T Nation

Is Bridging Even Worth It?


#1

I'm near coming off a 20 weeks test/EQ cycle and really interested in bridging. The jury seems to be hung though. 1g total gear per week

I am in a wicked groove right now with training and diet and I want to keep going- but I've already been on for 15 weeks.

My best idea is primo tabs @ 50mg a day and 750iu hcg/week split into 3 doses
Run this for 8-10 weeks then get back on. Is this too suppressive for a bridge ?

If I bridge for 2 months then cycle for another 4 months will it be harder to PCT?
Or will it be easier to just recover from a 6 months cycle ?

Jordan


#2

i think the bridge is generally a bad idea. you don’t recover from HPTA suppression when you’re still taking androgens, as least not in doses that are greater than what you normally produce.

what you’re suggesting is being “on” for a year… you are not likely to recover well from that.

with that being said, plenty of guys “blast and cruise”… the difference is, they’re not fooling themselves into thinking that the cruise (or the “bridge”) is going to help their HPTA.


#3

I used to, prior to about 2000 or so, advocate a light bridge (morning only orals) that began with PCT but over time blood testing proved even that to impair recovery, and practical results proved it unnecessary for strength or size. It wasn’t a bad program, but with time it proved not the best either.

I would definitely not begin a bridge until feeling fully recovered, and then would use only little enough that still maintains good LH levels.

In terms of overall risk/benefit, as opinion I think a pretty valid measure is total grams of anabolic steroids used per year. If you’re using more grams per year whether distributed differently or not, that’s more aggressive.

In other words, for a valid comparison as to whether bridging is “better” or not, at least as a thought experiment take away the same number of grams from your cycles… does the overall program now sound better or worse? Or if considering adding the bridge while keeping the cycles the same, then at least as a thought experiment consider adding the same amount to your cycles.

I’ve from time to time done moderate “supplementation” such as 100 mg/week Masteron and have always moderately liked the effect, but that happened in years in which for whatever reason I didn’t do any or not much cycles, so I felt it made sense to me for the overall year.

As opinion, in a year of using anabolic steroids seriously, I’d much rather either be here (having a powerful cycle) or there (having natural production, hormone levels, and overall natural body function back to their best as fast as possible) rather than also have considerable time that’s neither here nor there. So I don’t personally see bridging as being an optimal strategy.

And on your specific bridging plan: Agreed with cycobushmaster, that’s blast and cruise rather than a bridge. The Primo alone might count as a bridge, but add in the HCG and I don’t see LH production having much chance of being normal.


#4

not to hijack completely, but Bill, do you PCT or blast and cruise?


#5

Thank you very much cyco and bill for your responses- you have given me the information I needed!


#6

[quote]Yogi wrote:
not to hijack completely, but Bill, do you PCT or blast and cruise?[/quote]

PCT.


#7

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:

[quote]Yogi wrote:
not to hijack completely, but Bill, do you PCT or blast and cruise?[/quote]

PCT.
[/quote]

interesting, seems like most seasoned users go down the blast and cruise route eventually


#8

Well, although the advice has been out there for a long time to do in a given time frame say five 8 week cycles rather than say two 20 week cycles, or three 8 week cycles rather than two 12 week cycles, etc many choose not to follow the advice.

And for these it is likely that they will experience poor recovery at some point. Doing badly between cycles as a result, they’re likely to move to “blast and cruise.”

Or sometimes blast and cruise will be tried before yet having a problem, but then that suppresses for extended periods, and the lifter never fully regains natural production so it becomes the routine.

I never fell into those practices.


#9

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Well, although the advice has been out there for a long time to do in a given time frame say five 8 week cycles rather than say two 20 week cycles, or three 8 week cycles rather than two 12 week cycles, etc many choose not to follow the advice.

And for these it is likely that they will experience poor recovery at some point. Doing badly between cycles as a result, they’re likely to move to “blast and cruise.”

Or sometimes blast and cruise will be tried before yet having a problem, but then that suppresses for extended periods, and the lifter never fully regains natural production so it becomes the routine.

I never fell into those practices.[/quote]

So the shorter cycles get a shorter PCT too to allow for enough cycles during the year? Just curious as to what you might recommend for PCT and of time for these 8 week cycles?


#10

Ordinarily an 8 week cycle, figuring time in the sense of weeks spent suppressed, gives such fast recovery that 2 weeks SERM use is all that’s actually needed, as judged by blood tests and performance, but often 4 weeks is used to be certain.

On off time, it’s really a sliding scale with no hard cutoff points, but a useful way to look at it is that twice as much time off as on is being conservative, equal time off as on is moderately aggressive yet can give great results over the training year, and half the time off as on is quite aggressive, about as much as possible without being on all the time.


#11

but bro, don’t you realise you’ll lose all your sweet, sweet gains when you come off?

…just kidding


#12

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Ordinarily an 8 week cycle, figuring time in the sense of weeks spent suppressed, gives such fast recovery that 2 weeks SERM use is all that’s actually needed, as judged by blood tests and performance, but often 4 weeks is used to be certain.

On off time, it’s really a sliding scale with no hard cutoff points, but a useful way to look at it is that twice as much time off as on is being conservative, equal time off as on is moderately aggressive yet can give great results over the training year, and half the time off as on is quite aggressive, about as much as possible without being on all the time. [/quote]

So just for clarification, you mention in the sense of time suppressed, so if I am using a long ester that 8 weeks “on” might look more like 10 weeks total time on to give it time to kick in. Maybe a frontload? Or would the time suppressed start with the day the oral is started?

Example:

Weeks 1-4: Oral Kickstart
Weeks 1: Test-E @750mg
Weeks 2-10: Test-E @500mg
Weeks 11-12: Taper AI
Weeks 13-14+: SERM

Assuming this schedule is kind of what you meant do I then take 14+ weeks off? Or did I just totally misinterpret this and 8 weeks on and the “off” time starts the end of week 8?

I am a little slow, sorry for all the questions!!!


#13

Definitely frontload to make things more efficient.

Time suppressed would count from the beginning, including orals.

By 8 weeks I definitely didn’t mean 10 weeks of use, but 8 weeks from first administration to levels being low enough to allow recovery. This typically would be 7 weeks of injections and, depending on esters used, possibly some or most of week 8, with orals able to continue to the last day of week 8. In the 8-week example; substitute 10 weeks or other value if wishing some other value.

With testosterone enanthate at only 500 mg, I’d count suppressed time as being only 1 week past the last injection. Levels absolutely won’t be totally non-suppressive, but low enough for recovery to begin. (Obviously, much better still a week past that, but enough for things to begin at about 1 week.)

In your example, I’d count the cycle as 11 weeks, though for some reason “odd numbers” are almost never chosen for cycle duration, except sometimes 3 and very rarely 5. (Just an odd observation, there is no importance to it!)

So in that instance, yes, 11 weeks off. Or 12 if not caring for odd numbers!


#14

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Definitely frontload to make things more efficient.

Time suppressed would count from the beginning, including orals.

By 8 weeks I definitely didn’t mean 10 weeks of use, but 8 weeks from first administration to levels being low enough to allow recovery. This typically would be 7 weeks of injections and, depending on esters used, possibly some or most of week 8, with orals able to continue to the last day of week 8. In the 8-week example; substitute 10 weeks or other value if wishing some other value.

With testosterone enanthate at only 500 mg, I’d count suppressed time as being only 1 week past the last injection. Levels absolutely won’t be totally non-suppressive, but low enough for recovery to begin. (Obviously, much better still a week past that, but enough for things to begin at about 1 week.)

In your example, I’d count the cycle as 11 weeks, though for some reason “odd numbers” are almost never chosen for cycle duration, except sometimes 3 and very rarely 5. (Just an odd observation, there is no importance to it!)

So in that instance, yes, 11 weeks off. Or 12 if not caring for odd numbers![/quote]

Fantastic, thanks! I was really convinced I needed to go B&C, but I feel like this might be the way to go for me.

Weeks 1-8: Oral(s)
Week 1: Test-E @750mg
Week 2-8: Test-E @500mg
Week 9-10+: SERM

Then take another 6 weeks off minimum.

Is this closer to what you meant? Thanks again!


#15

Yes, although I’d do the 750 mg on the first week as 500 mg on the first injection and 250 on the second (this may be what you meant) and for the 8th week have only the first injection. Still “8 weeks’ worth” of injections, but arranged more optimally.

Other than that, if that’s even any change at all, yes.

You’re very welcome!


#16

Yes, although I’d do the 750 mg on the first week as 500 mg on the first injection and 250 on the second (this may be what you meant) and for the 8th week have only the first injection. Still “8 weeks’ worth” of injections, but arranged more optimally.

Other than that, if that’s even any change at all, yes.

You’re very welcome!


#17

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Yes, although I’d do the 750 mg on the first week as 500 mg on the first injection and 250 on the second (this may be what you meant) and for the 8th week have only the first injection. Still “8 weeks’ worth” of injections, but arranged more optimally.

Other than that, if that’s even any change at all, yes.

You’re very welcome!

[/quote]

To be honest I didn’t even think about it! Thanks again!


#18

In my opinion bridging is a waste of time and compounds. If you want to “bridge” just use a more elevated dose HCG along with a month long pct.

As for front loading a long ester… it won’t get your levels up quicker. They will be higher but still relative to the release rate in which the ester allows… around 8-10 days. I’ve had great results with front loading a short ester like propionate or acetate (if you can get it) along with my longer estered test of choice. Just food for thought


#19

[quote]Tr3ngod wrote:
In my opinion bridging is a waste of time and compounds. If you want to “bridge” just use a more elevated dose HCG along with a month long pct.

As for front loading a long ester… it won’t get your levels up quicker. They will be higher but still relative to the release rate in which the ester allows… around 8-10 days. I’ve had great results with front loading a short ester like propionate or acetate (if you can get it) along with my longer estered test of choice. Just food for thought [/quote]

well, test enanthate/cyp actually peak in less than a day (some data shows 10 hours, dose dependent). obviously it’s a smaller peak than something like prop, because the enanthate/cyp releases the rest of the dose (so to speak).

so front loading with enathate/cyp does work. most people just don’t understand what the actual pharmokinetics of the various drugs are…

Source: Pharmacology of testosterone preparations, H.M. Behre, C. Wang, D.J. Handelsman and E. Nieschlag