Frustrates the hell out of me. I had a co-worker whose son wants to get big for football. High school kid. Co-worker was grilling me on the supplements I use. I’m like “Dude, I’m in my mid-30s and broken: I use supplements to help me navigate pain and inflammation. Your son needs 20 rep squats and a gallon of milk a day. And you should grill him a steak pretty frequently”
Totally blew me off: started asking about creatine.
@cdep89 @SkyzykS that’s kind of my point about the high volume piece: how can we say “high volume won’t work for naturals” if we can’t absolutely define what high volume is?
I think that’s more or less where @T3hPwnisher is headed with the definition conversation.
@RT_Nomad that is interesting on the androgen receptor sites. What then happens to that cortisol? It’s such recycled through the body? I have no knowledge in this area, but it almost seems like it creates more problems - similar to insulin.
People taking 600mg of test for 10 weeks gained almost 3x as much muscle as naturals on a placebo, is that not obscene? Of course it is. Obscene in terms of what a natural bodies biological principles would allow without aid.
We’ve already figured out that amazing progress could be completely subjective.
100%, I’ve gone from ~125lbs to 200lbs+ myself.
That was in 10 weeks only, not indefinitely. I am pretty sure we are allowed to train for longer than that. This is a marathon not a sprint. They are not going to just keep adding muscle without training.
Are you suggesting that users wouldn’t continue to gain more muscle over a much longer period than 10 weeks?
Nobody ever shares their Crayons with me.
Sad day.
The study was 7 lbs in 10 weeks with no training. No, they will not continue to put on muscle indefinitely.
Also, I don’t consider that obscene.
That wasn’t the part I was picking up on. People on the placebo gained 4lbs whilst training, and people on 600mg gained 13lbs. Almost 3x as much.
To the human body compared to its natural state. That is 100% obscene, there’s no pussyfooting around that.
All I’ve ever done in this thread is mimic thoughts from an article added here a couple years ago. And I still mimic all of that.
And I will not. That is all. Enjoy the rest of the thread.
That is awesome. Really. Thats like transformative gains.
This is what you asked and without training the as per the study the answer is no.
Whoops! iPhone got me again
Yep. Whats low to Pwn or ChongLordUno is stratospheric to some.
Or what is high to some is virtually insignificant to others.
Given that I’m accustomed to relatively low volume, jumping to a 10x10 format about killed me.
As to natty or not- 
. I’ve never used real steroids, so I dunno.
I’ve gained 10 lbs in one day.
Most people on 600 mg of Test will put on 10 lbs of water. That water is partially in the muscle. It might appear as muscle, but it is water and sugar.
FWIW, the guys that do the bullshit workouts you mention and are huge generally are taking insane amounts of gear, or have great genetics and use moderate amounts consistently. Also, I’ve had this same thought about an individual I know. He is all ways doing these fluff exercises. Then I did a few sets with him and found out he was doing 50 sets that day.
It’s eye opening when you actually get to know these guys. The drug use is in the grams, not milligrams. They aren’t getting that body free of cost.
Of the guys that I know that have cycled beginner cycles (300-600 mg of Test and maybe a mild oral), they all look natural. They look a bit thicker on, but a month goes by and they look like they did before. They are lucky if they keep 1/3 of the muscle or strength gained IME.
Steroids work, no doubt, but many that don’t have experience with them think they are more magical than they actually are.
Again I would refer you to my initial response, which is that there are VERY few actual examples of this. It feels like a straw man to me.
I would also say that the ideas of amazing progress and half-decent body are inherently incongruent. So perhaps this really is just a problem with definition of terms. I think we have VERY different ideas of what amazing progress means. There is no such thing, outside of severe health conditions such as cerebral palsy, where I would say that, for example, a 250 bench press is amazing progress. Perhaps you see this differently.
That’s correct. That’s probably more or less the ceiling for an untrained individual using steroids.
I went from 217 to 227 in about a week in a half from 182mg/wk Test while also low carb.
Some people be crazy like that
I was gonna try not to respond to another notification in this thread. I’ve already conceded all my thoughts on “not accepting advice from a certain type of steroid user”, and that was summed up in the C.Thib excerpt from one of his articles I quoted.
I ended up in conversations about things not in line with my original statement and in turn ended up talking about things I don’t know enough about (steroids). Seems like I irked a few people with some of my perhaps ill-educated comments but as I say, it was never my intention to get into these chats - just to make the point in my original comment. Maybe it was misconstrued, maybe it’s my own fault, it doesn’t matter.
I definitely have a lower entry level for amazing progress but I don’t feel like there’s any shame in that. I feel that all battles in the mind and gym are personal and the definition of amazing changes as the months go on.
An otherwise unimpressive feat that I would consider amazing progress for me right now would be managing to shake off the rest of this nasty cold by Monday so I can return to the gym!
Now, this was an eventful thread, shifting focus from form to volume to steroids to general thoughts about what works or not. Did we lose @bwags in the process? Why so?
In my opinion you can’t completely separate form from load. Form lies in the eyes of the beholder - subjective. Load is - objective - which in turn can make you blind to what form you’re using. A clip of a dude covering the leg press with weights, only to barely move the weight for a max rep, comes to mind.
Many coaches stress the importance of good form. I mean, what good is the heavy load without a form to handle it? Then again, an explosive intent/rep is NOT bad form in the right context. SuperSlow may be the opposite, which to me is far more demanding. I’m surprised the discussion never progressed into set length - which could be a by far more interesting discussion (but alas probably overkilled in the HIT forum).
I believe we always end up with the same requisites: The balance between frequency, intensity and volume.
Thats an important distinction too.
I saw a form check vid a while back where a guy is getting himself all contorted like he’s going for a weight class world record, only to do like 3 reps with 135 or something, not even near his own max.
I think it was in Under The Bar or something from Dave Tate around that time where he talks about how what you need to do to bench 600lbs. Is not what you did starting out. (Of course I’m butchering that due to poor recollection)
Essentially, good form is what gets the white lights in pl’ing, which is different from the olympic lifter which is different from the gym guy/bb’r.