Results 41 to 54 of 54
Thread: short cycles/ long cycles
-
01-03-2006, 12:04 PM #41Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Posts
- 924
I guess it makes sense being on for only 3-4 weeks will certainly make recovery much easier than being shutdown for 12-16 weeks, how much time is advised between these short high dose cyles.
-
01-03-2006, 12:16 PM #42Originally Posted by j martini
-
01-03-2006, 12:25 PM #43Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2005
- Posts
- 924
Sounds good insulin would be a useful addition. After my contest in march i will try a 30 day high dose blitz cycle. During that time my body will be ready for growth and in a very anabolic state after a hard 12 week diet. I can imagine this approach of high dose during this time will work extremely well.
-
01-03-2006, 12:29 PM #44Originally Posted by j martini
-
01-03-2006, 02:28 PM #45Originally Posted by marcus300
-
01-03-2006, 02:49 PM #46
Well i wish i had more experience but this is my first cycle, in the first month i gained 27 lbs i'm on week 7 right now and i'm only up 3 lbs in the last two weeks 30 total. I've been VERY strict with my diet/training/sleep but i'm think of cutting this 12 weeker short and starting pct, only problem is i'm 1 week into the ANAVARpart of the cycle, so that would pretty m,uch be a waste
-
01-04-2006, 02:46 AM #47Originally Posted by Warrior
The heavy short type of cycling is ONLY for the advanced bodybuilder who has reached his full potential and is struggling to build new muscle tissue, as the user gets older it gets harder to keep gaining and more and higher dosages are required, recovery is a distant memory and its a roller coaster ride of highs and lows with our emotions, this method is a far safer way to cycle in the long run, you recover, you build new muscle tissue, and you dont have to keep increasing the dose, and it pushes you past a sticking point to new growth,
also this method can be designed to any user at any stage, cycles are designed to the history and cycle experience, Dorian,Nasser and many more have all said in interviews that this type of cycling they prefered, we should never dismiss anything, why eventually should we keeping increasing the dose or bridging just to feel or get something from our cycling when there is other methods what will work without doing the above? Do we all want to start H.R.T sooner?..
Its not new its been around for years
Its worth trying then you can say it worked or didnt work
Its used at top level with all the other methods of cycling
Am not giving medical advice dont know were you got that from!! all am saying its worth a try then you can decide if its for you or not, in Europe its widely used and well rated, ive been in contact via PM's with alot of the most knowledgeable ones on this site who have heard about it and are going to try it, then hopefully you will all get some feedback on this methods instead of a select few, how can you get more info if you dont try it or learn about it, experience is priceless when we are introducing chemicals to the body,
I do value our discussion Warrior and i feel you are getting slightly more open minded with the idea...all the best
-
01-04-2006, 05:45 AM #48
It's "new" to many of the people reading this forum. I am not going to argue about everything I type with you. You seem pretty deffensive about people wanting to criticize it - I just had to say I am happy to see people be critical about it... for all we know, someone could come on to AR and share a radical idea only to see if there are enough Internet dummies to follow the leader... like lemmings dropping off the cliff...
Again, this type of cycling is interesting... I have not stumbled on it in my research and I would like to know where I can read more on it - and I am sure many others would as well. Has it been written in any current publications (books, magazines), if so - what authors xan I search for? Any good online reads about this?
-
01-04-2006, 06:22 AM #49Originally Posted by Warrior
i do share your view on follow the leader on theses types of sites, there are a few who just say what the rest of the bb"s say or do and before you know it everyone is saying the same thing,which isnt always the best for the indivdual or correct,
If you do a search on Borreson"s work or buy his books the ones i know of are The Stack and Anabolic Edge he also has videos which he as done around the world on training/dieting/ pharmaclogy if you search you will find, also L Rea mentions Paul's work in some his articles and people say he followed alot of what he said,
like ive said previous i value your intrest WarriorLast edited by marcus300; 01-04-2006 at 08:14 AM.
-
12-21-2006, 08:15 PM #50New Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Posts
- 5
Hey marcus, i believe that the 2 weeker cycles are a good idea, i have a couple questions for you that could help me out. what are a good choice of stacks/combos to use, and what dosages would be ideal?(i know it depends on a million things) but if you normally do 250 mg's a week is there a rule of thumb to follow like double or triple what you would take in a 4-6 week cycle? amd with the 2 weeker would you recomend PCT?
-
12-22-2006, 03:57 PM #51Anabolic Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 2,355
i was wondering if i can use the same idea of cycling but at lower doses to suit my history,i was thinking of sustanon ,dbols or anadrol and maybe some winny and slin ...i am really interested of running a cycle or 2 and seeing how it works for me cause i do believe i may respond a lot better using this type of cycling...thanks in advance marcus..
-
12-22-2006, 05:27 PM #52
Very interesting, Ive been following these short cycle threads now for a few days. Is HCG necassary, due to the short cycle length?
-
12-23-2006, 04:58 PM #53Anabolic Member
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 2,355
Originally Posted by fitguy
-
12-24-2006, 01:49 AM #54
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