Rihad's log

Discussion in 'Training Logs' started by HST_Rihad, Jan 19, 2013.

  1. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Yesterday's legs flexed @BW 63.4 kg (139.7 lb) (the one with quads on the right has toes more out)

    20140529-63kg-quads1.jpg 20140529-63kg-quads2.jpg

    20140529-63kg-hams1.jpg 20140529-63kg-hams2.jpg
  2. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

  3. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Waist is 73cm/28.7" (was 80cm/31.4" when I was fat)
    Left leg 52.5cm/20.6" (was 61cm/24" when I was fat)
    Right arm 34cm/13.4" (was 38cm/15" when I was fat)
    Chest 99.5cm/39.1" (was 109.5cm/43" when I was fat).

    The home bodyweight scale has been showing weird numbers for almost a week (not only for me) so I've been logging new daily numbers as ??.? for now. Which is a good thing because it will allow me to lean down to visible ab levels more easily without fearing that my bodyweight would go "unacceptably" low. Which is a stupid idea in every sense because bodyweight never directly contributes to how you look, leanness and some muscle development do.
    I'm on a more aggressive body recomp for now - eat more on workout days (which are full body workouts on Mo-Wd-Fr), eat slightly below maintenance on rest days. Never measured calories/grams, judging by the progress only.
    20140603 72.6cm ??.?
    20140602 72.6cm ??.?
    20140601 72.5cm ??.?
    20140531 72.5cm ??.?
    20140530 72.6cm ??.?
    20140529 72.6cm ??.?
    20140528 72.7cm ??.?
    20140527 72.7cm ??.?
    20140526 72.7cm ??.?
    20140525 72.9cm 63.9
    20140524 72.8cm 63.4
    20140523 72.9cm 63.4
    20140522 73.0cm 64.0
    20140521 73.0cm 63.5
    20140520 73.0cm 63.5
    20140519 73.0cm 63.5
    20140518 73.0cm 63.5
    20140517 73.0cm 63.1
    20140516 73.0cm 63.1
    20140515 73.1cm 63.7
    20140514 73.1cm 63.4
    20140513 73.1cm 63.7
    20140512 73.2cm 63.2
    20140511 73.2cm 63.5
    20140510 73.3cm 63.5
    20140509 73.3cm 63.2
    20140508 73.3cm 63.6
    20140507 73.4cm 63.6
    20140506 73.4cm 63.0
    20140505 73.3cm 63.0
    20140504 73.4cm 63.0
    20140503 73.5cm 63.8
    20140502 73.5cm 63.2
    20140501 73.6cm 64.0
    20140430 73.5cm 63.3
    20140429 73.6cm 63.9
    20140428 73.6cm 63.6
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2014
  4. mickc1965

    mickc1965 Well-Known Member

    Do you train first thing in the morning?
    HST_Rihad likes this.
  6. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    I think results-based diet adjustment (what you're doing) is definitely more viable for cutting (getting lean) than getting bigger. The carb-water variance throws the scales considerably (depending on your eating scheme), it's hard to be objective about the phenotypical expression of p-ratio etc.
  7. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    On gym days 3 times per week, no, I break my fast fairly big (pro+cho+fat+vits+cre) and then work out 55-60 minutes later in a full body fashion. Eating big pre-workout allows me to drag the workout to as much as needed, which amounts to 2:15-2:20 towards the end of a cycle.
    On rest days I do workout fasted using resistance bands at home doing higher-rep myo-rep work. This is no big deal and is more like a glycogen depleting workout to allow for more fat to be burnt later.
  8. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    I think I will be doing the same when I decide to slow-bulk with recomping. The only difference (for starters) would be eating for growth for 4 days, and cutting for 3 days out of 7 (i.e. 4+3 as opposed to 3+4 now as I still need to see my abs, hence more days cutting).
    Image092.jpg Image093.jpg Image094.jpg Image095.jpg Image096.jpg
  9. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    Your abs are visible in those photos. But again, horses for courses ...
  10. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Not the lower ones. There's a slight chance that getting rid of the stubborn fat area that's been there for ages will reconstruct my metabolism for the better.
  11. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    4-week checkpoint. All loads in kg.

    Squat 97х5, 77х12
    Incline bench press 72х5,4,2, 65х9, 55х13+1 myo-reps 3 breath pause
    Leg curl 13 bricks х8 not fully
    Seated rows 68х6х2, 60х10 medium grip, 50х15 wide grip.
    1-arm bent-over row 50х6х2
    BB shrugs 122х7
    Rack pulls 150х10
    BB shrugs 92х15
    Incline CGBP 60х4,3,2, 50х10+1 myo-reps 4 breath pause
    BB curls 45х4+4, 3+4
    Standing calves raise BW+96х12
    Hyperextensions 30х15
    Arnold press 21х8 right (1-2 short), 21х2 left
    Seated Smith machine BB press (not OHP) 40х3 until chest on the bottom
    Bent over rear delt raises 12.5х7

    I think I will be ditching Arnold press at this point of my cycle to move over to standing supported 1-arm press, for the sake of increasing the load. Arnold presses are fine for the first few weeks of a cycle when loads are relatively light. I want to work up to 3-5RM maxes and then do some heavier negatives.

    Also, my lats seem to be humming along.
  12. gbglifter

    gbglifter Member

    Thats the widesr Ive seen your lats. Good going! I seem to be going against the grain but Id say keep "cutting/recomping" as youre not too far away from shredded abs there. Once you get that under your belt then the psychological boost it gives you allows one to do whatever the [email protected] they want with regards to body fat as you know you can achieve a shredded state again.
    HST_Rihad likes this.
  13. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Thanks, I don't think I'll ever want to get fatter, while I'm into this thing anyway. Who said we can't gain muscle mass while recomping? Of course we can. Bulk on some days of the week, cut on others. That's it.
  14. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    'Recomping' doesn't exist. All you're doing // attempting to do is bulking and cutting on a micro scale, not a macro scale. I use 'attempting' because it doesn't look like you're actually gaining muscle here. Clearly you've learned how to diet & train in a fashion that spares muscle and maximises fat gain, though you're on 12 months now. Definitely time to consider going into surplus.

    Do you have a before and after front-lat spread? It's a better visual indicator of gains on the lats, generally speaking.
  15. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Recomping IS bulking and cutting on a micro scale. Duration of both can be within hours, not even days. Stay fed for a few hour span - you're anabolic. Stay fasted during the other hours - you're catabolic and retaining muscle thanks to gh and the general resistance-exercise induced anabolic/anti-catabolic environment .

    The earliest was on 20140310, then 20140505, and 20140606 respectively:
    20140310-64kg.jpg 20140505-63kg-3.jpg 20140606-~63kg-lats.jpg

    I'm still on my way to developing the lats. Gaining bodyweight/size because of being constantly overfed can't be the right way to be gaining muscle because there you're also getting fatter and losing form. Also read this article named "Anabolic resistance" - the fatter you get the less muscle and the more fat you'll be getting for your efforts.
  16. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member


    I assume you have clinical data to support this? Links? Citations?

    You realise that the food you eat at 12pm is going to be digested for the next 16-24hrs, yes ... ? 'Fasted' as a concept, implying not-eating, empty stomach etc. doesn't really reconcile with how long it takes the body to break down and digest foods.

    You're still confusing 'bulking' as a concept, and the way the term is used, with simply overeating too much whilst doing resistance exercise (ala eating too much and lifting weights to build muscle). Bulking does not, and has never implied getting fat as fuck and calling it 'ok' because it also contends you'll gain a bunch of muscle.

    Article read, and analysis is that it's pretty useless in terms of supporting your contention that bulking = fat. All it says is that if you eat too much above X-threshold, for Y-time period, you'll add more fat and less muscle. That isn't what is suggested by anyone here as far as I know, so not really relevant.

    You need to eat significantly to gain muscle. Thermodynamics and biochemistry says so. Entropy is a b1tch etc. Just don't eat so much that the accompanying fat becomes an issue (in any sense).

    Lats are still essentially the same IMO, they're more defined because you've lost bodyfat, which is probably a good thing if you're pursuing your 8-pack // modeling career // whatever you want abs for ... but you aren't gaining muscle on that back as far as I can tell. Definition is looking great as the adipose vacates.
  17. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member


    It's not all black & white - both processes occur pretty much simultaneously, we're analog, not digital. It's the degree that matters. The more time passes since your last food depending on its size, the more you switch to burning the stored fat orchestrated by the dropping levels of insulin, increased gh & glucagon secretion etc.

    It's simply more appropriate to eat enough on some days to allow for mass gains at an optimal rate, and cut off the fat that's been stored on others, that's it. It doesn't necessarily have to be months or even weeks each.

    It's too early to tell, subjectively I think I have been gaining, mostly on the traps :) I will be measuring lat progress again as I get into much heavier negatives.
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2014
  18. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    Links for the rest of the contention ?

    Upper traps shoot up in anyone really quickly, in my opinion. Androgen receptors all over the place and they're vastly under-utilised in 21st century lifestyles; we don't carry things at our sides anymore.

    What are training goals btw, in term of specifics?
  19. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Training goals: lean (6-pack visible) & muscular.
    Traps aren't apart from the rest of the muscles... I've been hitting them properly with 200+kg loads (considering my frame), that's it. Nothing close to that for lats at the moment.
    I'll try looking for info explaining the analog nature of hormonal milieu (the other contention).
  20. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    No need re: analog milieu. I agree entirely. Anyone who's read anything beyond basic hormone physiology would have no other reasonable conclusion, for at least 80-90% of our hormone management - and in general, it's just a part of homeostasis. My issue is with your interpretation and extrapolation of the processes into your proposed applied outcomes.

Share This Page