Tbol Vs Ostarine

[210LBS]

The problem there is with what benching like that will end up doing to your shoulders over time. I think you are also not realizing that your abs are MOST DEFINITELY ENGAGED in a strong arch. To lock the arch in you must flex your abs as hard as you can. Also you are in a more dangerous position regarding your back. It is not natural to have the small of your back touching while laying down with your legs down. Now if you were benching with your legs on the bench sure that would make sense but then that is just ill advised. Your spine has a natural S curve, and you are forcing it out of it's natural and strongest shape when you force the lower back down.

I would challenge you to try to learn a good arch, it does not have to be exaggerated like a lot of power lifters that you see in pictures. A lot of the arches you see people do are to limit ROM more than to brace and be put in a strong and stable position. Some of those arches are actually not that healthy either. I don't recommend you exaggerate your arch, just find your strongest point where everything is solid. I think at the highest part of my arch my lower back MIGHT be 2-3 inches of the bench at best, but it is locked in like a brick and everything in my core is SAFE!!! It ain't moving!!! That is what you want for spine safety.

Just the fact that you mention your press gets unstable and you need to arch to train in the 8-10 range, says that it is actually not a stable or good set up for you. It is your body trying to make you move naturally, safely and efficiently. You are just fighting it out of fear of the injury but I promise what you are doing is actually less safe for your back and is creating a weak link in the chain. You have an area of the back that is weaker, and you are avoiding strengthening it out of fear but weakness is what is going to get it injured in the long run.

I can't say you are wrong because you are not. A small arch (small - not like the powerlifting arches) is the right way to bench with the feet on the floor. However, I still do bench with my feet on the bench - I know it's not the right way but it served a purpose when I did it. I always benched with a slight arch and my feet on the ground. However, once I hurt my lower back I started using machines. This is when I started getting into HIT. I really focused on keeping my core tight throughout every exercise. Whether it was leg extension, leg curls, hip abduction, leg press, etc. I always kept my lower back flush and abs engaged - and it made a difference. The difficult part came when I began doing upper body exercises. There are just some exercises where you need to arch in order to engage your muscles. You need a strong arch on the pec fly, you need a small arch on compound row, etc. The seated chest press machine, however, fell somewhere in the middle for me. You don't want to huge arch, but you want to retract your shoulders enough to activate your pecs. However, even the slightest arch would irritate my lower back on it. So, then I began putting a small bad between my lower back and the seat and I felt much better. After some time I removed the pad and I had found that I could fully retract my shoulders and keep my lower back against the seat. I liked it because it felt like it gave my abs a good workout and I felt no pressure at all in my lower back.

Now fast forward to free weights. Still a little nervous of the bench press I began to bench with my feet on the bench. Why? Because it required me to use lighter weights (which meant even if I did cheat it wouldn't be with a heavy weight) and I was less likely to arch. I think I might have even started with my feet in the air because I was so deadly afraid of arching my lower back. Is it the right way to bench? No. But if I had to do it all over again, I am not sure I would have changed it because I didn't hurt my back again.

Now fast forward another couple years and I've been doing it out of habit. With my back now 90% better, I should revert to the original benching style. And since tomorrow is chest, what better time to start?

 

[Cgkone]

I can't say you are wrong because you are not. A small arch (small - not like the powerlifting arches) is the right way to bench with the feet on the floor. However, I still do bench with my feet on the bench - I know it's not the right way but it served a purpose when I did it. I always benched with a slight arch and my feet on the ground. However, once I hurt my lower back I started using machines. This is when I started getting into HIT. I really focused on keeping my core tight throughout every exercise. Whether it was leg extension, leg curls, hip abduction, leg press, etc. I always kept my lower back flush and abs engaged - and it made a difference. The difficult part came when I began doing upper body exercises. There are just some exercises where you need to arch in order to engage your muscles. You need a strong arch on the pec fly, you need a small arch on compound row, etc. The seated chest press machine, however, fell somewhere in the middle for me. You don't want to huge arch, but you want to retract your shoulders enough to activate your pecs. However, even the slightest arch would irritate my lower back on it. So, then I began putting a small bad between my lower back and the seat and I felt much better. After some time I removed the pad and I had found that I could fully retract my shoulders and keep my lower back against the seat. I liked it because it felt like it gave my abs a good workout and I felt no pressure at all in my lower back.

Now fast forward to free weights. Still a little nervous of the bench press I began to bench with my feet on the bench. Why? Because it required me to use lighter weights (which meant even if I did cheat it wouldn't be with a heavy weight) and I was less likely to arch. I think I might have even started with my feet in the air because I was so deadly afraid of arching my lower back. Is it the right way to bench? No. But if I had to do it all over again, I am not sure I would have changed it because I didn't hurt my back again.

Now fast forward another couple years and I've been doing it out of habit. With my back now 90% better, I should revert to the original benching style. And since tomorrow is chest, what better time to start?

Big arch small arch is user dependant.
Point is. You should arch.

 

[MrKleen73]

I can't say you are wrong because you are not. A small arch (small - not like the powerlifting arches) is the right way to bench with the feet on the floor. However, I still do bench with my feet on the bench - I know it's not the right way but it served a purpose when I did it. I always benched with a slight arch and my feet on the ground. However, once I hurt my lower back I started using machines. This is when I started getting into HIT. I really focused on keeping my core tight throughout every exercise. Whether it was leg extension, leg curls, hip abduction, leg press, etc. I always kept my lower back flush and abs engaged - and it made a difference. The difficult part came when I began doing upper body exercises. There are just some exercises where you need to arch in order to engage your muscles. You need a strong arch on the pec fly, you need a small arch on compound row, etc. The seated chest press machine, however, fell somewhere in the middle for me. You don't want to huge arch, but you want to retract your shoulders enough to activate your pecs. However, even the slightest arch would irritate my lower back on it. So, then I began putting a small bad between my lower back and the seat and I felt much better. After some time I removed the pad and I had found that I could fully retract my shoulders and keep my lower back against the seat. I liked it because it felt like it gave my abs a good workout and I felt no pressure at all in my lower back.

Now fast forward to free weights. Still a little nervous of the bench press I began to bench with my feet on the bench. Why? Because it required me to use lighter weights (which meant even if I did cheat it wouldn't be with a heavy weight) and I was less likely to arch. I think I might have even started with my feet in the air because I was so deadly afraid of arching my lower back. Is it the right way to bench? No. But if I had to do it all over again, I am not sure I would have changed it because I didn't hurt my back again.

Now fast forward another couple years and I've been doing it out of habit. With my back now 90% better, I should revert to the original benching style. And since tomorrow is chest, what better time to start?

Excellent, and I do understand why you would do things the way you did and it worked so that is a bonus. Now if you are healthier definitely find your ideal arch. Start small and work your way into it. Turn your upper back into a tight platform that is driving itself down into the bench then just before you break the weight off of the j hooks brace your entire core as hard as you can and hold that throughout your work set. When bracing your waist should get a bit thicker, not your abs retracting like a crunch. Thing more along the type of tension you create when you are about to get punched, or have to pick up something heavy off of the ground.

 

[210LBS]

Excellent, and I do understand why you would do things the way you did and it worked so that is a bonus. Now if you are healthier definitely find your ideal arch. Start small and work your way into it. Turn your upper back into a tight platform that is driving itself down into the bench then just before you break the weight off of the j hooks brace your entire core as hard as you can and hold that throughout your work set. When bracing your waist should get a bit thicker, not your abs retracting like a crunch. Thing more along the type of tension you create when you are about to get punched, or have to pick up something heavy off of the ground.

I am going to do that tomorrow. About time I break out of the habit now anyway. It's just personal experience, but anyone who does hurt their lower back I would highly recommend trying to place a small pad between the bench and their lower back. That little bit of support made a huge difference for me. On the flip side, it can unfortunately get you into a bad habit.

 

[fueledpassion]

I read it correctly and still both statements you are making are not correct because they are too exclusive and absolute.

Singles alone can make you grow, and 200 reps per set can make you growl!!!! My problem isn't with the generalized information you are giving out, it is with you stating things in absolutes that are not correct... Not to be rude but it seems that you simply don't have enough of a grasp of biology to make those absolute statements... If you did when I challenged you with science you would have had some type of rebuttal. There have been too many strides in training research to ignore and simply go off of the 1970's base 8-15 reps for is the hypertrophy range plan if trying to be more efficient with gains. Will it work, yes, but there is more to it than just working. Ways it can be more efficient... Ways to train with more specificity...

I mean, I know you can still type a newsletter with a type writer, so you are not wrong in that regard. However that doesn't mean it's the best, or only way to get the job done...

Somewhere someone told you that singles were useless and high reps weren't for growth, and you adopted that belief... just because you adopted the belief doesn't make it correct.

Anyway, I am done, you obviously are not interested in broadening your knowledge base so I am not going to keep on

Invalid Link Removed





Yes, yes, and yes! However we also know that different stressors cause different types of adaptation, some more inline with energy systems within the muscle that add size via volume, and other stressors IE weight increases that tend to drive the growth of the contractile proteins. Obviously the best way to attack this is via multiple avenues.

Correct, which is why I always tell people different rep ranges is important, but training to failure in each of those ranges is still required. Neil Hill basically figured out that Slow twitch fibers didn’t respond to growth like the Type IIa & IIb’s because the training stimulus was 8-12 reps, which is decidedly in the Fast Twitch realm of training. Those slow twitchers need more TUT, which requires a lighter load and longer sets/more reps. TUT & the pace at which you land the “plane of failure” is the real difference, rep ranges are how we get there. The slow twitch fiber stimulation is in the basement and requires extra work to get to it so naturally, we lighten the load and push to exhaust not just the ATP-Creatine Phosphate energy but also the anaerobic glycolysis, aerobic glycolysis & aerobic lypolysis. That said, many people don’t stress the lactic acid pathway hard enough to realize max Slow Twitch stimulus. In between using glycogen anaerobically & aerobically is a full blown searing pain associated with bringing a muscle to failure very gradually due to too much lactic acid build-up. You can’t find that Twilight Zone with heavy weight. It must be between 50-75% of 1RM depending on how conditioned you are and it may require 50-100+ reps to get there.

 

[MrKleen73]

Correct, which is why I always tell people different rep ranges is important, but training to failure in each of those ranges is still required. Neil Hill basically figured out that Slow twitch fibers didn’t respond to growth like the Type IIa & IIb’s because the training stimulus was 8-12 reps, which is decidedly in the Fast Twitch realm of training. Those slow twitchers need more TUT, which requires a lighter load and longer sets/more reps. TUT & the pace at which you land the “plane of failure” is the real difference, rep ranges are how we get there. The slow twitch fiber stimulation is in the basement and requires extra work to get to it so naturally, we lighten the load and push to exhaust not just the ATP-Creatine Phosphate energy but also the anaerobic glycolysis, aerobic glycolysis & aerobic lypolysis. That said, many people don’t stress the lactic acid pathway hard enough to realize max Slow Twitch stimulus. In between using glycogen anaerobically & aerobically is a full blown searing pain associated with bringing a muscle to failure very gradually due to too much lactic acid build-up. You can’t find that Twilight Zone with heavy weight. It must be between 50-75% of 1RM depending on how conditioned you are and it may require 50-100+ reps to get there.

BOOM!!!!!!

 

[Chados]

I didn't see that comment so let me respond yet again cause you don't wanna be rude yet you make it personal. What I said was that doing one rep on each machine is not gonna make you grow and I don't care what science you're referring to. Had it been for strenght I would agree but why don't you challenge yourself and do 4 exercises with 4 reps at your absolute max for 5 months and then you go for 70% of your max for around 6-15 reps the next 5 months. The one reps are mainly for strenght to be able to increase your weights. I like how you go, there's something missing on the charts. There's nothing wrong by going for a max lift but to only use that as your workout routine won't get you anywhere, that's the only thing I said. It's not 70s science it's fact, you're not gonna find one bodybuilder that works out with Max weight every time are you? You will however find thousands that doesn't max out every time at the gym. There's also something to be said about making the body guessing, changing your repetitions , weights and exercises

 

[MrKleen73]

I didn't see that comment so let me respond yet again cause you don't wanna be rude yet you make it personal. What I said was that doing one rep on each machine is not gonna make you grow and I don't care what science you're referring to. Had it been for strenght I would agree but why don't you challenge yourself and do 4 exercises with 4 reps at your absolute max for 5 months and then you go for 70% of your max for around 6-15 reps the next 5 months. The one reps are mainly for strenght to be able to increase your weights. I like how you go, there's something missing on the charts. There's nothing wrong by going for a max lift but to only use that as your workout routine won't get you anywhere, that's the only thing I said. It's not 70s science it's fact, you're not gonna find one bodybuilder that works out with Max weight every time are you? You will however find thousands that doesn't max out every time at the gym.

I never made anything personal. I stated what was obviously going on and is still going on. Speaking to someone who OBVIOUSLY HAS MORE KNOWLEDGE THAN YOU DISMISSIVELY IS JUST YOUR LAST LINE OF DEFENSE... You have a very limited view of the big picture and that is unfortunate that you don't want to even try to see the big picture... You keep trying to pin things down into only doing this at one time, or only doing that at one time. NOBODY BUT YOU IS LIMITING THINGS HERE!!!!

He asked VERY SPECIFICALLY how to train during PCT and was given an answer. You gave an answer too but it had no specificity to his question and said other options were not good ones. THEN when I challenged your statement saying training for strength wasn't appropriate for his situation you went from saying training for strength was not going to help and that higher reps were the way to go to suddenly you were ONLY referring to 1 set of singles per exercise... which was a pretty pathetic attempt to dilute your response and unrealistic at that because NO ONE TRAINS THAT WAY!!! You had to make up a scenario that would never happen in real life to even try to validate your point... Even then I listed tons of benefits to something you very specifically said was USELESS!!!! You don't have the knowledge to get this far into the deep end of the pool, so now with this response you have reached the immature, "I don't care what science or real word training says... I still want to be right!!!"

For the last time, no one is arguing that 8-15 reps doesn't work for hypertrophy, but you are arguing that lower, and even HIGHER reps don't. You are wrong... nothing to argue there. You are simply incorrect!

 

[Chados]

I never made anything personal. I stated what was obviously going on and is still going on. Speaking to someone who OBVIOUSLY HAS MORE KNOWLEDGE THAN YOU DISMISSIVELY IS JUST YOUR LAST LINE OF DEFENSE... You have a very limited view of the big picture and that is unfortunate that you don't want to even try to see the big picture... You keep trying to pin things down into only doing this at one time, or only doing that at one time. NOBODY BUT YOU IS LIMITING THINGS HERE!!!!

He asked VERY SPECIFICALLY how to train during PCT and was given an answer. You gave an answer too but it had no specificity to his question and said other options were not good ones. THEN when I challenged your statement saying training for strength wasn't appropriate for his situation you went from saying training for strength was not going to help and that higher reps were the way to go to suddenly you were ONLY referring to 1 set of singles per exercise... which was a pretty pathetic attempt to dilute your response and unrealistic at that because NO ONE TRAINS THAT WAY!!! You had to make up a scenario that would never happen in real life to even try to validate your point... Even then I listed tons of benefits to something you very specifically said was USELESS!!!! You don't have the knowledge to get this far into the deep end of the pool, so now with this response you have reached the immature, "I don't care what science or real word training says... I still want to be right!!!"

For the last time, no one is arguing that 8-15 reps doesn't work for hypertrophy, but you are arguing that lower, and even HIGHER reps don't. You are wrong... nothing to argue there. You are simply incorrect!

That's bull**** and I've never said it. I said exactly that 1 rep workouts will be useless. Didn't say 5 reps, didn't say 3 reps. I never said that going for max weight is useless. I dont know where you got that from. The reason I said that was because it's true, you're not gonna gain anything by lifting a weight one time each set during a whole workout, while doing 8 reps you would. That doesnt mean it should be done every time and on every excersise for the rest of your life cause even then your body will be used to It. The most obvious workout for a bodybuilder and not a strongman is to focus on the muscle and not the weight.

5 reps is a hell of a lot more than 1 rep especially after a long workout it can be massive.

And no, not one professional bodybuilder is lifting their max all the time, that's what kids do at the gym and they don't grow.

 

[MrKleen73]

To address this response

That's bull**** and I've never said it. I said exactly that 1 rep workouts will be useless. Didn't say 5 reps, didn't say 3 reps. I never said that going for max weight is useless. I dont know where you got that from. The reason I said that was because it's true, you're not gonna gain anything by lifting a weight one time each set during a whole workout, while doing 8 reps you would. That doesnt mean it should be done every time and on every excersise for the rest of your life cause even then your body will be used to It. The most obvious workout for a bodybuilder and not a strongman is to focus on the muscle and not the weight.

5 reps is a hell of a lot more than 1 rep especially after a long workout it can be massive.

And no, not one professional bodybuilder is lifting their max all the time, that's what kids do at the gym and they don't grow.

Here is a memory refresher for the way this has transpired to help you out a bit...

Well since you grow much more you can also injure yourself. Most bodybuilders swear by 8-20 reps mostly 12. Imagine going to the gym lifting a weight one time or lifting 70% of that weight 8 times. The only reason to lift your max is to increase the weight you can lift = increasing your normal 70% with a higher weight. you want the burn and the pump when building building physique.

Bold is not a correct statement... it is not the ONLY reason... and the burn and pump are not the only things you want for building the physique.

I will concede to the fact that you started with mentioning only lifting the weight one time.

YOu need both to grow efficiently, it is not just the burn and pump that makes things grow. Their are many avenues toward growth and the more you take advantage of the better results you are going to get. The rep ranges you mention are effective but there is far newer information regarding muscle growth that goes much deeper into things and increases the efficiency of growth.

I already went through the trouble of typing this up in another thread, so I am just going to quote it over here to explain some of the reasons why the higher volume on cycle and higher intensity post cycle makes the most sense for those seeking to gain and retain hypertrophy as opposed to performance increases from a cycle...

I don't mean you shouldn't lift heavy but the fact that lifting one rep is useless is true. The only time it's beneficial to some degree is of you're burning yourself out on other sets. In other words you can't go and do your max 1 time at bench, one time with dumbbells etc.

None of this is true... if you are going in and doing 1 single max effort attempt on even just 1 exercise will provide adaptation and pretty much the same as doing 1 set of 8 reps with 70% which would also be wildly ineffective over all... using one rep, or even one set of multiple reps in those ranges are going to be wildly inefficient, and I really don't have a clue why the idea of training like that would even be given the time of day much less using it as an example when NO ONE TRAINS THIS WAY for either rep range.

Training the 1 rep max is useless for what exactly? It is far from useless, and definitely still drives physical adaptation, just not a big factor for hypertrophy training. Training our 1 rep max to increase your 1 rep max is quite effective... Training it to increase contractile efficiency is useful in every aspect of training including the mind muscle connection that is always talked about in hypertrophy training. Also if you think that hitting a few hard singles a week for each body part is not going to tell the body it still needs to preserve the contractile protein it accrued specifically to handle heavier weights then you do not understand how the body treats contractile tissue ie muscle when it comes to overall energy consumption and efficiency. The body gets rid of muscle that is sees as unneeded because it is a drain on the system if it is not being used or preserved for a specific reason. EI lifting heavy crap...

Also, one heavy set to failure IE failing at 1 rep or 3 is still going to drive some growth because you hit failure and the body knows it needs to be stronger for the next time... That drives adaptation again by increasing contractile tissue or increasing the efficiency at which the CNS makes the muscle fire.

Things are not all about volume and single rep efforts do offer lots of value. Now injury wise it is a bit smarter to keep the intensity a bit lower like in the 90% range and do 3-5 reps a set instead. However adaptation, or decisions to use resources to keep newly accrued contractile protein will largely be based on if the activities still show a need to maintain it.

Can't find one piece of incorrect info in here... but lots of reasons why a 1RM is not useless...

Again I'm saying that not burning your muscles is not gonna be more effective than high reps. Not saying to completely skip shorter sets

Back peddling, you said they were useless...

No, you very specifically said singles were useless... I listed multiple reasons why they were not. I also listed multiple reasons why in the users scenario it could be more beneficial to do lower reps in the 3-5 rep range during PCT. Which you did not address or challenge, but came back with a more watered down response saying you aren't saying not to lift heavy, but reiterated that singles are truly useless... Now your response is more watered down, it is not even singles, we have gone more generic and said "Again (for the first time actually) I am saying that not burning your muscles is not gonna be more effective than high reps. Not saying to completely skip them."

You also specifically said that the burn and pump was what he wanted to go for to grow. Not true, that is just ONE of the aspects of training that can make you grow, however progressive overload is the most important factor in training to gain an adaptation. I know guys who have gotten huge off of nothing but 5 reps or below, and have never really worked for a pump, but they grow regardless due to consistent progressive overload...

So first low reps / singles were useless, now it is a much less committed low reps aren't gonna be more effective than feeling the burn and getting a pump... Seems at some point during all of this you would exercise some humility and just mention that you had not considered some of the other information and each principle of training has its place in hypertrophy accrual. However your pride isn't allowing it to the point you keep reinventing what it was you said to make each version less of a concrete statement. Pride is a mofo...

In an effort to get this back on track...With what has already been said regarding why it would be beneficial to change gears in PCT which was the last question he asked. Can you tell me why it would not be beneficial for him to change over to a higher intensity lower volume workout rather than staying high volume throughout PCT?

Here is where I tried to engage to to tell me why my suggestion didn't make sense and you ignored it and gave an incorrect response again...

Read again its useless to only do It like that while high reps isn't for building muscle

Not true and has been proven...

I read it correctly and still both statements you are making are not correct because they are too exclusive and absolute.

Singles alone can make you grow, and 200 reps per set can make you growl!!!! My problem isn't with the generalized information you are giving out, it is with you stating things in absolutes that are not correct... Not to be rude but it seems that you simply don't have enough of a grasp of biology to make those absolute statements... If you did when I challenged you with science you would have had some type of rebuttal. There have been too many strides in training research to ignore and simply go off of the 1970's base 8-15 reps for is the hypertrophy range plan if trying to be more efficient with gains. Will it work, yes, but there is more to it than just working. Ways it can be more efficient... Ways to train with more specificity...

I mean, I know you can still type a newsletter with a type writer, so you are not wrong in that regard. However that doesn't mean it's the best, or only way to get the job done...

Somewhere someone told you that singles were useless and high reps weren't for growth, and you adopted that belief... just because you adopted the belief doesn't make it correct.

Anyway, I am done, you obviously are not interested in broadening your knowledge base so I am not going to keep on

Invalid Link Removed





Yes, yes, and yes! However we also know that different stressors cause different types of adaptation, some more inline with energy systems within the muscle that add size via volume, and other stressors IE weight increases that tend to drive the growth of the contractile proteins. Obviously the best way to attack this is via multiple avenues.

Here again I specifically tell you singles alone can make you grow and so can high reps... Granted not your silly one max rep attempt per exercise nonsense that noone does. Instead more along the lines of 10 sets of heavy singles in a workout will damn sure cause some growth and adaptation. Hell even 1 failed attempt at a single is going to cause growth and adaptation, just not a ton of it.

That's bull**** and I've never said it. I said exactly that 1 rep workouts will be useless. Didn't say 5 reps, didn't say 3 reps. I never said that going for max weight is useless. I dont know where you got that from. The reason I said that was because it's true, you're not gonna gain anything by lifting a weight one time each set during a whole workout, while doing 8 reps you would. That doesnt mean it should be done every time and on every excersise for the rest of your life cause even then your body will be used to It. The most obvious workout for a bodybuilder and not a strongman is to focus on the muscle and not the weight.

5 reps is a hell of a lot more than 1 rep especially after a long workout it can be massive.

And no, not one professional bodybuilder is lifting their max all the time, that's what kids do at the gym and they don't grow.

You most certainly said singles were useless that is the entire point of this discussion... and it was listed above in the quotes...

I am not sure why you are so wrapped up in only using 8-15 reps, or only doing a 1 set max attempt workout at once... In all honestly I am not even sure why you would choose to try and use a single set argument to prove your point when there isn't anyone that I or even you know of that trains this way in reality... However limiting it to one set of either is inefficient and does not allow for volume or intensity accrual needed to really drive gains efficiently.

Anyway, I apologize for saying that you started out not stating it was only 1 single. I mis-read that part, but it changes nothing else about the rest of conversation.

I have admitted the merit of training in the 8-15 rep range, and agreed with most of everything you said about the benefits of that rep range for hypertrophy. All I have said was that some of your stuff you are stating as fact about the other ranges are simply incorrect and have offered science to refute them. I even asked at one point for you to explain to me why him training for strength would not be beneficial to him in his situation. You chose to ignore that and go nuts on this 1MR set per exercise per workout that no one would ever call a training system... It was quite obvious as I continued to list out other reps that I wasn't being baited into this ridiculous limitation you tried to put on the training to make it seem it was useless. No one trains this way just like you do not just do 1 set of 8-15 reps @ 70% and expect results. So lets try to keep things in perspective and not cling to unrealistic nonsense like that to try to make your argument valid.

You said a lot of absolutes that are simply incorrect and for some reason insist that the rep ranges and training principles live inside a vacuum with no crossover and must be segregated to prove your point. My point is and has been this whole time that you will get farther using all of the tools of the trade appropriately than you will limiting yourself to the 8-15 rep range when science has proven a lot of other ways to stimulate growth that are just as effective if not moreso and work via different avenues. So leaving any avenue unused is like choosing to close down a lane of traffic, then wondering why it is taking longer to get where you are headed.

We don't have to agree, like I said I do apologize for questioning your character, but not your line of thought on the absolutes you keep stating as fact that are simply incorrect.

If you agree you can get better results hitting the muscle from every effective aspect possible then we are in agreement regardless of the other nonsense. I am not going to argue the effectiveness of 1 set of your 1RM or 1 set 8-15 @ 70% when they are both far from efficient and have no place in a "what should I do for my training discussion"...

A single set of a 1RM has extremely high mechanical tension but very low volume, and would not be efficient for growth or strength training, and a single set of 8-15 @ 70% is going to have slightly higher volume, but lower mechanical tension, but both would be lacking the volume or intensity to be efficient. Neither are a good set up, and neither would provide much hypertrophy.

 

[Cgkone]

That's bull**** and I've never said it. I said exactly that 1 rep workouts will be useless. Didn't say 5 reps, didn't say 3 reps. I never said that going for max weight is useless. I dont know where you got that from. The reason I said that was because it's true, you're not gonna gain anything by lifting a weight one time each set during a whole workout, while doing 8 reps you would. That doesnt mean it should be done every time and on every excersise for the rest of your life cause even then your body will be used to It. The most obvious workout for a bodybuilder and not a strongman is to focus on the muscle and not the weight.

5 reps is a hell of a lot more than 1 rep especially after a long workout it can be massive.

And no, not one professional bodybuilder is lifting their max all the time, that's what kids do at the gym and they don't grow.

Your wrong again.
You can do a complete work out doing singles.
The problem is you don't know enough about training to act as arrogant as you do.
Instead of listening you argue.
And you argue with guys who know way more than you do.
Today I did a 6/1 rep scheme
6 reps at 80%
1rep at 90%
6 reps at 82%
1rep at 92%
6 reps at 85%
1x1x1x1 at 90%
Some times I do 5/4/3/2/1
Sometimes 3/2/1
1 rep is a staple in weight training
Its called a heavy day.

 

[Cgkone]

I didn't see that comment so let me respond yet again cause you don't wanna be rude yet you make it personal. What I said was that doing one rep on each machine is not gonna make you grow and I don't care what science you're referring to. Had it been for strenght I would agree but why don't you challenge yourself and do 4 exercises with 4 reps at your absolute max for 5 months and then you go for 70% of your max for around 6-15 reps the next 5 months. The one reps are mainly for strenght to be able to increase your weights. I like how you go, there's something missing on the charts. There's nothing wrong by going for a max lift but to only use that as your workout routine won't get you anywhere, that's the only thing I said. It's not 70s science it's fact, you're not gonna find one bodybuilder that works out with Max weight every time are you? You will however find thousands that doesn't max out every time at the gym. There's also something to be said about making the body guessing, changing your repetitions , weights and exercises

Also what's a machine?

 

[Chados]

Your wrong again.
You can do a complete work out doing singles.
The problem is you don't know enough about training to act as arrogant as you do.
Instead of listening you argue.
And you argue with guys who know way more than you do.
Today I did a 6/1 rep scheme
6 reps at 80%
1rep at 90%
6 reps at 82%
1rep at 92%
6 reps at 85%
1x1x1x1 at 90%
Some times I do 5/4/3/2/1
Sometimes 3/2/1
1 rep is a staple in weight training
Its called a heavy day.

So you did something and that's correct? Again you didn't just do 1 reps so you're comment is supposed to mean what?

 

[Cgkone]

I did several 1 reps

 

[Cgkone]

So you did something and that's correct? Again you didn't just do 1 reps so you're comment is supposed to mean what?

You can train with singles.
Again its a heavy day.
Try it.
Not on a machine or a stairmaster.
Work up to a heavy single and do 4 0r 5 single reps.
You'll hit fibers that havnt been hit in awhile.
Also try NOT being so damn upitty.
People will respond better to you if you stop acting like you know everything.

Your wrong again.
You can do a complete work out doing singles.
The problem is you don't know enough about training to act as arrogant as you do.
Instead of listening you argue.
And you argue with guys who know way more than you do.
Today I did a 6/1 rep scheme
6 reps at 80%
1rep at 90%
6 reps at 82%
1rep at 92%
6 reps at 85%
1x1x1x1 at 90%
Some times I do 5/4/3/2/1
Sometimes 3/2/1
1 rep is a staple in weight training
Its called a heavy day.

 

[Chados]

To address this response



Here is a memory refresher for the way this has transpired to help you out a bit...



Bold is not a correct statement... it is not the ONLY reason... and the burn and pump are not the only things you want for building the physique.

I will concede to the fact that you started with mentioning only lifting the weight one time.






None of this is true... if you are going in and doing 1 single max effort attempt on even just 1 exercise will provide adaptation and pretty much the same as doing 1 set of 8 reps with 70% which would also be wildly ineffective over all... using one rep, or even one set of multiple reps in those ranges are going to be wildly inefficient, and I really don't have a clue why the idea of training like that would even be given the time of day much less using it as an example when NO ONE TRAINS THIS WAY for either rep range.


Can't find one piece of incorrect info in here... but lots of reasons why a 1RM is not useless...


Back peddling, you said they were useless...

Here is where I tried to engage to to tell me why my suggestion didn't make sense and you ignored it and gave an incorrect response again...

Not true and has been proven...


Here again I specifically tell you singles alone can make you grow and so can high reps... Granted not your silly one max rep attempt per exercise nonsense that noone does. Instead more along the lines of 10 sets of heavy singles in a workout will damn sure cause some growth and adaptation. Hell even 1 failed attempt at a single is going to cause growth and adaptation, just not a ton of it.


You most certainly said singles were useless that is the entire point of this discussion... and it was listed above in the quotes...

I am not sure why you are so wrapped up in only using 8-15 reps, or only doing a 1 set max attempt workout at once... In all honestly I am not even sure why you would choose to try and use a single set argument to prove your point when there isn't anyone that I or even you know of that trains this way in reality... However limiting it to one set of either is inefficient and does not allow for volume or intensity accrual needed to really drive gains efficiently.

Anyway, I apologize for saying that you started out not stating it was only 1 single. I mis-read that part, but it changes nothing else about the rest of conversation.

I have admitted the merit of training in the 8-15 rep range, and agreed with most of everything you said about the benefits of that rep range for hypertrophy. All I have said was that some of your stuff you are stating as fact about the other ranges are simply incorrect and have offered science to refute them. I even asked at one point for you to explain to me why him training for strength would not be beneficial to him in his situation. You chose to ignore that and go nuts on this 1MR set per exercise per workout that no one would ever call a training system... It was quite obvious as I continued to list out other reps that I wasn't being baited into this ridiculous limitation you tried to put on the training to make it seem it was useless. No one trains this way just like you do not just do 1 set of 8-15 reps @ 70% and expect results. So lets try to keep things in perspective and not cling to unrealistic nonsense like that to try to make your argument valid.

You said a lot of absolutes that are simply incorrect and for some reason insist that the rep ranges and training principles live inside a vacuum with no crossover and must be segregated to prove your point. My point is and has been this whole time that you will get farther using all of the tools of the trade appropriately than you will limiting yourself to the 8-15 rep range when science has proven a lot of other ways to stimulate growth that are just as effective if not moreso and work via different avenues. So leaving any avenue unused is like choosing to close down a lane of traffic, then wondering why it is taking longer to get where you are headed.

We don't have to agree, like I said I do apologize for questioning your character, but not your line of thought on the absolutes you keep stating as fact that are simply incorrect.

If you agree you can get better results hitting the muscle from every effective aspect possible then we are in agreement regardless of the other nonsense. I am not going to argue the effectiveness of 1 set of your 1RM or 1 set 8-15 @ 70% when they are both far from efficient and have no place in a "what should I do for my training discussion"...

A single set of a 1RM has extremely high mechanical tension but very low volume, and would not be efficient for growth or strength training, and a single set of 8-15 @ 70% is going to have slightly higher volume, but lower mechanical tension, but both would be lacking the volume or intensity to be efficient. Neither are a good set up, and neither would provide much hypertrophy.

You read one comment and then your narcissistic way of thinking is that even though I don't know the guy im gonna completly ignore the fact that he posted a response saying that's not what he meant. Instead you keep sending me novels about something I've never stated and never asked for and when I don't compliment your so called knowledge and admit I was saying something I wasn't you get angry and start calling me out. You are in no position to say what I meant or to say what I know. You want to be superior by using caps lock and typing 2 pages of how much more you know then people. I have no need to attack you or to pretend that I'm superior to someone else and I don't care at all wether you know more than me. The point is I didn't say what you wanted me to say so you could have an argument like a 12 year old. You don't have to believe me and frankly I don't care if you do. If I question someone's comment and they say that's not what I meant I tend to let it go, even if i believe that's not true, it's a comment, it's very easy to misunderstand, mistype, and very hard to explain yourself when you're not talking eye to eye. So believe what you want and take your white horse and ride away.

 

[Chados]

You can train with singles.
Again its a heavy day.
Try it.
Not on a machine or a stairmaster.
Work up to a heavy single and do 4 0r 5 single reps.
You'll hit fibers that havnt been hit in awhile.
Also try NOT being so damn upitty.
People will respond better to you if you stop acting like you know everything.

I know I don't know everything. You're the one questioning people not me. I only said my comment was misunderstood. I don't think mrkleen needs another white horse dude. He's old enough. You keep misquoting what I said, that's a narcissistic way of winning an argument. It was one harmless comment and this is where it's gotten. Your workout is nothing close to what my comment said. I said one rep on each workout is useless, it was a way of overdoing it to prove a point. You don't have to take it so literally and you don't either have to misquote me.

 

[Cgkone]

I know I don't know everything. You're the one questioning people not me. I only said my comment was misunderstood. I don't think mrkleen needs another white horse dude. He's old enough. You keep misquoting what I said, that's a narcissistic way of winning an argument. It was one harmless comment and this is where it's gotten. Your workout is nothing close to what my comment said. I said one rep on each workout is useless, it was a way of overdoing it to prove a point. You don't have to take it so literally and you don't either have to misquote me.

Its all good bro.
You'll be ok
?

 

[Chados]

Its all good bro.
You'll be ok
��

Oh im fine, you're clearly not having the need to jump in other people's conversation over nothing. Well I do one set very often. Yeah and I met Jesus yesterday, nobody knows what you're saying is true. Nobody even knows if you're working out. It's a forum not a reality show.

 

[Cgkone]

Honestly you just come off as a know it all.
You comment like its FACT.
In fact 1 rep can be and is useful.
PERIOD.
Its usefully to say IMO if its just your opinion.

 

[Cgkone]

Oh im fine, you're clearly not having the need to jump in other people's conversation over nothing. Well I do one set very often. Yeah and I met Jesus yesterday, nobody knows what you're saying is true. Nobody even knows if you're working out. It's a forum not a reality show.

Well as long as you make comments like there facts and your wrong people are going to call you on it.
Try not doing that bro.

 

[MrKleen73]

You read one comment and then your narcissistic way of thinking is that even though I don't know the guy im gonna completly ignore the fact that he posted a response saying that's not what he meant. Instead you keep sending me novels about something I've never stated and never asked for and when I don't compliment your so called knowledge and admit I was saying something I wasn't you get angry and start calling me out. You are in no position to say what I meant or to say what I know. You want to be superior by using caps lock and typing 2 pages of how much more you know then people. I have no need to attack you or to pretend that I'm superior to someone else and I don't care at all wether you know more than me. The point is I didn't say what you wanted me to say so you could have an argument like a 12 year old. You don't have to believe me and frankly I don't care if you do. If I question someone's comment and they say that's not what I meant I tend to let it go, even if i believe that's not true, it's a comment, it's very easy to misunderstand, mistype, and very hard to explain yourself when you're not talking eye to eye. So believe what you want and take your white horse and ride away.

Wait, so I am narcissistic because I stated that I know more than you? Your lack of information proved it and the fact that this entire response is an attack because you actually have nothing else to say that justifies your stance... There was 1 thing I said that was incorrect and that was that you back peddled about going from strength training down to doing only one single. I was a man and actually apologized for the misunderstanding on that part.

Now everything else I called you out about was you being completely wrong, and or back peddling. Re-reading the quotes above show that in unquestionable light... You still haven't offered up anything valid to argue your point other than your opinion which you state as FACT! You used caps lock on that too. By the way since when did using caps lock mean someone is superior like you stated above. Here I thought it was being used to emphasize a point I was making... I never made a two page post on how I knew more than people. I may have posted some things that PROVED I knew more than you, but that was not the intent. The sharing of information was...

You are also correct, I am not in a position to tell you what you know. I AM in a position to tell you what you don't know because you have displayed your ignorance of the subject matter. So I have a very specific grouping of things I know that you are ignorant of regarding training and biology which you apparently are choosing to stay ignorant of.

However everything else was an honest effort to help you and more importantly keep anyone else from being sucked into your limited view and thinking it was gospel as you seem too.

I don't need you to compliment my knowledge, your opinion of me is not even a consideration of mine. You mis-educating others and coming up with nonsense analogies that hold no water was the reason I continued to address you. It aint for you or me but anyone reading this that doesn't know any better than you.

As far as saying the bottom line is that you didn't say what I wanted you to say. I didn't really care what you said as long as you stopped saying things were useless that were not, and stop saying high reps aren't for growth or any of the other incorrect statements you said as fact.

At this point it is pretty obvious that you see this as a personal attack rather than sharing information and trying to stop the spread of misinformation. That's unfortunate, but it is obvious we don't agree on many things as I have seen many of your other posts and you really push your own experiences on everyone as if they will have the same experience you did. Here we are seeing even more of this... You have experience in the 8-15 rep range and that is all that you champion because it is what you know...

Either way, I was trying to find some common ground with you by just talking common sense in the last part of my last post. I can see that is not going to happen. So I wish you the best of luck and complete success in life and your fitness endeavors.

 

[Chados]

Well as long as you make comments like there facts and your wrong people are going to call you on it.
Try not doing that bro.

When did i state that one rep was useless? I can understand my comment lead to confusion but I also stated what I meant. I am sorry if you're not allowed to correct yourself on a forum. Hopefully nobody got hurt

 

[Cgkone]

When did i state that one rep was useless? I can understand my comment lead to confusion but I also stated what I meant. I am sorry if you're not allowed to correct yourself on a forum. Hopefully nobody got hurt

Seems like you've been bumping heads with people lately.....
Maybe its everybody else......
Maybe its you.

 

[Cgkone]

When did i state that one rep was useless? I can understand my comment lead to confusion but I also stated what I meant. I am sorry if you're not allowed to correct yourself on a forum. Hopefully nobody got hurt

Its all good bro
No hard feeling

 

[Chados]

Wait, so I am narcissistic because I stated that I know more than you? Your lack of information proved it and the fact that this entire response is an attack because you actually have nothing else to say that justifies your stance... There was 1 thing I said that was incorrect and that was that you back peddled about going from strength training down to doing only one single. I was a man and actually apologized for the misunderstanding on that part.

Now everything else I called you out about was you being completely wrong, and or back peddling. Re-reading the quotes above show that in unquestionable light... You still haven't offered up anything valid to argue your point other than your opinion which you state as FACT! You used caps lock on that too. By the way since when did using caps lock mean someone is superior like you stated above. Here I thought it was being used to emphasize a point I was making... I never made a two page post on how I knew more than people. I may have posted some things that PROVED I knew more than you, but that was not the intent. The sharing of information was...

You are also correct, I am not in a position to tell you what you know. I AM in a position to tell you what you don't know because you have displayed your ignorance of the subject matter. So I have a very specific grouping of things I know that you are ignorant of regarding training and biology which you apparently are choosing to stay ignorant of.

However everything else was an honest effort to help you and more importantly keep anyone else from being sucked into your limited view and thinking it was gospel as you seem too.

I don't need you to compliment my knowledge, your opinion of me is not even a consideration of mine. You mis-educating others and coming up with nonsense analogies that hold no water was the reason I continued to address you. It aint for you or me but anyone reading this that doesn't know any better than you.

As far as saying the bottom line is that you didn't say what I wanted you to say. I didn't really care what you said as long as you stopped saying things were useless that were not, and stop saying high reps aren't for growth or any of the other incorrect statements you said as fact.

At this point it is pretty obvious that you see this as a personal attack rather than sharing information and trying to stop the spread of misinformation. That's unfortunate, but it is obvious we don't agree on many things as I have seen many of your other posts and you really push your own experiences on everyone as if they will have the same experience you did. Here we are seeing even more of this... You have experience in the 8-15 rep range and that is all that you champion because it is what you know...

Either way, I was trying to find some common ground with you by just talking common sense in the last part of my last post. I can see that is not going to happen. So I wish you the best of luck and complete success in life and your fitness endeavors.

I don't have time reading all that again. I already stated what I said was badly typed and I explained what I meant by it and I also stand by that. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain myself for you to get it. Yes you are being narcissistic. You're lack of listening to others and only hearing yourself, your way of telling others what they mean by a comment and the fact that you're incapable of letting people explain themself. And yes saying that you know more than someone else based on a comment over the internet. As I said, I don't care if you know more than me, I let you have that one of you want. All I said was that only doing one rep excersises is pointless, I never said you shouldn't max out in any comment.

 

[Chados]

Seems like you've been bumping heads with people lately.....
Maybe its everybody else......
Maybe its you.

Haha that's such a childish comment. Trust me when i say this. No matter what you say you're not gonna trigger me. You remind me of the kids that are trying to tease the older guys from miles away so they can have an advantage if they have to run lol.

 

[MrKleen73]

I don't have time reading all that again. I already stated what I said was badly typed and I explained what I meant by it and I also stand by that. I'm not sure how many times I have to explain myself for you to get it. Yes you are being narcissistic. You're lack of listening to others and only hearing yourself, your way of telling others what they mean by a comment and the fact that you're incapable of letting people explain themself. And yes saying that you know more than someone else based on a comment over the internet. As I said, I don't care if you know more than me, I let you have that one of you want. All I said was that only doing one rep excersises is pointless, I never said you shouldn't max out in any comment.

I listened, I looked I really hoped you had something to say but you didn't. I even asked you to explain yourself... Every response from you was either dismissive or evasive. You never tried to reiterate anything even when I asked you to point blank why my suggestions were unsound. You can explain yourself a million times but even once would have been nice. However it still won't make the fact you think you are right correct... You are the one refusing to listen to anyone... You think I am not listening because I haven't agreed with you. I am listening but I can't agree with what is not correct... you assertion that singles are pointless or useless is simply incorrect and nothing can change that but a shift in reality.

I would have LOVED to learn something from you. LOVED IT! I enjoy when I think I have a firm grasp on something and someone comes in and blows me away. Ask anyone on the forum, when someone teaches me something even if it started out as me thinking I was dead on correct I admit where I was wrong or ignorant and thank them for what they taught me in the process... I would have LOVED for this to have gone that way! Hell it is one of the main reasons I get into debates with people on here so that we can get deep into things and learn or consider some things we wouldn't have without someone elses insight.

Sorry it didn't workout for us that way. I am sure this won't be our last encounter either. Hopefully if we have more they can be more amicable, but that is mostly up to you and how you react to being questioned with logic and depth when people expect you to back up what you are stating as fact with proof of some sort.

I already apologized about saying you didn't start out with the single rep workout. I have already tried to back out of this nicely after addressing your accusations and or denials one by one via quoting your responses. So hopefully you can drop this now...

Once again, I wish you the best and that you find great success in life and your fitness endeavors.

 

[Cgkone]

Haha that's such a childish comment. Trust me when i say this. No matter what you say you're not gonna trigger me. You remind me of the kids that are trying to tease the older guys from miles away so they can have an advantage if they have to run lol.

That's probably right.
Id run.

 

[Chados]

I listened, I looked I really hoped you had something to say but you didn't. I even asked you to explain yourself... Every response from you was either dismissive or evasive. You never tried to reiterate anything even when I asked you to point blank why my suggestions were unsound. You can explain yourself a million times but even once would have been nice. However it still won't make the fact you think you are right correct... You are the one refusing to listen to anyone... You think I am not listening because I haven't agreed with you. I am listening but I can't agree with what is not correct... you assertion that singles are pointless or useless is simply incorrect and nothing can change that but a shift in reality.

I would have LOVED to learn something from you. LOVED IT! I enjoy when I think I have a firm grasp on something and someone comes in and blows me away. Ask anyone on the forum, when someone teaches me something even if it started out as me thinking I was dead on correct I admit where I was wrong or ignorant and thank them for what they taught me in the process... I would have LOVED for this to have gone that way! Hell it is one of the main reasons I get into debates with people on here so that we can get deep into things and learn or consider some things we wouldn't have without someone elses insight.

Sorry it didn't workout for us that way. I am sure this won't be our last encounter either. Hopefully if we have more they can be more amicable, but that is mostly up to you and how you react to being questioned with logic and depth when people expect you to back up what you are stating as fact with proof of some sort.

I already apologized about saying you didn't start out with the single rep workout. I have already tried to back out of this nicely after addressing your accusations and or denials one by one via quoting your responses. So hopefully you can drop this now...

Once again, I wish you the best and that you find great success in life and your fitness endeavors.

I have only felt that your questions was regarding something I never meant. I am honestly very confused what this is all about. I don't have any reason to argue with you since I don't have anything to say about it. You've same ne countless times to prove you wrong and my intention was never to prove you wrong. I only responded that my first comment was misunderstood and wether people wanna believe that or not it's up to them. No hard feelings from my side

 

[fueledpassion]

so maybe I'm just gonna share something that has kept me out of arguments over the past few years in AM (trust me, I used to find myself in them a lot though). I believe forum discussing is a skill that needs to be developed and one must be extra careful since all of the most effective ways to communicate are nonexistent on forums (i.e. non-verbal communication). Heck, we developed an entire industry of communications called "emoticons" because of people constantly being misunderstood and conversations escalating to the heights in a fraction of a thread post.

1) No matter what, only be interested in learning the truth or the best alternative to something currently unknowable
2) Always be willing to concede
3) State your opinions & validate them with a) several patterned facts, b) your reputation (This implies a BUNCH about how your past conduct plays into your future influence. If you want people to listen to your opinion and weigh it heavily, start building your reputation NOW)
4) Be sensible in your interpretation of facts and be able to know the value of a set of facts, whether anecdotal or clinical
5) Remind, remind, remind yourself that you win if you learn the truth or something closer to it
6) Sometimes we have to settle for the most sound, logical, observable opinion just beneath the truth
7) Don't get angry. Anger always wants to win. When does it ever lay itself down for the sake of truth?
8) If you insist on going to the grave with an opinion or belief, make sure said position agrees with the pattern of life around you. In other words, make sure this sort of concept is true elsewhere in life.

A simple case in point - It is my opinion that muscle growth comes in seasons for most of us - seasons that can be manipulated or lengthened for sure - but still seasons nonetheless. In most biological examples in life, this is true and in philosophical examples too, such as the King Solomon in Ecclesiastes 3 stating that "For everything there is a season". It's practically a universal truth which is a fancy way of saying that this pattern can be observed in all of creation/universe. I tend to look at & study things this way for personal reasons. I believe the world we live in is by design, so I am constantly in pursuit of the Designer and so I look for patterns of design that might tell me some greater truth about the Designer. Geez that was a mouthful!

9) There are almost alwaysexceptions. The fringe exceptions rarely teach us anything since they don't happen enough to observe and glean anything from it. Avoid using fringe scenarios that rarely or never happen to make a point. It looks bad not only statistically but also socially. Plus, you don't want to be like the nonsensical political parties of our day by building entire philosophies on a tiny fraction of a % of scenarios.

I feel like I should be adding one more to even it out to 10 things, lol. But I'd just be making crap up on the fly if I did. Truth is, there is probably 100 things you ought to do for effective communication with others. I saw many of these on my list being broken, mainly the ones associated with pride, which are #1, 2, 5, 7 & 8.

 

[MrKleen73]

I have only felt that your questions was regarding something I never meant. I am honestly very confused what this is all about. I don't have any reason to argue with you since I don't have anything to say about it. You've same ne countless times to prove you wrong and my intention was never to prove you wrong. I only responded that my first comment was misunderstood and wether people wanna believe that or not it's up to them. No hard feelings from my side

Okay, we can chalk it all up to miscommunication... no hard feelings here. Don't let this interaction detour you from trying to help others. I see you all over the place making an effort and contributions. It is commendable and I don't want this convo to dissuade you from it.

so maybe I'm just gonna share something that has kept me out of arguments over the past few years in AM (trust me, I used to find myself in them a lot though). I believe forum discussing is a skill that needs to be developed and one must be extra careful since all of the most effective ways to communicate are nonexistent on forums (i.e. non-verbal communication). Heck, we developed an entire industry of communications called "emoticons" because of people constantly being misunderstood and conversations escalating to the heights in a fraction of a thread post.

1) No matter what, only be interested in learning the truth or the best alternative to something currently unknowable
2) Always be willing to concede
3) State your opinions & validate them with a) several patterned facts, b) your reputation (This implies a BUNCH about how your past conduct plays into your future influence. If you want people to listen to your opinion and weigh it heavily, start building your reputation NOW)
4) Be sensible in your interpretation of facts and be able to know the value of a set of facts, whether anecdotal or clinical
5) Remind, remind, remind yourself that you win if you learn the truth or something closer to it
6) Sometimes we have to settle for the most sound, logical, observable opinion just beneath the truth
7) Don't get angry. Anger always wants to win. When does it ever lay itself down for the sake of truth?
8) If you insist on going to the grave with an opinion or belief, make sure said position agrees with the pattern of life around you. In other words, make sure this sort of concept is true elsewhere in life.

A simple case in point - It is my opinion that muscle growth comes in seasons for most of us - seasons that can be manipulated or lengthened for sure - but still seasons nonetheless. In most biological examples in life, this is true and in philosophical examples too, such as the King Solomon in Ecclesiastes 3 stating that "For everything there is a season". It's practically a universal truth which is a fancy way of saying that this pattern can be observed in all of creation/universe. I tend to look at & study things this way for personal reasons. I believe the world we live in is by design, so I am constantly in pursuit of the Designer and so I look for patterns of design that might tell me some greater truth about the Designer. Geez that was a mouthful!

9) There are almost alwaysexceptions. The fringe exceptions rarely teach us anything since they don't happen enough to observe and glean anything from it. Avoid using fringe scenarios that rarely or never happen to make a point. It looks bad not only statistically but also socially. Plus, you don't want to be like the nonsensical political parties of our day by building entire philosophies on a tiny fraction of a % of scenarios.

I feel like I should be adding one more to even it out to 10 things, lol. But I'd just be making crap up on the fly if I did. Truth is, there is probably 100 things you ought to do for effective communication with others. I saw many of these on my list being broken, mainly the ones associated with pride, which are #1, 2, 5, 7 & 8.

Great post fueledpassion these are typically my markers for this type of thing also. In these situations I also tend to reread what I am saying and reword it a few times to try and make sure that I am communicating exactly what I am trying to before I respond. Admittedly this particular convo went on a bit longer than I would have normally engaged someone in this manner.

 

[fueledpassion]

Being willing to concede for the sake of redeeming the topic of conversation, even if its just to extend an Olive Branch to the opposing party, is a display of high character and a moment of high influence because those watching innately know that you care more about the truth than you do about winning. People value truth-telling and authentic sincerity over being right all the time. (Being right = winning an argument)
Mrkleen - I know you understand these things but in the moment of trying to make your point, it often becomes very difficult to reflect on tried-n-true principles. I mentioned all this in hopes that both parties would reflect and make nice because we need debate as often as possible. Truth only comes through dissenting voices building and defending their case. It’s why our 1st Amendment protects the right the speak freely - so we can learn the truth through dissenting positions!

The worst thing we can do is get mad or offended when someone hotly disagrees with us b/c it discourages us and others from debating.

 

[MrKleen73]

Being willing to concede for the sake of redeeming the topic of conversation, even if its just to extend an Olive Branch to the opposing party, is a display of high character and a moment of high influence because those watching innately know that you care more about the truth than you do about winning. People value truth-telling and authentic sincerity over being right all the time. (Being right = winning an argument)
Mrkleen - I know you understand these things but in the moment of trying to make your point, it often becomes very difficult to reflect on tried-n-true principles. I mentioned all this in hopes that both parties would reflect and make nice because we need debate as often as possible. Truth only comes through dissenting voices building and defending their case. It’s why our 1st Amendment protects the right the speak freely - so we can learn the truth through dissenting positions!

The worst thing we can do is get mad or offended when someone hotly disagrees with us b/c it discourages us and others from debating.

Yep, it is definitely easy to get swept up in the passion of things. Especially if passionate about the subject matter.

 

[YamahaC76]

To inject myself in here and make a hair pin turn regarding HCG. The consensus seems to be to pre load and then freeze your doses. However, this would require about 30+ insulin needles for the cycle @250iu EOD. My question is, is HCG stable when repeatedly thawed and frozen. lets say 3 times, so 750IU per Syringe, and it's Luer Lock, so you just swap the needle. You would freeze and thaw this 2-3 times before it is expelled. I've read HCG is stable regardless even after doing this process over the course of 90 days. So, is this a viable method, or is a single use of 250iu per syringe better...it certainly is more syringes.

 

[solidsnake]

This thread has got to go down as the most” off topic”thread in history, I do like it though

 

[MrKleen73]

To inject myself in here and make a hair pin turn regarding HCG. The consensus seems to be to pre load and then freeze your doses. However, this would require about 30+ insulin needles for the cycle @250iu EOD. My question is, is HCG stable when repeatedly thawed and frozen. lets say 3 times, so 750IU per Syringe, and it's Luer Lock, so you just swap the needle. You would freeze and thaw this 2-3 times before it is expelled. I've read HCG is stable regardless even after doing this process over the course of 90 days. So, is this a viable method, or is a single use of 250iu per syringe better...it certainly is more syringes.

HCG is a protein based hormone, in my experience freezing, thawing and refreezing is an issue for most any protein. I don't have the specifics for HCG, but even with a steak, you don't thaw it and refreeze it, that changes the quality of the meat.

Here is what they say the problem is with a steak and I would think the same would hold true of any protein.

"The reason a double freeze takes such a toll on meat is because freezing water inside the meat’s protein cell physically changes the shape of it. So the more you do that, the more noticeable the change."

That would imply that a double freezing of a delicate protein like HCG could cause some issues. I know that with other peptides which is also protein based there is a 1 freeze rule once reconstituted.

That being said if you read from a reliable and scientific source that you can do that then don't rely on my opinion or thoughts if you have something based on scientific evidence. I would just say that the above is something I would consider heavily if there was not some scientific evidence otherwise.

 

[YamahaC76]

So I'm sure everyone remembers what it was like being in the position I am. I started this thread with a simple SARM/Oral question, and that's turned into quite the adventure and thread. Below is disclosed the cycle as well as questions and supplements. I encourage everybody who has helped me on this thread to briefly familiarize yourself with the products named to paint a better picture.

As it stands, the cycle begins the 1st or second week of January. If anybody has anything to add in, please feel free. This was quite a journey in research itself. Iv'e been on this forum for awhile and started on that clown thread ran by ISARMS earlier this year...

Weeks 1-12
-500mg Test C Every week
-.25mg Arimidex E3d (Adjust as needed)

Weeks 1-6
-Tbol 50mg ED

6 months straight
- 12.5mg MK-677 ED

Weeks 1-6 (Optional) Comments are welcome. Purpose would be to preserve Tendon Integrity and durability with the rapid increase in strength.
-Ostarine 3-20mg

Weeks 2-14
-HCG 250iu EOD

Weeks 1-16
-Cycle Support, Olympus Labs K1ngs Guard ED (half serving) with an an additional 250mg of TUDCA.

Weeks 14-20
-PCT Still Deciding, though everything is accounted for. Lower dose at a longer period to reduce sides. I may use one and not the other at all. Comments welcome, however I have seen bloods from a dose of 12.5mg EOD of Clomid boosting test up to the 900 range. So I am taking a more is not better approach to PCT.
-10mg Nolva ED and/or 12.5MG Clomid ED or EOD

Pointers on food, and supplements are welcome. I'm not opposed to any BS mass gainer though Redcon1 MRE is really the only non BS one I will take. I know this is made or broken in the kitchen and have my macros figured out. My Multi-vitamin is "Green Vibrance" it's a nasty green powder with literally everything in it. I encourage you to look up this product. Any last minute advice on optimal protein intake would be greatly appreciated. I don't want to miss a beat with this.

Now as for pre-workouts. I will cease all pre workout, I was using mesomorph but have a large amount of tubs of "Off the Chain" Aminos to take it's place. The logic here is the pumps from the cycle compounds will be enough, and anything from a pre workout supplement that would give pump could be too overwhelming, not to mention the cardiovascular complications that could arise. Is this a correct outlook?

 

[MrKleen73]

So I'm sure everyone remembers what it was like being in the position I am. I started this thread with a simple SARM/Oral question, and that's turned into quite the adventure and thread. Below is disclosed the cycle as well as questions and supplements. I encourage everybody who has helped me on this thread to briefly familiarize yourself with the products named to paint a better picture.

As it stands, the cycle begins the 1st or second week of January. If anybody has anything to add in, please feel free. This was quite a journey in research itself. Iv'e been on this forum for awhile and started on that clown thread ran by ISARMS earlier this year...

Weeks 1-12
-500mg Test C Every week
-.25mg Arimidex E3d (Adjust as needed)

Weeks 1-6
-Tbol 50mg ED

6 months straight
- 12.5mg MK-677 ED

Weeks 1-6 (Optional) Comments are welcome. Purpose would be to preserve Tendon Integrity and durability with the rapid increase in strength.
-Ostarine 3-20mg

Weeks 2-14
-HCG 250iu EOD

Weeks 1-16
-Cycle Support, Olympus Labs K1ngs Guard ED (half serving) with an an additional 250mg of TUDCA.

Weeks 14-20
-PCT Still Deciding, though everything is accounted for. Lower dose at a longer period to reduce sides. I may use one and not the other at all. Comments welcome, however I have seen bloods from a dose of 12.5mg EOD of Clomid boosting test up to the 900 range. So I am taking a more is not better approach to PCT.
-10mg Nolva ED and/or 12.5MG Clomid ED or EOD

Pointers on food, and supplements are welcome. I'm not opposed to any BS mass gainer though Redcon1 MRE is really the only non BS one I will take. I know this is made or broken in the kitchen and have my macros figured out. My Multi-vitamin is "Green Vibrance" it's a nasty green powder with literally everything in it. I encourage you to look up this product. Any last minute advice on optimal protein intake would be greatly appreciated. I don't want to miss a beat with this.

Now as for pre-workouts. I will cease all pre workout, I was using mesomorph but have a large amount of tubs of "Off the Chain" Aminos to take it's place. The logic here is the pumps from the cycle compounds will be enough, and anything from a pre workout supplement that would give pump could be too overwhelming, not to mention the cardiovascular complications that could arise. Is this a correct outlook?

I would up your cycle supports during the TBol period. Run the K1ngs guard at full dose with extra TUDCA with it too. Other than that it looks pretty good. Not sure you need the Osta there competing with real gear for the AR... but as you have it listed as optional, personally I would save it for another cycle.

 

[YamahaC76]

I am aware that HCG can cause gyno. Is my Arimidex too conservative, or a dose non considerate of this factor? Perhaps .5mg and then .25mg E3D?
??

 

[YamahaC76]

Confession time guys. My stats are 5'8 and 160lb, maybe 15% bf. Over this last month, I have been training with the fitness manager at my gym and my lifts are going up at ridiculous rates. I Don't even have to pay him. Almost 10lb a week for pretty much everything but curling. Before my hernia 3 years ago I was 168 and 13% bf. This whole new training method has me breaking PR and I'm not talking 1 rep max. I was shoulder pressing 35lb last week in sets of 12 for dumbell, this week it was 45. It's insane. It feels like gear. I'm only taking mk677 at the moment. I should note that I know part of that BF is major bloat.

Basically I want to disclose I am not at my genetic potential, but after 3 years of chronic injury, Im closer than ever to being to the body I was so close to years ago. The attention I'm receiving is also very noticeable and I feel amazing. Iv'e really only since June been able to do real workouts and get some real soreness and results, but this November and December have been crazy for gains. The training is awesome. Never the same. I


I basically just don't want to snap a bicep, shoulder, or pectoral tendon on cycle. and I'm already getting some soreness with the progress iv'e been getting this past month. It makes me think I should postpone the cycle and maybe run ostarine one more time. If my lifts go up any higher than the rate they are going now, it could be dangerous, though I am pleased with my results.

 

[MrKleen73]

Confession time guys. My stats are 5'8 and 160lb, maybe 15% bf. Over this last month, I have been training with the fitness manager at my gym and my lifts are going up at ridiculous rates. I Don't even have to pay him. Almost 10lb a week for pretty much everything but curling. Before my hernia 3 years ago I was 168 and 13% bf. This whole new training method has me breaking PR and I'm not talking 1 rep max. I was shoulder pressing 35lb last week in sets of 12 for dumbell, this week it was 45. It's insane. It feels like gear. I'm only taking mk677 at the moment. I should note that I know part of that BF is major bloat.

Basically I want to disclose I am not at my genetic potential, but after 3 years of chronic injury, Im closer than ever to being to the body I was so close to years ago. The attention I'm receiving is also very noticeable and I feel amazing. Iv'e really only since June been able to do real workouts and get some real soreness and results, but this November and December have been crazy for gains. The training is awesome. Never the same. I


I basically just don't want to snap a bicep, shoulder, or pectoral tendon on cycle. and I'm already getting some soreness with the progress iv'e been getting this past month. It makes me think I should postpone the cycle and maybe run ostarine one more time. If my lifts go up any higher than the rate they are going now, it could be dangerous, though I am pleased with my results.

This is where knowing yourself and knowing the reasons for what you are doing comes into play.

To me there are really only a few pertinent scenarios here:
1) Health / Long Term Focus - Stay the course and enjoy the gains as they are coming. If making great gains off cycle then stick with what you are doing first. When that plateaus then revisit the cycle. Allows you to push your natural abilities before going to gear. This is the path of the righteous!!!!

2) Short Cut to your immediate goal - You KNOW that you want to grow more than you can possibly grow naturally in the amount of time you have allotted yourself for the cycle. You also know that you are doing it as a shortcut to get there faster and are okay with that. Regardless of what the righteous people say.... If you are in this category, congratulations!!!! You are in the 90% majority of all PED users!!!!

The morality that some people put on the decision to use PED's is just ludicrous. Here in Houston we have toll roads, I am sure all metropolis areas have them. I can not imagine anyone passing moral judgement over the people who pay to use the toll way because it gets them to their destination faster. Well gear has it's own added price, and guess what, it does exactly the same thing. It gets you to your destination faster...

Also for those in the know, they realize that the whole reach your genetic potential first stuff actually limits your growth because many things happen when on gear that set you up for more growth later in life. Higher rates of differentiation, activation and what not from satellite cells give a leg up to someone who started gear earlier.

None of this is talking you into anything but moreso saying consider all sides and make the decision based on what your goals are, and whether or not you see PED use as a moral issue or not.

As far as snapping a tendon or any of that, I don't think you really understand just how strong your tendons and ligaments are. I do not think you are in any danger of tearing things from sheer weight. If your form is good then you have a bit before you need to start worrying about snapping something. People who tend to rip things like that tend to already be pretty strong before cycle, and then getting on gear and get much stronger, and even then it is normally a muscle tear when having to do with sheer weight. Now overuse injuries that is a different thing but can happen whether using heavy or light loads.

 

[fueledpassion]

It is important to note that while AAS can take you beyond your natural potential, most users, and by most I mean at least 90-95%, never exceed their natural genetic potential even while using gear. It takes a world class effort to do that but when done, the results will make noise and speak for itself.

But saying steroids bring us beyond our “genetic potential” is nonsensical to say the least. If you got there then obviously your genetics had such a potential. In fact, I’d say that gear actually enables us to reach our full genetic potential, if we’re honest about it.

 

[Whacked]

Preach on FP

Good to see you still around

 

[MrKleen73]

It is important to note that while AAS can take you beyond your natural potential, most users, and by most I mean at least 90-95%, never exceed their natural genetic potential even while using gear. It takes a world class effort to do that but when done, the results will make noise and speak for itself.

But saying steroids bring us beyond our “genetic potential” is nonsensical to say the least. If you got there then obviously your genetics had such a potential. In fact, I’d say that gear actually enables us to reach our full genetic potential, if we’re honest about it.

Interesting take on the genetic potential. To me your genetic potential includes your hormonal make up. Once you go beyond your hormonal limitation into the supraphysiological levels of exogenous androgens then you are going above your genetic potential for hormones to get there. Which for me leads to why someone would say genetic potentioal, IE natural limitations, as opposed to simply saying potential.

Kind of like saying Ronnie Coleman had the genetic potential to be a 230lb freak on stage, but had the potential to be a 300lb monster with hormonal assistance. Just as an example of my thought process as to why people use that statement. Basically, once you are using exogenous hormones you are no longer limited to your genetic potential because you have added to it with more hormones than you have the potential to create due to genetic limitations.

 

[fueledpassion]

Interesting take on the genetic potential. To me your genetic potential includes your hormonal make up. Once you go beyond your hormonal limitation into the supraphysiological levels of exogenous androgens then you are going above your genetic potential for hormones to get there. Which for me leads to why someone would say genetic potentioal, IE natural limitations, as opposed to simply saying potential.

Kind of like saying Ronnie Coleman had the genetic potential to be a 230lb freak on stage, but had the potential to be a 300lb monster with hormonal assistance. Just as an example of my thought process as to why people use that statement. Basically, once you are using exogenous hormones you are no longer limited to your genetic potential because you have added to it with more hormones than you have the potential to create due to genetic limitations.

You have it right. I think the difference is in that saying “genetic potential” to by default mean as a result of natural hormone production belittles the discipline and up plays the steroids as a result of what bodybuilders accomplish. It says, “he only looks that way because of the steroids”. I know you didn’t say that but I’ve caught on to this “everyone deserves a trophy” society and that downplay of bustin tail and the up-play of PEDs is a form of excuse and resentment to those who get it done. It’s the fitness industries version of “virtue signaling” and I’m so sick of it. You can’t just take the drugs and look like Coleman or even half of Coleman for that matter. You need a grit and determination to do that AND al the PEDs as well.

That being said, I look at “genetic potential” as the gene signaling that our DNA is programmed with. If increasing a single class of hormones in the body results in absurd growth, increased IQ and a host of other benefits, it would seem that the only thing limiting the genetic potential is the hormone output itself & thus would seem that all other genes in the body are very capable of being what these monsters of men turn out to be. It would appear to me that man is capable of being much bigger & stronger than we typically are.

You get my drift though.

 

[MrKleen73]

You have it right. I think the difference is in that saying “genetic potential” to by default mean as a result of natural hormone production belittles the discipline and up plays the steroids as a result of what bodybuilders accomplish. It says, “he only looks that way because of the steroids”. I know you didn’t say that but I’ve caught on to this “everyone deserves a trophy” society and that downplay of bustin tail and the up-play of PEDs is a form of excuse and resentment to those who get it done. It’s the fitness industries version of “virtue signaling” and I’m so sick of it. You can’t just take the drugs and look like Coleman or even half of Coleman for that matter. You need a grit and determination to do that AND al the PEDs as well.

That being said, I look at “genetic potential” as the gene signaling that our DNA is programmed with. If increasing a single class of hormones in the body results in absurd growth, increased IQ and a host of other benefits, it would seem that the only thing limiting the genetic potential is the hormone output itself & thus would seem that all other genes in the body are very capable of being what these monsters of men turn out to be. It would appear to me that man is capable of being much bigger & stronger than we typically are.

You get my drift though.

Absolutely I do!

However I also see things from the other side too. I just mentioned in another thread that the reality is doing everything 80-90% correctly on a cycle is still going to net you 150-300% of the gains you would have natty in the same time frame doing everything right. That aspect can not be denied and the average person can most definitely build a far above average body through a reasonable workout and diet while on a cycle. Without any major extremes.

Gear is often more of a recreational use, than it is used in the way that you use them, or that I would used them if prepping for a contest. Basically a vanity drug in a lot of ways. At least when used recreationally. IE any other use than for competition or medical purposes. I know you are extremely dedicated, and disciplined at all times. You also compete so it is serious business for you. Me, I won't lie to anyone and say that I go 100% on diet or training when on cycle just because I am on cycle. In prep that is different. On cycle I definitely give an added push, but I also enjoy the conveniences that the gear brings with it to get more out of less sacrifice. I don't apologize for this either.

To me that would be like apologizing to someone sitting in traffic passing judgment on me for zipping by them in the express lane and saying I am making a bad decision because there is a cost associated to being in the express lane. I have the choice to use the express lane, so I do... Nothing moral or idealistic about it.

I know this goes in the face of a lot of people in your position because there are tons of guys like me who make excellent progress while not being extremely disciplined. However most people on gear that have the mentality to get on gear are pretty intense individuals, so hard work is never really the issue. Diet is. It is hard for the more disciplined guys to argue that gear is not responsible, when we can make such great gains not doing everything right or trying to squeeze the most out of a cycle. People see this and then see you compete and think it is just more of the same.

However to achieve that level takes an extreme level of work and discipline whether gear is involved or not. I can get down to 10% without counting a macro if I want to on cycle without too much fanfare. That's a six pack for me... I have done it more than once. However getting down to 3-8% requires another level of dedication and discipline. When I competed it was a miserable experience while in the middle of prep and then I stuck to everything I had too. You don't get to 4% not doing so. So I know the difference between what a "Relaxed Cycle" brings to the table and what an extremely disciplined one does and the difference is pretty obvious. The only way I will ever restrict myself in that way again is for another prep.

 

[fueledpassion]

Preach on FP

Good to see you still around

Thanks for the WOE

Words of encouragement - Yes, I just made up an acronym

 

[fueledpassion]

Absolutely I do!

However I also see things from the other side too. I just mentioned in another thread that the reality is doing everything 80-90% correctly on a cycle is still going to net you 150-300% of the gains you would have natty in the same time frame doing everything right. That aspect can not be denied and the average person can most definitely build a far above average body through a reasonable workout and diet while on a cycle. Without any major extremes.

Gear is often more of a recreational use, than it is used in the way that you use them, or that I would used them if prepping for a contest. Basically a vanity drug in a lot of ways. At least when used recreationally. IE any other use than for competition or medical purposes. I know you are extremely dedicated, and disciplined at all times. You also compete so it is serious business for you. Me, I won't lie to anyone and say that I go 100% on diet or training when on cycle just because I am on cycle. In prep that is different. On cycle I definitely give an added push, but I also enjoy the conveniences that the gear brings with it to get more out of less sacrifice. I don't apologize for this either.

To me that would be like apologizing to someone sitting in traffic passing judgment on me for zipping by them in the express lane and saying I am making a bad decision because there is a cost associated to being in the express lane. I have the choice to use the express lane, so I do... Nothing moral or idealistic about it.

I know this goes in the face of a lot of people in your position because there are tons of guys like me who make excellent progress while not being extremely disciplined. However most people on gear that have the mentality to get on gear are pretty intense individuals, so hard work is never really the issue. Diet is. It is hard for the more disciplined guys to argue that gear is not responsible, when we can make such great gains not doing everything right or trying to squeeze the most out of a cycle. People see this and then see you compete and think it is just more of the same.

However to achieve that level takes an extreme level of work and discipline whether gear is involved or not. I can get down to 10% without counting a macro if I want to on cycle without too much fanfare. That's a six pack for me... I have done it more than once. However getting down to 3-8% requires another level of dedication and discipline. When I competed it was a miserable experience while in the middle of prep and then I stuck to everything I had too. You don't get to 4% not doing so. So I know the difference between what a "Relaxed Cycle" brings to the table and what an extremely disciplined one does and the difference is pretty obvious. The only way I will ever restrict myself in that way again is for another prep.

For the record, I don’t frown on people using gear recreationally or for “vain” reasons. So I use it to compete, in which I’m competing for the best overall muscularity and proportion on the stage, which IIRC is pretty freakin’ surface level stuff. But the grit and mental battle required to forge such a body is not at all in vain and the mental fortitude that I am building in the process will serve a very specific purpose in my latter years. I’ll spare you those details.

Anyways, the part that is reprehensible to me is that society’s reasons to reject PED’s as immoral are at best half truths, which is a clever and less condemning way to say that society build’s it opinion and position about PED’s on a bunch of lies. It’s the beautiful, well-endowed, tall, strong, smart, powerful & wealthy, along with their mindless lemmings, that oppose PED’s use from the general public. Let’s not forget the incredibly insecure people that also happen to have trypanophobia - they get mad cause they ain’t willing to go to those lengths and for the rest that oppose it, they have poinephobia (fear of punishment) as if having a bottle of Clomid shipped to your house = feds are going to kick in your door and drag you outside, cuff you and ship you off to a max security pen for the remainder of your life.

Ugh, for those that read this post and secretly know you fall into one of those categories - just know that at the end of the day, you either:

1) oppose using it because you don’t want others to compete with you (in terms of performance, intelligence, beauty) or

2) if you aren’t willing to overcome whichever phobia you have about PED’s, you also were never willing to do whatever it takes to be competitve at any serious level to begin with!

 

[buidlerpro]

I've heard people gaining almost 10lbs on ostarine alone