Adarq.org

In the first case, the 85kg 15% guy became 20%bf with 18kg of fat, so he is 90kg. So his added weight was 100% fat?
In the second case, an 75kg-10% guy bulked 10kg and MAYBE 5kg of them was not fat?

You got it. In my experience you can gain a lot of strength in that bulk from higher bodyfat 85 to 90 but very little muscle mass to show for it. Your muscles will fill up though and look a lot bigger, from carbs and fats and having a decent pump from using a higher volume regularly. Plus getting stronger, psychologically feeling good about yourself - it's very easy to believe you've put on serious mass. But cutting down you'll  find there isn't really much changed except your fattiness. Maybe you put on half a kilo of actual muscle if you're lucky. The whole thing comes down to being anabolic for that long, makes recovery go well and you can get stronger easier than if you were trying to cut bodyweight or maintain it.

This comes back to another thing i was thinking about. Suppose i'm 10% bf or less. And i wanna get stronger without putting on much bodyweightt. If  I eat a decent amount of carbs  around training so the majority of my caloric surplus is coming from carbs, I won't really get much fatter because (body will burn carbs preferentially than ever store them as bodyfat - it will store dietary fat instead lol so keep that real low which is hard on a dutty bulk!). Though I haven't tried it, it makes a lot of sense that carbs would allow you to circumvent the usual fatfucking that happens when you eat a lot while trying to push strength up significantly. The catch is, if you're doing this at a higher bodyfat, with poor insulin sensititivity your fat storage sky rockets.  Doing it lean with low bodyfat means excellent insulin sensitivity - now you can use those carbs without the excessive fat storage.

But all of this hinges on being able to be disciplined about your eating and training, something you can't take for granted.

Also, i did not cut from 90 to 85, i cut from 92 to 82 and that does make a huge difference.

It makes no differnce because unless you're starting from that baseline 7-9kg of bodyfat, that number will just go up with any bulk and if you're starting from   say 16kg and go up to 20kg then forget athletic gains (the only exception is if you are a chris hickson and end up pulling 800 as a 260lb and somehow make up for the huge gains in bw with huge really huge gains of strength).

Also, you are not 15%, you cut from ~95 to ~75, you log that you have a six-pack and visible veins in your abs.
For god's shake, get your numbers stairght!!!

I may be closer to 10% bodyfat when i cut to 75kg than i am around 77-78kg atm, which cud be anywhere from 12% to 15%. I'd be safe and say 15% unless proven otherwise but eiiither way i'm cutting to 75kg and less eventually regardless of unreliable estimates. It's looking more and more likely i need to get to 72kg to be at my athletic bodyfat level of ~7kg.

Plus, it depends what vag means by being on the heavier side.

If he means being at 85 kg with 9% bodyfat, then I'm 100% with him.
If he means being at 85 kg with 18% bodyfat, then why the heck would you want to be there? Just so you say "I'm heavier and harder to push around and a Mark Rippetoe prototype MAN"?

Yeah. Consider this, vag started from 90kg. Has cut to 85kg (i know he's currently low 80s but that's not important for this argument). Is he now athletic at 85kg? Is he lean? Nope. So suppose he bulks from 85kg up to 90kg - he gains some strength and he thinks some muscle. But since he started above 15% now he's would being in the 20%s again. So he cuts back to 85kg and is he suddenly 10%? Nope. So that's the problem with cutting down to a bodyweight that isn't quite lean - it means any bulks will go inefficiently from there and you're effectively just spinning wheels.

But consider vag instead cuts to a legit 10% - maybe for him that means having a bodyweight of 75kg. He bulks up to 85kg. Now he's not lean anymore but, he's definitely holding MORE muscle mass at 85kg than he was cutting from 90kg (even if he'd bulked to 90kg from having cut to 85kg first).

That's true, I guess I'm just doubting the gains versus potential injury. That's like doing plyos with weight. And I don't see why the body won't adjust back quickly after you remove the weight since most of your day you'll be normal weight then for a small period you'll be heavier. Idk, Im probably over thinking

The whole time i was thinking of myself actually while you're probably thinking of someone more generic? That's funny. But consider it from my POV. I'm tall but very light, what would i have to loose from using a weighted vest of 20-30kg when i weigh 70kg/155lb?   That means a top end weight of 100kg/220lb - something i've done naturally (dunked in january with a 96kg morning bw naked, and close to 100kg with clothes and food in the PM). So that's where im coming from. And it's not like i'd suddenly put on 20kg one day, i'd build up to it, 2kg or so a week over a period of 6 months or so.

I don't like a weight vest for quad dominant people. If you're quad dominant and you add a weight vest, you're going to be even MORE quad dominant in my experience. Due to that additional weight, you're going to push off using your strongest muscles even more => even more knee bend and quad overload.

i'm not talking about anyone else but for myself. im not quad dominant at all. now what? lol.

Yeah i dont mean for using it as a potetentiating tool. By the way i wouldnt do what you did, go from weighted to unweighted, that's supposed to be dangerous for tendons. I would train it as a proper 'lift', add weight, program it, etc. And when i've reached my goal (say 5x100kg smooth/powerful dunks) i'd maintain that and just hit that set 1x a week to keep the gains. The idea is to build muscle/strength not to potentiate..

---

BW: 77.95kg/171.85lb

Training
FBS 2x100
FS 1x112.5, 0Fx119.5
BP 2x80, 0Fx88.5, 3x78.5, 3x77.5, 5x75

Squat notes:
Haven't recovered well from saturday dunk sesh. Regretting that now. Only positive was I managed to avoid re-injuring my back by avoiding heavy backsquats. I thought i got owned by the FS max single but i actually got it up to half-squat depth pretty quickly and easily, just didn't lock it out, though during the rep i felt completely defeated from fried hips. Will give squats another crack next session, decided to end it there to avoid burning out and ruining my chances of a successful 2nd squat session later in the week.

---

Feeling quite weak. Hopefully that was my last training sesh done fasted/carb depleted/fatigued.  Next training sesh will coincide with a carb reload, which might even mean a poor session actually but subsequent sessions shud be good considering i'll be eating at maintenance calories for bodyweight. 2 days of rest to come and final training sesh of the week on friday, hopefully at a bodyweight ≤ 77kg.

death to the tall. seriously, though, getting up pretty good there, man. looking smooth.

Looks v good indeed. A fair bit quicker than what I remember from your last video.
Well done.

No surprise, but you are looking a hell of a lot faster and smoother at this lower BW. Nice!

2 handers with ease.

Thanks guys. If the last vid was the one where i was outdoors while weighing 96kg then yup. If it was the one from feb when i was around 90kg, then nope, i was a lot smoother/faster there, maybe from movement efficiency from dunking semi regularly. Right now this is the first time i've put on my bbball shoes since like march or something so movement efficiency is not quite there yet. The only reason im looking kinda smooth (compared to when 96kg) is because i'm almost 20kg lighter lol.

Hopefully with another 5-6kg bodyweight drop, practice and movement efficiency and some baseline strength (130kg fs and 140kg bs) i'll improve considerably.

Why don't you try some deeper plants and see what happens?

you mean how much chest dip? i just dont need much right now, the lighter i get, the less dip i need. am not thinking about my form at all while approaching  the rim

Nice pulls bro. Get that up to 5x180 and then 5x200  and you'll be a beast!

Ok WA it is.
If they've got them try the outlet stores. Otherwise Foot Locker is ridiculously expensive.

i'll see. it's usually a waste of time to go shops, they never have half sizes, and the range is so limited anyways, ive bought on some bad impulse decisions just because it was teh best available choice. Like my current pair of bball shoes are size 14. Im not a 14. But that's all i cud find at the time and i needed a pair :/

I tried on nike frees in 12s while i was in teh states and they were really tight. 13s were loose. Go figure. Im guessing that rules out the hyperdunks for me. But i've had this idea that maybe i shud be wearing 12s with really thin socks, that might work. May try your suggestion of going to my local footlocker and seeing. WA btw.