I'd like to hear some thoughts on RE-COMP cycles.

[nussnussbaby]

Hello all,

I'm 26, 5-7, 185-190lbs, 15-ish %bf (recent picture below). My end goal is about 170lbs, 6-ish %bf. I'm in the process of cutting right now, and I think I should be able to get to about 170lbs, 9-ish% bf naturally.

The plan right now is this. I'm going to get to about 170lbs, 9-ish %bf. Then I'm going to start a 12-week cycle (the recommended beginner's cycle on this site). I'm going to eat maintenance calories for 170lbs before, during and after the cycle. (*remember - a proper calorie equation is based on lean body mass, not total body weight, so 'maintenance' calories will be increased as I gain muscle and lose fat.). I'm hoping I'll be about 170lbs, 7-ish %bf at the end of the cycle.

I'd like to hear the board's thoughts on this plan. Do you think it will work as I hope it will? Do you think I will be able to maintain the new composition (with perfect diet and training) long after the cycle is over?

Thanks a ton in advance for any feedback!



Notes:
1) I've been on the board for about a month now. I've read all of the educational stickies on the site. I've started a few threads, asked a lot of questions, and gotten a lot of great answers!
2) I'm pretty advanced as a (natural) bodybuilder. I believe my diet and training regiments are near-perfect. I train very hard. I am very disciplined with my diet. And I have great genetics. I know getting to, and maintaining, close to 6% bf is impossible for average bodybuilders. But I'm not really average (sorry if that makes me sound like a dick ~ I'm just trying to paint an accurate picture).
3) That's a nice picture of me, I know it doesn't look like 15% bf, but I was tested in a bod-pod.
4) My goal, 170lbs, 6-ish %bf, is not up for debate.

[dem_gains]

I remember a study conducted on men who did 600mg test for 20 weeks with a standard diet and NO exercise. By standard diet I assume one can infer maintenance calories.

On average they lost 2lbs of fat and gained 12lbs of muscle

Swear you've made this thread like 5 times already; the above is the only new thing I have to add.

Don't know if you'll lose any bf - may stay the same. But I guess an increase in lbm means body fat percent goes down even if fat mass remains the same

[Oki-Des]

Well, one thing to consider is that running test causing different people to gain various amounts of water weight. When you are thin and are at a low body fat, like you are, it will look great in my opinion. Many inexperienced users think this water weight is all lean mass when taking roids, but it isnt. You will gain a lot of water weight and lose it when you finish the test and if you eat right and keep working will be left with an increase in siz and some nice gains. But to get to 170lbs with 6% body fat you need to lose learly 17 pounds of fat as it is. I know you said you are 15%, but you are right in that you dont look like it. But if your goal is to be 17lbs lighter than you are I am not sure roids are the right decision. Honestly, with my limited experience, I would suggest you keep doing what you are doing natty until your goal is to weigh about 200 with 6% bf. You do not have a normal body, so I am curious how your results turn out. ( I obviously mean that in a complimentary way) I have been doing this stuff for 20 years and simply am not sure what to suggest considering your goals, but wanted to say good luck and do keep us informed of your progress whatever you choose to do.

[Sgt. Hartman]

IMO a recomp type cycle/diet plan will not work to get as low as 6%.

If you have great genetics like you say, that might get you into single digits but you won't get much lower than that without aggressive diet/cardio/gear.

There's good reason you don't see people (even on lots of gear) walking around at 6%.

[nussnussbaby]

Don't know if you'll lose any bf - may stay the same. But I guess an increase in lbm means body fat percent goes down even if fat mass remains the same

If I increase muscle mass, while maintaining 170lbs total weight - - right, I'll have lost fat.

[Oki-Des]

Well you would have to lose 15 - 20 lbs of fat before you are at your goal of 170lbs, right? Then you will be at your goal, which you stated was not up for debate. That is what I was saying before regarding waiting to do roids until you had a desire to weigh more than 170lbs. Im trying to offer my advice, but am now confused about your goal.

[nussnussbaby]

Well, one thing to consider is that running test causing different people to gain various amounts of water weight. When you are thin and are at a low body fat, like you are, it will look great in my opinion. Many inexperienced users think this water weight is all lean mass when taking roids, but it isnt. You will gain a lot of water weight and lose it when you finish the test and if you eat right and keep working will be left with an increase in siz and some nice gains. But to get to 170lbs with 6% body fat you need to lose learly 17 pounds of fat as it is. I know you said you are 15%, but you are right in that you dont look like it. But if your goal is to be 17lbs lighter than you are I am not sure roids are the right decision. Honestly, with my limited experience, I would suggest you keep doing what you are doing natty until your goal is to weigh about 200 with 6% bf. You do not have a normal body, so I am curious how your results turn out. ( I obviously mean that in a complimentary way) I have been doing this stuff for 20 years and simply am not sure what to suggest considering your goals, but wanted to say good luck and do keep us informed of your progress whatever you choose to do.

Interesting..

1-It's a personal preference, neither right or wrong, but I like to use the Steve Reeves ideals in setting my goals. A maxed out 170lbs is where I want to be (given my height).

2-Remember, I'll be at about 170lbs, 9-ish%bf before beginning the cycle.

3-Regarding Water Weight. Having a lower bf% means I will gain less water weight than the average person? So, I should expect to gain some lbs on the cycle and then lose them after? How many lbs, roughly, are we talking here?

[Sgt. Hartman]

Don't forget that water weight, for purpose of measuring bf, counts as lbm. So as you lose fat you lose a significant amount of water along with it so even in a perfect scenario you're not losing muscle mass you're still losing lbm.

[Oki-Des]

But yes, if you are at your goal weight already, and add muscle mass while not gaining any weght, your bf% will be going down.

[Oki-Des]

I see, I didnt see your last post. I think I gain about 15-20lbs of water weight when I cycle.

[Oki-Des]

And yes it goes away after a cycle.

[nussnussbaby]

IMO a recomp type cycle/diet plan will not work to get as low as 6%.

If you have great genetics like you say, that might get you into single digits but you won't get much lower than that without aggressive diet/cardio/gear.

There's good reason you don't see people (even on lots of gear) walking around at 6%.

I've actually gotten to 6% before, naturally (bod-pod measured) - and I did it with zero cardio (I'm a leangains practitioner). But I was about 155lbs then, and I didn't like the look.

Like I said, I think I'll be able to get to about 9%bf at 170lbs naturally before beginning the cycle. How low do you think I'll be able to get from there?

I'll just be on the beginner's protocol gear-wise (I think?). And I'm not going to be doing any cardio (see leangains dot com for the reasoning). But my diet is very aggressive.. or I guess, 'advanced' is what you'd say.

[nussnussbaby]

Well you would have to lose 15 - 20 lbs of fat before you are at your goal of 170lbs, right? Then you will be at your goal, which you stated was not up for debate. That is what I was saying before regarding waiting to do roids until you had a desire to weigh more than 170lbs. Im trying to offer my advice, but am now confused about your goal.

I'll be able to get to about 170lbs, 9-ish%bf naturally. I'd like to be at 170lbs, 6-ish%bf ultimately though. So - - from the starting point of 170lbs, 9-ish%bf - - 12 week cycle, eating maintenance calories for 170lbs - - will I end up close to 170lbs, 6-ish%bf?

[nussnussbaby]

Don't forget that water weight, for purpose of measuring bf, counts as lbm. So as you lose fat you lose a significant amount of water along with it so even in a perfect scenario you're not losing muscle mass you're still losing lbm.

I'd really, really love a thorough explanation of this, because I don't understand it at all..

Step 1: I get to about 170lbs, 9-ish%bf naturally prior to beginning the cycle. I eat at maintenance for 170lbs for 1 or 2 weeks there before beginning the cycle.

Step 2: I go on a 12-week cycle (the recommended beginner's stack). I continue to eat at maintenance for 170lbs throughout the cycle (*and remember, because my TDEE equation is based on LBM, calories will increase as I gain muscle mass...even if my weight remains the same).

Step 3: The cycle ends. I continue eating at maintenance for 170lbs and whatever my new (hopefully 2-3% lower) bf% is.



...So. With all of this. Eating to 170lbs the entire time. Am I still going to gain weight on the cycle? Is it just going to be water weight? How much will it be? Will I lose it after the cycle. What will the end result be?

Obviously very curious to hear your take on this.

[nussnussbaby]

I see, I didnt see your last post. I think I gain about 15-20lbs of water weight when I cycle.

But you eat extra calories to gain weight while on cycles, correct? I plan to eat maintenance calories..

[nussnussbaby]

bump.

[nussnussbaby]

anyone back?

[Sgt. Hartman]

But you eat extra calories to gain weight while on cycles, correct? I plan to eat maintenance calories..

You can gain lbm and lose bf on cycle eating at maintenance but it won't get you to such an extreme low bf % imo.

[king6 II]

Just out of curiousity why are you fixed on 6%? As lean as single digit body fat percentages go I don't think you would notice a difference between 6% and 8 or even 9%. If you are 15% in your pic, you will look friggin shredded at 8%.

[kelkel]

I plan to eat maintenance calories..

That being said, why bother with AAS? I don't think you need it to achieve your goals.

[Oki-Des]

Kelkel is right. This is also what I was talking about yesterday. With what your goals are, I think you will reach them easier without using any AAS. Once you want to get to 200; then consider them. I think if you do a cycle it will be extremely difficult to get to 170 with 6%bf. Also, there are not a lot of amatueurs on here who have never made it to 6%bf, so it is also hard to give advice on it. I may have hit 8% or 9% once in my life, but it was extremely hard for me and lasted a few weeks, at most, before jumping up to around 12%; which was much easier to maintain. I do wish you luck and want to see some images when you reach your goal. Good luck!

[nussnussbaby]

You can gain lbm and lose bf on cycle eating at maintenance but it won't get you to such an extreme low bf % imo.

Even if I'm starting at like 170lbs, 9%bf, perfect diet, perfect training? How low do you think I could get at 170lbs?

[nussnussbaby]

Just out of curiousity why are you fixed on 6%? As lean as single digit body fat percentages go I don't think you would notice a difference between 6% and 8 or even 9%. If you are 15% in your pic, you will look friggin shredded at 8%.

Idk, just setting high goals I suppose. I appreciate the compliment.

[nussnussbaby]

That being said, why bother with AAS? I don't think you need it to achieve your goals.

Really, you don't think it'd be much benefit?

[nussnussbaby]

Kelkel is right. This is also what I was talking about yesterday. With what your goals are, I think you will reach them easier without using any AAS. Once you want to get to 200; then consider them. I think if you do a cycle it will be extremely difficult to get to 170 with 6%bf. Also, there are not a lot of amatueurs on here who have never made it to 6%bf, so it is also hard to give advice on it. I may have hit 8% or 9% once in my life, but it was extremely hard for me and lasted a few weeks, at most, before jumping up to around 12%; which was much easier to maintain. I do wish you luck and want to see some images when you reach your goal. Good luck!

I've gotten to 6.1% before (bod-pod). But it was at 155lbs. Honestly, it wasn't that hard for me to get to, or to maintain (I'd still be there if I didn't decide to bulk up). Don't get me wrong on "not that hard" though, my diet was perfect and I never missed a workout. THAT is just not that hard for me.

I'm guessing I'll be at about 9% when I get to 170lbs. But I guess I'll just have to wait and see, and then re-evaluate. If I'm at 170lbs, 9% though - - do you think a maintenance cycle would help me lose body fat while maintaining total weight?

[kelkel]

Really, you don't think it'd be much benefit?

Unless you have a contest coming, making money from appearances, etc, then for your goal I just don't think it prudent to shut yourself down and take the risk. You're at a good level and can achieve positive results without them, imho.

[nussnussbaby]

Unless you have a contest coming, making money from appearances, etc, then for your goal I just don't think it prudent to shut yourself down and take the risk. You're at a good level and can achieve positive results without them, imho.

Hmm. Well, I appreciate that. I guess we'll see how things end up at 170.