Problem with muscle definition

[ken]

Originally Posted by Jared

But until I plateau, perhaps it's not worth the effort for slight improvement and I should just concentrate on form, nutrition, and other well-established aspects?

You got it. Just lift the weight and get stronger. When you stop getting stronger, you can reevaluate your training.

 

[gvibes]

Originally Posted by Jared

Not every forum can have a designer like j.

I admit I didn't understand all of what I skimmed through there. Personally, I take that as a symptom that exercise is still more art than science: there are partial theories and significant but mostly "unscientific" data. So if I want to figure out the optimal way to exercise, I need to read a bunch and synthesize an answer using my best judgement. But until I plateau, perhaps it's not worth the effort for slight improvement and I should just concentrate on form, nutrition, and other well-established aspects?
The only exercise programs that have seen that seem to have some sort of significant scientific support is hypertrophy specific training. See http://www.hypertrophy-specific.com/articles.html http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/hst1.htm

 

[NoVaguy]

Originally Posted by Mike Lowry

Alphonso Soriano is 6' and around 165 and I'd say he's pretty damn strong.

he's not 165. espn's player card has him at 180, and he is probably 185 or 190. i know that mccarver mentioned he was 165 at the AS game, but I think the 165 is the weight he came up at, with the yankees and it never got corrected in mccarver's brain.

wilt chamberlain went through the same thing - the player cards kept listing his weight in the mid-200's, even though by the end of his career he had weightlifted his way up to the high 200's and low 300's.

 

[whacked]

Originally Posted by NoVaguy

he's not 165. espn's player card has him at 180, and he is probably 185 or 190. i know that mccarver mentioned he was 165 at the AS game, but I think the 165 is the weight he came up at, with the yankees and it never got corrected in mccarver's brain.

wilt chamberlain went through the same thing - the player cards kept listing his weight in the mid-200's, even though by the end of his career he had weightlifted his way up to the high 200's and low 300's.

That makes sense. Watching the Cubs-Giants game yesterday, I was thinking there's no way in hell dude only weighs 160s.

 

[ken]

Originally Posted by gvibes

The only exercise programs that have seen that seem to have some sort of significant scientific support is hypertrophy specific training.

Then you have not seen very many exercise programs.

 

[Flame]

Thanks for the advice gentleman.

I'm in no way a skinny person, I have a large skeletal frame (for an asian) and I have been lifting for 2 years. However, I have never taken muscle supplements before, but my current look is pretty similar to Soriano, I can bench my own weight.

Anyways, in the last couple of months, have been doing a lot of cardio together with my usual weightlifting workout. Diet is 5 meals a day, mostly brown rice, whole wheat bread, fish, tofu, veggies, eggs, some lean meat. I'm following this regime where I take about 2500 cals and make sure I work off 500-600 cals daily.

My weight is now 170, however overall my back, chest, arms and legs have become alot more defined (I'm pretty close to getting the "bicep vein&quot and I have dropped an inch in the waist. My guess is the fat has been converted to muscle.

My aim is not to bulk, but rather stay around my current weight with more definition. Think a swimmer or kickboxer body. Also it would be nice if my glutes and hams don't get any bigger, since I wear alot of skinny pants.

 

[Maharaja]

Originally Posted by ken

My guess is that there's very little fat on your shoulders (who's got fat shoulders at 6' 165lbs.?). Are you on a creatine supplement? If not, start. Along with increasing performance in the gym, it'll keep you "pumped" for longer afterwards, sometimes even carrying into the next day. Also, fix any problems with your post-workout meal.


this is a horrible piece of advice!

you dont specify NOT to use creatine monohydrate, OR ethyl ester

instead of using creatine which has the tendency to re-precipitate in the liver and kidneys after multiple cycles USE KRE ALKALYN...it has the benefits of creatine without the side effects

but chances are that if your the height and weight you say you are, it would be way easy for you to get toned up

 

[mizanation]

Originally Posted by Saucemaster

Jared is probably right for most people--it's hard to be very strong at 165. I know, I'm right around 165, and despite a lot of training, I could be a lot stronger. BUT it depends a lot on how you train, what your frame is, etc. 165 is, what, super middleweight in boxing? I guarantee you that a boxer whose fighting weight is 165 is strong as hell by any vaguely reasonable standard.
sauce, you're correct 165 is super middleweight in boxing (161-168) and is welterweight in mma (155-170). HOWEVER... every boxer cuts weight to fight. this means dropping up to 20 pounds of mostly water weight, depending on the weight class. this means, for let's say, super-middleweight, you have people who are already cut and strong at 185-190, dropping down in weight to about 168.5 for the weigh-in. then over the next day, they re-hydrate and pack on up to 20 pounds of weight in food and water. comparing flame to a professional prize-fighter (let alone professional athlete) is a little unfair. he lacks the years of sports-specific training and probably genetics (like most of us). it takes decades to develop the strength of someone like matt hughes who fights at 170. to flame: please, don't fool yourself. benching your own weight is not strong. benching twice your weight is strong. also, fat doesn't "convert" to muscle. but, sounds like you're doing better, so congrats!

 

[knucks]

Originally Posted by Maharaja

this is a horrible piece of advice!

you dont specify NOT to use creatine monohydrate, OR ethyl ester

instead of using creatine which has the tendency to re-precipitate in the liver and kidneys after multiple cycles USE KRE ALKALYN...it has the benefits of creatine without the side effects

but chances are that if your the height and weight you say you are, it would be way easy for you to get toned up
Who are you? What side effects? Get the **** out.

 

[Flame]

Miz - thanks for the advice.

How would you go about gaining muscle mass (and dropping fat) without putting on much weight? Increasing the amount I can bench and squat is definately in my goals, but I don't want to appear massive since I'm quite satisfied with my current body frame.

 

[nioh]

Originally Posted by Flame

Miz - thanks for the advice.

How would you go about gaining muscle mass (and dropping fat) without putting on much weight? Increasing the amount I can bench and squat is definately in my goals, but I don't want to appear massive since I'm quite satisfied with my current body frame.

Unless you prep it will take years and years of hard training to become massive. So I wouldn't really worry about it. Just put yourself on a slightly +cal diet and do your best at the gym. It's way easier to gain and then go on a diet than try to do both at the same time.

 

[whacked]

Originally Posted by nioh

Unless you prep it will take years and years of hard training to become massive. So I wouldn't really worry about it. Just put yourself on a slightly +cal diet and do your best at the gym. It's way easier to gain and then go on a diet than try to do both at the same time.

+1. Cutting is always much, much easier than clean bulking.

 

[mizanation]

Originally Posted by Flame

Miz - thanks for the advice.

How would you go about gaining muscle mass (and dropping fat) without putting on much weight? Increasing the amount I can bench and squat is definately in my goals, but I don't want to appear massive since I'm quite satisfied with my current body frame.

do what nioh says, which is the common procedure.

it's not easy to get "massive", so i wouldn't worry about that problem.

 

[Saucemaster]

Originally Posted by mizanation

comparing flame to a professional prize-fighter (let alone professional athlete) is a little unfair. he lacks the years of sports-specific training and probably genetics (like most of us). it takes decades to develop the strength of someone like matt hughes who fights at 170.
Oh, of course. That's also why I mentioned that for most people, it really is difficult to be very strong at 165. I'm not, and I'm a pretty lean 165. I was just pointing out that weight isn't really a good indicator of strength. Even muscle mass isn't always a good indicator. I'm sure we've all seen guys at the gym who are pretty huge, but lift (relatively) little for their size, spending all their time doing isolation exercises and high reps. Which, are those guys just all on 'roids or something, or are they just genetically gifted? I can't gain **** if I sit around doing isolation exercises.

 

[mizanation]

^^^ yeah, i agree completely.