Lean bulk or main gain?

[2_Meter_Titan]

Can you still put on body fat eating 200 over maintenance or is main gain the way to go??

 

[idkmanimao]

Can you still put on body fat eating 200 over maintenance or is main gain the way to go??

lean bulk, you gain lean mass faster but bf% will increase over time (in like 1 year or longer) then you just run a quick 2-3 week cut, and get lean again

 

[copinglowltn]

lean bulk, you gain lean mass faster but bf% will increase over time (in like 1 year or longer) then you just run a quick 2-3 week cut, and get lean again

your wrong because muscle growth isn’t actually calorie dependent. do some research, bulking is vaulted just maintain it does the exact same thing with less BF

 

[Zeekie]

Can you still put on body fat eating 200 over maintenance or is main gain the way to go??

You can and WILL put on body fat while being 200 calories over maintenance, there's simply no way to bulk without gaining any amount of fat, but of course, if you bulk correctly the fat gain would be minimal compared to the muscle gains.

You could also main gain, but that comes at the cost of SIGNIFICANTLY slower progress and muscle gains, to the point where you probably won't ever reach your genetic limit if that's your goal.

I like to think of bulking fast like an investment, you take a "negative" blow now, to enjoy the benefits later on. It's a well-worth sacrifice in my opinion.

 

[idkmanimao]

your wrong because muscle growth isn’t actually calorie dependent. do some research, bulking is vaulted just maintain it does the exact same thing with less BF

lean mass in terms of slight water retention (in your muscles) and Glyogen, ect. but you'll get extra, therefore be bigger long term

 

[Zeekie]

your wrong because muscle growth isn’t actually calorie dependent. do some research, bulking is vaulted just maintain it does the exact same thing with less BF

Absolutely not. Yes, you can gain muscle while maintaining, but if you were actually up-to-date with the literature you would be aware that the potential for muscle growth on a bulk vs main gaining are significantly mismatched, for pure hypertrophy a bulk will inevitably be superior in terms of the amount of muscle you can put on, and in terms of exercise performance as well.

 

[copinglowltn]

lean mass in terms of slight water retention (in your muscles) and Glyogen, ect. but you'll get extra, therefore be bigger long term

 

[copinglowltn]

Absolutely not. Yes, you can gain muscle while maintaining, but if you were actually up-to-date with the literature you would be aware that the potential for muscle growth on a bulk vs main gaining are significantly mismatched, for pure hypertrophy a bulk will inevitably be superior in terms of the amount of muscle you can put on, and in terms of exercise performance as well.

yeah i just came across this. i’ve been more tapped into hypertrophy training, my bad thanks for the correction.

 

[idkmanimao]

View attachment 3881941

well, still better for someone to bulk up when starting out (or still new) to fill out there frame, you can't only fill it out with muscle naturally

 

[copinglowltn]

well, still better for someone to bulk up when starting out (or still new) to fill out there frame, you can't only fill it out with muscle naturally

yes of course

 

[copinglowltn]

Absolutely not. Yes, you can gain muscle while maintaining, but if you were actually up-to-date with the literature you would be aware that the potential for muscle growth on a bulk vs main gaining are significantly mismatched, for pure hypertrophy a bulk will inevitably be superior in terms of the amount of muscle you can put on, and in terms of exercise performance as well.

what are your thoughts on this, because also if your training science based, (single joint movements) Full body ect, it shows that carbs are actually not that needed due to rest times and total number of sets per muscle group

 

[copinglowltn]

Absolutely not. Yes, you can gain muscle while maintaining, but if you were actually up-to-date with the literature you would be aware that the potential for muscle growth on a bulk vs main gaining are significantly mismatched, for pure hypertrophy a bulk will inevitably be superior in terms of the amount of muscle you can put on, and in terms of exercise performance as well.

just depends on your training style as if you have a more science based approach, less carbs and total calories consumed pre gym are needed. but i still agree

 

[Zeekie]

View attachment 3881947
what are your thoughts on this, because also if your training science based, (single joint movements) Full body ect, it shows that carbs are actually not that needed due to rest times and total number of sets per muscle group

First off, train however you want, different methods can lead to hypertrophy even if it's not truly "optimal". However, bulking is not vaulted, whoever wrote that is right in what they say, but wrong in the conclusion they come up with.

Yes, you can build muscle on maintenance, yes you will stay leaner. But for people with a precise muscle goal in mind, this method is simply way too slow. The same amount of muscle you can gain in a year of maingaining, you could obtain with a few months of bulking at the cost of a little body fat that you will be able to cut anyway. Just because you can still build muscle in maintenance, doesn't mean it's "optimal" in all cases.

If you're new to consistent lifting (haven't hit intermediate strength metrics or haven't been going to the gym consistently for at least 1 year), you used to lift but stopped and decided to come back or simply dislike the hustle of having to bulk and cut, then maingain, you will build muscle. But for an advanced lifter or someone trying to put on meaningful amounts of muscle in the shortest amount of time, this method will not function.

 

[Zeekie]

View attachment 3881947
what are your thoughts on this, because also if your training science based, (single joint movements) Full body ect, it shows that carbs are actually not that needed due to rest times and total number of sets per muscle group

Regarding the carbohydrate thing. Carbohydrates are not necessary for muscle-building, but they sure do help, A LOT. Carbohydrates spike your insulin and mTOR, which are key anabolic pathways when it comes to muscle-building, when you're on a lower carb diet both of these are reduced, and therefore you will be in a much more catabolic state (which is why it's easier to lose fat on a low-carb/keto diet, but it's harder to put on muscle).

On top of that carbohydrates simply help performance, this is why it's recommended to get carbohydrates around training time, so your glycogen stores are full, this is also why all top level athletes utilize carb cycling before, during and after their games. If you're low-carb, your body will probably be pulling carbohydrates from your fats and proteins, but this process is excruciatingly slow and inefficient, hence the reduced anabolism.