Primo Vs Masteron

[Oakley6575]

Hey man, I’ve done it. I worked with one of broderick’s protégés. I tore my pec and had crashed estrogen. Shit doesn’t work for me! But by all means, it looks like it works for some.

That transformation looks an awful lot like a rebound post show. If that’s what it is, that strategy of low test and high mast would make sense to keep water off.

he just looks filled out from food and gh... imagine how much bigger he could of been if he used a real offseason anabolic

Seems like neither of you clicked the link and went and looked at all the transformations.

Also, you crashed your estrogen. Yea, if masteron crashes your estrogen, it obviously wouldn't work for you. That is basic cycle design. If you know Mast lowers your estrogen, that was a terrible cycle, for you. A lot of people don't have E2 lowering effects from Mast. So your first post saying mast won't grow you like test, really is only viable for people like you.

 

[Oakley6575]

I sure as shit couldn’t imagine taking 1300 mast post show lol

Literally none of those guys in that thread look stage lean as a starting point...

 

[Ckmeter]

Seems like neither of you clicked the link and went and looked at all the transformations.

Also, you crashed your estrogen. Yea, if masteron crashes your estrogen, it obviously wouldn't work for you. That is basic cycle design. If you know Mast lowers your estrogen, that was a terrible cycle, for you. A lot of people don't have E2 lowering effects from Mast. So your first post saying mast won't grow you like test, really is only viable for people like you.

I did click the link and look at the “transformations”. The posts give very little detail.

If you read what I said, I said that whatever works for you works for you. There’s a reason most guys aren’t running cycles like this.

Test is better than mast for growth. But hey, you do you. Waste the time while I grow

 

[Ckmeter]

Seems like neither of you clicked the link and went and looked at all the transformations.

Also, you crashed your estrogen. Yea, if masteron crashes your estrogen, it obviously wouldn't work for you. That is basic cycle design. If you know Mast lowers your estrogen, that was a terrible cycle, for you. A lot of people don't have E2 lowering effects from Mast. So your first post saying mast won't grow you like test, really is only viable for people like you.

Also, do you really believe John Jewitt built his physique off masteron?

Most of the open guys are running 1200mgs minimum of test in the off season. Shit, I have a buddy on 3500mgs of test e year round!

Test + gh + slin = freak

So much more goes into drugs than just total mgs. Mast is far more toxic than test is as well.

 

[Oakley6575]

I did click the link and look at the “transformations”. The posts give very little detail.

If you read what I said, I said that whatever works for you works for you. There’s a reason most guys aren’t running cycles like this.

Test is better than mast for growth. But hey, you do you. Waste the time while I grow

You keep making this about me. Like I'm running a low test high mast cycle. Again, I'm not. I simply asked why mast was shit for putting size on when the statement was made.

You are mirroring the same argument. Again, is the only reason you are saying that is because you had a bad cycle design for yourself and so now you are going to tell everyone that mast is trash for growing?

Can you post an 18 week or 26 week push where your test cycle grew you more than the guys in that thread? And this is offseason, not a rebound like you guys keep bringing up. The two guys who show how long their off season was, where clearly not stage lean to begin so a "rebound" does not count.

 

[Oakley6575]

Also, do you really believe John Jewitt built his physique off masteron?

Most of the open guys are running 1200mgs minimum of test in the off season. Shit, I have a buddy on 3500mgs of test e year round!

Test + gh + slin = freak

So much more goes into drugs than just total mgs. Mast is far more toxic than test is as well.

No, definitely not. That is why I'm talking about his clients where he is using low test / high mast cycles. They seem to be growing optimally. My point is based on their off seasons, I just don't see how anyone can think if they would have taken high test, they would have ended their push much bigger than they did.. You can only build muscle so fast... The difference in their physiques after 18 weeks and 26 weeks is crazy. Is it not?

 

[Ckmeter]

You keep making this about me. Like I'm running a low test high mast cycle. Again, I'm not. I simply asked why mast was shit for putting size on when the statement was made.

You are mirroring the same argument. Again, is the only reason you are saying that is because you had a bad cycle design for yourself and so now you are going to tell everyone that mast is trash for growing?

Can you post an 18 week or 26 week push where your test cycle grew you more than the guys in that thread? And this is offseason, not a rebound like you guys keep bringing up. The two guys who show how long their off season was, where clearly not stage lean to begin so a "rebound" does not count.

In 99% of situations, most of the top bodybuilding coaches would never put guys on an off season cycle without test being the highest dosed compound.

No, I’m speaking from seeing what guys are running, as well as my experience. In my experience, mast also makes me feel more toxic. I just can’t stand people trying to reinvent the wheel. We know what works. If someone can’t tolerate large doses of test, then maybe they should try running an off season with other drugs. I just personally don’t like masteron. I’ve never run it higher than 800/wk, so I really can’t say.

The black dude you posted looks like he was post show. No, he isn’t stage lean. Maybe he did trt for a bit before the push. But he was pretty damn lean. Anything he would’ve taken with higher food would’ve blown him up.

 

[Ckmeter]

No, definitely not. That is why I'm talking about his clients where he is using low test / high mast cycles. They seem to be growing optimally. My point is based on their off seasons, I just don't see how anyone can think if they would have taken high test, they would have ended their push much bigger than they did.. You can only build muscle so fast... The difference in their physiques after 18 weeks and 26 weeks is crazy. Is it not?

You’re also trusting that the clients are taking exactly what they are told to. This is a big assumption.

The transformations look good. I would absolutely not say crazy.

I’ve seen mutations from high test with gh and insulin and some other compounds in the mix. I personally do believe higher test could’ve added more muscle than the same mgs of masteron.

 

[Ckmeter]

Honestly, here are my final thoughts on this. We know how to get big — AAS, gh, insulin, and food. The more you take, the bigger you get and faster you get there within reason.

I feel better on higher test than higher masteron, and I find I grow better. With that said, to each their own.

 

[Leanmeantinypeen]

I feel better on higher test than higher masteron, and I find I grow better.

Do you always answer questions with half relevant facts about yourself?

 

[Ckmeter]

Do you always answer questions with half relevant facts about yourself?

This is a bodybuilding forum where we talk about our experiences and try to help others learn from our mistakes.

So yes, if I can impart some of my “half relevant facts about myself” and help guide people away from using 1300mgs of masteron to grow, then it’s a good thing.

Do you always add negative comments that provide zero value on threads? Or just this one?

 

[Ckmeter]

Do you always answer questions with half relevant facts about yourself?

You are fat and look like you don’t even work out, let alone take gear. How about you shut the fuck up, don’t attack me for trying to provide my insight into this thread, and go diet for a bit

 

[Leanmeantinypeen]

You are fat and look like you don’t even work out, let alone take gear. How about you shut the fuck up, don’t attack me for trying to provide my insight into this thread, and go diet for a bit

....You know I can see what you look like right?

 

[Ckmeter]

....You know I can see what you look like right?

Yep, as can I!

Shit, come to the USAs next year and see in person

 

[Leanmeantinypeen]

So yes, if I can impart some of my “half relevant facts about myself” and help guide people away from using 1300mgs of masteron to grow, then it’s a good thing.

Well you replied to the question with "I don't like masteron and I've never run it that high".

don’t attack me for trying to provide my insight into this thread

Well now I see why you've been such a cry baby. But nobody is attacking you, just hoping you had relevant information to share. Silly us.

 

[Ckmeter]

Well you replied to the question with "I don't like masteron and I've never run it that high".



Well now I see why you've been such a cry baby. But nobody is attacking you, just hoping you had relevant information to share. Silly us.

Did you even read through my responses to this thread?

But hey, before I get scolded again by some of the mods for tearing you a new one, let’s resolve this in private message.

You clearly have an issue with me. This thread is about primo vs masteron, not whether masteron is effective at 1300mgs… come deal with it like a man.

 

[StellarLabs]

I've been cruising for a couple months now and I'm thinking of running Test/Mast or Test/Primo for my next cycle. I have ran test and mast, but not test and primo. Looking to run more of a moderate "safer" cycle. In terms of your bloodwork, does it look better with masteron in your stack or primobolan. Cholesterol being the main concern here for me. Any input would be appreciated!

If you've just been cruising the last couple months, my first question would be why test/mast or test/primo? What is your goal? Are you looking to put on size or? I agree with most of the guys here that said mast and primo are similar and primo affects lipids to a higher degree, but no one mentioned that mast has a higher likelihood of taking your hair. In my opinion, both compounds are end of cycle "polishers" or for those already sitting at a low bf%. Thats why I ask why test/mast or test/primo.

 

[AndrewT15]

If you've just been cruising the last couple months, my first question would be why test/mast or test/primo? What is your goal? Are you looking to put on size or? I agree with most of the guys here that said mast and primo are similar and primo affects lipids to a higher degree, but no one mentioned that mast has a higher likelihood of taking your hair. In my opinion, both compounds are end of cycle "polishers" or for those already sitting at a low bf%. Thats why I ask why test/mast or test/primo.

View attachment 146276

Im looking to put on mass with compounds that have the least detrimental health effects. I knew mast and primo were safe compared to other steroids. I wanted to know which one hits the lipids to a lesser extent so I can run that with test.

 

[Tresto]

Im looking to put on mass with compounds that have the least detrimental health effects. I knew mast and primo were safe compared to other steroids. I wanted to know which one hits the lipids to a lesser extent so I can run that with test.

Primo if you’re looking for mass, mast if you want less lipid hit. It’s been said repeatedly in this thread. You must choose

 

[BBruce]

I was under the impression that Primo had less impact on lipids than Mast…

 

[tbda]

Yep, as can I!

Shit, come to the USAs next year and see in person

Out of curiosity how do you think your going to do at USAs?

 

[Ckmeter]

Out of curiosity how do you think you’re going to do at USAs?

I won’t do the USAs unless my coach and I decide I am competitive enough to win, obviously depending on who shows up it’s always up in the air.

This year, I would’ve gotten either 5th or 6th in my height class for classic. Why do you ask?

 

[Ckmeter]

Out of curiosity how do you think your going to do at USAs?

I sure as shit hope you aren’t trying to give me advice about “how I’ll place at the USAs”. If so, please just don’t. I’m not in the mood this morning to put someone down.

 

[tbda]

I sure as shit hope you aren’t trying to give me advice about “how I’ll place at the USAs”. If so, please just don’t. I’m not in the mood this morning to put someone down.

I was asking you a legitimate question. Seems like you might be a little retarded.
Crazy you placed second in a regional show, your going to CRUSH the USA's no doubt!

 

[Ckmeter]

I was asking you a legitimate question. Seems like you might be a little retarded.
Crazy you placed second in a regional show, you’re going to CRUSH the USA's no doubt!

Do you know anything about me? I won my regional show.

Where did I ever say I’m going to “crush the usas”? Get a grip man. 5th or 6th isn’t crushing it. It’s losing.

I won’t do the USAs till I will crush it. And that will be up to my coach. We are targeting next year. If I’m not ready, I’m not ready.

 

[tbda]

I won’t do the USAs unless my coach and I decide I am competitive enough to win, obviously depending on who shows up it’s always up in the air.

This year, I would’ve gotten either 5th or 6th in my height class for classic. Why do you ask?

Thanks for the normal response to a normal question.

I'm asking because I was talking to coach about doing USAs but he recommended doing a JR national show.

 

[Ckmeter]

Thanks for the normal response to a normal question.

I'm asking because I was talking to coach about doing USAs but he recommended doing a JR national show.

I mean here’s the deal man, a national show is a national show. I’m not sure where you’re located, but certain national shows depending on where they are and the judges there have favored different looks.

Historically, the USAs have been one of the most competitive national shows. It’s the easiest national show for me to do with my location, so that is why it is on my radar.

The guy that won the Jr. Nats this year in my height class swept everyone. He was a massive Nigerian dude lol.

 

[Ckmeter]

Thanks for the normal response to a normal question.

I'm asking because I was talking to coach about doing USAs but he recommended doing a JR national show.

I think one of the benefits to the USAs assuming you’re still in classic is the top 2 guys in each height class get a card.

At jr nats, it’s only the winner of each height class. At jr USAs, it looks like it’s the top 2 as well.

 

[tbda]

I think one of the benefits to the USAs assuming you’re still in classic is the top 2 guys in each height class get a card.

At jr nats, it’s only the winner of each height class. At jr USAs, it looks like it’s the top 2 as well.

That and location was why I initially picked USA's for the national show. My coach mentioned USA's being tough because it draws the dudes with elite shape genetics for classic where JR nats is a little less competitive in that aspect. I'm still far off from winning my class but might as well get the experience and the feedback.

You're Class D?

 

[Ckmeter]

That and location was why I initially picked USA's for the national show. My coach mentioned USA's being tough because it draws the dudes with elite shape genetics for classic where JR nats is a little less competitive in that aspect. I'm still far off from winning my class but might as well get the experience and the feedback.

You're Class D?

Yessir! How bout you?

Yeah I was at the usas in person this year. The guy who got 2nd in class D actually had way wilder shape and structure than the guy who won. He is a mutual friend and fucking freak.