>mfw my only excuse for not going vegan is because I'd

huh, apparently i only need to lose about 4 pounds to be in 'contest condition'

>>42076041
This seems suspiciously low end. Maybe for people who don't do regular training and track nutrition this is true, but for people going into contest I doubt it.

>>42076028

>protein shake in the morning
>some oats or something

>eat some tofurkey or something for lunch
>maybe a protein bar

>eat some lentils or tofu or seitan for dinner

>**Only at 2000 calories or less brah**

>>42076041
It sounds right to me.

I'm 5'7 and 185lbs with 5 years lifting.

That chart is for 5% bodyfat (ie contest condition). Based on my current body I pretty sure 30-35 pounds of fat loss would put me around 5% bodyfat, ie around 150 pounds.


I think you might just be really underweight and lacking gains.

I understand veganism but would rather choose locally sourced meat as much as possible rather than give it up. There really isn't an argument possible that anyone should eat factory farmed meat. Read a book or two about how most livestock is treated and veganism will quickly become the only realistic choice if you're poor and cant buy well treated meats

>>42076198
i'm 5'6" or 5'7" (haven't measured in years) and about 151. need to lose about 9 then to be at 5% even at the 5'7" level.

I mean, i'm not small, but i'm sure as hell not considered close to 'natty limit', especially not within a few pounds of lean mass

>>42076198
I'm 5'7 and 145 lbs right now, just started lifting. Does it feel cool being like 180? I wanna get huge, is 200 lbs as a goal too much for my height?

>>42076252
How long have you been lifting?

I was 150lbs 20% bodyfat before I started lifting.

I'm 185lbs about 25% bodyfat after 5 years lifting.

>>42076253
frank zane was about 185 in contest shape, and he was 5'9".

set your sights a little lower

>>42076076
It is accurate, it's assuming you're at your natural limit. It doesn't seem right because every popular YouTube juice monkey claims natty

>>42076281
on and off 2-3 years maybe, but never really bulked while doing it.

>>42076253
You will be a fat fuck at 200 unless you're on roids. Somewhere around 145-150, 10% body fat should be easily achievable.

>>42076305
That's why dude. You're not reading the chart correctly. I've been lifting years non-stop and I have done many bulks. You lifting on and off and never bulking is why you're near that chart besides having very little gains.


Me being 5'7 185lbs 25% bodyfat after 5 years goes like this.

25% of 185 lbs = 46.25 lbs fat mass, that means at 0% bodyfat I am 138 lbs. Now being 5% bodyfat that would be about 10-12 pounds of bodyfat, so that means at 5% bodyfat I'd be around 150 pounds.

Pretty much spot on with GH15 natty guide.

File: facepalm.jpg (13KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 300x300px

>>42076041
>>42076305
>heey guys that chart cant be real that would mean im already near my natty potential
>b-but ive been lifting off and on for 2-3 years, never bulked
>the chart is totally wrong!

really?

>>42076355
nah, i'm sure. i'm 151 and probably 11%, so we'll say 134 lean. according to the chart, 143 lean is max, so 9 pounds away. probably less than 11% as is, and also probably closer to 5'6", and it's telling me i only need a solid 9 pounds to max natty gains? ridiculous.

>>42076435
You're either..

>Not 11% bodyfat
>Underestimating how much 9 pounds of bodyfat is for a natural at your height

Questions

How long have you been lifting, have you bulked? How long was the bulk?

For being 151 pounds even at 5'6 I doubt you've done much bulking, unless you just cut down from somewhere.

>>42076478
Exactly what I'm saying. lifts aren't all that great, 175 OHP max, 260 (probably more, no spotter) bench max, stopped squatting/deadlifting at 3 plates because legs were getting too big for my pants/shorts.

there's plenty of room to grow, especially legs, but 9 pounds isn't that much farther for a 'natty max'. don't even want to see the math for the 5'6" bracket...