posted Wed, 12/12/2012 - 16:19
2230
Diminishing Gains
ad
i have a question for the vets or anyone else who can provide insight on what they think. how much would you think gains would be diminished if one was to run consequetive cycles of the same amount of AAS and cycle it for the same amount of time? assuming everything else was a control (diet, training, pct, ect) for example:
cycle #1 : test e @ 500mg / week for 12 weeks. Gains : say, 20lbs
cycle #2 : test e @ 500mg / week for 12 weeks. Gains : 15lbs?
cycle #3 : test e @ 500mg / week for 12 weeks. Gains : 10lbs?
i appriciate any ideas or thoughts, be it personal experience or theorectical. thankyou
- Bookmark
- 1
- 1
very little gains would be made, if you gained 20 on the first the next 2 would simply be keeping those gains until you come off. I understand what your thinking but it dont work that way. after a long period off my gains are almost always in the first 4 weeks that the ester has kicked in, so for test-e that would be by week 7/8, after that no matter how long I run it or whether I triple my dose there is very little gains made. taking breaks are necessary for continued weight gain unless your TRT and switching compounds for continued growth... And yes ofcourse diet is everything and yes you can with proper diet continue to make gains however it is minimal and not even close to the kind of gains when receptors are clear.
skalpagreat response dude, so the key is time off. my plan is to take 20 weeks off between cycles anyways. if the gains halt at or around the 4 week mark after the esters kick, do you think shorter esters like prop would be better as to cut down on the wait time and time off versus runnning those 20 weekers we see some run here?
So when you say switch compounds do you mean like going from example test e 7/8 wks to test p.for 4or more wks? or would you switch more than once and if so how would you do that? that sounds beneficial and could possibly go for shorter cycles and get the same results.
test-e and test-p are the same compound just attached to a different ester. when you get more cycles under your belt and a better understanding of roids this will make sense.
I understand that test is test. I understand now what you were talking about .you mean completely changing the compound because they have different binding properties I have been doing research and don't clam to know it all and will not be running cycles like that for a while. but your right I do need to have more cycles under my belt to completely grasp the concept of how to run more advanced cycles. was just curious. thanks
100% agree. My gains weight wise are almost non existent since I am only trying to maintain. I do think it would be very difficult for me to gain weight running my dosages. I think at this point for me to gain solid mass it's going to be very slow and could take some years. Goes back to the Turtle and the Hare analogy. Slow and steady wins every time.
skalpareally, this is a serious inquiry i have. id like to know what you guys think. yes, i know everybody is different, no fucking shit. id like to hear what YOU, yes YOU, specificly believe is the diminishing rate of gains just due to receptor down regulation. i dont want to see "eat more, lift harder" like this dumbfuck. this is already a given dipshit. dont post unless you have a intelligent theory or idea about what you think is the diminishing rate of gains due to receptor down regulation. thankyou
eat mmore, lift harder
skalpano shit!? ..that wasnt the question, thats a given, guy
were bodybuilders not fortune tellers dumbass, why dont you run the cycles and tell us, girl
skalpayou have a basic understanding of critical thinking don't you? if this inquiry is too much for you to handle then dont post, and real, real mature downthumbing all my posts bro. if you read im actually asking an intelligent question and have no need for ignorant naive responses and childish schoolyard tactics you imploy just because someone whos never cycled before and wants to learn more about it has a greater grasp on the subject then yourself. im newer here, i had 9+ karma before you went ape on the thumbs down, youd think for someone with 55+ karma would have a greater grasp or knowledge on cycling to provide an intelligent response. roid,strongman, gs, ace...those guys know what theyre talking about. read their responses for examples on how to formulate well thought out posts. thanks guys again for your responses
bro i was kinda serious kind of joking, there was no need to loose it and start swearing over one silly post thats the kind of dimeaner that degrates this wonderful place so yes i neg'd you. finally this is an adult reply, so +2.
skalpano worries bro. i thought you were just trollin my thread, thats why i went off. sry bout that. thanks for the +s
1jakd_hipyI don't know if this helps but since I've switched to TRT mine gains aren't as big when I blast but I maintain all my gains and gain continuously throughout the year.
I also think there is a misconception about gains. You will continue to see gains with the same doses granted you take proper time off. However, I think the misconception is that people see the gains that other people have posted but have failed to realize the person's goals. When some people gets close to where they want to be they will start recomping rather than straight bulking. So they might gain 5-10 lbs at the most. But what you don't know is that they have lost about the same amount of fat during the same cycle.
skalpathats why i stated diet would be a control. bulking or cutting are really diet dependable. if one was on a clean bulk diet (3500-4000 cals) for each cycle and did proper pct and maintained roughly 70% of gains made how much gross gains would the next cycle produce given everything else was the same. so its mainly how quickly does the receptors become down regulated and by how much? 25% each cycle? 50%? what do you think?
that's the problem right there. taking in the same calories for every cycle you would not gain the same. that's why you would only gain a few pounds in the last cycle. the bigger you get the more calories you need. there's no such thing as a control when your weight changes. and down regulation is b.s. as long as you take the proper time off. just like your body gets rid of waste it also clears the receptors. don't take it the wrong way just stating my opinion.
skalpagood response finally. that makes perfect sense strongman,. thankyou. i get a bhunch of thumbs down when i call these ignorant people on their bull when all i wanted was to hear was something intelligent and thought out. you sir have a brain in your headthanks for the response dude
Impossible for somebody to tell you that everybody is different.
You won't see gains again like you did on your first cycle, unless you manage to loose it all. But the further you get above your genetic potential the slower gain will be.