Adarq.org

i have those same boxers. arent they wonderful?

I don't like how Zach is butchered as an example of a failed diet in this ridiculous thread. His goal was to get bigger and stronger, both of which he accomplished very well. His goal was not to enter a physique contest or to be an underwear model. Just get over it, that there are people who couldn't care less if they have a six pack or not. Also notice that those who cry the loudest about this being an example of how not to approach eating and training are often also those who never got an average kid as strong as fast - good diet or not.

Would I encourage eating this way for an athlete that wants to jump higher? No, probably not since athletes will usually need to be in contest shape for a big proportion of the year. But if the objective is to get as strong as possible as fast as possible eating a ton of stuff with GOMAD is likely going to meet your needs very well.

 

Um... so how do all these apply for me?

In my book, I don't give a rat's ass if I gain even more fat RIGHT NOW. I will later. The thing is gaining strength and I will work on shedding fat later. That's the idea. Build the muscle. Keep the muscle. Lose the fat. Improve relative strength.

I definitely don't want to cut muscle, I want to cut FAT!

The reason Zach gets made fun of is because Rippetoe bragged about how much muscle and how little fat he put on.  Rippetoe is the reason the kid gets made fun of online, because he was bragging about the Aesthetic part of it. If he just talked about how he got his squat up 200 pounds in 6 months, then nobody would care.

Rip was claiming like 45 pounds of muscle and 20 pounds of fat or something ridiculous like that.

If you think Rip bragged about the aesthetic outcome of Zach's training up to that point then you are are delusional. He did although claim that the kid gained tons of muscle and he is in a better position to judge that then you or me are since he caliper measured him. I am not going to get into the debate whether the numbers are accurate or not, for me it's pretty obvious that Zach gained a lot of muscle and strength and that was the whole point of that article which was published back then. It's not Zach's fault that some people without brains thought it would be fun to cry about those pictures and how the kid failed and stupid shit like that.

steven-miller, i'm not making fun of Zach one bit, but the fact is that's what happens when you bulk dirty. He might not care one bit about any of that, but that has no bearing on what actually happened to his physique during that bulk.. Lots of people think you have to stuff your face to put on some decent mass, and end up going down the road he took to put on mass, usually not to that extent, but that "well i'll put on fat with muscle then cut (edit:) fat" ideology is definitely the most common among athletes trying to put on mass, imo.

peace

I don't know what's the point of that argument. It's not that you suddenly wake up and have 22% bf because you ate a cheeseburger the day before. People should be able to evaluate their progress at any point and come to conclusions whether or not they are getting closer to their goals or if they better clean up their diet a bit.

I personally think that there is nothing wrong with the ideal to put on muscle but stay rather lean (say at 10% bf or lower). You just have to accept that gains will, at least for most people, come slower and this is especially true for novices who will stall prematurely because their eating does not keep up with their potential for growth in strength and mass.

Yeah, I'd be terribly disappointed to gain 100 lbs on my squat while packing 32.5 lbs more weight on me.

I'd be at ~100 kg squatting ~185.

And gaining 65 pounds but only putting on 200 pounds on your squat is pretty lousy imo.

And your best squat was what again?