Impatience or a valid time to use gear?

Mags · 08-30-2005, 09:45 AM

Over the last year or so Ive read a fair bit in this forum and with exception of some of the bigger experienced guys, alot of people tend to talk of steroid use/cycles and then of relatively non-impressive lighter lifts etc. Im not trying to start any beef, but even on gear some peoples lifts are still fairly low. I thought it was best to reach your natural limit first in both strength/growth before giving gear a go. I know you do get people of all shapes/sizes/strengths but do you think people are simply naturally weaker or lazy/impatient. I dont boast of super lifts either but I feel I could still improve naturally although itching to have a go on gear. Is it impractical to perhaps hit a target of maybe 300+lb bench/squat etc naturally before cycling AS as plenty of clean lifters can shift that sort of weight. Do you think its best to keep increasing calories and lifting weight to the point where growth stops/slows or just have a go with gear when confident, as I dont want to waste another say 6 months breaking my balls, lifting more, eating more and not seeing too much return. What you guys think? Cheers.

Tha Don · 08-30-2005, 10:14 AM

sup mate

i hear what u sayin, i've seen guys before hit the juice way too early, i don't think its a good idea due to the tremendous amount of strain that you will be putting on your body/organs and joints if your weight and poundages start flying up, its best to make natural progress first and get your body used to lifting, usually a good 4-5 yrs i've heard guys recommend... this is how long i left before my first cycle

if you feel like you can still make good progress without, then i wouldn't recommend juicing yet, you will kinda know when it is time, coz you will keep increasing cals until the only part of you that is growing is your waistline and you will totally plateau in the gym, that is what happened to me, and the gains i was hearing people making on steroids was just too tempting, i have no problem running a little juice to reach my goals, but there is a lot more to steroids than meets the eye, certainly the psycological effects were the biggest challenge for me and i feel they will be in the future (super confidence and the feeling of invincibility on cycle, depression and lack of motivation to do anything post cycle), these are things you have to be prepared for, and not things were if you notice symptoms you can pop a few tabs n it'll clear up

TJ Cline · 08-30-2005, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mags

Over the last year or so Ive read a fair bit in this forum and with exception of some of the bigger experienced guys, alot of people tend to talk of steroid use/cycles and then of relatively non-impressive lighter lifts etc. Im not trying to start any beef, but even on gear some peoples lifts are still fairly low. I thought it was best to reach your natural limit first in both strength/growth before giving gear a go. I know you do get people of all shapes/sizes/strengths but do you think people are simply naturally weaker or lazy/impatient. I dont boast of super lifts either but I feel I could still improve naturally although itching to have a go on gear. Is it impractical to perhaps hit a target of maybe 300+lb bench/squat etc naturally before cycling AS as plenty of clean lifters can shift that sort of weight. Do you think its best to keep increasing calories and lifting weight to the point where growth stops/slows or just have a go with gear when confident, as I dont want to waste another say 6 months breaking my balls, lifting more, eating more and not seeing too much return. What you guys think? Cheers.

It depends on your body..
A natural 300lb bench is low IMO, unless your 175 or less....
I have known dozens of guys who benched 300-435 naturally, and also many who did a natural 500+ squat and dead lifts as teenagers.

Only you can judge what is a good natural goal for yourself.

lnvanry · 08-30-2005, 01:55 PM

some people like myself just don't care at ALL about strength. Yea I know all the fat powerlifters at my gym make fun of some of us, b/c my max bench is probably around 200lbs and I weigh 180 w/ 7% BF (never tried benching any more than 185 till failure). I am weak in almost all lifts accept barbell curls and lat pulldowns. I train for pure cosmetics and asthetics. I know that comes off pretty pussy like, I know I look good and that is my goal.

gococksDJS · 08-30-2005, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lnvanry

some people like myself just don't care at ALL about strength. Yea I know all the fat powerlifters at my gym make fun of some of us, b/c my max bench is probably around 200lbs and I weigh 180 w/ 7% BF (never tried benching any more than 185 till failure). I am weak in almost all lifts accept barbell curls and lat pulldowns. I train for pure cosmetics and asthetics. I know that comes off pretty pussy like, I know I look good and that is my goal.

Yeah but you've never had anyone in the gym look at you in awe because the weight your throwing around would shatter a normal persons bones.

Mags · 08-30-2005, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gococksDJS

Yeah but you've never had anyone in the gym look at you in awe because the weight your throwing around would shatter a normal persons bones.

That's what its about right there. Lookin good as a byproduct from being strong from body building

**Mudge** · 08-31-2005, 12:45 AM

I heard of someone with a 185 bench press who was on I think their 5th cycle, just days ago in fact.

Gear wont fix lack of knowlege, it may get you further but you will still reach a dead point. I've also heard of people using BIG cycles with shitty numbers, who then claim to be resistant. Then you see their training and diet (say, Lucky Charms for breakfast with toast and OJ) and you know why their numbers suck.

**Mudge** · 08-31-2005, 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

It depends on your body..

YES.

Quote:

A natural 300lb bench is low IMO, unless your 175 or less....
I have known dozens of guys who benched 300-435 naturally, and also many who did a natural 500+ squat and dead lifts as teenagers.

Only you can judge what is a good natural goal for yourself.

Some of us have shit genetics.

Likewise though, you have to judge. Not everyone is the same. There are people who claim raw 800 squats all natural (usually people who HAVE used gear but have been off for 'months'). Everyone is different.

I reached 265 benching and even that was putting me in pain, until I discovered the powerlifters bench form. I dont have the genes for constant abuse, and after having used for awhile I have close gripped 315x8 I think at my peak. This is not astronomical for some but compared to my natural lifts and those I typically see in my gym, its a huge difference.

Some people also have different levels of response to gear, there was a huge and educational thread about this. Some people are more prone to getting sick on gear, and some like myself find its still a fight to break plateaus while on gear, and some respond amazingly well and never seem to stop growing.

There was one NPC competitor who put on 70 pounds in one year, but died from recreational drug abuse about a year ago.

LAM · 09-02-2005, 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mudge

I heard of someone with a 185 bench press who was on I think their 5th cycle, just days ago in fact.

Gear wont fix lack of knowlege, it may get you further but you will still reach a dead point. I've also heard of people using BIG cycles with shitty numbers, who then claim to be resistant. Then you see their training and diet (say, Lucky Charms for breakfast with toast and OJ) and you know why their numbers suck.

so true. I have a buddy who probably used gear for a solid 10 years straight and still couldn't bench 400 lbs raw. fuking pathetic !

I have seen many people over the years get big from gear, but the majority of them had average strength at best

Tough Old Man · 09-02-2005, 11:44 AM

Got to tell you something. Getting older doesn't help strength gains either. With this bad left shoulder of mine which stopped me lifting in the 80's and now with the same shoulder having a slight tear of the rotator cuff, never less is the 400 + lb bench gone, maybe the 300 lb bench for me.
Going to start all over using really light weight and try to work up slowly. I'm talking about going down to 150 lbs on my bench and starting over. last year I could incl 390 lbs and now look at me.

PT

lnvanry · 09-02-2005, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAM

so true. I have a buddy who probably used gear for a solid 10 years straight and still couldn't bench 400 lbs raw. fuking pathetic !

I have seen many people over the years get big from gear, but the majority of them had average strength at best

Hello.....Some people do not train for strength....Its called Hypertrophy. You know this LAM. It is a principle of priorities. The priority is a great pump...not a heavy weight. The local pro at my gym is 260 one stage...I have never seen him bench over 300, ever.

TJ Cline · 09-02-2005, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lnvanry

Hello.....Some people do not train for strength....Its called Hypertrophy. You know this LAM. It is a principle of priorities. The priority is a great pump...not a heavy weight. The local pro at my gym is 260 one stage...I have never seen him bench over 300, ever.

how do you not train for strength? Do you run marathons or do the Iron man? Or do you do sets of 50 to 100 reps??

kraziplaya · 09-02-2005, 03:28 PM

what are your age..weight...lifts..training exp now?

i just saw ur gallery....u seem in pretty good shape... i dont see why u wouldnt be able to run gear now as long as u get the proper knowledge

lnvanry · 09-02-2005, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

how do you not train for strength? Do you run marathons or do the Iron man? Or do you do sets of 50 to 100 reps??

It is very simple...you train for hypertrophy. I'll try to explain in a nutshell.
Your goal is increase blood volume in a specific muscle group by method of isolation. Yes, sometimes that means reps of 50-100. WHATEVER it takes for your muscle to swell to maximum size. Think of it this way...

...you increase blood volume and flow by contrating the muscle as intense as possibly. If one maximizes contracting by doing 50-100 reps then so be it...4 reps at heavy weight the so be it...It is different for everyone. This blood volume is what the "pump" is. The pump that NO2 hypes up. The pump the EQ creates. The pump Arnold always spoke of.
This maximum size pump is what stretches the fascia allowing the muscle to grow. The fascia is a constricting fibrous tissue around the muscle the "constraints" growth. Great pump=maximum growth. Great pumps do not necessarily come from heavy weights.
On an social note, it is somewhat difficult to train like this when strength has been ones goal for years. My mission is to contract my muscles as intense as possible no matter what the frequency. It is not about being able to lift a weight from point A to point B. Lifting point A to B is about strenth.

**Mudge** · 09-03-2005, 12:41 AM

A to B is called a half repetition and has nothing to do with strength or hypertrophy. You can be a bodybuilder, powerlifter, or fitness model and do an A to B back to A lift.

brogers · 09-03-2005, 12:48 AM

Do you not think strength and mass are positively correlated? Wow.

**Mudge** · 09-03-2005, 12:55 AM

They do not, science has known this for some time. While they often share some relationship when we are talking about CHANGE, two guys both the same height, weight, and measurements do not neccessarily lift the same weights. You may be able to guess with a muscle biopsy, but size doesn't mean strength and strength does not require size.

In times of duress for example, the human body can trigger great strength by contracting more fibers than it normally would. Those that train for strength can not only better channel this ability through 'practice,' but they also will increase myofibrils within the tissue.

sarcoplasmic/myofibrillar hypertrophy

TJ Cline · 09-03-2005, 12:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lnvanry

It is very simple...you train for hypertrophy. I'll try to explain in a nutshell.
Your goal is increase blood volume in a specific muscle group by method of isolation. Yes, sometimes that means reps of 50-100. WHATEVER it takes for your muscle to swell to maximum size. Think of it this way...

...you increase blood volume and flow by contrating the muscle as intense as possibly. If one maximizes contracting by doing 50-100 reps then so be it...4 reps at heavy weight the so be it...It is different for everyone. This blood volume is what the "pump" is. The pump that NO2 hypes up. The pump the EQ creates. The pump Arnold always spoke of.
This maximum size pump is what stretches the fascia allowing the muscle to grow. The fascia is a constricting fibrous tissue around the muscle the "constraints" growth. Great pump=maximum growth. Great pumps do not necessarily come from heavy weights.

I'm familiar with this theory but it conflicts with every thing I know and have researched in anatomy and physiology.

Skeletal Muscle Hypertrophy is a gain in both size and strength ( the greater the cross sectional area, the more tension it can develop and the greater its strength). You may be able to focus more on size than strength but only to a very small degree......I.M.O

sarcoplasmic hypertrophy........I have never found this term or idea in any text book....only on body building sites.

brogers · 09-03-2005, 10:43 AM

I didn't mean they were perfectly (1-1 ratio) correlated, but there is no doubt that strength and mass are positively correlated.

Tha Don · 09-03-2005, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mudge

They do not, science has known this for some time. While they often share some relationship when we are talking about CHANGE, two guys both the same height, weight, and measurements do not neccessarily lift the same weights. You may be able to guess with a muscle biopsy, but size doesn't mean strength and strength does not require size.

i agree with mudge on this, they is no direct correlation IMO when comparing individuals

however i do feel that if someone was to increase their muscle mass through weight training, their strength would go up (and vice versa)

FishOrCutBait · 09-03-2005, 01:56 PM

IMO, at an early point in one's lifting career, sarc. hypertrophy and myofibrillar hypertrophy are going to progress at a fairly equivalent rate, later on though, depending on what sort of regimen one is on, diet/training wise, either sarcoplasmic or myofibrillar hypertrophy will progress at a greater rate than the other, i.e, a very advanced bodybuilder's progress will go towards muscle size more than strength, and a very advanced powerlifter's gains will go more towards strength than size, whereas an absolute, fresh off the street beginner will gain more or less equally (i use this term loosely) in both.

Did that make sense?

**Mudge** · 09-03-2005, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brogers

I didn't mean they were perfectly (1-1 ratio) correlated, but there is no doubt that strength and mass are positively correlated.

I have gained measureable strength with ZERO size or weight gains. I would primarily agree that someone who gains size should gain strength but I would not be shocked if they did not, and vice versa. Just as my max bench to bodyweight ratio fluctuates.

**Mudge** · 09-03-2005, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForemanRules

sarcoplasmic hypertrophy........I have never found this term or idea in any text book....only on body building sites.

It would not be the first time bodybuilders knew what was going on before science admitted it OR even gave a rats ass about it.

buildingup · 09-03-2005, 02:16 PM

im confused! if i increase the weight of my bench press every week then will i get a bigger chest?
i have got a bigger chest by increasing my bench press from 60kg to 80kg!

**Mudge** · 09-03-2005, 02:20 PM

You probably would, but you might not. Most people I know of note strength before size gains, size gains follow - along with bodyweight increases as well, which means the diet has to be there for it to happen.

08-30-2005, 09:45 AM	#1
Mags We ate the toys eddie! Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: East London, UK Posts: 927 Photos: 8	Impatience or a valid time to use gear? Over the last year or so Ive read a fair bit in this forum and with exception of some of the bigger experienced guys, alot of people tend to talk of steroid use/cycles and then of relatively non-impressive lighter lifts etc. Im not trying to start any beef, but even on gear some peoples lifts are still fairly low. I thought it was best to reach your natural limit first in both strength/growth before giving gear a go. I know you do get people of all shapes/sizes/strengths but do you think people are simply naturally weaker or lazy/impatient. I dont boast of super lifts either but I feel I could still improve naturally although itching to have a go on gear. Is it impractical to perhaps hit a target of maybe 300+lb bench/squat etc naturally before cycling AS as plenty of clean lifters can shift that sort of weight. Do you think its best to keep increasing calories and lifting weight to the point where growth stops/slows or just have a go with gear when confident, as I dont want to waste another say 6 months breaking my balls, lifting more, eating more and not seeing too much return. What you guys think? Cheers.
	BUILD IT, AND THEY WILL COME. THE ONLY TIME SUCCESS COMES BEFORE WORK IS IN THE DICTIONARY. DO OR DO NOT - THERE IS NO TRY.

08-31-2005, 12:45 AM	#7
Mudge Dieting I swear! Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Here Posts: 23,149 Photos: 1	I heard of someone with a 185 bench press who was on I think their 5th cycle, just days ago in fact. Gear wont fix lack of knowlege, it may get you further but you will still reach a dead point. I've also heard of people using BIG cycles with shitty numbers, who then claim to be resistant. Then you see their training and diet (say, Lucky Charms for breakfast with toast and OJ) and you know why their numbers suck.
	Kinesiology Vote @ Top 25 Deads Comp Bench Motivation Bench form MaxCalc Charles Poliquin When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be. Lao-Tzu I don't know any sources so don't ask - thanks

09-03-2005, 12:41 AM	#15
Mudge Dieting I swear! Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Here Posts: 23,149 Photos: 1	A to B is called a half repetition and has nothing to do with strength or hypertrophy. You can be a bodybuilder, powerlifter, or fitness model and do an A to B back to A lift.
	Kinesiology Vote @ Top 25 Deads Comp Bench Motivation Bench form MaxCalc Charles Poliquin When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be. Lao-Tzu I don't know any sources so don't ask - thanks

09-03-2005, 12:48 AM	#16
brogers Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,401	Do you not think strength and mass are positively correlated? Wow.
brogers Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,401

09-03-2005, 12:55 AM	#17
Mudge Dieting I swear! Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Here Posts: 23,149 Photos: 1	They do not, science has known this for some time. While they often share some relationship when we are talking about CHANGE, two guys both the same height, weight, and measurements do not neccessarily lift the same weights. You may be able to guess with a muscle biopsy, but size doesn't mean strength and strength does not require size. In times of duress for example, the human body can trigger great strength by contracting more fibers than it normally would. Those that train for strength can not only better channel this ability through 'practice,' but they also will increase myofibrils within the tissue. sarcoplasmic/myofibrillar hypertrophy
	Kinesiology Vote @ Top 25 Deads Comp Bench Motivation Bench form MaxCalc Charles Poliquin When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be. Lao-Tzu I don't know any sources so don't ask - thanks

08-30-2005, 10:14 AM	#2
Tha Don Registered User Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Nottingham, England Posts: 3,826 Photos: 33	sup mate i hear what u sayin, i've seen guys before hit the juice way too early, i don't think its a good idea due to the tremendous amount of strain that you will be putting on your body/organs and joints if your weight and poundages start flying up, its best to make natural progress first and get your body used to lifting, usually a good 4-5 yrs i've heard guys recommend... this is how long i left before my first cycle if you feel like you can still make good progress without, then i wouldn't recommend juicing yet, you will kinda know when it is time, coz you will keep increasing cals until the only part of you that is growing is your waistline and you will totally plateau in the gym, that is what happened to me, and the gains i was hearing people making on steroids was just too tempting, i have no problem running a little juice to reach my goals, but there is a lot more to steroids than meets the eye, certainly the psycological effects were the biggest challenge for me and i feel they will be in the future (super confidence and the feeling of invincibility on cycle, depression and lack of motivation to do anything post cycle), these are things you have to be prepared for, and not things were if you notice symptoms you can pop a few tabs n it'll clear up

08-30-2005, 01:55 PM	#4
lnvanry primeau Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Illinois Posts: 3,163 Photos: 16	some people like myself just don't care at ALL about strength. Yea I know all the fat powerlifters at my gym make fun of some of us, b/c my max bench is probably around 200lbs and I weigh 180 w/ 7% BF (never tried benching any more than 185 till failure). I am weak in almost all lifts accept barbell curls and lat pulldowns. I train for pure cosmetics and asthetics. I know that comes off pretty pussy like, I know I look good and that is my goal.

09-02-2005, 11:44 AM	#10
Tough Old Man Canine club CEO Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: baja calif, Mexico Posts: 6,933 Photos: 1	Got to tell you something. Getting older doesn't help strength gains either. With this bad left shoulder of mine which stopped me lifting in the 80's and now with the same shoulder having a slight tear of the rotator cuff, never less is the 400 + lb bench gone, maybe the 300 lb bench for me. Going to start all over using really light weight and try to work up slowly. I'm talking about going down to 150 lbs on my bench and starting over. last year I could incl 390 lbs and now look at me. PT

09-02-2005, 03:28 PM	#13
kraziplaya Registered User Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: VA Posts: 527 Photos: 1	what are your age..weight...lifts..training exp now? i just saw ur gallery....u seem in pretty good shape... i dont see why u wouldnt be able to run gear now as long as u get the proper knowledge

09-03-2005, 10:43 AM	#19
brogers Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,401	I didn't mean they were perfectly (1-1 ratio) correlated, but there is no doubt that strength and mass are positively correlated.
brogers Registered User Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 1,401

09-03-2005, 01:56 PM	#21
FishOrCutBait lifts weights Elite Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Minneapple Posts: 4,447 Blog Entries: 1 Photos: 2	IMO, at an early point in one's lifting career, sarc. hypertrophy and myofibrillar hypertrophy are going to progress at a fairly equivalent rate, later on though, depending on what sort of regimen one is on, diet/training wise, either sarcoplasmic or myofibrillar hypertrophy will progress at a greater rate than the other, i.e, a very advanced bodybuilder's progress will go towards muscle size more than strength, and a very advanced powerlifter's gains will go more towards strength than size, whereas an absolute, fresh off the street beginner will gain more or less equally (i use this term loosely) in both. Did that make sense?
	"tried and true theory on one's self is probably the only non-biased proof that something works for someone." - juggernaut http://www.ronpaul.com/

09-03-2005, 02:16 PM	#24
buildingup Elite Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,101	im confused! if i increase the weight of my bench press every week then will i get a bigger chest? i have got a bigger chest by increasing my bench press from 60kg to 80kg!
buildingup Elite Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 1,101

09-03-2005, 02:20 PM	#25
Mudge Dieting I swear! Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Here Posts: 23,149 Photos: 1	You probably would, but you might not. Most people I know of note strength before size gains, size gains follow - along with bodyweight increases as well, which means the diet has to be there for it to happen.
	Kinesiology Vote @ Top 25 Deads Comp Bench Motivation Bench form MaxCalc Charles Poliquin When I let go of