Why Do When Some People Diet, They lose a Ton of Size, Whereas Others Dont?

[NickEdge779]

Is it because they are running more gear?

I see some guys at my gym diet for competitions and they are absolutely massive when bulked up, but lookstringy and lose tons of mass when they reach contest shape. Whereas I see some guys who don't look as impressive when bulked up, but when they diet, they look absolutely insane when they reach contest shape and look twice as big.

[Jizmo]

genetics, mainly glycogen storage imo
i get absolutely tiny when cutting down, and get huge quick when bulking up again... i also usually lose/gain 15-20lbs within the first 2-3 weeks

my buddy for example doesnt lose shit when he starts to cut and doesnt gain shit when he starts to bulk (with regards to water)
he can hit test, deca, dbol and eat 1000g carbs a day (he actually does) and doenst gain more than 4-5lbs water weight
put me on that stack/diet and id look like the stay puff marshmallow within a month and gain 40lbs water

even when he gets fat he just has to lose 15lbs of pure fat and thats all the weight he loses
for me i would gain at least 15lbs of water with 15lbs fat (but id lose these 30lbs within the same timeframe)
it just makes you much more depressed quicker when cutting if youre one of these heavy weight gainers 

[heenok]

I think people who really lose tons of size during cutting are people who dont use gear lol
Also a lot of time fat perma bulkers look much bigger that they really are in clothes but without the fat you just realise how little muscle mass they actually carry.
Gear or not EVERYONE look smaller in clothes when dieted down. Shirtless however its the complete opposite.
On gear you get flat but you dont lose tissue from my experience, however without hormones then you are fucked  

[lilhawk1]

Most don't have a clue how to diet.  Also most gain nothing but bloat on a cycle and once you diet it is gone, then nothing left.  Guys that started gear as soon as they started lifting tend to lose a lot when they diet as well from what I've seen.  Guys that train like wimps, never squat, deadlift, or lift heavy lose a lot as well when they diet.  There are exceptions, but from what I've seen this stuff is common.

[dj181]

I think people who really lose tons of size during cutting are people who dont use gear lol
Also a lot of time fat perma bulkers look much bigger that they really are in clothes but without the fat you just realise how little muscle mass they actually carry.
Gear or not EVERYONE look smaller in clothes when dieted down. Shirtless however its the complete opposite.
On gear you get flat but you dont lose tissue from my experience, however without hormones then you are fucked  

the reason for this imho is because fat takes up much more space ie. volume than muscle

take 5 pounds of fat and 5 pounds of lean dry muscle tissue and put them side by side and then you'll see what i mean

i don't know the exact ratio but i'd say it's about 3 to one ie. you'd need 3 pounds of lean dry muscle tissue to take up the same amount of space that 1 pound of lard takes up

[pestosterone]

Some people use gear differently and I think it's how they genetically hold fat comfortably if I bulk I will gain weight pretty steadily non stop but some will b fat l, my friend is opposite of me he can't gain weight for shit eats a ton. He starts a good cycle and some tren he loses about 5 lbs and looks like he doubles in size mayb idk

[oni]

99% of people don't have a fucking clue what they are doing, honestly

[equipoise]

Nah they lose a ton of size because most of their size is fat tbh

[kevinf]

Nah they lose a ton of size because most of their size is fat tbh

agreed

[Qwert II]

Nah they lose a ton of size because most of their size is fat tbh

Amen!!!!!

[dj181]

size vs. "no size", which would you prefer to look like 

[Jizmo]

well i think that instagram guy is out of the ordinary when it comes to bulk/cut looks... very unusual.
EITHER his body carries fat/water in the worst way possible, because he doesnt look a single pound bigger on the left pic, actually the opposite... genetics?
OR he was simply off gym/diet/PEDs on the left pic.

imo comparison is also far from "size vs no size" but its "fat+bloated vs shredded with more actual LBM".
just compare his arms and pecs. theyre much bigger on the right pic too.

for most people its way different and they look much smaller when ripped- ofc theres some illusion of size when youre shredded but in general shredded means much smaller.

[dj181]

^^^ the funny thing his he's more than 50 pounds heavier in the "big" pic

so in the small pic he's bout 185 and in the big pic bout 240

so if he's say 5% @ 185 that puts his LBM @ 175

and let's say he's 20% @ 240 in the big pic, so that puts his LMB @ 192

yep, his arms and pecs do look bigger on the "small" pic, but i bet if you actually measured them they'd be at least one inch bigger on each arm, and maybe 4-5 inches bigger on the chest, in the big pic

but i bet that his waist is a good 12-15 inches bigger 

this sadik guy posted up photos of himself @ 233 on his intsa and he looks MUCH MUCH worse pounds 40 heavier  and again.... he looks bigger "smaller"

[Jizmo]

^^^ the funny thing his he's more than 50 pounds heavier in the "big" pic

so in the small pic he's bout 185 and in the big pic bout 240

this sadik guy posted up photos of himself @ 233 on his intsa and he looks MUCH MUCH worse pounds 40 heavier  and again.... he looks bigger "smaller"

damn, wouldnt have expected that. actually didnt expect him to be any heavier at all on the left pic.

and yeah ive seen the off season pics of sadik
he looks like a normal (albeit fucking big) gym rat, youd never expect that to be one of the best physique competitors in the world...
 funny how these physique guys only look impressive when truly shredded.
very genetic thing imo.

[dj181]

damn, wouldnt have expected that. actually didnt expect him to be any heavier at all on the left pic.

and yeah ive seen the off season pics of sadik
he looks like a normal (albeit fucking big) gym rat, youd never expect that to be one of the best physique competitors in the world...
 funny how these physique guys only look impressive when truly shredded.
very genetic thing imo.

and everybody tries to say that physique guys have no legs...

yeah right, sure thing chief

https://www.instagram.com/p/BBWSQJeruus/?taken-by=sadikhadzovic

and in this pic his legs actually outsize his upper body IMHO

https://www.instagram.com/p/BB6Bi_vLuhZ/?taken-by=sadikhadzovic

[pestosterone]

Well if u r 170 and shredded u will look badass but stay that level of mass and add 30 lbs of water and fat and u have a dad bod.  This is why physique dudes look awesome lean.

[dj181]

Well if u r 170 and shredded u will look badass but stay that level of mass and add 30 lbs of water and fat and u have a dad bod.  This is why physique dudes look awesome lean.

yeah that's true but did you see sadik's wheels?

i showed this pic of serge to my trainer and said "here is the perfect example of ideal aesthetics/proportions" and she disagreed and said "no, his legs are too small for that big back" so i ended up being in a pissed off mood for 2 or 3 days after that LOL

fuck!!! i think that i might take this shit a bit too serious 

[Jizmo]

that was the aesthetic ideal back then
moderately big legs, huge upper body

[dj181]

that was the aesthetic ideal back then
moderately big legs, huge upper body

yep, and with arms actually being bigger than shoulders, nowadays the shoulders own the arms especially when you consider that thier arms are oiled up

imo it looks best when they are bout the same size

[Jizmo]

yep, and with arms actually being bigger than shoulders, nowadays the shoulders own the arms especially when you consider that thier arms are oiled up

imo it looks best when they are bout the same size

idk, im a big fan of the huge delts... when theres a clear tie in between delts and the rest of the arm... boulder shoulders look badass imo (AS LONG AS THEYRE STILL STRIATED AND NOT BEN PAKULSKI SEO GLOBS), but ive been spending the last couple years trying anything and everything to achieve that look too. its the most outstanding feature that makes you look huge imo. other people say arms, but i always had pretty big arms and smaller delts, so my focus was there of course.

nubrets shoulders are way too tiny for my personal taste... as anyone elses delts from that era really. but as i said, that was the desired look back then. obviously nowadays pro shoulders look that way because of tons of injections, high androgens, GH, slin, SEO and whatever. nobody hat ben pakulski delts 30 years ago