Keeping size in the long run....

[Perfection Awaits]

...

 

[Old Balls]

Good question and something I have been thinking about. It seems everybody does a huge amount 2-3 times/year and struggle with all the issues...sides, post cycle therapy (pct), etc. Wouldn't it be better to take the same gear you would use for those cycles and spread it out over 12 months??? Isn's a slow, steady build up using lower doses over time better for your body, etc???

 

[DocJ]

Ah, the question we always wonder about...
It all comes down to how you train/eat/etc when OFF cycle. If you are someone who is VERY good about doing everything right, day in and day out whether on cycle or not, 1 longer cycle/year may be best. IMO a 16-18 week cycle would be ideal.

I'm toying with a different approach involving short cycle bursts with peptide bridging but it's still in the planning stages.

 

[DocJ]

....also, I'd like to add that the 1 cycle/year approach would especially be good for people who have NOT reached their natty potential before cycling (which is the vast majority).

 

[DocJ]

great reply, thats what i was getting at. I think im going to run one 20 week cycle per year...until im out of supplies.

I would switch compounds the last 4-6 weeks to attempt to "solidify" (for lack of a better term) gains. Example: Let's say you were doing the following:
Week 1-16: Test 600mg/week, Deca 300mg/week.
*I would do this:
Week 17-20: Test 600mg/week, Masteron 400mg/week.
Instead of finishing out the full 20 weeks with deca.

 

[Old Balls]

I run 150mg of test e every week and every 4 months going to run a 10 week cycle of either test/deca or test/eq, then back to the 100/150mg of test e in lieu of PCT.

 

[ManOfMuscle]

I hate to play devil's advocate here but when you say keeping gains we're assuming you're not at or near your natty max correct ?

 

[ManOfMuscle]

like doc said, most of the people here are not. I am sure i could have added another 20lbs or so on naturally, but it would have taken a long ass time. I had been stuck for almost a year at my weight, and even changed my diet/routine a couple times to try and shock out of it. Then i ended up just going at it. Too late now, im on the "darkside".

My point was not about you starting too soon, rather that if you are attempting to keep muscle past your genetic abilities then it's a lost cause if you aren't on steroids.

 

[Perfection Awaits]

bump

 

[Insane_Man]

if you can't keep size while off (assuming you aren't a pro) then you need to take a serious look at your diet and training. sure your muscles will pop like toaster pastries a bit more while on, and you can hit the weights hard for longer intervals, but aside from those you shouldn't be shrinking if you eat and train right.

 

[Thompson31580]

My point was not about you starting too soon, rather that if you are attempting to keep muscle past your genetic abilities then it's a lost cause if you aren't on steroids.

This is the predicament that ALL advanced bodybuilders reach. My diet, sleep patterns, training are always near optimal, but when I take a break, I lose alot of size. This is the reason for so much interest in peptides and GH. These compounds elicit a hope of being able to augment ones genetic potential.
If not, year round usage with lower dose bridge periods is really going to be the only way to maintain those levels. Although then you have to consider the long term implications on your health.

 

[Thompson31580]

if you can't keep size while off (assuming you aren't a pro) then you need to take a serious look at your diet and training. sure your muscles will pop like toaster pastries a bit more while on, and you can hit the weights hard for longer intervals, but aside from those you shouldn't be shrinking if you eat and train right.

This is totally dependant on how advanced the trainer is! I personally know Flex Wheeler and other pro's. They have the best genetics in all of existance, yet they shrink incredibly when they come off.... Look back at Mike Morris when he decided to go natural. He was incredibly gifted and he went from a competitive weight of 260+ to being only able to maintain about 220 with out the diuretics etc. So in reality if you include the loss of fluids he endured to get in contest shape he was probably closer to 270 contest time. Thats 50 pounds of muscle in one of the most genetically gifted individuals around.
Now I know none of us are pro's but that doesnt mean that we havent reached near those limits in terms of what our bodies can attain.

 

[Insane_Man]

This is totally dependant on how advanced the trainer is! I personally know Flex Wheeler and other pro's. They have the best genetics in all of existance, yet they shrink incredibly when they come off.... Look back at Mike Morris when he decided to go natural. He was incredibly gifted and he went from a competitive weight of 260+ to being only able to maintain about 220 with out the diuretics etc. So in reality if you include the loss of fluids he endured to get in contest shape he was probably closer to 270 contest time. Thats 50 pounds of muscle in one of the most genetically gifted individuals around.
Now I know none of us are pro's but that doesnt mean that we havent reached near those limits in terms of what our bodies can attain.

the OP is about the size of the average middle school basketball player



how big are you?

 

[Thompson31580]

the OP is about the size of the average middle school basketball player



how big are you?

Whats OP?
Im no monster. Im 5'8 and I am currently 212 at 8.3% Ive been off for 2 months. Ive been as heavy as 242 when on. Maintaining even this weight is VERY difficult for me. Like I said its very dependent on genetics. I just cant carry alot of muscle naturally. I just took my numbers this morning as Im starting IGF and MGF with insulin this week to see if I can get some more size back.

 

[Thoms]

I think there's a line somewhere. Longer cycles give your body more time to accomodate for the extra mass and use it as a new base point, but too long (providing you take time off and not cycle indefinitely) will add little in the end, and compromise your recovery. I would split the cycles for the most long-term gains.

 

[mo'primo]

This is totally dependant on how advanced the trainer is! I personally know Flex Wheeler and other pro's. They have the best genetics in all of existance, yet they shrink incredibly when they come off....

keeping size is genetics but also dose dependent. pros take more than the average user.

in terms of keeping size naturally in the long run I'd think lower doses over a longer period versus higher doses over a shorter period would be better as the body learns to adapt better to the new muscle.

 

[ManOfMuscle]

if you can't keep size while off (assuming you aren't a pro) then you need to take a serious look at your diet and training. sure your muscles will pop like toaster pastries a bit more while on, and you can hit the weights hard for longer intervals, but aside from those you shouldn't be shrinking if you eat and train right.

Build yourself up to a solid 250 then come off. Then tell me how it goes.

 

[ManOfMuscle]

This is the predicament that ALL advanced bodybuilders reach. My diet, sleep patterns, training are always near optimal, but when I take a break, I lose alot of size. This is the reason for so much interest in peptides and GH. These compounds elicit a hope of being able to augment ones genetic potential.
If not, year round usage with lower dose bridge periods is really going to be the only way to maintain those levels. Although then you have to consider the long term implications on your health.

This is the gospel truth. It's just something that people refuse to admit for some reason.