BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General diet questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 01-17-2017, 08:09 AM
kyoun1e's Avatar
kyoun1e kyoun1e is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Scituate, MA
Posts: 1,763
Default Abs By Memorial Day

It's usually at this point in the year (winter here in the NE) that I decide enough dieting, it's time to eat and bulk. I'm thinking that's not such a good idea since I always seem to be scrambling before summer hits to get lean and then vacation type behavior (i.e. drinking/eating) start to take over all fitness plans. So, I'm thinking of going for broke, sticking with dieting, and going for abs.

I'm looking for help from this board on the best strategy for achieving abs by Memorial day and also getting a gut check on if this is even a reasonable goal in the time frame.

Some specifics:

* Age: 49 (hormones and body aren't what they used to).
* Height: 6' 2"
* Bodyweight: 174 in pic below. Probably started 192 after labor day.
* Bodyfat: Not sure. Put pic on bodyfat estimation thread and got anywhere from 13% - 18%.
* Weeks until Memorial Day: 18 weeks.
* Maintenance weeks: I figure two weeks of vaca potentially. Maybe two different 2 week maintenance weeks. So, six week's maintenance.
* Training Weeks Left: 12 weeks.
* Some Realities: I'm a corporate executive. Family with children. Real life responsibilities don't always allow for rigid, self indulgent programs.

I used a combo of EOD and UD2 to get me to this point. Usually I'll go EOD if work gets in the way due to work travel or meetings or family obligations. If I see a clear week where I see I have "control" I'll switch to UD2.

As an aside, I love UD2. I know many find it painful, but I personally can't go on RFL forever. 4 days of dieting where I see the light at the end of the tunnel and a carb load is perfect. Also, at 49 I can't pound my joints going heavy endlessly. The early week high rep work helps me avoid injury.

So, my first question is, is this goal realistic? Or too ambitious understanding the time available and other factors?

If it is, would my EOD/UD2 combo work or would you recommend another approach?

And lastly, any thoughts from mathematicians and BF experts on what my landing spot should be in terms of body weight where abs would be visible?

Pic below.

Thanks.

KY



Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 01-17-2017, 08:24 AM
Determinism Determinism is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 406
Default

I'd say you're about 18% BF. Given that you're 174 lbs your LBM is about 142 lbs. In general, abs are clearly visible at 10% BF, so your target weight is about 158 lbs. Of course, when no LBM is lost.

Summary: 15-20 lbs weight loss.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 01-17-2017, 08:37 AM
kyoun1e's Avatar
kyoun1e kyoun1e is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Scituate, MA
Posts: 1,763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Determinism View Post
I'd say you're about 18% BF. Given that you're 174 lbs your LBM is about 142 lbs. In general, abs are clearly visible at 10% BF, so your target weight is about 158 lbs. Of course, when no LBM is lost.

Summary: 15-20 lbs weight loss.
158 lbs. Wow.

I don't think I've weighed 158 lbs since 8th grade. I currently weigh less than I did at 18 and I was lean 30 years ago.

And this is the constant battle. While abs would be great, does a 6'2" guy with abs at 158 lbs even look like he goes to the gym? Or does he look like he needs to go to the hospital?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 01-17-2017, 08:43 AM
Determinism Determinism is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 406
Default

Haha, probably the latter. Note that I could be wrong about your BF%. If it's lower, your target weight may as well be 160+ lbs.

Looking small (with clothes on anyway) is a problem for a lot of natural lifters. Without regard of the genetically gifted or lean, for most of us it's not very satisfactory. At least esthetically.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 01-17-2017, 08:48 AM
zLeeKo's Avatar
zLeeKo zLeeKo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 490
Default

Nah, it's not that high. 16% maybe, if you didn't flex abdomen.

I went to the 10% for the first time two months ago, since in the past I would dissapear at that BF level. I was 140lbs at 5'8. Honestly, in shirt, I looked like a boy. Now I got fat and happy again.
__________________
"He never had the makings of a varsity athlete"
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 01-17-2017, 08:50 AM
kyoun1e's Avatar
kyoun1e kyoun1e is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Scituate, MA
Posts: 1,763
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Determinism View Post
Haha, probably the latter. Note that I could be wrong about your BF%. If it's lower, your target weight may as well be 160+ lbs.

Looking small (with clothes on anyway) is a problem for a lot of natural lifters. Without regard of the genetically gifted or lean, for most of us it's not very satisfactory. At least esthetically.
I'm not genetically gifted. That's for sure.

Not sure if this is any help but my legs are sticks. My calves are non-existent (despite my dad having monstrous ones) and my quads/upper legs are similar. There is no doubt I carry most of my fat in the midsection.

I'm also not terribly vascular. Even when I was a stick in high school I always wondered why I didn't have cool veins.

If you are correct in your estimations, I don't think my goal is realistic. With 12 weeks and 15-20 lbs to go that's 1.5 lbs of fat loss per week. Don't think that's going to happen. Right before I slowed up at the holidays, I was hitting < 1 lb per week and sometimes I'd have flat weeks. In short, the low hanging fruit has been plucked. My body is no doubt fighting me now and doesn't want to let go as much as it did in the Fall.

KY
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 01-17-2017, 12:15 PM
alcahuetej's Avatar
alcahuetej alcahuetej is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 646
Default

I'd say you're in that 15 - 18% range, very healthy, but not terribly lean (which isn't terrible either). Maybe closer to 15%, but it doesn't matter.

Forget the exact percentages anyways, and using those to pin down exact numbers.

My gut tells me 15 - 20 lbs. is about right though. This has been said already, but when most naturals get lean enough to have abs, they realize they no longer look like they lift weights. I think if you hit 160 you'd be happy though, get there first and see what you look like. It's a nice round number.

Here's a quick way to estimate though if you're set on determining roughly how much you need to lose. I've had a couple DEXA scans and find the numbers generated from this website match up fairly well.

http://fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculat...=Body-Fat-Navy

This is the Navy body fat calculator. The big metrics here are your waist at the navel, height, weight, and your neck size. Personally, ~5 lbs. or so of weight (hopefully fat) lost equals ~1 in. on my waist.

Obviously individuals have different body fat patterns, so if you don't store a disproportional amount of fat around your mid section, or elsewhere, it can throw this off. But give it a whirl if you're curious.

Good luck!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 01-17-2017, 12:50 PM
squat squat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 685
Default

At 6 feet, similar condition, I once had abs at 160. Several years ago.

One time I was also 6ft 130 pounds, no abs.

Just sayin', who knows?

I think frankly you'd look great at 165, but that's if you manage to maintain your lean mass on the way down. You don't have far to go at all.



You look pretty undeveloped, abdominally, though. I'd start working abs, in the meantime. Wake them up. No time like the present. Larger obliques would make your torso look a lot better.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Unread 01-17-2017, 01:04 PM
zLeeKo's Avatar
zLeeKo zLeeKo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 490
Default

What is this, everyone is >6 feet tall here ?!
__________________
"He never had the makings of a varsity athlete"
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Unread 01-17-2017, 01:13 PM
Determinism Determinism is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by zLeeKo View Post
What is this, everyone is >6 feet tall here ?!
Maybe large people have more difficulty looking muscular?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:02 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.