Why bulk/cut for months instead of weeks?

[RedRum OG]

Why do people do cuts or bulks in cycles of months/years instead of shorter periods like weeks? I experimented with 2 weeks bulk 1 week cut for about 6 months and progressed about the same as I had been with 4 month bulk, 2 month cut. Of course this is just one guy with a million uncontrolled factors.

Sure there is slightly less efficient use of time in that the couple days between bulk/cut are awkward and probably don't get much done. But this does not add up to many days over long term periods. It seems many people have the best results at the beginning. I am of the opinion that long cuts and bulks lead to the body changing where the end of these periods are less efficient. Possibly by hormone compensation? Even if you have AAS in the equation they don't extend that significantly longer from what I've seen. How good are gains really after 12-16 weeks.

Give me good reasons this is a dumb experiment or tell me why I'm right

 

[RedLeader]

I think that shorter bulks/cuts are better if you are serious about strength. Make strength gains on the short bulks and then hold your strength constant on the cut. It seems like most people who cut for a long time don't start to lose strength until a month or two into the cut. But that would depress me a ton if I got up to amazing numbers at the end of a long bulk and then watched it all fade away.

I also think people get caught up in the idea of bulking for the winter to stay warm and cutting for the summer.

And then there is the theory of reverse dieting and metabolic adaptation. Reverse dieting over a long period of time could allow someone to then cut at a higher caloric level, but metabolism might only adapt so fast.

 

[Serotonin101]

For bulking it would be to adhere to a higher set point of weight for the body. Hold weight longer, the easier it is to hold it as appetite and metabolism adapt to sustain it and not force feeding yourself. Longer cuts so you don't have to crash diet or spin your wheels of just eating away glycogen and not really hitting the fat stores. Generally the slower cuts for me are more sustainable and run less risk of losing lean tissue. Slower bulks add fat more slowly and also allow the body to become accustomed to its new size. A one week cut for me unless its a crash diet won't do shit for me.

 

[CFC]

Probably it's to do with several things including an unwillingness to endure constant lifestyle changes, as well as convention, and because rapid changes in LBM/bodymass are perhaps less likely to lead to long-term adaptation to new set points (as sero says above).

Plus training objectives like progressive strength gain are a pretty major part of most bodybuilder's/powerlifter's repertoires (as RL says), and it really makes it harder to get the programming right (or consistent) if you're constantly stopping and starting.

Lots of people also take time adjusting to eating more food, or cutting back calories. Ramping up your genes and all the biological systems and pathways (mTOR etc) that lead to optimised muscle growth also inevitably takes some time (which is not to say that being fully optimal is necessarily saving you time if you have to cut more fat after of course).

What I tend to do myself is a typical long duration bulk, but perform very hard cuts every other weekend (or every weekend if the fat's being stubborn or my insulin sensitivity is in the gutter).

The body seems more willing to release fat in the short-term without drastically slowing your metabolism, so you're basically tricking it, because come Monday you're shovelling food back in, and your improved insulin sensitivity appears to partition more of that excess to muscle (especially while using AAS) rather than to replenish the fat you lost. Basically you get a sweet little rebound every other week