Short cycles, some thoughts

Page 1 of 5 123 ... Last
  1. Professional Member
    size's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    4,233
    Answers
    0

    Short cycles, some thoughts


    For quite some time, the concept of short cycles has been bouncing around in my mind, but since AAS seem to be a thing of the past for me I neglected writing it down. However, after reviewing the amazing gains made by jminis on his short cycle according to ALR's protocol, I decided I would write some rough ideas for discussion. Initially, one needs to recognize that these are just my thoughts on the matter and not an in depth scientific study.

    First, consider the composition of a typical cycle. The conventional cycles tend to last 8-12 weeks, but the range can reach 24+ weeks. Now examine two typical cycles, 8 weeks and 12 weeks for practical purposes. With each cycle, one ideally follows the concept of equal time on/off. However, the equal time on.off doctrine is not always followed. Particularly, when cycles tend to linger for longer periods, the time off tends to decrease. For instance, an 18 week cycle may be followed by 12 weeks off, rightly or wrongly is not significant.

    Average cycles consist of a variety of AAS from test enan to nandrolone decanoate to tren acetate to test propionate etc. However, at this point I am ignoring specific drugs/cycle construction and assuming that one has an understanding of AAS(like I said, rough ideas). Instead, I will focus on time on/off. First, consider the 8week cycle. 8 weeks on is followed by 8 weeks off for a total of 16 weeks to complete a “cycle life?. During this period, I will assume a net gain of 15lbs. Following the same 8week on/off “cycle life? one could complete 3 cycles yearly. If we generously assume, equivalent gains for each period, then one nets 45 lbs yearly. Over the course of a year, one is using AAS for 24 weeks. Moving on to the 12 week cycle following the same approach, but rather than applying 12on/off, I will use 12 on / 10 off. Realistically, I think individuals are more likely to follow this for a few reasons which I assume you can decipher. So, 12 weeks on is followed by 10 weeks off for a total of 22 weeks in a “cycle life?. Such an approach allows for two cycles yearly. Longer periods on tend to correlate with more weight gain (not always though). Consequently, I assume a net gain of 20lbs per cycle and a total net gain of 40lbs yearly. In one year, again, 24 weeks of AAS usage. In both cases there are extra weeks in each year to start a cycle but not enough time to complete a “cycle life?(time on +time off=cycle life).

    Yearly gains of 40 and 45 pounds are great. I believe the vast majority would be satisfied with such increases in mass. However, I postulate that net gains are not the only concern. Personally, I am concerned about my health 5 to 20 years from now. The side effects from AAS usage are a reality. While, they are not (in my opinion) near the extreme painted by the masses, the side effects do exist. Now in my experience, side effects correlate not only with drug dosages but also with time on. The greater period “on? tends to manifest a higher number of side effects and severity of side effects. Moving on from side effects while using AAS, one needs to consider recovery to a normal hormonal balance. Cycle length seeming has a direct impact on recovery, as does drug usage. Longer cycles trend towards longer and more difficult recovery periods. This seems especially true for the older user. Difficult recoveries can lead directly into a host of new problems, depression, weight loss, lots of bad days etc.

    Now, consider the shorter cycle approach. I will call it a burst cycle because in theory one bursts into and out of the cycle. Ideally, I believe these cycles should only last 4 or 5 weeks of AAS usage. However, I consider an off period of “time on + 2weeks? should be maintained. These noticeable 2 weeks are to add additional time where one is not using any exogenous hormones or manipulating hormones via pharmaceuticals. Following either the 4 or 5 week on, I reasonably assume one could achieve a net gain of 7.5lbs. Note, the “cycle life? of each is 10 and 12 weeks. Applying this yearly for the 4 weeks on, one could compete 5 cycles and assumingly net 37.5 lbs. Over this year actual time on, is only 20 weeks. Notice this is 4 fewer weeks of AAS usage when compared to the longer cycles.

    The key to these burst cycles are the AAS used. Ideally, one should use the base compounds but prop ester(for example) should work as well. In addition, an oral compound could be added and used for the entirety of the cycle. Drug selection may come down to preference. However, the key is to use AAS that are “fast? acting and for this reason the base compounds would make ideal selections.

    To me the “burst? protocol is more logical. In addition, I truly believe that while such an approach may not yield as great a weight gain, it will not be as taxing on one’s health. Personally, I believe this exchange is worth the cost.


    I probably made a few mistakes while writing this as I had to do it twice since my computer locked up and it is late. I hope it makes sense to you.
    Last edited by size; 06-08-2005 at 02:48 PM.


  2. Senior Member
    Cuffs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    2,193
    Answers
    0

    Nice read Size. I don't have experience with aas's, but I tend to agree with the short cycles theory. For me, if I ever turn, short cycles would be the way to go. Not necessarily for the health issues (although I do have some concern), but to gain smaller pounds of mass so it isn't so dramatic to bring attention to myself.

    I remember reading something in a bodybuilding book years ago. I can't remember which one it was, but I read it back in the late 80's or early 90's. It spoke of safe cycles being two 6 week cycles, twice a year. Basically doing a 6 week cycle every 6 months.

    I might be able to find a rat for you to try this experiment on.

  3. New Member
    Skyline00021's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Age
    31
    Posts
    10
    Answers
    0

    ^ haha

    I figure, If I decide to go ahead and do AAS .... might as well go all out

    •   
       

  4. Banned
    N4cer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    37
    Posts
    691
    Answers
    0

    If you read the whole "Building the Perfect Beast" book, he goes into layering these short cycles. So on week 4 of the 4-week cycle, you maintain that last week of the original protocol, and add in the next protocol. It's amazing. In the middle you have an estrogen & cortisol suppression phase, and it seems great.

    When I finish the book a couple of times, I'm gonna write out the protocol so I can understand it, make a list of what's needed, and get a better grasp of how to try it.

    I'm gonna be a guinea pig, once again.

    But I've tried a 4-week tren ace, test prop, nandpp cycle and loved the 4lbs of solid muscle from it.

  5. Elite Member
    Matthew D's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    5,019
    Answers
    0

    Only thing I would be wondering about would be how much stress would the extra cycles would be on the endrocine system. I remember reading something, I think some by Big Cat, that talked about that but never really explained why it would put any extra stress on the body. Also, this kinda sounds similiar to DC' cruising method except you are coming off.. I know it would be easier to control side effects if you were only using short esters..

  6. Get big or die trying
    Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Age
    32
    Posts
    898
    Answers
    0

    I really like this idea. It would be much easier for a person to be "on" for five weeks, and then "off" for seven. As opposide to being "on" for twelve weeks, and "off" for twelve. But if one is on for say 15/16 weeks does the body really need that long to recover to a normal state? I think this is a very common question, and as you stated many times people tend to lean towards shortening their "off" period.

    But would 4/5 weeks really be enough time to recover if you were constently going back on cycle. I would think after your 3rd of 4th cycle you would be completely burned out.

  7. Banned
    N4cer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    37
    Posts
    691
    Answers
    0

    Remember, that off time between short cycles is optimum time for IGF or slin cycling.
    DNP/slin would be great during that time.

  8. Get big or die trying
    Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Age
    32
    Posts
    898
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by N4cer
    Remember, that off time between short cycles is optimum time for IGF or slin cycling.
    DNP/slin would be great during that time.
    sounds like a gateway to the "never ending" cycle.

  9. Professional Member
    jminis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    4,023
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by N4cer
    If you read the whole "Building the Perfect Beast" book, he goes into layering these short cycles. So on week 4 of the 4-week cycle, you maintain that last week of the original protocol, and add in the next protocol. It's amazing. In the middle you have an estrogen & cortisol suppression phase, and it seems great.

    When I finish the book a couple of times, I'm gonna write out the protocol so I can understand it, make a list of what's needed, and get a better grasp of how to try it.

    I'm gonna be a guinea pig, once again.

    But I've tried a 4-week tren ace, test prop, nandpp cycle and loved the 4lbs of solid muscle from it.
    That's what I did. I read the book about 3 times then devised a protocol which when all said and done took me about 3 weeks. Right now as I've told Size and posted in another thread I'm on day 37 and I'm up around 19lbs. This cycle has been without a doubt the best I've run and it's funny because it's a transdermal. With ALR protocols you keep gaining. You don't gain 15lbs then stall out for 4 weeks. The phases in the cycle are key and I believe recovery as a result will run smoothly. He say's get in grow hard and fast and get the hell out before your body has time to mount a defense and he's right.

    Size you already know I agree with you. Cycles should be based around recovery. Anyone can take AAS and gain weight. The hard part is actually keeping the gains, which most typical meatheads don't. Anyway I'm not out of the woods yet as PCT is rapidly approaching but I'll make sure to keep the guys who are interested posted. later, J

  10. Professional Member
    size's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    4,233
    Answers
    0

    Some more thoughts on the topic. The info on esters is a little out of date since this is from 2002 and there are much more available today. Again, these are opinions and thoughts on the topic. This is long and I have cut some out from the original.


    by MuscleTrainee
    Background:
    I began BBing with a trainer from Germany. In educating me, he related to me that, in his time BBing there, European BBers were relatively without American influence. Common practice called for the use of short halflife ester injectables, the variety of which was very much greater than exists today, combined with mild orals like Anavar and Winstrol and, sometimes, Dbol. Short cycles(2-4 weeks) were also the norm. Most interesting, use of test was very uncommon, and considered a horror. What was commonly used was Parabolan, what we, today, call Trenbolone. Eight week cycles were virtually unheard of, and the desire to pack on 20-40 pounds in such a short time was unthinkable. European BBers took a much more unhurried pace of growth. Young, competitive BBers were very much smaller than those found in the US, today, due to this orderly pace of growth. It was only the very rare, genetically unusual BBer who was big at a young age. Europeans simply had a different outlook and different standards.

    Early on, my trainer lamented the situation he found in the US: heavy dependance upon test, long halflife esters used in long cycles, gross overeating, poor estrogen suppression, acceptance of high bodyfat percentages, and excessive lbm development in short timespans. He was horrified at what he envisioned would be the longterm consequences of widespread use of these practices. He was associated with IFBB pros, like Zhur, el Sonbaty, Schlierkamp, and Ruhl, while in Europe. He was well aware of the health complications associated with extreme muscularity. He kept reiterating "BBing is a sport for life".

    While still a natural, I began to examine how an entire philosphy of AAS use might be developed, based upon the European experience. By the time it was appropriate for me to begin AAS, years later, I already had a plan. Initially, I quietly used myself as a lab rat. The results became quite visible, and, before too long, questions followed. My trainer asked that we work together, to develop a new way for his athletes to grow. And here we are.....

    Characteristics of AAS:
    There are two clearly discernable characteristics of interest to BBers. Anabolic: muscle growth/hypertrophy. and Androgenic: strength, aggression, fat burning. Most AAS possess these two characteristics in varying ratios, and in various strengths. For example, Halotestin may be seen to produce a pure androgenic response, but no anabolic response. Deca, on the other hand, will produce anabolism with no significant androgenic response. Test produces roughly a 50 percent anabolic response, and 50 percent androgenic response. Then there is strength of response. Winstrol is a moderate, pure anabolic. Anavar is a moderate, pure androgen. Trenbolone is a very powerful androgen(80 percent of total response), much more powerful than the androgenic characteristics of test. Tren's anabolic characteristic(20 percent of total response), is weaker than that of test. And so on. I have built a complete table of response characteristics of all the AAS components we use.

    Site injection and localized growth:
    Time and time again, we have seen localized growth response to site injected, esterless and short halflife AAS. I no longer accept that a positive response is anecdotal. It's just too commonplace, in my own work. Consequently, we no longer waste gear in glutes and quads. We identify and then site inject any and all lagging bodyparts, in a rotating injection program. And we have seen some startling responses. In nearly every case, we prefer tren and an esterless AAS, for the most powerful response. There must be weak-, or non-responders, but I have yet to find any. I owe much, in this particular area, to the work of Paul Borreson.

    Cycle design:
    Cycles are assembled by, first, determining the end response characteristics desired, and assembling components whose AAS characteristics interlock together to produce that end response with a minimum of overlap, over the cycle timespan desired. Consider this cycle: Nandrolone phenylpropionate(EOD), tren(EOD), Winstrol depot((ED), optional Anavar(ED). I've remarked, elsewhere, on the desireability of pairing tren with Winstrol. We require the use of a pure androgen for EVERY cycle, to insure strength, onging muscle definition, density, and post cycle androgenicity, so Anavar is our choice for this cycle. Here, Tren is our primary androgen, and nandrolone our primary anabolic. All of these agents are selected for their lack of water retention. All are either short acting or esterless, so that meets our requirements for site injection. And, yes, we do site inject it all. We begin by frontloading the estered injectables, up to three days before cycle day zero, and add the orals and esterless injectables at cycle day minus one. On cycle day zero, the AAS is already active, with blood levels increasing. We end the injectables and orals, suitably in advance of the end of the cycle, so that, on cycle day 15, the AAS is non-inhibitory, and HTPA recovery begins immediately. Add on 14 days further system recovery, and then a cycle can begin anew. Seven weeks, total. Over a year, this might be acccomplished seven times. When HCG, and an anti-e at suitable dosage, are added to the Clomid, the HTPA may be recovered in only 2 weeks. This shortens the next cycle availability point by one week.

    Yes, it's a lot of injections. And the Winstrol hurts.

    What might be expected, in the way of results? Bulking, we have seen as much as 10 pounds lbm. Average is five pounds. Over a year, that's 35 pounds. You say, "Hell, I can grow that much in 8 weeks". I say, let's see how many times a year you can accomplish that, and over how many years do you think you will continue to accomplish that? We have this steady, measured growing, going on and on. My guess is that this approach, using only a modest bulking diet, rather than the typical American pig-out bulking diet, can be accomplished for years and years. Due to short cycle length and rational diet design, there is very little fat gain. No pressing need to cut. No need to look like the typical big, smooth BBer, who only looks cut once a year. Our people are lean, defined, and feel healthy, all the time. They only spend two weeks out of seven(or six), cycling. And, since they get normalized quickly, they can train and grow natural, more quickly, because there is none of the weeks and weeks of getting that slow AAS out of their systems. The BBer doing the typical 8 week long acting ester cycle, exists for weeks in a kind of limbo, where the blood levels are not high enough for anabolism, but are still inhibitory, and he must wait all that extra time. My people are off, longer than they are on. Their bodies, free of drugs.

    We tend to avoid test. Not completely; just most of the time. What we found is that, anytime you use test, it magnifies the sides of whatever you use with it. Tren, used in rational dosages, is relatively free of sides, and causes fewer overall sides during cycles. We use tren, like the typical BBer uses test. With tren, you get much more response, with much lower dosages, with greater androgenic intensity. Someone once wrote that tren was "the gear of the gods". Indeed, the Europeans brought to BBing AAS, a very great gift. We do use test, but only for very specialized purposes.

    We only use one type of eight week bulk cycle. That for Boldenone, which now can only be obtained in a very long halflife ester. We are working with a supplier, and are patiently awaiting him to provide us with our first esterless Boldenone. Testing will begin immediately afterwords, to develop new dosage and protocols, following which, we expect to end our use of nandrolone phenylpropionate. Too many of our clients exhibit some degree of bloat from progesterone aromatization, emerging from the nandrolone. We consider any bloat, from any origin, entirely unacceptable, on health and esthetic grounds.

    Bodyfat gain on cycles:
    Ever notice how productive of muscle, a cycle usually is, during the first four weeks, and how it slows down and bodyfat accumulates, during the second four weeks? You end up eating more, in the attempt to return things to the former rate. More bodyfat. Finally, the whole process slows down for good. What's going on? The common explanation is that you are getting bigger, so that requires more nutrition. We say no. We say the body realizes what is going on, it exhausts and compensates, and body metabolism and developmental processes simply will no longer support this process. But you continue to eat. And that food has got no place else to go, but be turned into fat, with unproductive lbm production.

    Our short cycle designs, whether for 2, 3, or 4 weeks features tren, as a foundation, which is a potent fat burner, due to powerful androgenicity, and will not aromatize to estrogen. And a diet, which is clean, and appropriately sized for rational lbm gain, while minimizing conversion to fat. Later, the body is clean of AAS, and primed for most sensitive and effective response, before the cycle begins. The conversion from nutrition to muscle takes place under optimum conditions, at low bodyfat levels. The AAS ramp-up is swift and full, and the cycle ends before the system can de-sensitize and cause spillover of nutrition to bodyfat.

    Estrogen pileup is another cause of bodyfat accumulation, during the typical 8 week, long halflife ester cycle. I suggest that readers visit the AE zine Issue 46, and download the blood concentration calculator from the excellent article on blood concentration of various halflife esters of AAS. Then, plug in your long halflife ester cycle components, and witness the startling blood level concentrations of what you are injecting, late in the cycle. Using the typical paltry anti-e dosages of the typical BBer, is it any wonder that, late in the cycle, estrogen levels build up out of control, and bodyfat follows?

    Estrogen and anti-e:
    It is an obsolete belief that estrogen is necessary in any cycle. Indeed, ANY amount of estrogen is BAD in any cycle! There is not one study which supports the notion. But the idea lived on in yet another obsolete notion; that water weight is good weight, in a cycle. That, water introduced into the muscle, causes increased lifts, and by lifting heavier, greater growth is obtained. The experts would purposely advise minimal amounts of anti-estrogen drugs, only to minimize the chance of gyno, but to insure lots of this, supposedly, desireable water weight. On the AE boards, I have witnessed these experts advising NO anti-e's, but only to have some Nolvadex at hand, to deal with gyno, should it appear. Not only do you end up with fake strength and fake muscle size, but, at the same time, the estrogen buildup causes high blood pressure, electrolyte imbalance, and a host of health issues. There is water buildup in the lower back to the extent that posts frequently document BBers in pain, cramps, and difficulty, attempting deads. The champions of this approach say "Oh just take some ibuprofen, and you will be just fine". Try asking your liver what it thinks about that approach. Following the cycle, the water disappears, along with the strength and size it fooled the user into believing was real muscle. This often causes depression, and chases the user into a course of Creatine, to re-introduce that fake size and strength. The muscle character appears smooth, and the density is poor. When the BBer diets down, all this is lost, and the truth is seen. It's no wonder that certain other experts advise that BBers never come off AAS, so this scenario may never be exposed for what it is: a rollercoaster of reality versus water weight. I agree with them. It is not healthy to run back and forth between lost size and fullness caused by water weight. But it also is not a good thing to stay on AAS, all the time, either. This is a totally brain dead approach to AAS use. And the BBer who engages in it never attains the quality, defined physique he deserves. It's just alot of smooth water weight and high bodyfat.

    And bodyfat. Everyone should know that the presence of excess estrogen causes fat deposition. The greater and the longer the exposure to elevated levels of estrogen, the greater the bodyfat accumulation. Endos, listen up; stay away from any situation which creates elevated estrogen levels. Everyone, listen up; it is OBSOLETE cycle technology to enable anything but minimal levels of estrogen, at any time. Estrogen is evil, and it is NOT your friend. Using anti-e's cannot reduce estrogen to levels below which the male body cannot function properly. It requires very little estrogen to function, and no anti-e removes it all.

    What to do? Begin, with an entirely different approach. Say that ANY water weight is BAD weight. That estrogen must be banished, to the fullest rational extent. And that the muscle you grow and see is, in fact, muscle, and not water. That the muscle produced will be dense and well defined. A quality physique. How, then does one obtain that increased strength, which the water provided, to enhance growth during the cycle? As stated, we first kill off the estrogen and bloat. Second, we emphasize the introduction of powerful androgens into the cycle structure. I am speaking, once again, of tren and anavar. Together, these components make you VERY strong. And with NO bloat or estrogen required. The concentrated androgenicity encourages intense, aggressive workouts, while also encouraging fat burning. It is very commonplace to observe body recompositions during such cycles. In other words, you get big and lose bodyfat, simultaneously. The androgenicity also produces significantly increased muscle density and definition. At cycle end, what you end up with, is the real deal. Solid muscle, growth, and increased definition. No need to rush to the nearest container of creatine to stem your losses. And that strength is yours, to keep. And no test.....

    Now, go back to that blood concentration calculator, and compare the blood concentrations of the typical 75 mg EOD of tren, to what you were subjecting yourself to, with that long halflife ester cycle. No stress caused by estrogen pileup, either. Now, you tell me which alternative is better.

    What do we use to suppress Estrogen? Well, we formerly used grams of Arimidex per day. Arimidex is now an antique for us. We use Femara. We prefer one 2.5 mg tab ED. Our clients are kept dry as a bone. We will begin to study Aromasin, in mid-September. Aromasin utilizes a different approach to Estrogen control, which promises to be even more powerful than Femara. But research indicates that IGF-1 production is not suppressed by Femara, but may, in fact, be enhanced by it. We do not see that with Aromasin. Time and experimentation will tell.

    Most importantly, we keep our people on anti-e, post cycle, during the HTPA recovery process, and later. This both speeds recovery of the HTPA, as well as minimizing fat buildup, while hormone levels fluctuate wildly.

    Androgenicity and quality:
    BBers commonly justify their long cycles by saying that they need the long cycle to enable "consolidation". They observe that this effect only occurs late in the cycle. Why is this? It's because the androgen level of the Sustanon test, typically used, takes that long to pile up and affect the muscularity of the BBer. But what about Trenbolone? Almost without fail, users commonly report density and hardening to appear within a few weeks. Why is this? Because the androgenic response of tren is so much more powerful than that of test. You can get this response to produce quality muscle at dosages of only 75 mg EOD, in less than a month. In a Sustanon test, it takes many weeks to accumulate an immense blood concentration, to achieve the same result. It is commonplace to observe tren users burning fat, while they cycle. Sust users never report this effect. Why? Once again, the androgenic response of tren is so much greater than that of test. Intense androgenicity induces fat burning. If Anavar is added, the androgenicity effect is intensified, still further.

    Ever hear of the term "muscle maturity"? It describes muscle which is dense and defined. The commonly accepted belief is that it takes years and years to acquire this muscle characteristic. But why? Because, using test, the exposure to the muscle hardening androgenicity only occurs for about two weeks in the typical long cycle. And that cycle can only be repeated a few times a year. In the tren/anavar-based short cycle, the exposure to muscle hardening androgenicity occurs for longer periods, and the cycle can be repeated many times a year. "Muscle maturity", and quality, appears with rapidity, and not with years and years. I see muscle quality in only one year of regular short cycling, which I never see in the typical long cycle BBer, unless it occurs for years. Which would you prefer?

    The issue of health:
    There are those who say the typical American method of cycling, using long acting ester cycles, for 8 weeks or more, and eating 7-10,000 calories per day, for all that time, is no danger to health. To that, I say this: in the millions of years of human evolution, at no time, ever, has the male of our species been exposed to the barrage of hormonal, metabolic, and developmental pressure and manipulation, as occurs during the long acting ester eight week cycle. Do you really believe our bodies were engineered and evolved to deal with this attack, as well as the stress of being forced to add 20-40 pounds of lbm and bodyfat in this same timespan, over and over, again? Don't be a fool. If you believe so, then you are whistling past the cemetery. And there are additional fools, who would have you believe that staying on this course, continuously, can do you no harm. This is, currently, an unprecedented, uncontrolled lab experiment, taking place all over the world, with thousands of men as lab rats. The long term outcome cannot be predicted by anyone, today. True, every single one of us will die, someday. My people and I have no intention of hastening the ar***** of that inevitable day, just to look big in a coffin, as we are laid to our eternal rest. What the hell is YOUR hurry? And, what if you don't die? What if you are forced to leave your beloved sport, and spend the rest of your days, living with hypertension and heart damage due to tachycardia. And kidney damage caused by the hypertension. And still other health issue possibilities. Is this any way to live? It's a personal value judgement and risk assessment process. Step back for a moment, and re-evaluate your position and priorities..............

    Summary:
    I have presented, above, only the most basic introduction to my philosophy and approach to short cycling, and offered only a simple example out of a program which I spent years developing. I have devised an entire series of special-purpose cycles, each of which embody most, if not all of the above principles.

    The purpose of the short cycle is to employ moderate dosages of short halflife ester and esterless injectable and oral AAS, combined with moderate and healthy diet, to promote moderate stress anabolic growth, over time. This same process results in very high quality muscle production, which only increases with each cycle, and minimal health impact. It assumes a long term outlook. It is intended for the mature and rational BBer, who expects to remain in the sport for the rest of his life. If you truly love BBing, you never want to leave, and you want to keep your interest and grow, then consider how the short cycle might be what you need for your future in our beloved sport.

  11. Professional Member
    size's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    4,233
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by jminis
    Size you already know I agree with you. Cycles should be based around recovery. Anyone can take AAS and gain weight. The hard part is actually keeping the gains, which most typical meatheads don't.
    You are correct. Recovery is so important but I think many individual neglect to recognize this fact.

  12. Professional Member
    jminis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    4,023
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by size
    You are correct. Recovery is so important but I think many individual neglect to recognize this fact.
    I read that article a while ago it's a good one about short cycles. Size what it basically comes down to is personal preference. Some people will argue for longer cycles and some for shorter ones, it's really up to the individual to look at all the facts and decide. As a result of reading article after article and book after book I've come to the conclusion that short cycles are better. Great gains, easier recovery, less sides, easier to manipulate, ect.... ect...

  13. Professional Member
    size's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    4,233
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by jminis
    ISize what it basically comes down to is personal preference. Some people will argue for longer cycles and some for shorter ones, it's really up to the individual to look at all the facts and decide....
    I agree with you.

    I think this is a good discussion to let people see that there are alternatives. One needs to decide on goals and concerns, then address them properly.
    Last edited by size; 06-08-2005 at 02:48 PM.

  14. New Member
    mauibuilt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    368
    Answers
    0

    They are leaning towards androgenic compounds for the short cycles...say goodbye to the hair on your head correct?

  15. Professional Member
    size's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    4,233
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by mauibuilt
    They are leaning towards androgenic compounds for the short cycles...
    I think test suspension and bold base or prop would make an ideal short cycle.

  16. Get big or die trying
    Sticks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Age
    32
    Posts
    898
    Answers
    0

    That article is a great read. It's really got me thinking about my upcoming cycle. I'm just not crazy about the idea of trying to recover after being suppressed for 12, or more weeks. As well as attempting to keep gains made over that time period.

  17. Board Supporter
    Harland's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  259 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    28
    Posts
    498
    Answers
    0

    so what would a typical short cycle look like?

    also it is basically 4-5 weeks on, followed by 4-5 week PCT and then repeat?

  18. Professional Member
    jminis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    4,023
    Answers
    0

    Shorter esters or bases I think are best but you could use longer ester for 40day cycles just as easily. You just have to design it differently. ALR's book has plenty of sample cycles using test enanth, deca, test cyp ect.

    Anyone who's interested in shorter blasting cycles I would recommend Building the perfect beast by Author L Rea. His idea's and protocol's are all based around recovery and phase cycling, great stuff.

  19. Advanced Member
    Jeff's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    641
    Answers
    0

    I had a discussion on another board about short cycles here is an exeprt. There are some sample stacks, most of which are short ester and an oral.

    As many of you already know I have had decent success with short cycles. I, along with some of my friends and clients, have had good results with cycles as short as 14 days long.
    I no longer do cycles longer than 4-6 weeks as I am simply sick of the sides that build up after 4-6 weeks and I no longer feel comfortable walking around with a ****ty lipid profile for months on end.


    WHAT QUALIFIES AS SHORT

    "In my book" any cycle 6 weeks or less is a short cycle. Personally I now think that 4 weekers give the best gains to sides ratio.

    You can do 2 weeks "on" 2-4 weeks "off"
    You can do 4 weeks on and 4-6 weeks off
    Or you can do 6 weeks on with 6-8 weeks off.
    4 weeks on and 4 weeks off, year round, gives excellent results and you are only "on" half the year.

    WHY DO THEM

    #1.
    If you are one of those bro's that does longer cycles, of say 10-12 weeks or more, and then wisely takes an equal amount of time off, and you are tired of loosing so much of your gains post cycle due to the length of the time off...the yoyo affect....then why not try doing shorter cycles with their corresponding shorter off times...... obviously you don't gain as much with a short cycle but then again you don't loose as much post cycle either due to the shorter off time.

    Now... over say a year of doing 4 on 4-6 off you are gong to get very similar results as that seen from doing longer cycles of say 12 "on" 12-14 off but with less yo-yo affect and less sides. In fact most of my clients that do 4-6 week cycles tell me that they are actually getting better gains over a years use.

    #2.
    Do them to have less of a negative impact on ones lipid profile and to have less total time per year with a poor lipid profile.

    Some of you may not know that androgens, taken at even newbie bodybuilding doses, alter everyones lipid profile. Everyone sees their hdl(good cholesterol) take a huge "nosedive" and most also see their ldl(bad cholesterol) go up to some degree but not to the same extent that hdl decreases. Generally hdl decreases 40-70% in as little as 2 weeks and ldl increases an average of 35% in 4 weeks, In my experience this reduction in hdl puts all bro's hdl WELL below the pathological minimum of 35. My ldl does not elevate above the pathological level of 160 but others see ldl's well above 160.
    Lipid levels typically normalize within 3-10 weeks after dicontinuation.
    (details taken from Medscape article)

    Here are my "numbers" taken after week 7 of my last long cycle of test 750mg/week and tren 75mg/day...powerful stack but not a huge dose of gear. I have had numbers just as bad with less powerful gear and lower doses.

    Total cholesterol 180...not too bad
    ldl 160...not very good
    hdl 11.6...terrible
    cholesterol to hdl ratio 15.7 to 1...ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE...this is when my doc and I had a COW at the same time.
    Triglycerides 50...good.

    This is my normal "baseline" without roids.

    Chol...152...great!
    hdl 45-48 good
    ldl 106 ..great
    tri 50 ..good.
    chol to hdl ratio..3.16 to 1....good

    As far as I and my endochrinologist are concerned this lipid altering side of gear use is the single worst side of steroid use.
    In as little as a week hdl decreases. Personally my brother-in-law and I really see a huge decrease after about 3 weeks "on' cycle. The last time I did a long cycle my total cholesterol to hdl ratio plummeted to 15 to 1!...My doc had a cow and so did I!!

    According to current medical thought ones total cholesterol to hdl ratio is the single greatest LIPID indicator for assessing ones chances of developing heart disease. Men with low total cholesterols but with crappy hdl have gone on to develope heart disease WITHOUT ANY OTHER RISK FACTORS such as smoking, or diabetes.

    Ideally you want an hdl of at least 40 and a ratio of 3.5 to 1 or better.

    My mentor, the late great MIKE MENTZER died of heart disease at age 50 and I know for a fact that ARNOLD had more than valve surgery(I am an operating room nurse as well as a trainer)


    #3.
    Do them to decrease liver stress.
    Generally long cycles with non 17aa roids are not that hard on the liver but sometimes one can get into trouble. The short cycle allows for less total stress on the liver and the frequent "off" times allows the liver to regenerate very well.
    Generally a healthy liver can take pretty big "hits" for short periods of time without any problem ...it is long term stress that cause liver damage(as seen with elevated GGT enzyme levels)

    #4.
    Do them if you want to "tone down" your use of steroids.

    #5.
    Do them if you do NOT want to use HCG during a cycle to prevent testicular atrophy. HPTA shut down will be complete in as little as a week "on" but testicualr atrophy is minimal due to the short length of this shut down. This then allows for better HPTA recovery post cycle.
    It is small testes that makes HPTA recovery slow because GnRH from the hypothalamus and LH from the pituitary normally rebound pretty rapidly.
    * There will be some testicular shrinkage in any cycle so if you do 4 "on" 4 "off" for several cycles in a row then it would be a good idea to use hcg at 500iu's every 3rd day while "on" to prevent testicular atrophy...the 4 weeks "off" may not be enough time to allow for complete testicular recovery and over the span of several cycles this may impact your HPTA recovery.

    You certainly can use hcg while on any short cycle if you like so as to prevent any testicular shrinkage but it really isn't needed.

    #6.
    Do them if you do not want to see much in the way of water retention and do not want to use an estrogen inhibitor or an ace inhibitor(diuretic)


    #7.
    Do them if you get high blood pressure and do not wish to use the above mentioned ancillaries.

    #8. Do them if you are sick of androgenic sides such as ance, prostate hypertrophy and hair loss(if prone to hair loss) etc etc.
    Androgen sides come on for two reason...dose used and especially length of time "on". I do not get acne until after 4 weeks on and then I get hammered.....and I hate it.

    #9.
    Do them if you are tired of walking around with high estrogen levels for months on end and do not wish to or cannot afford to use an estrogen inhibitor. High estrogen levels are NOT good for the prostate at all!

    You certainly can use an estrogen inhibitor while on any short cycle if you do not want elevated estrogen levels and next to no water retention.


    WHY NOT TO DO THEM

    Obviously if you compete at a high level then short cycles are probably not the best for you, BUT I think they are the best way to use steroids for the vast majority of bro's.
    Top competitors need to be "on" either all the time or most of the time....thats unfortunate but usually necessary in order to get freaky huge which is now needed to win big.


    WHAT TO EXPECT

    If one is not yet at ones natural maximum level of muscular developement then very good gains can be seen of up to 15 pounds and 10 pounds kept after a 4 weeker...as long as you train correctly as a natural post cycle.

    If one is off gear and has dropped to ones natural max then a short cycle can add up to 10 pounds. If you take no more than 6 weeks off after each four weeker you will not loose much...then in each successive cycle you can still gain but the gains will be smaller the further you get from your natural max.

    Those that are off cycle and have not yet shrunk down to their natural max can still gain well with successive short cycles but don't expect to win at the national level.

    One of the things I like about short cycles is the short time "off" between cycles.......muscular atrophy is minimal during the off time and you are allowing for frequent bodily normalization after minimal time "on". LESS SIDES IN GENERAL, LESS TIME WITH A ****TY LIPID PROFILE and LESS MUSCLE LOSS POST CYCLE.

    NOTE: You cannot get "freaky big" in this way...that takes very big doses and spending most of the year, for years on end, on steroids as well as GH and slin, and that my freinds is simply not a good idea unless you plan to make your living as a bodybuilder.

    Getting pretty darn big in small steps is a safer way to use gear IMHO...and it messes less with one head too. Some guys really get depressed during "off" times of 12 or more weeks waiting to start their next cycle.


    GEAR CHOICE and RATIONAL

    The idea behind short cycles is to "get in" quick, hit the androgen receptors hard, get some gains, and then get the hell out as fast as possible so as to minimize sides. So with this in mind one should only use orals and rapid acting/clearing injectables. The limited time "on' simply doesn't justify the use of the "slower" esterfied injectables like deca etc. Also, these same roids take too long to clear the system and that too goes against the philosophy of short cycles.

    The gear choosen should be powerful for best results and doses need to be decent as well in order to get the most from the short time on.
    You can use mild gear like anavar but your results will be reduced.

    BEST Gear

    d-bol
    test prop
    tren
    anadrol

    BEST stacks.

    Personally I think d-bol/tren cannot be beat. There is only one roid that is better than testosterone, in the short run, IMHO and that is d-bol...too bad it's 17aa.

    Test prop/tren
    Test prop/tren/winny
    Test prop/anadrol
    Test prop/d-bol

    STACKS AND DOSE EXAMPLES

    Novice... TREN/D-BOL....

    Tren 50mg/day for 4 weeks and d-bol 30mg/day in 4 divided doses per day(one right before bed) for 4 weeks.
    Two days after last tren do clomid at 200-300mg on day one individed doses and then 50-100mg/day for a week and then 50mg a day for 3 more weeks. OR...Nolva at 80mg on day one in divided doses followed by 40mg/day for a week and then 20mg/day for 3 more weeks.
    Have nolva or clomid on hand for gyno protection.

    More advanced...200 of tren on day one as a front load to get tren levels up pronto and then 75mg/day for 4 weeks. D-bol 50mg/day in 4 divided doses for 4 weeks. SERMS as above

    Novice...TEST PROP/TREN

    Test prop 75mg/day for 4 weeks and tren 50mg/day for 4 weeks. Serms as above. Nolva on hand.

    more advanced.....Test prop 300mg on day one and then 100-200mg/day for 4 weeks. Tren 75mg/day. An estrogen inhibitor might be needed.

    MEGA STACK... ADVANCED
    Test prop 300mg on day one and then 100mg /day for 4 weeks, d-bol 50mg/day and tren 75mg/day......LOOK THE HELL OUT! Have the nolva on the tip of your tongue he he he ...arimidex at 1-1.5mg/day would be wise even for the short 4 week period.

    SINGLE STEROIDS

    D-bol really is an unreal roid and as I said it is even better than test in the short run IMHO.
    One can get very nice results from d-bol alone at 50mg/day for 4-6 weeks. Don't take it for longer than 6 weeks though as it is a 17aa roid and as such is somewhat hard on the liver.
    D-bol for 6 weeks at a time was a favorite in the old days and produced excellent gains.

    Test prop can be run all by itself at 75-200mg/day with great results too.


    BLOOD LIPIDS

    You might want to consider taking the worlds best hdl improver while "on" cycle...NIACIN!
    Nothing even comes close to niacins hdl incresing powers. Personally it has not helped my hdl while "on' nor has it helped my brother-in-laws, but you might see some level of improvement(don't expect a great improvement though since androgens do such a great job of messing with hepatic lipaze)

    Nicain comes in three forms...regular, extended release(Niaspan) and non flush niacin. Niaspan is the best and works well at 1500mg/day taken once daily. Regular niacin works well at 500-100mg three times a day but it gives a nasty ichy flush for a while after taking each pill.
    Non flush works fairly well at 2-3 grams a day but not as good as the others IMHO.


    Use nicain while "off" for sure as it will rapidly improve your ****ty hdl level.
    NOTE*** niacin can be hard on the liver so never use it with acutane which is hard on the liver. You really should have liver panels done if you use niacin for more than 6 weeks and be followed by a doctor(Swale would be good) especially if you are on steroids as well.

    I recommed that all be followed by a doctor while on steroids or at the very least educate yourself about the sides of steroid use and how to avoid the pitfalls by following yourself with blood work at labs that do not require a docs script(especially liver panels and psa for us older guys) And guys at a minimum also watch your blood pressure while on gear at your local drug store monitoring station....keep the BP under 140 over 90 if you can especailly if you are "on" for months on end.


    Best of gains and health to you all.

    RG
    Short cycle 'case' study
    http://www.mesomorphosis.com/article...e-study-01.htm

  20. Board Supporter
    Harland's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  259 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    28
    Posts
    498
    Answers
    0

    this doesn't sound that bad imo
    Novice...TEST PROP/TREN

    Test prop 75mg/day for 4 weeks and tren 50mg/day for 4 weeks. Serms as above. Nolva on hand.


    You could split that up into EOD injects, instead of ED injects?

    This might be a stupid a stupid questions but,
    what if you went off longer then suggested.

    say do a 4 week then do like 8 weeks off, then a 6 and wait 12 weeks. Still be as effective?

  21. Professional Member
    size's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    4,233
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by Harland
    this doesn't sound that bad imo
    Novice...TEST PROP/TREN

    Test prop 75mg/day for 4 weeks and tren 50mg/day for 4 weeks. Serms as above. Nolva on hand.


    You could split that up into EOD injects, instead of ED injects?

    This might be a stupid a stupid questions but,
    what if you went off longer then suggested.
    Staying off longer is fine. I you read my original post you would see that I think longer time off is ideal.

    The only problem I see for novices is the frequent injections. EOD can work but injection frequency is dependent on choice of drugs

  22. Advanced Member
    Jeff's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    641
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by size
    Staying off longer is fine. I you read my original post you would see that I think longer time off is ideal.

    The only problem I see for novices is the frequent injections. EOD can work but injection frequency is dependent on choice of drugs
    The link from the case study above has a 2 week on followed by a 4 week off cycle. The subject also starts 'PCT'/anti-E with the first shot and I think he is opting to do a get-in-and-hit-it-quick with a larger first day front load and ED injects. I was going to give it a try, any thoughts or suggestions?

  23. New Member
    BAD_MO_FO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Age
    37
    Posts
    119
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by jminis
    That's what I did. I read the book about 3 times then devised a protocol which when all said and done took me about 3 weeks. Right now as I've told Size and posted in another thread I'm on day 37 and I'm up around 19lbs. This cycle has been without a doubt the best I've run and it's funny because it's a transdermal. With ALR protocols you keep gaining. You don't gain 15lbs then stall out for 4 weeks. The phases in the cycle are key and I believe recovery as a result will run smoothly. He say's get in grow hard and fast and get the hell out before your body has time to mount a defense and he's right.

    Size you already know I agree with you. Cycles should be based around recovery. Anyone can take AAS and gain weight. The hard part is actually keeping the gains, which most typical meatheads don't. Anyway I'm not out of the woods yet as PCT is rapidly approaching but I'll make sure to keep the guys who are interested posted. later, J
    jminis,

    Do you have your cylce posted. I did a search and could not find it. If you do could you please post a link.

    thanks.

  24. Board Supporter
    Harland's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  259 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    28
    Posts
    498
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by BAD_MO_FO
    jminis,

    Do you have your cylce posted. I did a search and could not find it. If you do could you please post a link.

    thanks.
    bump, i would like to see of the cycles that people have done out there.

  25. Keto Jedi / HomeBrew Advocate
    chi_town's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    173
    Answers
    0

    From a safety standpoint, shorter cycles just make sense.
    I subscribed to the short cycle theory even a few years ago.....while messing with dermal 1-test, 4ad and such. While my gains were not amazing...........they were good......anywhere from 5-10 lbs on 2 or 3 week cycles. I did this more for safety then anything else.

    In the AS world, I have never done a cycle under 12 weeks. I don't know, maybe I have thrown a bit of safety to the wind (which might need to change). Currently ending week 9 of 13 of a prop/tren/winny cycle that I even front loaded some m1t I had lying around.......LOL.

    One of the other thing I wonder about is how shorter cycles will effect ones sense of wellness. I mean ****, I love being on..........the way I feel when on is hard to decribe.
    The yo-yo'ing effect form shorter cycles emotionally might make me crazier then I already am. But then again with short cycles......this yo-yo'ing may be non-existant.

    There is no doubt in my mind the longer off, the safer things are. But I must say that especially this cycle.......my best gains both mass and strength wise did not start to happen until about week 5 or 6. What would I think of my current cycle if I had stopped at week 4 or 5 ? I bet I would have been a bit disappointed. Maybe front loading harder would have made things a bit different.

    Seeing that I am staying at no more then 2 cycles a year.......I'll probably stick to longer cycles. But who know's, when I only have so much of this or so much of that......maybe I'll try a short cycle.

    Nice discussion.........Nice thread Size !

    -- Chi

  26. Board Supporter
    Harland's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  259 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    28
    Posts
    498
    Answers
    0

    Alright you say you start seeing your gains around week 6.

    Ok if you were to do 8 weeks on and 8 weeks off three times a year, like size said.
    Would total to 24 weeks on, which is basically how much you are on right now.

    And in the scenario of 4weeks on 4 weeks off, you would still be in the 24 weeks on area.

    So the differences I see are, if you did longer cycles, you would probably gain more in size and strength, but also in sides.

    So in conclusion, it would come down to your goals.

  27. Jergo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,436
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by size
    by MuscleTrainee
    Cycle design:
    Consider this cycle: Nandrolone phenylpropionate(EOD), tren(EOD), Winstrol depot((ED), optional Anavar(ED).
    That cycle seems very odd to me. Okay, tren, NPP, winny, and var? Two orals, and two of the most supressive compounds stacked together...LOL

    I guess you could get away with the sides more since you'll only be on for a short time span, but that just seems greek to me...

    Although, don't knock it till you try it, right?

    Jminis, let us all know how it pans out man, I'd like to hear some more personal experiences....

  28. Keto Jedi / HomeBrew Advocate
    chi_town's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    173
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by Harland
    Alright you say you start seeing your gains around week 6.

    Ok if you were to do 8 weeks on and 8 weeks off three times a year, like size said.
    Would total to 24 weeks on, which is basically how much you are on right now.

    And in the scenario of 4weeks on 4 weeks off, you would still be in the 24 weeks on area.

    So the differences I see are, if you did longer cycles, you would probably gain more in size and strength, but also in sides.

    So in conclusion, it would come down to your goals.
    Agreed ! Yeah, I can see 8 weekers.

    So keeping in mind goals, side/safety........ect.......
    whould a protocol for benefit one person better over another. What I mean, is like, would guys cutting be better served with longer cycles..........and bulker's......better off with shorter ? Also being endo, ecto or meso.........how would these factors play into one choosing a protocol ?

    I guess it really boils down to......plan it, try and find out.



  29. Board Supporter
    Harland's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  259 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    28
    Posts
    498
    Answers
    0

    I think on benifet of short cycles could be the off time and how you bridge it to the next on time.

    As someone said, it would be optimal for those 4-8 weeks to do some IGF/SLIN/DNP/CLEN or whatever you want.

  30. Advanced Member
    Jeff's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    641
    Answers
    0

    size,

    the article by MuscleTrainee states that he is using tren and nor and no test in his cycle. What are your thoughts on that? I was under the impression that it is not a good idea to mix the two together becuase of progesterone induced gyno. Also he states that Winny is primarily anabolic not androgenic, does that sound correct?

  31. Professional Member
    size's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Age
    42
    Posts
    4,233
    Answers
    0

    I do not fully agree with the information in the article, but rather the idea or notion of the short cycle is the importance of the article. Cycles adjustments should be made in my opinion. "Consider this cycle: Nandrolone phenylpropionate(EOD), tren(EOD), Winstrol depot((ED), optional Anavar(ED). " is NOT a cycle I would choose.

  32. Advanced Member
    KingMeso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Age
    33
    Posts
    606
    Answers
    0

    I am very interested in this concept. My next cycle will be a short one. One of the downsides I see in trying to put a short cycle together, is that you're limited to a couple of AAS b/c of their half lives.

  33. Board Supporter
    Harland's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  259 lbs.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Age
    28
    Posts
    498
    Answers
    0

    but you are limited to some of the best ones, fina, test, dbol.... etc.

  34. Jergo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,436
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by KingMeso
    I am very interested in this concept. My next cycle will be a short one. One of the downsides I see in trying to put a short cycle together, is that you're limited to a couple of AAS b/c of their half lives.
    Well, you can get any compound with a shorter ester or no ester for that matter and their usually widely available....

    I'm still wanting to do my test suspension/bold suspension mix this coming winter....I wasn't planning on a short length though...probably around 10-12 weeks....I probably won't even use longer esters again...short and fast acting is the way to go IMO..

  35. Advanced Member
    Jeff's Avatar
    Stats
    5'10"  180 lbs.
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Age
    44
    Posts
    641
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by Jergo
    Well, you can get any compound with a shorter ester or no ester for that matter and their usually widely available....

    I'm still wanting to do my test suspension/bold suspension mix this coming winter....I wasn't planning on a short length though...probably around 10-12 weeks....I probably won't even use longer esters again...short and fast acting is the way to go IMO..
    You are a tougher man then me Jergo, 2xDay for 12 weeks, I am just sore thinking about it.

    So from all the articles posted, it looks like an oral (dbol, winny, var, etc...) is essential for the success of a short cycle?

  36. Jergo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,436
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff
    You are a tougher man then me Jergo, 2xDay for 12 weeks, I am just sore thinking about it.

    So from all the articles posted, it looks like an oral (dbol, winny, var, etc...) is essential for the success of a short cycle?

    Hehe, yeah well I haven't started it yet, so my thoughts on twice daily injects might take a turn for the worse once I'm already on....LOL..

    But yeah, orals would be good to use, and you could use them for the duration of the cycle since it's only 4-6 weeks....

  37. New Member
    nidan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Age
    39
    Posts
    14
    Answers
    0

    Talking


    Hi,

    first Id like to congratulate all of you for this damn good board...
    second I want to excuse for my poor english.
    I´m very fascinated by the short cycles and I think I´ll try one of these.
    I want to use 75mg of Tren acetat eod and 20-30mg of oxandolone ed.
    What do you think about ist? Will it be ok? I don´t want to bloat and keep the sides as low as possible.
    I´m planing for a 3-4 week cycle.
    with at least 3-4 month off in between. My goal is not to look lilke a freakin monster
    Thanx
    Nidan from Germany

    BTW Here the bros are doin 20+ weeks cycles...ts much to long for me

  38. Registered User
    Beelzebub's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    35
    Posts
    6,680
    Answers
    0

    Quote Originally Posted by nidan
    Hi,

    first Id like to congratulate all of you for this damn good board...
    second I want to excuse for my poor english.
    I´m very fascinated by the short cycles and I think I´ll try one of these.
    I want to use 75mg of Tren acetat eod and 20-30mg of oxandolone ed.
    What do you think about ist? Will it be ok? I don´t want to bloat and keep the sides as low as possible.
    I´m planing for a 3-4 week cycle.
    with at least 3-4 month off in between. My goal is not to look lilke a freakin monster
    Thanx
    Nidan from Germany

    BTW Here the bros are doin 20+ weeks cycles...ts much to long for me
    might want to throw some test prop in there with it for a great cycle. 150 EOD would go nicely.

  39. New Member
    nidan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Age
    39
    Posts
    14
    Answers
    0

    150mg of pro eod?
    is it best to inject ed? i mean day 1. tren, day 2. pro, day 3. tren and so on or better to use all together in one siringe?
    and what about the recovery? what ist best to use: nolva, clomid finastride?

    nidan

  40. Registered User
    Beelzebub's Avatar
    Stats
    6'1"  240 lbs.
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Age
    35
    Posts
    6,680
    Answers
    0

    yeah, you could do it that way if you wanted but personally i would put it all in one syringe that way i wouldn't have to stick myself ed. i'd go for about 8 weeks with it and have clomid and nolva as PCT. pretty simple and common cycle.

  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-01-2011, 11:39 PM
  2. Need some thoughts on an upcoming cycle
    By TheDarkHalf in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-27-2010, 01:59 PM
  3. New & First Cycle - Some Questions
    By gettin'old in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-29-2003, 08:29 PM
  4. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-29-2003, 07:36 PM
  5. bulking agent mid-short cycle
    By khafra in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-28-2002, 10:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in