[quote]JamesBrawn007 wrote:
skohcl wrote:
And about bastardizing the protocol… we don’t even have anaconda, so we are already bastardizing it… can’t really speak to the effectiveness of the “real” protocol yet then, can we? I mean we’re supposed to “crash and burn” if we don’t have Anaconda in our protocol according to nate.
It’s already been stated that without the bars it’s still 80-90% effective, right?
This is the main point made in this thread by most lifters: we are all keen to follow the protocol to he letter but whether for availability or budget reasons we make the best of what is available.
Getting pent up about using high-grade WH and leucine instead of Anaconda, or having to opt for blending single quality supplement ingredients to make up a version of Workout Fuel (like me, because I can’t really afford the real stuff) is as pointless as fretting because your workout programme stipulates incline Smith presses but you only have access to a barbell and an incline bench! Will my upper chest results only be 80-90% effective because I didn’t use the Smith? We are talking narrow margins here.
[/quote]
Agreed, and it hasn’t been bastardized for any other reasons than affordability for most of us. We’re not looking to say this is just as good, but rather hey, you can do this and still get some of the gold from the original proto, and afford it.
Not trying to place misinformation out here, I think we all are clear on that right?
This is just a thread to see who’s kicking ass with the proto, and help out a few guys like myself who just don’t have the funds to do it right. Sorry to say but some of us are in that boat.