Who is more interested in definition?

Sultan5000 · 09-11-2002, 09:20 AM

I had a guy come up to me at the gym the other day and he asked me how much weight I was trying to gain. I just really don't think of it like that. I'm 6'4 200lbs and am more interested in the cut of my body. Muscle size is important, but not overal bulkiness. I am more impressed by a defensive back or linebacker's cut than a lineman's girth. Maybe that's since I'm lean to start with?

Anyhow, anyone else after something like that? And what do you do differently in the weight room, and as far as diet? They talk about carlories, calories, but I just don't want bulkiness that covers up cut.

**Robert** · 09-11-2002, 09:42 AM

It's hard to gain mass and stay lean simultaneoulsy, it can be done but it's easier to gain muscle and fat, or "bulk up".

However, it's not really that effective, at least not in my experience. Every time I "bulk up" it seems like I lose the majority of what I gained when I get lean. I still cycle up and down with my weight, but not as drastically as I used to.

**Mudge** · 09-11-2002, 10:47 AM

I want both, I'd like to be more cut but you can't do much cutting to a stick without being a toothpick!

I do not plan on being 400 pounds though, thats pretty much for sure.

Yanick · 09-11-2002, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sultan5000
Anyhow, anyone else after something like that? And what do you do differently in the weight room, and as far as diet? They talk about carlories, calories, but I just don't want bulkiness that covers up cut.

You still need to do the same thing that everyone else does, then when you reach a size you are happy with, just stop trying to gain and maintain your current condition.

Robboe · 09-11-2002, 11:32 AM

I am obsessed with fat loss.

But at the same time, i want to get bigger and stronger muscles.

I know what you mean though, being viewed as a 'bodybuilder' holds no appeal for me. A more 'athletic' kinda physique is what i prefer.

Kinda like Linford Christie.

EarWax · 09-11-2002, 11:55 AM

I like to be well defined. But I don't wanna look like I was made out of plastic wrap.

Jedi · 09-12-2002, 12:36 PM

so in order to have defined back and defined biceps etc first of all you must have a low body fat %?
coz there are many guys in the gym with HUGE guns but no definition

Robboe · 09-12-2002, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jedi
so in order to have defined back and defined biceps etc first of all you must have a low body fat %?

Yeah. Well think about it. How can you expect to see veins or striations and tight skin if you got a layer of fat covering the muscle?

It's quite logic when you think about it.

Just the same as you'll never get visible abs from sit ups unless you're lean enough to actually see them.

Quote:

coz there are many guys in the gym with HUGE guns but no definition

Same with mine.

If they dropped bodyfat down to competition weight they'd sharp realise that their huge 'guns' aren't as huge as they think, since i'll bet a good few inches are from fat alone.

Training God · 09-12-2002, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Prince
It's hard to gain mass and stay lean simultaneoulsy, it can be done

*** I agree.

Robboe · 09-12-2002, 04:46 PM

I do too, but it depends how you define 'lean'.

If you mean it as 'hover around a certain bodyfat region eg the 8-12% region' (which IS considered lean by today's standards), then sure it is possible.

If you mean it as in add muscle without adding any bodyfat at all and staying at (for example) 7% all the time, then i'll say that you're crazy for trying and you're probably better off letting the bf% go up a little while adding more muscle (in comparison).

Fit Freak · 09-13-2002, 08:56 AM

Very true...I think you can stay in good shape...8 or 9 to 12% and add size but I don't think it's too possible to add muscle without fat when you're in the sub-8% group.