Results 41 to 80 of 89
-
11-29-2004, 10:44 AM #41Originally Posted by catabolic kid
of coarse not guy,..just kidding.
-
11-29-2004, 11:00 AM #42Originally Posted by JohnnyB
Thanks guy,..i was 99.9% set on that after months and months of research, buying products, asking questions,.and now im not to sure....back to the drawing board...thanks for you input.
-
11-29-2004, 11:11 AM #43Banned
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 2,584
Originally Posted by Pork Chop
http://67.18.108.244/showthread.php?t=130961
to see how clueless you are and what alot of the bro's here think about you.
As for body size, your pics are there as well. If your happy with that bloat and pregnant chick belly.
OK, I'm done. Let everyone get back to their thread and confine our arguments to PM's
-
11-29-2004, 11:15 AM #44
Guys lets none start a flaming thread here, we still have the no flame rule here at AR
JohnnyB
-
11-29-2004, 11:45 AM #45Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 594
Originally Posted by toolman
Bros, 'still waiting for your pics.. oh yeah, thats what i thought.Last edited by Pork Chop; 11-29-2004 at 11:57 AM.
-
11-29-2004, 12:21 PM #46Originally Posted by Pork Chop
-
11-29-2004, 12:34 PM #47Originally Posted by JohnnyB
-
11-29-2004, 12:38 PM #48Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 594
Originally Posted by DEVLDOG
-
11-29-2004, 01:13 PM #49Associate Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2004
- Posts
- 176
supposed knowledge of what old timers took
I have never heard reliable evidence of what the od time pros like Arnold and Mentzer used to take. The only quote I've ever heard from Arnold was in a pamphlet he published very early in his career, where he said he never used anabolic compounds to put on muscle, but only used a small amount while dieting to preserve muscle. Yeah right. As for Frank Zane, I've not heard him give specifics about what he took, just said in general that the use back in the day was lighter. I'm not convinced that the old time pros, especially Arnold were using as light as is listed here, although I do believe that they were more conservative in their use as far as dosage. However at the same time, I think many of these guys were on all the time, as drugs were cheap, plentiful and legal. So lower dosages but longer cycles is the same as higher dosages and shorter cycles now. Bottom line is you do need to significantly raise your hormone levels to pas genetic barriers to muscle growth. This can be done through the length of the cycle or the dose of the cycle or both.
-
11-29-2004, 02:07 PM #50Banned
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 2,584
Originally Posted by Pork Chop
-
11-29-2004, 02:33 PM #51Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 594
Originally Posted by toolman
put up or shut up.
-
11-29-2004, 02:41 PM #52Originally Posted by BASK8KACE
-
11-29-2004, 03:34 PM #53Banned
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 2,584
Originally Posted by Pork Chop
Keep our exchanges in private as JohnnyB said no flames. Out of respect for his request I am done with you in public until you give more of your incorrect advice.
-
11-29-2004, 04:11 PM #54Originally Posted by buylongterm
What was your first cycle in comparison to what you're doing now? Cut it in half how?
-
11-29-2004, 04:19 PM #55Originally Posted by Pork Chop
never mind i saw them. Do you do the high doses that you talk about so much? ill stick to the moderate ones for now if so. j/k broLast edited by Jackman; 11-29-2004 at 04:42 PM.
-
11-29-2004, 05:24 PM #56Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 594
Originally Posted by toolmanLast edited by Pork Chop; 11-29-2004 at 05:31 PM.
-
11-29-2004, 05:30 PM #57Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 594
-
11-29-2004, 05:49 PM #58Originally Posted by Cuttup
-
11-29-2004, 05:54 PM #59Originally Posted by juiceinthehood
why thank you,..I try, I try....
-
11-29-2004, 06:52 PM #60Banned
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 2,584
Originally Posted by Jackman
Porkchump you actually motivated me to step into my office john and take this picture for you. I am off gear and cold. As I am a hair away from 40, I'm very happy with my results. Though they could always use more work, you can see abs instead of the bloat you boast of. If you are truely 40 lbs heavier and the fat on your belly was due to the dbol as you imply, We would love to see the shreaded, bigger, you. Otherwise bro your shots are nothing to brag about. Neither are mine, but most definately not yours....unless you are into the staypuff marshmellow look.
Either way let's keep it peaceful.
-
11-29-2004, 07:34 PM #61Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 594
Originally Posted by toolman
I won't pick your pic apart, you did it for me. You could have sparred the excuses why you're so out of shape though. When i end my cycle, i'll buy a roll of duct tape, tape my mouth, not eat for 7 days and will count the abs. But for now while i'm on cycle -> I EAT. I don't limit my calories when i'm trying to build muscle.
I never made this a pissing contest Toolman. From the beginning you called me names, asked me to post my pic, and i did. You're only disapointed you saw 18 3/4" inch arms instead of a carbon copy of yourself.
All i ever did was give the best advice i could from first hand experience.
All you do is crap on people.
Props for putting up your pic.. but i honeslty thought you were bigger.. or at the very least big.
-
11-29-2004, 07:51 PM #62Banned
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 2,584
Originally Posted by Pork Chop
I'm 6'3", 210 and in far better shape than you my friend, so if you look better than the pics you posted with the tits and fat belly, far more than inch over your belt, I would love to see it.
Let's drop drop the insults and if I catch you giving the wrong information, I will be more friendly about it. I invite you to do the same if I am posting a fact that is not true as well. If you want to continue this arguement, as I have said many times before, do it in PM's
-
11-30-2004, 08:11 AM #63Member
- Join Date
- Sep 2003
- Posts
- 594
Originally Posted by toolman
you should say "Pork Chop if you say anything that's different than what i do or that could result in increase in muscle mass, i will call you names because nobody knows more than me".
the pic wasn't to compare who was in better shape. it was to prove the knowledge you have, when applied, amounts to skinnyness and bones; mine amounts to mass.
i'm done here.
-
11-30-2004, 12:29 PM #64VET Retired
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Location
- barbados
- Posts
- 6,251
LOL@ "porkchump" I'll have to side with Toolman on this one as i said before Pockchop need to do his reseach and use a little common sense when giving out advice. As for the debate i've decided to cut my 2nd cycle doses by more than half.
-
11-30-2004, 02:25 PM #65Banned
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 2,584
Originally Posted by Pork Chop
-
11-30-2004, 02:29 PM #66Banned
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 2,584
Originally Posted by big k.l.g
-
11-30-2004, 03:21 PM #67
toolman look **** good for near 40.
-
11-30-2004, 03:37 PM #68Banned
- Join Date
- May 2003
- Location
- USA
- Posts
- 2,584
Originally Posted by Jackman
-
11-30-2004, 07:42 PM #69Writer
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Posts
- 1,733
Originally Posted by Cuttup
-
11-30-2004, 07:58 PM #70Anabolic Member
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 2,396
Originally Posted by hooker
That's not true.
I'm not sure why you try to spin words like this. It doesn't make for a reasonable discussion.
You're a MOD here. So, your behavior is really disappointing. Not only did you at first take a really nasty approach to the discussion, you were rude in the way you interacted with me (which we discussed in PM's), and now you're completely misrepresenting my statements.
I wish you'd spend more time focusing on what people are actually writing.Last edited by BASK8KACE; 11-30-2004 at 08:16 PM.
-
11-30-2004, 08:41 PM #71Writer
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Posts
- 1,733
Well...ok...lets put it this way:
Never, in the history of Medical studies on Testosterone , has 250mgs/week shown to produce as much weight gain as 500mgs/week; Nor has a lower dose of testosterone (or nandrolone for that matter) ever produced more results (in a reputable medical study) than a higher one.
Ever.
-
11-30-2004, 08:42 PM #72Anabolic Member
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 2,396
As I stated in the other thread:
Just because you disagree with me doesn't justify your position. Nor is your advice optimal.
Despite not being concerned with how you come across, you do represent the board since you're a MOD, so it's something you should consider. Furthermore, your tactics do not encourage reasonable discussion of topics.
-
11-30-2004, 08:53 PM #73
BASK8KACE:
I posting in the other thread that never got a reply from you that it's
clear you have some really good genetics... Not everyone does I've
seen your before pis and you may say you don't have good genetics,
but it's clear to me that you look like alot of bros I know personally
and you may be one of the lucky few that grow well on low doses...
Look at me... I started growing fine on 300mg per week, but that
was over 12-13 years ago... that doesn't work anymore for me at
all and I need triple that now to see the kind of results I'm looking
for if I'm going to bother injecting myself and that is with my diet
and training in check... Everyone is different... Personally I know
you posted it before, but I'd love to see your diet and training
routine again more then just what doses you take as that is more
key to growth then anabolics alone...
-
11-30-2004, 09:03 PM #74Anabolic Member
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 2,396
Originally Posted by buff87
Do I think some of my success is genetic? Some.
Do I think most of my success comes from busting my ass in the gym and my focus on the basics (diet, rest, workout intensity)? Definitely.
BTW...you and I are not that far apart in age. I'm in my early thirties.
-
11-30-2004, 09:08 PM #75
I agree... I'm mid 30's bro... Trust me those few years make
a big difference...lol You've improved alot over the years, so
I know you work it hard in the gym and I know the diet is in
check or else there wouldn't be that type of progress....
Originally Posted by BASK8KACE
-
11-30-2004, 09:11 PM #76Anabolic Member
- Join Date
- May 2002
- Posts
- 2,396
Originally Posted by buff87
-
12-02-2004, 09:28 AM #77
yes but to take it up to 500mgs instead of 250mgs,..we say one will gain more,..but how much is water and fat,...dime for dime,..is there much difference in muscle quality here??????? which is what we are shooting for
-
12-02-2004, 10:33 AM #78VET Retired
- Join Date
- Dec 2001
- Location
- barbados
- Posts
- 6,251
I don't have the ref for the study here but the one i know of, young men were given 25, 150, 300 or 600 mg Test E WK for 20 WKs. The 600 mg group had the best results in lean muscle and strengh gains with only a negitive drop in lipids. NO ****ing way i'll be ever taking 250-300mg of total AAS intake WK but that's me.
-
12-02-2004, 12:09 PM #79Originally Posted by Cuttup
First cycle results...
http://67.18.108.244/showthread.php?t=58158
BLTLast edited by buylongterm; 12-02-2004 at 12:15 PM.
-
12-02-2004, 12:18 PM #80Originally Posted by Cuttup
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Zebol 50 - deca?
12-10-2024, 07:18 PM in ANABOLIC STEROIDS - QUESTIONS & ANSWERS