50oz of water minimum goal every day except possibly yesterday due to my sleep coma lol. i think i was short 10 oz but i'm not sure sure

Aw man, well it has been years since I've last been around, and...yesh...counting my old account, almost 18 years since I first joined! Eh, whatever, some soda, or junk food once in a while is fine. Everything in moderation!

Good for you, that's great to hear! Why the minimum 50oz of water per day? Just not drinking enough in general?

 

[Iceman]

That’s a shame. I’ve always loved deadlifts.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

That’s a shame. I’ve always loved deadlifts.

Yeah, me too. But from what I've seen, read, watched, listened to, it seems like Das just put too much stress on the body, and the injury risk/reward tradeoff also isn't great.

I don't think there is a big concern when people are only DLing something around sub 300lbs, or somewhere in that range. But it does seem to absolutely be a concern when going above 300-400+lbs for DLs. It also seems that as far as activation for those muscle groups, it is also inferior to a number of other exercises, squats for quad, and SLDL/RDL for hams, and glutes for two examples.

It is still a great test for overall strength, but if you're doing them, especially above the 300+/- range, I'd probably trade them out for safer, and more effective exercises.

 

[ComicChick]

From what I remember, it seems like you always work too much!

haha good memory. yeah i work a lot still. not as much as i used to, but still a lot.

 

[TheGuy]

Hmm, so you want to build strength, while also on a cut, or caloric deficit? Seems like you're going to make things harder on yourself while doing so? Also why two months? Any specific reason? What happens if you can't make it there in two months? What if in doing so you gain weight? Seems like either doing one say losing the weight first, and then the other, gaining the strength, or vice versa, seem like more efficient ways to go? Also, for most people, strength gains in the squat, and dead lift are going to happen faster than in the bench.

Well, my protein intake is about okay, so in terms of muscle recovery I'm doing fine which is where I'm at now. If my protein intake is less than desired, I'll know it because my muscles wouldn't be recovered to the next gym session. That DOMS phase days ago was just basically my body feeling a bit more sore than usual because of my general lack of fitness compared to before (170 lbs now, 140-ish lbs before). And yes, strength building and weight loss can absolutely be done on a high protein and low carbohydrate eating.

Lastly, why deadlift? It seems like most research these days has shown that DLs put too much strain on the entire body (various systems) in terms of the trade off for strength, that the recover takes. You'd probably be better off doing straight legged deadlifts/romanian deadlifts, or cleans.

I'm sorry but this is absolute nonsense. DLs when done on an alternating schedule allows for recovery while at the same time gaining pounds on the lift. And I don't think there has been any research at all that says DLs have worse trade offs between recovery and lift gain, unless of course if the person does DLs more than twice a week. Now that is a sure way to ruin your body. Straight legged and romanian DLs are more localized in results, unlike the conventional DLs which activates almost all muscle groups. I'm not really a fan of localized training and just generally prefer the big lifts (DLs, bench, squat), so both straight legged and romanian DLs are a no for me.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Well, my protein intake is about okay, so in terms of muscle recovery I'm doing fine which is where I'm at now. If my protein intake is less than desired, I'll know it because my muscles wouldn't be recovered to the next gym session. That DOMS phase days ago was just basically my body feeling a bit more sore than usual because of my general lack of fitness compared to before (170 lbs now, 140-ish lbs before). And yes, strength building and weight loss can absolutely be done on a high protein and low carbohydrate eating.

Only to a degree, and only in certain/specific situations, which it would sound like you are in. Basically the beginner, or novice phases of lifting, or someone that has been detrained for long enough. You cannot do this indefinitely, and just because you can for now, doesn't mean you should, or that it is the most optimal. Again, it does depend on your goal(s). If you're only trying to lose about 10lbs, and are only wanting to get your deadlift upwards of 240lbs, then you'll probably be fine. But that doesn't mean doing both at the same time is optimal. The research is solid on this, eating and gaining is the most optimal way to build strength, and muscle mass. Cutting and being in a caloric deficit is the most optimal to lose weight, but will make it harder, if not impossible to gain strength and muscle mass, depending on how trained an individual is.

I'm not saying you can't do this, I'm just saying it's not the most optimal way to do it is all. It's like saying you can take route A, or B to get to a place, both will get you there at the same time, but will be different paths. Or you can take route C, which will also get you there, but it's going to take you longer. Again though, in your case, for your goals, you can probably get away with it due to being in the beginner/novice phase.

I'm sorry but this is absolute nonsense. DLs when done on an alternating schedule allows for recovery while at the same time gaining pounds on the lift. And I don't think there has been any research at all that says DLs have worse trade offs between recovery and lift gain, unless of course if the person does DLs more than twice a week. Now that is a sure way to ruin your body. Straight legged and romanian DLs are more localized in results, unlike the conventional DLs which activates almost all muscle groups. I'm not really a fan of localized training and just generally prefer the big lifts (DLs, bench, squat), so both straight legged and romanian DLs are a no for me.

I'm not saying DLs are all bad, and will break a person in half, but the trade off for how much DLs tax a person's system compared to the results has come under scrutiny, which I will say not everyone agrees on. People are not dismissing the DL as being a useless exercise, not by any means. In fact, it's the opposite, research shows that they take so much out of a person that unless you're deadlifting to be a better deadlifter, or because you are specifically competing at some point for the DL, the trade off isn't worth it. So I will concede that if you're lifting to be a strength athlete, you might want to keep the DL around. But are you? Again, not throwing any salt at all your direction, but a DL of about 225-240lbs isn't a lot, by any means. And you could get to that level of strength with other, "safer" exercises.

EKG results have shown they don't activate the hamstrings, glutes, or quads as much as other similar exercises. SLDL/RDL I suppose you could say are more localized, but they seem to target the muscle groups that the DL also hits, better than the DL does.

Again though, this is also something that applies to people once you are strong enough, deadlifting 125lbs probably isn't going to get in the way of a person's training or recover very much. Once the weight starts getting heavy enough, on top of all of the other training a person does, that person could probably see better overall results no longer doing DLs. It would absolutely be better for their recovery.

 

[Flash525]

Lastly, why deadlift? It seems like most research these days has shown that DLs put too much strain on the entire body (various systems) in terms of the trade off for strength, that the recover takes. You'd probably be better off doing straight legged deadlifts/romanian deadlifts, or cleans.

I can't speak for everyone, but I used to suffer (a lot) with my lower back. Deadlifts were suggested to me by both a physio, and a gym instructor/trainer, and I honestly swear by them now.

I wouldn't say dead-lifting is too much strain, it's the incorrect technique that's the problem, and a lot of people probably don't have the technique right, or life too heavy when they don't have the strength to maintain form that presents problems.

I’m not sure why you’re asking why that doesn’t seem right? Are you saying because his numbers seem high? Please don’t take offense, but you’re numbers would be considered below average, even for just recreational lifters. But it all depends on your goals.

No offence taken, but I think you've already answered the question; different goals, and also your definition of recreational gym users.

I utilize deadlifts alongside squats, pullups, and occasionally bent-over rows, so I'll do them back to back, have a rest, and then crack on with the next round. I'm not looking to bulk up; I'm more about maintaining my mass/weight, so I don't need to go heavy or go home, but I did think his numbers seemed high, but then he may have very different intentions to me, as would you.

I'd love to see typical recreational gym users do what I do too, though I think I'm safe in saying that I can assure you that isn't the case where I gym.

 

[TheGuy]

Only to a degree, and only in certain/specific situations, which it would sound like you are in. Basically the beginner, or novice phases of lifting, or someone that has been detrained for long enough. You cannot do this indefinitely, and just because you can for now, doesn't mean you should, or that it is the most optimal. Again, it does depend on your goal(s). If you're only trying to lose about 10lbs, and are only wanting to get your deadlift upwards of 240lbs, then you'll probably be fine. But that doesn't mean doing both at the same time is optimal. The research is solid on this, eating and gaining is the most optimal way to build strength, and muscle mass. Cutting and being in a caloric deficit is the most optimal to lose weight, but will make it harder, if not impossible to gain strength and muscle mass, depending on how trained an individual is.

I'm not saying you can't do this, I'm just saying it's not the most optimal way to do it is all. It's like saying you can take route A, or B to get to a place, both will get you there at the same time, but will be different paths. Or you can take route C, which will also get you there, but it's going to take you longer. Again though, in your case, for your goals, you can probably get away with it due to being in the beginner/novice phase.

Bolded is basically the jest gist of my argument that I failed to properly articulate. I'm back at the beginner stage due to a long layoff, and my primary goal is to increase my lifts equal or beyond my previous personal records as well as going down to those same weight range I used to before. Beyond those numbers, I still don't know but would really like to climb 2.5xBW deadlift, 2xBW squat, and 1.75xBW bench. Your argument is definitely applied to the intermediate stage, above a beginner. I'm still a beginner (again) so I could definitely get away with my current diet, even if it takes long.

I'm not saying DLs are all bad, and will break a person in half, but the trade off for how much DLs tax a person's system compared to the results has come under scrutiny, which I will say not everyone agrees on. People are not dismissing the DL as being a useless exercise, not by any means. In fact, it's the opposite, research shows that they take so much out of a person that unless you're deadlifting to be a better deadlifter, or because you are specifically competing at some point for the DL, the trade off isn't worth it. So I will concede that if you're lifting to be a strength athlete, you might want to keep the DL around. But are you? Again, not throwing any salt at all your direction, but a DL of about 225-240lbs isn't a lot, by any means. And you could get to that level of strength with other, "safer" exercises.

EKG results have shown they don't activate the hamstrings, glutes, or quads as much as other similar exercises. SLDL/RDL I suppose you could say are more localized, but they seem to target the muscle groups that the DL also hits, better than the DL does.

Again though, this is also something that applies to people once you are strong enough, deadlifting 125lbs probably isn't going to get in the way of a person's training or recover very much. Once the weight starts getting heavy enough, on top of all of the other training a person does, that person could probably see better overall results no longer doing DLs. It would absolutely be better for their recovery.

Somewhat.

I don't have any notion of ever competing in an actual professional capacity, but I do and want to at least reach a level similar to them. Strength training has always fascinated me over bodybuilding. So it really is a matter of personal philosophy. Bodybuilding IMO is a massive waste of time, unless if you get to compete.

Lastly, I disagree that you could achieve personal peak deadlift numbers or squat and bench through other exercises, just based on experience and observation from others. Guys bigger than me couldn't even properly lift the same weights I did as a high-beginner/low intermediate (specifically the DLs and squats).

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I can't speak for everyone, but I used to suffer (a lot) with my lower back. Deadlifts were suggested to me by both a physio, and a gym instructor/trainer, and I honestly swear by them now.

I wouldn't say dead-lifting is too much strain, it's the incorrect technique that's the problem, and a lot of people probably don't have the technique right, or life too heavy when they don't have the strength to maintain form that presents problems.

No offence taken, but I think you've already answered the question; different goals, and also your definition of recreational gym users.

I utilize deadlifts alongside squats, pullups, and occasionally bent-over rows, so I'll do them back to back, have a rest, and then crack on with the next round. I'm not looking to bulk up; I'm more about maintaining my mass/weight, so I don't need to go heavy or go home, but I did think his numbers seemed high, but then he may have very different intentions to me, as would you.

I'd love to see typical recreational gym users do what I do too, though I think I'm safe in saying that I can assure you that isn't the case where I gym.

If you've suffered a previous injury, I won't argue there, nor will I argue with that a physical therapist recommended, I might however argue with a personal trainer, just because there are so many different avenues a person can take to become one, and I've met more than my fair share that I wouldn't trust to train a hamster. With that said, again, I'm not knocking them in terms of do't ever do them, or no one should have them.

But athletes on various levels, NFL teams, some strongmen Robert Oberst to name one, and a personal friend that literally is an Olympic level athlete twice, and now coaches on the D1 level of college, also doesn't recommend them. In addition to the scientific field of body building and weight lifting start to have more concerns about how much stress they put on the body as a whole.

Again, if you're deadlifting sub 300lbs, (assuming you're healthy and within a reasonable weight with proper form) you're probably fine, but you could do other exercises that tax the body's systems less. Just curious, have you ever tried reverse hypers? Talk about being a seriously great exercise for strengthening your lower back, and core. Also, have you tried more core work?

Also bulking up isn't as easy as people think, you can easily gain some, or even a lot of strength and not become some massive giant. Guys like Brian Shaw, or Ronnie Coleman get there because of elite genetics, a lot of hard work, yes drugs, and eating a good diet and a lot of it. Also, putting on 10lbs of muscle and losing 20lbs of fat, you'd look even slimmer.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Bolded is basically the jest gist of my argument that I failed to properly articulate. I'm back at the beginner stage due to a long layoff, and my primary goal is to increase my lifts equal or beyond my previous personal records as well as going down to those same weight range I used to before. Beyond those numbers, I still don't know but would really like to climb 2.5xBW deadlift, 2xBW squat, and 1.75xBW bench. Your argument is definitely applied to the intermediate stage, above a beginner. I'm still a beginner (again) so I could definitely get away with my current diet, even if it takes long.

No worries man, and having a goal is great, I think everyone that does some type of exercise, weight lifting, body building, strength training, is involved in some type of sport, et cetera, all should have a goal. It help immensely, so that's great that you have them! My argument might apply more to above the beginner phase, but that doesn't mean the same principles don't apply to the beginner phase. Eating more, lifting for size, and/or strength is going to produce faster/better results than trying to do the same while eating less. Or vice versa. Again, we are in agreement, the beginner phase/severely undertrained phase is pretty much the only area where you can do both at the same time, just as long as you know it will be a slower road/less optimal. That's all.

Somewhat.

I don't have any notion of ever competing in an actual professional capacity, but I do and want to at least reach a level similar to them. Strength training has always fascinated me over bodybuilding. So it really is a matter of personal philosophy. Bodybuilding IMO is a massive waste of time, unless if you get to compete.

Lastly, I disagree that you could achieve personal peak deadlift numbers or squat and bench through other exercises, just based on experience and observation from others. Guys bigger than me couldn't even properly lift the same weights I did as a high-beginner/low intermediate (specifically the DLs and squats).

Hmm, well maybe where I am missing something is what your notion of "reaching a level similar to them.", is? Because from the sound of you using a "professional capacity", it almost sounds like you want to have lifts in the advanced range, which for bench, squat, DL, those numbers would be 300lbs+, 350lbs+, 450lbs+, with some variations. I don't typically like to use the hard numbers associated with the various levels without taking weight into account. A male sub 200lbs benching over 400lbs without PEDs is going to be very rare, where as a male over 300lbs and elite should easily be able to bench over 400lbs raw without PEDs. So there is a wide range based on weight for the various stages of someone lifting. But even with that being said, even for your weight, you could relatively easily wind up in the range benching over 300lbs, squatting over 400lbs, and deadlifting over 450-500lbs. Those numbers aren't that unattainable.

Also, yes you can reach the advanced levels on certain lifts without performing them. I can't find the video right now, I'll probably have to do more digging as I saw it years ago now, but a guy that was only a bodyweight lifter wound up posting a video after requests to see how much he could deadlift, and he easily lifted over 400lbs. His warm up was so cautious that he actually did multiple lifts of 400lbs+, and if he had help from someone with a better warm up, he might have been able to DL over 500lbs.

So reaching the world record setting elite numbers, no probably not. Also, is it optimal for those types of lifts, bench, DL, squat, again no probably not. But to say it can't be done isn't true. People can achieve a very high level, if not even advanced level of strength with other lifts, or other routines.

 

[Flash525]

If you've suffered a previous injury, I won't argue there, nor will I argue with that a physical therapist recommended, I might however argue with a personal trainer, just because there are so many different avenues a person can take to become one, and I've met more than my fair share that I wouldn't trust to train a hamster. With that said, again, I'm not knocking them in terms of do't ever do them, or no one should have them.

Knowing the PT’s at my gym, the majority of them seem more interested in their own vanity than they do actually helping people, so I can totally understand your reluctance to put any faith or truth in them.

But athletes on various levels, NFL teams, some strongmen Robert Oberst to name one, and a personal friend that literally is an Olympic level athlete twice, and now coaches on the D1 level of college, also doesn't recommend them. In addition to the scientific field of body building and weight lifting start to have more concerns about how much stress they put on the body as a whole.

The benefit these people have is that they know what they need to succeed; they’ve either studied it and are qualified, or they’re being aided by people with the knowledge and qualifications.

The majority of people (myself included) just learn on the job (or in the gym as it were). The guys you’ve mentioned above probably know of many more alternate options that they’re quite comfortable doing.

Again, if you're deadlifting sub 300lbs, (assuming you're healthy and within a reasonable weight with proper form) you're probably fine, but you could do other exercises that tax the body's systems less. Just curious, have you ever tried reverse hypers? Talk about being a seriously great exercise for strengthening your lower back, and core. Also, have you tried more core work?

I don’t know what reverse hypers are. I do a little core work, though admittedly I know I could do more - I just find it a little tedious at times. When I lift weights, I want to lift weights, not jump on a mat and do sit-ups (example only - I know sit-ups alone don’t make a strong core.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Knowing the PT’s at my gym, the majority of them seem more interested in their own vanity than they do actually helping people, so I can totally understand your reluctance to put any faith or truth in them.

The benefit these people have is that they know what they need to succeed; they’ve either studied it and are qualified, or they’re being aided by people with the knowledge and qualifications.

The majority of people (myself included) just learn on the job (or in the gym as it were). The guys you’ve mentioned above probably know of many more alternate options that they’re quite comfortable doing.

I don’t know what reverse hypers are. I do a little core work, though admittedly I know I could do more - I just find it a little tedious at times. When I lift weights, I want to lift weights, not jump on a mat and do sit-ups (example only - I know sit-ups alone don’t make a strong core.

Again, not dismissing DL at all, I personally love them, but it's not that hard to look into other options, but to each their own, I'd just at least consider some alternatives.

You should definitely do more core work, that's where your strength comes from, and how it determines how strong everything else is. I know there's a school of people that say if you just do the compound movements, your core will get strong without additional work. Sure, but if you're not squatting, DLing, and benching with good form in the ranges high enough to strengthen your core, well then doing core work is going to benefit you. If you have any previous injury history, I'd strongly consider doing core work.


Reverse hyperextensions
Edit: Hey I figured it out! lol

 

[Flash525]

You should definitely do more core work, that's where your strength comes from, and how it determines how strong everything else is.

Any suggestions? The only core workouts I do at the moment are;

• Cable Crunches
• Cable Rotations
• Bicycle Kicks
• Setups
• Planks

Reverse hyperextensions
Edit: Hey I figured it out! lol

I don't think my gym has any equipment that would make this do-able.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Any suggestions? The only core workouts I do at the moment are;

• Cable Crunches
• Cable Rotations
• Bicycle Kicks
• Setups
• Planks

I don't think my gym has any equipment that would make this do-able.

I think your core routine is fine, but do you ever increase the load? Remember, our bodies like to adapt, so for example if your plank hold never changes in terms of hand and body position, and no time or weight is ever added, eventually your body will adapt, and the stimulus you used to get, will not be the same. Essentially, it will be too easy for you.

I'm a big fan of V-ups, and hanging leg raises, both that I like to add weight to slowly over time. But they can be hard to try and start with initially, so maybe taking your current routine and increasing the weight slowly, by anywhere from 2.5lbs to 5lbs or 10lbs, and see how that goes.

Does your gym have a bench? Then you can do reverse hypers.
Also I'd recommend utilizing dead bugs as a good warm up for your core as well. This is also a good exercise to be able to tell how much control over your core you really have/how strong it is. If this is hard to do, you can definitely use some strengthen for your core.
Dead Bug Tutorial: Improve your Core Stability – Nicholas Elorreaga

 

[jolldan]

Question for you all. I always have my cheat day on a Saturday (occasionally bleeds in to Sunday) and I have been accounting for that for the last couple months by simply fasting for all of Monday. However I changed it up yesterday and instead just had one meal at about 500 calories and the same again today.

So was just wondering which you think would be better to keep doing?

• Fast the whole day Monday?
• Single smaller meals on Monday & Tuesday?

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Question for you all. I always have my cheat day on a Saturday (occasionally bleeds in to Sunday) and I have been accounting for that for the last couple months by simply fasting for all of Monday. However I changed it up yesterday and instead just had one meal at about 500 calories and the same again today.

So was just wondering which you think would be better to keep doing?

• Fast the whole day Monday?
• Single smaller meals on Monday & Tuesday?

It depends on what your goal is, or goals are? You say this has been going on for the last couple of months. So my first question would be, have you taken a break? If not, a week off of your diet might not be a bad idea, it might help.

It seems that the scientific community of research based approaches for both lifting in most fields, as well as dieting. But the short, and simple answer seems to hold true. Ever type of diet (medical conditions specific aren't what we're talking about here) more or less just seems to be a type of system that allows any given person to better adhere to it. From what I gather, fasting does not increase the metabolism, but it does seem to have benefits in various other areas, in terms of the way the body, and the systems within the body respond.

So I'd say, as long as you're approaching whatever your goal is currently, losing weight, gaining muscle mass, gaining total weight, losing fat while retaining muscle mass, then stick with whatever you're doing. With maybe taking a week off every 4-6 weeks. If you want to try something new, or vary something, such as fasting an entire day, versus eating smaller meals for two days. Then try them out and compare.

There's a reason people become so passionate about something that they have had success with, and then seem to become a bit preachy to others about it, Crossfit for example. It's because they finally were either able to adhere to it, and stick with it consistently, or their body responded better to the given approach that worked, over other approaches they tried in the past and failed at. Or perhaps a combination of both.

I assume if you're doing intermittent fasting, you're either trying to lose weight all around, or lose body fat while trying to maintain muscle mass? Hope that helps, if not, knowing what your goal is might be of some use in trying to give you a better answer.

 

[jolldan]

It depends on what your goal is, or goals are? You say this has been going on for the last couple of months. So my first question would be, have you taken a break? If not, a week off of your diet might not be a bad idea, it might help.

It seems that the scientific community of research based approaches for both lifting in most fields, as well as dieting. But the short, and simple answer seems to hold true. Ever type of diet (medical conditions specific aren't what we're talking about here) more or less just seems to be a type of system that allows any given person to better adhere to it. From what I gather, fasting does not increase the metabolism, but it does seem to have benefits in various other areas, in terms of the way the body, and the systems within the body respond.

So I'd say, as long as you're approaching whatever your goal is currently, losing weight, gaining muscle mass, gaining total weight, losing fat while retaining muscle mass, then stick with whatever you're doing. With maybe taking a week off every 4-6 weeks. If you want to try something new, or vary something, such as fasting an entire day, versus eating smaller meals for two days. Then try them out and compare.

There's a reason people become so passionate about something that they have had success with, and then seem to become a bit preachy to others about it, Crossfit for example. It's because they finally were either able to adhere to it, and stick with it consistently, or their body responded better to the given approach that worked, over other approaches they tried in the past and failed at. Or perhaps a combination of both.

I assume if you're doing intermittent fasting, you're either trying to lose weight all around, or lose body fat while trying to maintain muscle mass? Hope that helps, if not, knowing what your goal is might be of some use in trying to give you a better answer.

Thanks for the very detailed reply, only had access to my phone last night so thought would be easier to wait to respond on a proper computer.

I don't have a real specific goal more a set of targets right now

1. I want to get back down to about 180lbs or just under (was very close to this around December but you know Christmas meals and nights out) im at around 190lbs just now
2. I want to try and get a bit leaner and more muscular without gaining too much mass, im not trying to look like Cap fresh off a dose of the super solider serum lol(plus I know that doesn't happen without an insane amount of work) but I would like to achieve a physique you see more on rowers and swimmers as I want to get in better overall shape but im not wanting to start putting back on too much weight as I really enjoy being lighter than I have been previously.

I took pretty much two weeks off around Christmas as I had several meals, family functions and nights out.

Its only one week so far so hard to get a real indicator but think I might switch to two smaller meals across Monday & Tuesday rather than the fast for all of Monday as energy levels overall felt better yesterday.

I know what you mean a lot of people can be very pushy that their diet/workout is the way to go. One thing I will give myself is I don't have much of an ego in that regard the only thing my workouts have consisted of is about 90% on a running machine 10% on a stair master. Have received praise from a lot of folks I know because when I started this nearly a year ago now I was damn near 280lbs, but I just tell everyone I literally just stayed on a running machine for a year lol im sure you could do it quicker and better if you stick to an actual programme. Really haven't moved in to doing weights much yet.

Yeah dropping body fat is the main goal just now get back around that 180lbs mark and just feel comfy in most of my medium sized clothes.

 

[Flash525]

I think your core routine is fine, but do you ever increase the load? Remember, our bodies like to adapt, so for example if your plank hold never changes in terms of hand and body position, and no time or weight is ever added, eventually your body will adapt, and the stimulus you used to get, will not be the same. Essentially, it will be too easy for you.

I don't increase weight all that much, but I alternate what I'm doing instead - I suppose that's my way of ensuring my body can't adapt to a specific workout, ie...

For say, six weeks, I'll do dumbbell press alongside dumbbell flyes (and a set of pressups for good measure), the following six weeks I'll substitute the dumbbells for a barbell and the flyes for cable flyes instead; similar exercise, but different movements and such.

I don't quite get the forever increase weight mindset, because there's going to come a point at which you physically can't go any higher.

Does your gym have a bench? Then you can do reverse hypers.

Tried these the other day - they're tougher than they may look, and boy don't you feel like a complete idiot when doing them.