Gaining on a deficit

File: 1496893665900.jpg (74KB, 320x454px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 320x454px

>hurr how do i gain things by subtracting things

there is no addition by subtracting a negative here you retard. fuck off and get a clue before you post something to mind-numbingly stupid next time.

>>41925234
I have. But it's been really slow process. Te thing is I've been barely losing weight and stalled really hard at one point. So maybe what I'm doing is more of a recomp than a deficit.

>>41925268
How much weight did you lose weekly on average?

>>41925234
When i started i did gain muscle while maintaining my weight so obviously i was burning fat.
Was eating just the daily intake, no surplus or deficit

>>41925306
How long until you stalled?

srs question.

Suppose you are on a deficit (not a large one, but still) and you work out (damage muscle), wouldn't your body still repair the damaged muscle regardless of caloric deficit/surplus?

>>41925286
For the first 6 months about 0.5lb week, then the next year I didn't lose anything. But I went down almost 6 pant sizes and my lifts still went up a lot (495 sq, 485 diddy, 275b, 182.5 ohp).

I was only eating about 400kcal deficit a day, but about once every 2 weeks I would break that and go over between 500-1000. So my weight could fluctuate a lot even just day to day (sometimes as much as 10lbs in the spawn of 3 days, which seems bizarre). But I'd always equalize.

>>41925286
I've been maintaining for 270 for about a year. In that time I've lost around 5% bodyfat while still making very solid gains. My plan is to do this until I get a 400 wilks (getting really close) with a 225 ohp and then drop down to 250.

>>41925349
5% body fat over a year? Do you have an estimate for the percentage you started at? And just out of curiosity how tall are you? That's impressive

>>41925251
You lose fat faster than you gain muscle, retard. If you eat at a deficit you are still losing mass overall, even if youre gaining muscle.

>>41925234

I'm on 1k cal deficit and slowly progressively overloading but only at 1/2/3 so not saying much

>>41925381
When I first first started I was 330lbs, probably 60%, maybe 65%. When I stopped cutting cutting and started to maintain instead I was about 45%. Now I'm probably about 40% at 270. I wouldn't reccommend it because it seems a lot slower than just actually cutting, but I couldn't cope with stalling on my lifts anymore and I NEEDED to see that 500 squat before I even though about cutting again (just hit it last week, go me).

I guess it depends on what your goals are. That said I seriously wouldn't recommend it unless the only thing you care about is your lifts going up and not your general health. Even though my heart and lungs are a million times what they started they should be better for how long I've been at this. I can only run 2k before I get winded, for instance.

>>41925464
Thanks for the advice, I think I'll just stay at 300 over maintenance till I have respectable lifts and hopefully not put on some fat

File: 1493610521637.jpg (49KB, 500x601px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 500x601px

>>41925251
>no addition by subtracting a negative