short cycle

[motodawg]

Well said.....

Well, I'm biased about this topic since I believe I was the first to write about it (certainly not the first to do it) back in the Dan Duchaine days. It was the Steroids For Health 3 week cycle. (Later adopted as the 2 week cycle and the bridged cycle and the every other wek cycle and every other bull shite version).

Yes, it's easier to keep a 10 pound gain than a 20 pound gain. That's just basic biophysics.

As far as the "kicking in' period, I can't believe that myth still exists. Steroids put you in an anabolic state almost immediately. Of course, it takes time to grow muscle. But it's not like your body needs to wait a few weeks. Muscle growth actually comes in pretty quick spurts. You probably won't "see" results until a week or two but that doesn't mean the process hasn't begun.

Steroids actually becoem less effective after a couple of months. You'll continue to gain but the best and most solid growth period should be in the first month.

 

[chestmaster1]

why do short cycles when you can do long ones?

 

[Mac173]

Well, I'm biased about this topic since I believe I was the first to write about it (certainly not the first to do it) back in the Dan Duchaine days. It was the Steroids For Health 3 week cycle. (Later adopted as the 2 week cycle and the bridged cycle and the every other wek cycle and every other bull shite version).

Yes, it's easier to keep a 10 pound gain than a 20 pound gain. That's just basic biophysics.

As far as the "kicking in' period, I can't believe that myth still exists. Steroids put you in an anabolic state almost immediately. Of course, it takes time to grow muscle. But it's not like your body needs to wait a few weeks. Muscle growth actually comes in pretty quick spurts. You probably won't "see" results until a week or two but that doesn't mean the process hasn't begun.

Steroids actually becoem less effective after a couple of months. You'll continue to gain but the best and most solid growth period should be in the first month.

I see my best gains near the end. "Kicking in" is just a way to gauge when you will actually feel and see the effects.

 

[Nelson Montana]

why do short cycles when you can do long ones?

If you're doing cycles as an adjunct to training, short cycles are the way to go to prevent a host of problems. Some people mistakenly believe that ANY amount shuts you down. It doesn't. Any amount is suppressive but that doesn't mean "shut down." If you're going to do high dose, long cycles, you might as well never come off.

 

[EtchedfromMarble]

Even though its not the norm, many people get great results from 2 weeks cycles.

 

[ProtienFiend]

With long cycles(10-12weeks) your body has time to adapt to the new weight it has gained. This way, when you come off, if you keep training and eating the same way for a while, you should keep those gains. Or atleast that is what I believe.

Also, with short cycles, there are more rollercoasters of hormone levels (more stopping and starting).

Ive only done low dose (<500mg/wk) 10 week cycles so keep that in mind.

 

[jitc476]

Even though its not the norm, many people get great results from 2 weeks cycles.

and what compounds are you using that work great results in two weeks?
d-bol?
d-blade?

 

[EtchedfromMarble]

tren ace, test prop, anavar, halo

 

[Mac173]

Even though its not the norm, many people get great results from 2 weeks cycles.

Anything less than 8 is a complete waste IMO.

 

[StRoNg_WoN]

I've done both.. and I prefer 3 or 5 week cycles... the gains are less, but so are the sides. and when you do 3 sessions of 3 on, 4 off... it ads up to a nice gain...