1st Cycle. Test Prop.

[bluestone10]

Hey guys!

Stats:
Age: 25
Height: 5'11
Weight: 158.5 lbs @ sub 8% bf
Experience: 5 years



I've been reading and researching for a while and this is what I've got so far:

Cycle (8 weeks):
1-8 w: Testosterone Propionate 75mg ED
1-8 w: HCG 250iu 2x/week (drop 5 days prior to pct)
1-8 w: Aromasin 10mg/EOD (drop 1 day before pct)

PCT (3 days after last prop injection):
Nolva 40/20/20/20/20
Clomid 50/50/25/25/25

Im aware prop can hurt, but I dont want the bloat that comes with longer esters. Im also prepared to inject every day.

Any input/advice on my compounds and doses would be greatly appreciated.

thanks

EDIT
JUST TO CLEAR THIS UP: I WEIGH 158.5LBS NOW BECAUSE I AM DEPLETED @ LOW BODYFAT. WHEN I ADD CARBS I WEIGH 174@8% and 180+@10%.
I CUT DOWN TO SUB 8%BF BECAUSE IVE READ COUNTLESS TIMES THAT LOW BODYFAT = LESSER CHANCE OF GYNO ON CYCLE.

[marcus300]

You need to build more of a base first before starting steroids, at 158lbs you can gain more naturally. If you start now with the current diet you will lose all your gains after the cycle due to your diet not being able to support any new tissue. Head over to the diet section and post your diet and let the diet guys sort you out.

[bluestone10]

my diet is on point. I've weighed as much as 200 lbs when i bulk but ripped is where it is at. Muscle is worthless when its covered with fat. When you diet down under 8% bf naturally, weight and muscle plummet

edit: me at 174lbs @ 8%.

[marcus300]

my diet is on point. I've weighed as much as 200 lbs when i bulk but ripped is where it is at. Muscle is worthless when its covered with fat. When you diet down under 8% bf naturally, weight and muscle plunge.

You need to build more of a foundation naturally because at 158lbs you can build alot more without steroids and if you do you will be in a far better position to build and maintain muscle tissue after the cycle.

[bluestone10]

oh, and i fully understand the different concepts and phases of dieting. the calorie intake i use know to maintain 158.5lbs @ sub 8% bf naturally, would not be the sam as when i bulked on steroids.

[auswest]

U look much better at the higher %bf , looking good I wouldn't go lower than that

[bluestone10]

You need to build more of a foundation naturally because at 158lbs you can build alot more without steroids and if you do you will be in a far better position to build and maintain muscle tissue after the cycle.

yes i understand what you are saying but it seems you are fixd on the number instead of the quality of that number.

If I weighed 158.5 @ 12% i would agree. hell even 10%. but this is not 12%. this is ripped and depleted 158.5

This is what happens when one diets natty and has tiny bone structure.

When im 12%+ bf i weigh well above 180lbs.

[bluestone10]

U look much better at the higher %bf , looking good I wouldn't go lower than that

I know i look better. But i want to be ripped when i start my cycle.

[marcus300]

yes i understand what you are saying but it seems you are to fixd on the number instead of the quality of that number.

If I weighed 158.5 @ 12% i would agree. hell even 10%. but this is not 12%. this is ripped and depleted 158.5

This is what happens when one diets natty and has tiny bone structure.

When im 12%+ bf i weigh well above 180lbs.

You look alot better 20lbs heavier at 8% and this would be a far better position than were you are now to start a cycle, why start a cycle to only end up were you could be naturally.

Thats my advice take it or leave it, best of luck

[bluestone10]

You look alot better 20lbs heavier at 8% and this would be a far better position than were you are now to start a cycle, why start a cycle to only end up were you could be naturally.

Thats my advice take it or leave it, best of luck

ok, but just to make it clear. Getting back to 175lbs@8% would take me less than 3 weeks. The difference between the two is that one is depleted as fukk on sub 100g carbs/day at lower bodyfat without any anti catabolic substances (no clen, no eca. nothing). the other is on 500 g carbs/day, glycogen filled to the max.

I appreciate your advice but im just saying; Im more or less at the same place in all of the pictures.

So, with all this being said; any advice on the cycle??

[The Bear 79]

ok, but just to make it clear. Getting back to 175lbs@8% would take me less than 3 weeks. The difference between the two is that one is depleted as fukk on sub 100g carbs/day at lower bodyfat without any anti catabolic substances (no clen, no eca. nothing). the other is on 500 g carbs/day, glycogen filled to the max.

I appreciate your advice but im just saying; Im more or less at the same place in all of the pictures.

So, with all this being said; any advice on the cycle??

I'd like 2 hav a look @ ur diet, post it here (in detail) would ya.

[bluestone10]

I'd like 2 hav a look @ ur diet, post it here (in detail) would ya.

when bulking natty:

3700 kcal/day, ratio: 30%P,55%C,15%F

[chuckt12345]

cycle looks good
i dont think you need the HCG until a couple weeks in

[The Bear 79]

when bulking natty:

3700 kcal/day, ratio: 30%P,55%C,15%F

HA!! OK, that's NOT "in detail" bro..............

[bluestone10]

cycle looks good
i dont think you need the HCG until a couple weeks in

why not? From what i've read you should run it from the start

HA!! OK, that's NOT "in detail" bro..............

how is that not detailed lol. Ive given you my exact calories and macros. but ok, I see what you're after;

I dont have a set diet when bulking. Im currently in college which gives me alot of spare time inbetween classes; and since I live only 500 yds from school I head home and prepare my meal on the spot every time.

I basically spread those 3700 kcal over 4-5 meals. The first 3-4 meals are aprox 700-1000 kcal a piece and then i adjust the last meal of the day so that i hit my cals and macros on the dot.

A typical meal:

150-200g tuna/chicken/turkey/ground beef/cottage cheese etc...
150-200g brown rice/whole wheat pasta/oats etc...
+ fat source; olive oil/avocado/cashews
+ veggies or fruit
+ dill

Ive found meal timing/portion size/carb timing/seperating carbs and fats etc to be of lesser significance. It has never made any difference for me when i work out. The only thing that makes a difference for me is how carb loaded i am when i hit the gym. If my glycogen isnt maxed i regress.

[gixxerboy1]

you do meaning less post in the lounge so you can post this. then you get good advice and argue about it.

What is the point

[bluestone10]

you do meaning less post in the lounge so you can post this. then you get good advice and argue about it.

What is the point

So looking at my pics and posts in this thread, you honestly think i shoud head to the diet section?! cmon really?

I have spent thousands of hours reading up on nutrition and lifting the past five years. I know how to correctly bulk/cut. I know how many calories my body needs to lose weight/gain weight. I know how carb sensitive my body is.

I appreciate the fact you are trying to steer me in the right direction but i feel your advice is given soley on my weight and nothing else, even though my current weight doesnt show how experience or developed i am

[The Bear 79]

So looking at my pics and posts in this thread, you honestly think i shoud head to the diet section?! cmon really?

I have spent thousands of hours reading up on nutrition and lifting the past five years. I know how to correctly bulk/cut. I know how many calories my body needs to lose weight/gain weight. I know how carb sensitive my body is.

I appreciate the fact you are trying to steer me in the right direction but i feel your advice is given soley on my weight and nothing else, even though my current weight doesnt show how experience or developed i am

Well, if u don't hav a good foundation, u don't hav a good foundation.............period. Cycling without a good foundation is a waste of time & $$$$$.

[bluestone10]

Well, if u don't hav a good foundation, u don't hav a good foundation.............period. Cycling without a good foundation is a waste of time & $$$$$.

But wtf!? how can you say i havnt got a good foundation. Ok, maybe the first three photos dont look too good because of being carb depleted but the last pic? that is 174lbs of quality on an extreme ectomorph.

That pic is the result of thousands and thousands of hours in the gym. 100% dedication. countless thousands of hours of reading up on nutrition and lifting. If that is not good foundation then what is???

Show me a picture of someone with good foundation.

[chuckt12345]

i think your foundation is fine,
what exactly is your ?
Why start with HCG at the beggining if its gonna take a few weeks for the test to shut you down.

[The Bear 79]

But wtf!? how can you say i havnt got a good foundation. Ok, maybe the first three photos dont look too good because of being carb depleted but the last pic? that is 174lbs of quality on an extreme ectomorph.

That pic is the result of thousands and thousands of hours in the gym. 100% dedication. countless thousands of hours of reading up on nutrition and lifting. If that is not good foundation then what is???

Show me a picture of someone with good foundation.

OK, so u hav good dedication.................great. U hav proven training & diet experience............awesome. But @ 5'-11" & 158.5 lbs................u hav no foundation. At ur height, u should b closer 2 the 200 lbs / 10 - 15% BF mark, b4 u cycle, that's a fairly decent foundation 4 some1 ur height.

[gixxerboy1]

OK, so u hav good dedication.................great. U hav proven training & diet experience............awesome. But @ 5'-11" & 158.5 lbs................u hav no foundation. At ur height, u should b closer 2 the 200 lbs / 10 - 15% BF mark, b4 u cycle, that's a fairly decent foundation 4 some1 ur height.

I agree. Even if you were 180 and 10% i would be fine. You under 160lbs at 5'11. Yes you a ripped but that isnt much muscle on a 5'11 person.

I agree you probably know nutrition very well. Then start eating to gain muscle and put on some size first.

[bluestone10]

i think your foundation is fine,
what exactly is your ?
Why start with HCG at the beggining if its gonna take a few weeks for the test to shut you down.

fair enough. I was reading Swiftos Q&A thread in the pct section and from what i gathered i should run it from the start, but what your saying makes sence. Anyone else have an opinion on the matter?

OK, so u hav good dedication.................great. U hav proven training & diet experience............awesome. But @ 5'-11" & 158.5 lbs................u hav no foundation. At ur height, u should b closer 2 the 200 lbs / 10 - 15% BF mark, b4 u cycle, that's a fairly decent foundation 4 some1 ur height.

In my fourth pic i weigh 174lbs, not 158.5. And that is still at 8% bf.
At 10% bf i weigh 180+, and at 15% (which is fat as fukk and something i will never be again) i weigh more than 200 lbs.

[bluestone10]

I agree. Even if you were 180 and 10% i would be fine. You under 160lbs at 5'11. Yes you a ripped but that isnt much muscle on a 5'11 person.

I agree you probably know nutrition very well. Then start eating to gain muscle and put on some size first.

no no no, guys. 158.5 is CARB DEPLETED at low bodyfat. In my fourth pic I weigh 174 LBS @ 8%. 174@8%=180+@10%=200@15%

how many times must isay this. CARB DEPLETED WHEN SUB 8% BF ECTOMORPH = LOW NUMBERS

I am litterally 2 weeks from 180@10% if i wanted to. krank up carbs and lift heavy as fukk and muscle/water/fat would put me at 180 in no time.

I have the muscle, its just depleted in the first 3 pics.

[The Bear 79]

no no no, guys. 158.5 is CARB DEPLETED at low bodyfat. In my fourth pic I weigh 174 LBS @ 8%. 174@8%=180+@10%=200@15%

how many times must isay this. CARB DEPLETED WHEN SUB 8% BF ECTOMORPH = LOW NUMBERS

I am litterally 2 weeks from 180@10% if i wanted to. krank up carbs and lift heavy as fukk and muscle/water/fat would put me at 180 in no time.

I have the muscle, its just depleted in the first 3 pics.

Alright, let's eliminate the confusion. Wut r ur stats RITE NOW AS WE SPEAK?

[gixxerboy1]

you are still caring more muscle at 180 @ 10% then you carb depleted pics. So put the muscle and weight back on first. Then start.

You are asking people who have done more cycles and for years longer then you even thought of lifting weights. Why are you trying to argue. You joined the board for advice. You have multiple people with experience telling you the same thing. If you only want advice that you want to hear then this is the wrong board. Your going to get the truth here.

You obviously know you what you are doing. So hold on the cycle for a little bit and get to where you need to be

[bluestone10]

Alright, let's eliminate the confusion. Wut r ur stats RITE NOW AS WE SPEAK?

well thats the thing. It depends on my carb intake. As of this second it is 158.5bls, but if i was to eat say 700g carbs tonight i would wake up tomorrow weighing 170lbs becuase of the water (still @ sub 8% tho).

The whole reason i cut down to 158.5 (which took me 2 weeks by the way ie mostly water) was because Ive read countless times you should be ripped when you start your cycle to minimize possility of gyno.

If you guys rather i be 180@10%, well ok then. No problem. That will take me 2 weeks. I do have the muscle and foundation tho. I just dont know how else to explain it or show it.

[The Bear 79]

well thats the thing. It depends on my carb intake. As of this second it is 158.5bls, but if i was to eat say 700g carbs tonight i would wake up tomorrow weighing 170lbs becuase of the water (still @ sub 8% tho).

The whole reason i cut down to 158.5 (which took me 2 weeks by the way ie mostly water) was because Ive read countless times you should be ripped when you start your cycle to minimize possility of gyno.

If you guys rather i be 180@10%, well ok then. No problem. That will take me 2 weeks. I do have the muscle and foundation tho. I just dont know how else to explain it or show it.

Bull sh!t!!!!

[bluestone10]

you are still caring more muscle at 180 @ 10% then you carb depleted pics. So put the muscle and weight back on first. Then start.

You are asking people who have done more cycles and for years longer then you even thought of lifting weights. Why are you trying to argue. You joined the board for advice. You have multiple people with experience telling you the same thing. If you only want advice that you want to hear then this is the wrong board. Your going to get the truth here.

You obviously know you what you are doing. So hold on the cycle for a little bit and get to where you need to be

fine 180@10% it is. I'll be there within 2 weeks. I hadnt planned on running the cycle until febuary anyway...

But again, I AM @ 180 10%, its just a matter of adding carbs and lifting heavy and I will be ther in no time.

still need advice on the cycle tho...

[bluestone10]

Bull sh!t!!!!

how is that bs? Im European and use KG's so i might of messed up the conversion, but gaining 4-5 kg's of water over night is easy if you are as depleted as i am and hold enough muscle to be around 180@10%.

This is what ia m trying to tell you. sub 8%bf is not good for the body inte the long run natty. Its not meant to be that low. It is screaming for fuel. All those carbs will be shoved right in to the muscle and i will balloon up.

again, this would not happen if i was 12% bf and ate 700g carbs. I would not gain as much. But now, its very possible.

[Standby]

ok this is kind of a question for everyone and if im right maybe help the OP understand. are you guys just saying that he can be that last pic but he is not right now. cycle and he'll be just like his last pic. but he has already got there with out cycling. its the simplest way i can put it to what is being said ami some what right?

[dec11]

ok, but just to make it clear. Getting back to 175lbs@8% would take me less than 3 weeks. The difference between the two is that one is depleted as fukk on sub 100g carbs/day at lower bodyfat without any anti catabolic substances (no clen, no eca. nothing). the other is on 500 g carbs/day, glycogen filled to the max.

I appreciate your advice but im just saying; Im more or less at the same place in all of the pictures.

So, with all this being said; any advice on the cycle??

that certainly would not be muscle, it would be water.

the more i read from you, the more misinformed you sound mate, no offence

[bluestone10]

ok this is kind of a question for everyone and if im right maybe help the OP understand. are you guys just saying that he can be that last pic but he is not right now. cycle and he'll be just like his last pic. but he has already got there with out cycling. its the simplest way i can put it to what is being said ami some what right?

i understand what they are saying and what you are saying, but what they dont understand is that I AM more or less the fourth picture right now. All thats missing is more calories + higher carb intake + heavy weight. Muscle memory + water will get me there within weeks.

[gixxerboy1]

how is that bs? Im European and use KG's so i might of messed up the conversion, but gaining 4-5 kg's of water over night is easy if you are as depleted as i am and hold enough muscle to be around 180@10%.

This is what ia m trying to tell you. sub 8%bf is not good for the body inte the long run natty. Its not meant to be that low. It is screaming for fuel. All those carbs will be shoved right in to the muscle and i will balloon up.

again, this would not happen if i was 12% bf and ate 700g carbs. I would not gain as much. But now, its very possible.

then your weight will settle back down. You dont have enough muscle on you now to be 180 @10%

a few % of bf doesnt equal the 20 something lbs you need to put on

[bluestone10]

that certainly would be muscle, it would be water

EXACTLY. thats what im saying. I have the muscle to be 175lbs@8%bf when not carb depleted.

[bluestone10]

then your weight will settle back down. You dont have enough muscle on you now to be 180 @10%

a few % of bf doesnt equal the 20 something lbs you need to put on

for me it does. i went from 174lbs to 158.5lbs within weeks.

and you have got it backwards. my weigt will settle HIGHER than it is now because i am forcing the bf down where it doesnt want to be.

[dec11]

EXACTLY. thats what im saying. I have the muscle to be 175lbs@8%bf when not carb depleted.

errr, no, read again, i left out the word ''not'', it has been edited. i dont know where you've heard all this bs from, but i'll assure you muscle doesnt go up and down that fast and i dont care if you can put on 50lbs water, it makes no diff, you still havent got alot muscle

[chuckt12345]

i believe what he is saying is he weighs 158.5 with no water in him,, his normal weight is in the 170's

[gixxerboy1]

for me it does. i went from 174lbs to 158.5lbs within weeks.

and you have got it backwards. my weigt will settle HIGHER than it is now because i am forcing the bf down where it doesnt want to be.

you didnt understand me. Yes you weight will go up because its depleted. Say it goes up 15 lbs because of the rebound. You will probably loose 5 of that once you settle.

158 @ 7% bf doesnt equal 180@ 10%. Its simple math.

[bluestone10]

errr, no, read again, i left out the word ''not'', it has been edited. i dont know where you've heard all this bs from, but i'll assure you muscle doesnt go up and down that fast and i dont care if you can put on 50lbs water, it makes no diff, you still havent got alot muscle

Have you read the thread? Post #3 is a picture of me 174lbs@8% bf. And that is where I was at just a few short weeks ago. 174lbs@8% is 180lbs@10%.

I can I explain it clearer? This is the 10th time i say. it