Jump to content

Test C 500mg 12 weeks cycle log!! first real cycle


 Share

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, eightyeight14 said:

As for training - As I thought, I knew I could be training harder but fell victim to those claiming max hypertrophy is with a bunch of reps with moderate weight. So you are saying I should raise intensity, meaning lowering the number of reps per set by increasing the weight so i try harder? Or intensity as in more reps and get more pump going with dropsets and stuff?

Common misconception here.  Lower intensity is a technical term meaning lower percentage of one rep max NOT feeling like you could be training harder.  Even volume advocates like Isratel say two or three reps in reserve max.  Combined with high volume, that is a tough workout.  Even Isratel cautions against 'junk volume'.  If you feel like you could be training harder, your entire workout is probably junk volume.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BobTheOldLifter said:

Common misconception here.  Lower intensity is a technical term meaning lower percentage of one rep max NOT feeling like you could be training harder.  Even volume advocates like Isratel say two or three reps in reserve max.  Combined with high volume, that is a tough workout.  Even Isratel cautions against 'junk volume'.  If you feel like you could be training harder, your entire workout is probably junk volume.

so for example, I should go higher intensity, lower reps like 2 sets of 8 reps , then maybe 1 set 15 reps in the end/start of each lift  , with lower weight just to mix in a bit more activation time under tension? Would this be the most effective approach or am I still misunderstanding? This routine was feeling really good for a couple weeks but now i feel like i’ve maybe outgrown it a bit and I don’t get as much stimulation as when i was natty like it isn’t as challenging . i’ll think of some changes 

Edited by eightyeight14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, eightyeight14 said:

so for example, I should go higher intensity, lower reps like 2 sets of 8 reps , then maybe 1 set 15 reps in the start of the set before that , with lower weight just to mix in a bit more activation time under tension? Would this be the most effective approach or am I still misunderstanding? This routine was feeling really good for a couple weeks but now i feel like i’ve maybe outgrown it a bit and I don’t get as much stimulation as when i was natty like it isn’t as challenging . i’ll think of some changes 

Haha...yes 'the most effective approach'.  To say that this is a topic of debate is a huge understatement.   But the best advice is to TRY them.  Give Isratel's approach a try and see.  Or, give doggcrapp a try (an example of the other end of the spectrum). MONSTERS have been built with DC training.

But don't do a bastardization of a program.   Do them properly and give them a real chance and see what works for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t take this the wrong way man but accutane is harsh , not many take that unless they absolutely have to its a terrible drug . Ok I’m not messing with you here but try washing your back and acne sites when you shower with warm water with dawn 2x dish soap. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, CapeBretonDadBod said:

Honestly i do 2 high rep warm up sets per each exercise and 4 sets of 6 to 8 reps and and the last one to failure.

okay, that sounds pretty good and much better than what I am doing, looks like i gotta add more sets

 

with the accutane, I know your approach is less is more and use bare minimum, but I am a bit mre liberal LMAO I am willing to run the riskier stuff for the high reward ... just hope one of these days i dont get bit in the ass for taking it too far 

Edited by eightyeight14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Mike Isratels approach especially training off a frequency based plan and adjusting effort appropriately. HOWEVER, I think a massive flaw in implementing this idea is that most people have ZERO clue of what 1 in the tank feels like, or 2 reps to failure. Even myself I find that hard to judge... so how is someone relatively new to training going to figure that out... or at least enough for it to be effective. So in my opinion, I think thats going to lead to a bunch of wasted time and ineffective training.

So I say this, TRAIN YOUR ASS OFF - if its a set of 8, rep 3 should start to feel challenging. If you can get to 8 fairly easily it was a wasted set, add more weight. 

Don't overthink training in terms of volume/intensity/etc... just give it your all time and time again in the gym, use a journal so you can make sure you're actually utilizing progressive overload. Then BAM magic. 

Just so everyone also understands, I prescribe more of the theories of Dante Trudel (DC Training), Jordan Peters, Phil Viz. I like and don't disagree with the volume discussion I just think its not as "easy" to implement as people make it out to be. 

Give it your all, get strong as hell, then add in more sets to build volume. Thats basically my philosophy lol

Edited by Corey5150
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, eightyeight14 said:

okay, that sounds pretty good and much better than what I am doing, looks like i gotta add more sets

Maybe, but not necessarily.  It depends on a lot of things, perhaps the most important is training status.  4 hard sets is probably overkill if you're not advanced.  Sure you can do it, but two good ones could be enough to grow just as much or more.  Frequency is also an important variable that also can vary significantly with training status.

Also, there is generally value in periodized programs, but they're not simple one-sentence programs.  The intensity and volume changes over time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Corey5150 said:

Even myself I find that hard to judge... so how is someone relatively new to training going to figure that out... or at least enough for it to be effective. So in my opinion, I think thats going to lead to a bunch of wasted time and ineffective training.

I don't disagree, but you can do a couple 'discovery' workouts from time to time to nail this down more accurately.  But I'm a more high-intensity guy myself as well and don't like high volume.  Hell, the high volume might be better for me for growth purposes, I'm just saying I don't like it. 😢

"Give it your all, get strong as hell, then add in more sets to build volume. Thats basically my philosophy lol"

Well, yeah I agree, especially for naturals, but assisted you may be able to get away with more growth with less intensity. 

Just look at those strongmen guys.  If you peeled the blubber off those fat bastards they'd still be mighty huge!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BobTheOldLifter said:

I don't disagree, but you can do a couple 'discovery' workouts from time to time to nail this down more accurately.  But I'm a more high-intensity guy myself as well and don't like high volume.  Hell, the high volume might be better for me for growth purposes, I'm just saying I don't like it. 😢

"Give it your all, get strong as hell, then add in more sets to build volume. Thats basically my philosophy lol"

Well, yeah I agree, especially for naturals, but assisted you may be able to get away with more growth with less intensity. 

Just look at those strongmen guys.  If you peeled the blubber off those fat bastards they'd still be mighty huge!

I considered this as well. That the super heavy weight might not be as efficient as just doing more reps due to me being on the 500mg test and my muscles being super reactive to basically any stimulus regardless of going super intense or not. So hard to decide on differing opinions, thats why I usually "bastardize" programs and just mix the advice 50/50 lmao...i may just be retarded for that tho and getting 50% efficiency out of both programs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to agree with @Corey5150.Corey5150 approach. Power and volume are both needed, and it varies in body parts. You'll never get the full developed look without using both. As you learn your body more and more you will be able to better identify smaller tweaks you can implement for yourself as well. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, eightyeight14 said:

I considered this as well. That the super heavy weight might not be as efficient as just doing more reps due to me being on the 500mg test and my muscles being super reactive to basically any stimulus regardless of going super intense or not. So hard to decide on differing opinions, thats why I usually "bastardize" programs and just mix the advice 50/50 lmao...i may just be retarded for that tho and getting 50% efficiency out of both programs

I'm just pulling this number out of my ass, but I think that at LEAST 80% of optimal gains are achieved with being regular with your workouts, and working hard... very hard.  To get 100% optimal is more technical and individual.  But hard work is MANDATORY!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I’m going to sound like a dick here I apologize in advance , you keep saying your on 500mg of test , that’s fine but that’s the absolute smallest piece of the puzzle, food , training , intensity , food amounts for body parts trained , I tweek my volume of food more for back day then I do for say an arm day , I consume more for leg day then chest , what’s your post workout meal ? Pre workout meal ? What do you consume intra workout ? That 500mg of test means nothing it self , if you give an experienced guy 500mg test vs a not very experienced guy you will get what I’m saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CapeBretonDadBod said:

Ok I’m going to sound like a dick here I apologize in advance , you keep saying your on 500mg of test , that’s fine but that’s the absolute smallest piece of the puzzle, food , training , intensity , food amounts for body parts trained , I tweek my volume of food more for back day then I do for say an arm day , I consume more for leg day then chest , what’s your post workout meal ? Pre workout meal ? What do you consume intra workout ? That 500mg of test means nothing it self , if you give an experienced guy 500mg test vs a not very experienced guy you will get what I’m saying.

I understand. Ok, Pre workout I will usually have like 1 cup oats thats fruit flavored so about 20g sugar too, some skim milk, thats about it, if I have it prepped Ill also eat 2oz chicken just for a better macro ratio for the meal.

Post, I am now having a white rice 1cup, breaded chicken maybe 6oz, 2 cups skim milk, 0.5 fruit flavored oatmeal- thats about it, i just eat that 3x post workout. I may have a poptart (just 1) at the end of the day  but thats my only junk i eat to stay solid the whole rest of the time.

 

intra i dont do anything, am i goofing there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t use gear as a crutch too many newbies do that nothing bothers me more than that, as what all others have said here , hard work , solid diet , dedication , that’s where it’s at . Here’s a good way to look at it @Corey5150 will get more results than me on 500mg of test than myself if I was on 500mg test and some tren, because of his experience and tuning, but I’m going to get further than you on the 500mg of test than you will due to experience, all this comes in time but the biggest thing is you just can’t pick things online , you can get ideas but it boils down to what works for you . You don’t have to do as everyone says here but take the parts of what these coach’s and vets say and make  a plan for you .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BobTheOldLifter said:

I don't disagree, but you can do a couple 'discovery' workouts from time to time to nail this down more accurately.  But I'm a more high-intensity guy myself as well and don't like high volume.  Hell, the high volume might be better for me for growth purposes, I'm just saying I don't like it. 😢

"Give it your all, get strong as hell, then add in more sets to build volume. Thats basically my philosophy lol"

Well, yeah I agree, especially for naturals, but assisted you may be able to get away with more growth with less intensity. 

Just look at those strongmen guys.  If you peeled the blubber off those fat bastards they'd still be mighty huge!

- I understand you could do those. But first I’d think those are wasted time and your strength/ability recover are constantly changing so week 1 your 1 to fail is not necessarily week 2, and so on and on. Volume is a variable that needs to be adjusted based on your recovering ability. It’s not saying volume isn’t important BUT I think it’s secondary to intensity. Once you’ve gotten strong as hell, then you’ll add in more volume to accommodate and build over time. And when I say strength I am referring to it over a rep range - not simply 1 rep maxes or anything like that.
 

- Id actually argue the opposite, people with natural physiques don’t have the ability to recover like those who use PEDs. So they more so need to manage volume. The point of using PEDs is to recover faster... so why not work HARDER? That statement sounds like someone who is training at say 70% and sure they’d probably get more results than a natural at the same rate. But again why? That’s like saying I’m going to buy a car with 500hp only to drive it under 50km/hr - not happening lol.
 

- While genetics play a huge part especially at the top end of sports, it’s mostly true (although that’s not to say outliers don’t exist). 
 

This doesn’t have anything really to do with the quote anymore but it’s a pet peeve of mine so I want to bring it up. I talk to countless new bodybuilders, people who want to be bodybuilders and it’s always the question of what are those (bigger guys, pros, etc..) doing that I’m not? Insulin? Growth? Etc...

and guess what the answer is almost always two things 1. They’re more consistent and 2. They work harder.

ive met and trained with countless pros. And probably my favourite to bring up is Ian Valliere. You want to talk about someone that has great genetics and will bulldoze anyone with his work ethic? He makes it simple: be better than you were yesterday and stop overthinking it. 

Edited by Corey5150
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Corey5150 said:

Id actually argue the opposite, people with natural physiques don’t have the ability to recover like those who use PEDs. So they more so need to manage volume. The point of using PEDs is to recover faster... so why not work HARDER? That statement sounds like someone who is training at say 70% and sure they’d probably get more results than a natural at the same rate. But again why? That’s like saying I’m going to buy a car with 500hp only to drive it under 50km/hr - not happening lol.

Let's pick this apart so you're clear on what I'm saying - wasn't worded so clearly initially.

"people with natural physiques don’t have the ability to recover like those who use PEDs."

Of course, 100% agree.  

" So they more so need to manage volume."

Don't know what you mean by 'manage'.

"The point of using PEDs is to recover faster... so why not work HARDER?"

Sure, yes, and also more often potentially, but I'm saying for a natural after a certain point, you WILL not get larger if you're not also getting stronger, so naturals should, at least part of time, work in the high intensity ranges.  In fact I think it's a MUST for naturals to grow when they become advanced.

"That statement sounds like someone who is training at say 70% and sure they’d probably get more results than a natural at the same rate. But again why?"

Yeah I don't disagree,  but one will still get results and one won't.  My point is that an advanced natural will not gain without significant strength focus as part of their program, whereas a noob AAS user can train like a moron for quite some time and still grow.  Sub-optimally, yes.  Wasteful, yes.  Stupid, yes.   But grow all the same.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12/13

off day today 

 

I just mixed up an epic hairloss treatment solution , custom . I might actually release this mix as a product, but for now it’s personal use only. Might make a small batch of 25 bottles and see how it goes . It is an amazing topical I have dubbed “The Big 4” 

 contains :

-Minoxidil 10%

-Ketoconazole 2%

-RU-55841 or Spiro 5%

-Finasteride %0.3

 

-(Spiro is currently being used, but beta testing with RU is underway. excluding it for now as it’s long term effects have no been studied nearly as well as spiros, if at all.)

 

gonna use it for the first time tonight and stop using regular ol rogaine / minoxidil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

small mini update - 12/14

First beta test notes for “the big 4”

- spiro smells like farts / sulfur

-RU will replace spiro ASAP in the mix due to smell problems, as well as efficiency. 

-am going to now use the new topical for the first time this morning . Skin is a little dry on my beard area and moustache area because i’ve been putting it on my face as well but since this mix has spiro in it which thins facial hair , it’s only gonna be used on the scalp. i’ll use regular minoxidil and ketoconazole on the beard still.

Edited by eightyeight14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Guest locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines