Author Topic: BLAST vs. Slow and Steady cycles?  (Read 3811 times)

Arnold jr

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7247
  • fleshandiron.com
Re: BLAST vs. Slow and Steady cycles?
« Reply #25 on: November 04, 2009, 04:20:36 PM »
the short blasts were big in the uk when i was on my way up, mostly because of paul borreson and others
at the time....

the whole point was to break your set point, as the theory and also from my personal experience is, once youve been to a certain size you can get there again !!

from what i can remember youd totaly overload for 3 to 4 weeks, have a few weeks off, then start on a normal long range cycle, youd only do 1 or at the most 2 of these types of cycles a year.




See, now that makes more sense to me than these cycles that are 4-6wk blast and then the guy takes off for 4-6wks, or even longer in some cases...that makes no sense whatsoever. But the 3-4wk burst followed by a more "standard" cycle could make more sense. Now I'm not sure if I'd agree with taking the off time after you did this short blast, why not just go right into the regular planned out cycle or at least bridge in between the two?

local hero

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8714
  • mma finance warrior of peace
Re: BLAST vs. Slow and Steady cycles?
« Reply #26 on: November 04, 2009, 10:48:53 PM »
i never followed it as it should have been layed out, i used to do a safe version now and then just to mix things up,,, boresson used to look after my mate, and the little break was needed, as i know from what he was like, your just sick of the sight of another shot, and youve got so much in your body you dont realy miss it... i cant  remember the exact protocols of it,, but it was a sickening amount of sus, decca and prima and prop