First I agree with your first response. Now this awesome sarcasm. Nice!
I logged back on to respond to this thread specifically.
MONSTRO seems to be the new hero here. I like he is contributing so much and a lot of it helpful information, but I hope members are reading between the lines on his post, or at least adding them up and deciding what is good and what isn’t.
Perhaps top level bidybuilders are using these crazy number and dosages but many think the bodybuilders today, while definitely bigger across the board, don’t have the refined physiques of the 80s and 90s. The info MONSTRO is getting from these guys may bet correct but I know for a fact what some Olympians were using in 1989. How do I know this? Because before these guys were celebrities in the instagram and youtube age, they were broke fuckers who slept at my friends houses in San Diego because they didn’t have enough money for hotals. I got them into my local gyms for free as guests and even gave one guy gas money so he could get back to LA.
We talked openly about steroids because they weren’t really controlled at the time. They told me of a couple of guys who used crazy amounts (for the time) and it was the subject of amazement and laughter.
The guys I knew used around a gram of test...maybe, 2 amps of parabolan (maybe 3) and never went over 150mg of anadrol or 75mg of dbol.
Pre-contest that array switched to winstrol, anavar and two weeks of 20mg halotestin. The only anti-estrogen they used was 10mg of nolvadex.
I could list names of these guys but it would serve no purpose and I would sound like every other name dropper.
Seeing this ridiculously high dosing being promulgated here is exactly why I won’t contribute anymore.
Methinks the rational guys on the forum just skip over this shit these days.
I do not know what pro show was in San Diego in 1989, but bodybuilding in the 1980s was much different from bodybuilding in 2020. All the Mr. Olympias in the 1980s were below 200 pounds except Lee Haney, who brought a new size standard to the stage with his big lat wings. Even so, in 1989 Lee Haney weighed in at 243 pounds. Nobody else on stage was like him. In fact, the second place winner was Lee Labrada. What did he weigh? 180?
Here is Lee Haney weighing in on video for 1989.
The Arnold Sports Festival claims Brandon Curry weighs 260. He is
short - only 5'7" (Lee Haney was 5'11" - a full third of a foot taller).
Then look at the list of other competitors qualified for the Olympia, like James Hollingshead and Roelly Winklaar and, well, Phil Heath, and take note of the vast differences between the 1980s and today.
Could it all be better genetics in 2020?
I doubt it. Increased doses and increased growth hormone and insulin. <----- Just my two cents.
Guys like Monstro have to compete in this field and have to do well to make money.
Your typical poster here has no reason to be pushing things like the pros do, so I am 100% with you if that is your point, but I sincerely doubt the 2020 lineup is doing what your acquaintances in 1989 (who were financially broken) shared with you while crashed at your place. The typical poster here probably has no business doing "
a gram of test...maybe, 2 amps of parabolan (maybe 3) and . . . 150mg of anadrol or 75mg of dbol. Pre-contest that array switched to winstrol, anavar and two weeks of 20mg halotestin." Either.
But the question was asked in the original post and the title of this thread.
Let's face it. There is a size-dose relationship.
300mg a week of testosterone and 600 - which will support more size? There is an actual study on that one, by the way, and 600 wins, with no controlled diet and
no working out.
Would 800 be better? No way to know, because no study has ever been done higher than 600mg.
But the reality is that every time I try something new or push dosages a little higher, I get a little bigger and better. The only thing stopping me from continuing down that road is concern for my health, and, let's face it, at my age there is no real point to it, since it would be impossible for me to be a pro bodybuilder AND I doubt I had the genetics for it even when I was younger (but we'll never know, as that window closed a long time ago).
So, yeah, genetics matter, yeah, diet matters (duh), training matters, but
gear matters, and we should not pretend it does not.
Without hormones many of us would be cutting down to 5% body fat and weighing 135-140, maybe 160 if taller and 180 if some sort of genetic freak (and tall). <---- and that's a fact.