Any particular routine more suited to gaining definition

[Sim882]

Well summer in Australia is coming, and I like hitting the beaches in Adelaide. Have only started doing weights this year and whilst I'm not large are going to devote 4-6 weeks from start of October 29th to cut and hopefully get completely ripped.

Currently, 5'6, 73kg or 161 pounds, 10-11% bf.

Goal, 69-70kg, 6%bf.

Anyway, since i can't hope to gain any muscle mass during this period, I was thinking of varying from my modified version of 5x5 for a routine that may increase definition.

I note many bodybduiling books (e.g., Arnie's) suggest some exercises promote greater definition, whereas some others argue that b.f. and genetics alone determines definition.

What is the consensus on this? Does any one have links to definition-orientated weights programmes. My main concern is to increase leg definition, and improve tricep/biscep separation (mines very poor but I can't seem to pinch any fat there). Can't imagine the 6 pack will be too much of a problem, as can already flex it now, just imagine a bit more fat loss will mean no need to flex it.

I'm not on anything thing other than creatine, glutamine and whey.

 

[Tatyana]

Not sure if this will work for you, but high volume training, so 3-4 sets of 15-20 reps.

'definition' is lower body fat. The pics you see in mags of a lot of the pros are just days before or after competitions, and all sorts of 'tricks' are used to peak for those few days, so that look is not attainable on a day to day basis.

 

[Mercere]

I would suggest keeping the volume low, reps heavy. You won't gain any muscle in calorie deficit, but heavy lifting will help you preserve that hard earned muscle. Dieting will give you definition. Try to lift at least the same weight as your cut progresses. Same lift at a lower bodyweight is an improvement, so your focus should be on keeping the plates on the bar.

 

[Tatyana]

I would suggest keeping the volume low, reps heavy. You won't gain any muscle in calorie deficit, but heavy lifting will help you preserve that hard earned muscle. Dieting will give you definition. Try to lift at least the same weight as your cut progresses. Same lift at a lower bodyweight is an improvement, so your focus should be on keeping the plates on the bar.

I would think about the difference between powerlifters and bodybuilders.

Also there is no strong scientific basis that heavy weights or higher reps are any better at building muscle.

Most BBers I know often vary their routines, cause the body will get used to heavy low volume work.

The ultimate hardgainers are women, and I know loads of girlies who have gained loads of muscle and gotten ripped on high volume workouts.

 

[Mercere]

I would think about the difference between powerlifters and bodybuilders.

Also there is no strong scientific basis that heavy weights or higher reps are any better at building muscle.

Most BBers I know often vary their routines, cause the body will get used to heavy low volume work.

The ultimate hardgainers are women, and I know loads of girlies who have gained loads of muscle and gotten ripped on high volume workouts.

I wasn't talking about building muscle, I was talking about preserving muscle mass while on a cut. In a calorie deficit, muscle glycogen is lower than normal. Doing a low volume, high intensity workout will allow the person to finish the sets with a heavy weight. If you lower the weight on the bar in a cut, you will lose more strength and more muscle than you would if you'd kept the weight the same.

Now if we talk about building mass (causing muscle hypertrophy), which requires caloric excess, there is a certain amount of volume needed. Though you cannot judge the volume on reps in a set. 5x5 with a 1x8 back off set has more volume than 3x10. Lifting above 12 reps in a set won't do you much good except to increase muscle endurance.

In addition, I can assure you lifting heavy weights builds more muscle than lighter ones, as long as you have sufficient (not excessive) volume in the program.

 

[Sim882]

Thanks - so you all think there would be for example little point trying Arnie's extreme superset/triset comp routine then for the hope it creates more definition (it looks pretty hardcore, so I thought it could be fun). Arnie in his book often talks about some exercises developing size, others definition. So far I had ignored this and just done the core exercises.

As for super low b.f., I'm not aiming to enter a competition, and want a maintainable low b.f. However, a lot of pro-athletes such as gymnasts and 100-200m sprinters seem to maintain awesome b.f. levels all year round with decent muscle mass, and I would be more than happy to look like that. I guess ultimately I would love to look like a pro-gymnast upper body, sprinter lower body. For me (and this is just personal tastes) there body is more attractive than the slightly more ripped comp bodybuilder body anyway

 

[Mercere]

Thanks - so you all think there would be for example little point trying Arnie's extreme superset/triset comp routine then for the hope it creates more definition (it looks pretty hardcore, so I thought it could be fun). Arnie in his book often talks about some exercises developing size, others definition. So far I had ignored this and just done the core exercises.

I don't. Don't follow any training advice from Arnold or his books, they have no scientific basis. I know you don't want to hear this but different exercises won't change the shape of your muscles. You can make them bigger, or smaller. That's about it. Lift heavy compound lifts and eat to make muscle, lower your body fat for definition. Refer to the training vault sticky for further reading.

 

[Tatyana]

Not everyone can train like Arnie did.

I have been finding his high volume works for me. My coach has recommended high reps to rip up the quads, she often has people doing enough sets so that leg extension hit the 100s, and she also recommends to 'lunge till you puke' for getting tight glutes.

She has probably trained more of the British pros than anyone in the UK.

As far as muscle glycogen goes and calorie deficit, it depends on how much you cut your calories.

I was just reviewing my metabolic pathways and an interesting bit of info came up.

Muscle prefers fatty acids over carbohydrates (glycogen) as a fuel source.

Glycogen will make the muscle look fuller, but they are not necessary for maintance, a higher fat diet (with low carbs) will also work.

You will have to figure out what works for you. If you are a hardgainer, this is not the best approach for you.

 

[MsBeverlyHills]

"Currently, 10-11% bf.

Goal, 6% bf."

you can do hi-volume workouts 24/7 but to get BF down in the single digits - its 99% DIET!

 

[Mercere]

I was just reviewing my metabolic pathways and an interesting bit of info came up.

Muscle prefers fatty acids over carbohydrates (glycogen) as a fuel source.

Glycogen will make the muscle look fuller, but they are not necessary for maintance, a higher fat diet (with low carbs) will also work.

You are grossly misinterpreting what I've said. Muscles use ATP for energy. How they synthesize it depends on the immediate energy requirements of the activity. If the person engages in an intense exercise, such as weightlifting, there isn't enough time for aerobic metabolism to reach peak efficiency and supply the energy, so the body uses anaerobic respiration. Fatty acids can only be utilized in aerobic respiration, so they don't help us much when we're lifting or sprinting. Of course, anaerobic respiration is grossly inefficient compared to aerobic respiration so the body prefers aerobic as the main way to sustain metabolic functions. But both reactions use glycogen. Glycogen is essential to life.

Plus I've never said a low carb diet doesn't work, where did that come from?

 

[Sim882]

The only other time I dieted before (at start of year, when I had let my self go), I think I used 50 C/35 P/15 F, to get down from 15%bf to 8-9%bf (I had let myself go whilst suffering a knee injury the year before).

It seemed to work well, and I had energy. I'm currently planning on more aggressive cut this time (35C/P45/20F), but really don't understand how extremely low carb diets don't cause muscle loss if your doing HIT and weights, given that your body cannot use fat as an energy source during this activity. Are extremely low carbs only necessary to get below a certain level of b.f (8?).

PS, THere is never any love for Arnie on this board (but didn't Franco even train longer and harder?)