Is it possible to maintain large amounts of muscle with lower doses?

[BradScott]

Isn't it funny how some of the genetically elite call themselves average? And then when the guys who are truly average post pictures and cycles its then all about how they aren't working hard enough or eating right.

I've spoken to my friend, a natural WNBF pro and bodybuilding fanatic, about that, the notion that a pro or elite powerlifter is average. Matt Kroc used to write about that, how he was a guy with average genetics who worked hard. Some others too.

While there is no doubt that Kroc trained like a madman and was one of the strictest and methodical people around, I do not believe that he would have been such an elite lifter if he truly had ordinary genes.

I believe they say this either to make their undoubtedly admirable accomplishments seem even greater than they are or to fuel the ambitions of lesser gifted men, to serve as a motivator of sorts, which is not bad, but a bit silly when one is operating on a level that nearly all men cannot.

I remember Dave Tate once wrote in an article, "Anyone can squat 700 pounds, including you."

 

[Gaintrain]

Yep with proper diet and training intensity.

 

[buck]

If a person is born with less muscle fibers then the average person I would have to think they would have a much more difficult time getting bigger and stronger then the average guy training the same way. And if he was born with more muscle fibers then it would seem that getting big would be easier.

 

[johnjuanb1]

This is my good friend. He takes 500mg test with 1-2ius serostim all year until his competition. Post show hcg, plus 1ius serostim for two months.
He trains excrutistingly heavy and hard, eats tons of clean food.
He weighs 280Lbs off season, 224Lbs on stage.
High doses mode me feel toxic and rage. I put him on a cycle like mine and he ended looking worse than sticking with low doses.

 

[trainlikeaboss]

Really enjoying this thread. One thing I think (I could be wrong) that hasn't been pointed out (maybe it's being assumed) is that test levels vs doses are not going to be 100 percent even for everyone. Some are saying they are at 900ng/dl on 80-100mg/wk but someone else may only at 500ng/dl. Genetics may play a factor and possibly more importantly the source and weather or not it is pharma grade. So maybe it would be more accurate to say, you can maintain your muscle at 900ng/dl rather than to say you can maintain at 80mg/wk.

 

[biglizard225]

I think a lot of people are mistaking "less than average" genetics for "average" Genetics.

 

[trainlikeaboss]

I think a lot of people are mistaking "less than average" genetics for "average" Genetics.

Haha you could be right! I'd hate to think of my genetics as "less than average" but I'm definitely not built to hold a lot of muscle. It's an uphill battle for me! The advantage of course is that I stay lean.

 

[dragonfire101]

Yes, I find staying lean harder not maintaining muscle!

 

[jay_dub]

I think a lot of people are mistaking "less than average" genetics for "average" Genetics.

Too many variables to consider really.

Genetics on :
Growth
Shape
How the muscle contracts or pops when flexed
Where fat is stored
How fast fat is burned
How fast fat is gained
Digestion
How well muscle is maintained while in a calorie deficit

Just too many unkown factors or ways to test and truly know where each of us stands. I mean shit, I've heard of pros eating like crap their entire offseason. Then another pro who that looks just as good doing everything he can to maintain an impeccable diet.

All up to opinion