Post your CURRENT Calories/Macros

[ChickenRiceRepeat]

I remember when I worked with Alex azarian after working with another coach he laughed at the carb cycling diet and changed my approach and made things steady daily calories. But, he later added in 1 or 2 cheat meals a week and they were always post workout on the day I trained a weak part. Just shows how different approaches can work and even a non carb cycling coach still..when adding a bolus of calories..made sure the timing was of course on a training day and post workout.

I believe I saw one coach in a video...could have been justin or maybe skip talking about skip loading...suggested the cheat meal/cheat day/high day was on an off day. He explained why but I forget the rationale..maybe to replenish glycogen for the next days workout.

The reason behind Justin’s cheat meal on at the end of a high day was for client struggling to get in enough calories without binging, so he puts The chest meal at the end of the day when appetite is lowest. They normally wouldnt get it any more food, so the chest meal allows something more without going to wild.

Now Justin sometimes does structure cheats on off days, but this will typically (based on the plethora of research ive done into his methods as he is my favourite) only he in athletes he can not get enough calories into otherwise. He will still follow a carb cycling diet in these clients but will incorporate more days that have higher calories out of necessity.

An example of this is what he was doing with Luke Sandow not too long ago.

 

[ChickenRiceRepeat]

For maintaining insulin sensitivity and not getting fat in the offseason, better nutrient partitioning/better pumps, gives your digestive system a break, it’s a pretty common practice for alot of coaches. Looks like you’ve been around long enough to know that there’s more than one way to do things, same with training.

Well put

 

[rotinaj]

Bro, honestly, I’m not interested in studies, because those studies are not done on 120-kg bodybuilders who are running 2–3 grams of steroids, 10 IU of growth hormone, insulin, and God knows what else.

Second thing, I’m not interested in studies because what matters to me is whether something works or not. And this clearly works.

If you say this approach is wrong, then go and tell that to hundreds of bodybuilders who do exactly this, get great results, and move on.

I do believe the context, a person’s body composition(physical and pharmacological) is extremely important and throw a large portion of standard recommendations out the window.
You’re an advocate of it, and it works for you, so I’m not trying to say it outright doesn’t work.

I do however believe that research data on mechanisms is extremely important for both natural and enhanced bodybuilders to use. Ie. If we didn’t understand carbs being stored as glycogen we would have guys trying to fill out on keto.

My point wasn’t to state that carb-cycling is entirely useless, only to emphasize that applying complicated approaches to the diets of every random gym bro on test can can be a red flag in many coaches.

Applying unnecessary complexity can be a fallacious way create perceived value by a person purchasing the product(diet) because leans into the their biases of thinking “more complex is more better.”

TLDR carb cycling can work, shady coaches will overcomplicate things to keep a client, most people just need to eat & digest consistently(imo).


Plus I get flat on anything less than 300 carbs so I’ll swing on a mf who tells me to have a day lower than that

 

[ChickenRiceRepeat]

I do believe the context, a person’s body composition(physical and pharmacological) is extremely important and throw a large portion of standard recommendations out the window.
You’re an advocate of it, and it works for you, so I’m not trying to say it outright doesn’t work.

I do however believe that research data on mechanisms is extremely important for both natural and enhanced bodybuilders to use. Ie. If we didn’t understand carbs being stored as glycogen we would have guys trying to fill out on keto.

My point wasn’t to state that carb-cycling is entirely useless, only to emphasize that applying complicated approaches to the diets of every random gym bro on test can can be a red flag in many coaches.

Applying unnecessary complexity can be a fallacious way create perceived value by a person purchasing the product(diet) because leans into the their biases of thinking “more complex is more better.”

TLDR carb cycling can work, shady coaches will overcomplicate things to keep a client, most people just need to eat & digest consistently(imo).


Plus I get flat on anything less than 300 carbs so I’ll swing on a mf who tells me to have a day lower than that

Yeah I can agree with that. Since I’m a newer coach, ive actually never been able to use a complicated plan like this with a client simply because I don’t think it’s applicable to any of the clients I’ve had given their respective levels of development and commitment.

I dream of one day having clients who care enough that I can complicate their plans to what I believe is optimization.

 

[Mufasa123]

Yeah I can agree with that. Since I’m a newer coach, ive actually never been able to use a complicated plan like this with a client simply because I don’t think it’s applicable to any of the clients I’ve had given their respective levels of development and commitment.

I dream of one day having clients who care enough that I can complicate their plans to what I believe is optimization.

IMO you are coaching correctly via prioritization of the current state of a given athlete.

A good quote I like, "If you want someone to learn nothing, try to teach them everything." I'd extrapolate that to focus areas as well. Making everything a top priority at every moment is guaranteed to blow them up.

Take a raw beginner. Learning basic lifts, progression and diet are key. This gets fairly ingrained before we include other things because these are most important at the moment. A more advanced athlete already has these, so we move to 2nd order items which are invariably more important than 3rd order items. Eventually a given athlete progresses to where items that were minutia to the beginner are game changing or if major importance to an advanced lifter but only after a point where the previous items have also progressed a great amount to mastery and near exhaustion. It's also much slower progress at this point and obviously complexity increases as progress slows. It all starts out basic though and those basics aren't ever abandoned - they remain the foundation even if altered some and strengthened over time.

 

[ChickenRiceRepeat]

IMO you are coaching correctly via prioritization of the current state of a given athlete.

A good quote I like, "If you want someone to learn nothing, try to teach them everything." I'd extrapolate that to focus areas as well. Making everything a top priority at every moment is guaranteed to blow them up.

Take a raw beginner. Learning basic lifts, progression and diet are key. This gets fairly ingrained before we include other things because these are most important at the moment. A more advanced athlete already has these, so we move to 2nd order items which are invariably more important than 3rd order items. Eventually a given athlete progresses to where items that were minutia to the beginner are game changing or if major importance to an advanced lifter but only after a point where the previous items have also progressed a great amount to mastery and near exhaustion. It's also much slower progress at this point and obviously complexity increases as progress slows. It all starts out basic though and those basics aren't ever abandoned - they remain the foundation even if altered some and strengthened over time.

Thank you for your words of support and advice. It means a lot to me, I truly appreciate it.

I’m often criticized both on forums and by friends for my over complication and obsession of variables. I think if I can constrain the application of optimization to where it is applicable that it can be a good attribute in me as a coach, so what youve said helps me support that belief in myself.

 

[TEHL]

Just from the direct sources:
TD
C 600
P 240
F 40

NTD
C 300
P 240
F 40

253lbs 6' 12% dieting down atm.

 

[Mufasa123]

Thank you for your words of support and advice. It means a lot to me, I truly appreciate it.

I’m often criticized both on forums and by friends for my over complication and obsession of variables. I think if I can constrain the application of optimization to where it is applicable that it can be a good attribute in me as a coach, so what youve said helps me support that belief in myself.

A few thoughts if helpful. If this helps attributes of a good coach or advisor:

1) Knowledge and experience
2) Knowing how/when to apply given knowledge and communicating it to the athlete
3) Being able to assess and communicate to a range of athletes (both to their capabilities/physical state and mental processing style which can vary just as significantly)
4) Being conscious of own biases and limitations

I like to think narrow and communicate 3 goals at any point in time. One is non-negotiable most important thing we are trying to accomplish. Other two are highly desirable and supportive. To a beginner, say a single mom coming into holiday season, first time in the gym after learning lifts is:
1) Don't quit. Stay in the game. Perfect is enemy of the good. If you make it here for even 1 session during a week and only squat or deadlift for maintenance - you are on the path to winning even if all else fails.
2) Try to eat a good diet, given conversation focus on X/Y/Z but #1 is the most important.
3) Don't get down on yourself and overly focus on minutia or how you you think you look/feel on any given day. This is a process and takes time and investment. No one achieved a long-term goal in one or a few sessions. If you are showing up and doing something it's better than on the couch doing nothing. It's a win. Try to expand on it, but stay in game - this is how you win.

Would my advice be even remotely similar to the average member of this board? Not even close. #1 is often a 10-20+ years in. #2 is locked and down to individual factors to optimize and minutia. I'm not remotely worried about them quitting.

My advice would also change as specialization increases. If a person's goals no longer align with your areas of competence or begin to come close to your abilities and limits - refer them on or work jointly with a specialized remote coach if you can so you can also learn more if this is desirable to you.

Likewise someone's mental processing style or even specialized needs may not be good fit for you - same thing. Example of this was the old school Bulgarian OL coaching, such a coach often had one method he'd apply to a team with only a modicum of variation. A given athlete may have a lot of potential but if they don't thrive under that method, coach sends them and gets another athlete until he finds one who will. Contrast that with a recreational coach in the US - it's capitalism and you need to make everyone their best and feel good even those with less talent, often just to keep the doors open.

What worked in a communist country with state controlled athletic programs, doesn't really work in a more free society. There are positives and negatives to this. Russians and lots of eastern block countries would test at a young age and funnel kids into sports they'd likely excel at. Natural selection from there. In the US, we have former JV benchwarmers and score keepers convinced that starting their kids at 3 years old will get them a D1 scholarship and vicariously fulfill their own childhood dreams. Invariably the advantages of starting early clog the system freezing out some superior potential late starters. But eventually many early starters are left in the dust as they never had the talent and athleticism to compete in that given sport anyway despite the hopes and dreams of their parents. You can see it on the field. There are laggards and bodies floating around not doing much - and maybe top performer or two that truly stands out. Those will move on to the next level and honestly, many find themselves average or even lagging at the next level. Competitive Darwinism. Also in the US via capitalism, our strongest/fastest/most athletic athletes are focused on football or baseball. These are also potential top Olympic lifters...but there's no money behind that option and no real economic future. Hence US dominance and competitiveness has dropped in OL with the rise of more highly compensated professional sports.

Just some ideas and fun thinking on coaching and systems.