How Long Between Cycles?

Cool. Your reply is what I expected. I just wanted to get clear what your idea of “natural limit” is, because that term is really loaded with a lot of assumptions and ambiguities. What you stated I completely agree with.

I’ve been thinking about it a lot recently as I gear up (harhar) for my first cycle, which I’ll start in about 2 months. I am just over 200 lbs now, have been training for over ten years (most of them stupid), and I am still very, very slowly growing, but it takes a lot more for the little gains I get now and, as you said

I have to keep my bodyfat a lot higher than I would like in order to keep them coming. As such, my actual natural limit is probably beyond this, but I have definitely reached the point of diminishing returns, and am ready to take things to the next level.

Thanks for the reply.

[quote]Prisoner#22 wrote:

Even when natural, you cannot grow at all times. you have to have periods of ‘down time’ in your training if you wish to continue to progress.

So sure, following the 3 months yeah! back at her!

As for myself. I trained for 13 years au naturel.

In the picture mentioned I weighed about 185 lbs at 6% or less bodyfat.

Yes it is hard to gain when you have to keep yourself in tip top shape year round like I did, However, even when I did bulk up over 200 lbs (at around 9 or 10%) I could never keep the size when I dieted down.

I was ectomorphic to begin with and my begining weight was 120-130 lbs at 5’9" I grew an inch and a bit since then but still, as a natural bodybuilder I was holding onto about 50lbs of extra skeletal muscle that I would not have had, had I never have weight trained.
Since using AAS I have gained just over 40lbs of muscle, from there to then so far.

I trained hard, and right for about 3 years without gaining anymore measureable amount of muscle.

Everyone is different though, Everyone’s metabolism is different - (mine was fast)

but when your progress begins to slow down to a snail’s pace, you can either accept it and be satisfied, or do something about it.

For myself for many years the ‘big guys’ gave me the respect in the gym as they new I was all natural and had the ‘athletic look’.

But when the young guys start blowing up and getting bigger then you and having attitude about it, that is when my competitive nature exploded.

One cycle shut everyone up. I gained 20lbs the first cycle, and in all the right places. Basically shut up all the young ‘juice-head punks’ in four weeks time.

[/quote]

P22

Word!

If you’re seriouos about bodybuilding you’ll stay on year long sooner or later. Otherwise take at least the same time off as you did on.

[quote]raiderUM wrote:
What is your guys opinion on how long someone should be off a cycle, before they start another?? I’ve read that it varies and depends on the individual…what do you think?[/quote]

[quote]Cortes wrote:

I have to keep my bodyfat a lot higher than I would like in order to keep them coming. [/quote]

Amen bra. That’s what put me over the top.

Just to clarify, when you use the taper protocol, that actually counts as “off” time, correct? So when P22 says “3 months off” that consists of the 6 week holding period @100mg/week and then the 4-6 week taper, is that correct? Or is it the taper and then 3 months off? I just wanted to make sure your opinion hasn’t changed since authorizing the test taper thread. (excellent protocol btw, using it now with great success)

[quote]bigbugga wrote:
Just to clarify, when you use the taper protocol, that actually counts as “off” time, correct? So when P22 says “3 months off” that consists of the 6 week holding period @100mg/week and then the 4-6 week taper, is that correct? Or is it the taper and then 3 months off? I just wanted to make sure your opinion hasn’t changed since authorizing the test taper thread. (excellent protocol btw, using it now with great success)[/quote]

That is correct. The 3 months you are using the taper protocol is considered time off cycle.

At the end of this you can jump back on another cycle.

I took steroids 3 years ago and made huge gains in a months time. I went from 180 to 240 in 6 months from steroids. Then I went off of them and had to get down to 195 for my job. I am currently natural and 212 about 5%. Of course of you can make gains natural after taking steroids. It is just a hell of a lot slower.

[quote]J.Rocker wrote:
I took steroids 3 years ago and made huge gains in a months time. I went from 180 to 240 in 6 months from steroids. Then I went off of them and had to get down to 195 for my job. I am currently natural and 212 about 5%. Of course of you can make gains natural after taking steroids. It is just a hell of a lot slower.[/quote]

Yeah, but you are just reclaiming some of the size you attained on your cycle due to muscle memory.

The definition of making gains while off would be to get back to where you were while on and surpass that while off

[quote]Prisoner wrote:
J.Rocker wrote:
I took steroids 3 years ago and made huge gains in a months time. I went from 180 to 240 in 6 months from steroids. Then I went off of them and had to get down to 195 for my job. I am currently natural and 212 about 5%. Of course of you can make gains natural after taking steroids. It is just a hell of a lot slower.

Yeah, but you are just reclaiming some of the size you attained on your cycle due to muscle memory.

The definition of making gains while off would be to get back to where you were while on and surpass that while off[/quote]

Which…is not going to happen.

So, just to clarify: Are these size gains or strength gains we’re talking about here? Or both? I assume both.

My strength is still going up nicely, but my weight less so. I mean, it creeps up slowly, but then back down again. I generally fluctuate around 235lbs @ 5’10" and around 12%BF.

You’re saying that after any sort of AAS use (say I get up to 245lbs on cycle) I will never ever ever be able to surpass 245lbs without AAS? Even if in theory I could have reached 260lbs naturally? Amsterdam Animal seems to be proof against this theory, along with quite a few others (if I am interpreting what you are saying correctly, that is).

Many Thanks for your time,

Dave