2 week on 4 off questions..

[daddy01]

op the biggest problem with 2 weeks on 4 weeks of is there is no way that the aas would even have time to react well or raise you levels high in 2 weeks even with prop it will be 4-7 days to be into your system fully then you have 1 week theoretically with high levels then drop them down right away. i think that you should definitely stick to more common cycle styles. there is a reason that bodybuilders and all experienced people use the same cycle style and system because it works. from a biology stand point destroying your test levels and e2 levels like what would happen with this would not be good. your levels of everything would be so up and down i would not ever recommend anything like this. with all that being said you do sound like you have done your research and i would tell you to keep learning and retaining the information. some people may come across a little harsh but the majority are here to help keep you safe and make sure you are running the cycles in the best way possible. that is why some kinda pushed are is because this cycle would be a horrible idea.

Thanks for the info all! i think i might just copy my last one cycle with deca and test

 

[DeeXII]

Thanks for the info all! i think i might just copy my last one cycle with deca and test

It's risky business asking questions from what I've seen. The flame is real.

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

I must admit it disappoints me to see the OP flamed by people who simply dont have the knowledge to comment on this protocol - they simply assumed it to be worthless.

The 2 week on/4 week off protocol has been around for a long time way before bill roberts, in fact I recall Duchaine discussing it in his later years.
It was designed for short acting compounds ONLY such as dbol, tren ace, etc. The idea was to utilize sufficient doses, or frontloading techniques, to esnure high levels from the beginning & to enable full recovery within a few days due to the short acting nature of the compounds.

I do recall a study where it was shown that endogenous test recovered FASTER after a cycle with a cut off point of 14 days with short esters - this is clearly beneficial since you could string together multiple cycles with less time dedicated for recovery & more towards anabolism.

Of course 1 round of 2 on/4 off would be ineffective since the body needs time to adapt to the new levels of hypetrophy, specifically satellite cell activity & hyperlasia.

And for most people, the traditional 10-12 weeks cycle is STILL the best way to achieve as much muscle mass as possible within a short timeframe - but that does NOT mean that cycles like 2on/4off cant be utilized depending on your goals.

Hopefully the OP learns something and for the rest of you - dont flame something that you dont understand

 

[trekrider215]

In my opinion, it seems like the only way to get any type of benefit from that is if you run youre own TRT and stay on a dose of say 200-250 of test year round. I can see maybe blasting 50mgs of Dbol with 100mgs Adrol and some test suspension and maybe a gram of tren ace for two weeks you might see some gains.

Honestly to cycle It just seems like a complete waste of time. I run test year round and blast high doses of everything I listed above and STILL nothing special happens in two weeks.

 

[Rida5d]

In my opinion, it seems like the only way to get any type of benefit from that is if you run youre own TRT and stay on a dose of say 200-250 of test year round. I can see maybe blasting 50mgs of Dbol with 100mgs Adrol and some test suspension and maybe a gram of tren ace for two weeks you might see some gains.

Honestly to cycle It just seems like a complete waste of time. I run test year round and blast high doses of everything I listed above and STILL nothing special happens in two weeks.

I totally agree.. It could work if you are on trt

Anyways , the OP deserves an answer with respect , without bashing.. That's why he asked , that's why we are here reading the forums .. Thnx for pointing that out @ zilla

Generally speaking , and not related to this thread:
I came to ology in dec 2010 (I know joining date 2012) and I didn't even know what a sticky meant .. And I found guidance and patience from all members back then ... Which is not the case now by some members .
This attitude is forcing new members to run to non reliable other forums , and Ology is/was/ and will be my favorite.
Stickies are always great , but if the answer is always : READ THE STICKIES, then let's change the forum to an automated system with one answer: read the stickies... Makes no sense to me.

Back to the subject..

Here is a thread by a vet regarding this way of cycling:

http://www.steroidology.com/forum/a...29773-short-cycles-good-gains-less-sides.html


Op.. IMO, this is not the best way to approach a cycle specially for someone who is pct-ing, it could work for someone who is on trt but I guess it might not be optimal

The thread was posted in 2004 , and we know more about Hpta and steroids in 2014..

 

[bigben66]

A question is only a stupid question if you know the answer...

The OP asked an 'unusual' question that made most people think outside the box.... after reading his post entries, he isn't stupid, he read an article by someone he though he trusted, and did the right thing by running it through this forum to get some honest feedback.

From my point of view, it's not a cycle that I'd like to run, as I like to get a feel for the compounds I am taking as the cycle progresses.

But that doesn't mean it doesn't have it's merits or isn't worth considering by some.

I DO fear what continuous running of this cycle would do to your HPTA in the long run, as Megatron said, you are a young guy, the last thing you need to be doing is taking a gamble on what god gave you in this fashion.

If you must cycle, keep it simple, follow the guidelines to the letter, and ensure you give yourself more enough time off to fully recover afterwards. You said yourself, you have made good gains keeping it simple in the past, so if it aint broke, don't fix it buddy!

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

One of the major advantages to the 2 week in/4 week off protocol is actually INCREASED hpta recovery - you have more chance of staying shutdown on a more traditional cut.
The 4 weeks off portion is also supercompensatory in nature, especially in terms of an increase in LH, so I certainly dont see recovery being an issue.
Some other advantages that come to mind include the elimination of an ai on cycle, less liver damage & less sides in general due to the timeframe.

Again, it is not optimal for muscle building purposes vs traditional cycle lengths but it does have its place and, as rida & ben have shown, certainly deserves to be discussed rather than thrown away as nonsense.
I should add that bryan hancock (creator of the starting strength programme), dr scally & a few reputable coaches that I personally know & trust do advocate this protocol based on the clients goal - just saying

 

[bigben66]

One of the major advantages to the 2 week in/4 week off protocol is actually INCREASED hpta recovery - you have more chance of staying shutdown on a more traditional cut.
The 4 weeks off portion is also supercompensatory in nature, especially in terms of an increase in LH, so I certainly dont see recovery being an issue.
Some other advantages that come to mind include the elimination of an ai on cycle, less liver damage & less sides in general due to the timeframe.

Again, it is not optimal for muscle building purposes vs traditional cycle lengths but it does have its place and, as rida & ben have shown, certainly deserves to be discussed rather than thrown away as nonsense.
I should add that bryan hancock (creator of the starting strength programme), dr scally & a few reputable coaches that I personally know & trust do advocate this protocol based on the clients goal - just saying

That's interesting zilla... never would have thought that it was actually better for recovery than a standard cycle...

Surely though, you would have to run this for a whole year to get comparable gains to say a 14-16 week standard cycle....?
(ie: 2 weeks on 4 weeks off multiplied by 8 = 48 weeks)

 

[Rida5d]

That's interesting zilla... never would have thought that it was actually better for recovery than a standard cycle...

Surely though, you would have to run this for a whole year to get comparable gains to say a 14-16 week standard cycle....?
(ie: 2 weeks on 4 weeks off multiplied by 8 = 48 weeks)

Check the thread above by real gains , could be an interesting read..

Some of the info are out dated , but reading it could be nice...

Notice: I myself won't take that approach.

 

[Megatron28]

I just don't see the advantages of a cycle like this in this day and age where aromatase inhibitors, hCG and PCT (clomid/nolva) are readily available and deemed reasonably safe for most guys.

 

[Buzzbait]

I'm not going to say you could not benefit from a cycle like this, but you could also benefit from a deca/tren only cycle and we all know that's not standard protocol. 20 years ago deca only cycles was an acceptable cycle for countless people but thru evolving of knowledge we know that Test is base for ALL cycles. I personally would never run a two on four off cycle ever, with any gear. It just seems pointless to raise levels for a very short time, to begin to recover, then repeat. As for recovery, yes it would be higher success rate, because you are not shutdown but for a hot second, but you are not on gear long enough for substantial gains to be shutdown. Some questions do get redundant, but I'm an advocate for gathering opinions and science, if for nothing else but to see how we have evolved.

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

Surely though, you would have to run this for a whole year to get comparable gains to say a 14-16 week standard cycle....?
(ie: 2 weeks on 4 weeks off multiplied by 8 = 48 weeks)

As I stated in my original post, you would need to do multiple rounds for it to have any benefit to muscle gains.
Let's say you did 6 rounds totalling 12 weeks on/24 weeks off
Would there be a huge difference in the amount of muscle mass optained? I doubt it but a traditional cycle is more optimal for maximum results.
Would your hpta recover better? Yes.
Would you keep more of your gains? Yes


Also, in case people got confused, you would still need to run a pct during the 4 weeks off - simply for a shorter timeframe. I dont recommend the no pct approach.

I'm not going to say you could not benefit from a cycle like this, but you could also benefit from a deca/tren only cycle and we all know that's not standard protocol. 20 years ago deca only cycles was an acceptable cycle for countless people but thru evolving of knowledge we know that Test is base for ALL cycles. I personally would never run a two on four off cycle ever, with any gear. It just seems pointless to raise levels for a very short time, to begin to recover, then repeat. As for recovery, yes it would be higher success rate, because you are not shutdown but for a hot second, but you are not on gear long enough for substantial gains to be shutdown. Some questions do get redundant, but I'm an advocate for gathering opinions and science, if for nothing else but to see how we have evolved.

Your under the presumption that this is some old protocol no longer deemed relevant - to this very day coaches, dr scally, bill roberts & other experts are using it so it very much has its place.

Again, if your looking to build maximum mass, as the OP is, then a traditional cycle layout is best.
But if your interested in much less sides (sports players for example) & a better chance of recovery - 2on/4off is worth looking at.

 

[daddy01]

As I stated in my original post, you would need to do multiple rounds for it to have any benefit to muscle gains.
Let's say you did 6 rounds totalling 12 weeks on/24 weeks off
Would there be a huge difference in the amount of muscle mass optained? I doubt it but a traditional cycle is more optimal for maximum results.
Would your hpta recover better? Yes.
Would you keep more of your gains? Yes


Also, in case people got confused, you would still need to run a pct during the 4 weeks off - simply for a shorter timeframe. I dont recommend the no pct approach.





Your under the presumption that this is some old protocol no longer deemed relevant - to this very day coaches, dr scally, bill roberts & other experts are using it so it very much has its place.

Again, if your looking to build maximum mass, as the OP is, then a traditional cycle layout is best.
But if your interested in much less sides (sports players for example) & a better chance of recovery - 2on/4off is worth looking at.

Well Just want to say thank you everybody for all the input, this is exactly what i was looking for. A discussion. I was a little taken back by the negativity at first but I'm sure lots of guys on these forums deal with retards everyday as i have seen from browsing around forums for the last couple of years. I would like to think I'm not one of those guys. So the main reason why i was inquiring about this cycle as i find when i come off of cycle i have very little motivation and some sides like acne i want to keep under control which i have had a hard time in the past two cycles. And i also want to do as little damage to my body and cycle as healthy as i can especially because i have chosen to cycle before my body has fully developed which we all know is not the healthiest thing to do. So maybe a 2 on 4 off may be what I'm looking for. More research for me and back to the drawing board. Thank you again everybody for the input on the subject.