# Dieting by macros



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Right so , from reading some of @Pscarb posts on basing diet around complete macros not cals i've decided to give it a go and would be gratefull for advice on what i have come up with.

My total daily macros will be : 250g carbs 300g protein 70g fats

Meal 1 - 70-50-20

Meal 2 - 40-50-15

Post shake -50-50

Post meal - 40-50-15

Pre bed - 00-55-20

Today diet for example:

- 75g berries, 90g oats, 2.5 scoops whey, 40g pb all blended + vits etc

- 2 tin tuna, burgan bread, 40g cheese

- 200g sweet patato, 250g lean mince (made into burgers), veg

- 2.5 scoops whey, 50g dextrose

- 250g chicken, 60g rice, veg

- 2.5 scoops casein, 40g pb

I am only counting protein from protein sources, carbs from carb sources etc, for example 90g oats has 8g p but that is not counted towards the protein macros.

For curoisity macros on my fitness pal are 380p 260c and 90 fat!!

All advice welcome.

Atm i weight 180 lbs and am fairly lean. and just started a cycle of test tren eq 

@C.Hill , @Suprakill4 , @Milky , @Bad Alan

Thanks for the help


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

this is how i diet and to date it has been the best way i have dieted both in the off season and pre contest.....


----------



## davesays (Aug 9, 2012)

Looks good mate, should make some good gains on that cycle. May I ask if you're trying to add size or cut bodyfat?


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

This is also how I plan my meals out, So much easier!

Diet looks good to me mate! Nice variation in it.


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

davesays said:


> Looks good mate, should make some good gains on that cycle. May I ask if you're trying to add size or cut bodyfat?


Gain lean mass mate, not sure if their is enough or too much there as i am going from sitting on my @rse during college to a manual job over the summer so will see how it goes 



C.Hill said:


> This is also how I plan my meals out, So much easier!
> 
> Diet looks good to me mate! Nice variation in it.


Yeeeeah!! Basically stole the layout from you haha


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

davesays said:


> Looks good mate, should make some good gains on that cycle. May I ask if you're trying to add size or cut bodyfat?


Gain lean mass mate, not sure if their is enough or too much there as i am going from sitting on my @rse during college to a manual job over the summer so will see how it goes 



C.Hill said:


> This is also how I plan my meals out, So much easier!
> 
> Diet looks good to me mate! Nice variation in it.


Yeeeeah!! Basically stole the layout from you haha


----------



## davesays (Aug 9, 2012)

Galaxy said:


> Gain lean mass mate, not sure if their is enough or too much there as i am going from sitting on my @rse during college to a manual job over the summer so will see how it goes


Good luck bro! You can always increase carbs if you're not gaining as much as you'd like :thumbup1:


----------



## jonnym4 (May 8, 2011)

How have you decided on your macro breakdown, % etc?


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

jonnym4 said:


> How have you decided on your macro breakdown, % etc?


Eh :confused1:

Macros are stated in the first post!!


----------



## jonnym4 (May 8, 2011)

I see that but what I meant was how did you calculate what split of protein/carbs/fat your consuming?


----------



## Lockon (Nov 21, 2011)

COUNT MACROS FROM EVERYTHING!

I count my protein from rice,tuna,pasta and even flipping cereal.


----------



## Lockon (Nov 21, 2011)

jonnym4 said:


> I see that but what I meant was how did you calculate what split of protein/carbs/fat your consuming?


I dont think he's using a macro ratio at all btw. I say stay with the 40/40/20 on a cut but hey, he can do what ever he likes.

@Galaxy

Also you're eating 3370 calories if my maths is right. And you only want to eat 2830. That's 540 calories more than you need.

*Count fat, carbs and proteins from every food item!*


----------



## jonnym4 (May 8, 2011)

Lockon said:


> I dont think he's using a macro ratio at all btw. I say stay with the 40/40/20 on a cut but hey, he can do what ever he likes.
> 
> @Galaxy
> 
> ...


Yeah I don't really understand where the numbers have came from. Surely just following macros must be based on hormonal response rather than calories in/out but it just seams like they've been picked out at random


----------



## Lockon (Nov 21, 2011)

jonnym4 said:


> Yeah I don't really understand where the numbers have came from. Surely just following macros must be based on hormonal response rather than calories in/out but it just seams like they've been picked out at random


Well its usually set up first calories needed to lose weight.

Then the protein level for that person is found. Leaving just the carbs and fats.

Fats are usually 75-55 dependent on the person

And the rest is filled with carbs. Carbs are the key point as they'll ensure muscle isnt lost when dieting and also allows you to have better workouts.

Decreasing the fat is what you usually see first as it is a higher calorie content and it also helps to burn fat when reduced because of this.


----------



## Robbie789 (Sep 6, 2012)

I don't get it either :confused1: So you're just underestimating your caloire intake so you eat more?


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Lockon said:


> COUNT MACROS FROM EVERYTHING!
> 
> I count my protein from rice,tuna,pasta and even flipping cereal.


You seem to disagree with this method of dieting but yet you liked pscarbs post!?!?!?

And why count all macros, serious question?


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Lockon said:


> Well its usually set up first calories needed to lose weight.
> 
> Then the protein level for that person is found. Leaving just the carbs and fats.
> 
> ...


Thats one theory yes, but not the only one....



robdobbie said:


> I don't get it either :confused1: So you're just underestimating your caloire intake so you eat more?


NO!!  , calories have nothing to do with it, i will alter macros depending not calories.

OK, basically i templated this diet from both pscarb and chris ( c hill). In the past i have always counted macros from all sources but how do we know what works best if we don't try different methids?

This is basically a trail and error type of thing, it is very easy to follow, prepare and keep varied.

Protein is at 300g which it usually always is, all be from every source before. I simple chose this as pscarb in one of his recent posts found optimal results at 1.5 -2 g per lbs if i am not mistaken.


----------



## Ginger Ben (Oct 5, 2010)

I've never really understood this either tbh.

Ultimately a set amount of a macro = a set amount of calories. So by adjusting macros eg adding 30g carbs you are adding 120 calories.

Therefore what is the advantage of measuring grams rather than calories?

It clearly works so I'm wondering if I'm missing something obvious or not! Lol


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

Ginger Ben said:


> I've never really understood this either tbh.
> 
> Ultimately a set amount of a macro = a set amount of calories. So by adjusting macros eg adding 30g carbs you are adding 120 calories.
> 
> ...


This is how I feel, slightly confused


----------



## TommyFire (Jul 18, 2010)

So what happens for example if you eat a rack of ribs? You count the protein but don't count the fat?


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

TommyFire said:


> So what happens for example if you eat a rack of ribs? You count the protein but don't count the fat?


Of course you count the fat?


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Ginger Ben said:


> I've never really understood this either tbh.
> 
> Ultimately a set amount of a macro = a set amount of calories. So by adjusting macros eg adding 30g carbs you are adding 120 calories.
> 
> ...


Good point there mate, but cals won't be the same everyday only *complete macros*, as for example the cals in chicken and tuna are different because of the different amount of fat,carbs in it but only the protein is counted! if that makes sense 

Its just a different approach that i found interested all be confusing as fook so decided to give it a shot


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

TommyFire said:


> So what happens for example if you eat a rack of ribs? You count the protein but don't count the fat?


According to @Pscarb , no you don't if i am correct.

For example 100g PB has 50g fat 25g carbs and x protein and if you eat 100g you only count the fats


----------



## Ginger Ben (Oct 5, 2010)

Galaxy said:


> Good point there mate, but cals won't be the same everyday only *complete macros*, as for example the cals in chicken and tuna are different because of the different amount of fat,carbs in it but only the protein is counted! if that makes sense
> 
> Its just a different approach that i found interested all be confusing as fook so decided to give it a shot


No sorry mate it doesn't make sense! Lol

Also how do you know where to start? Your maintenance level has to be an amount of calories per day which you then convert to macros based on your chosen ratios which I get. However It's still based on calories.

Or are you saying that once you've found a macro ratio that works for you it doesn't matter what the calories are as long as ratios are correct? Then you just add or subtract based on cutting or gaining.

Confused


----------



## TommyFire (Jul 18, 2010)

C.Hill said:


> Of course you count the fat?





Galaxy said:


> According to @Pscarb , no you don't if i am correct.
> 
> For example 100g PB has 50g fat 25g carbs and x protein and if you eat 100g you only count the fats


 :confused1:


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

Wow I'm confused aswell lol

I find it simple really, say for example I want 300g protein, 300g carbs, 100g fat a day, split over 6 meals.

So-

Meal 1- 50/75/20

Meal 2- 50/50/20

Meal 3- 50/50/20

Meal 4- 50/75/0

Meal 5- 50/50/10

Meal 6- 50/0/30

And I just throw foods into meet the macros lol


----------



## Ginger Ben (Oct 5, 2010)

C.Hill said:


> Wow I'm confused aswell lol
> 
> I find it simple really, say for example I want 300g protein, 300g carbs, 100g fat a day, split over 6 meals.
> 
> ...


How do you arrive at 300, 300, 100 though? Trial and error?

Ultimately It's still calorie balancing isn't it?

The meal breakdown I get It's where the numbers come from and not counting macros from some sources but from others that confuses me


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

Ginger Ben said:


> How do you arrive at 300, 300, 100 though? Trial and error?
> 
> Ultimately It's still calorie balancing isn't it?
> 
> The meal breakdown I get It's where the numbers come from and not counting macros from some sources but from others that confuses me


Well no my breakdown is roughly 400/450/120 at the moment, and yeah it is trial and error, been tracking kcals for years and this suits me.

I include all sources when dieting down like the 8g protein in 100g oats for example.


----------



## Ginger Ben (Oct 5, 2010)

C.Hill said:


> Well no my breakdown is roughly 400/450/120 at the moment, and yeah it is trial and error, been tracking kcals for years and this suits me.
> 
> I include all sources when dieting down like the 8g protein in 100g oats for example.


Ok that makes more sense. Cheers for explaining.


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Ya c hill pretty much summed it up their 

Its hard to get your head around alrite, just have to forget about cals!


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

wow i guess i should of read this thread before i used this method.........

@TommyFire you would not eat ribs though this method is for those that use clean foods to both diet and bulk how would you count the pro? would you take them off the bone then weigh the meat?

this method is trial and error to a degree but if you have some common sense it is not hard to find a starting point then adjust from there, people do not believe it works because you are so hooked up in calories as this is what has been repeated by so many gym rats over the years......

all the people i coach use this method with success i used this method in 2010 when i competed at the NABBA Universe then in 2011 when i reached 240lbs with half decent condition then last year when i competed at the Britain/Worlds and Universe.......

to many guys dismiss an idea without even trying it WHY???


----------



## Ginger Ben (Oct 5, 2010)

Pscarb said:


> wow i guess i should of read this thread before i used this method.........
> 
> @TommyFire you would not eat ribs though this method is for those that use clean foods to both diet and bulk how would you count the pro? would you take them off the bone then weigh the meat?
> 
> ...


Was more a case of not understanding it than dismissing it tbh

As I said, it clearly works but I didn't get hoe it was worked out.


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> wow i guess i should of read this thread before i used this method.........
> 
> @TommyFire you would not eat ribs though this method is for those that use clean foods to both diet and bulk how would you count the pro? would you take them off the bone then weigh the meat?
> 
> ...


Exactly 

I was reading an article on our site in which you stat that breakfast and post wo are the key times for carbs. From my op do you think I should swap carb meal macros so I have more at these times?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Ginger Ben said:


> Was more a case of not understanding it than dismissing it tbh
> 
> As I said, it clearly works but I didn't get hoe it was worked out.


don't take my post in meaning everyone.......as it was not intended for everyone.

it is easy to start with, you take your daily calories and split then use the macro numbers from that then depending on your goal apply the split for fat loss i favour a timed carb approach for some so all the carbs are around training then you tweak it over the following weeks, no diet plan will be perfect straight off the bat it will need adjusting and there lies the skill


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Galaxy said:


> Exactly
> 
> I was reading an article on our site in which you stat that breakfast and post wo are the key times for carbs. From my op do you think I should swap carb meal macros so I have more at these times?


it depends on you and your body type if you find it hard to drop fat then yes split the carbs between breakfast/PWO and the meal after PWO


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

I'd follow the c hill approach if I was you.

Pscarb's will work, but it suited to a diet with restricted types of food.


----------



## Lockon (Nov 21, 2011)

Galaxy said:


> You seem to disagree with this method of dieting but yet you liked pscarbs post!?!?!?
> 
> And why count all macros, serious question?


It's really not that hard.

If you had 100g of peanut butter do you then say its 70g of fat? If you have 200g of minced meat do you say its 40g of protein? No, you subtract the carbs, fats and proteins from your daily allowance. Even if it is 10g because 10g of fat is an extra 90calories.

Macro dieting is nothing hard. @Galaxy is making it harder than it is for no reason.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Lockon said:


> It's really not that hard.
> 
> If you had 100g of peanut butter do you then say its 70g of fat? If you have 200g of minced meat do you say its 40g of protein? No, you subtract the carbs, fats and proteins from your daily allowance. Even if it is 10g because 10g of fat is an extra 90calories.
> 
> Macro dieting is nothing hard. @Galaxy is making it harder than it is for no reason.


but the method is not about counting calories 100g of PB is 51g of fat, there are some rules to follow just like all diet methods you count both Pro/Fats in whole eggs and salmon you eat 96%FF mince

you are correct it is not hard but it is more effective for everyone i have applied it to than the standard counting calories but the proof is in the pudding if anyone wants to show me the results they have had with the standard run of the mill counting calories we can compare the methods, i have done both in fact pretty much all diet methods for those that says this way does not work how long did you follow it for?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

simonthepieman said:


> I'd follow the c hill approach if I was you.
> 
> Pscarb's will work, but it suited to a diet with restricted types of food.


why is it restricted? if you mean there is no junk then yes i will agree it is restricted but my choice of food is huge


----------



## Lockon (Nov 21, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> but the method is not about counting calories 100g of PB is 51g of fat, there are some rules to follow just like all diet methods you count both Pro/Fats in whole eggs and salmon you eat 96%FF mince
> 
> you are correct it is not hard but it is more effective for everyone i have applied it to than the standard counting calories but the proof is in the pudding if anyone wants to show me the results they have had with the standard run of the mill counting calories we can compare the methods, i have done both in fact pretty much all diet methods for those that says this way does not work how long did you follow it for?


I dont track the calories I track the individual macros and it works best for me. It does work. Look at people like Matt Ogus eating bloody ice cream and stuff yet still getting shredded.

PSCarb do you count each macro to the dot? If no why do you not?


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

The macros way of counting as opposed to the calories of each macro type is in some ways less fiddly because you don't always have to think about converting kcals and grams, is one less thing to measure. It does seem odd when you are used to counting the kcals, but it's not that tricky at all because usually after a few years of bbing and prepping meals, the numbers of grams for what you need of each thing (and the relationships between the macros that work for you) becomes so hammered into your brain from counting grams for all those meals that you realise you can work it out direct from g's.

For me for example I know that 250g carbs, 200g protein and 85-90g of fats (one third each type of fat for me) is my maintenance when I'm fairly active, so then cutting becomes about dropping a few g's of the carbs and fats for me; bulking about adding a few g's of each macro.

I still do still translate back to kcals and macro ratios but mostly only out of habit and when talking to people about what my diet breaks down to - most people see it in terms of ratios between the macros as a percentage of energy intake, so that info makes explaining simple.

In respect of counting the g's of incidental macros, I don't count to the very gram (because you'd probably be wrong anyway), but if something contains 10g or more of carbs or prot, or 5g of fats then I will count it. For smaller numbers not really because they will vary anyway, but probably even out to an average over time anyway, especially if you eat as much variety as possible.

One thing I started doing last time I was energized enough to be doing things seriously was not count daily macros, but work out how many g of pro/fat/cho I needed over three days, and keep food that matched up to that value on one shelf of the fridge, cupboard, freezer etc - I'd just then simply make sure that was what I ate over the following three days (with a bit of nutrient timing here and there).

That actually worked really well for me both trying to gain where my appetite struggles if I eat big more than two days in a row (so I could eat big two days then back off the third day), and when cutting where I might eat a little bigger one day and then taper a bit over the next two - and on no day would I have to count anything, simply look at what was left to eat for the next few days.

Anyway the way people count diet up really doesn't matter IMO - so long as the approach works for you and allows a consistent organized diet over time, it's all good.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Lockon said:


> I dont track the calories I track the individual macros and it works best for me. It does work. Look at people like Matt Ogus eating bloody ice cream and stuff yet still getting shredded.
> 
> PSCarb do you count each macro to the dot? If no why do you not?


i never said it did not work??? you are a fan of IIFYM and thats cool you should watch layne nortons video blog on it as he gets it correct, yes it works but not as a full diet but there are a select few who can eat ice cream and be shredded but then i have worked with these type of people and it is not that it is ice cream but calories without the bulk.......i use IIFYM post workout as i use cereal and not the standard maltodextrin but for the most those who preach this way of dieting as the main method are not big nor are they very lean (this does not mean you as i have no idea what you look like unless you look like a 1990 ronnie coleman??) one of the biggest issues with IIFYM is the lack of fibre which can cause many issues check Layne Nortoan video blog he does not slate calorie counting or IIFYM but then he has a lot to say about those that preach both methods as the only way to diet.

i count each macro to the dot for the food i am eating for example if i have a Pro shake and PB then i count the Pro in the shake and the Fats in the PB, why? because i am not using calories i am using macro's and the only Macro that matters is the one that i am eating that food for (there are a few exceptions as i mentioned above) i was turned on to this approach by Ken "Skip" Hill my former coach and as i stated before the proof if something works is in the pudding and my physique speaks volumes that this method does work and work well.


----------



## nick-h (Nov 17, 2011)

I'm struggling to get my head round this sorry if I sound like a dumb dumb, so if you are having olive oil for fats you only count the fats from it not the cals or anything else. If I'm eating steak for the protein I only count the protein in that steak?


----------



## Bull Terrier (May 14, 2012)

Pscarb said:


> it depends on you and your body type if you find it hard to drop fat then yes split the carbs between breakfast/PWO and the meal after PWO


When cutting, do you recommend keeping carbs lower on non-workout days? Are fats somewhat higher on non-workout days?


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Pscarb said:


> why is it restricted? if you mean there is no junk then yes i will agree it is restricted but my choice of food is huge


I'm going to tip toe on this one and try and find the common ground on this one. What i mean is not limited, but 'clean' (despite the fact i hate that word) food in pretty much their natural state, seasoned and cooked. Where there is little things added to it. Yes, their is a cornucopia of foods available too you.

So for a lean meat, with a clean ( :death: ) carb source and veg. Or a shake and nuts it's easy to just count the carbs and pro in meal 1 and fat and protein in meal two and skip the carbs in meals two as the overall calories not hugely significant. The macros for composition change will be hit too as the plans is built around hitting macros. Your calories goals will be slightly misaligned, but it's minor trial and error to fix and you are not fat from the target.

So for that style of eating, it's great, it's easy it's effective and you errr on the side caution of eating too many calories which is much better than eating too little in terms of muscle building.

However if you diet involves more compound food (for lack of a better term) and you often eat pre-prepared food or mealy food like lasange, carbs in a rich sauce, a crusted fattier cut of meat, stews, curries etc it makes no sense to to extract one or even just two of the macros out as they will have a significant impact on your overall calorie goal and your margin of error is potentially huge. In this case, counting ALL your macros makes the most sense.


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Lockon said:


> It's really not that hard.
> 
> If you had 100g of peanut butter do you then say its 70g of fat? If you have 200g of minced meat do you say its 40g of protein? No, you subtract the carbs, fats and proteins from your daily allowance. Even if it is 10g because 10g of fat is an extra 90calories.
> 
> Macro dieting is nothing hard. @Galaxy is making it harder than it is for no reason.


I am not making it complicated mate, your simple been ignorant towards the idea.

As pscarb has stated multiple times the principal of this diet is macros not calories, you can accept it or not but that


----------



## Lockon (Nov 21, 2011)

Galaxy said:


> I am not making it complicated mate, your simple been ignorant towards the idea.
> 
> As pscarb has stated multiple times the principal of this diet is macros not calories, you can accept it or not but that


Yeah, I get PSCarbs point. I was just stating for you, you should count every macro from all the food sources. Because you're 80g over you're limit.

But hey do what ever you wanna do it might work.






Extremely useful vid if you give a fu*ck.



Pscarb said:


> i never said it did not work??? you are a fan of IIFYM and thats cool you should watch layne nortons video blog on it as he gets it correct, yes it works but not as a full diet but there are a select few who can eat ice cream and be shredded but then i have worked with these type of people and it is not that it is ice cream but calories without the bulk.......i use IIFYM post workout as i use cereal and not the standard maltodextrin but for the most those who preach this way of dieting as the main method are not big nor are they very lean (this does not mean you as i have no idea what you look like unless you look like a 1990 ronnie coleman??) one of the biggest issues with IIFYM is the lack of fibre which can cause many issues check Layne Nortoan video blog he does not slate calorie counting or IIFYM but then he has a lot to say about those that preach both methods as the only way to diet.
> 
> i count each macro to the dot for the food i am eating for example if i have a Pro shake and PB then i count the Pro in the shake and the Fats in the PB, why? because i am not using calories i am using macro's and the only Macro that matters is the one that i am eating that food for (there are a few exceptions as i mentioned above) i was turned on to this approach by Ken "Skip" Hill my former coach and as i stated before the proof if something works is in the pudding and my physique speaks volumes that this method does work and work well.


IIFYM Is the best way to diet no doubt.

I unfortunately have only been training for less than 2 years and I always try and find the "right" way to do something.

I dont have any pictures up but if you willing to give me a few more months on my first cut I can show you the results.

Also did you read my PM?


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

for the record IIFYM doesn't mean eating crap all the time. It means just that. Fitting Your Macros.

You can do IIFYM 100% clean or 100% Dirty, you will make progress either way, it's obvious one is better for health and longevity though.

Or, as most intelligent and non-pro people people do, eat the best quality and unprocessed food you can, but don't worry if you eat some 'junk' food along the way. So long as you hit your macros and keep you calories in check.

However if you are looking to go from 9% to 5% BF, i would make sure nothing is left up to chance and that would be a tough task to do with 'junk' food for the sodium content alone


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Lockon said:


> Yeah, I get PSCarbs point. I was just stating for you, you should count every macro from all the food sources. Because you're 80g over you're limit.
> 
> But hey do what ever you wanna do it might work.
> 
> ...


Calm down mate!

Saw that vid before! Not sure what your point in posting it is though as I.m not saying iifym is wrong, what I am saying is that it is not the only way!

and why do you agree with pscarb and not me, is it because he competed?

And saying iifym is the best way period, please do tell how you have come to this? Don.t get me wrong I have used that approach minus junk food and found it worked well but decided to try another method!


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Bull Terrier said:


> When cutting, do you recommend keeping carbs lower on non-workout days? Are fats somewhat higher on non-workout days?


this is how i do it and how i work with my clients this is not to say it is the only way but i find it works very well...


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

simonthepieman said:


> I'm going to tip toe on this one and try and find the common ground on this one. What i mean is not limited, but 'clean' (despite the fact i hate that word) food in pretty much their natural state, seasoned and cooked. Where there is little things added to it. Yes, their is a cornucopia of foods available too you.
> 
> So for a lean meat, with a clean ( :death: ) carb source and veg. Or a shake and nuts it's easy to just count the carbs and pro in meal 1 and fat and protein in meal two and skip the carbs in meals two as the overall calories not hugely significant. The macros for composition change will be hit too as the plans is built around hitting macros. Your calories goals will be slightly misaligned, but it's minor trial and error to fix and you are not fat from the target.
> 
> ...


but this is it the one main thing that makes people fail in their goals is the nutrition side of things, if the goal was to either bulk with limited fat or drop fat why would the food choice be processed pre packaged food like lasagne, covered in a rich sauce or curries? this is what i do not get if you make the commitment then do it right. this is not to say food should be bland as it should not be none of mine is, if we are talking about guys who just want a bit of strength or size no matter the cost then yes eat these things and you are correct my method would not be able to be applied but i am a BB and this is a BB forum so my answers will come the side of making quality lean gains or dropping fat apart from a few gifted individuals if you make these foods you have pointed out as a mainstay to your diet you will not achieve your goals.

some might say that i am at a higher level and are used to this approach and it is easy blah blah but it works for both newbie and men and women at any level recently used this to drop 35lbs off a guy who was 130kg in 6 weeks he was not hungry nor did he do hours of cardio the drop has slowed now so the diet will be adjusted but he followed the same method i use and he is not what i call a BB nor is he assisted.....

i see you mention calories above these mean nothing whatsoever to me as i do not count calories at all, i have no idea what calories i am on now but i am 220lbs at 5'5" with Abs and muscle separation without taking any fat burners of any description nor am i doing more than 45min of cardio per week, people need to open there eyes to different methods and stop thinking the only thing that counts is calorie as it is not....


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Lockon said:


> Yeah, I get PSCarbs point. I was just stating for you, you should count every macro from all the food sources. Because you're 80g over you're limit.
> 
> But hey do what ever you wanna do it might work.
> 
> ...


sorry buddy with you only training for 2yrs how many methods have you tried for any period of time? you obviously have not tried the way i do things but dismiss it as not as good as IIFYM?? how can you do that? what about Timed carbs, Carb cycling, Carb backloading, anabolic diet etc......how many of these have you trialed to come to the conclusion IIFYM is the best??

the point about the pictures is not to compare to me as this would be stupid but if it is the best way to diet then the results will have been already seen otherwise why would you say it is the best way to diet? so showing proof of this is an acceptable request?

i did read your PM but i do not DL anything i cannot trust you seem to be under the misguided impression i do not know what IIFYM is and how it works......don't be as i have already stated i use this principle in both my PWO meal and my refeed day and it works but as a whole dieting method it is lacking and from my experience those that are blind to any other method normally as you did give one example of a BB that does it and is good, which in the grand scheme of things means nothing....apart from it works for him....


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

simonthepieman said:


> for the record IIFYM doesn't mean eating crap all the time. It means just that. Fitting Your Macros.
> 
> You can do IIFYM 100% clean or 100% Dirty, you will make progress either way, it's obvious one is better for health and longevity though.
> 
> ...


i will agree that IIFYM is not about eating junk i use it PWO but for many who claim it to be great do eat a lot of junk, i was once lectured on the principle of this and the guy said i can eat pizza or ice cream as long as it fits my Macro's so i said ok how did you weigh the ice cream or pizza? he was confused but when i pointed out without weighing the food you are eating with this method how do you know it fits your Macro's (some can be seen on the box) he was stumped and i think that is the issue.....many use this as a way to eat junk not giveing ther slightest thought to the quality of say Pro or fats or the amount of fibre they are not getting as historically the foods that most use in the IIFYM method is not clean i am sure you will agree...

a good video by Layne Norton on the subject.....


----------



## kingdale (Nov 2, 2010)

Lockon said:


> IIFYM Is the best way to diet no doubt.


How do you know? Have you tried all the methods? Does my nut in when people dismiss things without ever trying it.


----------



## Talaria (Jun 30, 2011)

interesting.


----------



## Heath (Mar 3, 2011)

found this a good read:

http://www.letsaddmass.com/is-a-calorie-a-calorie/

"To put it simply: People need to stop calorie counting and eat real foods. There was never an obesity epidemic until the world turned to refined sugars and processed meats. Until the world devises a better system and a better education for weight management or weight loss then people will continue to use this flawed system and get terrible results.

Unless you are heating 1 gram of water through 1 degree Celsius at an atmospheric pressure of 1 bar, then I'm afraid a calorie will never simply be a calorie."

Rick Hall posted it on FB.










seems to work for him..


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

The single best diet is the one that u r more likely to stick to for any length if time, for me it involves fasting, a lot of coffee and myfitnesspal lol alongside a few select snacks which help me out.

Lockon, u have found what works well for u. Doesn't mean everyone will enjoy or get the results they want from it.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Fatstuff said:


> The single best diet is the one that u r more likely to stick to for any length if time, for me it involves fasting, a lot of coffee and myfitnesspal lol alongside a few select snacks which help me out.
> 
> Lockon, u have found what works well for u. Doesn't mean everyone will enjoy or get the results they want from it.


Well said that man.....


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

MutantX said:


> found this a good read:
> 
> http://www.letsaddmass.com/is-a-calorie-a-calorie/
> 
> ...


I'm afraid if the 'seems to work for him' line was valid reasoning, it would mean we would be forced to believe a lot of bull****. As what people say and do are often varied. Sometimes polarised. Especially when money's concerned.


----------



## Heath (Mar 3, 2011)

simonthepieman said:


> I'm afraid if the 'seems to work for him' line was valid reasoning, it would mean we would be forced to believe a lot of bull****. As what people say and do are often varied. Sometimes polarised. Especially when money's concerned.


Wouldn't disagree with this at all but on the other end of the spectrum I wouldn't listen to someone who knows a lot but has not been there done it.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Pscarb said:


> i will agree that IIFYM is not about eating junk i use it PWO but for many who claim it to be great do eat a lot of junk, i was once lectured on the principle of this and the guy said i can eat pizza or ice cream as long as it fits my Macro's so i said ok how did you weigh the ice cream or pizza? he was confused but when i pointed out without weighing the food you are eating with this method how do you know it fits your Macro's (some can be seen on the box) he was stumped and i think that is the issue.....many use this as a way to eat junk not giveing ther slightest thought to the quality of say Pro or fats or the amount of fibre they are not getting as historically the foods that most use in the IIFYM method is not clean i am sure you will agree...
> 
> a good video by Layne Norton on the subject.....


That video is ace. As is layne.

The biggest problem with IIFYM is that people have abused what is supposed to be a template to get them to focus on what matters (macros and energy) and they have turned it into a structured excuse to eat crap100%.

The origin of the phrase comes from another forum where someone was asking this experienced guy a million questions about 'is this food better' when it was all fine. In the end he just said 'if it fits your macros, get that **** down' and it became a meme that became a fad


----------



## Lockon (Nov 21, 2011)

Fatstuff said:


> The single best diet is the one that u r more likely to stick to for any length if time, for me it involves fasting, a lot of coffee and myfitnesspal lol alongside a few select snacks which help me out.
> 
> Lockon, u have found what works well for u. Doesn't mean everyone will enjoy or get the results they want from it.


Fatstuff that's very true. I didnt think about that. I just thought wow it works for me it must work for everyone else. That's why I was preaching it.

Dumb way to think but hey. I love it I cannot see myself dieting in any other way. Some people may just hate it and not stick to it.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Fatstuff said:


> The single best diet is the one that u r more likely to stick to for any length if time, for me it involves fasting, a lot of coffee and myfitnesspal lol alongside a few select snacks which help me out.
> 
> Lockon, u have found what works well for u. Doesn't mean everyone will enjoy or get the results they want from it.


100%

That's why I insist people learn about macros. You have the foundation if what gets you 80% of the results.

Then play with food type, clean/dirty, meal frequency to hot the other 20% of your results.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

simonthepieman said:


> That video is ace. As is layne.
> 
> *The biggest problem with IIFYM is that people have abused what is supposed to be a template to get them to focus on what matters (macros and energy) and they have turned it into a structured excuse to eat crap100%. *
> 
> The origin of the phrase comes from another forum where someone was asking this experienced guy a million questions about 'is this food better' when it was all fine. In the end he just said 'if it fits your macros, get that **** down' and it became a meme that became a fad


This in bold is 100% true


----------



## Northern Lass (Aug 10, 2011)

Im really confused


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

YummyMummy said:


> Im really confused


Step 1:Work out what macros you should aim for to meet you goal.

Step 2: Eat food that meets them

Step 3: be consistent

Step 4: results


----------



## Northern Lass (Aug 10, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> wow i guess i should of read this thread before i used this method.........
> 
> @TommyFire you would not eat ribs though this method is for those that use clean foods to both diet and bulk how would you count the pro? would you take them off the bone then weigh the meat?
> 
> ...


What about using this method for cutting? Would it work? X


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

YummyMummy said:


> What about using this method for cutting? Would it work? X


yes i use it with my clients and i used it last year whilst prepping for the Britain, Worlds and Universe


----------



## Northern Lass (Aug 10, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> yes i use it with my clients and i used it last year whilst prepping for the Britain, Worlds and Universe


Thanks pscarb.. it just sounds more relaxed then having to add everything you eat to macros x


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

From my perspective IIFWYM is lacking the way most people use it, primarily because I think even within macros there is such a variety of food - I think of it as more important to select macros that fit with your mirco-nutrient goals (which involves avoiding excessive amounts of certain things as well as seeking out certain others), especially for long term success.


----------



## LeviathanBodyBuilding (Jan 9, 2012)

> Step 1:Work out what macros you should aim for to meet you goal
> 
> Step 2: Eat food that meets them
> 
> ...


And how do you do this? Is there any site with info on how to go about determining your p,c,and f %??


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

danMUNDY said:


> And how do you do this? Is there any site with info on how to go about determining your p,c,and f %??


Are you natty or assisted? Do you know your maintenance?


----------



## LeviathanBodyBuilding (Jan 9, 2012)

simonthepieman said:


> Are you natty or assisted? Do you know your maintenance?


Natty for the time being, my maintenance is around 4500 kcals, I can thank Royal Mail for that :cursing:


----------



## Lockon (Nov 21, 2011)

danMUNDY said:


> Natty for the time being, my maintenance is around 4500 kcals, I can thank Royal Mail for that :cursing:


http://www.freedieting.com/tools/nutrient_calculator.htm?cals=4500

put in 40c/40p/20f for a cut

50c/30p/20f for a bulk


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

danMUNDY said:


> Natty for the time being, my maintenance is around 4500 kcals, I can thank Royal Mail for that :cursing:


you really should find this out before you go further do a food log for a week weighing everything you eat then note if you have gained, lost or maintained then split this into something like 60c/40p/10f then split these amounts over say 6 meals and you have a starting point then adjust as needed...


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Do people still work things out by percentages?

Just walking into gym. Will post more after


----------



## LeviathanBodyBuilding (Jan 9, 2012)

Pscarb said:


> you really should find this out before you go further do a food log for a week weighing everything you eat then note if you have gained, lost or maintained then split this into something like 60c/40p/10f then split these amounts over say 6 meals and you have a starting point then adjust as needed...


And that's exactly what I did Paul, back in October I wanted to start a bulk, so I started at 4000 kcals and I logged and counted everything for 7 days, added it all up and divided it by 7 to get my daily average intake then weighed myself at the same time in the morning when getting up for work, if I had lost weight, which I did I increased my kcals by 300 and did it all again till I found the amount to start gaining, took me a few weeks as I had to adjust several times but I finally found I needed 4800 to start putting on the smallest amount of weight rather than pile it on, and from October till march I out on 14.5lbs I used the 50c 30p 20f % as layed out in Dorian Yates book.

I just wanted to know how you find out how to adjust the macro split, as if I was to use 50p 30c 20f for the 4800, instead of 50c 30p 20 fat, would I still have gained the same amount of weight as the 4800 kcals would still have been consumed weather it be one macro split or the other, but that said, would my body weight have increased but with a different effect on my body comp?

See this is why I needed you to be my coach


----------



## jonnym4 (May 8, 2011)

The only thing that I still don't understand is why not just account for the extra calories you are consuming? Like the op said, his diet comes out as 380 grams of protein but only counts 300. Why not just aim for 380?

I personally follow a % of macros and adjust calories by about 100 a week until progress stops. This article is well worth a read http://www.cutandjacked.com/The-Ultimate-Guide-To-Bulking


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

jonnym4 said:


> The only thing that I still don't understand is why not just account for the extra calories you are consuming? Like the op said, his diet comes out as 380 grams of protein but only counts 300. Why not just aim for 380?
> 
> I personally follow a % of macros and adjust calories by about 100 a week until progress stops. This article is well worth a read http://www.cutandjacked.com/The-Ultimate-Guide-To-Bulking


Because if you read any of pscarbs posts, that is not how this method of dieting is structured!!!


----------



## Northern Lass (Aug 10, 2011)

so does that mean if someone was to have the same amount calories but one had more high protein and low carbs, higher fats- they would cut and if someone had high protein high carbs and low fat -they would be bulking?


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Woo hoo. Under 80kg for the first time this year. Not bad considering I had steak and chips for lunch and had macdonalds for lunch yesterday.

Back to percentages. Now it seems a slightly silly way to do things. The theme of this thread is spot on. Your body process macros. So lets start there. And not faff about with imperical protocols that are based on volume of food consumed.

If you eat 2000 cals of food or 4000 cals, your bodies protein requirements shouldn't change much be here we are prescribing double bases on percentages. A bit silly right

And the same thing for skinny guys v big guys. Asume we have 2 twins with opposite backgrounds. Do you really think mr marathon running starting in the gym needs as much protein as the buff beast who has 70% more muscle?

I could go on. But I thing hope you get it.

This is for a natty:

Base you protein on your lean mass. Work out 1.5g per gram lbm and 0.7g of high quality fat per gram lbm (for hormonal benefits).

They are your base macros. Now subtract your calories from the above from your maintenance and spread the rest across carbs and fat depending on you preference and how your body responds. -/+ 500 cals for bulking cutting.

You can eat more protein if you like, but you are unlikely to see more benefit.

I'm no expert of diets for juicers, but its safe to say you can get away with more protein and less fat.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

jonnym4 said:


> The only thing that I still don't understand is why not just account for the extra calories you are consuming? Like the op said, his diet comes out as 380 grams of protein but only counts 300. Why not just aim for 380?
> 
> I personally follow a % of macros and adjust calories by about 100 a week until progress stops. This article is well worth a read http://www.cutandjacked.com/The-Ultimate-Guide-To-Bulking


because you do not need to....listen if you want to document every single calorie in a food type then do it ultimately it is down to you, there are a million and one articles out there concerning the so called best way to diet if you read 2 of them you will get two different opinions, if you do not understand a method do not do it really it is that simple.....


----------



## jonnym4 (May 8, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> because you do not need to....listen if you want to document every single calorie in a food type then do it ultimately it is down to you, there are a million and one articles out there concerning the so called best way to diet if you read 2 of them you will get two different opinions, if you do not understand a method do not do it really it is that simple.....


Just trying to understand it fully that's all then maybe it's something t try in the future, nothing wrong with questioning right? I was dismissing it in any way just looking for the method behind it. I believe I've seen Jordan Peters mention that he follows this too?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

jonnym4 said:


> Just trying to understand it fully that's all then maybe it's something t try in the future, nothing wrong with questioning right? I was dismissing it in any way just looking for the method behind it. I believe I've seen Jordan Peters mention that he follows this too?


yes Jordan does with huge success, my post was not one of anger just that i am now finding i am repeating myself hence the comment about you need to do your own thing.....

after 25yrs in this game if i know one thing for sure it is that there is no one way that is perfect...this works very well for me and some of those that i coach some it does not so they use other methods like timed carbs or carb backloading......no one can tell you a single way to diet be that for mass or fat loss you really need to commit to a way and see it through....


----------



## L11 (Jan 21, 2011)

simonthepieman said:


> Base you protein on your lean mass. Work out 1.5g per gram lbm and 0.7g of high quality fat per gram lbm (for hormonal benefits).
> 
> They are your base macros. Now subtract your calories from the above from your maintenance and spread the rest across carbs and fat depending on you preference and how your body responds. -/+ 500 cals for bulking cutting.
> 
> ...


When you said 1.5g per gram lbm what do you mean? Did you mean 1.5g per kg or per lb?

Eg I weigh 165lb, 10% body fat, so 150lb lbm? 225g protein and 100g of fat?

Or if you meant per kg it would be more like 110g protein and 55g of fat.. surely thats too low?


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

L11 said:


> When you said 1.5g per gram lbm what do you mean? Did you mean 1.5g per kg or per lb?
> 
> Eg I weigh 165lb, 10% body fat, so 150lb lbm? 225g protein and 100g of fat?


Gold star. Although 70g-80g of fat should be fine too


----------



## jonnym4 (May 8, 2011)

L11 said:


> When you said 1.5g per gram lbm what do you mean? Did you mean 1.5g per kg or per lb?
> 
> Eg I weigh 165lb, 10% body fat, so 150lb lbm? 225g protein and 100g of fat?
> 
> Or if you meant per kg it would be more like 110g protein and 55g of fat.. surely thats too low?


He means lbs mate and then the rest of your intake would be from carbs


----------



## L11 (Jan 21, 2011)

simonthepieman said:


> Gold star. Although 70g-80g of fat should be fine too


Cool, I'm bang on the money for protein. Fats are too low though. What's the importance of fats?


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

L11 said:


> Cool, I'm bang on the money for protein. Fats are too low though. What's the importance of fats?


I'll try and dig out the links. Biut essentially it helps with fat oxidisation, hormone regulation (including testosterone) and brain function. All useful things :lol:

Quality over quantity is key.


----------



## L11 (Jan 21, 2011)

simonthepieman said:


> I'll try and dig out the links. Biut essentially it helps with fat oxidisation, hormone regulation (including testosterone) and brain function. All useful things :lol:
> 
> Quality over quantity is key.


Cool, thanks, what kinda of fats are good quality? Please don't say evoo. I refuse to drink my calories lol.


----------



## nick-h (Nov 17, 2011)

nuts

avocados

fish

Think I'll give a version of this a go soon, eat to my macros rather than my calories. although as I don't fully understand the not counting certain macros from certain foods I'm just going to count macros from everything and keep it "clean"

269P

125F

100C

are my figures based on your formula mr pieman


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

L11 said:


> Cool, thanks, what kinda of fats are good quality? Please don't say evoo. I refuse to drink my calories lol.


Lol. Do you know me, waste good flavour by necking it. Evoo is for salad and sauces.

Eggs, meat and fish. Try and get as much omegas as possible. Especially omega 6. Oily fish like makeral and salmon are great. A reasonable amount of Saturated fine for a guy who lifts, just don't make it you primary source. Mono-saturates good. Trans fats should be avoided


----------



## Robbie789 (Sep 6, 2012)

L11 said:


> Cool, thanks, what kinda of fats are good quality? Please don't say evoo. I refuse to drink my calories lol.


Nuts, peanut butter, avocados, fatty fish, tofu... evoo


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

I forgot about avocados. Yum


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

simonthepieman said:


> Lol. Do you know me, waste good flavour by necking it. Evoo is for salad and sauces.
> 
> Eggs, meat and fish. Try and get as much omegas as possible. Especially omega 6. Oily fish like makeral and salmon are great. A reasonable amount of Saturated fine for a guy who lifts, just don't make it you primary source. Mono-saturates good. Trans fats should be avoided


I try to make a third of my fats saturated, good old butter and animal fat, u can't beat it lol.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Fatstuff said:


> I try to make a third of my fats saturated, good old butter and animal fat, u can't beat it lol.


Put butter in scrabbled eggs and don't over cook them. It's mouth sex


----------



## JPO (Apr 8, 2009)

simonthepieman said:


> Put butter in scrabbled eggs and don't over cook them. It's mouth sex


I'm going to try this at the weekend !


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

simonthepieman said:


> Put butter in scrabbled eggs and don't over cook them. It's mouth sex


Don't like eggs in any form lol

Apart from cakes :lol:


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

JPO said:


> I'm going to try this at the weekend !


top with smoked trout or salmon, some freshly cracked pepper and a little squeeze of lemon.

Serve with asparagus, posh bread and spinach and grilled baby tomatoes on the vine. Mush up seasoned avocado and spread it on the bread instead of butter

This is the common Saturday the pieman household


----------



## Northern Lass (Aug 10, 2011)

Fatstuff said:


> Don't like eggs in any form lol
> 
> Apart from cakes :lol:


Same here... fats


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

I think are amazing.

Just think about it. All the require is heat (aka calrories) and they everything that is required to create life and and existance. Worth thinking about


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

simonthepieman said:


> I think are amazing.
> 
> Just think about it. All the require is heat (aka calrories) and they everything that is required to create life and and existance. Worth thinking about


i realise im missing out lol believe me ive tried to eat them lots of times, just cant bring myself to eat anything that smells like fart lol


----------



## Northern Lass (Aug 10, 2011)

Fatstuff said:


> i realise im missing out lol believe me ive tried to eat them lots of times, just cant bring myself to eat anything that smells like fart lol


They don't agree with me... thought of eating them makes my stomach turn x


----------



## Fatstuff (Mar 2, 2010)

YummyMummy said:


> They don't agree with me... thought of eating them makes my stomach turn x


i like yorkshire pudding :rolleye:


----------



## Northern Lass (Aug 10, 2011)

Fatstuff said:


> i like yorkshire pudding :rolleye:


I do but thats different... I like pancakes too x


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

nick-h said:


> nuts
> 
> avocados
> 
> ...


I think i maybe used a too high figure on fats. But there's nothing wrong with that many for fats. 80 is a minimum for most sizable adults.

I recommend counting all macros. It's not that hard and it's going to more accurate.

if you eat a 100% 'old body builder diet' then the just counting the main macros works fine, but for the average joe. The more you measure, the most accurate your results and changes will be


----------



## nick-h (Nov 17, 2011)

Fats did seem a little high to me to be honest as I'm currently running a low carb cut under 60g a day and my fats aren't that high even on that diet.

I track everything at the moment anyway so it's not a problem contiuning to track but just dis-regaured the calories value actually would make hitting the macros easier


----------



## jonnym4 (May 8, 2011)

Fats are awesome! I'm having 100 grams and I'm cutting! Will be about 140 eventually as my calories increase


----------



## Talaria (Jun 30, 2011)

So what do you do if your calorie goal is 3300 yet your

protein requirements are 300g, carbs 250g, fats 100g

adding total 3100 would the missing 200cals not matter or would you have to adjust macros to fit, surely this would mean adjusting

your macro targets? :confused1: @simonthepieman


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

goldenballs23 said:


> So what do you do if your calorie goal is 3300 yet your
> 
> protein requirements are 300g, carbs 250g, fats 100g
> 
> ...


Spot on. Eat 200 cals more.


----------



## Talaria (Jun 30, 2011)

simonthepieman said:


> Spot on. Eat 200 cals more.


But wouldn't that be out of my macro targets.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

goldenballs23 said:


> But wouldn't that be out of my macro targets.


you are over thinking this.

macros and calories have to correlate as macros have a calorific value. Targets are that, targets.

The bricks and mortor required to do a job. Going over it is fine so long as you do go to excess over your calories target to excess


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

goldenballs23 said:


> But wouldn't that be out of my macro targets.


If you are dieting by macros then cals are irrelevant!! Otherwise just divide up your cals into protein, carbs fats. Pick on method only at a time.


----------



## Talaria (Jun 30, 2011)

Galaxy said:


> If you are dieting by macros then cals are irrelevant!! Otherwise just divide up your cals into protein, carbs fats. Pick on method only at a time.


Yeah I'm gonna give it a try seems easier is this what your doing even when you don't hit your cals target but macros you are.... although your post is suggesting the opposite from @simonthepieman


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

goldenballs23 said:


> Yeah I'm gonna give it a try seems easier is this what your doing even when you don't hit your cals target but macros you are.... although your post is suggesting the opposite from @simonthepieman


I don't have a cals target mate...........did you even read this thread??

I go by a macro target 300p 250c 70f training days and 300p 210c 90g f on non training days, all from complete sources. I then adjust macros depending on results not cals as they fluxuate slighty every day with different foods etc


----------



## Talaria (Jun 30, 2011)

Galaxy said:
 

> I don't have a cals target mate...........did you even read this thread??
> 
> I go by a macro target 300p 250c 70f training days and 300p 210c 90g f on non training days, all from complete sources. I then adjust macros depending on results not cals as they fluxuate slighty every day with different foods etc


Yep I am doing this, hows that working for you?


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

goldenballs23 said:


> Yep I am doing this, hows that working for you?


Simple to follow once you get the hang of it tbh, but i am liking it so far so will stick with it for the forseable future.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

if you have a macro target you have a calorie target by implication. All macros have a calorific value. It's intrinsic. you don't need to track calories if you track macros.

If you have targets for macros and calories that are out of sync, there is an elementary mathematical error


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

simonthepieman said:


> if you have a macro target you have a calorie target by implication. All macros have a calorific value. It's intrinsic. you don't need to track calories if you track macros.
> 
> If you have targets for macros and calories that are out of sync, there is an elementary mathematical error


not necessarily having a macro target does not mean you have a calorie target, yes they add up to a calorie total but that is not the reason for the Macro split, for myself and others i coach the amount of calories they eat is irrelevant as it is the Macro split that dictates the diet they can work it out if they want but it is irrelevant for me when i design a diet plan, if i am up late for what ever reason i will repeat my 6th meal of the day which is P/F.

you choose one or the other not both, if you choose to plan your diet around calories then how they are split is irrelevant as the daily calorie total is king but if you choose to run the macro route it is not only the macro's for the day that counts but how they are split in each meal through the day.....i prefer the Macro route but both are good you just need to chose one and stick with it.


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> not necessarily having a macro target does not mean you have a calorie target, yes they add up to a calorie total but that is not the reason for the Macro split, for myself and others i coach the amount of calories they eat is irrelevant as it is the Macro split that dictates the diet they can work it out if they want but it is irrelevant for me when i design a diet plan, if i am up late for what ever reason i will repeat my 6th meal of the day which is P/F.
> 
> you choose one or the other not both, if you choose to plan your diet around calories then how they are split is irrelevant as the daily calorie total is king but if you choose to run the macro route it is not only the macro's for the day that counts but how they are split in each meal through the day.....i prefer the Macro route but both are good you just need to chose one and stick with it.


Paul, is the macro split per meal throughout the day generic or do you do it individualised per client/yourself? I'am following this atm and the split is

p/c/f each meal bar my final meal, and reduce carbs /increse fats on non training days??

Thanks


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Pscarb said:


> not necessarily having a macro target does not mean you have a calorie target, yes they add up to a calorie total but that is not the reason for the Macro split, for myself and others i coach the amount of calories they eat is irrelevant as it is the Macro split that dictates the diet they can work it out if they want but it is irrelevant for me when i design a diet plan, if i am up late for what ever reason i will repeat my 6th meal of the day which is P/F.
> 
> you choose one or the other not both, if you choose to plan your diet around calories then how they are split is irrelevant as the daily calorie total is king but if you choose to run the macro route it is not only the macro's for the day that counts but how they are split in each meal through the day.....i prefer the Macro route but both are good you just need to chose one and stick with it.


I agree. I think they are two effective ways of skinning the same cat. With methods suited to different styles/habits.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Galaxy said:


> Paul, is the macro split per meal throughout the day generic or do you do it individualised per client/yourself? I'am following this atm and the split is
> 
> p/c/f each meal bar my final meal, and reduce carbs /increse fats on non training days??
> 
> Thanks


i don't do generic mate, some clients react better with a P/F/C split others with either P/C or P/F it all depends on the goal and if the plan uses carb cycling, backloading, Timed Carbs etc.....

one thing that many try to do and should not is they try to get the split number or overall daily calorie number down perfect before they start, there is no calculator on the net that can give you a accurate number it is all a guess of some degree based on simple rules (training, activity etc)

when you start either a cut or a bulk detail what you are eating daily now be this by calories or macro then add or subtract 500cals per day depending on your goal then see if that works, trial and error is by far the best way to learn anything.


----------



## CJ (Apr 24, 2006)

I hit macros (with Pauls diet) and works perfectly.

allows you to easily tweak timings of macros around training / evenings etc where the body may need increased or decreased carb intake


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> i don't do generic mate, some clients react better with a P/F/C split others with either P/C or P/F it all depends on the goal and if the plan uses carb cycling, backloading, Timed Carbs etc.....
> 
> one thing that many try to do and should not is they try to get the split number or overall daily calorie number down perfect before they start, there is no calculator on the net that can give you a accurate number it is all a guess of some degree based on simple rules (training, activity etc)
> 
> when you start either a cut or a bulk detail what you are eating daily now be this by calories or macro then add or subtract 500cals per day depending on your goal then see if that works, trial and error is by far the best way to learn anything.


Persumed that to be the case mate. csn imagine it can be very time consuming for each individual client.

I am only a few weeks into this method, before i started this diet style i was counting cals and found my maintaince to be around 3000 so used this as a base and used the following macros as a starting point 300p 250 c 70f/ The whole thing that confuses me is when you need to alter it depending on results where do you start? What i mean by this, do i increase carbs or fats, do i have more fats for breakfast and less around my workout etc.

But as you say, its all trial and error.

Quick question now also while your here, what macros do you count in raw milk? I was thinking the protein and fats??

Thanks again


----------



## Galaxy (Aug 1, 2011)

CJ said:


> I hit macros (with Pauls diet) and works perfectly.
> 
> allows you to easily tweak timings of macros around training / evenings etc where the body may need increased or decreased carb intake


Agreed so far i find the whole diet very easy to follow and plan. In terms of carbs, i atm have them fairly spaced throughout the day as i have a physical job, would you say i would benefit more if i priororitised (bad spelling!!) them more around my workout in the evening?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Galaxy said:


> Persumed that to be the case mate. csn imagine it can be very time consuming for each individual client.
> 
> I am only a few weeks into this method, before i started this diet style i was counting cals and found my maintaince to be around 3000 so used this as a base and used the following macros as a starting point 300p 250 c 70f/ The whole thing that confuses me is when you need to alter it depending on results where do you start? What i mean by this, do i increase carbs or fats, do i have more fats for breakfast and less around my workout etc.
> 
> ...


with Raw Milk you count all P/F/C as they are all relatively the same


----------



## Talaria (Jun 30, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> not necessarily having a macro target does not mean you have a calorie target, yes they add up to a calorie total but that is not the reason for the Macro split, for myself and others i coach the amount of calories they eat is irrelevant as it is the Macro split that dictates the diet they can work it out if they want but it is irrelevant for me when i design a diet plan, if i am up late for what ever reason i will repeat my 6th meal of the day which is P/F.
> 
> you choose one or the other not both, if you choose to plan your diet around calories then how they are split is irrelevant as the daily calorie total is king but if you choose to run the macro route it is not only the macro's for the day that counts but how they are split in each meal through the day.....i prefer the Macro route but both are good you just need to chose one and stick with it.


So if I just choose to hit my macros and ignore the calories I will be ok, which is the way you do it and your clients?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

goldenballs23 said:


> So if I just choose to hit my macros and ignore the calories I will be ok, which is the way you do it and your clients?


Exactly!!!!!


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

@Pscarb - Hey Paul, I'm currently just under 4 weeks out and have dieted down by counting macros the same way as you do. It's worked well but I've had Shelby watch over me which obviously made it easier.

The other evening I decided to create a lean bulk diet which I can use after my competition. What I did however was calculate the numbers by macros, and also by exact calorie and macro-nutrient figures to the gram.

When counting only protein from protein sources, carbs from carb sources and fats from fat sources, this is what I got...

*Option A* - 325/250/20 - 2480Kcal

When counting everything by exact figures (MyFitnessPal) and not missing out a gram of anything, this is what I got...

*Option B* - 361/299/70 - 3270Kcal

As you can see there's quite a big difference there. When counting by macros it looks more like a cutting diet as opposed to a lean bulk diet.

How do you overcome this discrepancy without harming your results? It seems that when bulking or cutting you'll always be consuming more calories than you actually think.

Another thing with counting by macros is that with Option A, you can see that the fat intake looks very low which makes you think there's no flexibility left at all with this macro-nutrient. The diet I created consists of two meals containing 95% lean beef but the fat content was omitted and only the protein content was taken into account. With option B you can clearly see though the fat intake is low, it can be taken even lower if one wishes to by simply replacing beef with chicken, turkey or fish.

I'm not at all saying counting by macros doesn't work as it obviously does. I'm more interested in how these little small factors and discrepancies are taken into account so not to jeopardize your results.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

you are the exact diet and for one you counted just macro's and then the other you counted calories? then you compare calories? but you do not use calories with a macro based diet so you cannot compare, these both options above give the same calories as they are the same diet....

you do not need to overcome anything initially, you have dieted and got to show ready condition using a macro based diet, so you use the numbers you have been running for the show then add to them to gain weight, adjusting this as you go to make sure progress is maintained....

so lets say you have a macro split of 325/250/20 (P/C/F) to get into the condition for the show, then once you are rested from the show you go back on these numbers for a few days to balance out water gained from a day or so of relaxing then add to them so it might be these numbers a month after the show 325/400/70, you run this then adjust........

if you choose to go the Macro way then you do not count calories, you base your macro amounts on the goal and your metabolism/physique.......

*Note - there are exceptions to this rule, for example you count both fat/pro in eggs, salmon, mackerel


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> you are the exact diet and for one you counted just macro's and then the other you counted calories? then you compare calories? but you do not use calories with a macro based diet so you cannot compare, these both options above give the same calories as they are the same diet....
> 
> you do not need to overcome anything initially, you have dieted and got to show ready condition using a macro based diet, so you use the numbers you have been running for the show then add to them to gain weight, adjusting this as you go to make sure progress is maintained....
> 
> ...


I see what you mean mate. I think in my head I overcomplicated things by comparing calories from both methods.

I'm aware that eggs and fatty fish are an exception, but what about eating lean beef multiple times in a day. If I eat 500g of lean beef spread over 2 meals, that equates to roughly 26g of fat. When dieting down for a competition and trying to be very specific to achieve utmost condition, wouldn't this top-level approach cause a hindrance?

If I were to substitute the beef meals with chicken or fish, the macro's themselves won't change as fat is not taken into account when talking about meats, yet the actual fat content of the overall diet will be radically reduced which can have an overall impact on condition.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Contest said:


> I see what you mean mate. I think in my head I overcomplicated things by comparing calories from both methods.
> 
> I'm aware that eggs and fatty fish are an exception, but what about eating lean beef multiple times in a day. If I eat 500g of lean beef spread over 2 meals, that equates to roughly 26g of fat. When dieting down for a competition and trying to be very specific to achieve utmost condition, wouldn't this top-level approach cause a hindrance?
> 
> If I were to substitute the beef meals with chicken or fish, the macro's themselves won't change as fat is not taken into account when talking about meats, yet the actual fat content of the overall diet will be radically reduced which can have an overall impact on condition.


it only becomes a issue if you do not monitor your progress, you have said yourself that you have dieted now to contest condition using Macro's so you all ready know the answer to if it impacts your condition.

if you choose to use macro's then you cannot be wondering about calories or it will blow your mind.......


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> it only becomes a issue if you do not monitor your progress, you have said yourself that you have dieted now to contest condition using Macro's so you all ready know the answer to if it impacts your condition.
> 
> if you choose to use macro's then you cannot be wondering about calories or it will blow your mind.......


I agree with what you're saying mate. I accept the fact that with macro's, thinking about calories is a waste of time.

The only bit that bothers me is that with macro's, the leeway to make certain adjustments in certain scenario's aren't there (when you look at it on paper).

For example my current macros using yours & Shelby's method works out to 270/150/20. That 20g of fat is from 40g of cashews. Yet in my current diet, I'm eating 250g of beef 3x a day so my real-world fat intake is actually much higher.

If my progress were to stall now, on paper it would appear the only macronutrient I could realistically adjust is carbs, where as in reality if I were to replace the 3 beef meals with chicken or fish, the macros would still remain 270/150/20, but I'd be cutting out 30g of fat and may start progressing again.

I suppose with the macro's approach it's best to break it down into a top-level and low-level approaches.

Top-level meaning to adjust your macros accordingly and only counting the main macro's from food sources as you normally do. Basically keeping the setup nice and simple.

Low-level meaning where you get a little specific about certain food choices and make changes that do not necessarily affect your macro's on paper, but do aid in furthering your progression.

I personally feel though the macro's approach is easier to design, follow and re-adjust, it requires a very fine eye when it comes to monitor your progression as you said in your last post.

After this competition, I'll be doing my off-season solo and would like to also prep myself for my next competition but I don't know whether I have that fine eye when monitoring myself.

Shelby got me to 104kg and now I'm 91kg and in all honesty, I can't really tell the difference when I look in the mirror lol. I feel lean but not entirely ready yet for my competition though Shelby tells me I am exactly where I should be.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

i really do not get your thinking, you are very lean and dropped 13kg using this method but think that you cannot adjust numbers if you stalled, there are many ways to adjust things when you stall......i think you are over thinking it all, if you think that it cannot be done(although you have done it) then switch to Calorie cased diet plans.....

i cannot answer your questions concerning calories on a macro based diet as to me it is irrelevant, plus i would never drop to only 20g of fats.


----------



## jayDP (Jan 31, 2012)

I do the same thing

How do you know exactly how much cals he need to grow? I mean how can anyone know? Everyone metabolism is different, some jobs are more intense then others, people are more active then others etc


----------



## 31205 (Jan 16, 2013)

How do you even know where to start? I'm currently eating 300p/200c/85f. So I monitor my weight and measurements for a while and up the carbs if I want to gain weight or reduce carbs/fat if I want to lose weight?


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> i really do not get your thinking, you are very lean and dropped 13kg using this method but think that you cannot adjust numbers if you stalled, there are many ways to adjust things when you stall......i think you are over thinking it all, if you think that it cannot be done(although you have done it) then switch to Calorie cased diet plans.....
> 
> i cannot answer your questions concerning calories on a macro based diet as to me it is irrelevant, plus i would never drop to only 20g of fats.


Sorry mate, I may have over analyzed and delved too much into this lol.

Both macro and calorie based diets work, though what I should've mentioned in my last post was that an individual who is not so in-tune with the concept of dieting may get confused what to do when progress does stall.

I know 20g of fat isn't my actual fat intake and I can fine tune my diet by simply switching meat sources though some people may not know this as they'll be in the mindset that...

Chicken, beef & fish are protein

Oats, rice and potatoes are carbs

Nuts, oils and butters are fats

When you say you would never drop to 20g of fat, I imagine you're talking in regards of a macro based diet? This is where I feel it gets confusing lol. On paper my macros are 270/150/20, yet my actual fat intake is roughly 60g as I eat 3 meals consisting of extra lean beef. Each beef dish contains 13g of fat.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Contest said:


> Sorry mate, I may have over analyzed and delved too much into this lol.
> 
> Both macro and calorie based diets work, though what I should've mentioned in my last post was that an individual who is not so in-tune with the concept of dieting may get confused what to do when progress does stall.
> 
> ...


i am referring to a macro based diet, if each of your beef meals are giving you 13g of fat then i would assume your having just over 300g of mince per meal, as this rule only applies to 96%fat free or higher......??

the key is to choose the type of diet that is best for you, Macro diets are simple to create it is the adjusting that is the challenge only because most think in calories. but you take a newbie and ask him how many calories he eats he would be lost, there is no easy way as both require detail.....

if you are going to use a macro diet then you make sensible food type choices, there is no point choosing a macro based diet then eating 5 meals of beef (plus that would be bad from a enzyme and digestive point of view) you don't avoid 96% red meat but you use your head......


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

Contest said:


> Sorry mate, I may have over analyzed and delved too much into this lol.
> 
> Both macro and calorie based diets work, though what I should've mentioned in my last post was that an individual who is not so in-tune with the concept of dieting may get confused what to do when progress does stall.
> 
> ...


PScarb method would work fine if you have a fairly routine way of eating food types and meal sizes. It relies on trial and error to eliminate the energy measurement. but once dialed in, it should deliver the same results if you don't deviate off course and 'can' be easier to track and measure.

If you have a diet varied in meal sizes, food types and eating meals with lots of ingredients I can't see this working as well measuring everything and using calories as the master variable. Ultimately calories are most overriding variable in terms of growth or weight loss.


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> i am referring to a macro based diet, if each of your beef meals are giving you 13g of fat then i would assume your having just over 300g of mince per meal, as this rule only applies to 96%fat free or higher......??
> 
> the key is to choose the type of diet that is best for you, Macro diets are simple to create it is the adjusting that is the challenge only because most think in calories. but you take a newbie and ask him how many calories he eats he would be lost, there is no easy way as both require detail.....
> 
> if you are going to use a macro diet then you make sensible food type choices, there is no point choosing a macro based diet then eating 5 meals of beef (plus that would be bad from a enzyme and digestive point of view) you don't avoid 96% red meat but you use your head......


I'm having 250g of 95% lean beef mince three times a day mate.

I think you're right when it comes to making sensible food choices mate. As my metabolism is very fast, eating beef 3x a day wasn't an issue in Shelby's eyes but others may not be so lucky.

If you don't mind me asking Paul, what are your current macro's when using a macro diet?



simonthepieman said:


> PScarb method would work fine if you have a fairly routine way of eating food types and meal sizes. It relies on trial and error to eliminate the energy measurement. but once dialed in, it should deliver the same results if you don't deviate off course and 'can' be easier to track and measure.
> 
> If you have a diet varied in meal sizes, food types and eating meals with lots of ingredients I can't see this working as well measuring everything and using calories as the master variable. Ultimately calories are most overriding variable in terms of growth or weight loss.


I think your right on the money with this mate.

For 17 weeks I've eaten the same thing day in, day out which has made it very simple to monitor progress. It's when introducing different foods or adding extra ingredients where it can make tracking more difficult.


----------



## Silvaback (Jul 31, 2013)

Eat it, count it.

How do people find ways to over complicate everything!?


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

Silvaback said:


> Eat it, count it.
> 
> How do people find ways to over complicate everything!?


You may see it as complicating things where as others may find dieting by macro's simplifying.


----------



## dtlv (Jul 24, 2009)

simonthepieman said:


> PScarb method would work fine if you have a fairly routine way of eating food types and meal sizes. It relies on trial and error to eliminate the energy measurement. but once dialed in, it should deliver the same results if you don't deviate off course and 'can' be easier to track and measure.
> 
> If you have a diet varied in meal sizes, food types and eating meals with lots of ingredients I can't see this working as well measuring everything and using calories as the master variable. Ultimately calories are most overriding variable in terms of growth or weight loss.


 @simonthepieman , just noticed your tagline under your avi... very funny, lol. Am not that much of a smartass know it all am I? :lol:

I agree very much with the above - if diet is consistent and relatively unvaried then you can save yourself a lot of hassle calculating by missing out incidental macros and just reducing portion sizes as you cut and count the main macros only... but if you are a person who likes to mix up food sources a lot then you'll do better to track all macros more closely. Is about achieving consistency as best you can without going insane in the process... there is always some room for leeway that you shouldn't stress over.


----------



## Silvaback (Jul 31, 2013)

Everyone diets by macros, I do, my clients do, if you're counting cal's you're still counting macros.

I hate these "dieting by macro" "iifym" tags that flexible / common sense eating is being labeled by.


----------



## simonthepieman (Jun 11, 2012)

dtlv said:


> @simonthepieman , just noticed your tagline under your avi... very funny, lol. Am not that much of a smartass know it all am I? :lol:
> 
> I agree very much with the above - if diet is consistent and relatively unvaried then you can save yourself a lot of hassle calculating by missing out incidental macros and just reducing portion sizes as you cut and count the main macros only... but if you are a person who likes to mix up food sources a lot then you'll do better to track all macros more closely. Is about achieving consistency as best you can without going insane in the process... there is always some room for leeway that you shouldn't stress over.


Dude, you write what I think and try to say. Just more eloquently 

And more politely too


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Contest said:


> If you don't mind me asking Paul, what are your current macro's when using a macro diet?


P-300/C-275/Fats-40 this is a training day diet

P-300/C-140/Fats-100 this is a none training day diet

I am increasing the numbers now after cutting back for my holiday and after being ill.....these numbers will change over the next month or so...



Meat Discounts said:


> IIFYM calculator is a good place to start. That's where I got my macros from. Starting a cut for the first time, going for 209g protein 226g carbs 73g fat each day. Going well in the first week although protein is always slightly over and carbs slightly under. Everything recorded in My Fitness Pal.


but IIFYM is not using macro's as the way we are talking in this discussion, plus if your recording everything then it is calorie based, as Macro dieting you are only counting the macro you are eating the food for, not all the calories, is this how you are doing it or u just count say carbs in oats or just fat in peanut butter



Silvaback said:


> Everyone diets by macros, I do, my clients do, if you're counting cal's you're still counting macros.
> 
> I hate these "dieting by macro" "iifym" tags that flexible / common sense eating is being labeled by.


you are but your not counting all the macro's in the foods you eat, if you are counting calories for everything in a food then that is not doing a diet by Macro's as it is known.........


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> P-300/C-275/Fats-40 this is a training day diet
> 
> P-300/C-140/Fats-100 this is a none training day diet
> 
> I am increasing the numbers now after cutting back for my holiday and after being ill.....these numbers will change over the next month or so...


Really proves how dieting by macro's is different from a calorie based diet. If those macro's were devised using a calorie based diet and every gram of every macronutrient was taken into account, your calories would work out to 2660.

Obviously you're on much more as you're such a big fella :thumb:

I know you're a fan of almond butter but how exactly do you measure and weigh this mate... Or do you just literally have a few table spoons straight out of the tub?


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

I weigh everything buddy, almond butter is like all nut butters weigh it and approx half the weight is the amount of fat


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

Pscarb said:


> I weigh everything buddy, almond butter is like all nut butters weigh it and approx half the weight is the amount of fat


How exactly do you weigh it though mate? Do you put a bowl on a pair of scales, reset to zero and then scoop how much you need into the bowl? I've tried it this way but find it difficult as the peanut butter always sticks onto the spoon and takes forever to let go lol.

Also, on a macro based diet, eggs and salmon are an exception, but would you say cashews would be an exception also?

75g of cashews has the following macros - 14/23/33.

They're quite high in carbs and protein compared to nuts such as almonds and walnuts.

I don't know whether it's me but I feel if eating certain foods in large quantities, or small quantities but several times through the day, it may make sense to also take the other macronutrients into considerations as well.

My earlier beef example is a perfect illustration of this. 250g beef x 3 meals = 39g of fat.

Shelby was fine me eating beef 3x a day but now that I'm 4 weeks out, I'll be relying on chicken and turkey :crying:


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

I put a container on the scale and weigh the PB,

I don't eat cashews so never have this issue....

You are questioning a method and that is good but you have used it to get in good condition 4 weeks out so I really don't understand you questioning the method, if the amount of fat from the mince is bothering you then diet using calories.

At 4 weeks out you should not be questioning a method that got you this far as it has worked, you are working with Shelby who is very experienced just do as he has planned and you will be fine


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

Lmao talk about making a mountain out of a molehill! Some funny questions in here too lol


----------



## Silvaback (Jul 31, 2013)

There's a facepalm moment on every single page.... I'm out.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

certainly agree this thread has become a lot more complicated than the method is, which is confusing, as if you want that much detail then use Calories not just Macro numbers...


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

'How do you weigh peanut butter?'


----------



## Silvaback (Jul 31, 2013)

C.Hill said:


> 'How do you weigh peanut butter?'


Whilst standing on one foot, rubbing your head and patting your stomach :lol:

I'm surprised some people make it through a day :lol:


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

C.Hill said:


> 'How do you weigh peanut butter?'





Silvaback said:


> Whilst standing on one foot, rubbing your head and patting your stomach :lol:
> 
> I'm surprised some people make it through a day :lol:


You guys can laugh all you want but results speak for themselves.

I'm willing to be extra meticulous and detailed because I believe it's these little things that will give me that extra edge. My aim is to look the best I can possibly look on stage. I wanted to be shredded, as lean isn't good enough for me.

It's very easy to overindulge Almond butter when simply eating straight out of the container and over the course of a week, the calories will build up. Weighing it isn't easy either as it's so sticky and I'm not the only one who's mentioned this.

It's funny as over this weekend I spoke to a few veteran UKBFF & NABBA competitors who had the same issue and what they do is put the entire tub on the scale, and scoop the almond butter directly from the tub so that they can see the exact amount they're consuming.

If they can be so thorough, I don't see why I can't either.


----------



## Silvaback (Jul 31, 2013)

Contest said:


> You guys can laugh all you want but results speak for themselves.
> 
> I'm willing to be extra meticulous and detailed because I believe it's these little things that will give me that extra edge. My aim is to look the best I can possibly look on stage. I wanted to be shredded, as lean isn't good enough for me.
> 
> ...


I'm not laughing at the fact you're doing it, I do it, I tell the people I coach to do it. It's the asking how to do it, surely that's common sense. I do the same with bags of whey etc, chuck it on, scoop it out.


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

Silvaback said:


> I'm not laughing at the fact you're doing it, I do it, I tell the people I coach to do it. It's the asking how to do it, surely that's common sense. I do the same with bags of whey etc, chuck it on, scoop it out.


I'm so used to weighing stuff by putting it into a container, it didn't occur to me to weigh the whole product itself and just subtract the amount that I need.

It's only butters I can see you'd have to weigh this way. Everything else just get's thrown into an empty container.


----------



## C.Hill (Nov 21, 2010)

Contest said:


> You guys can laugh all you want but results speak for themselves.
> 
> I'm willing to be extra meticulous and detailed because I believe it's these little things that will give me that extra edge. My aim is to look the best I can possibly look on stage. I wanted to be shredded, as lean isn't good enough for me.
> 
> ...


Same as SB mate I weigh my pb when dieting down too, just made me laugh you asking how you do it lol no hard feelings buddy 

Good luck on stage!


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

C.Hill said:


> Same as SB mate I weigh my pb when dieting down too, just made me laugh you asking how you do it lol no hard feelings buddy
> 
> Good luck on stage!


No offense taken mate and thanks


----------



## ReRaise (Nov 19, 2010)

So when not bothering about calories, and counting only the macronutrient that you are eating the food for, what would you do about any condiments and sauces that's being consumed purely to add flavour as oppose for any particular macro? In contest prep I know this is a non-issue as most likely condiments with any real calorific value won't be used (not for me anyway), so off season I presume these can just go untracked?


----------



## Silvaback (Jul 31, 2013)

ReRaise said:


> So when not bothering about calories, and counting only the macronutrient that you are eating the food for, what would you do about any condiments and sauces that's being consumed purely to add flavour as oppose for any particular macro? In contest prep I know this is a non-issue as most likely condiments with any real calorific value won't be used (not for me anyway), so off season I presume these can just go untracked?


Depends how much you use and wether it takes you over your carbs/fats or not.

I do the same as I do with whey, on the scale, set to zero, squirt and then it's back on the scale.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

When not on prep condiments/spices are fine I encourage the use of punk salt no issues at all with dry spices (as long as they are not packet stuff with hidden maltodextrin in, sauces as in Worcester sauce or the walden farm range I have no issue in moderation.....

As for the peanut butter issue I fail to see how hard it is, you put a container on the scale you spoon the peanut butter out the jar and use your fingers or another spoon to get it off the spoon?????


----------



## Contest (Oct 4, 2011)

I use Balsamic Vinegar as my condiment of choice all year round.



Pscarb said:


> When not on prep condiments/spices are fine I encourage the use of punk salt no issues at all with dry spices (as long as they are not packet stuff with hidden maltodextrin in, sauces as in Worcester sauce or the walden farm range I have no issue in moderation.....
> 
> As for the peanut butter issue I fail to see how hard it is, you put a container on the scale you spoon the peanut butter out the jar and use your fingers or another spoon to get it off the spoon?????


What brand peanut/almond butter are you using mate?

I use the TPW one and it's ridiculously gloopy and sticky compared to any other one I've used though it also tastes the best. I can feel it sticking to my throat when I'm chugging it down lol.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

Nuts n more mainly but I have a range of different ones


----------

