Density vs Intensity best for AAS ?

When using AAS which is the most effective for making the best gains -

Density of training

ie - density refers to the amount of work being performed per unit of time. To increase density is to gradually reduce the amount of rest between sets. You progress in this system either by using more weight without resting more or by using the same weight while resting less

or

Intensity of training

ie - The amount of weight lifted in relation to your maximum. An intensity-dominant system revolves around the use of heavy weights, in the 85-100% range. During that type of training the number of sets per exercise is fairly high (to maximize neural stimulation) but the overall volume of work is fairly low

I realise there are other factors such as volume and frequency however i believe that density and intensity are the polar opposites of my training where everything lies between
#
hope i made myself clear cheers RC

got to bump this

The second option seemed to work for Dorian. And Ronnie wasn't shy of going monstrously heavy. I'd be more inclined to go down the heavier/lower volume route, too, as I feel I respond (particularly in my early days as a skinny ectomorph) better to that sort of stimulation. With that in mind (knowing how my body works), I'd fully exploit the extra strength, power and anabolic advantages the gear would give me to make decent gains. Of course, it's always good to change things up once in a while, but I'd try just one approach with one cycle: that being the intensity option.

Everyones different so there is no one protocol that everyone should follow.

For me, training stays the same except for workload is increased through frequency when on a cycle as recovery ability is enhanced.

surely -shadowcam- we are all human beings (most of us) and therefore all function essentially in the same manner therefore there must be a set protocol that must yield better results? do i sound a bit mentzer??

It's a lot more complex than that. A general rule that works based on the fact we all have a heart, arms, legs and lungs is just too simple and negates other factors. Of course, in general, we all tend to grow when a muscle is stimulated and broken down by lifting a weight and then rebuilt with protein. However, although I see your point, it's not our general similarities that govern how we progress, but the individuality of our genes. Being 'the same' only goes so far, after that it's all down to genetics regarding development, growth, potential, recovery and natural ability.