aj_rock

Not just that, but if you push those exercises too hard and your body starts bonking on you, THAT is the point that the body starts metabolizing protein at a significant rate. Your body will literally start starving for sugar. It's one of the main reasons that you commonly hear trainers say to ingest carbs:protein in 2:1 after a workout. The carb intake is extremely protein sparing (aka prevent protein metabolism). As for Sisson, that link that Waldo gave shows a pretty low carb count that he recommends. He even called fruit bad. I haven't read too much into his products, but, as is common in this industry, someone's offering him a lot of money to push specific products. It always happens. Re: grains. If you aren't gluten intolerant or something similar, grains are not gonna kill you. It's really as simple as that. They aren't the nutrient wasteland that a lot of people think anymore as well (most breads and pastas are enriched nowadays), and a lot of the haters really seem to grasp for straws in their arguments.

Didn't mean to make it sound like he doesn't know a thing or two, I was knocking his writing style more or less. I will never support the use of blatant over-the-top scare tactics when it comes to balanced nutrition, which as Waldo pointed out is what happens to a significant portion of his followers. For you, as an individual, regardless of who or what you get your information from, you have to do your thing; I agree with that. Using a carb lowered methodology? That's fine with me. Stopped eating carbs because an internet guru screamed at you until he was blue in the face that carbs are literally hitler? Doesn't fly.

I always love that first workout back. You feel like you're gonna have slid back a bit, but instead you feel... more... RAWR MOAR POWERFUL THAN EVAR!!!1!1!!

I swear Mr. Sisson is the carbohydrate anti-christ. His writing seems like it's tailor made to piss people who actually know a thing or two about nutrition off.

Sounds about right actually, especially if you're cutting at 2200.

Meh. Water is technically LBM. As long as you aren't losing real strength, no need to sweat. Time to see what the measurement master can do when things don't go according to plan

I like coconut oil as much as the next person, but a tbsp by itself? o_O Think I'd feel sick... I like the backload protocol though. Definitely more rigorous than mine ever was

How does 80/10 work exactly? Is it more like 90/10 or 80/20

Since you're coming off a bulk, glycogen levels are probably falling to normal instead of super-compensated, so that plus water would make sense-ish?

Doesn't have to be vascularized to receive blood. Don't need to open a vein to bleed Not being explicitly vascularized is a reason for reduced blood flow. But interstitial space still gets blood flow. It's the only means of delivering nutrients in the body really (well not ONLY, but definitely primary)

Yo, We need foe' moe' ab-blaster pros and we can totally strut up an alleyway in our jeans too I did RFL back when I was 19 and knew nothing about fitness yet. Being naive, the results weren't as good as I wanted, and my already pitiful strength didn't exactly shine. I recently went over a similar theory of mine in the IF LG thread (it's been revived!), but my thought was that you could get away with a 50% calorie reduction for up to 4 weeks. It would still be an incredibly difficult party line to stand to. For me, RFL would be about a 66% reduction, so right off the bat I would say never do this for more than 2 weeks, and I'd even caution you to do it a maximum of four times a year (who the hell wants to eat so little for more than two months of the year anyway?) Anyway, the REAL problem I have with RFL goes like this: - it doesn't encourage anything remotely resembling healthy eating practices - guaranteed to feel like crap after the first week. - and here's the big one: a lot of times, when I've seen people embark on this sort of path, their head REALLY isn't in the right place to be trying something like this. Everyone wants to lose weight fast, but this kinda dieting strategy is what leads to bulimia and anorexia. I would personally MUCH rather someone use good dieting practices rather than enacting a diet scheme that even it's original writer encourages people NOT to do.

Y u no cougar? looking forward to this!

Will's not back yet? Guess I got a few questions at the intra-squad tomorrow...

Any other changes in diet? I know I'll free-fall a bit if I forget my creatine for a couple of days.... Make sure you link your new challenge here when you start mkaaaay?

Yup, just keep stretching it. myofascial release stretches can help too. Vector; that isn't quite correct. Tendons and ligaments do get blood flow, otherwise how did they grow while you were a kid? They have a 'reduced' blood flow I guess, but ITB is well situated for blood flow. The stretching and myofascial is designed to encourage blood flow and flexibility. Ninja edit to say: make sure you link your new challenge from here! I hate having to hunt down everyone's challenge again after six weeks >.>

Haha you guys are lucky to have Sean instead of Will as coach... I kept my fitness up this winter and guarenteed I'll still be huffin and puffin from his two hour cardio odysseys...

Related: as some people in these forums know, I'm a bit of an EDM nut, so I'll be catching both Digital Dreams and Veld this summer in Toronto. Reply here or msg me if you're interested in meeting up!

Mhmm, mhmm, mhmm. Definitely see the start of a six pack there!

Umm I weighted it out so that nine days off (two weekends and a week) should do yah. I would say do a total of six weeks if you wanted to go 50% then 33%, but why not just straight 40% then? You got it. Your life just sucks that much more, but for less time. In your case, a 50% cut also leaves ZERO room for carbs, which could have other negative consequences on work capacity. Much like Mr. Mcdonald always says, if YOU perceive a need to lose weight that fast, then that's up to you. He never recommended people use his RFL program but they do all the time anyways...

First of all, I tend to raise an eyebrow at anyone who's go-to solution for everything and anything as paleo. I won't get into that here though. He's right on maaaaybe one front. That ITB can be caused by a weak posterior chain. In fact, that's the reason for a whole host of shenanigans for your body. But ice not working as an anti-inflammatory? NSAID's a bad idea also? Maybe if you're a git without a proper license to be giving advice. But we've used both to treat inflammation because THEY WORK. Jeesh. He also shows a very poor understanding of what non-elastic tendons/ligaments are supposed to be. They are tough. In non-engineerey type terms, that means they absorb a lot of elastic energy per unit stretch. They provide elastic reflexes without the need to bend like a rubber fricken band. The entire idea of anti-inflammation and stretching is to encourage blood flow in the area. Inflammation prevents blood flow, and stretching encourages it. Enhanced blood flow = better nutrient delivery = faster recovery. It's really as simple as that. Nowhere does he actually make a good argument for training through recovery. Stretch it, ice it, and when it's past the mend, start looking at preventative methods. Not before.

As always, there's gonna be some pros and cons to doing this: - I'm not suuuuper familiar with 5/3/1, so I have to ask if it has a diet plan to go with it? If so, then why not just cycle the diet plan? As in, do two 4 week cycles at bulking calories and 2 cycles at cutting levels. Maybe a bump in calories during maintenance weeks. - bjj food requirements are gonna play a big factor here. Wendler builds a bit of conditioning into his program variations, but nothing like you'd get with bjj. Bf is gonna himself with the wind knocked out of him if calorie levels are off. - heavy heavy lifts are weird, because the energy requirements aren't actually that high, so the amount of 'extra' he gets from eating more during the 5/3/1 week is questionable. Energy requirements relate more closely to total volume (sets*reps*weight) than intensity (e.g. say you 1 rep @ a 225 squat. you drop to 65% of that and do 15. You're looking at a total volume of 225 vs 2025.) -that being said, high calorie levels after the big workouts will definitely help him recover faster, but seeing as 5/3/1 has a prescribed weight jump from cycle to cycle, he can't take advantage of any 'extra' gains he gets. - I say all this, but keep in mind that if he follows through properly on the low calorie weeks, odds are he WILL drop fat. So keep that in mind when considering the other points I made above Anyway, everything I say is just conjecture until someone tries it, so best of luck to the bf Laura!

Can't be right based on the OMG NOT BELOW 1200!!! principle? Which we don't even violate. If you take your TDEE as 2000, then 50% redux is 1000, and total calorie intake for a week is 1000*5 + 2000*2 = 9000, which is an average of 1285 calories a week. If you took that route, than you'd have 145 g protein and 50g fat which totals to about 1000 calories. So you'd be going essentially keto. Remember, you're also using the most extreme deficit I listed (I don't even cut THAT hard!) which you could only do for four weeks. After which you'd lose between 5-6 lbs. OR Taking the less extreme amount:33% cut So you'd be eating about 1350 calories through the week, 2000 on weekends still. You'd lose a little less than a lb a week and lose about 7 in total. So your diet would be the same only adding about 70 grams of carbs to your daily intake. You'd be surprised how much of a difference that makes to your energy levels. And yes, re-feeds are usually on the weekend. Yah know, when it's convenient. It's better to string two together so that you get the added benefit of systems taking a breather for more than 24 hours. So again, I listed the 50% but don't actually recommend it. Weekly numbers seeeeeem harsh because of the refeeds.

% under and length both vary and depend on the presence of a refeed. Because I generally advocate refeeds anyway, assuming you do, I'd say: - you can cut daily calories by 50% for 4 weeks, 40% for 6 weeks, and 33% for 8 weeks(where I'm at). Once you factor in refeeds at maintenance levels (2 days worth), your weekly deficit becomes 35/29/25% respectively. - obviously, these are STARTING POINTS. Knowing actual hard numbers is difficult, and if you experience negative symptoms of a hard cut, bump your calories up. If you're slashing calories by at least a 1/3 of normal intake, I highly doubt you'll run into problems NOT losing weight; maybe it's not as fast as you'd like, but that's what'll happen when you base things off %, heavier, higher BMR people will lose weight faster. It's just how the game works. - refeeds are quite literally just eat around maintenance; as a college student, I tend to eat what I was before and imbibe in alcohol for the rest of the calories. Realistically, it would be better to increase total intake by eating carbs -macros are set in different ways, to me. Protein is 1g/lb body weight, but I DO NOT revise this number down as the diet continues and body mass is shed. Fat is set to 50-60 grams in total, and the rest goes to carbs. So for me, aiming for 2000 calories (based on a 3000 TDEE) that's 200/55/175 prot/fat/carbs. For the refeed, I'd double my carb intake and let some extra fat in as well (for taste). What about calculating TDEE? -> obviously for all of the above to apply, you need to count calories. I however loathe trying to quantify exercise quality because this varies more than a blind man's dart shot. Instead, start with BMR and activity multipliers, and run your first cut cycle. Based on your results (1 lb = 3500 cal deficit), you can figure out what your AVERAGE TDEE is. Please note that you need to take a week or so eating around maintenance before you re-weigh yourself so that lost water/glycogen weight is still accounted for (initial weight lost in your first week will be substantial, and all but 1-2 lbs of it is actual fat). No, the two day refeed has NOT been sufficient to restore all that weight (although fluctuations are to be expected). So what exercise should I do? -> I'll assume you already have your exercises picked out and you're familiar with performing them. Each program is different, and making general rules that apply to the bells, BW, and power lifting is difficult, but some general things: - keep doing what you do, at least for the first week or two. Because you're taking in enough protein, it'll take that long before performance is affected (hell you might even make gains in this time) - as training energy begins to feel more 'sapped', reduce VOLUME, but NOT INTENSITY. Aka try to keep the same weight on the bar, but less sets. Research HAS shown that the body responds to as little as one set of exercise, so really you don't lose that much by taking a set or two off the total. If you like your cardio, reduce the number of sessions per week. Preferably, get at least one workout in while refeeding to take advantage of heightened energy levels at those times. - as you get closer to the end, YOU WILL LOSE STRENGTH. Accept that fact NOW so you don't freak out later, the same way you accept that you will gain some fat while bulking down the road. Once you bump your calories back up, within a week or two of training, your numbers should come back a-okay. So what does this have to do with IF? -> IF is a eating style that makes it easier for some to reach their diet goals. I tend to only eat two meals a day nowadays because I don't have the first one until two in the afternoon. The way my own discipline works, I do very well with the all-or-nothing attitude; if I'm not eating, I'm not eating. Personally, there are a couple supplements I use that work better while fasted, and this is my primary concern with IF. Everything besides personal prefence, as with most things in the fitness world, is still up for debate, and this ain't the place to go over what little literature we have. The only proof I see is that people have successfully lost weight both with and without IF, so again, it's become mostly a matter of personal preferences. Now, I have a paper I should be working on, so that'll be it until later tonight, if anyone has moar questions. PS: as waldo says above, he goes month to month bulking to cutting, which doesnt fit the schema I set out above. The depth vs length I set out is as MAXIMUMS. Feel free to shorten the lengths, but I do feel like you need to perform at least half the max cycle (so two weeks for 50%, four weeks at 33%) in order to 'see' results.

Hey Maegs! Good to hear you've been doing well at practice! I'm sure everyone lets go just a little bit during Easter

Hmmm fair enough, haven't quantified my results in a while! So, one cut, one bulk, partially through a cut right now, been going since mid-november. Start stats: 195 lbs 35" waist And lifting records, for lifts that have been in rotation the whole time: Deadlifts: 2X370 Incline DB Press: 5X65 Squat: 5X255 HS Bench: 5X248 Pull-ups: 13 Rows: 5X210 (similar for lat pulldowns) Current stats: 180 lbs (keep in mind this will shoot up a bit once I finish the cut) 33.5" waist -1.5 Deadlifts: 2X390 +20 Incline DB Press: 5X75 +10 Squat: 4X305 +50 (give or take for the loss of a rep) HS Bench: 5X268 +20 Pull-ups: 18 +5 Rows: 5X235 +25 NOT quantified: the massive amount of cardiovascular training I have also done to prep for the season Anyway, this is for about 4.5 months worth of training, minus a couple weeks for training breaks. Important notes though: - after the cut, once refed for a while, numbers at the gym shot up fast and then continued to progress. This doesn't really quantify that I had also taken Cleans from 135 max to around 205, but I stopped due to back problems. - weekend refeeds keep me sane and my body able to recover properly - I'm not done yet! Still got till the end of April to continue the cut, so still room for improvement