WTF! My short/long cycle thread closed by Fonz!

[Krazykat]

Seems Fonz decided to close my thread on whats better short or long cycles.Giving the final word on the matter as fact. Apparently short cycles are useless since they don`t allow for neuro factors involved in maintaining muscle mass.

Personally I think its damn wrong to close a thread thinking that one has THE answer to the question. No other moderator did that.


Comments anyone, Mr Montana?

Chris

 

[Nelson Montana]

A moderator may, and should, close a thread that has derailed into a pointless flame fest. That clearly was not the case here. Fonz simply didn't agree with the opinions presented and decided to use (abuse) his authority and lock the thread. If he can't have things his way, nobody can play. It's obvious the guy's ego is simply out of control.

I would think George and the other Mods would find this behavior unacceptable and I'm sure once it's brought to their attention, something will be done about it.

 

[Bulldog_10]

It shouldn't have been locked, but Fonz did make a good point.

 

[Juice Authority]

A moderator may, and should, close a thread that has derailed into a pointless flame fest. That clearly was not the case here. Fonz simply didn't agree with the opinions presented and decided to use (abuse) his authority and lock the thread. If he can't have things his way, nobody can play. It's obvious the guy's ego is simply out of control.

I would think George and the other Mods would find this behavior unacceptable and I'm sure once it's brought to their attention, something will be done about it.

Nelson, Fonz hit it right on the head as usual. Plus, he adds mush more value to this site than your self-serving comments and arrogant disposition ever will. Your short-cycle theory has been proven counter-productive and useless by countless people already. You are just too thick headed, obstinate, full of yourself and arrogant to realize how wrong you are. Personally I don't see why George allows to spew and promote the nonsense that you do. Some of your ideas are interesting but most of them like your clomid theory and short-cycle approach to AAS are just outright useless and counter-productive.

 

[Nelson Montana]

It shouldn't have been locked, but Fonz did make a good point.

Really? What point was that?

Fonz is fond of using psuedo scientific terms like "nuero factors" which I suppose impresses some people. (Yeah! Nuero factors! Gotta have the nuero factors!)

Explain Fonz's nuero factor BS to the people who have done 3 week cycles and gained solid muscle.

The "nuero factors" are established from training the enlarged muscle in a manner than will sustain the increased size. That comes from proper training, not longer cycles.

Nope, Fonz just made a grandstand play. He hates the fact that people are realizing he doesn't know as much as he thinks he does, and it irks him. It's kind of sad really.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Really? What point was that?

Fonz is fond of using psuedo scientific terms like "nuero factors" which I suppose impresses some people. (Yeah! Nuero factors! Gotta have the nuero factors!)

Explain Fonz's nuero factor BS to the people who have done 3 week cycles and gained solid muscle.

The "nuero factors" are established from training the enlarged muscle in a manner than will sustain the increased size. That comes from proper training, not longer cycles.

Nope, Fonz just made a grandstand play. He hates the fact that people are realizing he doesn't know as much as he thinks he does, and it irks him. It's kind of sad really.

haha...gotta have the neuro factors...LOL

But honestly, i see some validity to his point. Your body needs time to adjust to these new muscles, and the new strength...and if you drop the juice so fast, and you're shut down...your body might not be able to maintain your newfound musculature.

I didn't say it was the say all end all of the discussion...but it was just a point that no one addressed during that whole discussion...which lasted about 6 months

 

[Juice Authority]

Nope, Fonz just made a grandstand play. He hates the fact that people are realizing he doesn't know as much as he thinks he does, and it irks him. It's kind of sad really.

Look who's fucking talking!! Your comment is like the pot calling the kettle black. You are the one who hates the fact that people like myself point out on a regular basis that your theories are so full of holes they look like swiss cheese. When myself and others bring this to your attention you scream and complain like a little bitch. Get a life Nelson. If it wasn't for Elite allowing you to promote your book you would have NO book sales.

 

[DeepZenPill]

I usually respect Fonz and everything he brings to the board, but I can't believe he just closed the thread like that. He stated his opinion as fact, though it was flawed.

Maybe we should all run 47 weeks of tren like he did. Obviously that's the correct and safe way to do things.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Well, so much for this one being flame free. I'm not sure how much "adjustment" is required for the 2-4 lbs I'd hope to gain on a 3 week cycle, but it's probably less than required for the 30 lb gain on a 16 week cycle.

Yes, but as long as you give your body time, it will adapt. 3-5 weeks may be enough time, but you don't gain the muscle on the first day of the cycle...you probably gain most of it in the last few days.

 

[thate]

Nelson, Fonz hit it right on the head as usual. Plus, he adds mush more value to this site than your self-serving comments and arrogant disposition ever will. Your short-cycle theory has been proven counter-productive and useless by countless people already. You are just too thick headed, obstinate, full of yourself and arrogant to realize how wrong you are. Personally I don't see why George allows to spew and promote the nonsense that you do. Some of your ideas are interesting but most of them like your clomid theory and short-cycle approach to AAS are just outright useless and counter-productive.

Why must you tug on Fonz's bag everytime you try to prove Nelson wrong? Also, I know many people who do well with short cycles.

 

[EF Sam]

Well, it seemed like the point of this was not to flame yet I see people flaming Fonz. Why doesnt everyone just sit back and realize, that opinions are opinions. Not everyone will agree, and lets get on with things.

 

[chanmanfoo]

i have never tried the three week cycle idea, however i dont discredit the theory at all. i think there were some very good points being made by nelson, dial_tone, and others. what i dont understand is what the FUCK does having a degree in chemistry have to do with anything! that was the most self righteous
ignorant statement i have ever read on this site. i was under the impression that this was a fucking discussion board. fonz, is your "opinion" the fucking end all or what. i guess your word is gold and all questions should all be directed to you and only you as your opinion is the only valid one. i have one question, at what point did you realize you were the smartest person on this board, and how does it feel to be such an elitist?
foo

 

[chanmanfoo]

also to juice authority, you seem like a knowledgeable guy with good intentions. and you certainly make good points, however i think if nelson said the earth was round you would say it was flat. i am in no way saying nelsons points are all correct or should not be contested, but do you really feel he is so underqualified to give advice, and that his only motive is book sales? i always read all his posts because they are usually very interesting but you seem to start a flame war with him in every one. i could really care less about the flames, but do you know something i dont or just dont like him?
foo

 

[SofaGeorge]

I consider Fonz a rarity here... a true genius who makes frequent unique contributions to the site.

If he gets pissed and wants to lock a couple threads, he has my blessing.

 

[DeepZenPill]

Well, it seemed like the point of this was not to flame yet I see people flaming Fonz. Why doesnt everyone just sit back and realize, that opinions are opinions. Not everyone will agree, and lets get on with things.

Yes, this was most of our points, and the whole driving factor behind the anger at Fonz closing the thread. Not everyone will agree, but this is no reason to end the discussion.

Like SofaGeorge said, I too think Fonz is an extremely valuable asset to this board. He can assert his views in posts and point out faults in the theory behind short cycles if he doesn't agree. Insulting those who want to learn more and closing their thread in no way helps anyone.

 

[Johnny Cut]

I disagree with Nelson more and more lately. However I don't see why people accuse him of pushing his book (which he doesn't do) when we always have 3-4 threads of Ulter & Macro (who I have no problem with) doing the same thing.

i actually agree with this guy, even though he is a prick...jk bro

 

[DTOX]

Anyone else remember the good old days of EF.com when you could go through the forum and not find 1 in 10 threads closed because some mod was having a low self-esteem day?

 

[thelegacy]

too many damn threads lock especially when they start to get good---i love the bickering its fun to read and people bring up great points and ideas--i think i learn the most here when people dont agree so they try and prove their points by bringing out the knowledge

 

[variation]

also to juice authority, you seem like a knowledgeable guy with good intentions. and you certainly make good points, however i think if nelson said the earth was round you would say it was flat. i am in no way saying nelsons points are all correct or should not be contested, but do you really feel he is so underqualified to give advice, and that his only motive is book sales? i always read all his posts because they are usually very interesting but you seem to start a flame war with him in every one. i could really care less about the flames, but do you know something i dont or just dont like him?
foo

Well said, I was thinking the exact same thing! Infact it made me laugh.

 

[The_Eviscerator]

Everyone can pull out as many studies and bullshit that they want, but I live by experience.

I have done, 3 week, 4 week, 5 week, 6 week, 8 week, 10 week and 12 week cycles. My verdict is that 6 week cycles work the best for me. Nelson is right in his assessment that most of your gains and adjustments to a dose come in the 3rd, 4th or 5th week. If using long acting esters, a 6 week cycle is the same as an 8-9 weeker with a taper down. Your other choice is to double your dosage to continue growing. For me, I would rather get off, solidify my gains through diet and exercise and jump back on in 2-3 months.

 

[Lumberg]

I consider Fonz a rarity here... a true genius who makes frequent unique contributions to the site.

If he gets pissed and wants to lock a couple threads, he has my blessing.

Wow George for a reasonable guy you sure are going with a dark horse.

I find it hard to support EITHER of the egomaniacal, wanna-be know-it-alls who go by the handles Fonz and Nelson Montana.

They both have the capacity to make positive contributions but that does not convey carte blanche to act like assholes.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Everyone can pull out as many studies and bullshit that they want, but I live by experience.

I have done, 3 week, 4 week, 5 week, 6 week, 8 week, 10 week and 12 week cycles. My verdict is that 6 week cycles work the best for me. Nelson is right in his assessment that most of your gains and adjustments to a dose come in the 3rd, 4th or 5th week. If using long acting esters, a 6 week cycle is the same as an 8-9 weeker with a taper down. Your other choice is to double your dosage to continue growing. For me, I would rather get off, solidify my gains through diet and exercise and jump back on in 2-3 months.

And that's where differences really come in...

I feel that you should do no more than one cycle per year anyways...So I'd say that anywhere from 6-12 week cycles are good.

 

[Ttokkyo Jack]

I have never done a short cycle, but some of the theories sound good. Anyhow the thread debating which was better should not have been locked. There are benefits to each, and some people will benefit more from longer cycles and it will be in some peoples interest to do short cycles. Bottom line, the point of this thread is that Fonz should not have locked the other thread

 

[jboldman]

i can not believe that i am staying out of this!

jb

 

[The_Eviscerator]

And that's where differences really come in...

I feel that you should do no more than one cycle per year anyways...So I'd say that anywhere from 6-12 week cycles are good.

I agree with you about the one cycle.... I just prefer to do my 12 weeker half in the spring and then half in the late fall early winter...

 

[junk]

Fonz is GREAT and so do all other mods!

I think most of you fail to remember one thing: MODS DON'T GET PAID ! . They are here to contribute from their enormous knowlege !

Fonz is a fucking genius and his contribution to this board is great!

Where the hell would you find a guy so loyal that does remarkebly pedant and percise Blood Glucose levels testing compounds on himself and bringing real world no bullshit information we can all use ?

Where would you find a nut that does 47 weeks cycle of Fina and showing his blood work middle and end cycle to break some myths about fina and show the power of supplements to keep us safe ?

Fonz once helped me personally during a crisis I had, giving valuable information and spending time.

Both Fonz AND Nelson are great contributions to this board and they are NOT GETTING PAID TO ANSWER US.

We should respect both of them and all other mods and SHUT THE FUCK UP!

 

[Krazykat]

junk

What the hell man, Fonz shouldn`t of closed the thread. Who the hell is he to give the final word. So what is he is a `genius`? I don`t really know is he is or isn`t I haven`t been on this board long enough.

Don`t tell me to shut the fuck up, or anyone else. No other mod saw it fit to close a perfectly good thread down.

Talk about missing the point.

 

[The_Eviscerator]

Re: junk

What the hell man, Fonz shouldn`t of closed the thread. Who the hell is he to give the final word. So what is he is a `genius`? I don`t really know is he is or isn`t I haven`t been on this board long enough.

Don`t tell me to shut the fuck up, or anyone else. No other mod saw it fit to close a perfectly good thread down.

Talk about missing the point.

I agree, if it was a flame fest then it is appropriate to shut a thread down. But, if you merely disagree then that is plain wrong.

It isn't like anyone told Fonz his dick is so small that he pisses on his nuts (sorry.. I stole that from "jims" who recently had his thread locked).

 

[Bulldog_10]

Re: Fonz is GREAT and so do all other mods!

I think most of you fail to remember one thing: MODS DON'T GET PAID ! . They are here to contribute from their enormous knowlege !

Fonz is a fucking genius and his contribution to this board is great!

Where the hell would you find a guy so loyal that does remarkebly pedant and percise Blood Glucose levels testing compounds on himself and bringing real world no bullshit information we can all use ?

Where would you find a nut that does 47 weeks cycle of Fina and showing his blood work middle and end cycle to break some myths about fina and show the power of supplements to keep us safe ?

Fonz once helped me personally during a crisis I had, giving valuable information and spending time.

Both Fonz AND Nelson are great contributions to this board and they are NOT GETTING PAID TO ANSWER US.

We should respect both of them and all other mods and SHUT THE FUCK UP!

I don't get paid either...nor does anyone else.

 

[bbkingpin]

Everyone can pull out as many studies and bullshit that they want, but I live by experience.

I have done, 3 week, 4 week, 5 week, 6 week, 8 week, 10 week and 12 week cycles. My verdict is that 6 week cycles work the best for me. Nelson is right in his assessment that most of your gains and adjustments to a dose come in the 3rd, 4th or 5th week. If using long acting esters, a 6 week cycle is the same as an 8-9 weeker with a taper down. Your other choice is to double your dosage to continue growing. For me, I would rather get off, solidify my gains through diet and exercise and jump back on in 2-3 months.

I agree. Unless you want to double the dosage and really cripple your HPTA, after 6 weeks you will usually have plateaued. I think 6 weeks is ideal, as well, because of the motivation downgrade you will usually be experiencing by that time.

 

[white boy]

too many damn threads lock especially when they start to get good---i love the bickering its fun to read and people bring up great points and ideas--i think i learn the most here when people dont agree so they try and prove their points by bringing out the knowledge [/QUOTE

THAT'S RIGHT!!! I think most of us like to see things stirred up a bit, when everyone agrees on a subject all you get is "yup you'l grow like a weed on 50m mg's a day of this and 700 mgs of that a wk" how boring

Besides when people get pissed, thats when the adrenalin gets going and they start doing some serious digging for the research to back up the point they are trying to make

 

[xonic2xonic]

What I see is the same shit over and over again here, where people somehow see it fit to post their research/experimentation/experience (or often just reading) as conclusive evidance.

We need to sit back and observe that champions of old and new have had success from different and often conflicting methods. If we had conclusive evidance, there would be one way to eat, train and juice. There are common elements that have been learned over the years but there is also disparity. What works for one may not for another. What works best for one may not work the best for another.

Here are some of my beliefs:

a) Beliefs should be stated as just that, with a level of modesty reflective of the above.

b) An individual/group who directly or indirectly benefits or stands to benefit from the promotion/sale of a given product or source MAY not be unbiased and reliable.

c) It should be observed that even "clinical trials" MAY be taken out of context, inconclusive, inadequate, erroneous, etc. Sometimes no-one cares enough/no resources to challenge such publications. When a drug is developed, it does not simply go through one trial and then get approved by the FDA, there are numerous trials performed. The same methodology is not required to make claims about and sell non-prescription supplements.

I was going to write more but fukkit.

 

[IronKop77]

OKAY
ANY CYCLE WILL PUT ON KEEPABLE MASS
how about that one!

As far as fonz closing down the thread it was not warrented at all. IMO complete bullshit. This board is driven by opinions and personal experiences thus no one is 100% correct or 100% wrong.

In case you didnt realize cellular biology and the human body are NOT linear. We are a very copmplex system and what works for one WILL NOT NECESSARILY WORK FOR ALL.

As far as Montana, he has some great points and contributes more to this board then most of you; be it his innaccurate opinions or medical facts, most of what he says is backed by at least some research

SCIENCE IS ALWAYS CHANGING------THINGS SUCH AS A HEALTHY BLOOD PRESSURE RATIO, THE RDA FOR US, THE AMOUNT OF WHAT VITAMINS SUITES US BEST, ARE CONSTANTLY BEING UPDATED AND NEW THEORIES ARE RELEASED AND OLD TIME HONORED FACTS ARE BEING DEBUNKED.

 

[Juice Authority]

also to juice authority, you seem like a knowledgeable guy with good intentions. and you certainly make good points, however i think if nelson said the earth was round you would say it was flat. i am in no way saying nelsons points are all correct or should not be contested, but do you really feel he is so underqualified to give advice, and that his only motive is book sales? i always read all his posts because they are usually very interesting but you seem to start a flame war with him in every one. i could really care less about the flames, but do you know something i dont or just dont like him?
foo

I disagree with Nelson's short cycle theory, anti-clomid campaign and his position on the ineffectiveness of cardio. I don't recall any other major difference in opinion I've had with him. I also think he lacks the most basic understanding of AAS as evidenced in posts. I can't believe how many people on this thread flamed Fonz who is probably one of the most knowledgeable contributors to this board. What are some of you people thinking? It would take Nelson years to achieve the same knowledge base in AAS, anti-e's, supplements, dieting and training as Fonz. I personally don't think he's capable but that's just my opinion.

 

[DeepZenPill]

You make it a point to flame Nelson at every turn. If I don't agree with anyone's ideas, I just post what my reason is without pulling low blows.

Knowing a lot of shit doesn't make Fonz a better person than anyone else. I respect Fonz because he does contribute a whole hell of a lot of information, but you're missing the point entirely; the cause of outrage was that he was stifling the discussion of ideas by closing that thread. I don't have any problems with him other than that ridiculous post and subsequent locking.

Go tell all the people who had success with 3 week cycles that they don't work. I felt like absolute shit on clomid with constant headaches and depression. If Nelson wasn't here posting his thoughts on clomid, nobody else would tell me clomid doesn't agree with some people. I've been able to recover fine with nothing but Avena Sativa, Zinc, and Maca and keep my gains. But traditional wisdom tells me I shouldn't have, so I must've really lost those gains.

If people refuse to acknowledge the fact that the human body varies greatly from person to person then more and more people are going to piss away their gains and suffer unnecessary sides.

 

[Juice Authority]

I felt like absolute shit on clomid with constant headaches and depression. If Nelson wasn't here posting his thoughts on clomid, nobody else would tell me clomid doesn't agree with some people. I've been able to recover fine with nothing but Avena Sativa, Zinc, and Maca and keep my gains. But traditional wisdom tells me I shouldn't have, so I must've really lost those gains.

If people refuse to acknowledge the fact that the human body varies greatly from person to person then more and more people are going to piss away their gains and suffer unnecessary sides.

If clomid doesn't agree with you then it is best to take with Nolva. 20mg's of Nolva is just as effective at recovering hpta as 150mg's of clomid. You might want to consider lowering the dosage of clomid to say 50mg's ed and taking it with 20mg's of nolva along with the other supps you mentioned above. That might alleviate the headaches and depression you get from clomid alone. Nelson flat out suggested that clomid doesn't work at all for recovering hpta, which is completely wrong and bad advice IMO.

 

[thelegacy]

i got an idea----lets start an elitefitness war--we can meet in mid-america somewhere and the sides will be nelson montana side versus Fonz's side and whoever likes nelson or fonz thats where they'll go--then we will fight and i will probably kick a lot of ass so stay away-----oh yea im on Nelson Montana's side

 

[easy]

i got an idea----lets start an elitefitness war--we can meet in mid-america somewhere and the sides will be nelson montana side versus Fonz's side and whoever likes nelson or fonz thats where they'll go--then we will fight and i will probably kick a lot of ass so stay away-----oh yea im on Nelson Montana's side

Choose a side? Is this an Eastcoast Westcoast rap war? I don't understand why everyone is so pissed. Fonz might have been out of line but you can always start a new thread. Maybe I just need to become more passionate about the internet.

 

[DeepZenPill]

Choose a side? Is this an Eastcoast Westcoast rap war? I don't understand why everyone is so pissed. Fonz might have been out of line but you can always start a new thread. Maybe I just need to become more passionate about the internet.

First of all, the thread is getting sidetracked with people arguing over Nelson's knowledge. That's a good reason for a mod to step in and make sure people stick to the topic.

And we shouldn't have to start a new thread. This board is all about educating people on the bodybuilding lifestyle. If the discussion in specific threads isn't allowed to mature and instead it's spread to bits and pieces all over then fewer people are going to benefit from it.

 

[DaJudge]

Where's Fonz?

I'd like to hear his explanation for locking the thread.

 

[Juice Authority]

Where's Fonz?

I'd like to hear his explanation for locking the thread.

That's your first post here and you start off with wanting an explanation from Fonz on why a thread was locked? LOL! The thread was locked because the discussion of Nelson's short-cycle theory has already been discussed at length numerous times and the general consensus was that it's counter-productive yet he keeps trying to promote the idea as the optimal way to go.

 

[Juice Authority]

Where's Fonz?

I'd like to hear his explanation for locking the thread.

That's your first post here and you start off with wanting an explanation from Fonz on why a thread was locked? LOL! The thread was locked because the discussion of Nelson's short-cycle theory has already been discussed at length numerous times and the general consensus was that it's counter-productive yet he keeps trying to promote the idea as the optimal way to go.

 

[needsize]

That's your first post here and you start off with wanting an explanation from Fonz on why a thread was locked? LOL! The thread was locked because the discussion of Nelson's short-cycle theory has already been discussed at length numerous times and the general consensus was that it's counter-productive yet he keeps trying to promote the idea as the optimal way to go.

It shouldnt matter one bit how many times something has been discussed...everything in this forum has been discussed more times than I can count, I havent seen a new question or idea around here in a long time (other than the stuff Nelson posts which always turns into flame wars as his opinions are not the commonly held ones). There are only so many things about AAS that we can talk about. So going by your rational, all the threads in the anabolic forum should be locked.

There was absolutely nothing against the rules in the thread, it should have been left alone! The debates are good as thats where the learning actually takes place

 

[SofaGeorge]

I don't want to call anybody "pussies" or anything... but real men would settle this with knives.

 

[DaJudge]

Impressive Huh?

Honestly, I read these boards so I can get real world experiences from people who have used AAS. I haven't done my first cycle so I don't feel that my opinion on a short or long cycle means a thing. Most of the people on that thread do have first hand knowledge though. If Fonz wants to shut a good discussion down at least respond to people who are questioning his motives.

Your whole reason for being on Elite at all is to battle Nelson. So I couldn't care less what you think anyway.

 

[Fonz]

A moderator may, and should, close a thread that has derailed into a pointless flame fest. That clearly was not the case here. Fonz simply didn't agree with the opinions presented and decided to use (abuse) his authority and lock the thread. If he can't have things his way, nobody can play. It's obvious the guy's ego is simply out of control.

I would think George and the other Mods would find this behavior unacceptable and I'm sure once it's brought to their attention, something will be done about it.

I close threads when ideas are completely ridiculous and you're simply trying to stirr up controversy.....for profit. Which I don 't mind......sell all the books you want for all I care. Make yourself as much money as you want..BUT THOSE BOOKS BETTER BE FULL OF CORRECT INFORMATION.

And guess what? The 2-3 week cycle is a farce that was proven a long time ago.

And as I tried to explain in very simplistic terms.

The nerves CANNOT adapt at the same rate as EXPLOSIVE 2-3 weeks of muscle growth.

(The only way is through exo use of IGF-1 R3 long which causes direct innervation(Nerve growth) way over and above an AAS.)

End result..............you lose it all.....all.

6 weeks and over...yes. No doubt..with short-acting compounds you can make gains you can keep.

But <2-3 weeks NO.

This has been proven by vets and people a BILLION times more experienced than Nelson.

You guys just keep on talking...I really don't care. You're just wasting your own time and money and gains.

So as far as I'm concerned, jabber away...its simply amusing to me.

Fonz

 

[Nelson Montana]

I close threads when ideas are completely ridiculous and you're simply trying to stirr up controversy.....for profit. Which I don 't mind......sell all the books you want for all I care. Make yourself as much money as you want..BUT THOSE BOOKS BETTER BE FULL OF CORRECT INFORMATION.

And guess what? The 2-3 week cycle is a farce that was proven a long time ago.

And as I tried to explain in very simplistic terms.

The nerves CANNOT adapt at the same rate as EXPLOSIVE 2-3 weeks of muscle growth.

(The only way is through exo use of IGF-1 R3 long which causes direct innervation(Nerve growth) way over and above an AAS.)

End result..............you lose it all.....all.

6 weeks and over...yes. No doubt..with short-acting compounds you can make gains you can keep.

But <2-3 weeks NO.

This has been proven by vets and people a BILLION times more experienced than Nelson.

You guys just keep on talking...I really don't care. You're just wasting your own time and money and gains.

So as far as I'm concerned, jabber away...its simply amusing to me.

Fonz

Did this sound like mindless bantering to every one else?

So, in your opinion Fonz, muscle can not grow in 3 weeks? So how does it grow in the second 3 weeks?

Muscle growth is incremental. When in an especially anabolic state, (i.e. on gear) the growth rate is extremely rapid. No surprise. That's what they were designed to do. The drug doesn't sit around for weeks waiting to work. It works immediately. results can be seen in about 5 days and the following two weeks bring about the best results. I'm sure there are dozens of people on this board, some of whom may even prefer longe cycles, who will admit that gains in the first month are the most drastic. And that, has also been proven many, many times over.

Bottom Line: Long cycles work and short cycles work, but short cycles work with less sides.

Fonz has some things to offer, but he has to realize that he is not the end all and be all of knowledge. Nor is he the dictator of this board. No one knows it all - not me or him or anyone else.

If Fonz admitted he was wrong in this case, both in terms of the discusion and his petulant closing of the thread, I think a lot more people would respect him than if he continues with this silly belligerant posturing. It's really bad form bro. And it's an insult to the other mods, as well as the member of the board.

 

[Fonz]

OK, I've had it:

PROVE IT TO ME SCIENTIFICALLY THAT CONTRACTILE TISSUE(MUSCLE) CAN BE GROWN IN 2 WEEKS AND KEPT AFTERWARDS FOR AT LEAST 8 OR MORE WEEKS

I've just about had it with your BS statements.

This is a scientific discussion board not pseudo-writing.

Now shut up and PROVE YOUR DAMN THEORIES.

I certainly have gone to the ends of the bloody earth with my own money to prove mine....at NO PROFIT.

SO, you better start doing the same or ship out.

Fonz

 

[DaddyX]

this is awesome,i love reading poeple argue with eachother. i personally think we should have a fight board where we can all yell at eachother and make fun

 

[Nelson Montana]

OK, I've had it:

PROVE IT TO ME SCIENTIFICALLY THAT CONTRACTILE TISSUE(MUSCLE) CAN BE GROWN IN 2 WEEKS AND KEPT AFTERWARDS FOR AT LEAST 8 OR MORE WEEKS

I've just about had it with your BS statements.

This is a scientific discussion board not pseudo-writing.

Now shut up and PROVE YOUR DAMN THEORIES.

I certainly have gone to the ends of the bloody earth with my own money to prove mine....at NO PROFIT.

SO, you better start doing the same or ship out.

Fonz

........................

I'm sorry. I had a little trouble reading your thread. I think you need to increase the print size another six thousand points.

Do I dectect some compensation with those big letters? Hmmm.

Proof? How about hundreds of people that have done it?

Now it's your turn -- PROVE IT DOESN'T.


I better...? Ship out? Are you now the sole owner and ceo of Elite Fitness?

And no, I didn't take your strawberries. (Karma to anyone who gets that).

 

[xonic2xonic]

What is Fonz's educational background ?

"" Nelson ?

 

[Krazykat]

Hi,

Well although I think Nelson is right, Fonz is saying that muscle growth DOES occur in 2 to 3 weeks but rather nerve adaptation does not, resulting in muscle loss afterwards. The body simply cannot `hold` the muscle, according to Fonz of course.

Just wanted to say that since Nelson was writing like Fonz was saying muscle growth doesn`t occur at all in the first 2/3 weeks.

But sure, how can all those people who have done 3 weekers and held the muscle be wrong. I think Nelson himself is 40 pounds over his natural weight and hasen`t done gear in six years! Isn`t that proof? Along with everyone else, one example is never scientifically enough

 

[Bulldog_10]

Fonz, if you can't grow muscle in two weeks, and keep it for 8 weeks...how does anyone grow keepable muscle? Do you mean to say "grow A CERTAIN AMOUNT of contractile tissue in 2 weeks..."???

And if so, what is the limit to the amount of muscle that can be gained in a 2 week period and sustained for 8+ weeks?

 

[wyld1g]

I like to learn alot! I read everything here and try to make sense from everything. What I have determined is that everyone is different, and it all depends on what AS your using. I honestly seen no gains until about week three and four. That is when My other half started to notice a little. I am looking forward to the next eight. The point being, we should all read what someone has to say, then go to the gym and figure it out for yourself!

 

[flex123]

What is Fonz's educational background ?

"" Nelson ?

I think he's some arrogant penis in a University who thinks he knows it all. I don't even know what thread was locked or what but Fonz seems like a little pussy to me. He cries when someone else has a differing opinion then his own.

Fonz come on man, stop beleiving your own bullshit and step back into reality. You cannot just go around stomping on ideas that don't flow with your gathered "scientific" knowledge.

and on a side note get down on ya knees and suck this dick.







just kidding actually...I could careless. I'm just trying to follow the crowd in the thread.

 

[Bulldog_10]

I like to learn alot! I read everything here and try to make sense from everything. What I have determined is that everyone is different, and it all depends on what AS your using. I honestly seen no gains until about week three and four. That is when My other half started to notice a little. I am looking forward to the next eight. The point being, we should all read what someone has to say, then go to the gym and figure it out for yourself!

I agree...but there are limits, and to some point everyone is alike. And you don't see gains for 3 or 4 weeks, probably because you use long acting esters...whereas if you go by the 3-4 week cycle theory, you'd have to use fast acting drugs...

 

[wyld1g]

I agree...but there are limits, and to some point everyone is alike. And you don't see gains for 3 or 4 weeks, probably because you use long acting esters...whereas if you go by the 3-4 week cycle theory, you'd have to use fast acting drugs...

True. It also took me time to realise I was overtrainng.

 

[Juice Authority]

OK, I've had it:

I've just about had it with your BS statements.

This is a scientific discussion board not pseudo-writing.

Now shut up and PROVE YOUR DAMN THEORIES.

I certainly have gone to the ends of the bloody earth with my own money to prove mine....at NO PROFIT.

SO, you better start doing the same or ship out.

Fonz

Never happen. Nelson refuses to back up any of his theories with facts or proof. All he has is the alleged testimony of others you claim to have tried it and gotten results. Personally I think those who claim that that they have tried Nelson's short cycle approach and gotten results are completely full of shit and don't know their ass from their elbow. The ignorance of some people in support of this theory on this very thread is truly appalling. I got to hand it to Nelson though. Somehow is able to convince the herd mentality that his approach to AAS is the Alpha and Omega. That takes a special kind of skill. But then again the people that support this aren't exactly the sharpest tools in the shed.

 

[Bulldog_10]

Never happen. Nelson refuses to back up any of his theories with facts or proof. All he has is the alleged testimony of others you claim to have tried it and gotten results. Personally I think those who claim that that they have tried Nelson's short cycle approach and gotten results are completely full of shit and don't know their ass from their elbow. The ignorance of some people in support of this theory on this very thread is truly appalling. I got to hand it to Nelson though. Somehow is able to convince the herd mentality that his approach to AAS is the Alpha and Omega. That takes a special kind of skill. But then again the people that support this aren't exactly the sharpest tools in the shed.

No need for insults big guy.

 

[needsize]

I have done short cycles and had good results from them. Not as much mass gained as on a longer one, but not nearly as big of a crash either. But I did keep pretty much everything I gained on the short cycles. And I've been around here long enough that no one should be accusing me of being a lackie for nelson, in fact, i did the short cycles before Nelson started posting here. You can quote scientific principles all you want that prove otherwise, how do you explain that it worked for me. And not onlt did they work, I was way past my natural limits when I did them

 

[wyld1g]

I have done short cycles and had good results from them. Not as much mass gained as on a longer one, but not nearly as big of a crash either. But I did keep pretty much everything I gained on the short cycles. And I've been around here long enough that no one should be accusing me of being a lackie for nelson, in fact, i did the short cycles before Nelson started posting here. You can quote scientific principles all you want that prove otherwise, how do you explain that it worked for me. And not onlt did they work, I was way past my natural limits when I did them

What was in your short cycle?

 

[Lumberg]

This thread rightr here is what EF IS ALL ABOUT!

 

[DeepZenPill]

So fonz you're saying that the nerves stop adapting the increased muscle mass once the cycle is over? You're telling Nelson to back his theory up with fact, but I've never seen you post a single study about this "neuro factor." I read way too many threads on this board and have an impeccable memory, but I never saw a single study showing complete muscle loss after a short cycle of AAS.

I tried searching for it, but I'm not platinum. So I guess this question will come up ad infinitum.

 

[Nelson Montana]

Never happen. Nelson refuses to back up any of his theories with facts or proof. All he has is the alleged testimony of others you claim to have tried it and gotten results. Personally I think those who claim that that they have tried Nelson's short cycle approach and gotten results are completely full of shit and don't know their ass from their elbow. The ignorance of some people in support of this theory on this very thread is truly appalling. I got to hand it to Nelson though. Somehow is able to convince the herd mentality that his approach to AAS is the Alpha and Omega. That takes a special kind of skill. But then again the people that support this aren't exactly the sharpest tools in the shed.

.......................

I really should ignore this, but it's funny. This guys realized he was making a fool of himself and losing crediblity among the members so he PM'ed me and wanted to make peace. I said, "no problem" -- act like a decent person and I'll do the same. But as soon as Fonz got on my case I guess he figured it was open season on Nelson so he goes back on the attack, and insults manny and needsize and about a dozen other guys in the process. What a tool. Why don't you go hang out at BB.com where the only criteria for being accepted is to have an attitude and stick you nose up the resident gurus ass.

Okay, enough of that.

I'll say just one other thing pertaining to this topic. The ideal 3 week cycle uses a combination of short and long acting esters (i.e d-bol and primo or var and sus) In this way you could say that the cycle is active for about a month. It's possible to put on size in a month NATURALLY so I'm not sure why Fonz is so adamantly arguing this point. It's kind of ridiculous. If he likes long cycles, fine. I'm more concerned with health, long tern effects and getting the most result with the least amount of suppression and the least amount of drugs. Sure, it takes a little more disipline and you have to train and eat correctly, but the gains tend to be far more solid. I guess if someone can't, won't, or doesn't know how to train and eat to make the most of a cycle, they can't undersatnd how it can be effective -- but that, in a nutshell, is the reason we see bigger cycles and smaller muscles on so many guys today. I'm not talking about pros -- I see guys who look "okay" who are on a gram a week. Hell, I placed in the NPC on 400 mgs a week and I'm no mass motherfucker by any means.

It doesn't take a boatload of gear to look good. And if you can't progress beyond a certain point, more gear is just a fools paradise. You'll never keep it. But maybe Fonz doesn't know that because I doubt he's been clean for any appreciable amount of time in years.

 

[Juice Authority]

I have done short cycles and had good results from them. Not as much mass gained as on a longer one, but not nearly as big of a crash either. But I did keep pretty much everything I gained on the short cycles. And I've been around here long enough that no one should be accusing me of being a lackie for nelson, in fact, i did the short cycles before Nelson started posting here. You can quote scientific principles all you want that prove otherwise, how do you explain that it worked for me. And not onlt did they work, I was way past my natural limits when I did them

I've never seen you post advocating short cycles. In fact, most of the cycles you've posted here and at Steriodology were longer 12 + week cycles at 1 gm or more of Test per week - usually a long acting ester like Enan. When did you become a fan of the short cycle approach?

 

[wyld1g]

I beginnin to think it's like a Ford vs. Chev fight...lol..

 

[Juice Authority]

.......................

I really should ignore this, but it's funny. This guys realized he was making a fool of himself and losing crediblity among the members so he PM'ed me and wanted to make peace. I said, "no problem" -- act like a decent person and I'll do the same. But as soon as Fonz got on my case I guess he figured it was open season on Nelson so he goes back on the attack, and insults manny and needsize and about a dozen other guys in the process. What a tool. Why don't you go hang out at BB.com where the only criteria for being accepted is to have an attitude and stick you nose up the resident gurus ass.

Trust me, I was surprized to see that needsize supported this approach.

Nelson, Elite is the ONLY AAS message board where the members seem to support your ideas. Let me bring back a couple of thread for our viewers from bb.com that illustrate how widely regarded you and your views on things are. This should be good for a hoot!

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111963

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113416

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=112871

 

[needsize]

What was in your short cycle?

i ran a few

One was suspension, anadrol, fina

Another was prop, dbol and anadrol

 

[wyld1g]

i ran a few

One was suspension, anadrol, fina

Another was prop, dbol and anadrol

seen your pics at steroidology, look awesome bro! Thats why I was wonderin

 

[Bulldog_10]

Trust me, I was surprized to see that needsize supported this approach.

Nelson, Elite is the ONLY AAS message board where the members seem to support your ideas. Let me bring back a couple of thread for our viewers from bb.com that illustrate how widely regarded you and your views on things are. This should be good for a hoot!

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111963

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113416

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=112871

And my dad can kick your dad's ass!

 

[needsize]

I didnt support any approach, i just said it worked fo me and I kept my gains. I'm actually doing the opposite now, running a 6 month cycle, 3 months bulking followed by 3 months contest dieting. As long as I eat and train properly, then any approach that I have tried with gear has worked

wyld1g, thanks, I guess something must be working for me then....This is kind of like a thread on another board where guys who work for on of the underground labs were saying that the one I buy from sucks, the gear is underdosed. My answer was, if the gear sucks so bad, then how did I get so damn big....

 

[Bulldog_10]

then how did I get so damn big....

It sure wasn't your diet and training!

 

[needsize]

It sure wasn't your diet and training!

considering I hit my genetic limit 40lbs ago, it was a lot more than diet and training....it was the muscle tech...

 

[Bulldog_10]

it was the muscle tech...

Well that goes without saying.

BTW, how do you know what your genetic limit is?

 

[Juice Authority]

I didnt support any approach, i just said it worked fo me and I kept my gains. I'm actually doing the opposite now, running a 6 month cycle, 3 months bulking followed by 3 months contest dieting. As long as I eat and train properly, then any approach that I have tried with gear has worked

Some people are just blessed with good genetics and recover quicker than others so the gains they make are more sustainable post cycle. I would venture to guess that would apply more to you than most people here. For the vast majority, short cycles are completely ineffective. I bet if you were to average it out over a year the gains you make and keep from longer cycles would far outweigh those made from shorter cycles.

 

[needsize]

BTW, how do you know what your genetic limit is?

For the last three years of my natural training, so matter what supplement I tried, program i followed, I couldnt gain another lb of mass. That was my natural genetic limit, I dont plan on having a limit on how big I can get on juice...

 

[Bulldog_10]

Some people are just blessed with good genetics and recover quicker than others so the gains they make are more sustainable post cycle. I would venture to guess that would apply more to you than most people here. For the vast majority, short cycles are completely ineffective. I bet if you were to average it out over a year the gains you make and keep from longer cycles would far outweigh those made from shorter cycles.

See this is what you don't get...it's not all about the gains...it's about overall health. No one is arguing about whether you'll make MORE gains on shorter vs longer cycles...it's just that shorter cycles CAN give some gains, while being healthier.

 

[needsize]

Juice Authority, if you're saying I have good genetics you are dead wrong. I have a good frame and good muscle shape, but gaining muscle for me has always been extremely hard. You have to remember, I've been training seriously for over 12 years, 10 of those natural. So I do know my body and a whole lot about training. This allows me to maximize the amount I can gain from any cycle that I run. This knowlege and training experience also makes it easier to maintain gains post cycle, trust me though, genetics have absolutely nothing to do with it

 

[The Republican]

Trust me, I was surprized to see that needsize supported this approach.

Nelson, Elite is the ONLY AAS message board where the members seem to support your ideas. Let me bring back a couple of thread for our viewers from bb.com that illustrate how widely regarded you and your views on things are. This should be good for a hoot!

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111963

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=113416

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=112871

So because a few people with a very minute amount of knowledge dont agree with Montana's theories he is automatically wrong? The only hoot anyone with any intelligence would get out of this is the knowledge that your argument has no merit.

 

[The Republican]

Montana, I dont post much here on the anabolic section of the board, but when I joined here a month ago I went through some of your old topics. Impressed, I decided to invest in your book.
I apologize that this is going off topic but I suggest it to anyone interested in a good read that argues the "standard" of practice when it comes to diet and excercise routines.

 

[DeepZenPill]

So because a few people with a very minute amount of knowledge dont agree with Montana's theories he is automatically wrong? The only hoot anyone with any intelligence would get out of this is the knowledge that your argument has no merit.

Good point. Juice 'Authority' why don't you go around telling non-juicers how steroids really aren't that bad for you. I bet most people will disagree and tell you they're terrible. I guess they're all right.

And I love how this thread got moved to the conversation board. While some people are fucking around on it, there are still discussion of ANABOLICS going on.

 

[Burning_Inside]

Everyone who posted in this thread is BANNED!

Whoever simply browsed the thread is ALSO BANNED! We have your cookies!

 

[Fonz]

So fonz you're saying that the nerves stop adapting the increased muscle mass once the cycle is over? You're telling Nelson to back his theory up with fact, but I've never seen you post a single study about this "neuro factor." I read way too many threads on this board and have an impeccable memory, but I never saw a single study showing complete muscle loss after a short cycle of AAS.

I tried searching for it, but I'm not platinum. So I guess this question will come up ad infinitum.

There's plenty of research out there. However, I'm not your personal(nor nobodies) reserach machine.

#1 There are muscle growth factors right?

#2 There are Nerve Growth Factors right?

Well, to a NORMAL AAS user w/o access to very expensive drugs that have ben synthesized in the lab, cycles involving short periods(2-3 weeks)...this is what happens:

#2(NGF's(Nerve Growth Factors) are far slower than their muscular counter-parts..#1(MGF'sMuscular Growth factors).

So, your nerves cannot adapt to the muscular growth you have caused your body to achieve. Now, this is obviously for 2-3 weeks.

And I'm not talking about water weight...or even muscular tissue.

I'm talking about use. Can you USE YOUR extra musculature to the same ability as before?

The answer is no. Your nerves have not adapted.

There is avery good reason(albeit at the time they had no clue) why cycles were normally always kept in the 8-12 week range. Sme exceptional people can get away with 6 or so, but they are more than likely geneticallt gifted.

During the 8-12 week mark, your NGF's(Nerve Growth Factors) are able to adapt to your muscle gain, and you have the same capacity/usage with them as before..e.xcept you're more than likely stronger, quicker, etc.... Key word for this post ADAPTATION. Certain biological parts of your body take longer to adapt to external stimulae than others.

Now, I would love to see Nelson an Co. refute this b/c the simple answer is they can't. And I'm simply tired of trying to actually teach you something about how you can make better gains.

SO....if you want to follow Nelson..please do. I have no financial interest in this...while he does...which should open your eyes a little.

Fonz

 

[Lumberg]

I have gained and kept on a 3 week cycle before. Of Prohormones no less.

 

[Krazykat]

Hi,

I don`t think people still have got Fonz`s point. Now you might be asking why I am defending the mod that closed my thread, but I am not. I just want people to be clear on what he is saying.

Well although I think Nelson is right, Fonz is saying that muscle growth DOES occur in 2 to 3 weeks but rather nerve adaptation does not, resulting in muscle loss afterwards. The body simply cannot `hold` the muscle, according to Fonz of course.

Now of course is this true........

Can all those 3 week cycles that worked be wrong?

 

[Lumberg]

Good post DialTOne.

 

[Krazykat]

bump

bump for a scientific response to fonz`s arguments.

 

[Fonz]

Re: bump

bump for a scientific response to fonz`s arguments.

If you're waiting for Nelson or his cronies to refute this, don't waste your breath. He only cares about selling books. Nothing else.

In fact, its going to be highly amusing to watch him spew out "I'm being attacked", "singled out", "OMG, but it worked before for 100's of people" etc.. etc..

LOL

God, this is just going to be too funny.

NM is a writer NOT an athlete. I am a soccer player and have tried those 3 week cycles because I'm always willing to try someones theories. And while you obviously gain muscle..(This was never disputed)....what is the point of that extra musculature if you cannot use that extra musculature at 100% due to nerve growth adaptation constraints.

This was specially noticeable for me b/c soccer requires a fair degree of motor-control skill.

So, if you're just a bodybuilder/weight-lifter...go ahead....you won't have any problems.

But athlete in any form? FORGET IT.

Fonz

 

[Krazykat]

But Fonz

Can`t the mind-muscle connection be built after 3 week mass is attained?

 

[meman]

Well i don't really care what fonz says. Me and 2 friends all do 4on 4off 4 on ph cycles gains 8-16lb kept. The most popular ph cycle is 4 weeks and ppl maintain there gains, this isn't to do with aas, it's in response to
"nerves cannot adapt to the muscular growth you have caused your body to achieve this is obviously for 2-3 weeks."(close enough to 4)

 

[Fonz]

Well i don't really care what fonz says. Me and 2 friends all do 4on 4off 4 on ph cycles gains 8-16lb kept. The most popular ph cycle is 4 weeks and ppl maintain there gains, this isn't to do with aas, it's in response to
"nerves cannot adapt to the muscular growth you have caused your body to achieve this is obviously for 2-3 weeks."(close enough to 4)

1 post?

LOL

God, I wonder who this is....haha

Next time....you better use a proxy....god this is just too funny.

Fonz

 

[AAP]

I don't know the entire discussion behind this - and I ain't taking time to read the entire thread either - but scientifically, you CAN build muscle EVERY SINGLE DAY if you keep your body primed and well fed... anabolics not withstanding.

However, I do NOT see the need or purpose for a 2 week cycle? WTF? Going on and off like that is akin to standing at a light switch and flickering it back and forthy really fast. What is the point?

I am not a scientist, but I believe that it takes a lot longer to KEEP muscle. Yeah, you can juice it up for 2 weeks, but then what? Your body is not going to be primed or ready to support that "instant muscle" you gain from two weeks. Shouldn't it take longer for your body to get accustomed to carrying it and solidfying the muscle over a period of time. I mean, two weeks on dbol ain't gonna be muscle you know.

 

[Thread Locking MOD]

I locked your thread bitch, quit wining or I'll ban your ass to Gahzi's bodybuilding and you dont want that do you?


I didnt think so..


THIS SHIT IS LOCKED

:-D

 

[AAP]

I locked your thread bitch, quit wining or I'll ban your ass to Gahzi's bodybuilding and you dont want that do you?


I didnt think so..


THIS SHIT IS LOCKED

:-D

HA HA!! I know who this is.

 

[KAYNE]

FONZ IS A PRICK.....THATS WHY LARRY.

 

[Fonz]

FONZ IS A PRICK.....THATS WHY LARRY.

Get out of this thread you bozo. You have neither the intellectually capacity nor the conceptualization to even grasp an iota of what the hell we're talking about.

Back to the ghetto w/ you.

Fonz

 

[KAYNE]

Get out of this thread you bozo. You have neither the intellectually capacity nor the conceptualization to even grasp an iota of what the hell we're talking about.

Back to the ghetto w/ you.

Fonz

DONT MAKE ME GO DIG UP QUOTES ON HOW MUCH FUCKING STEROIDS YOU HAVE DONE BUT STILL WEIGH ONLY 200LBS SOAKING FUCKING WET........LARRY!!!

THAT PATHETIC ATTEMPT TO MAKE ME SOUND IGNORANT BY YOU IS LAME. MORON. CANT YOU COME UP WITH ANYTHING ELSE?




KAYNE

 

[Slowmo21]

Don't forget the pellet gun...what a genious.

 

[Fonz]

DONT MAKE ME GO DIG UP QUOTES ON HOW MUCH FUCKING STEROIDS YOU HAVE DONE BUT STILL WEIGH ONLY 200LBS SOAKING FUCKING WET........LARRY!!!

THAT PATHETIC ATTEMPT TO MAKE ME SOUND IGNORANT BY YOU IS LAME. MORON. CANT YOU COME UP WITH ANYTHING ELSE?




KAYNE

Yes, it must really suck to be a mongoloid.

My condolences.

Really.


Bwahahahaha.................

Fonz

 

[Fonz]

Don't forget the pellet gun...what a genious.

No, by all means do.

Then post all my other informative threads that outnumber the bad ones by what?

A 100-1?

Yes. SOunds about right.

Gotta love the morons who think they can point out faults in people FAR smarter than they are.

Go back to chump school, chump...until you develop a thing called a functioning brain, you neanderthal.

LOL@some of the obvious LOSERS on this chat board.

What a joke.

Fonz