Q: What do you guys think about short cycles with high dosages, as opposed to longer cycles with lower or moderate doses, or staggered doses?
A: This is a good question and one I don’t hear often. I should, is what I think. So I’m glad you asked it because it gives me a chance to sound off, hear the tone of my own voice and maybe impart something useful. The short answer is, it depends on a lot of factors, but to be honest, it’s more difficult to retain gains from a short cycle. I can only think of one reason to go on a short cycle: If you have an unexpected photo shoot or appearance. In that case, you’d jump on a cycle and go quickly on and off. But you’ll need to make sure you’re taking the right “short term” ‘roids in order to create the desired effect and eliminate the side effects. In other words, don’t jump on some heavy test for a few weeks and then abruptly drop off. Use a combination of substances from strong to mild and with at least one androgen to complement the anabolics.
I do feel strongly that staggered doses are probably the most ideal in all situations, except the one I mentioned, because they continue delivering results and the body never really catches on or develops any kind of resistance or tolerance to results.
The problem is the long cycles with low or moderate doses for the purpose of “enduring” that length of time. The best example of this is when someone has a 16 week diet and they end up extending their cycle out in this way. It’s not a problem to have a cycle that is close to that long, or two cycles almost back to back, but when you just tug at the shirt of result, rather than really grab it, it’s just going to cause more toxicity and elevated liver enzymes, without any dramatic result in muscle gain. It’s like taking 2 Advil for a muscle tear, 4 times a day, for 6 weeks. It’s better to take 4 Advil (800 mg prescription strength), 4 times a day, for 2 weeks and get out of there with a lot accomplished.
