Does anyone do short cycles with good results?

[silver_shadow]

plz don't tell newbies especially that short cycles don't work based on that cycle.

 

[Mini Viper]

as posted by silver_shadow

hey listen- sorry i didn't mean to flame u. ok my point is this- a dbol only cycle is no way to gauge AAS. it won't give u any significant gains. so plz forget that u did it- consider it an aberation (sp?). don't think of it as ur short cycle or any other cycle for that matter. don't use it as any sort of yardstick bcoz it doesn't count.

Hey no worries man, non offense taken! I do see your point, I kinda didnt count the short cycle as a 'cycle' so to speak, lol!! So my current cycle is my proper cycle, heheh!

Peace

 

[Nighthawkk]

This post has taken a bad direction...I don't know how it arrived on d-bol only cycles, I wouldn't even consider that to be a cycle.
What the original argument and inquiry concerned was the usage of short-acting esters in a 2-4 week cycle, as opposed to long-acting esters in 8-12 week cycles, and how they compare in terms of relative lean gain . Granted you might gain 15-20 lbs in 12 weeks...fucking great. But how much of that are you actually going to keep? Instead, assume you do a two-weeker of tren/winny/prop and gain, say, 7 lbs and keep it all. Relative to the 12 weeker, lean mass gained per time on-cycle is a much greater ratio, not to mention the increased recovery time. I suppose not everyone will choose to do this, but it's just an idea that shouldn't be disregarded because you have not done it, or don't want to try. I am not discluding the value of a long-cycle...in fact they are necessary for big mass gains. But shorter cycles can possibly be safer and effective as well...

 

[satchboogie]

3 weeks equals about 15 workouts.
how much can you really gain from 16 workouts????

on the other hand, a 16 week cycle equals about 80 workouts...

enough said!

 

[concordsize]

satch boggie I like the way you put that.

As far as Nelson is concerned I feel like you guys are too hard on him. I do not think Nelson i saying that long cycles will yield less gains then short ones I feel like he is trying to say that short cycles yield less sides. I agree alot with nelson because I feel he is conservative when it comes to drug use. On the other hand you will never become Mr.O doing 4 week cycles, but you can become big by many standards.

Just my thoughts
E

 

[Little Rage]

ran two cycles at 6 weeks: had great results with them. also ran one 5 week cycle. i will never run anything lower than 6 weeks.

 

[silver_shadow]

satch boggie I like the way you put that.

As far as Nelson is concerned I feel like you guys are too hard on him. I do not think Nelson i saying that long cycles will yield less gains then short ones I feel like he is trying to say that short cycles yield less sides. I agree alot with nelson because I feel he is conservative when it comes to drug use. On the other hand you will never become Mr.O doing 4 week cycles, but you can become big by many standards.

Just my thoughts
E

yes- no one said u can compete on 2-4 weekers: but u can make slow and pretty steady gains and get pretty big and strong.