I just wanted to ask a question about winny. I have now seen and talked to a few people who will be running similar cycles to my next cycle (test, tren, masteron) and they are adding winny to it. I cannot see where the winny would be of much benefit, if any in this stack.
If anyone knows why you would add this could you please shine some light on the benefits of it?
Thanks,
Juice
Then even if were the case that there was no particular reason to add Winstrol specifically as opposed to something else, still adding the Winstrol helps.
That’s probably not the case with regard to testosterone but it might take a lot of testosterone before that mechanism is saturated, and so with rather commonly used doses of testosterone there is room for improvement. It might be preferred to add the Winstrol instead of taking more testosterone.
Can’t say with respect to Masteron.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Then even if were the case that there was no particular reason to add Winstrol specifically as opposed to something else, still adding the Winstrol helps.
That’s probably not the case with regard to testosterone but it might take a lot of testosterone before that mechanism is saturated, and so with rather commonly used doses of testosterone there is room for improvement. It might be preferred to add the Winstrol instead of taking more testosterone.
Can’t say with respect to Masteron.[/quote]
Thanks BR.
That’s what I was trying to get at. Whether adding more of one compound would be better than the addition of winstrol, or if there is a certain synergy created by running winstrol in such a cycle?
I believe as far as noticable gains go adding a little more test would be more beneficial, if you are taking an AI to reduce the conversion of estrogen that you may experience with higher dose test.
I haven’t used winny before and am having a hard time, with much research, trying to find any real benefits to running it over other compounds that show greater results in a much shorter time.
Without knowing the amounts of each compound in the two plans being compared, there’s no way to say. In one situation for example adding more Winstrol might be better than adding more trenbolone, but in another, the other way around.
My particular cycle will be 100mg test prop ED, 50mg tren ace ED, 50mg masteron ED.
In that case maybe, compared to adding 50 mg/day of any of the others.
You could always try both ways: Especially as the Winstrol should be limited to no more than 6 weeks anyway, if your cycle is say 8 weeks (I hope it is not a lot longer) you could try instead using 150 mg/day testosterone propionate for the first 2 weeks – if you are keeping estrogen under control this usually would be fine – and then switch to 100 mg/day TP plus 50 mg/day Winstrol for the next 4 weeks, and finally back to the 150 mg/day TP for the last 2 weeks.
And come to your own opinion.
(I left out mentioning the Masteron and TA dosages as it would remain the same.)
By the way, this would be a 1.75 gram per week cycle. Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with that, it can be fine, but to be clear that this is quite a bit of stuff.
Or if you meant SUBTRACTING anything by 50 mg/day to allow adding the Winstrol in and keeping total dose the same: I would try in this case subtracting the Masteron and likewise doing a within-cycle comparison. This is still, either way, a quite substantial cycle (1.4 grams per week.)
The test and masteron will be ran 8 weeks with the tren ace being ran 6 weeks.
Test Prop 100mg ED: 1-8
Tren Ace 50mg ED: 1-6
Masteron 50mg ED: 1-8
Will be running arimidex @ 0.5mg EOD and adjusting as needed. Have caber on hand as well. This cycle wont be for another 3 months roughly but trying to sort it out now so I can be fully prepared.
As far as pct goes I do not come off so I will running 250mg Test E post cycle for likely 12 weeks.
I like the idea of the within cycle comparisons, not something that had crossed my mind, but seems like a great way to see how I react to different AAS.
There’s no need to cut the trenbolone acetate short. (Regardless of that apparently being a recent fashion.) Dropping it not only of course will reduce results, but will also utterly confuse your comparison if you choose to do that.
This has been a great back n fourth convo, anxious to follow your cycle juice82, curious to see how tren and mast work together
Thanks Bill, I will run the tren the full 8 weeks.
RK: I am curious to see how they work together as well! I will post when I start this cycle and try and post as often as possible my increases in strength, weight, and so on.
Not a log per say because I am too lazy to keep it updated all the time lol. But I will post anything significant. Who knows, maybe someone can learn something, myself included.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
There’s no need to cut the trenbolone acetate short. (Regardless of that apparently being a recent fashion.) Dropping it not only of course will reduce results, but will also utterly confuse your comparison if you choose to do that.[/quote]
So running test longer than tren does not help recovery in your opininion (Bill)?
[quote]Dynamo Hum wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
There’s no need to cut the trenbolone acetate short. (Regardless of that apparently being a recent fashion.) Dropping it not only of course will reduce results, but will also utterly confuse your comparison if you choose to do that.
So running test longer than tren does not help recovery in your opininion (Bill)?[/quote]
I know this question was directed to Bill but IMO my situation is likely different than most people as I will not be coming off. So I don’t see recovery being a problem, with me.
I also think that the tren ace has such a short half life that it should clear the system fairly quick so I don’t know how much it would actually affect recovery if it were stopped at the same time as the test.
But Bill has a lot more knowledge than I do on AAS and I am sure he can provide a better answer than I can.
[quote]Dynamo Hum wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
There’s no need to cut the trenbolone acetate short. (Regardless of that apparently being a recent fashion.) Dropping it not only of course will reduce results, but will also utterly confuse your comparison if you choose to do that.
So running test longer than tren does not help recovery in your opininion (Bill)?[/quote]
I was under the impression that this was really only a requirement with deca.
juice,
Thanks for the input. I realized that in your case it is not as crucial since you are continuing with a TRT level of test. The way Bill wrote that it isn’t necessary to run test longer than tren seemed like he meant in general as well as your special case.
Bill, what say you?
[quote]Westclock wrote:
Dynamo Hum wrote:
Bill Roberts wrote:
There’s no need to cut the trenbolone acetate short. (Regardless of that apparently being a recent fashion.) Dropping it not only of course will reduce results, but will also utterly confuse your comparison if you choose to do that.
So running test longer than tren does not help recovery in your opininion (Bill)?
I was under the impression that this was really only a requirement with deca.[/quote]
I agree with Westclock, and the reason test is typically run 2 weeks longer than deca is because of the long ester deca has. EQ IMO can be thrown in this category as well, You should be fine and even encouraged to run the test and tren the same length of time. I am def interested in reading Bill’s thoughts…
Westclock & RommelKorps,
I’ve seen so many suggest running test longer than tren to mitigate sexual sides. When you think of it ester half life wise however, it doesn’t seem logical.
Still would like to see Bill’s slant on this…
Yes, I meant in general it is not necessary to stop trenbolone sooner than testosterone. Not for “sexual side effects” or any other reason.
Thanks again Bill.
Not to hijack this thread, but now I am curious about Deca? I would have PM’d, but I think many would be interested in your take.
Would you run testosterone longer than Deca to address sexual sides?
[quote]Dynamo Hum wrote:
Thanks again Bill.
Not to hijack this thread, but now I am curious about Deca? I would have PM’d, but I think many would be interested in your take.
Would you run testosterone longer than Deca to address sexual sides?[/quote]
Don’t worry about hijacking this thread. It’s good to have discussion to increase the knowledge we have in this game we play. The more we know the safer we will be.
Deca is very inhibitory due to progestagenic effect and for good recovery use should be ended well before the end of the cycle, if used at all. There seems to be a quite long-lasting effect to inhibition resulting from this mechanism.
If one doesn’t personally benefit from and need its effect on joints, the logical reason why someone would want to take a progestagenic steroid instead of other anabolic steroids not having that problem seems a real puzzler. Additionally, from the practical standpoint there’s no real reason but the above to do so, either. It is surely not necessary to outstanding results nor is it key to maximal results.
(I’m not, above, referring to possible reasons such as having a vial already and, having paid for it, wanting to use it up; or being limited in what one can get so it is a question of using or including Deca or having a really lame cycle without it. Those would be practical reasons for it.)