Natural cutting vs. on cycle

[Zodiac85]

Ok, so I'm pretty new to all this and just trying to learn as much as I can. I have a theoretical question.

My assumptions:

You can only cycle safely 2 or maybe 3 times per year (with 12-14 week cycles).

You can absolutely cut naturally, but you have to go pretty slow to maintain your hard earned muscle mass.

You can do a cutting cycle using gear to help maintain your gains, this can be done considerably quicker.

Of course if you do a cutting cycle, that's one less bulking cycle. My goal is to stay between 10-15% bf and be as strong as possible. How do most of you guys with several cycles do it? Bulking cycles and cut naturally, or alternating bulking and cutting cycles? Or some other combination?

Please correct any assumptions that are incorrect as well. Again, this is just theoretical at this stage as I have yet to run my first cycle, and I'm over 25.

[MuscleInk]

I'm cutting now. My current plan:

Gear: trenE, mast, cyp, NPP
Diet: 700-800 cals below TDEE
Cardio 2hrs 6x a week
IF: 3x/wk

Does gear help? Yes, increases BMR and limits catabolic events. However, reducing bf is all about diet and cardio. Without those two critical factors set up to promote bf loss, gear won't get you where you want to go.

[Zodiac85]

So do you alternate bulking and cutting cycles? Or just cut when you feel like your bf is too high? I guess I'm asking, is there a pattern to your cycling?

[MuscleInk]

So do you alternate bulking and cutting cycles? Or just cut when you feel like your bf is too high? I guess I'm asking, is there a pattern to your cycling?

Yes, I alternate. Current plan is to drop bf to below 10%. Then bulk and cut one more time leading up to show.

[Zodiac85]

If you start below 10%, how high do you personally expect to end up after the bulking cycle?

[MuscleInk]

If you start below 10%, how high do you personally expect to end up after the bulking cycle?

My nutrition for bulking will be similar to cutting just more volume of food. I won't "dirty bulk" because I need to stay lean. For BB comps you need to be in the 5-7% bf range. My goal for bulking will be to keep the bf below 12%.

[Damienm05]

Nothing is more obnoxious than this nonsensical bro-science that if you aren't on gear or eating a million calories a day, your muscles will just magically eat themselves up and you'll lose all your gains. Okay, maybe I'm being a bit hyperbolic, but still, it's nonsense. Unless someone is way beyond their natural potential or setting a stupidly low caloric deficit and/or overtraining and/or doing obscene amounts of cardio, they aren't going to lose a noticeable amount of LBM from a responsible cut. Why not just cut down to below 12% and then use cycles to pack on lbs of LBM and get as big as you wanna be? I mean, is it really that hard to maintain a low bf% year-round once you achieve it? The answer is no. If you lack the discipline to achieve and maintain a low bf% without AAS, you probably aren't the type of person who should be doing AAS in the first place.

Nothing against you OP. I simply have a very strong opinion on this subject.

[MuscleInk]

Nothing is more obnoxious than this nonsensical bro-science that if you aren't on gear or eating a million calories a day, your muscles will just magically eat themselves up and you'll lose all your gains. Okay, maybe I'm being a bit hyperbolic, but still, it's nonsense. Unless someone is way beyond their natural potential or setting a stupidly low caloric deficit and/or overtraining and/or doing obscene amounts of cardio, they aren't going to lose a noticeable amount of LBM from a responsible cut. Why not just cut down to below 12% and then use cycles to pack on lbs of LBM and get as big as you wanna be? I mean, is it really that hard to maintain a low bf% year-round once you achieve it? The answer is no. If you lack the discipline to achieve and maintain a low bf% without AAS, you probably aren't the type of person who should be doing AAS in the first place.

Nothing against you OP. I simply have a very strong opinion on this subject.

True to an extent. As you correctly point out, every situation is unique. Not every case requires cycles to achieve desired outcomes.

[< <Samson> >]

It's just better on juice. . . After cycling for over a year I see this pretty clearly(for myself at least). Try your best to maintain yourself while off the sauce. Bulk on sauce - rest - cut on sauce

But, what I figure you can run possibly just one a year. If you are the size you want to be, just maintain the best you can, then cut.


It's easier on the sauce. . . You can cut cals very low and retain nearly all of your LBM.

[Zodiac85]

Nothing is more obnoxious than this nonsensical bro-science that if you aren't on gear or eating a million calories a day, your muscles will just magically eat themselves up and you'll lose all your gains. Okay, maybe I'm being a bit hyperbolic, but still, it's nonsense. Unless someone is way beyond their natural potential or setting a stupidly low caloric deficit and/or overtraining and/or doing obscene amounts of cardio, they aren't going to lose a noticeable amount of LBM from a responsible cut. Why not just cut down to below 12% and then use cycles to pack on lbs of LBM and get as big as you wanna be? I mean, is it really that hard to maintain a low bf% year-round once you achieve it? The answer is no. If you lack the discipline to achieve and maintain a low bf% without AAS, you probably aren't the type of person who should be doing AAS in the first place.

Nothing against you OP. I simply have a very strong opinion on this subject.

No offense taken at all. I'm genuinely interested in hearing both sides. So you would say use your valuable cycle time to bulk and the off cycle time to cut (if necessary)? This is actually the direction I was inclined towards when I questioned it myself. If you're competing I'm sure it's totally different, but it seems that 5 or 10 years from now this would lead to the most LBM at a reasonable body fat. But I do appreciate hearing different takes on the subject.

[MuscleInk]

It's just better on juice. . . After cycling for over a year I see this pretty clearly(for myself at least). Try your best to maintain yourself while off the sauce. Bulk on sauce - rest - cut on sauce

But, what I figure you can run possibly just one a year. If you are the size you want to be, just maintain the best you can, then cut.

It's easier on the sauce. . . You can cut cals very low and retain nearly all of your LBM.

There's no way I'd run my current cutting plan without gear.

[Zodiac85]

It's just better on juice. . . After cycling for over a year I see this pretty clearly(for myself at least). Try your best to maintain yourself while off the sauce. Bulk on sauce - rest - cut on sauce

But, what I figure you can run possibly just one a year. If you are the size you want to be, just maintain the best you can, then cut.


It's easier on the sauce. . . You can cut cals very low and retain nearly all of your LBM.

You would recommend this even for someone like myself that will never compete? I'm happy when I get down to 10%.

[Damienm05]

No offense taken at all. I'm genuinely interested in hearing both sides. So you would say use your valuable cycle time to bulk and the off cycle time to cut (if necessary)? This is actually the direction I was inclined towards when I questioned it myself. If you're competing I'm sure it's totally different, but it seems that 5 or 10 years from now this would lead to the most LBM at a reasonable body fat. But I do appreciate hearing different takes on the subject.

I'd say forget cycling again until you're as lean as you could ever want to be. It may take a while and be tough, but you can definitely get to 8% without gear. Sure, you may lose a little bit of LBM, but then when you cycle again and eat slightly above maintenance, you'd gain back all the lost mass and then some. Once you've achieved that, you could run a solid PCT, maybe gain 2% bf and still be at 10% and then stay nice and lean until/if you decide to run another cylce again, as much as a year down the road. I just don't see any advantages to doing it the other way, unless you want to use the gear as an excuse to eat dirty and still lose or set ridiculously low cals and not lose LBM (which still isn't healthy).

[human project]

Ok, so I'm pretty new to all this and just trying to learn as much as I can. I have a theoretical question.

My assumptions:

You can only cycle safely 2 or maybe 3 times per year (with 12-14 week cycles).

You can absolutely cut naturally, but you have to go pretty slow to maintain your hard earned muscle mass.

You can do a cutting cycle using gear to help maintain your gains, this can be done considerably quicker.

Of course if you do a cutting cycle, that's one less bulking cycle. My goal is to stay between 10-15% bf and be as strong as possible. How do most of you guys with several cycles do it? Bulking cycles and cut naturally, or alternating bulking and cutting cycles? Or some other combination?

Please correct any assumptions that are incorrect as well. Again, this is just theoretical at this stage as I have yet to run my first cycle, and I'm over 25.

I don't understand why everyone thinks you can't build muscle and cut fat??.... If all your eating is "clean" food... You won't get fat..... You want to bulk.... Eat even more.... You want to lean out a little... Raise you cardio and still eat more..... On even the biggest mass cycles. "Basic aas cycles" I would still never let myself get to far over 10%.... Being fat doesn't help build muscle..

[Zodiac85]

I don't understand why everyone thinks you can't build muscle and cut fat??.... If all your eating is "clean" food... You won't get fat..... You want to bulk.... Eat even more.... You want to lean out a little... Raise you cardio and still eat more..... On even the biggest mass cycles. "Basic aas cycles" I would still never let myself get to far over 10%.... Being fat doesn't help build muscle..

I understand that you can build muscle and cut fat at the same time. But if you are cutting and building, then you aren't maximizing the amount you could build? This is why people separate their cutting and bulking cycles? I'm not being argumentative, just trying to understand people's reasoning.

It seems like cycle time is very valuable muscle building time and I'm trying to understand the perspective of you guys that have done it a while.

[Zodiac85]

I'm more into lifting for strength, and I'll never compete in body building so I'm thinking that I'll bulk on cycle and cut off cycle. But I have yet to run my first cycle so I don't really know what I'll think when time comes for cycle 2.

[Damienm05]

I understand that you can build muscle and cut fat at the same time. But if you are cutting and building, then you aren't maximizing the amount you could build? This is why people separate their cutting and bulking cycles? I'm not being argumentative, just trying to understand people's reasoning.

It seems like cycle time is very valuable muscle building time and I'm trying to understand the perspective of you guys that have done it a while.

Regardless of how you interpreted his post for your own intents and purposes, it really was an excellent post. Ultimately you have to do what suits you best, but I think his point was that it doesn't take a huge surplus of calories to build muscle nor a huge deficit to lose fat and this is true. Once you're lean, there's no need to do traditional bulks that yield fat gain with a huge caloric surplus just to take advantage of your cylce. You could actually just set calories slightly above maintenance and gain just fine, while still doing some cardio; add in the added fat-burning properties of the mass you'd be gaining and you're killing two birds with one stone and actually looking the way you want year-round.

[Zodiac85]

Regardless of how you interpreted his post for your own intents and purposes, it really was an excellent post. Ultimately you have to do what suits you best, but I think his point was that it doesn't take a huge surplus of calories to build muscle nor a huge deficit to lose fat and this is true. Once you're lean, there's no need to do traditional bulks that yield fat gain with a huge caloric surplus just to take advantage of your cylce. You could actually just set calories slightly above maintenance and gain just fine, while still doing some cardio; add in the added fat-burning properties of the mass you'd be gaining and you're killing two birds with one stone and actually looking the way you want year-round.

I'm not trying to mis-interpret anyone's post. It seems to me that some people use their cycles for either bulking or cutting (by alternating them or whatever), while other people only clean bulk on cycle and/or cut some fat and bulk at the same time. I'm just trying to understand the reasoning that went into someones decision. If it seems like I keep asking the same things over and over, its only because I'm attempting to clarify things in my own mind. I sincerely appreciate the discussion.

[human project]

I understand that you can build muscle and cut fat at the same time. But if you are cutting and building, then you aren't maximizing the amount you could build? This is why people separate their cutting and bulking cycles? I'm not being argumentative, just trying to understand people's reasoning.

It seems like cycle time is very valuable muscle building time and I'm trying to understand the perspective of you guys that have done it a while.

I think during a cycle you will continue to gain muscle with increasing clean whole calories.... If while gaining muscle you see that your body fat is going too high I would just add more cardio and then even further raise calories to make sure to preserve muscle.... In my years of training I've found that just bc my bf is through the roof doesn't mean I'm gaining optimal muscle.,,,
I actually gain the most amount of muscle when I keep fit at around 7-9%..... If your goal is bodybuilding you need to always make sure to keep a decent bf % so you can actually see the statue you are sculpting

[Damienm05]

I'm not trying to mis-interpret anyone's post. It seems to me that some people use their cycles for either bulking or cutting (by alternating them or whatever), while other people only clean bulk on cycle and/or cut some fat and bulk at the same time. I'm just trying to understand the reasoning that went into someones decision. If it seems like I keep asking the same things over and over, its only because I'm attempting to clarify things in my own mind. I sincerely appreciate the discussion.

You're fine, dude. This shit is tough to get dialed in right and I wasn't implying that you weren't keeping up. People think about black and white terms like "cutting" "bulking" and, most of all, "calories" way too much. Calories in bodybuilding diets and nutrient density of foods are often miles apart. Think about being on a bulk and eating 4200 calories from peanut butter and nuts, whole eggs, wheat bread, milk, wheat pasta, fatty steaks, whole rotisserie chickens, corn on the cob, white rice, peas, baked potatoes; these are good foods, bulking staples, nothing wrong with them. Anyway, now let's say that same dude decides to eat about 800 cals less, right at maintenance, but via consuming only tilapia, fish oil capsules, extra virgin coconut, olive, and macadamia nut oils, lentils, chickpeas, brown basmati rice, oats, sweet potatoes, berries, ultra-lean venison/bison, chicken breasts, and tons of spinach, kale, broccoli, etc. He's probably actually getting more essential nutrients from the second list of foods at 3400 cals than with the first at 4200 -- and that's a very generous example, considering most guys eat far dirtier on a bulk. Anyway, I digress. My point is that if you really go all out to ensure that you're eating the most nutrient dense food possible, you're bound to be getting more muscle fuel than someone who isn't, even if there's a discrepancy in calories. Some people are possibly reading this and thinking, "but how can there be an anabolic environment if the body isn't getting a surplus of calories?" Simply put, that's over-hyped nonsense, perpetuated by the bodybuilding elite who are near or even beyond their natural potential. Yes, Ronnie Coleman or anyone even similarly huge probably won't grow at this point unless there's a huge surplus of calories. Back when I was a trainer, I had clients who were pretty big intermediate guys who'd been doing it for 4-5 years, a couple even had a cycle or two under their belts, and they gained just fine eating a well-dialed in high protein diet at maintenance with cardio. I've also experienced this first-hand. I'm not a monster, but I am 6'1" and over 210 lbs very lean and I've never "bulked" or even eaten more than a couple hundred calories over maintenance. I've unintentionally eaten way over TDEE in the past or planned "off periods" from tracking calories and I never experienced better gains during those periods. I really could go on for hours about this, citing all the examples I've seen of people upping their nutrient density and implementing techniques like planned carb refeeds, carb backloading and such and actually increased size and strength while reducing overall calories, but I'll spare you because it's all out there on the internet anyway.