5 weeks on 5 off

**wrestler152** · 10-28-2005, 07:49 AM

I have a buddy that runs five on five off cycles. He has been doing it for years. He only runs like 200-300 mg of test at a time. Is this a real bad idea. He says it is real stable. He has never had any sexual side effects. or anything like that. He has three kids and he's been doing this for prob about ten years or more

**Smak** · 10-28-2005, 08:12 AM

Well he's doing time on = time off, but depending on the test he's running and the duration of 5 weeks, it's quite short so he wouldn't be getting the full use out of his cycles. IMO Test needs to be run AT LEAST 10 weeks.

**Smak** · 10-28-2005, 08:13 AM

And does he do any PCT?

**BuildaBeast** · 10-28-2005, 08:15 AM

I would like to know what pct he is running. Also what type of test is he using. If he is using test e or c at 4-5 weeks he would just start to see some changes.

**shortie** · 10-28-2005, 08:16 AM

Besides, having kids is not a sign of the gear not affecting you HTPA, I have two boys and they were both concieved on cycle, higher doses and longer than 5 weeks.

He could be running prop and it prolly wouldn't be too bad, but it will still shut down the HTPA, but maybe an easier recovery than long cycles.

**anaBROLIC** · 10-28-2005, 08:47 AM

hope thats prop hes using..

**wrestler152** · 10-28-2005, 09:29 AM

no he does not do pct. Gives me all sorts of shit about it. He said in the 80's no one did it and everyone grew just fine. he also bawks at using deca alone or fina alone. He said back in the day everyone used deca with nothing else. He doesn't really ever run propinate. He was who got me started in gear. However, i am glad i found this board to further my education. He is a powerlifter and puts up many great numbers. He is in the top 100 in the country in the apf regularly. Something is working.

**shortie** · 10-28-2005, 09:32 AM

You should point out that "back in the day" Arnold was huge at 225, now he'd be a pipsqueak on stage with 290 pounders. Things change, for a reason.

**wrestler152** · 10-28-2005, 09:33 AM

good point

**magic32** · 10-28-2005, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by shortie

You should point out that "back in the day" Arnold was huge at 225, now he'd be a pipsqueak on stage with 290 pounders. Things change, for a reason.

Hey Shortie,

Don't short change the Oak babbby! He was usually 235lbs on stage, though your point is still valid, he'd be dwarfed today

...

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/pictures.html

Arnold Schwarzenegger (b. July 30, 1947) Arnold is 6' 2" and his competition weight was 235 lbs with a waist of 34". His waist-to-height ratio was 0.46 and his BMI was 30.2. In 1969 he won the Mr. Universe title and he dominated the Mr. Olympia competition from 1970 to 1975. Arnold's off-season weight was 250-260 pounds. Arnold had a long career making movies and eventually became governor of California.

Lou Ferrigno (b. Nov. 9, 1952) won his first Mr. Universe title in 1973 at age 21. He won the title a second time in 1974. Lou, who is 6'5" tall, weighed 285 pounds and had a 34" waist at the time. That corresponds to a BMI of 33.9 and a waist-to-height ratio of 0.44. Lou's off-season weight was 310-325 pounds. Lou gained notoriety for his role in the TV series "The Incredible Hulk".

M.

**shortie** · 10-28-2005, 10:48 AM

Nah, I ain't dissing the man, look at my avatar man. Arnold was IMO the greatest, and embodied far more of what I value in BBing than some of the freaks of nature we have today. But my point was that knowledge of gear and its applications has changed and the huge differences it has created in modern BBing and the founding years. Arnie is still the man, next to "The Duke" that is of course.

**magic32** · 10-28-2005, 10:54 AM

I know you're the man Shortie, just wanted you to put that extra 10lbs (Arnold at 235lbs) in your database for posterity.

Oh and the Duke was tough, but I'm an Eastwood fan myself...as you stated see the avatar...The Good, The Bad and The Ugly (Tuco, the avatar).

M.