Is a calorie deficit detrimental to the Strength routines? - JP Fitness Forums

teiresias · 10-10-2007, 06:39 PM

I know eating for your goals is the primary motivator, but I generally hear about it talked, and written, about in terms of building mass. My question is if you'd get the same strength gains from the the strength routines if you were to have a calorie deficit in your diet like one would traditionally be doing during one of the fat loss routines.

Mainly I ask because after a few weeks off (after a somewhat catastrophic life/health event) I came back to the gym. When I'd stopped I was in the middle of Fat Loss 3, but found i just couldn't do it given my time away, and my admitted lack of concentration given the circumstances. I retreated back to Fat Loss 1, which I'm currently doing, which isn't bad I suppose since I haven't actually done FL1 before, and started at FL2 initially.

In any case, I want to move on to Strength I to follow with Hypertrophy 2, but I'm still not happy with my fat loss yet, so I'm wondering if I can continue to eat with a caloric deficit and still make the strength gains during Strength 1 that I'm hoping will aid me in H2. Or is eating at a deficit just going to stifle my progress during the Strength workouts?

Leigh P. · 10-10-2007, 11:04 PM

The short answer is that strength can be and should be gained in a deficit. Losing strength is a sign of approaching things in the wrong manner. That being said obviously your gains in strength are not going to be amazing because lacking those nutrients for repair is going to effect recovery time.

Moving from one program to another is fine. Even in a deficit many people have gained muscle from NROL hypertrophy and strength from the strength.

Personally I would also recommend going form hypertrophy to strength instead of strength to hypertrophy.

teiresias · 10-11-2007, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leigh P.

Personally I would also recommend going form hypertrophy to strength instead of strength to hypertrophy.

Really? I would have thought doing strength first would allow one the ability to use more weight during the subsequent hypertrophy program and increase mass gains? Perhaps I have it backwards, but I was definitely experiencing strength-related plateaus during Hypertrophy 1 before I was seeing mass plateaus.

Hunter · 10-12-2007, 06:36 AM

I think you have it backwards: you want to add some mass first, which will provide a good foundation for making greater gains in strength.

teiresias · 10-16-2007, 06:17 PM

Ah, then I guess I'll switch it around and move to HT2 first, but I haven't even done any of the Strength programs yet, so I'm still feeling like I should do one before going to HT2.

Hunter · 10-17-2007, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teiresias

Ah, then I guess I'll switch it around and move to HT2 first, but I haven't even done any of the Strength programs yet, so I'm still feeling like I should do one before going to HT2.

I did FL I & II, then HT I & II before doing Strength I, and when I did Strength I, I made tremendous gains. It was the most fun of all the NROL programs.

AFI82 · 10-17-2007, 12:43 PM

Hunter, I'm on HT1 right now and was planning on going to S1 next. Do you think you're gains would have been less if you had done HT2 at a later date?

Hunter · 10-18-2007, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AFI82

Hunter, I'm on HT1 right now and was planning on going to S1 next. Do you think you're gains would have been less if you had done HT2 at a later date?

If your goal is to gain strength, I think you should do HTII then Strength I. You will continue to make good gains in strength while doing HTII, and it provides a good foundation for the heavy weights to come in Strength I.

As far as your question, that's hard to answer, but I think the gains would have been less had I not done HTII first. Think about it this way: if you do HTI and HTII consecutively, that's 10-12 weeks of increasing weights done over a wide variety of high rep ranges. Then you start Strength I, and now you're doing lower rep ranges with the additional mass you've accumulated, the strengthened tendons and connective tissues, the improved core performance, and the improved nueral performance developed over the previous 3 months.

So, do you think you'll make greater strength gains after 6 weeks of building this foundation, or after 12 weeks? I know what my answer is.

Then again, I'm no expert, and this whole theory might be completely wrong,

but you asked for my opinion based on my experience, and that's what it is.

Hopefully, a real expert weighs in on your question.

AFI82 · 10-19-2007, 09:11 AM

What you're saying makes good sense. I was trying to plan not just for the next 6-8 weeks, but the next few months. I'd like to do HT2, S1, and S2, not necessarily in that order.

I couldn't decide if it would be best to do
HT1--->S1--->HT2--->S2
or
HT1--->HT2--->S1--->S2

The first seems like it would have more consistent gains at each of the strength routines. The latter seems like it would have a huge jump in S1, and then smaller increases at S2.

Hunter · 10-19-2007, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AFI82

The latter seems like it would have a huge jump in S1, and then smaller increases at S2.

The first time you do a strength program, you'll make the greatest gains, so I think that statement is true no matter which sequence you follow. Without doing a side-by-side comparison of two identical athletes following the programs in the 2 different sequences you laid out, I don't think it's possible to know which, if either, is better.

I think we're splitting hairs here...just the fact that you're doing the programs is 95% of the battle, sequence is the other 5%.