Hello everyone I’m pretty new to the forum, talking hypothetically and trying to figure out which would be most effective, say you have someone that is going to run a cycle, does the net total of one or two different things, become more effective than a smaller weekly total of someone running multiple things, example below - #1 weeks 1-14
200mg test enanthate
200mg EQ
200mg tren enanthate
200mg Deca
#2 weeks 1-14
800mg test enanthate
300mg deca
as you can see the second cycle would have an increased net total of 300mg per week, would it work better even though the other one has multiple effects from multiple compounds? curious about this type of thing. thanks for everyones feedback.
Running multiple things can increase effect, for same total milligrams and similar potency of compounds, where the compounds work synergistically. This happens when two or more compound are somewhat lacking in some activities and each fills the other’s gap.
In your first example, trenbolone needs the testosterone as does the Deca (Dianabol or Anadrol would be other ways of filling the gap – EQ may also do so to some extent as judged by a number of cases but I have not tested that specifically.)
Neither cycle is particularly if at all strategized: they seem kind of random.
Compared to the first, the second cycle adds 600 mg/week testosterone enanthate (big change) and 100 mg/week Deca (near trivial), but takes away 200 mg of trenbolone enanthate (big change though not quite as much as with the testosterone) and drops 200 mg EQ (moderate change.)
Hard to call it between these two: the reason for why they might be pretty comparable despite lower dosage of the first is that trenbolone is unusually potent, so that 800 mg/week cycle acts more like a gram per week cycle.
Why do you have Deca in there? It has no special anabolic properties and has specific serious disadvantages.
[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Running multiple things can increase effect, for same total milligrams and similar potency of compounds, where the compounds work synergistically. This happens when two or more compound are somewhat lacking in some activities and each fills the other’s gap.
In your first example, trenbolone needs the testosterone as does the Deca (Dianabol or Anadrol would be other ways of filling the gap – EQ may also do so to some extent as judged by a number of cases but I have not tested that specifically.)
Neither cycle is particularly if at all strategized: they seem kind of random.
Compared to the first, the second cycle adds 600 mg/week testosterone enanthate (big change) and 100 mg/week Deca (near trivial), but takes away 200 mg of trenbolone enanthate (big change though not quite as much as with the testosterone) and drops 200 mg EQ (moderate change.)
Hard to call it between these two: the reason for why they might be pretty comparable despite lower dosage of the first is that trenbolone is unusually potent, so that 800 mg/week cycle acts more like a gram per week cycle.
Why do you have Deca in there? It has no special anabolic properties and has specific serious disadvantages.[/quote]
Hi Bill, thank you for your reply and all that great info you provided. First off to your question why I put deca there, I wasn’t really looking at the first one as a practice cycle, rather just looking for the answer to what I was trying to figure out, net total vs 3 or more compounds. You are absolutely correct in pointing out trenbolone is unusually potent, and in bringing up the fact certain compounds will compliment eachother, so I guess at the end of the day it would depend on what compounds.
What struck my curiousity and the reason I had wondered about the test deca eq tren is because I had recently heard things and came across a blend that claimed to be 400mg per ml, each ml containing 100mg of test deca eq and tren. And I wondered if a blend like that had any validity and if a stack like that even made sense at all.Thanks for your reply bill I always welcome what you have to say.
I would think that kind of combination is more from the standpoint of having a high total mg/mL concentration for the many who want that (I’d rather inject 2 mL of products at 200 mg/mL than 1 mL of a product at 400 mg/mL, myself, as high concentration products tend to be painful) and for those who would rather trade individual control for the hope that the supplier knew what he was doing with the combination.
Eq run at 200 mg a week is a waste. Imo (and most others would agree) it should be run at a rate of 400-600 mg week for 16-20 weeks. As for bills statement… Trenbolone is rated five times as anabolic and androgenic as testosterone and therefore would do more for you per mg than any other compound in these cycles.
That being said…
I would modify the second cycle to 600 mg test w 1 - 14 and tren 300 - 400 mg per week w 5-14