Getting dat 6 pack

[Kitten Mittons]

Meh, I spar so I have no desire to put myself in danger just to get a six pack. Undereating even by a couple hundred calories catches up with you over time - you can't move as freely, your can't keep your hands up, you can't throw as fast ... and you end up concussed.

I'm sure if I get extremely meticulous, it can be done but I got a life to live.

 

[Mrb1p]

Jeez, youre not getting tortured, its only a calorie deficit

 

[KapG]

I find bulking torturous myself

 

[Kitten Mittons]

Jeez, youre not getting tortured, its only a calorie deficit

Lol it is torture. I'm hungry and sore haha.

 

[kanuck87]

I find bulking torturous myself

What makes it so torturous?

 

[KapG]

What makes it so torturous?

Feel like I'm stuffing my face nonstop all day. It's a lot of work

 

[wingsnut19]

Feel like I'm stuffing my face nonstop all day. It's a lot of work

Same for me. Takes a lot of effort to make myself eat enough. My big limiting factor right now.

 

[LarKing]

Add me to the group that has the hardest time bulking as well. Eating all the time to bulk is both harder financially and time-wise. Plus, it makes me feel so bloated most of the time.

 

[aadi*]

6 pack

6 WAYS TO GET RIPPED 6 PACK ABS
RULE 1 EAT ENOUGH PROTEIN
Protein will help you build lean muscle as well as burn body fat. Out of all the macronutrients (protein, carbs, and fat) lean protein has the highest thermogenic effect on the body.
That makes it the most valuable macronutrient of all, because your body burns a ton of calories breaking it down.
RULE 2 EAT POST-WORKOUT CARBS
Most people have been falsely led to believe that carbohydrates are bad and that they will make you fat. This is definitely a myth that needs to be busted!
RULE 3 EAT HEALTHY FATS
Most people have been falsely led to believe that carbohydrates are bad and that they will make you fat. This is definitely a myth that needs to be busted!
RULE 4 FOCUS ON YOUR DIET
In order to burn fat and reveal your washboard, six pack abs, it is important to eat a balanced diet that is made up of protein, healthy fats, and some carbohydrates.
Protein helps form the building blocks of muscle and is probably the most essential macronutrient of them all, mainly because your body burns a ton of calories digesting protein.
RULE 5 STOP DOING THOUSANDS OF CRUNCHES
Compound, multi-joint, total body movements will promote more total fat loss and promote a much bigger muscle building response than crunches and sit-ups ever will.
Personally, I think that it is completely pointless to waste an hour of your time doing hundreds of useless crunches and sit-ups when that hour could be spent doing exercises that are more productive for fat loss.

 

[Mrb1p]

What is a "post workout" and how do we determine this arbitrarily defined time table.

Rule number two is mostly right but not exactly right at the same time.

 

[Mad Brills*]

leg raises > situps.

 

[CanadianPensFan1]

Same for me. Takes a lot of effort to make myself eat enough. My big limiting factor right now.

Good Christ this.

I can't possibly tell you how sick I am of eating 2700-3000 calories a day with 200g of protein. I literally mis the feeling being "hungry"

 

[Marotte Marauder]

1. Diet
2. Diet
3. Exercise to stimulate muscle growth not to destroy the muscle.
4. Genetics, some guys have 6 packs others 4 and some 8.

re hanging leg raises-they are great but be aware some people stretch/pull something around their tail bone doing them.

Best example of #4 is Boyer Coe. Obviously he knows how to do 1,2 and 3

 

[Minister of Offence]

6 WAYS TO GET RIPPED 6 PACK ABS
RULE 1 EAT ENOUGH PROTEIN
Protein will help you build lean muscle as well as burn body fat. Out of all the macronutrients (protein, carbs, and fat) lean protein has the highest thermogenic effect on the body.
That makes it the most valuable macronutrient of all, because your body burns a ton of calories breaking it down.
RULE 2 EAT POST-WORKOUT CARBS
Most people have been falsely led to believe that carbohydrates are bad and that they will make you fat. This is definitely a myth that needs to be busted!
RULE 3 EAT HEALTHY FATS
Most people have been falsely led to believe that carbohydrates are bad and that they will make you fat. This is definitely a myth that needs to be busted!
RULE 4 FOCUS ON YOUR DIET
In order to burn fat and reveal your washboard, six pack abs, it is important to eat a balanced diet that is made up of protein, healthy fats, and some carbohydrates.
Protein helps form the building blocks of muscle and is probably the most essential macronutrient of them all, mainly because your body burns a ton of calories digesting protein.
RULE 5 STOP DOING THOUSANDS OF CRUNCHES
Compound, multi-joint, total body movements will promote more total fat loss and promote a much bigger muscle building response than crunches and sit-ups ever will.
Personally, I think that it is completely pointless to waste an hour of your time doing hundreds of useless crunches and sit-ups when that hour could be spent doing exercises that are more productive for fat loss.

This isn't going to help anyone.

The bedrocks to get leaner are:

1. Calorie deficit (eat less than you burn)
-for most that's around bodyweight x9-12 assuming workouts are in order (more on that downward)

2. Maintain strength (by trying to gain it)
-this is how you know you're keeping muscle and it is training priority #1 while dieting.

3. Eat enough protein (upwards of a gram per pound of bodyweight daily)

The leaner you get the more of a game you have to play with 1 and 2 and it may really help, at that point, to add in some low intensity cardio. But when training for fat loss, priority number #1 is to spend the bulk (or even all of it) pursuing strength.

 

[Mrb1p]

This isn't going to help anyone.

The bedrocks to get leaner are:

1. Calorie deficit (eat less than you burn)
-for most that's around bodyweight x9-12 assuming workouts are in order (more on that downward)

2. Maintain strength (by trying to gain it)
-this is how you know you're keeping muscle and it is training priority #1 while dieting.

3. Eat enough protein (upwards of a gram per pound of bodyweight daily)

The leaner you get the more of a game you have to play with 1 and 2 and it may really help, at that point, to add in some low intensity cardio. But when training for fat loss, priority number #1 is to spend the bulk (or even all of it) pursuing strength.

Good guide lines, but scientific evidence show your not exactly right.

 

[Risingwind]

Good guide lines, but scientific evidence show your not exactly right.

Do you happen to have a source? I study these sorts of things so I'm always interested in reading research papers.

6 WAYS TO GET RIPPED 6 PACK ABS
RULE 1 EAT ENOUGH PROTEIN
Protein will help you build lean muscle as well as burn body fat. Out of all the macronutrients (protein, carbs, and fat) lean protein has the highest thermogenic effect on the body.
That makes it the most valuable macronutrient of all, because your body burns a ton of calories breaking it down.
RULE 2 EAT POST-WORKOUT CARBS
Most people have been falsely led to believe that carbohydrates are bad and that they will make you fat. This is definitely a myth that needs to be busted!
RULE 3 EAT HEALTHY FATS
Most people have been falsely led to believe that carbohydrates are bad and that they will make you fat. This is definitely a myth that needs to be busted!
RULE 4 FOCUS ON YOUR DIET
In order to burn fat and reveal your washboard, six pack abs, it is important to eat a balanced diet that is made up of protein, healthy fats, and some carbohydrates.
Protein helps form the building blocks of muscle and is probably the most essential macronutrient of them all, mainly because your body burns a ton of calories digesting protein.
RULE 5 STOP DOING THOUSANDS OF CRUNCHES
Compound, multi-joint, total body movements will promote more total fat loss and promote a much bigger muscle building response than crunches and sit-ups ever will.
Personally, I think that it is completely pointless to waste an hour of your time doing hundreds of useless crunches and sit-ups when that hour could be spent doing exercises that are more productive for fat loss.

Man, you're oversimplifying some things.

1. Extra protein not used to construct new tissue gets stored up with the help of insulin, and ultimately when it can't fit anywhere else, it will be stored as fat tissue. I suppose you did say "enough" in the title, but how much is that?

2. A similar issue with carbs, no matter if you eat them day or night, before or after training. The intake of protein, carbs, and fats should be enough that the body is well fed, but no more than that. Good luck trying to find that limit! The main point is that someone will misunderstand "eat carbs" as a license to pig out.

3. I'm not quite sure what you mean when combining these but I agree with the ideas on the title and the text afterwards.

4. I agree with the first part. The part about protein isn't quite that simple -- You have to actually have a workout schedule that demands a lot of protein intake before taking a lot of protein. Otherwise it will bloat your stomach and start to gather as fat if things go really bad.

5. That's good advice.

Having done abs on and off for several years, I didn't have anything resembling a sixpack until I went and dropped body fat to something around 10%. I feel obliged to say that just doing ab work and back work didn't really help with the core all that much. Pilates has been the missing link for me that finally enabled building a stronger core that can support deadlifts and squats properly (well, it's a work in progress still). It was quite eye-opening to see on the first classes how weak the deeper ab muscles were even after doing crunches, Swiss ball things, etc. over the years. If you want to lift up the visible portion of your abs, then training the deeper layers will help making them pop out.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Good guide lines, but scientific evidence show your not exactly right.

And what does the science disagree with?

There is a ton of bad science out there. It would be very very challenging to find a solid argument against what I said. Probably impossible.

Truth is, you can argue anything with science. I do this for a living and the art of breaking down complicated topics into simple foundations is, no question, paramount when getting people to actually do it.

But really, I'd be interested if you could show me something that proves:

1. A calorie deficit is not necessary for significant fat loss
2. Protein doesn't significantly enhance the bodies ability to choose fat instead of muscle
3. Strength training doesn't significantly enhance the bodies ability to choose fat instead of muscle

We can make some logical leaps on the strength training side as far as "getting weaker = losing muscle". If someone is actually trained enough for this to be a concern (if programming is at all intelligent) then we can assume the person is pretty efficient neurally. We could then assume any *real* losses to strength would be muscular.

Getting the 6 pac can be a lengthy process and tweaks usually need to be made and are best determined based on the person and their path already. But it would be very very hard to argue the foundations I provided above.

They are, essentially, the 3 most important principles for fat loss.

And yes, though it may be very hard to swallow for many..if you get calories and protein right, you don't actually have to count carbs and fats. Those will work out into normal ranges on their own. Low fat/Mod carb or low carb/Mod fat makes no difference -- the calories do.

A lot of things fall into place when you get calories and protein right. This stuff really isn't that complicated. Coaching someone through it can be.

 

[Mrb1p]

And what does the science disagree with?

There is a ton of bad science out there. It would be very very challenging to find a solid argument against what I said. Probably impossible.

Truth is, you can argue anything with science. I do this for a living and the art of breaking down complicated topics into simple foundations is, no question, paramount when getting people to actually do it.

But really, I'd be interested if you could show me something that proves:

1. A calorie deficit is not necessary for significant fat loss
2. Protein doesn't significantly enhance the bodies ability to choose fat instead of muscle
3. Strength training doesn't significantly enhance the bodies ability to choose fat instead of muscle

We can make some logical leaps on the strength training side as far as "getting weaker = losing muscle". If someone is actually trained enough for this to be a concern (if programming is at all intelligent) then we can assume the person is pretty efficient neurally. We could then assume any *real* losses to strength would be muscular.

Getting the 6 pac can be a lengthy process and tweaks usually need to be made and are best determined based on the person and their path already. But it would be very very hard to argue the foundations I provided above.

They are, essentially, the 3 most important principles for fat loss.

And yes, though it may be very hard to swallow for many..if you get calories and protein right, you don't actually have to count carbs and fats. Those will work out into normal ranges on their own. Low fat/Mod carb or low carb/Mod fat makes no difference -- the calories do.

A lot of things fall into place when you get calories and protein right. This stuff really isn't that complicated. Coaching someone through it can be.

The main problem is that your points in your first point dont exactly concord with the ones in your second posts.

Vulgarizing is fine, but you have to be certain that what you are saying still is the same thing.

Also, its not that you are "wrong", per se.

Where did you find the "1g of protein per pound"?

 

[Minister of Offence]

The main problem is that your points in your first point dont exactly concord with the ones in your second posts.

Vulgarizing is fine, but you have to be certain that what you are saying still is the same thing.

Also, its not that you are "wrong", per se.

Where did you find the "1g of protein per pound"?

Where? May have spat them off too quick but as far as I can see I said the same things twice.

Anyways not trying to be a dick but it would be very hard to argue those 3 points I made in the first post aren't all you really need. Anything is arguable but I have no idea why anyone would want to -- those 3 points makes the process very simple (and flexible). Not easy though.

There's absolutely no science that makes claim that there's anything special about 1 gram per pound -- that's just a square number that's been used - very successfully, mind you - for quite some time in bodybuilding and physique realms. And many "normal" people looking to get clean. I encourage all my clients to reach for that number if looking to get lean...it works.

The research so far has found 0.75 per pound of bodyweight but that's just because there isn't that much out there going above that. We just dont know whats optimal but we do know what works based on years and years of anecdotal evidence. Although there is some recent stuff finding additional fat loss benefits at something like 4.2 grams per kg (or something close to that). That's outrageously high and personally never advise it. Big hassle lol.

But honestly there is use in following the research but the truth is it can be very limited. The body of knowledge continues to grow though.

At the end of the day a calorie deficit creates weight loss and high protein and prioritization of strength (reps between 3-8 mostly) maintains muscle.

A lot of people, especially those formally educated, like to come in and talk about stuff like insulin and all that. But it is really ****ing cool to take note that recent research is showing us that insulin levels isnt as big a factor as once thought and people actually lose fat more effectively with more carbs (assuming calories are in the right place).

For those looking to burn off the fat, you take care of many things just putting all your eggs in managing calories and protein and letting your preferences decide how the rest shakes out.

By all means if anyone's got any question -- feel free.

Also, as an aside I did have a dietitian point out to me once that even protein can be converted to fat. I agreed with her...the body has many ways to accomplish its needs. But I also explained to her that if someone ate 400 grams of protein in a day but still ate less calories than they burned, they'd be losing fat.

The point isn't to look at all this stuff that doesn't matter in the end. Many variables do play into fat loss, but if you're not seeing fat come off it's pretty much always calorie intake that's the problem.

 

[Divine]

Do heavy deadlifts while engaging your core. Do this exclusively for your abs, don't put it in your deadlifting set and try to throw this in because it will significantly deplete your reps and you won't be able to hit either abs or lower back properly.

Deadlift a reasonable weight, I'd say around 50% of your max if you're new. Maybe less if you have a ton of strength (if you're deadlifting 500+ lbs, do around 2 plates). At the peak of your deadlift, just stand up straight... don't overarch your back, take a deep breath and flex your abs. When you flex your abs, your abs will be trying to stablize your core... with all that weight from the barbell you're holding trying to pull you down. This is by far the best ab workout for me. Your abs should be shaking, literally shaking... until you have to put it down. Then, put it down for a second and do another rep and go until failure. Continue doing this for 3-4 sets.

Another good one is the same thing with squats, where you go down around parallel and just take a deep breath and flex your abs at the bottom of the squat (parallel). Your core will try to stabilize you while the barbell on your shoulders is trying to push you down and this will again progressively tire out the abs. This one is harder to do because you need perfect (or at least very good) squat form, which most people don't have. So avoid doing this unless you know you can squat properly (depth, posture, stability).

I'd even say windshield wipers and planks are good, but they're not really mass building ab workouts like the ones above. The two above, along with any other resistance ab exercise (cable crunches) increase the mass in your abs so that when you cut, your abs are prominent. Other exercises just really burn fat and give you that skinny kid ab look, I don't even think they're that effective unless you already have abs.

These are windshield wipers by the way:
.

I don't know if I personally buy the entire 'if you lose enough weight, you'll have abs' ideology either. Yeah, maybe some people will.. but they'll have those anorexic abs. When I started lifting, I went into the gym and cut... got as lean as I could and I didn't really have any ab definition. I don't think I've ever engaged my core properly in my entire life before that. It wasn't until I started focusing on it that I noticed abs. These days I completely understand how to engage my abs, I can literally walk and engage my core and it would feel like I'm getting a semi-ab workout. Try it, try to walk and take a deep breath and flex your abs. You'll notice how your posture is more upright and you can feel yourself engaging your abs. Now, this isn't going to get you abs per se, but it shows you how to engage them which is half the battle.

This is all my anecdotal evidence, those 2 workouts at the top were the most effective for me. Oh, also... when you're doing those exercises, don't wear a lifting belt because that reduces core engagement.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Do heavy deadlifts while engaging your core. Do this exclusively for your abs, don't put it in your deadlifting set and try to throw this in because it will significantly deplete your reps and you won't be able to hit either abs or lower back properly.

Deadlift a reasonable weight, I'd say around 50% of your max if you're new. Maybe less if you have a ton of strength (if you're deadlifting 500+ lbs, do around 2 plates). At the peak of your deadlift, just stand up straight... don't overarch your back, take a deep breath and flex your abs. When you flex your abs, your abs will be trying to stablize your core... with all that weight from the barbell you're holding trying to pull you down. This is by far the best ab workout for me. Your abs should be shaking, literally shaking... until you have to put it down. Then, put it down for a second and do another rep and go until failure. Continue doing this for 3-4 sets.

Another good one is the same thing with squats, where you go down around parallel and just take a deep breath and flex your abs at the bottom of the squat (parallel). Your core will try to stabilize you while the barbell on your shoulders is trying to push you down and this will again progressively tire out the abs. This one is harder to do because you need perfect (or at least very good) squat form, which most people don't have. So avoid doing this unless you know you can squat properly (depth, posture, stability).

I'd even say windshield wipers and planks are good, but they're not really mass building ab workouts like the ones above. The two above, along with any other resistance ab exercise (cable crunches) increase the mass in your abs so that when you cut, your abs are prominent. Other exercises just really burn fat and give you that skinny kid ab look, I don't even think they're that effective unless you already have abs.

These are windshield wipers by the way:
.

I don't know if I personally buy the entire 'if you lose enough weight, you'll have abs' ideology either. Yeah, maybe some people will.. but they'll have those anorexic abs. When I started lifting, I went into the gym and cut... got as lean as I could and I didn't really have any ab definition. I don't think I've ever engaged my core properly in my entire life before that. It wasn't until I started focusing on it that I noticed abs. These days I completely understand how to engage my abs, I can literally walk and engage my core and it would feel like I'm getting a semi-ab workout. Try it, try to walk and take a deep breath and flex your abs. You'll notice how your posture is more upright and you can feel yourself engaging your abs. Now, this isn't going to get you abs per se, but it shows you how to engage them which is half the battle.

This is all my anecdotal evidence, those 2 workouts at the top were the most effective for me. Oh, also... when you're doing those exercises, don't wear a lifting belt because that reduces core engagement.

Well, whether you buy it or not doesn't change the fact that what's stopping anyone from having visible abs isn't how big their abs are, it's the fat that's hanging over it. I would hate for people to be misled.

You got as lean as you could? How lean did you get? And what did you weigh. Truth is if you're like 6'1 and weigh 150 pound you aren't holding much muscle mass and yeah your abs won't be showing much. But, even if that's the case and they're barely visible -- they're still more visible than if a layer (or 4) of fat is hanging off them.

One thing that actually really, truly, does get in the way of guys getting lean is they overestimate how much muscle mass they carry. They start losing weight, start feeling small, and then freak out and sop. And then they start bulking again. Endless cycle.

The idea that a guy that's like 5'10 would need to get to 140 to get lean is common and if that's the case, yeah, there isn't much muscle there and he won't just wanna focus on ab muscles, he'll want to focus on muscle everywhere. Being lean is still the #1 prerequisite stopping people from seeing their abs though.

 

[Divine]

Well, whether you buy it or not doesn't change the fact that what's stopping anyone from having visible abs isn't how big their abs are, it's the fat that's hanging over it. I would hate for people to be misled.

You got as lean as you could? How lean did you get? And what did you weigh. Truth is if you're like 6'1 and weigh 150 pound you aren't holding much muscle mass and yeah your abs won't be showing much. But, even if that's the case and they're barely visible -- they're still more visible than if a layer (or 4) of fat is hanging off them.

One thing that actually really, truly, does get in the way of guys getting lean is they overestimate how much muscle mass they carry. They start losing weight, start feeling small, and then freak out and sop. And then they start bulking again. Endless cycle.

The idea that a guy that's like 5'10 would need to get to 140 to get lean is common and if that's the case, yeah, there isn't much muscle there and he won't just wanna focus on ab muscles, he'll want to focus on muscle everywhere. Being lean is still the #1 prerequisite stopping people from seeing their abs though.

Maybe having 'visible' abs is possible for anyone without any muscle mass, but it's be completely detrimental to your health. I've heard both sides of the equation. Sure, anatomically... everyone has to have abdominal muscles for them to stand upright. However, to be able to visibly see them may not be possible in some people without hitting dangerous levels of body fat.

Most educated people would agree that if someone wasn't actively engaging their abdominal muscles for a the majority of their life (a sedentary lifestile), that abs would not be visible without hitting health impairing levels of body fat. Now, when people say 'just get to a low body fat percentage', I don't think they mean low enough that it's detrimental to your health. Everyone has different muscle imbalances, and for some people being low body fat (while being healthy) is not enough for abs to show (assuming you don't have much mass).

Take me for example, in regards to my story about the first time I joined the gym. I was 6'2, 160 (maybe 155, this was almost a decade ago) lbs post cut with virtually no ab visibility. I had a trainer and we measured my body fat as well, I was in the 8-9% range. I had no visible definition at that body fat percentage. The problem was, I never engaged my abs so they weren't prominent, and, like most people, the majority of my fat (at least the last bit) would be the stomach. Could I have gotten to a low enough body fat to see them? Maybe, but it would have been extremely detrimental to my health. These days, at around 195, with 11-15% body fat... my abs are all clearly visible. That's due to mass, even with fat over it they are muscular enough that they are visible.

So, while technically just getting to low enough body fat -might- work, we also might be talking about sub 7% which is detrimental to overall health (long term) and is never something you should be doing.

An example is here:

As you can see from the pictures above body fat % means how much fat you have and not how much muscle you have so for example…

You can be 10% body fat and look ripped or you could be 10% body fat and be very skinny with very little muscle mass & very little ab definition.

We need to lose this broscience ideology that everyone has abs. Yes, everyone does... but even at low body fat percentages not -everyone- can see them. I'm sure there's research on this if you look deep enough. I've had multiple people tell me the same thing. I was pretty much the same as the latter at 8-9% body fat, so I wouldn't rule it out to being a false picture either.

So yes, while technically everyone may have abs if they lost all their body fat, it's a really misleading statement. People aren't trying to get to 2% body fat to see their abs. Having visible abs at a healthy body fat percentage isn't something everyone could immediately have. Which, when someone asks "How can I get a 6 pack?", I assume they mean without having to cut to detrimental levels of body fat to have a six pack. Even that itself is debateable, I'm fairly confident there's people with 6% body fat that don't have visible ab definition. There's definitely anorexic people I've seen that have no ab definition, and I wouldn't say it's because their body fat levels are too high.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Maybe having 'visible' abs is possible for anyone without any muscle mass, but it's be completely detrimental to your health. I've heard both sides of the equation. Sure, anatomically... everyone has to have abdominal muscles for them to stand upright. However, to be able to visibly see them may not be possible in some people without hitting dangerous levels of body fat.

Yes, the more muscle mass you carry the easier it will be to have 3D abs. A lot of people trying to get lean aren't actually looking to be totally shredded though. I have no idea why anyone would want to just to be lean but have barely any muscle.

I mean yeah the health component, but also people get into this to look better naked....no one's aspiring to be the skinny guy with a 6 pack.

Most educated people would agree that if someone wasn't actively engaging their abdominal muscles for a the majority of their life (a sedentary lifestile), that abs would not be visible without hitting health impairing levels of body fat. Now, when people say 'just get to a low body fat percentage', I don't think they mean low enough that it's detrimental to your health. Everyone has different muscle imbalances, and for some people being low body fat (while being healthy) is not enough for abs to show (assuming you don't have much mass).

Absolutely. Most guys that don't have enough muscle just freak out once they start to see how "small" they're getting in their pursuit of abs.

For those that are looking to look really good with abs, there are some basic strength prerequisites that someone's gonna need before it's at all possible. These numbers aren't solid or fullproof, but 2x bodyweight deadlift, bodyweight bench for 10, and other numbers like that typically cover the muscle part. Strength numbers don't equate to muscle perfectly...but when people have a certain level of strength it usually does keep them away from the point that they'll have to look anorexic to get abs.

And if you're reading this and you think deadlifting 135 pounds is heavy or can't bench press with the 45 pound plates on the bar yet, that should be a primary focus for you. If you're somewhere around this point you can definitely build strength, some muscle and lose fat all at the same time -- if done correctly.

Take me for example, in regards to my story about the first time I joined the gym. I was 6'2, 160 (maybe 155, this was almost a decade ago) lbs post cut with virtually no ab visibility. I had a trainer and we measured my body fat as well, I was in the 8-9% range. I had no visible definition at that body fat percentage. The problem was, I never engaged my abs so they weren't prominent, and, like most people, the majority of my fat (at least the last bit) would be the stomach. Could I have gotten to a low enough body fat to see them? Maybe, but it would have been extremely detrimental to my health. These days, at around 195, with 11-15% body fat... my abs are all clearly visible. That's due to mass, even with fat over it they are muscular enough that they are visible.

So, while technically just getting to low enough body fat -might- work, we also might be talking about sub 7% which is detrimental to overall health (long term) and is never something you should be doing.

What did you use to measure body fat? You can ignore this question if it was a handheld device your trainer gave you. Or anything the gym had. Like, if it anything other than a very very expensive piece of equipment in the 1000s of dollar range than you were not 9% body fat without pretty visible abs

An example is here:

We need to lose this broscience ideology that everyone has abs. Yes, everyone does... but even at low body fat percentages not -everyone- can see them. I'm sure there's research on this if you look deep enough. I've had multiple people tell me the same thing. I was pretty much the same as the latter at 8-9% body fat, so I wouldn't rule it out to being a false picture either.

The idea that people can have too little muscle to make their abs all that visible at low body fat percentages is somewhat true. At that point, forget the abs, you should be building strength for many reasons.

So yes, while technically everyone may have abs if they lost all their body fat, it's a really misleading statement. People aren't trying to get to 2% body fat to see their abs. Having visible abs at a healthy body fat percentage isn't something everyone could immediately have. Which, when someone asks "How can I get a 6 pack?", I assume they mean without having to cut to detrimental levels of body fat to have a six pack. Even that itself is debateable, I'm fairly confident there's people with 6% body fat that don't have visible ab definition. There's definitely anorexic people I've seen that have no ab definition, and I wouldn't say it's because their body fat levels are too high.

This is very poor information. Anyone can have abs if it's approached the right way. Some may not want to do what's necessary and some may realize how pointless it is to get totally shredded. But anyone can have a visible 6 pack if it's done right

You know the picture example you showed.

The difference between left and the right is the left examples are much stronger and muscular than the right sides. Not debating that. The guy on the right finds a bare barbell heavy on the bench press...the guy on the left can bench 225 for reps. (whether that's true or not isn't the point - the point is the guy on the left is WAYYY more muscular than the guy on the right)

And yeah, the difference between the guy on the left and the guy on the right could be 2-3 years of work. You're talking like putting 20-30 pounds of muscle on is impossible. It's not -- if you put the work in.

And that's the thing man, I've had untrained guys ask me about how long it's gonna take. Getting the fat off? could be like 8,12,16,32 weeks. Depending on the person. But are you okay with being lean and 135-150 pounds (like the skinny 10% guy)? Every guy says no. Okay, so it's gonna take about 2-3 years to put on 30 pounds.

Anyone can have abs. But there are a lot of guys out there who are, unfortunately, but honestly, about 2-3 years of solid work away from carrying enough muscle muscle for it to look good.

I have a client of mine right now who's down from 200 to 172. He's not fat but he's not as lean as he wants to be. And he's only starting to see right now that if he wants to get rid of all the fat, he's gonna have to go sub 150. So far he's cool with that...and I just make sure he knows, the fun part is when you start eating more and training to build that muscle.

That's the difference.

 

[Minister of Offence]

Guys, there is some truth to what Divine is saying.

But.

Just know there are a lot of guys out there that want to get lean and think the only thing in their way is losing the fat. It's often not the only thing.

It is more uncommon than not, when it comes to the physique many many guys are after when they're in the gym, that another thing that separates you from looking good is probably anywhere from 15-35 pounds of muscle.

And actually, this is part of the reason why you've been misled in fitness marketing for so many years because a lot of those 12-16 week timeframes that supplement companies show are just out of shape guys pushing their bellies out that already have all that muscle.

And don't mistake me saying 15-35 pounds of muscle like I think you want to be a big bodybuilder...if that was the case, I'd say you'd need an extra 50-70 pounds of muscle. If you just wanna look good, like a lean actor, or athlete, you're gonna have to be blessed with muscle mass or you're gonna have to spend some time and go get it.

In the attachment I show one of my clients, who is about 5'9 and in the lean picture he's 155 pounds and in the before picture he's a little over 200. The thing to note about this guy is he was deadlifting 315, squatting 225 and benching 225...decent numbers at 155.

 

[Divine]

That's exactly what I'm saying, when someone asks "How do I get abs?", the common answer is just "get to a low body fat percentage".

While that is true to some degree, it also depends on the person. Someone who's been lifting weights for a few years will probably see his abs at a low body fat percentage, whereas someone who is walking into the gym for the first time probably won't. Saying it's all about low body fat percentage, while it being true, it doesn't paint the full picture. While basically everyone needs to be at a low body fat percentage to visibly see their abs, that doesn't mean everyone will have visible abs while lean.

I've seen the "it's all about low body fat percentage" said to people who have obviously never lifted before. While the statement itself is true, it's very unlikely that person will see abs at a low body fat percentage. That's why I mean there's more to it than just low BF, you have to actually strengthen the muscle for it to protrude.

That goes for every part of your body as well, if someone said they want their biceps to be more defined... you could say just get to a lower BF %. However, someone who's never worked out a day in their life is going to have skinny arms, and not bicep/tricep definition at low BF, yet for some reason people think abs are just there for everyone and it's all about getting to a low BF. That's all I'm saying... there's more to the picture than -just- low BF.