First Steroid Cycle log (with pictures)

[Southeastbeast1]

His pictures tell a way different story. He's more ready to use than your strong lifting dad bods you got going on there. But keep being more impressed by your dad bods and dismissing this guy if you want.

 

[grey]

completely dismissing this guy as serious off 1 thing (his 225 for 7 bench) is totally foolish.

We (I) dismissed it when his initial posting made it appear as though that were the result of 10 years of serious lifting...

Had that been the case, it would not only be unremarkable, but an indication of wildly ineffective training.

His more recent postings indicate that these numbers are after a pretty long lay-off following a major accident and injury. That is far more congruent with sanity.

 

[Test_Subject]

which is why completely dismissing this guy as serious off 1 thing (his 225 for 7 bench) is totally foolish.

When did I say that, again?

Don't feel discouraged to quote me.

No shit that 10 reps at X weight is going to yield better results than 10 reps at .75x weight. Man lands on moon.

But yet you're arguing that strength training and hypertrophy have little if any relation to each other.

Which is it?

 

[Southeastbeast1]

But yet you're arguing that strength training and hypertrophy have little if any relation to each other.

Which is it?

Try again bro

Are you going to gain some strength hypertrophy training? Sure as a side effect, you are lifting after all, but the goal isn't to hit certain numbers the same way.

Literally specifically said it's a by product but not the main goal.


Also are we really giving this guy his 10 years of training claim? I don't know if you guys can do math but that puts him at about age 13 with his start point. That's not truly 10 years of training like 10 years between 20-30 year old of training would be. Half of his 10 years of training he was basically a child with all do respect, which should be taken into account if you want to argue his 225 for 7 is so terrible.

 

[grey]

Half of his 10 years of training he was basically a child with all do respect, which should be taken into account if you want to argue his 225 for 7 is so terrible.

Are you so ill-informed that you think weight training as a healthy male teenager is ineffective for strength?

Yes, 225 for 7 starting serious training at age 13 and finishing at age 23 would be criminally ineffective.

What planet are you pulling this shit from? It sure isn't Earth.

 

[Southeastbeast1]

Let's try this a different way. Since you're so fond to call out what isn't an impressive number, what is an impressive number? Where should he be at to be considered serious enough to start AAS? Since you guys base your judgment off numbers you must have some cutoff point in mind and I gotta know it.

I've been open enough to say there's other factors and numbers isn't the only thing to consider. And his pics to me tell a different story. So what would this guy need to do to be ready in your mind since he's not so far?

 

[Test_Subject]

Literally specifically said it's a by product but not the main goal.

There's a reason that all of the mass monster bodybuilders are strong as fuck.

Do you not feel that they're following pure hypertrophy programs? Even if their goal isn't to get strong, they are. What is your point?

You're trying to create a dichotomy where one doesn't exist. Even your given example is under 200 pounds and can bench over 400. That's not bad for not concentrating on strength, is it?

 

[Southeastbeast1]

Are you so ill-informed that you think weight training as a healthy male teenager is ineffective for strength?

Yes, 225 for 7 starting serious training at age 13 and finishing at age 23 would be criminally ineffective.

What planet are you pulling this shit from? It sure isn't Earth.

Listen man, I'm saying not everyone is trying to push up as much weight as humanly possible. If that's not his goal why spend time getting up to 315 on bench instead of spending his time working on weak points to bring up his physique, rather than bring up his strength.

If I went in the gym and spent 100% of my time bench pressing, deadlifting, and squatting I'd get very good at it very quickly and my numbers would look real good on this forum for you idiots to critique. I guarantee you my physique would suffer if all I did was allocated my time to the big 3 though.

Do you never wonder why you see some strong guys with terrible physiques? It's different, you focus on different things. Just like the Buendia interview he literally said he doesn't lift super heavy any more.

Is it really that hard to understand what I'm saying? Some of you are so one track minded you're impossible to talk with. I'm done. Good luck with your training, I'm out (seriously, we're all bros here, I don't mind differing in opinions with you all on things).

 

[Test_Subject]

Where should he be at to be considered serious enough to start AAS? Since you guys base your judgment off numbers you must have some cutoff point in mind and I gotta know it.

If his goal is hypertrophy and definition, then there's no point in taking steroids before he has maxed out -- which he clearly hasn't.

People were just mentioning how poor his lifts were. Who said that he had to have specific numbers to take AAS?

 

[Southeastbeast1]

There's a reason that all of the mass monster bodybuilders are strong as fuck.

Do you not feel that they're following pure hypertrophy programs? Even if their goal isn't to get strong, they are. What is your point?

You're trying to create a dichotomy where one doesn't exist. Even your given example is under 200 pounds and can bench over 400. That's not bad for not concentrating on strength, is it?

This guy isn't a MP pro, let alone MP champion. What was Buendia repping for 7 before he ever touched a needle? We can't answer this but it surely wasn't 405.

My point from the beginning is you all calling him not serious enough for AAS use. So again I ask, what would he need to post to be serious for AAS use. Cause that's how this started. You all bashing his numbers saying his numbers don't indicate he's ready.

So my point is I look at other things beyond the numbers to determine if someone is ready. Y'alls point of bashing his numbers was to say he's not ready so for a second time I'll ask, what is ready then?

Keep ignoring the question though and we'll keep getting nowhere in this thread

 

[Test_Subject]

Keep ignoring the question though and we'll keep getting nowhere in this thread

Are you skimming over my response on purpose, or...?

 

[Southeastbeast1]

Are you skimming over my response on purpose, or...?

What are you talking about? I've already said hypertrophy and strength are related. But the goal is not the same thing. Ronnie Coleman is strong but is he as strong as Thor? Why not?

There ya go. Post fully not skimmed over now.

 

[Test_Subject]

What are you talking about? I've already said hypertrophy and strength are related. But the goal is not the same thing. Ronnie Coleman is strong but is he as strong as Thor? Why not?

There ya go. Post fully not skimmed over now.

He's not as strong as Thor because Ronnie Coleman is an actual person living in the real world... Pretty simple answer, really.

What does that have to do with:

If his goal is hypertrophy and definition, then there's no point in taking steroids before he has maxed out -- which he clearly hasn't.

People were just mentioning how poor his lifts were. Who said that he had to have specific numbers to take AAS?

 

[Southeastbeast1]

He's not as strong as Thor because Ronnie Coleman is an actual person living in the real world...

What does that have to do with:

1. I hope that Thor comment is a joke.

2. If your point is he shouldn't use because he hasn't maxed out his potential, and you're using his numbers as the basis for why you believe he hasn't maxed out his potential, then surely there must be some number (in your mind) that would make you believe he's maxed out his potential.

Is that an inaccurate assumption? You obviously know enough that 225 for 7 hasn't maxed out his potential (and I'm not even saying it has), then question still stands..... when would you consider him ready. There has to be a number, because you've made the judgment he's not maxed out off a number so there must be a number that he is maxed out his potential.

That's what I want to know.

And for the record as a side note I've never called 225 for 7 impressive or anything if that's what some of you are thinking. All I'm saying is I consider other things beyond just numbers to determine if someone is ready to use and if they are a serious lifter. The numbers tell a part of the story is the point, not the whole story.

 

[grey]

Some of you are so one track minded you're impossible to talk with. I'm done.

Bye.

 

[DarkSide94]

225 after ten years is...unremarkable. And yes, 225 for 7 is very unimpressive. There are dad-bod 40 somethings at my gym who can do that.

How many competitions he has won or competed in is entirely irrelevant to what I was saying.

The fact is, the stronger you are, the less "heavy" weight becomes to you. Doing 10 reps at x weight is going to give you better results than doing 10 reps at .75 of x.

Like I said, hypertrophy and strength are not distinct areas of training. There's a vast overlap.

So still looks like a couple of ya didn't actually read my follow up posts. AGAIN My strength WAS way better before I had to take all of last year off from getting hurt in my bike wreck and I've only been back in the gym 11 months and already gained about 20 lbs of muscle back in that 11 months (I was 155 january at about 16% bodyfat). PLUS......again..... 2 years ago i could rep 225 on INCLINE for 12 natty which I'm sorry is pretty good strength plus deadlift almost 500 even know as Southbeach said, I haven't been training for strength since I was in highschool (where I benched 325 at 175lbs, more than everyone else on my football team, even the dudes that outweighed me by literally 100 lbs). Again,my goal is bodybuilding as I want to compete again next year however I do aim to get my strength back to where it used to be and then improve on it as well, but I think a lot of people are really quick to want to say "Oh you're nowhere near ready to do AAS if your lifts and stats aren't x" I agree that no one should jump on a cycle without enough experience with diet and training naturally, however, If you don't solely focus on my CURRENT level of strength, as that has been much slower to get back then the mass, I think you'll agree I do have the needed experience under my belt. Just to show you where I started this January here's some pics from right before I started training again this year compared to a week ago

 

[DarkSide94]

anyway I posted this thread in the first place to log my cycle and my physique improvements not start a debate on whether I'm strong enough to take AAS. Im sorry if my original post didn't include my PAST strength stats and a fully explanation as to why they currently are not as impressive but I didn't think that it would be the focal point of the thread.....

 

[DarkSide94]

We (I) dismissed it when his initial posting made it appear as though that were the result of 10 years of serious lifting...

Had that been the case, it would not only be unremarkable, but an indication of wildly ineffective training.

His more recent postings indicate that these numbers are after a pretty long lay-off following a major accident and injury. That is far more congruent with sanity.

Thank you by the way, Looks like you DID actually read my follow up posts. Sorry for the idiot comment earlier

 

[DarkSide94]

By the way I DID re-post this in the right forum but it hasn't had even one response yet so I guess I'll just do my weekly update here too. Tuesday I'll do progress pics

 

[grey]

Looks like you DID actually read my follow up posts.

Yes, I just didn't want to get mixed into the other thread.