Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Bodybuilding Boards => Steroids Info & Hardcore => Topic started by: bigjohn_bluesfan on August 06, 2007, 09:20:34 AM

Title: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: bigjohn_bluesfan on August 06, 2007, 09:20:34 AM
I have in the past taken upwards of 700 mg deca and 1200 mg test per week with several other compounds mixed in --- I am on probably the last cycle of my life now and all i am taking is 500 mg test-cyp per week and 20 mg d-bol per day

I feel better than any other cycle and my gains are good. My philosophy: huge doses are not necessary and are probably doing more damage to the body than helping with gains... also a waste of money ---- i wish I would have realized this 2 years ago ---- id have about 3000 dollars more in the bank

just some food for thought fellas
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Rimbaud on August 06, 2007, 09:26:22 AM
Well, at some point the law od diminishing returns takes hold.

Anyway, how's life John?
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: bigjohn_bluesfan on August 06, 2007, 09:37:29 AM
Well, at some point the law od diminishing returns takes hold.

Anyway, how's life John?


yeah, but at what point? Ive only ran a few cycles but the ones I ran were at much higher doses than necessary...lifes good man. Its been a bit of a struggle lately though. You?
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Rimbaud on August 06, 2007, 09:44:17 AM

yeah, but at what point? Ive only ran a few cycles but the ones I ran were at much higher doses than necessary...lifes good man. Its been a bit of a struggle lately though. You?

Sorry to hear that - hope things work out. Things have been really busy & won't slow don't for about another two weeks. Kinda makes me mad because training has taken a back seat to work, family, & such. Look out in two weeks though.

How's married life?

Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: bigjohn_bluesfan on August 06, 2007, 01:42:57 PM
married life is fine...my wife is awesome...but taking tests and studying so much has caused my training to suffer...the tests are over now and i started two a days today....Im making a freakshow....hows married lif for you? check your pm....
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Rimbaud on August 06, 2007, 03:31:24 PM

yeah, but at what point? Ive only ran a few cycles but the ones I ran were at much higher doses than necessary...lifes good man. Its been a bit of a struggle lately though. You?

It's different for everyone.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: trab on August 06, 2007, 04:48:52 PM
married life is fine...my wife is awesome...but taking tests and studying so much has caused my training to suffer...the tests are over now and i started two a days today....Im making a freakshow....hows married lif for you? check your pm....

Hey Crazy Dude, shit will get easier in time. AND WE MISS YOUR BULL-SHIT ;D.

To much steroid is like dumping race gas down the side of the car, it don't do any more good after a point.
If your gonna hit extra hard, keep it short & up front is my feel.  They aint giving steroid away either.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: bigjohn_bluesfan on August 06, 2007, 05:53:53 PM
Hey Crazy Dude, shit will get easier in time. AND WE MISS YOUR BULL-SHIT ;D.

To much steroid is like dumping race gas down the side of the car, it don't do any more good after a point.
If your gonna hit extra hard, keep it short & up front is my feel.  They aint giving steroid away either.

ahh ha haa ha...whats up bro? thats a funny analogy and that shits so true....my guess is that until you strongly experience diminished returns, you may as well keep it at a reasonable dosage...I was so fucked up on  2000 migs per week of gear that I was walking around like a zombie
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: trab on August 06, 2007, 06:36:54 PM
ahh ha haa ha...whats up bro? thats a funny analogy and that shits so true....my guess is that until you strongly experience diminished returns, you may as well keep it at a reasonable dosage...I was so fucked up on  2000 migs per week of gear that I was walking around like a zombie

I knew That's what was gonna happen ;D  BUT WE ALL GOT TO CHECK at least once JUST TO BE SURE!!
Be a shame go thru life not knowing? ??? ;D
Im Fine,thanks.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Arnold jr on August 06, 2007, 09:09:48 PM
Higher end dosed cycles can be fine for some but like everything the cost should be weighed...matter of goals and experience should be considered. Can you make good gains on low dose cycles? Yes, but that doesn't mean they are for everyone...although they are for most IMO. For example, take 2 well trained experienced guys. One runs 500mg test/wk the other 1000mg test/wk. Assuming all things are equal, guy 2 is going to make better gains...that's just how it works.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Overload on August 07, 2007, 08:17:25 AM
Higher end dosed cycles can be fine for some but like everything the cost should be weighed...matter of goals and experience should be considered. Can you make good gains on low dose cycles? Yes, but that doesn't mean they are for everyone...although they are for most IMO. For example, take 2 well trained experienced guys. One runs 500mg test/wk the other 1000mg test/wk. Assuming all things are equal, guy 2 is going to make better gains...that's just how it works.

Exactly.

500mg of test would be a waste of time for myself and many other long time users.

8)
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Petrucci on August 07, 2007, 08:22:41 AM
Exactly.

500mg of test would be a waste of time for myself and many other long time users.

8)

but you mean that the gains (taking 500mg of test for example)are a lot worse than previous cycles, or you have the risk of maybe dont gain anything?
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Overload on August 07, 2007, 08:37:25 AM
but you mean that the gains (taking 500mg of test for example)are a lot worse than previous cycles, or you have the risk of maybe dont gain anything?

If your body is used to 1000mg a week off and on for several years, then 500mg wouldn't give you the same results as 1000mg on your next cycle. our body is built to adapt, that is what we are, adaptations of nature and evolution.

once you cycle 1000mg you will never respond to 500mg the same way you would to 1000mg. yes you would still make gains but not the same.


8)
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Rimbaud on August 07, 2007, 08:52:59 AM
If your body is used to 1000mg a week off and on for several years, then 500mg wouldn't give you the same results as 1000mg on your next cycle. our body is built to adapt, that is what we are, adaptations of nature and evolution.

once you cycle 1000mg you will never respond to 500mg the same way you would to 1000mg. yes you would still make gains but not the same.


8)

I tend to agree with you. However, I would think it would depend how long you were clean for (say 5-6 years & then you may respond to 500mg/EW again). Who know? One things for sure though - the first time is usually the best.  ;D
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Overload on August 07, 2007, 09:05:33 AM
I tend to agree with you. However, I would think it would depend how long you were clean for (say 5-6 years & then you may respond to 500mg/EW again). Who know? One things for sure though - the first time is usually the best.  ;D

Yeah, you are correct. if you take alot of time off i would actually recommend starting around 500mg.

i was basing my theory on/off cycles back to back.

8)
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Rimbaud on August 07, 2007, 10:30:03 AM
i was basing my theory on/off cycles back to back.

8)

I knew that's what you were talking about. I agree with that but with a long enough break it will be almost like square one again.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Dr Pangloss on August 15, 2007, 04:46:55 PM
I tend to agree with you. However, I would think it would depend how long you were clean for (say 5-6 years & then you may respond to 500mg/EW again). Who know? One things for sure though - the first time is usually the best.  ;D

Yeah, but... What about using a low dose for a long time?  I'm sorta tired of this concept that if you max out for 8-12 weeks and then take 12 weeks off, you're going to make awsome gains.  Just not true.  The best way, imo, is low to medium doses for a LONG TIME; like 8 weeks on and 4 weeks off, 8 weeks on, or similar paradigms.  When you use too much, you make barriers like, how often you can train a bodypart and how much you can eat huge barriers because of the time-limited nature of high dose short duration cycles.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Luv2Hurt on August 15, 2007, 05:39:52 PM
Yeah, but... What about using a low dose for a long time?  I'm sorta tired of this concept that if you max out for 8-12 weeks and then take 12 weeks off, you're going to make awsome gains.  Just not true.  The best way, imo, is low to medium doses for a LONG TIME; like 8 weeks on and 4 weeks off, 8 weeks on, or similar paradigms.  When you use too much, you make barriers like, how often you can train a bodypart and how much you can eat huge barriers because of the time-limited nature of high dose short duration cycles.

Your saying 8 weeks is a LONG time?  Then take 4 weeks off?  I dont like that idea, just stay on. The 4 weeks off will throw you for a loop.  The best gains would be made if you did just stay on for a couple years, medium doses of test and something else, like deca or EQ. 

But I did like what you wrote at the start, in bold, excellent point! :)
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Dr Pangloss on August 15, 2007, 05:49:37 PM
Your saying 8 weeks is a LONG time?  Then take 4 weeks off?  I dont like that idea, just stay on. The 4 weeks off will throw you for a loop.  The best gains would be made if you did just stay on for a couple years, medium doses of test and something else, like deca or EQ. 

But I did like what you wrote at the start, in bold, excellent point! :)

Yeah.  I still feel the need to take a few weeks off, but the idea is commensurate in scope with yours:  low/medium doses, don't go off.  This equals best progress.  I mean, lets get real here....
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: trab on August 15, 2007, 06:59:13 PM
Your saying 8 weeks is a LONG time?  Then take 4 weeks off?  I dont like that idea, just stay on. The 4 weeks off will throw you for a loop.  The best gains would be made if you did just stay on for a couple years, medium doses of test and something else, like deca or EQ. 

But I did like what you wrote at the start, in bold, excellent point! :)

I dont personaly think 4 off does Jack either. Counterproductive
Personaly, with a tapper to lower and lower doses of "anabolics"... I found Nat recovery no different after a year on, than
a 4month run "on". But I got all the kids I want...THAT (Kids) is the only isue in my mind against longer cycles...
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: RDW on August 15, 2007, 08:20:38 PM
John,

First off, long time no see! I haven't been on much in the past few years but good to see you are still around.  I did the same thing you are describing when I cycled about 2 years ago.  I was up to 500mg  of Test and 400mg of 'poise every 3 days and 60mg dbol ED. I basically fucked myself up.  My last cycle (recently) went back to basics of about 600/400 per week and still say pretty good results.  I felt like I needed to up my cycles every time and eventually they lead to stupid levels.  Gear can make you think funny sometimes, you gotta keep yourself in check and the best thing you can do is cycle with someone else on opposite times and have each other watch out for one another (esp. if you are using 'slin). You gotta keep the health and ego of your partner in check.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: ANAL DISCHARGE on August 21, 2007, 12:54:25 AM
Yeah, but... What about using a low dose for a long time?  I'm sorta tired of this concept that if you max out for 8-12 weeks and then take 12 weeks off, you're going to make awsome gains.  Just not true.  The best way, imo, is low to medium doses for a LONG TIME; like 8 weeks on and 4 weeks off, 8 weeks on, or similar paradigms.  When you use too much, you make barriers like, how often you can train a bodypart and how much you can eat huge barriers because of the time-limited nature of high dose short duration cycles.

I have heard that Dorian likes such an approach.  No reason the 4 weeks off should have an adverse effect - quite the opposite I would have thought.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Luv2Hurt on August 21, 2007, 04:24:33 AM
I have heard that Dorian likes such an approach.  No reason the 4 weeks off should have an adverse effect - quite the opposite I would have thought.

Yeah, yeah thats the best way to take gear.... for 8 weeks, crash for 4 then take for 8 weeks, crash again for 4, sounds like fun!  2 steps forward 2 steps back.  If you wanna be on a scary rollercoaster then go to an amusement park.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: ANAL DISCHARGE on August 21, 2007, 05:18:48 AM
Yeah, yeah thats the best way to take gear.... for 8 weeks, crash for 4 then take for 8 weeks, crash again for 4, sounds like fun!  2 steps forward 2 steps back.  If you wanna be on a scary rollercoaster then go to an amusement park.

If you crash that's your problem.  No need to. 
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: trab on August 21, 2007, 05:55:28 AM
If you crash that's your problem.  No need to. 

Are you saying your not really coming off for 4 weeks?
Because 8 weeks use of REAL Androgen WILL shut everyone down.

So, either your "Bridging" (Not really off) or your not.

Do you understand that just because some HCG or clomid made you "Feel" normal, and you didnt crash that you have not returned to normal Test production?

Clomid is still doing its thing about 10 days after the last tab.

You sound to me like a guy who thinks he's "Off" when in fact you still got steroid or other Exogenous Test stimulant in your system. I'd like to see you come off for 16 week.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: ANAL DISCHARGE on August 21, 2007, 07:45:22 AM
Are you saying your not really coming off for 4 weeks?
Because 8 weeks use of REAL Androgen WILL shut everyone down.

So, either your "Bridging" (Not really off) or your not.

Do you understand that just because some HCG or clomid made you "Feel" normal, and you didnt crash that you have not returned to normal Test production?

Clomid is still doing its thing about 10 days after the last tab.

You sound to me like a guy who thinks he's "Off" when in fact you still got steroid or other Exogenous Test stimulant in your system. I'd like to see you come off for 16 week.

Off for 16 weeks? I haven't touched the sauce in years but that's immaterial.  If you're competing and need to be on for much of the time then this is a fair approach.  It doesn't literally mean on 8, off 4 ad infinitum - use your common sense.  But for a sustained time then it can make sense.   I personally would rather go 8 on 4 "off" 8 on, then assess from there rather than 16 weeks straight.

If the latter 4 weeks were with faster acting compounds then some of the 4 will be off but I still believe with intelligent employment of ancillaries, attention to diet and adaptation of training, there is no need to crash very heavily at all during those 4 weeks, with the subsequent 8 weeks then superseding the progress already made.

Further, if you're not truly off during all those 4 wks - and I agree with you that you're not - then you won't crash anyway as another poster suggested.  It does however give the system a break from the constant bombardment of gear.
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: trab on August 21, 2007, 09:38:13 AM
Off for 16 weeks? I haven't touched the sauce in years but that's immaterial.  If you're competing and need to be on for much of the time then this is a fair approach.  It doesn't literally mean on 8, off 4 ad infinitum - use your common sense.  But for a sustained time then it can make sense.   I personally would rather go 8 on 4 "off" 8 on, then assess from there rather than 16 weeks straight.

If the latter 4 weeks were with faster acting compounds then some of the 4 will be off but I still believe with intelligent employment of ancillaries, attention to diet and adaptation of training, there is no need to crash very heavily at all during those 4 weeks, with the subsequent 8 weeks then superseding the progress already made.

Further, if you're not truly off during all those 4 wks - and I agree with you that you're not - then you won't crash anyway as another poster suggested.  It does however give the system a break from the constant bombardment of gear.




4 weeks off is pointless IMO. Might as well stay on. Invitation to bad sides. More bad sides from dropping & Low Test level then HIgh IME.



Many guys are still on and dont know it. Their system is so F'd up and they dont have a clue to that fact.
Even Enanthate builds up over time. Im sure its hanging around at least 2-3 weeks after a long hard run.
Sustanon? Shiet, 4 weeks till you start to count clean....
Title: Re: Low dose ---- versus--- high dose
Post by: Overload on August 21, 2007, 09:58:16 AM
i've known a few guys who had good results from these blast/cruise cycles but i've never tried it. i don't see how it could provide any benefits. you are basicly making your hormonal system spike and fall rapidly. which i don't agree with.

8)