Recomping while on Novice LP?

[Spartan040]

Having read Dr. Feigenbaum's article "To Be a Beast," I'm following his dietary advice for body recomposition while I'm doing the Starting Strength novice linear progression. At 23 years old and being a 5'11 197 pound male with a 37" waist and approx. 22-23% body fat, this means I'm eating approx. 2500 calories, made up of 226 grams of protein, 246 grams of carbs, and 70 grams of fat.

How soon could I expect to stall on my lifts by doing this compared to eating at a surplus?

Since I'm a young, untrained novice, am I a prime candidate for being able to drop some fat while also building some muscle? If so, what fat loss to muscle gain ratio could I expect?

Would it be a better idea for me to go on a very slight calorie surplus (300 ish extra calories daily)? I can't do a big bulk since I have to maintain certain weight and appearance standards in the military, and I've already accumulated more body fat than I'm comfortable with.

Would it be a good idea to prevent stalling early on the lifts by having a lighter day for each of the lifts at different times in the week? I know this is usually done towards the end of LP but I thought maybe I could prevent fatigue and stalling early by incorporating it early.

Is there another program besides SS that might be less aggressive in its weight increases that will better fit my goal of recomp?

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

Spartan,

Thanks for the post. Some answers:

1) I think you're probably eating closer to 3000kCal/day to maintain your current weight. Switching to 2500 as you're planning to, I think, will likely produce a weight and waist reduction.
2) I don't think your lifts will stall sooner (or later) based on your diet.
3) Depends on your genetics and general response to training more than your age, diet, etc.
4) It would not be a good idea to gain weight. No.
5) I would not tweak LP to make it work longer by reducing training stimulus, as the reason it stops working is because the stimulus isn't great enough to drive adaptations.

I would recommend this over LP 10/10 times: https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog...-prescription/

[Spartan040]

Spartan,

Thanks for the post. Some answers:

1) I think you're probably eating closer to 3000kCal/day to maintain your current weight. Switching to 2500 as you're planning to, I think, will likely produce a weight and waist reduction.
2) I don't think your lifts will stall sooner (or later) based on your diet.
3) Depends on your genetics and general response to training more than your age, diet, etc.
4) It would not be a good idea to gain weight. No.
5) I would not tweak LP to make it work longer by reducing training stimulus, as the reason it stops working is because the stimulus isn't great enough to drive adaptations.

I would recommend this over LP 10/10 times: https://www.barbellmedicine.com/blog...-prescription/

Something odd has happened to me since this time that I asked this question. I've gone up in weight to about 203-204 even though I've been 80% compliant with sticking to 2500 calories a day (I've had a couple binge days that I'm not proud of). Maybe that's due to the creatine I started taking again in PeriRx, but I only take that 3-4 times a week. My waist measurement has not changed, it's still at 37 ish.

I've seen you recommend that program over LP before but I'm curious why, what about it makes it superior? Is it more sustainable over the long term? Is it easier to be compliant with for beginners since it's less aggressive, and more varied and flexible? Or is there something inherently superior to the programming?

[Jordan Feigenbaum]

Spartan,

Thanks for the reply. It is likely that you're consuming more calories than 2500/day on average, which is why your weight has gone up.

LP is an inferior program due to the following:

1) It is hyperspecialized with respect to rep ranges, as the program is only 5's. This limits strength improvement, which is force production measured in a specific context, in other domains, e.g. lower or higher rep ranges- which are each associated with their own unique adaptations. We should be striving to build a large base of development, not focusing on rapid improvements in performance on a restricted set of tasks.

2) It is hyperspecialized with respect to exercise variation, as the program only has a few exercises. This increases the time to skill mastery, e.g. the motor learning of how to move and build efficiency in movement. It also predisposes to overuse injury.

3) No autoregulation tends to increase risk of injury.

4) Relatively low adherence rate despite how "simple" it is (<2%)

5) No conditioning to accompany the program and community recommends against doing cardio to not limit your "gains".

I could go on. The program is not something I would advise if given a choice. On the other hand, if it gets people into resistance training, that's cool...it's not going to last long anyway unless they get sucked into the belief that NeArLy EvErYoNe iS a NoViCe.