I'd be interested to find out the answer to this. Is there any studies on this? I know naturally the first year of training I gained 20lbs of muscle using SS. The second year is cited as having the potential to gain 10-12lbs. What could you build if you took steroids? Not that I'd ever do them.
I have something of a morbid curiosity about how an enhanced (none of the bollocks, get them on Test, Tren, all the heavy stuff), untrained and underweight beginner would respond to SS:BBT, following it exactly to the letter and eating exactly how Rip suggests an underweight male should eat (GOMAD for extra calories, 3500-6000 calories daily as standard).
I suspect that we'd talking close to 15-20lbs of pure LBM within three months or so, probably no stalling whatsoever, and 2/3/4 for 5's. But YMMV.
^ dude, 250/405/455 for 5s within 3 months is not-too-uncommon for an athletic, natty 17 year old. I bet most SS coaches who coach teens see these #s with every new crop of high school athletes.
LBM is not muscle growth. Let's not start throwing around LBM to answer a question about muscle growth rate. Muscle growth is a subset of LBM.
If teen gainzzzzzzz got you down, I'd encourage you to shoot yourself with something else.
Yep. Would see a lot more if I could get guys that had a 3 month offseason. Ridiculous.
But yeah, had basketball guys weighing ~150 or less, squatting mid 3s. Never peaked but the one guy (5'7" maybe) grew up to ~180 and would have definitely squatted 4 wheels
Everyone should raise their standards.
That's in America though where high schoolers lift from the get go, do they not? Well that's the impression I get from the boards anyway. There's a big football/other sports mentality thing over in the states where high school guys feel the need to bulk up.
Over in the UK we don't have as much emphasis on all this football/wrestling/etc stuff in our schools and we certainly don't have a weights room in school (well I didn't anyway).