aa1037

I'm 18 years old, 6'2 and about 190lbs. I've been workin out for about a year and a half. I started at about 180lbs and 10.6% body fat at about the same height, got to about 185 with 3.5% body fat, and am now at 190 with probably somewhere between 3.5-7% body fat.

I've had great strength gains in some places, and decent ones in all the rest (40lb dumbell presses, 100lb barbell curls, 245 squat, 360+ incline leg press, 135 bench - yea the bench has to get better)

However, I still look like I have "baby fat" on me. I heard that it may take up to 5 years at the gym at such a young age to get that cut look outside of when you're actually working out.

My back is nicely defined, as are my arms and my pecs are getting there. The baby fat I was talking about is in my abdominal section. I think I need to eat less in order for this to get more defined, but I have a rediculous apetite. I'm talking hungry an hour and a half after a huge meal. I basically am eating many times I'm not at class, asleep, at the gym, or playing basketball.

I guess my question is, should I continue to feed the hunger my body has or should I have restraint? I'm sure the common answer is to find a happy medium, but I'd just like to hear some other opinions.

(Currently I think I should continue to eat when I am hungry because I am so young)

Plan9Senior

3.5 %? If you were at that bodyfat percentage then you would not have any belly. Just so you know, 3.0% bodyfat isn't even enough bodyfat to sustain life, you could die . Might want to go get that tested again.

Classification - Men (% fat)
Essential Fat to live - 3-4%
Athletes - 6-13%
Fitness - 14-17%
Average - 18-25%
Obese - 25% plus

Also, you should never let yourself feel starved. You need to start eating lower GI (glycemic index) carbs if you are feeling hungry all the time. What are your typical eating habits for a normal day? Post your meals and times you eat them and somebody will be able to help you better tune your diet.

*edit: about your question on how long it takes to get that cut look. Well first you need to have a nice amount of muscle to look cut up, and that can take years to build. Creating a sculptured body takes a hell of a lot of patience, effort, and time. If it were easy to do, then 61% of America wouldn't be overweight (which is what the stats are at currently) and we would have a lot more models walking around

aa1037

Well that 3.5% was during basketball season when all I was doing was practice 3 hours a day. 3.5% is healthy for an active athlete like that. Although at that time, I did not have a whole lot of muscle.

I can see that muscle beneath my skin, it just has to come out haha.

Sleepyjack

haha, you sound exaclty like me!

Plan9 is righty about the GI though. It's interesting that, GI seems to be a "buzz word" they're now using on commercials to sell products :eeK:

Anyway, i eat a shitload as well. I don't know about eating an hour and half after a big meal though?
Sometimes you can feel hungry when you're actually thirsty, so make sure you're getting a good amount of water as well. Water helps fill up your stomach as well.

Alogside GI, fibre is another thing which sometimes make you feel fuller. Also, when eating, it's important not force it down. You should eat slowly and chew everything up as much as possible, no rushing. This is better for your digestion, because the food is already broken up really fine. Also the eating is over a slower time, so the food has more time to enter your stomach and start to make you feel "full".

I also read that the excess chewing fools the brain into thinking you're eating more than you actually are. ALthough this is physcological and i don't really hvae much validation for this
Although sometimes i chew gum and it does supress my appetiute some, so you never know.

You should always rty to eat slow and break up the food anyway. And this requires excess chewing.

So, it may not only be what your eating, but your eating habits. Maybe you're eating too quickly?

All these things have worked for me some.


And finally, you should probably stop fretting about what you look like, but moreso how you're playing baskteball.
I always find it fun to school all the pretty boys on the court with their "cool" basketball getups and other pretty boy crap, lol. Skills and ability over looks!
Tim Duncan is not flashy or speccy at all, yet he's probably (arguably) the best player in the league and then probably the world. Keep that in mind.

aa1037

Yea there is nothing I like more than taking it to those guys on the court wearin their A&F and Express basketball clothing. I def hear ya on this one. Plenty of basketball here at 'Cuse

water_boy1999

I agree with plan9 and sleepyjack. However, I am surprised that a healthy regimine of cardiovascular workouts was not recommended. You can have all the muscle in the world, but if you don't do your cardio, you are doing your body a disservice. The fat will remain there because you don't burn a ton of calories when you pump iron.

I used to be at 3.2% body fat when I was a long distance runner. I have pictures which are hilarious because I am totally shredded, but I was also like 145lbs at 5'11" my junior year in college. I did this with the dunk test and caliper test.

__________________
Doh!!!!


-Homer Simpson

Plan9Senior

Bump, good advice. Cardio is the one thing nobody should neglect.

rogue49

Most men grow in height until they are about 18,
then after that they start building mass naturally,
including shoulder width, etc...until about 28.

I was as skinny as a stick back when I was 18,
it took some time before a built up...you body is just burning everything too fast.

There are ways of gaining mass, but they are much more difficult
until you reach at least your early 20's

aa1037

thanks for all the advice guys...I'm just gonna keep doin what I'm doin...eatin a lot, workin out a lot, playin a lot of basketball. can't go wrong, really...

Sparhawk

Just some advice I've gotten from some trainers: Basketball is NOT a cardio exercise. Make sure your cardio routine gives you a *sustained* elevated heart rate.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

aa1037

Basketball is definately a cardio exercise...if you are playing horse in your driveway, it is not. 2 or 3 full court 5 on 5 games is definately a cardio workout, especially if you are moving the whole time.

Plan9Senior

Yes, it is considered Cardio, more specifically it falls under the category of High Intensity Interval Training (H.I.I.T.), which is a form of cardio that targets fatloss moreso then calorie loss.

discostu

calorie loss?

Can't say I've heard that phrase before, how is that diferentiated from fat loss?

(Sorry if this is off track)

Plan9Senior

Well, let me try and explain.

HIIT is often known as a superior fat burning method over long duration cardio. When compared to low intensity, long duration cardio (as it frequently is), HIIT wins hands down. Low intensity cardio like casual walking or jogging is never the best way to lose fat, except for beginners who are not physically prepared for higher intensity yet.

Normal long duration cardio burns the calories ONLY WHILE you are exercising whereas HIIT works well after your workout and does a better job boosting your metabolic rate. high-intensity exercise will result in greater post exercise energy expenditure and fat utilization. Meaning, you end up burning calories for hours afterwards, some believe as many as 16 hours after training. During the recovery of high-intensity exercise higher levels of free-fatty-acids can be found, or increased use of fat during the recovery period. Research has also found high-intensity exercise resulted in greater acetyl-CoA carboxylase inactivation, which in English means, an increase utilization of free-fatty-acid oxidation.

Phew... thats why I explained in simpilar terms, "it targets fat loss moreso then just calorie loss". Hope that helps clear that up

pocon1

While I'm not disagreeing with plan9, I think he is trying to read too deep into the results. Cardio for cardio's sake is a sustained heart rate level, which in the course of a basketball game is often not kept elevated enough. Now, if you are playing without subs and playing pickup, you may keep your hr high enough. But college athletes and other teams are often subbing in and out and they have some downtime. Practices of course can have much levels cardio, depending on what regimen is being utilized.
For burning calories, what you have to look at is how many are burned during exercise, and secondarily afer exercise. Yes, hiit does increase the calorie burn after exercise, but not as much as a good bout of strength training. Strength training also keeps your metabolism cooking for hours. 30 or 40 minutes of sustained aerobic exertion at a reasonably high level will burn more calories than twenty minutes of hiit. Just consider how far you can run for a good 30-40 minutes compared to a hiit 20 minute routine. calories burned is simply a measurement of energy expended, and energy expended is your bodyweight, your metabolic rate, and your distance travelled. Time is not a factor when measuring total calories burned. Time is a factor for how quickly you burn the calories and you heart rate level.
So anyway, the point is that you need to consider your goals. If you want to burn calories very quickly and train your body to deal with very high levels of lactic acid and have some cardio benefit and save time, then by all means use hiit workouts.
If you want a slightly greater cardio benefit, some more calories burned and don't mind a longer workout with less pain, use longersustained cardio exercise. Or, get the best of both worlds by varying your routine. Do 1 or 2 days of hiit, and 2 days of sustained cardio.
Oh, as far as fat loss vs calorie loss, Slightly more fat is burned when using low intensity cardio. The higher the exertion level, the more glycogen is consumed. At rest, the ratio is about 50% glycogen, 50% fat. At maximal exertion, energy is 100% glycogen. It is a sliding scale from there. So yes, long slow workouts do burn a higher proportion of fat calories, but your metabolic rate during exercise is so slow that it is not worth it. For weight loss, the overriding factor is total calories consumed. 500 calories of carbs burned off is better than 250 calories of fat burned off. In the end, you will be better off by burning more calories.

Plan9Senior

pocon1, HIIT is to be incorporated WITH moderate duration cardio. They advise to only do HIIT 3 times a week and the other 2 days to do normal cardio. I agree that you will get a better cardiovascular benefit from doing longer duration cardio, however, when fatloss is your sole goal and you are already in good shape then HIIT is the best option. You also have to take into account that longer duration cardio eats away precious muscle, and HIIT doesn't (with proper post workout meal). I'm not sure about you, but most don't want to sacrifice their muscle... but like you said, it depends on what your goals are.

P.S. I wasn't reading too much into anything, I was aswering discostu's post

pocon1

I'm not saying that hiit is not effective, but 30-40 minutes of sustained cardio a few times a week won't break down muscle. But any time you are in a calorie-deficient state, through diet, exercise, or both, you will start cannibalizing muscle. A good post-workout meal will help after any exercise. You know that only a real beginner can gain strength and muscle while losing weight, for at least a few months. The point is, go out and exercise. There is no one correct program, and plan9 and I are debating fine levels of detail that in the end make small difference to most exercisers. The bottom line is eat right, engage in resistive exercise, and do cardio.

aa1037

thanks for all the diff advice guys

Mael

okay, i've been reading mention for the last weeks about the whole cardio causing muscle catabolism, and wasn't going to say anything, but i guess i've read it one too many times.

during long duration exercise, the body will not start to breakdown muscle for energy until it's glycogen stores are nearly/entirely gone. most people never have to worry about it. a good measure i heard once was that if you run more than 35 miles a week, then you have to worry about it. marathon runners have to deal with it. and even for them, protein won't account for more than 2-15% of their total energy expenditure the entire time. these are people who are running for 3+ hours at a time.

so running for an hour is not going to have any effect on muscle mass for most people. it's an old myth. bodybuilders are probably the only ones who would have to worry about it a bit, and it wouldn't suprise me if there are other physiological reasons for that.

pocon1

Mael,
that is true if your calories are high enough. But if you are trying to cut calories, then you have to fight to protect your muscle. Running and cardio in a calorie depleted state will cost you. I did a bobdybuilding show about 5 years ago and lost about 45 lbs in 13 weeks, In that time, I went from barely being able to run, to running up to 4 miles in about 40 minutes. My strength dropped in every area. Bench press went from 225 for 8 to 185 for 8. The only things that improved were dips, pullups, and running. I could finally do 10 pullups and 8 dips with 45 lbs attached to my waist. This was at a bw of 185. According to the skinfold, I went from about 23% bf to 8.5% with about 8 lbs of muscle lost. So weight loss, by calorie and by cardio, will eventually deplete muscle. Weight gain will not occur with excessive cardio. Often, it is up to the individual to self-monitor by using these ideas and personally figure out what works for them.

Mael

^^^ okay... but if you notice i said people other than bodybuilders. most people don't drop that much weight in such a short time.