not OP but bamp

>>36835856
Read the sticky newfag

>>36835856
Any exercise burns calories, but the intensity with which you do it determines the calories burned.

>>36835856
>5 diesis of fat vs 1 diesis of fat

First faster, then slower. Yes, you can gain mass on caloric deficit (1500+ kcal) if you have enough proteins and you rest well. Yes, you can gain muscle mass on a caloric deficit. It's more difficult, but since you're probably a hambeast, it's actually very probable.

>>36835930
Many thanks.

The estimate I've heard is 0.20 pounds/wk to 0.40 pounds/wk. Would that be an accurate estimate? I've seen various estimates of my lean body weight, but it's probably around 210 pounds.

I probably qualify as a hambeast. Attempting to become a different sort of beast.

>>36836153
>lean body weight probably around 210 pounds
>lean
>210
... I doubt so. Unless you're a 6'4 powerlifter, you're very likely underestimating your bf%. Severely underestimating it.

>>36836423
I'm 6' 5'' and have a large frame. And while I'm not a power-lifter, or any sort of weight-lifter, my job involves heavy physical labor.

You could be right, though. I'm working off a formula, with no context whatsoever.

>>36836502
"Large Frame"

I always here fat guys say this, yet i've never seen proof.

hell, 5 lbs of muscle makes you look like you have a bigger frame, i can't imagine what 100+ lbs of fat can do

>>36836942
I mean I have wide shoulders and a thick chest. I doubt you are actually denying that some people have larger upper-bodies than others, regardless of muscle and body fat.

Also, I'm not disputing that I'm a fatass. If I were happy with my body, or defending my weight, I wouldn't be here.

>>36837023
my point is that your shoulders look tons wider than they actually are do to fat covering them. more than likely you have a slightly above average frame for your height