Keeping gains after a cycle?

[g-banger]

i know someone who used aas at around 75kg/165lb because he stopped gaining naturally. he did 3 cycles of sust (im not sure in what time frame he did the 3 cycles in). he got up to 110kg/242lb after the 3rd cycle. then he stopped aas and dropped down to 98kg/215lb. he hasnt used steroids for 3 years and has maintained his weight at 98-100kg/215-220lb. so after 3 cycles he netted 25kg/55lb

[delta1111]

i know someone who used aas at around 75kg/165lb because he stopped gaining naturally. he did 3 cycles of sust (im not sure in what time frame he did the 3 cycles in). he got up to 110kg/242lb after the 3rd cycle. then he stopped aas and dropped down to 98kg/215lb. he hasnt used steroids for 3 years and has maintained his weight at 98-100kg/215-220lb. so after 3 cycles he netted 25kg/55lb

Yes but 215-220lb is probably his natural genetic max. He just got there quicker using AAS. I doubt very much that he had stopped gaining naturally at 165lb if he was able to further increase to 242lb using AAS. His gains just probably slowed down to the point where he thought they'd stopped. The longer we have been training, the harder it is to make progress. He probably would still have made progress by adjusting his diet or mixing up his training regime. How long was he training to get to 165lb and what was his starting weight?

[SergeantCarbs]

What is kept/lost after a bulk cycle always seems to be an ongoing debate on the boards. Who really can determine whether lost weight is water weight, the person slacking off after a cycle etc...

If cycling while cutting allows one to hold there overall weight (burn fat while building muscle), I'm wondering if this may be the better way to go. It would allow one to lean out while cycling and when the cut cycle is completed the user can switch immediately to a calorie surplus with room to grow. I'm wondering if this would be more beneficial to keeping ones gains.

[Arai]

What is kept/lost after a bulk cycle always seems to be an ongoing debate on the boards. Who really can determine whether lost weight is water weight, the person slacking off after a cycle etc...

If cycling while cutting allows one to hold there overall weight (burn fat while building muscle), I'm wondering if this may be the better way to go. It would allow one to lean out while cycling and when the cut cycle is completed the user can switch immediately to a calorie surplus with room to grow. I'm wondering if this would be more beneficial to keeping ones gains.

that sounds pretty smart to me. But I guess it could possibly be wasting your gear, as if you'd do a bulk cycle you would be able to gain significantly more.. but yeah it all comes back to how much you can retain. It would be good if some of the vets chimed in on this more imo

[SergeantCarbs]

edit...

[dec11]

that sounds pretty smart to me. But I guess it could possibly be wasting your gear, as if you'd do a bulk cycle you would be able to gain significantly more.. but yeah it all comes back to how much you can retain. It would be good if some of the vets chimed in on this more imo

i'd personally say tht best to bulk natural and cut with cycle, cutting naturally loses alot of muscle whereas cutting on aas preserves the majority

[rasmsd]

I think if u train hard enough, eat alot you will have a good chance to keep most

[g-banger]

Yes but 215-220lb is probably his natural genetic max. He just got there quicker using AAS. I doubt very much that he had stopped gaining naturally at 165lb if he was able to further increase to 242lb using AAS. His gains just probably slowed down to the point where he thought they'd stopped. The longer we have been training, the harder it is to make progress. He probably would still have made progress by adjusting his diet or mixing up his training regime. How long was he training to get to 165lb and what was his starting weight?

yeah im sure he wouldnt have been at his natural max when he started, i think he just hit a plateau. im not sure what his starting weight was but he said he was training for a year before using aas. so yeah he basically used steroids to reach his genetic limit. i know the general way of doing things is to not use steroids until you have reached your genetic potential, BUT if its not possible to hold onto gains above your genetic potential without the continual use of steroids, then whats the point? who wants to be using gear forever just to stay big? why do so many people on here have a problem with using steroids to reach your genetic limit? i see it as a fast track to reaching your goals, not just a way of blowing beyond your genetic limits. ive never used steroids by the way, maybe in the future i will. but i personally dont see the problem with using aas as a way of simply making faster gains, as long as you have good training experience and youre not too young. im not an expert, thats just my humble opinion.