View Single Post
Old 01-17-2013, 09:17 PM   #18
jdmalm123
Less is More
Max Brawn
Points: 13,158, Level: 74 Points: 13,158, Level: 74 Points: 13,158, Level: 74
Activity: 1% Activity: 1% Activity: 1%
 
jdmalm123's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,883
Training Exp: not enough
Training Type: Powerbuilding
Fav Exercise: All of 'em
Fav Supp: Milk shake
Reputation: 405098
jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!jdmalm123 is one with Crom!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soldier View Post
I can see that type of volume working well to burn cals and maintain size, but I'd be concerned with loss of strength with no sets under 10.

I'm interested in what you guys are saying. I'm currently planning my training for an upcoming cut where maintaining strength will be a major goal.
From what I've read and tried (a little), you can drop volume and keep weights heavy to maintain strength.

Steve is going to have to find a good balance because you don't want to keep dialing back intensity as you lower food or your net calories might basically break even....

Hypothetical example:

3000 kcals ingested - 3200 kcals burned lifting heavy = 200 kcal deficit

2000 kcals ingested - 2200 kcals burned lifting light/moderate = 200 kcal deficit

You could sacrifice strength for an almost meaningless change in calorie exchange...
__________________
Balance
jdmalm123 is offline   Reply With Quote