1st Cycle: 300 Test, 100 Mast - any benefits to adding 10-20mg anavar?

[rpju]

Its a first cycle, any amount of anything that isnt test only is objectively bad practice. It is yikes, because it clearly shows the person either has not done their research, or only did enough to validate their idea, or worse ignored what the standard practice because they are chin deep in dunning Krueger.


Oil based preparations dont go subq. Its fine if your doing so to leverage the peak time on TRT dosages, but doing so on a first cycle/blast is idiotic.


the amount of sense this section makes is really telling as your your critical thinking skills and decision making.
Its your first cycle, and you want to pump 7 other peptides in for shits and giggles. you not knowing why that is cringe, is cringe.
deserved yikes


and the half dozen peptides and injections, and the anavar, and the HCG, without understanding how any of them work or what youre doing in the slightest because you have never ran a cycle before.


a bit simple are we?


you missed the point entirely of every one of my yikes.
I award you 0 stars
yikes

God man even that attempt at wit is just unsightly. You're doing what you can, and that's honestly what counts.

I think you provided literally nothing in terms of communication even in this retort which you had a while to type up.

Is it genuinely hard for you to comprehend (i think we know the answer) people do research before taking things, and then come to ....let's refer this message board moving forward as "Big Tommys Safe Space Where He Matters" , and ask for further insight from people with even more knowledge?

You're confused on the process of learning?

Again, I'll give you pudding cups, as many as you need. Jello? Whatever you want. You came off like the safe space ninja you are. "cringe" in 2024, you're just off lol

 

[trtbuilder]

God man even that attempt at wit is just unsightly. You're doing what you can, and that's honestly what counts.

I think you provided literally nothing in terms of communication even in this retort which you had a while to type up.

Is it genuinely hard for you to comprehend (i think we know the answer) people do research before taking things, and then come to ....let's refer this message board moving forward as "Big Tommys Safe Space Where He Matters" , and ask for further insight from people with even more knowledge?

You're confused on the process of learning?

Again, I'll give you pudding cups, as many as you need. Jello? Whatever you want. You came off like the safe space ninja you are. "cringe" in 2024, you're just off lol

A little self-awareness would go a long way with you, embarrassing post.

 

[sbtr12]

First cycle is as basic as it gets. Gain experience by testing the waters, you don't need much to get good gains. Use Testosterone only 250-500mg is sufficient. Since you already ran mast then it doesn't matter now, but usually no need for any of that. Later on add as you wish.

Good advice right here @rpju. and what @buzzingonaas said (sorry, I forgot to quote before I posted).

I agree with only needing test for a first cycle but there isn't one cookie cutter approach/protocol for everyone and given that you have already tried what you did and your bloods are fine, then to me, no harm, no foul.

The overall dose of test and mast combined is not crazy at all. The other stuff (HCG and peptides) I wouldn't add but guess what, I'm not you.

If I were in your shoes, and you wanted to add on, I think you just need to bump up your test to perhaps 400 and the mast to 150. You should do just fine with that alone or just use the test only at 400 or 500 mg per week. This is just my opinion.

Just ignore anyone that is sarcastic and insulting in their responses. In my experience, you will see that on any board. Focus on people that aren't trying to insult you with their responses. No need to argue with others that are trying to insult you.

No one here, no matter what they say knows you well enough to be able to definitively know what you have researched and to definitively know what works for you.

 

[rpju]

Appreciate the feedback, I'm going to go with what I mentioned in one of the earlier posts - possibly see about knocking this estradiol down a bit first, and then upping the test/mast.

I'll report back how it goes, and we can talk about it from there

 

[BigTomJ]

Appreciate the feedback, I'm going to go with what I mentioned in one of the earlier posts - possibly see about knocking this estradiol down a bit first, and then upping the test/mast.

I'll report back how it goes, and we can talk about it from there

Plain English confirmation you were never here to learn, only seeking cheap validation and atta boys.
Be sure to let everyone know how it goes, because I'm sure they care.

 

[buzzingonaas]

Its a first cycle, any amount of anything that isnt test only is objectively bad practice.

I wouldn't agree with this given someone has a coach who understands the compounds and interpreting bloodwork. Not sure if you meant it as a blanket statement or agree with that sentiment. Absolutely nothing wrong with a coach starting someone on 300 test and then 4 weeks later adding in 200 mast etc, pretty common with the new school of thought

 

[BigTomJ]

I wouldn't agree with this given someone has a coach who understands the compounds and interpreting bloodwork. Not sure if you meant it as a blanket statement or agree with that sentiment. Absolutely nothing wrong with a coach starting someone on 300 test and then 4 weeks later adding in 200 mast etc, pretty common with the new school of thought

I personally wouldnt take this approach with a client, especially not in such a short time as 4 weeks.
maybe at 4-5 weeks, after bloodwork, bump the test up slightly.
but my opinion is there is zero benefit to adding a second compound at any point for a persons first cycle.
They are already going to grow like crazy, there is no reason to get overly impatient.

I could see some coaches taking this approach and i would agree this wouldnt be the end of the world, but its not the way i would do it.

 

[bjjplayer]

Pinning daily oil subq works just fine. Been doing it for years. Everyone has their own preference. Not everyone gets huge gnarly oil lumps. There are just as many pros as there are cons.

I would not be running so many compounds on the first cycle. You are just introducing multiple variables into a process that can become cumbersome to troubleshoot. The peptides would be OK but take out the HCG and the mast. Run more test if you want but get through an entire cycle first. Take bloods a few more times and establish your trend. Then introduce another compound and you can see how you feel and see how it affects your markers.

It's not adding these extra compounds are going to kill you or hurt you, and it may even be a great addition for you. It's more about risk assessment and hindering your ability to troubleshoot what may be wrong if things go sideways.

Please remember that mast, Anavar, etc. were ever even talked about. They are for show prep and achieving certain goals a certain way at a certain time in order to compete.

The oral compounds are way toxic compared to test so if you want more androgens just add 70mg/wk to your test instead of 10mg/day of Anavar. You simply don't need that to achieve your goals. If your diet is ~80% dialed in you will get fucking absolutely shredded without a toxic oral compound. Adding Anavar will dry you out 1% more and you're putting your organs at risk for a cosmetic benefit no one will even notice.

 

[sbtr12]

I personally wouldnt take this approach with a client, especially not in such a short time as 4 weeks.
maybe at 4-5 weeks, after bloodwork, bump the test up slightly.
but my opinion is there is zero benefit to adding a second compound at any point for a persons first cycle.
They are already going to grow like crazy, there is no reason to get overly impatient.

I could see some coaches taking this approach and i would agree this wouldnt be the end of the world, but its not the way i would do it.

This explanation actually makes some sense. Thank you.

Your blanket statement (quoted below) does not make sense which is what I believe @buzzingonaas was referencing with his post.

You could have been more clear and correct if you simply changed 'objectively' to 'subjectively' in your original statement. I often find that when people make blanket statements, they are false simply because they don't apply to everyone and they are almost always subjective statements or conclusions.

Is there a reason you started off by being sarcastic and insulting to OP? I am not judging. Its just not my style to try and help answer questions like you have in this thread unless it is obvious someone is trolling and OP is not trolling IMO.

Its a first cycle, any amount of anything that isnt test only is objectively bad practice.

 

[BigTomJ]

This explanation actually makes some sense. Thank you.

Your blanket statement (quoted below) does not make sense which is what I believe @buzzingonaas was referencing with his post.

You could have been more clear and correct if you simply changed 'objectively' to 'subjectively' in your original statement. I often find that when people make blanket statements, they are false simply because they don't apply to everyone and they are almost always subjective statements or conclusions.

I still believe that anything other than test only is OBJECTIVELY bad practice.

perhaps i could have been clearer.
Coach or no, a first cycle should be test only. period.
This is my opinion, however i recognize that some people are impatient and want to rush things. I do not agree with some people.
I recognize that it CAN be done under the context of working with an experienced coach, but i still believe this to be a worse practice by every metric.

Is there a reason you started off by being sarcastic and insulting to OP? I am not judging. Its just not my style to try and help answer questions like you have in this thread unless it is obvious someone is trolling and OP is not trolling IMO.

because i was convinced OP is trolling. his first post was like a "Trolling a BB board" bingo card

-First cycle thread
-multiple compounds
-tons of peptides
-should i add an oral?
-daily sub q
-"get trim"

If he included or mentioned tren anywhere in his posts i would have gotten bingo.

 

[Eddie.]

Since i've done a similar thing with OP i'll just throw in my 2 cents. I was opposed on first getting to gear with anything more besides test.

I started my gear journey with a dose of 200mg, to see first how i react, what i feel, how much i aromatise etc. After 4 months of this "cruise" i raised the test and added 150 primo leading to my first "real" cycle (475mg total) while going into deficit for a cut.

Now i'm into this combo for 10 weeks, learned couple things of both of these compounds and i'm planning to add var to finish my cycle and cutting and then go back to cruise. What i wouldn't do is adding 2 compounds at the same time for all the obvious reasons. Do i consider myself experienced now? Not even close, but definitely learned something and gained some knowledge based on my feels and my various bloodworks.

 

[buzzingonaas]

I still believe that anything other than test only is OBJECTIVELY bad practice.

perhaps i could have been clearer.
Coach or no, a first cycle should be test only. period.
This is my opinion, however i recognize that some people are impatient and want to rush things. I do not agree with some people.
I recognize that it CAN be done under the context of working with an experienced coach, but i still believe this to be a worse practice by every metric.

The example I mentioned where coaches will give a client test and mast or test and primo aren’t typically to rush things or drive the mg total up, they’re to fill that 400-500mg total with two compounds instead of all testosterone, eliminating the need for an ai and just a generally easier cycle. This shouldn’t be done without a coach but is becoming much more the new school of thought as there are frequently less side effects this way. Your opinion that it shouldn’t be done this way is valid, but saying it’s objectively wrong feels a little narrow minded. It’s done to mitigate risks that might come from 400-500 test only

 

[BigTomJ]

The example I mentioned where coaches will give a client test and mast or test and primo aren’t typically to rush things or drive the mg total up, they’re to fill that 400-500mg total with two compounds instead of all testosterone, eliminating the need for an ai

I dont agree with this methodology when approaching a first cycle. Primo and masteron are not AIs and do not act like AIs in most people. Using them to fill that role, when you have no idea how the client responds to just test alone, much less whether they see any type of anti estrogenic effects from mast/primo is, in my opinion, bad practice. If they need an AI, they need an AI, thats going to be part of what you set out to learn with a first cycle. AIs are not the end of the world and adding additional compounds for the sole purpose of eliminating their use is just convoluted and pointless.

will it work? sure it can work. but that approach means making far more assumptions vs learning for sure how they respond to exogenous hormones.
Its not how i prefer to do things.

and just a generally easier cycle. This shouldn’t be done without a coach but is becoming much more the new school of thought as there are frequently less side effects this way. Your opinion that it shouldn’t be done this way is valid, but saying it’s objectively wrong feels a little narrow minded. It’s done to mitigate risks that might come from 400-500 test only

What is the risk of 400-500 of test only that is being mitigated by a 400-500mg total androgenic load of mixed test/mast or primo?

 

[marsupial]

Mast on first cycle....at least you used a low dose. But idk what mast will really do at that dose. Hopefully it functions as a SERM and is masking anti E effects for you

 

[sbtr12]

I still believe that anything other than test only is OBJECTIVELY bad practice.

perhaps i could have been clearer.
Coach or no, a first cycle should be test only. period.
This is my opinion, however i recognize that some people are impatient and want to rush things. I do not agree with some people.
I recognize that it CAN be done under the context of working with an experienced coach, but i still believe this to be a worse practice by every metric.


because i was convinced OP is trolling. his first post was like a "Trolling a BB board" bingo card

-First cycle thread
-multiple compounds
-tons of peptides
-should i add an oral?
-daily sub q
-"get trim"

If he included or mentioned tren anywhere in his posts i would have gotten bingo.

For the most part I agree with you. When I am giving advice on a first cycle, I normally say IMO someone only needs test to make good progress and not even that much (I don't normally recommend going over 300 to start but it normally depends on where their baseline bloods are at).

I don't agree with your original blanket statement. It is simply misleading to make the statement that for a first cycle anything other than test only is objectively bad practice. Saying now that you BELIEVE your original statement takes away the blanket part of your original statement.

Anyway it is just semantics at this point. Obviously others, even here in this thread have voiced that they believe at least somewhat differently.

I can see where you are coming with thinking that OP's post was a troll post. I am new here so it didn't jump out at me as a troll post but when you put it all together like you did, I can see how it may seem suspect. Definitely if he had said tren, I would have suspected him as a troll as well.

In the past I have seen posts like hey, 'first cycle, 700 mg test, 1g tren, 50 mg adrol a day, what would you add and suggest to optimize my first cycle,' clearly as a troll post. I guess because OP's doses were low, this one didn't come across to me as a troll post.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be a dick. Hope you don't take it that way. Have a great weekend.

 

[buzzingonaas]

What is the risk of 400-500 of test only that is being mitigated by a 400-500mg total androgenic load of mixed test/mast or primo?

blood pressure, gynecomastia, etc. Like I said, I understand you don’t agree with it, but highly successful coaches are turning to this methodology for first cycles. And as for acting as “AIs” or not, use one or not, I personally don’t care. But this approach nearly guarantees that you don’t need one.
And as for not knowing how the client responds to test alone, like I said previously, they typically add the second compound in after 4-6 weeks.

Either way, I don’t have a stake in this. The statement “anything other than test only for a first cycle is objectively bad” threw me off as it’s quite literally not “objectively” bad. There’s no rules in bodybuilding, just different schools of thought

 

[BigTomJ]

blood pressure, gynecomastia, etc. Like I said, I understand you don’t agree with it, but highly successful coaches are turning to this methodology for first cycles. And as for acting as “AIs” or not, use one or not, I personally don’t care. But this approach nearly guarantees that you don’t need one.
And as for not knowing how the client responds to test alone, like I said previously, they typically add the second compound in after 4-6 weeks.

Either way, I don’t have a stake in this. The statement “anything other than test only for a first cycle is objectively bad” threw me off as it’s quite literally not “objectively” bad. There’s no rules in bodybuilding, just different schools of thought

unfortunately i disagree with almost all of this.

 

[buzzingonaas]

unfortunately i disagree with almost all of this.

All good you don’t have to agree lol like I said I don’t have a stake in this and wasn’t coming on here to argue, just wanted to clarify that you actually meant “objective” and wanted to point out to everyone else that it’s very subjective and there’s nothing objective about it.