strength post ph cycle

Page 2 of 2 First 12
  1. PC1
    PC1's Avatar

    Originally posted by maggmaster
    Yes the study was done sans androgens it was based on percent body fat vrs over all mass,I will try and post the study, we looked at it in one of my staitistics classes.
    Magg.......

    I'd be very interested in seeing that study if you can put your hands on it fairly easily. Moderator Matthew D and I have been having similar discussions in another thread, I'm sure he'd be delighted to see it also.

    Thanks


  2. There are so many concepts in your posts PC1 that could be explored into much greater detail, it's hard to know where to start, lol. I'm just going to rattle a few things off the top of my head:

    1. Cycling of androgens and training should be blatantly obvious to anyone in this game, anyone who has even read anything about BB'ing. I do see your point about lifts, although standard advice isn't "bad" necessarily. I agree that one should probably lower the weight some when off cycle, but the rest of the advice is vaild IMO. Lower the volume and keep cals high, makes sense to keep gains. If you disagree with those, I'd like to know why exactly.

    2. Steroid use is different now than 15 years ago, and I'm sure you know that, but it seems not to be incorporated enough into your theories IMO. Even though many still follow the old school way of things, not all do. Oral only cycles were common then, and ancillaries were not always used, among many other differences such as stacking and available compounds. With time comes knowledge, and this IMO has improved the chances of "keeping gains".

    3. We definitely need to attempt to define the "endocrine system's limit". Your theories are nearly inarguable considering that the word "limit" implies a certain intangible line that cannot be crossed. If something is a "limit", then it cannot be surpassed (obviously our context implies with normal hormone levels), so your statement is redundant in a way. The goal of everyone here is to find and extend that alleged limit. Maybe a better question is: can we, through many different means, extend our natural "limit"? If we continually improve our body's ability to retain mass by diet, training, and reasonable anabolic use, will that not extend this "limit"? The body is built to adapt, and if we force it to adapt to lean mass accruel by manipulating as many channels as possible, even without androgens, shouldn't we be able to carry more mass? I assume you believe that no matter what we do, our bodies will absolutely stop letting us grow at a certain point, and then therefore this must be determined at the origin of life and cannot be altered? I'm simply asking if we cannot extend this point? Isn't this what we are doing with androgen use in a way?

    4. Ronnie Coleman trained with heavy weight 5 weeks out from the Olympia I know, I know, many factors there, but goes to show that any logic has flaws, lol.

    5. I'm done for now, have to eat, might be back for more later
    •   
       


  3. Originally posted by PC1
    GangstaJDog...................

    I meant to say this before but was interrupted by one of my kids...

    You got a mean looking arm bro! Nice triceps, you look like you're well put together to push heavy weight on the bench press.

    What were you benching at the time of this photo?
    Thanks a lot, I appreciate the compliment. However, my answer is an embarassment. Disappointingly, the only max I've attempted recently was 235lbs two weeks ago, went for one rep and ended up with two, that's as heavy as I go on that lift. The photo is a week old. My triceps however are pretty strong, I might try narrowing my grip when I max bench to take advantage of that. A lot of experienced bodybuilders I talk to, mainly powerlifters, tell me I'm built to bench and have potential to push some big weight, which might be why my bench has gone up 100lbs in my one year of bodybuilding. I have great genetics though and grow like magic, thus looking more impressive than I actually am in the gym.
  4. PC1
    PC1's Avatar

    GangstaJDog.......

    Don't ever be embarrassed by what you can and can't lift. The weights will come on the bench press. You LOOK like you can bench 350! If I start feeling like I'm getting really strong on the bench, I know that in comparison to the current record, something over 800 pounds, my bench isn't squat either.

    Your physique looks a lot like that of my brother-in-law, whom I've described as being a natural bench presser. I've seen some well written articles on bodybuilding.com about upping one's bench press by altering technique, bar grip, squeezing shoulder blades together, and of course, training over time. Check them out. You just need some guidance. My money says you'll be sailing right past most of us in very little time. A 100 pound gain on the bench in one year is an impressive gain. Just keep at it.

    Jweave..........

    You make several good points. And I think you're right to point out that our endocrine systems are not "static", and while I didn't get into that, we can tweak our systems to degrees to get the most out of them. I wouldn't say on the magnitude of monstrous freak versus average Joe, but yeah, it can be improved on and you're right to point that out.

    The only place I'm going to take exception with you is on your comment of how much AS has changed in 15 years. Really, it's changed very little at all.

    The concept of stacking orals with injectibles, varying cycle lengths, and even post cycle recovery have all been around going back to the mid 80's, if not furher bro. I'll admit that, to my knowledge anyway, anti-e's like Nolva and Clomid either weren't available, or weren't used post cycle by AS atheletes. However, AS atheletes were aware of post cycle crashes during the 80's and HCG (pregnyl) came into vogue "way back then".

    AS atheletes "used" to believe that ski-sloping androgen usage down would provide a signal to the HPTA to resume endogenous testosterone production, which is no longer believed. So yeah, post cycle ancillaries have definately improved, no argument. Still, many of the specific androgens used then are still what's used today. And even the newer derrivatives used today chemically are not so different: In the end, they're synthetic testestosterones having anabolic/androgenic properties. So in spite of some refinements, the landscsape remains largely the same.

    I've heard many guys now in their 20's talking about how different things are today, kind of like "new school" being far suprior to "old school". That really isn't the case. Some improvements and refinements, but clearly no paradigm shift. I think this is merely propaganda espoused to mislead newbies into thinking they'll keep more of their gains post cycle, unlike the poor idiots who couldn't back then because we didn't know better :~)

    And again, I'm ignoring the advent of synthetic GH which inarguably raised the bar several notches in competetive circles. While GH has created a paradigm shift in competetive circles, most guys here on this board won't get into taking it. So my focus here is specifically on androgens.

    WHile post cycle ancillaries have admittedly improved insofar as avoiding a crash, NOTHING has changed in the adrogen game that would allow users to retain gains over and above what their endocrine system can support, once the athelete comes clean. That claim still can't be made today. And that's the bottom line.

    Why am I making such a big deal of this?

    1. It's rarely if at all discussed;

    2. Knowing this might affect someone's decision about whether or not to take androgens in the first place.

    3. Serious injuries such as the ones I've suffered might be avoided post cycle if guys were more aware of this.

    4. If guys knew this before beginning cycles, they might not be so disappointed once coming clean, and think that somehow it's just something in their own genetic shortcoming..... call it a "shame factor". More guys might continue training after quitting androgens having gone into it with a more realistic expectation of where they will end up.

    5. How about just in the interest of full disclosure and education, like everything else discussed in this and other boards?

    As you can see by looking through some of my posts bro, some guys DON'T KNOW this is how it is. And when I put this out there, some guys VEHEMENTLY deny it. Like there's really anything to contest.

    IN my own case, I was never told this. In fact, I was told just the opposite by guys who also, had never been off long enough to know.

    I don't have any regrets, I probably would have done it anyway. Being in your 20's, lifting and taking AS is one HELL of a great ride.

    Still, it's about knowing what you're getting into beforehand. The purpose of this and other similar boards.

    Be well.
    Last edited by PC1; 07-31-2003 at 11:24 AM.

  5. EXTREMELY fascinating thread. A very good read, thank you PC1!!!
    •   
       


  6. Not to long a go i was under the impression that there was no reason a guy who cycled AS could not keep a great majority of his lbm gains.

    QUESTION:

    Once i achieve my lbm potential, which will probably happen within the next five years ish, And I decide to try an AS cycle, are you saying that I would probably lose all of the lbm gains? assuming my diet is in check

  7. As others have said, great thread. Props to PC1 for taking the time to provide us with a well thought out, articulate series of posts.

  8. PC1,

    Fantastic posts and info. Sure we all get caught up in the quest for continual improvement, but we needed to be reminded occasionally that there is no magic formula or routine. Really appreciate your common sense posts.

    Thank you, Avalon7

  9. Dam I got to admit this is an awsome thread by all,but Kudos to you PC-1 for articulating your position so well,truly impressive.My experience has been it did not matter whether I did AAS 20 years ago or Prohormones now(im too old to be sticking needles in me)
    I always lost all my size when I went off cycle,that is why I only used gear and Ph's when I was cutting up.I found that I could really restrict calories without cutting out too much protien so I could maintain muscle mass while strictly dieting.Once I had reached my ideal Bodyfat (none) I would gradually increase overall calories and be able retain some mass..This method works for me because it's not a big loss while im dieting but if I go off cycle and loose alot of mass that would play with my head too much so I avoid the temptation......Great thread guy's

  10. I have been on other boards. I have used ph/ps in the past and currently in a ph/ps cycle. I greatly appreciate this thread. Excellent information that you can take to the bank! Thanks PC1

  11. pc1 - thats a very informative thread but very depressing. If someone reaches their limit then there really isn't much of a point in continuing to try and gain muscle if its all in vain. This read has given me mixed opinions about weight lifting in general now.

    Do you suggest taking ph's or AAS at all now with your prior experience? Its hard to tell from your post where you now stand on AAS and PH use. It seems liek your basically suggesting to use them at the beggining so you reach your potenitial alot quicker than you would if you trained naturally (but in the end your goin to be at the same point anyways, just time is a factor).

    How does one know their limit? Ive known people who were at a plateau and thought that was their limit but then added pounds to their frame and lifts. I can't see how that picture above is that mans limit, he is a bean pole... he could add alot more weight on his frame if he wanted too (i just can't see his endocrine system being at that physique)

    sorry about the rambling im just confussed about everything now. I don't want to waste hours in the gym and money on food and supps if i can only be a 203 lb skinny guy the rest of my life.
  12. PC1
    PC1's Avatar

    So... Future Prodigy, what happens if you stop training? You'll lose everything you've gained through your hard work and discipline.

    Why is one's "natural potential" being seen as such a bad thing?

    My overall point was to counter a long held belief that guys should wait 5-10 years of training naturally before they get into AS or PH's, because they will gain more from them if they hit their natural potential first. My personal experience and observation from others is that guys tend to keep more of their gains if they're still within their natural potential and have good pct, rather than guys who have waited the 5-10 years before starting.

    In the case of the guys who waited, maybe they can keep some of the gains, but usually much of it is lost. It's no reason for depression, just as you understand that all of the size and strength gains you've accumulated from weight training naturally would be lost to you if you stopped training altogether.

    I think if guys have unrealistic expectations going into an AS cycle, thinking they're going to put on 25 lbs of mass and will keep 23 lbs of them pct, those are the guys who are going to be depressed when they only end up keeping 4-5 pounds.

    Now, I'm not saying everyone will only keep 4-5 pounds pct, but it does happen. And maybe if you've been training naturally for many years and have made good progress, you'd be better off staying that way.

    There is a lot of great PCT advice on this board, and many people do very well with it. I've learned a lot here and have made improvements in size and strength retention pct. But, it's definitely a game of diminishing returns, and it's something to keep in mind especially if you're an older fart like me and concerned with increasing risks of sides

  13. maybe i am taking everythign the wrong way but after reading these posts i want to use PH's so i can reach my natural potential quicker instead of waiting 5-10 years.

    When you say you think AS should be used once you reach your natural potential because you will benefit more from the cycle. How is this so ( i couldn't think how else to word it, i tried... i mean no offence!)? If you won't keep any of your gains past that limit then whats the point, you mentioned earlier that AS and PH's are basically tools just to reach your limit quicker?
  14. PC1
    PC1's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by Future Prodigy
    maybe i am taking everythign the wrong way but after reading these posts i want to use PH's so i can reach my natural potential quicker instead of waiting 5-10 years.

    When you say you think AS should be used once you reach your natural potential because you will benefit more from the cycle. How is this so ( i couldn't think how else to word it, i tried... i mean no offence!)? If you won't keep any of your gains past that limit then whats the point, you mentioned earlier that AS and PH's are basically tools just to reach your limit quicker?
    I agree generally with your first paragraph.

    On the second paragraph, I don't think I've indicated AS should be used once one reaches their natural potential, versus using PH prior to that?

    AS are similar to PH in many respects, although they are a more potent albeit illegal alternative. One has to consider the additional risks associated with their illegality.

    You have to keep in mind that a lot of the size gains that come from a compound like dbol are water weight. A lot of that goes away pct.
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Hairloss post PH Cycle (Big Vrunga please help)
    By TheMonster in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-14-2005, 12:27 AM
  2. Need a good strength routine for a PH cycle
    By blown_stang in forum Training Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-22-2004, 02:37 PM
  3. Post PH cycle Workout routine???
    By Cam75 in forum Training Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-27-2003, 11:23 PM
  4. Liquid Clen worth it post ph/ps cycle?
    By max silver in forum Anabolics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-04-2003, 02:02 AM
  5. Post PH cycle.
    By Cat-Kicker in forum Supplements
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-16-2003, 11:44 AM
Log in
Log in