 |
Search misc.fitness.weights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
misc.fitness.weights -> Weight gain from muscle - how much?
There are 96 messages in this thread.
You are currently looking at messages 1 to 20.
|
Author: Stephan CarydakisDate: 10:57 24-11-06
|
|
Hi All,
I have been weight training for a year now but before that I had never done
any form of exercise. I spent the first 3 months on machines and cardio 3
times a week to get used to exercise. I then started on free weights 4 times
a week with an additional 1 or 2 one hour cardio sessions in the form of
power walking and running. When I started on the free weights, I consulted a
PT with the goal of toning/cutting. My regime consists of the following:
3 exercises for each muscle group
1st exercise in each group:
2x10 warm-up sets
3x8 heavy sets
1x10 warm-down (to failure)
2nd and 3rd
1x10 warm-up set
3x8 heavy sets
1x10 warm-down (to failure)
On to my question/s. I am wondering how much muscle I may have gained in the
past year given my regime, genetics, age, medical factors etc? I am 37
years old, 5'10" and when I started training I weighed 104kg (~229lbs).
Even though genetically I am a heavy build, I was overweight! I am minus a
thyroid gland and have syndrome-x (an insulin resistance which untreated,
can lead to type-2 diabetes).
As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
measurement I took. I now weigh 90kg (~198lbs). I gather I have lost more
than 14kg of fat but I'm wondering how much I have gained in muscle mass? I
guessed about 4kg. Is this ridiculous or sound about right?
Thanks in advance,
Steph.
|
|
|
|
Author: joanneDate: 12:02 24-11-06
|
|
On Nov 24, 7:57 am, "Stephan Carydakis" <steph...@netspace.net.au>
wrote:
> As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
> were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> measurement I took. I now weigh 90kg (~198lbs). I gather I have lost more
> than 14kg of fat but I'm wondering how much I have gained in muscle mass? I
> guessed about 4kg. Is this ridiculous or sound about right?
One of the better ways to track how your body composition changes is
thru knowing your bodyfat percentage. There are online calculators that
use tape measurements (they vary alot), caliper pinch tests of your fat
rolls (they may vary depending on who is doing them and how many sites
they measure), the unreliable Tanita scales (depends on time of
day/hydration levels), and hydro water dunking (the most reliable).
The main thing is to use a method consistantly and watch the bodyfat go
downwards.
Once you know what your bodyfat percentage is, you can use a simple
math formula to figure out if you have actually gained or lost muscle,
and or gained or lost bodyfat.
MULTIPLY your BODYWEIGHT by your BODYFAT% = your fat poundage
SUBTRACT that number from your BODY WEIGHT = your lean mass poundage
Then compare your before and after numbers to get lbs lost/gained
For example:
Before weight: 145lbs @ 26% bodyfat
145lbs x .26 bodyfat = 37.7 lbs fat
145 - 37.7 = 107.3 lbs lean mass
After results: 145lbs @ 18% bf
145 x .18 = 26.1 lbs fat
145 - 26.1 = 118.9 lbs lean mass
Take the fat amount from before & subtract the after amount:
37.7 - 26.1 = 11.6 lbs fat lost
Take the after amount of lean mass & subtract the before amount:
118.9 - 107.3 = 11.6 lbs muscle gained
Hope this helps!
joanne
|
|
|
|
Author: ShuteDate: 12:22 24-11-06
|
|
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
<steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
>were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
>measurement I took.
That sounds a bit absurd.
|
|
|
|
Author: EatMeDate: 21:40 24-11-06
|
|
Shute wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>
> >As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
> >were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> >measurement I took.
>
> That sounds a bit absurd.
Perhaps he measured his forearms on the first try...then, upon applying
his corrective optics with help from his mom, he measured his neck.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Author: Stephan CarydakisDate: 23:57 24-11-06
|
|
It's not! That's the fact of the matter. But they are not exactly 17. They
are more like 16.8 but hey, I'm a man...
"Shute" <Shute@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ceaem29cntpf7e78qmdp9dn0431jp7gdcc@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>
> >As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
> >were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> >measurement I took.
>
> That sounds a bit absurd.
>
|
|
|
|
Author: Stephan CarydakisDate: 00:08 25-11-06
|
|
hehe - mums arthritis ruled her out so my dad helped me measure my neck.
On a serious note, why does this sound ridiculous? Not everyone's genetics
allows them to have results like me! As my PT pointed out 9 months ago,
genetics are an overwhelming factor. After 3 months of circuit type work, I
was doing weights not that far away from where he was after years of
training. While he was not a large man, he was strong and cut to the max.
So now that your feelings are hurt does this mean you wont be attempting to
answer my questions?
"EatMe" <trollsblow@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1164422449.133844.292970@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Shute wrote:
> > On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> > <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > >As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms.
They
> > >were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> > >measurement I took.
> >
> > That sounds a bit absurd.
>
> Perhaps he measured his forearms on the first try...then, upon applying
> his corrective optics with help from his mom, he measured his neck.
>
> Just a thought.
>
|
|
|
|
Author: BullyDate: 04:14 25-11-06
|
|
Stephan Carydakis wrote:
> hehe - mums arthritis ruled her out so my dad helped me measure my
> neck.
>
> On a serious note, why does this sound ridiculous?
A gain of more than 50% over a 9 month period DOES sound a bit suspect!!!
Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure, but possibly not on the 1st?
> Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!
But, IMO, someone with good genetics would generally start out with big arms
before training them!
> As my PT pointed out 9
> months ago, genetics are an overwhelming factor. After 3 months of
> circuit type work, I was doing weights not that far away from where
> he was after years of training.
Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
depending on other variables.
> While he was not a large man, he was
> strong and cut to the max.
>
> So now that your feelings are hurt does this mean you wont be
> attempting to answer my questions?
>
>
> "EatMe" <trollsblow@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1164422449.133844.292970@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Shute wrote:
>>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
>>> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>> As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my
>>>> arms. They were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches.
>>>> That's the only measurement I took.
>>>
>>> That sounds a bit absurd.
>>
>> Perhaps he measured his forearms on the first try...then, upon
>> applying his corrective optics with help from his mom, he measured
>> his neck.
>>
>> Just a thought.
--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk
"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss
|
|
|
|
Author: PeteDate: 07:00 25-11-06
|
|
"Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
> As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms. They
> were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> measurement I took. I now weigh 90kg (~198lbs). I gather I have lost more
> than 14kg of fat but I'm wondering how much I have gained in muscle mass?
> I
> guessed about 4kg. Is this ridiculous or sound about right?
It is ridiculous.
If i gain 2 inches on my upper arms, i gain about 40 pounds all over.
Including legs.
You gained 6 inches. That means you trippled the *mass* of your upper arms.
It is not unusual that BBers that gain 6 inches on upper arms, lets say from
14 to 20 inches, gain more than 100 pounds of muscle mass...
----
Pete
|
|
|
|
Author: PeteDate: 07:05 25-11-06
|
|
"Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> schreef:
>> On a serious note, why does this sound ridiculous?
> A gain of more than 50% over a 9 month period DOES sound a bit suspect!!!
> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure, but possibly not on the
> 1st?
Its more than 50%. Its about 300%.
>> Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!
> But, IMO, someone with good genetics would generally start out with big
> arms before training them!
Not always.
Some people have an *excellent* response to resistance training, but were
skinny to begin with.
>> As my PT pointed out 9 months ago, genetics are an overwhelming factor.
>> After 3 months of
>> circuit type work, I was doing weights not that far away from where he
>> was after years of training.
> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
> depending on other variables.
If it takes 2 years to increase your strength with 20%, you are maxed out.
----
Pete
|
|
|
|
Author: Stephan CarydakisDate: 08:37 25-11-06
|
|
"Bully" <bully1@proteinbars.co.ok> wrote in message
news:4sqfscF10pfi8U1@mid.individual.net...
> Stephan Carydakis wrote:
> > hehe - mums arthritis ruled her out so my dad helped me measure my
> > neck.
> >
> > On a serious note, why does this sound ridiculous?
>
> A gain of more than 50% over a 9 month period DOES sound a bit suspect!!!
> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure, but possibly not on the
1st?
>
It may but thats the measurements! No I was not flexing on the first. 5
months ago they were over 14 inches.
> > Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!
>
> But, IMO, someone with good genetics would generally start out with big
arms
> before training them!
>
Not if you don't/have never really used them! Sitting down and typing on a
computer aint such a good bicep workout.
> > As my PT pointed out 9
> > months ago, genetics are an overwhelming factor. After 3 months of
> > circuit type work, I was doing weights not that far away from where
> > he was after years of training.
>
> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
> depending on other variables.
>
He was on the same type of regime as I am now on and he was maxing at 27.5kg
in each hand on BB bicep curls. I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was
maxing at 200 kg and I was doing 170kg. He mentioned that he probably
wouldn't get any bigger and would not see much if any increases in weights
at the stage he was at.
> > While he was not a large man, he was
> > strong and cut to the max.
> >
> > So now that your feelings are hurt does this mean you wont be
> > attempting to answer my questions?
> >
> >
> > "EatMe" <trollsblow@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:1164422449.133844.292970@h54g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >>
> >> Shute wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 02:57:35 +1100, "Stephan Carydakis"
> >>> <steph777@netspace.net.au> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my
> >>>> arms. They were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches.
> >>>> That's the only measurement I took.
> >>>
> >>> That sounds a bit absurd.
> >>
> >> Perhaps he measured his forearms on the first try...then, upon
> >> applying his corrective optics with help from his mom, he measured
> >> his neck.
> >>
> >> Just a thought.
>
> --
> Bully
> Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk
>
> "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't
> matter, and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss
>
>
|
|
|
|
Author: Stephan CarydakisDate: 08:42 25-11-06
|
|
"Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:4568306f$0$70470$dbd49001@news.wanadoo.nl...
> "Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>
> > As an indication, 9 months ago a friend suggested measuring my arms.
They
> > were 11 inches. 9 months later they are 17 inches. That's the only
> > measurement I took. I now weigh 90kg (~198lbs). I gather I have lost
more
> > than 14kg of fat but I'm wondering how much I have gained in muscle
mass?
> > I
> > guessed about 4kg. Is this ridiculous or sound about right?
>
> It is ridiculous.
>
> If i gain 2 inches on my upper arms, i gain about 40 pounds all over.
> Including legs.
>
> You gained 6 inches. That means you trippled the *mass* of your upper
arms.
>
> It is not unusual that BBers that gain 6 inches on upper arms, lets say
from
> 14 to 20 inches, gain more than 100 pounds of muscle mass...
>
> ----
> Pete
>
>
To be more accurate, it's more like 5.6 inches as they are not exactly 17
but around 16.8. And they were not exactly 11 they where 11.2 or 11.3. But
anyways, they are the facts wether you guys believe it or not. They haven't
grown in the last 3 weeks as I took the 16.8 measurement 3 weeks ago and
they are still that. The only other thing I can think of is that I was not
on creatine when I took the initial reading, but now am. I have not taken a
measurement when not on creatine. They say creatine can increase the size of
muscles due to water retention in muscle cells?
|
|
|
|
Author: PeteDate: 08:52 25-11-06
|
|
"Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
>> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
>> depending on other variables.
> He was on the same type of regime as I am now on and he was maxing at
> 27.5kg
> in each hand on BB bicep curls. I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was
> maxing at 200 kg and I was doing 170kg.
No-no-no!
A 22.5 kg DB curl and a 170kg pulldown?
No fucking way...
----
Pete
|
|
|
|
Author: Andrzej RosaDate: 09:38 25-11-06
|
|
Dnia 2006-11-25 Pete napisał(a):
> "Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>
>>> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg is
>>> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
>>> depending on other variables.
>
>> He was on the same type of regime as I am now on and he was maxing at
>> 27.5kg
>> in each hand on BB bicep curls. I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was
>> maxing at 200 kg and I was doing 170kg.
>
> No-no-no!
>
> A 22.5 kg DB curl
I can curl 10kg per side one-armed on my barbell. Right hand with good
form, left hand with no-nonsense form. I mean, that to curl it with
left hand I need to lower my shoulder a bit, but that's it.
I have virtually no biceps, too. And I do not curl (if one-armed clean
and press doesn't count).
> and a 170kg pulldown?
I guess it's a machine with some unknown leverages.
> No fucking way...
I believe him. I doubt his measurements, but I believe that he can curl
22.5 kg per side.
P.S. - Is a curl over 20 kg per side non-sucky? If so, I managed to
reach non-suckiness in a strangest way. I *never* thought that I may
turn out to be non-sucky on curls!
--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R
|
|
|
|
Author: Stephan CarydakisDate: 10:58 25-11-06
|
|
"Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl> wrote in message
news:45684ab2$0$86552$dbd4d001@news.wanadoo.nl...
> "Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>
> >> Define not far away? The difference between a 100kg bench and a 120kg
is
> >> only 20%, but might represent an additional 2 [or more] years training
> >> depending on other variables.
>
> > He was on the same type of regime as I am now on and he was maxing at
> > 27.5kg
> > in each hand on BB bicep curls. I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was
> > maxing at 200 kg and I was doing 170kg.
>
> No-no-no!
>
> A 22.5 kg DB curl and a 170kg pulldown?
>
> No fucking way...
>
> ----
> Pete
>
>
Yes-yes-yes! What is wrong with you guys??? Firstly, I was on 22.5 but I can
now get to 27.5. I still can't get passed 170kg on lat pull down. What are
you saying anyways? Are you saying that if I do 170kg lat pull down (that is
with a spotter and I cant get more than 4), that I should be doing more on
db curls? I can curl more than 27.5 but not after doing 6 sets of standing
bb curls! 27.5 is all I can manage on my 5th set of db curls.
If you are going to make statements like 'No-no-no', you need to elaborate
on what it is you mean exactly.
|
|
|
|
Author: CurtDate: 11:52 25-11-06
|
|
Stephan Carydakis wrote:
[...]
re 11-inch arms to 17-inch arms (biceps measurement?) in 9 months with
corresponding fat *loss*
> <snip> why does this sound ridiculous?
Because it's an incredible size jump, Steph. One almost impossible to
accept as truth. Ymmv.
Pictures? Visual proof would indeed help, however even photos can be
manipulated. Were you measuring the same bodypart each time? Is your
one arm withered and you measured the healthy arm the second time? Are
you Casey Viator after recovering from an industrial accident AND
creating a time machine of some sort? Are you an alien that cloned
Bruce Randall... with a twist?
http://www.americanpowerliftevolution.net/BruceRandallPage.html
Seriously, I remember reading that to gain an inch on your arm that you
need to gain between ten and fifteen pounds. You claim that you gained
SIX inches on your arm while actually losing weight? So immediately
your claim is running contrary to my perceived reality. Hey, it
happens. But are you sure you've measured correctly?
> Not everyone's genetics allows them to have results like me!
Likewise, not everyone's imagination allows them to believe the results
you claim. ;o)
> As my PT pointed out 9 months ago, genetics are
> an overwhelming factor.
(looks at 14-inch bicep)
TELL ME ABOUT IT!
> After 3 months of circuit type work, I was doing weights
> not that far away from where he was after years of
> training. While he was not a large man, he was strong
> and cut to the max.
[...]
Okay, mister genetic superior. Schuh's table is over there. Get
yourself a protein drink and introduce yourself around. Welcome to the
newsgroup. Avoid the ferns.
--
Curt
|
|
|
|
Author: PeteDate: 11:53 25-11-06
|
|
"Stephan Carydakis" <steph777@netspace.net.au> schreef:
>> No-no-no!
>> A 22.5 kg DB curl and a 170kg pulldown?
>> No fucking way...
> Yes-yes-yes! What is wrong with you guys???
Nothing.
> Firstly, I was on 22.5 but I can now get to 27.5. I still can't get passed
> 170kg on lat pull down. What are
> you saying anyways? Are you saying that if I do 170kg lat pull down (that
> is
> with a spotter and I cant get more than 4), that I should be doing more on
> db curls?
Yes.
> I can curl more than 27.5 but not after doing 6 sets of standing
> bb curls! 27.5 is all I can manage on my 5th set of db curls.
> If you are going to make statements like 'No-no-no', you need to elaborate
> on what it is you mean exactly.
I can curl about 70 kilos for 8 reps right now.
And i do pull-downs with 115 right now.
So thats about 165% of what i curl.
Most people can pull-down 150-200% of what they curl with a barbell.
You said the following;
"I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was maxing at 200 kg and I was doing
170kg."
A DB curl with 22.5 equals about 50 kilo with a barbell.
So you can triple that, and THAN some, on pulldowns ?!?!?!
No.
Your biceps are the the weak link when doing pull-downs. Even with
superhuman lattisimus development, your biceps are involved in pulling that
weight down.
BTW, you weigh 90 kilos right? But you pull down 80 kilos more. Right?
Right.
----
Pete
|
|
|
|
Author: CurtDate: 12:06 25-11-06
|
|
Bully wrote:
re a six-inch jump in biceps measurement in 9 months in addition to a
weight loss
> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure,
> but possibly not on the 1st?
Even that wouldn't account for a six-inch increase, imo.
What's the difference between your flexed and unflexed arm? Even your
untrained unflexed arm and your trained and flexed arm? Rhetorical.
Regardless, if the OP accomplished such a feat then "Bully" for him.
;o)
> But, IMO, someone with good genetics would
> generally start out with big arms before training
> them!
I tend to agree, but will offer that it's not a necessity or an
absolute. Some do "balloon" but the OP presents an incredible leap.
--
Curt
|
|
|
|
Author: ShuteDate: 12:57 25-11-06
|
|
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 17:53:14 +0100, "Pete" <phoutstra@wanadoo.nl>
wrote:
>I can curl about 70 kilos for 8 reps right now.
>
>And i do pull-downs with 115 right now.
>
>So thats about 165% of what i curl.
>
>Most people can pull-down 150-200% of what they curl with a barbell.
>
>You said the following;
>
>"I was on 22.5kg. On lat pull down he was maxing at 200 kg and I was doing
>170kg."
>
>A DB curl with 22.5 equals about 50 kilo with a barbell.
>So you can triple that, and THAN some, on pulldowns ?!?!?!
>
>No.
>
>Your biceps are the the weak link when doing pull-downs. Even with
>superhuman lattisimus development, your biceps are involved in pulling that
>weight down.
>
>BTW, you weigh 90 kilos right? But you pull down 80 kilos more. Right?
>
>Right.
Pete I worked out with a guy that could do something like this. He
weighed about 175lbs. Used about 80lbs combined for the dumbbell
curl. Then used 250lbs for the lat pulldown. Not quite as bad as
this guy but still unusual. He seemed to be better at pulling
exercises than pushing ones. His bench press was shit and only used
135lbs. I didn't really watch how he did it. Maybe he threw his
lower back into it like I see a lot of people do.
Not that I believe this guy or anything. All his numbers are way out
of proportion.
|
|
|
|
Author: ShuteDate: 12:59 25-11-06
|
|
On 25 Nov 2006 09:06:59 -0800, "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote:
>Bully wrote:
>
>re a six-inch jump in biceps measurement in 9 months in addition to a
>weight loss
>
>> Were you flexing the bicep on the 2nd measure,
>> but possibly not on the 1st?
>
>Even that wouldn't account for a six-inch increase, imo.
>
>What's the difference between your flexed and unflexed arm? Even your
>untrained unflexed arm and your trained and flexed arm? Rhetorical.
He also lost fat while gaining muscle. Which means at least some of
the original 11 inches where fat.
|
|
|
|
Author: CurtDate: 13:08 25-11-06
|
|
Pete wrote:
[...]
> It is not unusual that BBers that gain 6 inches
> on upper arms, lets say from 14 to 20 inches,
> gain more than 100 pounds of muscle mass...
Which even exceeds just slightly the 10 to 15 pounds of bodyweight
range of what's reportedly needed to be gained to achieve an increase
of one inch on a bodybuilder's biceps, fwiw.
To lose weight and gain size and size like THAT (six inches on your arm
measurement in nine months), well, this guy immediately goes to the
very top of the Those Most Hated list.
No doubt about that.
> Pete
--
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact | Fitness
|
|
|
