Please help me DECIDE between two approaches!

[nussnussbaby]

Hello all,

I'm 26 years old. 5'7", 190lbs, 15-ish%bf, 161.5lbs LBM (I've posted a recent picture below). My end-goal is 170lbs, 6-ish%bf, 159.8lbs LBM. So, I've got 20lbs to lose overall (18.3lbs fat, 1.7lbs muscle).



I've been training for sports since I was about 13, and training and dieting seriously for physique the last 13 months (I started off at 240+lbs, 30+%bf). My training and dieting methods are quite advanced, and I have zero interest in changing them. My training intensity, dieting discipline, and overall consistency and motivation are (apologies if this is arrogant) quite advanced as well. I have never used gear before.

There are two approaches I am considering:

#1) I could cut down to 170lbs naturally as best as I can (about 1lb/wk, or less). Then, at 170lbs, I could re-composition cycle (i.e. adjust calorie intake to remain at 170lbs throughout the cycle). Hopefully I'd be able to reach my ideal body composition in one cycle. But I guess I'd be open to a second, perhaps even a third, if necessary.

#2) I could cut down to 170lbs on gear as best as I can (about 1.67lbs/wk, as I'd need to do it in 12 weeks). Hopefully I'd be able to reach my ideal body composition in one cycle. But, again, I guess I'd be open to a second, perhaps even a third, if necessary.

Total amount of time it's going to take to reach my ideal end-goal is a secondary concern. Limiting myself to 1, 2, maybe 3 cycles is a major concern (for health reasons). Being able to maintain my physique after I'm done cycling is also a major concern.

Would love to hear what everyone thinks is the better plan!

Thank you very much in advance for any input!





***NOTES***
-I've posted two (somewhat) similar threads previously. This one's more specific ~ as I'm learning more, I'm asking different questions (plus, I seem to get feedback from different posters each time I post a new thread).
-I've already read all the educational posts on the board.
-Please don't argue with me about what my current bf% is (that's a good picture - I've recently been to a bod-pod), about what my own personal goals should be, or about what is or is not possible for "normal" people (i.e. 6%bf).

[dem_gains]

I don't think either is the correct approach. If I were you I would cut naturally to 170 and then do a bulk cycle and then adjust calories to maintenance of your new weight and stick there for awhile until your body gets used to the new weight. Reasoning as follows:

1. Why would you waste your first cycle on virgin androgen receptors on a calorie deficit. Should be about maximizing muscle gains

2. Cutting naturally and then cycling will result in better results - look up threads on priming your body before cycle and creating the best possible anabolic environment.

3. There's no way even with gear you will be able to cut so effectively so that you lose only 1.7lb muscle and nearly 20lb fat. I'd say once you hit 170 you may be 8 percent bf at the best and not 6. So then do a bulk cycle; if you do this with a completely clean diet and just 500 Cals over maintenance you'll probably end up about 185 and still 8%. May even lose a few percent bf. but don't waste the cycle on a recomp maintenance.

I get that you want to be 170lb but I think first you should try do what is most efficient for muscle gain and then later work on slowly cutting down to 170. Remember you'll lose some gains on pct anyway

[Lunk1]

Is this for experts only as well or can anyone respond?

I think you are confusing yourself when using the term "recomp". The common understanding of rcomp is trying to cut fat while gaining muscle and not losing or gaining any significant weight. It's very difficult and requires a very strict diet approach.

I think what you are suggesting in #1 is a cut and lean bulk by definition. As I said before, you are going to lose muscle on a cut and it's 100% unavoidable. You can't eat at a deficit and gain muscle tissue (without AAS) and even if you used steroids to accomplish this, you couldn't maintain the new muscle unless you increased calories to sustain the new growth.

Ask 405 what it has been like to achieve and maintain lower BF%. 6% as a maintenance BF% is not realistic for hardly anyone year round. You are talking competition BF. Even competitors only stay that low for a short time.

Getting to 6% can require a change in diet that could be a subtle as 200 cals.

[nussnussbaby]

Is this for experts only as well or can anyone respond?

lol (I'm just paying extra attention to posters w/ better reputations).

I think you are confusing yourself when using the term "recomp". The common understanding of rcomp is trying to cut fat while gaining muscle and not losing or gaining any significant weight. It's very difficult and requires a very strict diet approach.

No, that's exactly what I mean. And I have the absolute strictest of diet approaches.

I think what you are suggesting in #1 is a cut and lean bulk by definition. As I said before, you are going to lose muscle on a cut and it's 100% unavoidable. You can't eat at a deficit and gain muscle tissue (without AAS) and even if you used steroids to accomplish this, you couldn't maintain the new muscle unless you increased calories to sustain the new growth.

No. In #1 I'm suggesting a recomp cycle ~ getting to 170 before starting the cycle, and keeping calories at maintenance for 170lbs throughout the cycle (and then after, also).

Ask 405 what it has been like to achieve and maintain lower BF%. 6% as a maintenance BF% is not realistic for hardly anyone year round. You are talking competition BF. Even competitors only stay that low for a short time.

Getting to 6% can require a change in diet that could be a subtle as 200 cals.

I'm well aware of how difficult it is. I think I can do it.

....

[nussnussbaby]

I don't think either is the correct approach. If I were you I would cut naturally to 170 and then do a bulk cycle and then adjust calories to maintenance of your new weight and stick there for awhile until your body gets used to the new weight. Reasoning as follows:

1. Why would you waste your first cycle on virgin androgen receptors on a calorie deficit. Should be about maximizing muscle gains

You must have misread that. I said I'd be eating at maintenance on the cycle.

2. Cutting naturally and then cycling will result in better results - look up threads on priming your body before cycle and creating the best possible anabolic environment.

Okay.

3. There's no way even with gear you will be able to cut so effectively so that you lose only 1.7lb muscle and nearly 20lb fat. I'd say once you hit 170 you may be 8 percent bf at the best and not 6. So then do a bulk cycle; if you do this with a completely clean diet and just 500 Cals over maintenance you'll probably end up about 185 and still 8%. May even lose a few percent bf. but don't waste the cycle on a recomp maintenance.

There seems to be disagreement on that. What is your experience/expertise?

I get that you want to be 170lb but I think first you should try do what is most efficient for muscle gain and then later work on slowly cutting down to 170. Remember you'll lose some gains on pct anyway

If I get to 170 naturally.. I think I'll be able to get there at about 9%bf. If I cycle for 12 weeks - - maintaining weight at 170lbs, eating for maintenance at that weight - - I'll come out of it at 170lbs and a lower bf%, right? And I'll be able to maintain that new composition if I continue to eat perfectly, right?

....

[Lunk1]

Have you ever been 6% BF? Till you have then I'm not sure you are "aware of how difficult it is".

Quite frankly from what I have seen your threads really are all the same. You are just looking for confirmation and already know what you plan to do regardless of advise.

I promise you that AAS or no AAS, you will never keep any muscle gained without an increase in calories!!!

[nussnussbaby]

Have you ever been 6% BF? Till you have then I'm not sure you are "aware of how difficult it is".

Quite frankly from what I have seen your threads really are all the same. You are just looking for confirmation and already know what you plan to do regardless of advise.

I promise you that AAS or no AAS, you will never keep any muscle gained without an increase in calories!!!

1-I've gotten to as low as 6.1%. I didn't think it was that hard, actually. But I was at 155lbs, and I didn't like the look.. so I started bulking soon after reaching it.

2-Frankly, you are wrong. I'm gathering information. I'm not sure what I'm going to do at this point.

3-

...If I cut down to 170lbs, about 9% naturally prior to starting my first cycle. And then I eat at maintenance for 170lbs throughout the cycle. What am I going to be at the end of the cycle? 170lbs and 6-7%bf?

...If I keep eating for maintenance at 170lbs, am I going to be able to maintain it?

[Lunk1]

1-I've gotten to as low as 6.1%. I didn't think it was that hard, actually. But I was at 155lbs, and I didn't like the look.. so I started bulking soon after reaching it.

2-Frankly, you are wrong. I'm gathering information. I'm not sure what I'm going to do at this point.

3-

...If I cut down to 170lbs, about 9% naturally prior to starting my first cycle. And then I eat at maintenance for 170lbs throughout the cycle. What am I going to be at the end of the cycle? 170lbs and 6-7%bf?

...If I keep eating for maintenance at 170lbs, am I going to be able to maintain it?

Your either missing my point or I am horrible at explaining myself. If you cut down to 170 and then introduce AAS while eating at 170 maintenance then it is possible to add a small amount of muscle. After you stop using AAS you will lose any muscle that you gained unless you increase calories to maintain that new muscle tissue.

[nussnussbaby]

Your either missing my point or I am horrible at explaining myself. If you cut down to 170 and then introduce AAS while eating at 170 maintenance then it is possible to add a small amount of muscle. After you stop using AAS you will lose any muscle that you gained unless you increase calories to maintain that new muscle tissue.

Why would I need to eat above 170lb maintenance to remain at 170lbs?

[dem_gains]

....

1. Wouldn't want to waste my first cycle on maintenance either. Need a surplus for muscle growth

2. No matter what anybody says you will lose lbm at the very least in the form
Of glycogen. So you'd end up probably like 165 or less once you hit the desired 17lbs of fat. Can't lose 17lb fat and only
1.7lb lbm lol. Whoever told you otherwise is just plain wrong

3. I think you need to get this stupid number of 170lb out your head and just cut and then use your first xucle on a bulk

[Lunk1]

Why would I need to eat above 170lb maintenance to remain at 170lbs?

Because you are planning to cut to 170 then add muscle mass using AAS. If you continue to eat at maintenance and add new tissue then stop the AAS and do not increase cals, you will lose the new tissue. You can argue till the cows come home but it's a fact!

[nussnussbaby]

Because you are planning to cut to 170 then add muscle mass using AAS. If you continue to eat at maintenance and add new tissue then stop the AAS and do not increase cals, you will lose the new tissue. You can argue till the cows come home but it's a fact!

Well..

Using a proper TDEE formula (one that's based on LBM) ~ maintenance calories for 170lbs would increase as muscle increases.

[ickythump]

Lunk don't bother.......BABY, you have garnered over 1000 views on your post collectively, yet not many people have managed to come up with a response, and that is because you have already been told the exact information and everybody else to tell you...your plans are now down to however you feel you will easily achieve your goal, the only other a bite people can offer is to tell you how difficult it is to maintain the goal you want to maintain, you keep saying that you are special and that you will get it done when everyone thinks it is impossible so what you should do is create a log and tell everyone how it went because you will have achieved something that is very difficult and other people would like to know how you were done it...you been on this board less than a month you don't know who has a good reputation or not, and if you think that you are so special that you can achieve this goal without changing your diet you seem so set on the go ahead and do it but I ask you why has it not work yet??

[ickythump]

search other boards search other threads they all tell the same tale of how difficult it is to maintain such a low body fat, in your first post you been offered the exact information by a very well respected and knowledgeable member about a cycle, what more could you possibly want???

[12345shawn]

Hi everyone, i am currently on clen but i am not getting any sides. I have been on 100mcgs pre a day for 10 days so far, someone give me some input? is it possible to get no sides?

[ppwc1985]

Hi everyone, i am currently on clen but i am not getting any sides. I have been on 100mcgs pre a day for 10 days so far, someone give me some input? is it possible to get no sides?

Yes, possible. Did you take your temp before starting? This is the only real way to be for sure. I don't always get shaking or anything, but I use my temp to know if it's still working. Then again idk where you got your clen , it may be under dosed or something.

[lovbyts]

Hi everyone, i am currently on clen but i am not getting any sides. I have been on 100mcgs pre a day for 10 days so far, someone give me some input? is it possible to get no sides?

It would be a good idea to start your own thread instead of bumping someone elses that is 7 months old and not realated.