Short or Long Cycles

nuknuk

MuscleChemistry member
saw this on another board and thought it would be nice to hear what others say. I have done both and prefer the longer cycle,atleast 3 months but no longer than 6 months. But I have seen people doing the "blitz" cycle's, some as short as 2 weeks. There are pro's and con's to both im sure. What do you prefer?
 
i like 16 -24 week cycles... but trying to keep the off as long as your on method is tough...

i'm not taking anything right now.. but it's not like i don't think about, just no cash
 
The biggest risk is the increased possible sides with a short blitz cycle. I prefer the 16-24 week cycles for me as well. The short cycles are fast acting AS which normally means poking yourself ED.
 
I haven't run anything over 12 weeks yet... maybe I should extand the current sust cycle I'm on right now. It would be nice to see how I react.
 
i like the life time cycles pernoaly,lol, on a serious note i had a friend who did 2 on 2 off and was jacked out his mind and always had good sperm count , and blood work etc,,, go figure
 
i like the life time cycles pernoaly,lol, on a serious note i had a friend who did 2 on 2 off and was jacked out his mind and always had good sperm count , and blood work etc,,, go figure

umm, 2 weeks on 2 off might sound like a plan to be able to stay on a bulk cycle year long. Might be hard to surpress your natural test levels that way. I think using fast acting aas would have to be used on this plan.
 
12 to 16 or maybe 20.

If you are on for only 2 weeks and then stop, doesn't your natural test level dip lower than it was before you started the two weeks, in the time you are off? And then when you get back on I would think it would be harder to gain anything because your hormones on going on a roller coaster. I would think that even with the fast acting esters that you would want to be on for a minimum of 8 weeks
 
umm, 2 weeks on 2 off might sound like a plan to be able to stay on a bulk cycle year long. Might be hard to surpress your natural test levels that way. I think using fast acting aas would have to be used on this plan.


yep prop was his test of choice and winny here and there. and yep he did this for years and years on end just doing 2 weeks on and 2 weeks off at a time,
 
12 to 16 or maybe 20.

If you are on for only 2 weeks and then stop, doesn't your natural test level dip lower than it was before you started the two weeks, in the time you are off? And then when you get back on I would think it would be harder to gain anything because your hormones on going on a roller coaster. I would think that even with the fast acting esters that you would want to be on for a minimum of 8 weeks

Yep on paper thats exactly how it sounds bro (dumb) and u would think it wouldnt work for shit, but loads of guys do this type of cycling with great success and are also able to keep fertile or atleast not far from being premium fertile, like i said it doesnt sound right but the proof is in the pudding so to speak
 
I have a hard time keeping gains from short cycles, so I prefer longer ones. Usually 12 - 20 weeks. I've had great gains in 8 weeks cycles, but lost most of it.

The two on, two off plan sounds like too much PCT too frequently for me. High doses of SERMs kill my joints. I don't think my shoulders would recover from one PCT before starting the next PCT. I guess NPP might help that a little, but then you have the issue of using a SERM and a progestin not too far apart, which might not be the best of ideas.
 
I like longer ones myself though this 2 on 2 off thing sounds very interesting. I think it would suppress you a little each time but then you come off so levels return to normal or close to normal depending on how much you took. It would take a lot longer time for your natural levels to get very low.
 
Where AAS doses are sufficient for good gains, an interesting pattern is seen. For the first two weeks of the cycle, only the hypothalamus is inhibited, and it produces much less LHRH as a result of the high levels of sex hormones it senses. The pituitary is not inhibited at all: in fact, it is actually sensitized, and will respond to LHRH (if any is provided) even moreso than normally. After two weeks however, the pituitary also becomes inhibited, and even if LHRH is provided, the pituitary will produce little or no LH. This then is a deeper type of inhibition. After this point, there seems to be no definite further "switching point" where inhibition again becomes deeper and harder to reverse. As a general rule, I would say that there seems to be little difference between using AAS for 3 weeks vs. 8 weeks: recovery is about the same either way. Between 8 and 12 weeks, it becomes more and more likely that recovery will be difficult and slow, though even at 12 weeks it is common for recovery to not be too problematic, taking only a few weeks. Cycles past 12 weeks seem much more likely to cause substantial problems with recovery. In the hundreds of consultations I have done for people with recovery problems, very few (I can recall two) were for very short cycles such as 6 weeks, while most were for usages of 12 weeks straight or more.

i like 16weeks too but im thinking of trying that 2week protocol...
 
Back
Top