# pics of the unc



## BIG-UNC (Feb 27, 2006)

if you where me would yyou go for size or cut up


----------



## BIG-UNC (Feb 27, 2006)

could some one resize these for me please


----------



## dale_flex (Feb 17, 2008)

Personally mate i'd try and add a little more size before I bulked up. But it's got to be your choice mate. You've got a good shape to your quads!


----------



## devilsquest (Dec 2, 2005)

bulk


----------



## BL1 (Jan 8, 2006)

I go for size mate. Build the base up a bit more and then cut. Good luck


----------



## the_gre8t_1ne (Apr 18, 2005)

lookin good, but agreed bulk up a lil more


----------



## John (Jun 5, 2004)

resize the guy,s pics for him please, mate im sure someone will do it, you may need to send them to them first though.


----------



## break (Oct 5, 2005)

resized


----------



## John (Jun 5, 2004)

good legs though they look pretty good, keep up the work.


----------



## Carlos901 (Nov 5, 2004)

nice legs for sure.. keep it up. i would personaly bulk more


----------



## megatron (Apr 21, 2004)

dale_flex said:


> Personally mate i'd try and add a little more size before I bulked up.


THINK! lol


----------



## break (Oct 5, 2005)

(lol, well spotted......) i would say go for a bit more size then cut up....best of luck to u fella


----------



## Littleluke (Nov 21, 2005)

deffo bulk, good legs tho!


----------



## Stu (Jan 22, 2005)

well it depends upon what your goals are and what sort of physique you are looking for, personally i try to cut some of that bodyfat before bulking. Its is easier to stay lean when bulking if you start from a low bodyfat.


----------



## Inch High (Apr 10, 2005)

whats the difference between putting on bulk and putting on size?


----------



## BIG-UNC (Feb 27, 2006)

thanks fellas some good advice for me are you's taking the p**s about my legs though never trained them till last week i think they're like sticks but soon to be OAK TREES


----------



## BIG-UNC (Feb 27, 2006)

thanks for resizing my pics for me break ...cheers


----------



## break (Oct 5, 2005)

no worries buddy!...... your legs are decent dude keep up the good work!


----------



## John (Jun 5, 2004)

legs are pretty good.


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

Me, I would cut before bulking.

The higher percent of Bodyfat you can cut losing less muscle and more fat.

When bulking and you are leaner you gain more muscle and less fat.

See, It is sortof a catch 22, you want size and are big, you are better off either just staying like that and adding mucle or cutting off the fat then re-bulk.


----------



## peachy (Mar 20, 2005)

looking good fella! i agree bulk up some more mate,you remind me of a ufc fighter but i can't think who


----------



## BIG-UNC (Feb 27, 2006)

what would be the best cycle/pct to use hackskii in your opinion for me to cut and bulk at the same time cheers unc


----------



## Inch High (Apr 10, 2005)

whats the difference between putting on bulk and putting on size?


----------



## RAIKEY (Jun 30, 2005)

Inch High said:


> whats the difference between putting on bulk and putting on size?


IMO you cant "put on" bulk,....you PUT ON SIZE..(be it, muscle,fat,water) when you perform a process called bulking.

IMO ...size is the amount of space you take up, so if its fat, muscle, water or whatever, its going to add to your SIZE,...

i think the word bulk is often used loosley anyway ...bulk is not a specific material ....its is a PROCESS ....

IE. "to bulk" meaning to eat in such a way that your body can more readily get all the carbs,protien and fats that it needs to bulid MUSCLE whenever it needs to,

so in effect , always having a system full of food from which your body can extract the stuff it needs.

but along with this is the fact that so many calories are consumed (in exces of the bodys req) that you gain weight AND SIZE from fat tissue and water aswell.

just my opinion of how i use the word BULK....


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

Me myself, Id diet down then do a test cycle.

I am dieting right now from 205 to around maybe 180 and possibly less but then I think I will do a cycle and put like 10 back on.

Dieting if you do it pretty well, you will lose anywhere from about 3 lbs in the beginning to around 1-2 in the end.

So taking off 20 then putting 10 back on clean will be very nice.

Once I get my weight where I want it with relitivly low body fat and do a cycle I will put on mostly muscle.

When I did cycles and was higher percent body fat I noticed I gained as much fat as mucscle.

Dieted down this will not be the case.

When you are around 20% and cut you lose mostly fat.

When you are around 20% and bulk, you gain alot of fat and some muscle.

When you are around 10% and cut you lose alot of muscle and little fat.

When you are around 10% and bulk you gain little fat and alot of muscle.

I have an article by John John bernardi that has all the graph and stuff, killer article and I will see if I can find it.


----------



## BIG-UNC (Feb 27, 2006)

cheers hackskii i look forward to reading it are you dieting natureally or taking any meds i think im one of the lucky ones cos i can lose weight rather quickly but unlucky in the gaining stage


----------



## hackskii (Jul 27, 2003)

It was posted here so I could find it

About a year and a half ago........here you go baby:

I just read an article yesterday written by John M. Berardi.

It was really interesting and this is what I have felt from my own personal experiances in dieting and bulking.

Sorry for the long post:

Q: One big debate in bodybuilding is whether one should bulk up first and

then cut down, or whether one should cut down first and then bulk up?

Which do you think is better?

A: Most popular opinions on this topic suggest that the best way to get

the ideal physique (big AND ripped) is to bulk up first and then try to

diet down. The proponents of this strategy suggest that in bulking up, you

will be adding muscle mass. They further state that this muscle mass will

be helpful, metabolically speaking, when you go to diet down. Since muscle

is the engine that burns fat, doesn't it make sense that with a bigger

engine you will burn more fuel and will get leaner much easier?

Well, although it makes sense intuitively, I'd like to present some data

and an argument that may lead you to rethink this strategy. I pretty much

want to propose that the simplistic idea of bulking up before cutting down

is a relatively useless one. It doesn't take into account how much muscle

and fat you have already. I mean, what if you're 15-20% body fat but only

weigh 160 at a height of 6 ft.? This is a relatively low ratio of lean

body mass to fat mass. So should you still "bulk up" to gain some muscle

and metabolic power before you try to get lean? The answer to this

question and a few more will be addressed below.

Before I talk about this issue though, I want to clearly state that I

doubt there ever will be a legitimate research study examining this

question in healthy male and female weightlifters. I just can't picture

the National Institutes of Health (NIH) throwing big research dollars at a

project designed to figure out how to make already muscular men and women

bigger and more ripped. They tend to fund studies that aim at curing

cancer and heart disease and stuff like that. So this question will

probably never be answered scientifically. But using some other

literature, we can come to some pretty cool conclusions.

The data I'm about to present isn't really new. However, for some reason

this information hasn't trickled down into the bodybuilding community as

of yet. And I'm not sure as to why. I guess it's probably due to the

dogmatic approach of most weight lifters who are guided by tradition

rather than objective science. Geez, I'm starting to sound like the late

Mike Mentzer, aren't I?

Anyway, while ignored in weight lifting, researchers have known for years

that one of the biggest determinants of your muscle loss to fat loss ratio

(when dieting) and your muscle gain to fat gain ratio (when bulking up) is

your initial level of body fatness. Basically the amount of body fat that

you have (percentage and total pounds of fat) will be a major determinant

of how your body responds to over eating or under eating.

Several studies have been done to explore this phenomenon and G.B. Forbes

has compiled the results of these investigations into one review article

(Ann N Y Acad Sci 2000 May;904:359-65). For organizational purposes, I've

split the results up into a weight loss experiment section and a weight

gain experiment section.

Weight Loss Experiments

In several experiments, subjects were underfed to varying degrees in

order to produce weight loss. Here are the results of these experiments

Subjects were given the following three hypocaloric diets to produce

weight loss:

Diet #1 - 0-450 kcal/day

Diet #2 - 500-1000 kcal/day

Diet #3 - 1000+ kcal/day

The interesting results of this study show that:

1. At the same calorie levels, the fatter subjects kept more muscle

and lost more fat.

Let's look at the numbers:

Initial Body FatCaloric IntakeLean Mass Lost

(% of Weight Lost) Fat Lost

(% of Weight Lost)

20 kg (44 lbs)Lowest60%40%

20 kg (44 lbs)Higher20%80%

60 kg (132 lbs)Lowest35%75%

60 kg (132 lbs)Higher10% 90%

I hope it's clear from this table that eating a diet too few in calories

causes a substantial LBM (lean body mass) loss, while eating a higher

calorie (but still hypocaloric diet) preserves more lean mass. In

addition, it's especially interesting to note that the fatter subjects on

both the higher calorie and the lower calorie diets have a remarkable

shift in the muscle loss to fat loss ratio toward more fat loss and less

muscle loss. This shift is especially striking in comparison to what

happens when their leaner counterparts diet.

Several other studies show that this phenomenon is not exclusive to

humans. It is also present in fasting and hibernating mammals:

Initial Body Fat Caloric IntakeLean Mass

(% of Weight Lost) Lost Fat Lost

(% of Weight Lost)

10% fatNone80%20%

30% fatNone40%60%

50% fatNone18%82%

Since all of the above studies were done in non-exercise trained humans

and mammals, further studies were done to determine the effects exercise

on weight loss. If exercise is used in place of, or in addition to calorie

restriction or fasting, more lean body mass is preserved than if there was

no exercise. However the same trends are evident in that the fatter

individuals preserve more lean mass while the leaner individuals lose more

lean mass.

Now that you've seen these data, I think that the take-home message for

dieting should be as follows.

1. Always use exercise in conjunction with diet to promote loss of fat

and preservation of lean mass.

2. Always consider your initial body fat before deciding how severe your

diet should be.

3. When starting a diet with a high level of body fat, your diet can be

more restrictive and/or severe since you will lose the fat

preferentially.

4. As you diet and get leaner, you should adjust your calorie deficit so

that it is actually smaller. So if you start a diet eating 1000 calories

below maintenance, as you get leaner, your daily deficit should decrease

to 500 calories per day.

5. If you don't decrease your calorie deficit as you lose fat, you will

begin to lose an unacceptable amount of lean mass.

Weight Gain Experiments

In several experiments, subjects were overfed to varying degrees in

order to produce weight gain. Here are the results of these experiments

These studies have shown that when overfed, initial body fat level is

also important:

Initial Body FatCaloric IntakeLean Mass Gained

(% of Weight Gained) Fat Gained

(% of Weight Gained)

10 kg (22 lbs)Overfeeding70%30%

20 kg (44 lbs)Overfeeding30%70%

40 kg (88 lbs)Overfeeding20%80%

These striking differences in the ratio of LBM gained to fat gained

illustrate the need to start an overeating phase while lean. In the

leanest subjects, there was a 2 1/3 pound muscle gain for every 1 pound of

fat gained. However, for the fatter subjects, 4 pounds of fat were gained

for every 1 pound of muscle gained.

From these overfeeding studies, it's clear that lean individuals gain less

fat and more muscle when overfeeding when compared to their fatter

counterparts. Since these subjects were not exercise trained, adding

exercise would have probably lead to a shift toward more muscle gain with

less fat gain. Exercise has a nutrient partitioning effect, shuttling

nutrients preferentially toward the lean tissues. As such, you'd expect

more lean gain during exercise training and overfeeding. However, either

way, the trends would probably remain and fatter subjects would gain more

fat during overfeeding than lean individuals.

One of the coolest things about this article is that a predicative

equation was generated that allows us to calculate the amount of muscle

and the amount of fat that we can expect to gain, based on our initial fat

weight. Check it out.

__Lean Mass Gain__

Weight Gain =_______10.4_______

10.4 + initial fat weight (kg)

In addition, this very same equation is valid when dieting for the

prediction of muscle loss and fat loss.

__Lean Mass Loss__

Weight Loss=_______10.4_______

10.4 + initial fat weight (kg)

While not flawless, these equations are handy tools for estimating how

much LBM and fat you may gain or lose when underfeeding or overfeeding. In

addition, they allow us to decide whether it's a good time to try to bulk

up or not.

Therefore, for someone who is 92 kg (200 lbs) and 5% body fat (4.6kg fat),

about 70% of the weight gained during an overfeeding phase can be expected

to be lean body mass (10.4 divided by 10.4 plus 4.6 is equal to 0.70),

while the remaining 30% is expected to be fat weight. However in someone

who is 92kg and 10% body fat (9.2kg of fat), 53% of weight gained will be

lean body mass.

Keep in mind that the opposite is also true. If you're 92 kg (200 lbs) and

5% body fat (4.6% fat), about 70% of the weight lost during a dieting

phase can be expected to be lean body mass.

So perhaps a good idea is to only overfeed when relatively lean and to

diet hard only when over fat. If you're 200 lbs and around 10-15% body

fat, these equations predict that about half the weight you gain will be

fat and half will be muscle. If you try to gain when fatter than 15%, much

of the weight you gain will be fat mass.

I must offer a word of caution, though. Remember that these equations were

mostly generated using diet alone. The addition of weight training and

cardio would have changed things up a bit. In addition, these numbers may

be different if supplements are used. Some supplements change nutrient

partitioning parameters (alpha-lipoic acid, fish oils, presumably

Methoxy-7, etc); others preserve lean body mass when dieting (ephedrine,

caffeine, etc); and others increase protein synthesis (anabolic steroids

and androgens). Any of these factors can change the exact ratios.

However, as I said before, the basic principles remain. When dieting, the

leaner you get, the less your calorie deficit should be or else you'll

lose more LBM than necessary. And, when bulking up, your best bet is to

start lean, as most of the weight you gain will be LBM. If you start fat,

much of your weight gain will be fat gain.

Although this was a roundabout way of answering your question, the bottom

line is that it looks like it is better to diet down first then bulk up

rather than the other way around.


----------

