02-10-2004, 01:00 PM #1
European Theories on the use of AAS
by hojo33 of bodybuildingforyou.com
I began BBing with a trainer from Germany. In educating me, he related to me that, in his time BBing there, European BBers were relatively without American influence. Common practice called for the use of short half-life ester injectables, the variety of which was much greater than exists today, combined with mild orals like Anavar and Winstrol and, sometimes, Dbol . Short cycles (2-4 weeks) were also the norm. Most interesting, use of test was very uncommon, and considered a horror. What was commonly used was Parabolan , what we, today, call Trenbolone . Eight week cycles were virtually unheard of, and the desire to pack on 20-40 pounds in such a short time was unthinkable. European BBers took a much more unhurried pace of growth. Young, competitive BBers were very much smaller than those found in the US, today, due to this orderly pace of growth. It was only the very rare, genetically unusual BBer who was big at a young age. Europeans simply had a different outlook and different standards.
IAN: Yes, within 5 months I was using 200 lbs for like 14 reps.
Early on, my trainer lamented the situation he found in the US: heavy dependence upon test, long halflife esters used in long cycles, gross overeating, poor estrogen suppression, acceptance of high body fat percentages, and excessive lean body mass development in short time spans. He was horrified at what he envisioned would be the long term consequences of widespread use of these practices. He was associated with IFBB pros, like Zhur, el Sonbaty, Schlierkamp, and Ruhl, while in Europe. He was well aware of the health complications associated with extreme muscularity. He kept reiterating "BBing is a sport for life".
While still a natural, I began to examine how an entire philosophy of AAS use might be developed, based upon the European experience. By the time it was appropriate for me to begin AAS, years later, I already had a plan. Initially, I quietly used myself as a lab rat. The results became quite visible, and, before too long, questions followed. My trainer asked that we work together, to develop a new way for his athletes to grow. And here we are.....
Characteristics of AAS:
There are two clearly discernable characteristics of interest to BBers. Anabolic : muscle growth/hypertrophy. and Androgenic : strength, aggression, fat burning. Most AAS possess these two characteristics in varying ratios, and in various strengths. For example, Halotestin may be seen to produce a pure androgenic response, but no anabolic response. Deca , on the other hand, will produce anabolism with no significant androgenic response. Test produces roughly a 50 percent anabolic response, and 50 percent androgenic response. Then there is strength of response. Winstrol is a moderate, pure anabolic. Anavar is a moderate, pure androgen. Trenbolone is a very powerful androgen (80 percent of total response), much more powerful than the androgenic characteristics of test. Tren 's anabolic characteristic (20 percent of total response), is weaker than that of test. And so on. I have built a complete table of response characteristics of all the AAS components we use.
"In a stunning scoop that has shaken bodybuilding to its core, we have convinced six of the current Top 20 professional bodybuilders in the world to reveal every detail of their drug and steroid regimens… What does this mean for you? Every bodybuilder who's ever stepped inside a gym has wondered what it is that separates the guys who lift for years and years (and get big, but not that big)... and the monsters that win the big professional contests. It isn't genetics that accounts for the incredible difference in size... and it isn't training or nutrition…"
Site injection and localized growth:
Time and time again, we have seen localized growth response to site injected, esterless and short halflife AAS. I no longer accept that a positive response is anecdotal. It's just too commonplace, in my own work. Consequently, we no longer waste gear in glutes and quads. We identify and then site inject any and all lagging body parts, in a rotating injection program. And we have seen some startling responses. In nearly every case, we prefer tren and an esterless AAS, for the most powerful response. There must be weak-, or non-responders, but I have yet to find any. I owe much, in this particular area, to the work of Paul Borreson.
The Oxford English dictionary defines the term somatotype as the "The physique of an individual as expressed numerically in terms of the extent to which it exhibits the characteristics of each of three extremes (the endomorph, mesomorph, and ectomorph)." So for example, a person exhibiting extreme mesomorphy might be assigned the numerical cocktail of 2-7-1. What does this mean?
Cycles are assembled by, first, determining the end response characteristics desired, and assembling components whose AAS characteristics interlock together to produce that end response with a minimum of overlap, over the cycle time span desired. Consider this cycle: Nandrolone phenylpropionate (EOD), tren (EOD), Winstrol (ED), optional Anavar (ED). I've remarked, elsewhere, on the desirability of pairing tren with Winstrol. We require the use of a pure androgen for EVERY cycle, to insure ongoing muscle definition, density, and post cycle androgenicity, so Anavar is our choice for this cycle. Here, Tren is our primary androgen, and nandrolone our primary anabolic. All of these agents are selected for their lack of water retention. All are either short acting or esterless, so that meets our requirements for site injection. And, yes, we do site inject it all. We begin by frontloading the estered injectables, up to three days before cycle day zero, and add the orals and esterless injectables at cycle day minus one. On cycle day zero, the AAS is already active, with blood levels increasing. We end the injectables and orals, suitably in advance of the end of the cycle, so that, on cycle day 15, the AAS is non-inhibitory, and HTPA recovery begins immediately. Add on 14 days further system recovery, and then a cycle can begin anew. Seven weeks, total. Over a year, this might be accomplished seven times. When HCG , and an anti-e at suitable dosage, is added to the Clomid, the HTPA may be recovered in only 2 weeks. This shortens the next cycle availability point by one week.
Yes, it's a lot of injections. And the Winstrol hurts.
What might be expected, in the way of results? Bulking, we have seen as much as 10 pounds lbm. Average is five pounds. Over a year, that's 35 pounds. You say, "Hell, I can grow that much in 8 weeks". I say, let's see how many times a year you can accomplish that, and over how many years do you think you will continue to accomplish that? We have this steady, measured growing, going on and on. My guess is that this approach, using only a modest bulking diet, rather than the typical American pig-out bulking diet, can be accomplished for years and years. Due to short cycle length and rational diet design, there is very little fat gain. No pressing need to cut. No need to look like the typical big, smooth BBer, who only looks cut once a year. Our people are lean, defined, and feel healthy, all the time. They only spend two weeks cycling, while seven (or six), clean. And, since they get normalized quickly, they can train and grow natural, more quickly, because there is none of the weeks and weeks of getting that slow AAS out of their systems. The BBer doing the typical 8 week long acting ester cycle exists for weeks in a kind of limbo, where the blood levels are not high enough for anabolism, but are still inhibitory, and he must wait all that extra time. My people are off, longer than they are on. Their bodies free of drugs, all that time.
We tend to avoid test. Not completely; just most of the time. What we found is that, anytime you use test, it magnifies the sides of whatever you use with it. Tren, used in rational dosages, is relatively free of sides, and causes fewer overall sides during cycles. We use tren, like the typical BBer uses test. With tren, you get much more response, with much lower dosages, with greater androgenic intensity. Someone once wrote that tren was "the gear of the gods". Indeed, the Europeans brought to BBing AAS, a very great gift. We do use test, but only for very specialized purposes.
We only use one type of eight week bulk cycle. That for Boldenone , which now can only be obtained in a very long halflife ester. We are working with a supplier, and are patiently awaiting him to provide us with our first esterless Boldenone. Testing will begin immediately afterwards, to develop new dosage and protocols, following which, we expect to end our use of nandrolone phenylpropionate. Too many of our clients exhibit some degree of bloat from progesterone aromatization, emerging from the nandrolone. We consider any bloat, from any origin, entirely unacceptable, on health and esthetic grounds.
Body fat gain on cycles:
Ever notice how productive of muscle a cycle usually is, during the first four weeks, and how it slows down and body fat accumulates during the second four weeks? You end up eating more in the attempt to return things to the former rate. More body fat. Finally, the whole process slows down for good. What's going on? The common explanation is that you are getting bigger, so that requires more nutrition. We say no. We say the body realizes what is going on, it exhausts and compensates, and body metabolism and developmental processes simply will no longer support this process. But you continue to eat. And that food has got no place else to go, but be turned into fat, with unproductive lbm production.
What's infinitely more interesting than Sheldon's view on somatotype permanency, is his assertion that somatotype and temperament are somehow intertwined. I'll use the example of a mesomorph's temperament because it leads to an amusing corollary involving Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Our short cycle designs, whether for 2, 3, or 4 weeks features tren, as a foundation, which is a potent fat burner, due to powerful androgenicity, and will not aromatize to estrogen. And a diet, which is clean, and appropriately sized for rational lbm gain, while minimizing conversion to fat. Later, the body is clean of AAS, and primed for most sensitive and effective response, before the cycle begins. The conversion from nutrition to muscle takes place under optimum conditions, at low body fat levels. The AAS ramp-up is swift and full, and the cycle ends before the system can desensitize and cause spillover of nutrition to body fat.
Estrogen pileup is another cause of body fat accumulation, during the typical 8 week, long halflife ester cycle. I suggest that readers visit the AE zine Issue 46, and download the blood concentration calculator from the excellent article on blood concentration of various halflife esters of AAS. Then, plug in your long halflife ester cycle components, and witness the startling blood level concentrations of what you are injecting, late in the cycle. Using the typical paltry anti-e dosages of the typical BBer, is it any wonder that, late in the cycle, estrogen levels build up out of control, and body fat follows?
Estrogen and anti-e:
It is an obsolete belief that estrogen is necessary in any cycle. Indeed, ANY amount of estrogen is BAD in any cycle! There is not one study which supports the notion. But the idea lived on in yet another obsolete notion; that water weight is good weight, in a cycle. That, water introduced into the muscle, causes increased lifts, and by lifting heavier, greater growth is obtained. The experts would purposely advise minimal amounts of anti-estrogen drugs, only to minimize the chance of gyno, but to insure lots of this, supposedly, desirable water weight. On the AE boards, I have witnessed these experts advising NO anti-e's, but only to have some Nolvadex at hand, to deal with gyno, should it appear. Not only do you end up with fake strength and fake muscle size, but, at the same time, the estrogen buildup causes high blood pressure, electrolyte imbalance, and a host of health issues. There is water buildup in the lower back to the extent that posts frequently document BBers in pain, cramps, and difficulty, attempting deads. The champions of this approach say "Oh just take some ibuprofen, and you will be just fine". Try asking your liver what it thinks about that approach. Following the cycle, the water disappears, along with the strength and size it fooled the user into believing was real muscle. This often causes depression, and chases the user into a course of creatine, to re-introduce that fake size and strength. The muscle character appears smooth, and the density is poor. When the BBer diets down, all this is lost, and the truth is seen. It's no wonder that certain other experts advise that BBers never come off AAS, so this scenario may never be exposed for what it is: a rollercoaster of reality versus water weight. I agree with them. It is not healthy to run back and forth between lost size and fullness caused by water weight. But it also is not a good thing to stay on AAS, all the time, either. This is a totally brain dead approach to AAS use. And the BBer who engages in it never attains the quality, defined physique he deserves. It's just a lot of smooth water weight and high body fat.
And body fat. Everyone should know that the presence of excess estrogen causes fat deposition. The greater and the longer the exposure to elevated levels of estrogen, the greater the body fat accumulation. Endos, listen up; stay away from any situation which creates elevated estrogen levels. Everyone, listen up; it is OBSOLETE cycle technology to enable anything but minimal levels of estrogen, at any time. Estrogen is evil, and it is NOT your friend. Using anti-e's cannot reduce estrogen to levels below which the male body cannot function properly. It requires very little estrogen to function, and no anti-e removes it all.
What to do? Begin, with an entirely different approach. Say that ANY water weight is BAD weight. That estrogen must be banished, to the fullest rational extent. And that the muscle you grow and see is, in fact, muscle, and not water. That the muscle produced will be dense and well defined. A quality physique. How, then does one obtain that increased strength, which the water provided, to enhance growth during the cycle? As stated, we first kill off the estrogen and bloat. Second, we emphasize the introduction of powerful androgens into the cycle structure. I am speaking, once again, of tren and anavar. Together, these components make you VERY strong. And with NO bloat or estrogen required. The concentrated androgenicity encourages intense, aggressive workouts, while also encouraging fat burning. It is very commonplace to observe body recompositions during such cycles. In other words, you get big and lose body fat, simultaneously. The androgenicity also produces significantly increased muscle density and definition. At cycle end, what you end up with, is the real deal. Solid muscle, growth, and increased definition. No need to rush to the nearest container of creatine to stem your losses. And that strength is yours, to keep. And no test.....
Now, go back to that blood concentration calculator, and compare the blood concentrations of the typical 75 mg EOD of tren, to what you were subjecting yourself to, with that long halflife ester cycle. No stress caused by estrogen pileup, either. Now, you tell me which alternative is better.
What do we use to suppress estrogen? Well, we formerly used Arimidex . Arimidex is now an antique for us. We use Femara. We prefer one 2.5 mg tab ED. Our clients are kept dry as a bone. We will begin to study Aromasin , in mid-September. Aromasin utilizes a different approach to Estrogen control, which promises to be even more powerful than Femara. But research indicates that IGF-1 production is not suppressed by Femara, but may, in fact, be enhanced by it. We do not see that with Aromasin. Time and experimentation will tell.
Most importantly, we keep our people on anti-e, post cycle, during the HTPA recovery process, and later. This both speeds recovery of the HTPA, as well as minimizing fat buildup, while hormone levels fluctuate wildly.
Androgenicity and quality:
BBers commonly justify their long cycles by saying that they need the long cycle to enable "consolidation". They observe that this effect only occurs late in the cycle. Why is this? It's because the androgen level of the Sustanon test, typically used, takes that long to pile up and affect the muscularity of the BBer. But what about Trenbolone? Almost without fail, users commonly report density and hardening to appear within a few weeks. Why is this? Because the androgenic response of tren is so much more powerful than that of test. You can get this response to produce quality muscle at dosages of only 75 mg EOD, in less than a month. In a Sustanon test, it takes many weeks to accumulate an immense blood concentration, to achieve the same result. It is commonplace to observe tren users burning fat, while they cycle. Sust users never report this effect. Why? Once again, the androgenic response of tren is so much greater than that of test. Intense androgenicity induces fat burning. If Anavar is added, the androgenicity effect is intensified, still further.
Ever hear of the term "muscle maturity"? It describes muscle which is dense and defined. The commonly accepted belief is that it takes years and years to acquire this muscle characteristic. But why? Because, using test, the exposure to the muscle hardening androgenicity only occurs for about two weeks in the typical long cycle. And that cycle can only be repeated a few times a year. In the tren/anavar-based short cycle, the exposure to muscle hardening androgenicity occurs for longer periods, and the cycle can be repeated many times a year. "Muscle maturity", and quality, appears with rapidity, and not with years and years. I see muscle quality in only one year of regular short cycling, which I never see in the typical long cycle BBer, unless it occurs for years. Which would you prefer?
The issue of health:
There are those who say the typical American method of cycling, using long acting ester cycles, for 8 weeks or more, and eating 7-8000 calories per day, for all that time, is no danger to health. To that, I say this: in the millions of years of human evolution, at no time, ever, has the male of our species been exposed to the barrage of hormonal, metabolic, and developmental pressure and manipulation, as occurs during the long acting ester eight week cycle. Do you really believe our bodies were engineered and evolved to deal with this attack, as well as the stress of being forced to add 20-40 pounds of lbm and body fat in this same time span, over and over, again? Don't be a fool. If you believe so, then you are whistling past the cemetery. And there are additional fools, who would have you believe that staying on this course, continuously, can do you no harm. There is currently an unprecedented, uncontrolled lab experiment, taking place all over the world, with thousands of men as lab rats. The long term outcome cannot be predicted by anyone, today. True, every single one of us will die, someday. My people and I have no intention of hastening the arrival of that inevitable day, just to look big in a coffin, as we are laid to our eternal rest. What the hell is YOUR hurry? And, what if you don't die? What if you are forced to leave your beloved sport, and spend the rest of your days, living with hypertension and heart damage due to tachycardia? And kidney damage caused by the hypertension. And still other health issue possibilities. Is this any way to live? It's a personal value judgment and risk assessment process. Step back for a moment, and re-evaluate your position and priorities.
The end game:
One other matter, which few consider. Everyone has a genetically pre-programmed maximum of lbm, which their body will support, regardless of whether you reach it via AAS. The faster you approach it, the sooner your gains will decline, no matter how much juice you cycle, and how often you cycle it. You will end up spending money, juicing larger quantities of gear, and stressing your body, for diminishing returns. Finally, you are tapped out. All the slin, growth hormone , IGF-1, and whatever else you toss at it, will never get you past that limit. In a minority of individuals, they will attain immense lbm gains, over time. The rest of us, face the remainder of our BBing careers, re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. All we accomplish is staying right where we are, until we leave the sport in frustration.
BBing is a sport for life. Why exhaust yourself and your body, in a hurry to arrive at the end of the journey, earlier than you need to? I'm 48 years old, and I look forward to growing and growing, for as long as I remain in the sport. We have a 65 year old client, who last competed 11 years ago. We did a few short cycles with him, dieted and prepped him, and he walked away with a second prize trophy, healthy and happy. Have any of you ever considered that you might still be able to lift and compete at that age? You better forget it, if all you can think of is slamming on endless pounds, today and tomorrow. Your time in BBing will either end in poor health, or the frustration of having reached your limit, and going no further.
I have presented, above, only the most basic introduction to my philosophy and approach to short cycling, and offered only a simple example out of a program which I spent years developing. I have devised an entire series of special-purpose cycles, each of which embody most, if not all, of the above principles.
The purpose of the short cycle is to employ moderate dosages of short halflife ester and esterless injectable and oral AAS, combined with moderate and healthy diet, to promote moderate stress anabolic growth, over time. This same process results in very high quality muscle production, which only increases with each cycle, and minimal health impact. It assumes a long term outlook. It is intended for the mature and rational BBer, who expects to remain in the sport for the rest of his life. If you truly love BBing, you never want to leave, and you want to keep your interest and grow, then consider how the short cycle might be what you need for your future in our beloved sport.
I want to take the time to publicly thank my very special friends and clients, who put their faith in me, and assisted me by using my protocols. Through their invaluable feedback and experience, they enabled me to refine and perfect my overall program. Without them, this all would be nothing but theory. Some are former and present members of this fine board.
And thank you, for taking the time to read all these words. I hope they help you in your journey, as BBers.
Now, let the discussion begin!!.....
02-10-2004, 01:13 PM #2
this has been gone over, and yes i completly agree with most of it. test? no thanks i dont need all that extra water in my body
02-10-2004, 02:05 PM #3Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2003
- new york
that whole article was based on one mans opinion with very little example of proof. and besides he is not going to put on 35lbs every year either!
02-10-2004, 03:17 PM #4
02-10-2004, 03:35 PM #5
02-10-2004, 03:42 PM #6Junior Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
yeh i am very interested in this article also, and does anyone have any input that has actually done cycles like this........the no test does raise a question...wont both of those products shut you hard pretty hard?
02-10-2004, 04:00 PM #7
He dosent speak for every European! Most uses test but in lower doses.
02-10-2004, 05:56 PM #8New Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Kansas City
You seem to bash long cycles and the use of "high dosage" test, but what do you think your putting your body through over the course of a year by cycling for 2 wks, then recovering for 6-7 then hitting it again, talk about hormonal imbalance. I certainly do not think your HPTA will recover from this fully, especially with such frequent "on" periods. Also, it is hard for me to see someone feeling recovered when they are cycling so frequently. For the most part, I believe many long to moderately long cylce guys follow the Time on = Time off rule and allow for proper recovery. It would seem to me that 2-3 cycle a year with moderate dosage would be better than 6 or more short cycles with constant change in hormones throughout the year--again this is my opinion....
One more thing, tren , nand phenylprop, and no test...seems to me after some time, say good bye to any sort of erection, for most guys this would play hell on sexual desire and performance---once again my opinion.......peace......
02-11-2004, 07:48 AM #9
WTF? I'm European and I sure use test up to 2500mg a week. Of course there are some bb'ers in Europe that don't like to overdo on the test, but I think you'll find these types in the US as well. No point in believing too much of this article.
02-11-2004, 07:56 AM #10
this is kind of a spin off of old school juicing...lots has been learned over the last 10 years. But test has been a foundation in steroids for a looonnnggg time with a very proven record. To each their own.
02-11-2004, 04:22 PM #11
I don't really agree with this guy either, I was just curious if any of you subscribe to this line of reasoning.
02-11-2004, 10:16 PM #12
steady blood levels = steady growth
03-04-2004, 02:27 PM #13
Im 50/50 on this article. Yes, i do beleive in test and testosterone use throughout a cycle. Do i think that test is used in an overabundance in the US? Yes i do. Test should always be a base for every cycle. 95% of the time the cycles people are doing will have an effect on their testosterone levels .
I do agree with him about high doses of test! people that do over 750mg a test a week need to know just how much there wasting. If they were to lower there amount of test and keep it at a moderate level, and spend their money on some other AS, the BBer would see more of a positive result post cycle. From experience, through stories, i know and have heard of people losing considerable amounts of weight after their cycle. Thinking about it, why? why not take just enough of the test to get that pump, to get that energy, to get that drive! and take something more effective for the long run. Something that will leave you will quality gains. Thats what its all about, isn't it? The long run! When you were 15, what did you want??? Your liscense! Everyone wanted there license to be cool! At 18 that phase ran out and driving started to suck! You had to run errands for your folks, had to pick up your sis. At 18 all you wanted to do was be 21, so you could get into bars! 21 comes and goes and your turning 23 or 24 and you realize that you will be 25 soon and that means you have 5 years before your 30!!!! OHH NO!!!!! Point is... everything changes. What you want now and what you think is cool now, won;t always be "cool" and won't always be what you want!
Take something from this article and listen to what the " big picture " is... I would remind anyone that wants to get into AS and make the effort it takes to do this, that nothing happens in a day. You should take it day by day but you are in it for the long run, waking up when your 30 and seeing positive results from where you had started to present day will be up to you. Doing it the right way or doing it the wrong way is your choice.... Lift hard bro's
04-05-2004, 08:06 AM #14
08-03-2004, 08:41 AM #15
I sort of agree with this guy my current cycle is six weeks with tren , var., deca phenylprop and of course test but test prop! by usinf short ester you can star PCT 3 to 3 days right after last injection and do pct almost in 3 weeks probalbly make a gain of 5 to 15 lbs. but lean lbs. I know a lot of guys think can achive this without AAS but maybe not solid 15 lbs. anyway I liked the article just that I like test on it! Propionate
03-23-2005, 01:09 PM #16
I want to move to Europe...where can i get roids!!!!!!!!!!!!1
03-23-2005, 01:14 PM #17
4 week runs are bs. Even though it was suggested against, I wasted the gear and tried it anyway. Remember you still have to recover about the same amount of time.
03-23-2005, 01:22 PM #18Originally Posted by Paranoid
Pretty much stopped reading after that.
03-23-2005, 01:37 PM #19Originally Posted by redmeat
03-23-2005, 01:43 PM #20
well I'm sorry it didnt work for you all but I had some success with 2 week cycles. I ran 3 of them and put on 15lbs. 15lbs for 6 weeks total on and no side affects is pretty good in my book.
I guess it depends on the person and their diet. I'm finished with them now and don't plan on running them again, just thought I'd try it for myself since that's the only way you find out anything true about gear with respect to you in the first place.
03-23-2005, 01:46 PM #21Originally Posted by symatech
03-23-2005, 01:47 PM #22New Member
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
Yeah, just a 1 guy opinion. But I did like to read it anyway.
However, I'm European and use test as a base in every cycle.
03-23-2005, 01:53 PM #23Originally Posted by Mesomorphyl
The reason I'm not going to run them again is because I used it to reach or at least come close to what I figure my natural potential is. If I wanted to get really really big I am near certain this wouldn't work. Once you hit a certain point you need big cycles to get even bigger, and I'm not interested in that. I want to be at a place where when I come off juice for good, I don't loose size.
Remember bbing is essentially lying to your body. You tell your body that you have to withstand more stress and therefore need more muscle. But your body has limits to what it can do naturally (obviously) and beyond that limit the only way to maintain muscle mass is with AAS. I don't want to be on for life. Thats just me, I know there are plenty of guys who do. Thats up to them.
EDIT: btw, I didn't follow this dudes advice. I ran prop and tren. I've also run prop and tren before I found this stuff, for I think 8 weeks and loved it until I came off. That's why I tried this
03-23-2005, 03:02 PM #24
hmm... that is an interesting read.... really made me pick my brain... I think that in the future I will try running a few cycles with VERY low test... My next one for sure as I plan on using it to recover my joints but I would welcome the low water retention because my face looks so bloated when taking Test... a TREN based cycle would be pretty hard on ya wouldn't it??? what if you only did it for 8 weeks??? I mean it makes sense that it would allow you to get much leaner.... right?
03-23-2005, 03:14 PM #25
WTF was that part about "IAN: Yes, within 5 months I was using 200 lbs for like 14 reps." I did not understand where that came from. I stopped reading after that and went with a quick scan. Seems outdated.
03-23-2005, 03:21 PM #26Originally Posted by BigJames
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)