BF 15% or less precycle?

**LmbrJak** · 06-16-2006, 10:13 PM

What are the benefits to being 15% BF or less.

What are the drawbacks if you are closer to say 18%,other than an increase in sides?

**Bigmax** · 06-16-2006, 10:16 PM

Draw back is more estrogen...you want to be at the lowest BF% you can be...preferably 9% and under....read pinnacles thread.Idle thoughts by maen mr.pinnacle.

**guest589745** · 06-16-2006, 11:31 PM

Benefits? You will look leaner. More than likely, people with low BF% are in better cardiovascular condition which plays a role in general health. Again, this is just a general idea IMO.

Well it depends on goals too. I am 18%bf and have had no problems gaining with legit aas. Cardiovascular condition is the real issue. As far as more sides with a higher bf%, I believe fat cells contain both androgen and estrogen receptors so take that into consideration. Take powerlifters for example, do they wait to get to a certain BF%? Not some or even a lot really, and they are big and strong as hell.

**guest589745** · 06-16-2006, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by Bigmax

Draw back is more estrogen...you want to be at the lowest BF% you can be...preferably 9% and under....read pinnacles thread.Idle thoughts by maen mr.pinnacle.

This is why AI/SERMs are administered.

**C_Bino** · 06-16-2006, 11:44 PM

I would say the things to worry about most are like Skull said cardiovascular. AAS are known to negatively effect cholesterol, lipids and your heart in general...not to mention hypertension. Being at a higher bf% you are at a higher risk to naturally have high blood pressure, increased cholesterol levels and your cardiovascular system is already working harder.

Also just for estrogenic sides there are issues. Gyno is going to be more prevelant and water retention higher as well. Plus just the simple fact that gains are much more easily monitored when you can easily see your muscles.

**guest589745** · 06-16-2006, 11:48 PM

Originally Posted by C_Bino

Also just for estrogenic sides there are issues. Gyno is going to be more prevelant and water retention higher as well. .

Now like I said, doesnt an anti e help this tremendously and more than likely eliminate this problem with the proper diet/anti e dose?

Originally Posted by C_Bino

Plus just the simple fact that gains are much more easily monitored when you can easily see your muscles.

I agree. Makes it easier to see.

**topvega** · 06-16-2006, 11:51 PM

Originally Posted by C_Bino

I would say the things to worry about most are like Skull said cardiovascular. AAS are known to negatively effect cholesterol, lipids and your heart in general...not to mention hypertension. Being at a higher bf% you are at a higher risk to naturally have high blood pressure, increased cholesterol levels and your cardiovascular system is already working harder.

Also just for estrogenic sides there are issues. Gyno is going to be more prevelant and water retention higher as well. Plus just the simple fact that gains are much more easily monitored when you can easily see your muscles.

This is better than what I wld have said... I wld have said... " so you can see your muscles grow..." Really though, when I was alot leaner this last cycle I really cld see a difference every cpl weeks... It was pretty much boner material at the gym every two weeks or so.... nothing like seeing progress......

**C_Bino** · 06-16-2006, 11:53 PM

Originally Posted by Skullsmasher

Now like I said, doesnt an anti e help this tremendously and more than likely eliminate this problem with the proper diet/anti e dose?

Oh ya, I mean no doubt anti-e's come into play and there are many different aspects to this. I was merely listing out some possible problems.

I mean the lower your bf% the less you need to rely on anti-e's (in most cases). And I always think the less drugs I have to take the better. Its the old "well to fix a drug problem just take another drug" idea.

But by all means you are correct my friend.

**C_Bino** · 06-16-2006, 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by topvega

This is better than what I wld have said... I wld have said... " so you can see your muscles grow..." Really though, when I was alot leaner this last cycle I really cld see a difference every cpl weeks... It was pretty much boner material at the gym every two weeks or so.... nothing like seeing progress......

Oh ya man, a high bf% really renders some AAs useless in a way. Imagine running primo or masteron at a high bf%. Even EQ I mean you are not gonna see that vascularity you love...and in your case the vascularity that gives you boners in the gym. LMAO, that was f'n hilarious man. I was laughin at your post for a while.

**guest589745** · 06-16-2006, 11:58 PM

Thanks bino.

**topvega** · 06-16-2006, 11:58 PM

Originally Posted by C_Bino

Oh ya man, a high bf% really renders some AAs useless in a way. Imagine running primo or masteron at a high bf%. Even EQ I mean you are not gonna see that vascularity you love...and in your case the vascularity that gives you boners in the gym. LMAO, that was f'n hilarious man. I was laughin at your post for a while.

Hahaha... I sure hope it's not gay to get turned on by yourself at the gym....?? (not that there is anything wrong with that).....lol
If it is I guess I shld be playing candle light piano in a Liberace tribute band........lol

**C_Bino** · 06-17-2006, 12:17 AM

Originally Posted by topvega

Hahaha... I sure hope it's not gay to get turned on by yourself at the gym....?? (not that there is anything wrong with that).....lol
If it is I guess I shld be playing candle light piano in a Liberace tribute band........lol

Your hilarious man holy shit, that had me cracking up.

Originally Posted by Skullsmasher

Thanks bino.

Anytime big guy.

**tvd220** · 06-17-2006, 12:26 AM

yea i think this is not talked about enough here. (not the boners, the low bf)

I should have started with a lower body fat, because you are usually going to gain extra fat with muscle on a cycle.

**LmbrJak** · 06-17-2006, 01:55 PM

Thanks guys I didnt expect to get that good of a response, 18% BF I can live with knowing what to expect and how to deal with it.

Now Ill post my cycle straight away.

**Pinnacle** · 06-17-2006, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by LmbrJak

Thanks guys I didnt expect to get that good of a response, 18% BF I can live with knowing what to expect and how to deal with it.

.

Don't expect alot bro.The higher the BF the higher the chances of estrogen soaring.And anti's can help a little,just a little though.When estrogen levels soar it SUPRESSES bio-available TESTOSTERONE !

I disagree with skullcrusher on his statement in regards to powerlifters.They are big alright...big and fat.Not muscluar...Big differnce.You don't have to have alot of muscle to be strong.If you think that,you've been dipping in the sauce way too much.Sober up and get back to me.

Anyway,I have no time to go back and forth on this topic since you guys convinced him it's "OK" to start a cycle at 18 % BF.When I know dam well it's a piss poor piece of advice to give anyone.

**Bigmax** · 06-17-2006, 02:12 PM

Thanks pinn!!!!!!!!

**guest589745** · 06-17-2006, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Pinnacle

Anyway,I have no time to go back and forth on this topic

Well I hope you can find the time to explain a little better at least?

**cfiler** · 06-17-2006, 03:41 PM

Lower body fat % is best before a bulking cycle.

**LmbrJak** · 06-17-2006, 03:44 PM

Don't expect alot bro.The higher the BF the higher the chances of estrogen soaring.And anti's can help a little,just a little though.When estrogen levels soar it SUPRESSES bio-available TESTOSTERONE !

If there is any info out there on this Id love to see it.

**guest589745** · 06-17-2006, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by cfiler

Lower body fat % is best before a bulking cycle.

The reasons being...........?

**NCNPC29** · 06-17-2006, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by Skullsmasher

The reasons being...........?

Reason being what has been stated above. The higher BF% you have the more estrogen. Then you go on a "bulking cycle"...hmmm..what's wrong with that..well too much test and it gets converted into estrogen. Now we have loads of estrogen on top of estrogen. Excess estrogen will increase the bodys SHBG which in turn will bind the free testosterone in the blood and make it unavailable to cell receptor sites

Me personally, I don't want estrogen competing for the test receptor sites but that's just me. You go ahead and bulk while your fat.
Nothing personal to you cause you've been on this site for a while but I agree with Pinnacle and Bigmax who both have extensive competitive experience.

**guest589745** · 06-17-2006, 07:33 PM

Originally Posted by NCNPC29

You go ahead and bulk while your fat..

Originally Posted by NCNPC29

nothing personal.

Lol, and you keep cuttin while yer still a little bitch.

Nothing personal.

**guest589745** · 06-17-2006, 07:34 PM

Im not disagreeing with pinn, just throwin in what I thought was true. If what I have read is true, he has more experience than I will ever have but, I still cant understand it.

**guest589745** · 06-17-2006, 07:35 PM

I still don't understand how anti e's only help a "little" when for example, if estrogen was a problem, letro can reduce it immensely. I just want to learn why that doesnt matter.

**NCNPC29** · 06-17-2006, 07:49 PM

Bro.... Don't disrespect me. I never disrespected you.

**Biggyb** · 06-17-2006, 08:18 PM

for my two cents and with all due respect i think the average guy at golds or worlds that wants to do a few cycles is not at 9% bf and we are happy for the most part with our results. and skull has a good point about anti e dont they deal with the estrogen. 18% might be a tad high but doesnt seem fat.

**Bigmax** · 06-17-2006, 08:20 PM

Originally Posted by Skullsmasher

Lol, and you keep cuttin while yer still a little bitch.

Nothing personal.

Thats not cool bro...he disagrees with you and all you to offer is name calling????That doesnt get anyone anywhere!!!!you're senior member and thats the example you show one of the junior members???you didnt act that way when pinn staright told you ...that your advise was piss poor.Lets keep this respectful.....you will only get respect when you give it bro.....and you do owe this guy an apology!!!!!!!

**1buffsob** · 06-17-2006, 09:02 PM

High bf% = estrogen

estrogen = Increased SHBG

Increased SHBG = Less bio-available testosterone

Less bio-available testosterone = Less gains

Less gains = WASTED CYCLE

Not to mention you're gonna look like shit. But hey, what do I know?

1buffsob

**C_Bino** · 06-17-2006, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by 1buffsob

High bf% = estrogen

estrogen = Increased SHBG

Increased SHBG = Less bio-available testosterone

Less bio-available testosterone = Less gains

Less gains = WASTED CYCLE

Not to mention you're gonna look like shit. But hey, what do I know?

1buffsob

Although I agree with your reasoning, that is quite the slipperly slope you are creating. I mean just because your bf% is high does not trickle down to having a wasted cycle AT ALL imo.

**Bigmax** · 06-17-2006, 10:18 PM

May be not a wasted cycle.But not a very positive and successful one.hey listen there are ways to do it and then there are better ways to do it.I cycle to put on as much lean muscle as i can while on a growth phase.Not to bloat up and get fat(but thats me)!!!!

**Bigmax** · 06-17-2006, 10:19 PM

Originally Posted by 1buffsob

High bf% = estrogen

estrogen = Increased SHBG

Increased SHBG = Less bio-available testosterone

Less bio-available testosterone = Less gains

Less gains = WASTED CYCLE

Not to mention you're gonna look like shit. But hey, what do I know?

1buffsob

bro you dont have to know much to NOT want to look like shit!!!!!!!!!1

**scriptfactory** · 06-17-2006, 10:47 PM

Assuming we're talking about a person who has been in the gym for at least a year training naturally taking testosterone at 16-18% bodyfat is a great way to cut down to sub 15% BF levels in a short amount of time. All of you saying otherwise are just delusional. I've personally never done it (I'm still a virgin) but I've seen and helped several of my friends do it. There is no such thing as a wasted cycle when your diet is on points... I know for a fact that test increases lypolysis with less loss of lean mass. It's simply a fact.

Now, I don't believe that anyone should try to bulk at 18-20% as that is just asking for all sorts of estrogen related problems, but a cutter at that level of BF is more than OK, it's extremely helpful.

**1buffsob** · 06-17-2006, 11:30 PM

Originally Posted by C_Bino

Although I agree with your reasoning, that is quite the slipperly slope you are creating. I mean just because your bf% is high does not trickle down to having a wasted cycle AT ALL imo.

You have a point Bino. Although it may not be a wasted cycle in the sense of the word, it is ineffecient. And ineffecient, to me anyway, is wasted.

I put a lot of time, effort, and research into nutrition/training/aas to create the most effective atmosphere for growth. And having a high BF%, does not fall into that line of thinking.

If you do not have the nutritional knowledge and discipline to reach a 10-12%bf natural, then you have no business cycling IMHO.

1buffsob