# do i need gear to compete ?



## yeaitzblitz (Nov 9, 2014)

Hey guys , didnt know where to post this been so is hoping here is ok . ive been training for 4 years now and wanting to compete in bodybuilding comps starting next year and wanted to knew if anyone here who has competed would be able to tell me if im not ready to or if i should do a cycle 2-3 month out from the comp and grow into it , i dont have recent pics but im going to get someone to take some later but il upload a few from last year if you guys could give me some tips on where i need work and if i could compete naturally in lower level comps with a chance to place or will i get blown away by guys on cycle ,thanks guys .


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

My man...

Don't do drugs.

Once you start taking gear, you are in it for life, or at least if you intend to continue to train seriously. And if you are training seriously, chances are you will want to compete. You cannot do it without gear once you do it with, because you will inevitably look worse without it. A lot worse.

You have a lot of muscle. You can bring a smaller, but conditioned package to the stage. Get conditioned naturally and consider competing in a smaller, fitness modelling show (like the WBFF) to begin with (there's a lot more opportunity and exposure and prestige in the WBFF even if you don't even win a pro card. People relate to it more, and you don't necessarily ned drugs to be a fitness model). Go on an offseason and make small, incremental progress. Train naturally.. The sense of fulfillment is a lot better.

Steroids and pro hormones are a slippery slope. I know because I effectively ruined my entire "journey" and ended it all prematurely taking prohormones (gear essentially). I made gains and I got shredded for the show, but when it was done, and I stopped taking, I lost all the condition and the fullness and the size I got from the drug, never to regain it without going back on cycle.

Get shredded naturally and compete dude. Don't go down this road... you have plenty of room to grow still and look amazing even at this stage. You've only been training 4 years... Steroids are a life-long commitment, not just for "competing". It becomes a major part of your life, in and out of the gym.

But if you decide to start taking... consider yourself warned. If you stop, you will wish you never started.

If you take, be honest with people... because they will ask you a lot of questions. And, you might develop a negative stigma as a juice head.


----------



## zasker (Jun 21, 2014)

pro-hormone-no said:


> My man...
> 
> Don't do drugs.
> 
> ...


do you realise you're on a forum with a high percentage of users.

out of curiosity what prohormone did you use and did you do a proper PCT afterwards?



yeaitzblitz said:


> Hey guys , didnt know where to post this been so is hoping here is ok . ive been training for 4 years now and wanting to compete in bodybuilding comps starting next year and wanted to knew if anyone here who has competed would be able to tell me if im not ready to or if i should do a cycle 2-3 month out from the comp and grow into it , i dont have recent pics but im going to get someone to take some later but il upload a few from last year if you guys could give me some tips on where i need work and if i could compete naturally in lower level comps with a chance to place or will i get blown away by guys on cycle ,thanks guys .


OP, its really up to you... there is alot available, ph's, orals, injectables if i were you i'd do some research yourself rather than asking us as only you can make the decision.

there's plenty of info on here and if you have questions just post.


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

zasker said:


> do you realise you're on a forum with a high percentage of users.
> 
> out of curiosity what prohormone did you use and did you do a proper PCT afterwards?
> 
> ...


I do, but I don't think people should take gear because they feel they "need it to compete". Looking at it as a necessity to step on any given fitness or bodybuilding stage is not the right attitude.. IMO. He can get into condition naturally from where he is now. And we all know that if you're running gear during contest prep the results are impossible to replicate doing the same thing naturally afterwards since you're so used to such a high standard of conditioning.

I mean, yeah he can take, but I'm trying to make him understand that once he does, he won't compete without it again. This is what a lot of people who start don't get. And I still think he has plenty of room to grow still. This is a lot of progress for 4 years...

I ran Halodrol for only 4 weeks with a Clomid and HCG PCT and DAA. 4 weeks alone shut me down badly... Overkill right? Didn't stop me from going through some awful PMS-type symptoms for months... I did this thinking I needed it to maintain mass during my cut. Yeah, I maintained got fuller and a little thicker through the lats and with deeper abs, but I don't think the shut down and stigma I got from it was worth it.


----------



## dsldude (Sep 11, 2008)

OP you do now there are drug free tested bodybuilding federations in the Uk?

Have a look into the BNBF/NPA/UKDFBA

You certainly don't have to take steroids to compete in Bodybuilding, just pick

a drug free federation.


----------



## curtisfisher (Nov 9, 2014)

You can always compete naturally. Are you guaranteed to win the show? No, not even if you're on drugs. If you're natural, can you stand next to people on drugs? Yeah, I have and I'm natural. Can you win the Mr. O naturally? No. Competing all depends on what you're trying to get out of it. If you're trying to become Mr. Olympia, then you're going to have to do some things that they may be doing.

If you just want to compete for you, you don't have to get on anabolics to still be competitive. It just means you're going to have to work a lot harder like I have to gain muscle naturally.


----------



## curtisfisher (Nov 9, 2014)

Another thing, don't listen to other people when it comes to changing your lifestyle. Always do what you want to do and always think about the long term and not just this year or next year.

It's important to stay true to what motivates you and not fall into the fads or what everyone else is doing because you'll notice after the years go by people will start to follow you as long as you're doing what's right.


----------



## yeaitzblitz (Nov 9, 2014)

curtisfisher said:


> Another thing, don't listen to other people when it comes to changing your lifestyle. Always do what you want to do and always think about the long term and not just this year or next year.
> 
> It's important to stay true to what motivates you and not fall into the fads or what everyone else is doing because you'll notice after the years go by people will start to follow you as long as you're doing what's right.


thanks man!


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

yeaitzblitz said:


> thanks man!


If you enhance... get ready for a lifetime of dependency (or get ready to keep having to use it for as long as you intend to compete).

hope you have a good source.

Dude... if you want my advice, keep training naturally and know that all this is your hard work. You will one day get the good physique youre after using gear (pretty much a guarantee that you will looking like you do now before gear). And when you do, GOOD LUCK WITH ALL THE "STEROIDS" COMMENTS YOU WILL GET, and good luck with having to inject or take pills just to maintain. This goes for prohormones and steroids.

If you don't mind, and you don't care then go ahead. TO be fair not everyone can build a physique they are personally happy with without assistance.


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

pro-hormone-no said:


> If you enhance... get ready for a lifetime of dependency (or get ready to keep having to use it for as long as you intend to compete).


That is not strictly true tbh.


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

andyhuggins said:


> That is not strictly true tbh.


Who actually feels happy about competing again and looking probably 100 times worse than they did when they prepped with gear? Seriously, the difference between using and not using is night and day. There's no way you can present anything short of laughable AFTER you have competed using gear... Not only will you come in smaller, but you'll be smoother. The difference will be so distinct, you'd probably be laughed at.


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

pro-hormone-no said:


> Who actually feels happy about competing again and looking probably 100 times worse than they did when they prepped with gear? Seriously, the difference between using and not using is night and day. There's no way you can present anything short of laughable AFTER you have competed using gear... Not only will you come in smaller, but you'll be smoother. The difference will be so distinct, you'd probably be laughed at.


This post has no relevance to your former post tbh :confused1:


----------



## DaveCW (Dec 9, 2013)

Yeah you can compete natty in natty feds and then perhaps if your views do change later on in life then you can make the choice.

But you don't absolutely have to use gear.

What im trying to say in a long winded way is natty's have viable options.


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

DaveCW said:


> Yeah you can compete natty in natty feds and then perhaps if your views do change later on in life then you can make the choice.
> 
> But you don't absolutely have to use gear.
> 
> What im trying to say in a long winded way is natty's have viable options.


Totally @DaveCW


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

andyhuggins said:


> This post has no relevance to your former post tbh :confused1:


They are two separate points...

I am definitely against people using gear out of desperation just to "do a show". I am not against people using it if they have thought everything through and understand the commitment. OP is clearly passionate enough about this that he wants to be doing it years down the line. He needs to understand that he will have to keep taking gear, as well as the necessary ancillaries for as long as he chooses to keep going. Not to talk of the fact that he needs to understand how taking it could possibly affect his social life, family life and even professional life.

People may disagree, but I think these are very reasonable considerations to make before jumping on.


----------



## gearchange (Mar 19, 2010)

pro-hormone-no said:


> Who actually feels happy about competing again and looking probably 100 times worse than they did when they prepped with gear? Seriously, the difference between using and not using is night and day. There's no way you can present anything short of laughable AFTER you have competed using gear... Not only will you come in smaller, but you'll be smoother. The difference will be so distinct, you'd probably be laughed at.


You are absolutely right,which is why most take the plunge..I don't think I have seen anyone natural win a big meet and those that compete in the all natural have usually as you know been on gear of some kind at one point or another.

If you are just after standing on stage and saying you did it then natty is the way to go..If you want to achieve anything of any worth then the dark side is the ONLY way to go.


----------



## diesel09 (May 27, 2009)

id agree with both the above, give the natty bodybuilding a try if gear is not something you are set on, would be some excellent experience


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

pro-hormone-no said:


> They are two separate points...
> 
> I am definitely against people using gear out of desperation just to "do a show". I am not against people using it if they have thought everything through and understand the commitment. OP is clearly passionate enough about this that he wants to be doing it years down the line.* He needs to understand that he will have to keep taking gear, as well as the necessary ancillaries for as long as he chooses to keep going. Not to talk of the fact that he needs to understand how taking it could possibly affect his social life, family life and even professional life. *
> 
> People may disagree, but I think these are very reasonable considerations to make before jumping on.


I don't agree tbh.


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

gearchange said:


> You are absolutely right,which is why most take the plunge..I don't think I have seen anyone natural win a big meet and those that compete in the all natural have usually as you know been on gear of some kind at one point or another.
> 
> If you are just after standing on stage and saying you did it then natty is the way to go..If you want to achieve anything of any worth then the dark side is the ONLY way to go.


Sorry mate but I don't agree tbh.


----------



## gearchange (Mar 19, 2010)

andyhuggins said:


> Sorry mate but I don't agree tbh.


Then explain why ? And it better be good


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

andyhuggins said:


> I don't agree tbh.


Really? Do you know anyone who has prepped enhanced and actually managed to come back prepping naturally who could present anything even remotely comparable to what they had before? I've never, ever heard of or seen it before. Guys who compete enhanced very, very rarely go on to compete naturally again. What's the point, really?

It'd be interesting to hear other peoples' opinions... But I defintiely don't think it's possible.


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

gearchange said:


> Then expline why ? And it better be good


Its just my opinion so it doesn't have to be good. I have witnessed some really good naturals compete in natural comps and pass the many tests. if people care to cheat then let them, a lot have been caught out and shamed.


----------



## gearchange (Mar 19, 2010)

andyhuggins said:


> Its just my opinion so it doesn't have to be good. I have witnessed some really good naturals compete in natural comps and pass the many tests. if people care to cheat then let them, a lot have been caught out and shamed.


Of course naturals compete in natural comps ,What has that got to do with what I said..I was just saying if you want to make a mark and end up at or close to the top you have to do what the others do ,If you want to call it cheating thats up to you.


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

andyhuggins said:


> Its just my opinion so it doesn't have to be good. I have witnessed some really good naturals compete in natural comps and pass the many tests. if people care to cheat then let them, a lot have been caught out and shamed.


THat's not what we're getting at here.

What we are saying is that it's not worth competing naturally if you've competed enhanced in the past. You'll bring a much worse physique to the stage. And just generally look like a clown. No matter how hard you would have worked.

Of COURSE it's worth competing naturally IF you're a lifetime natural and never competed enhanced before. Because at least you wouldn't have to worry about looking dramatically worse than before... after all, you'd have been less conditioned BEFORE the show, and most likely would only make improvements on your condition and size in subsequent shows.


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

gearchange said:


> You are absolutely right,which is why most take the plunge..I don't think I have seen anyone natural win a big meet and those that compete in the all natural have usually as you know been on gear of some kind at one point or another.
> 
> If you are just after standing on stage and saying you did it then natty is the way to go..If you want to achieve anything of any worth then the dark side is the ONLY way to go.


totally disagree tbh.


----------



## IGotTekkers (Jun 6, 2012)

pro-hormone-no said:


> If you enhance... get ready for a lifetime of dependency (or get ready to keep having to use it for as long as you intend to compete).
> 
> hope you have a good source.
> 
> ...


You ain't half talking a load of crap mate. Just because you have obvious psychological issues relating to your body imagine made worse by steroids don't push that into others.

Op, do you need gear to compete? Not at all, are you likely to win without it, probably not.

People are using steroids in natural and tested shows mate make no mistake.


----------



## gearchange (Mar 19, 2010)

andyhuggins said:


> totally disagree tbh.


Andy you already said that,Are we on the same page mate ?


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

andyhuggins said:


> totally disagree tbh.


Well, he's right and he's wrong.

There are some actual freaks out there who can do certain things naturally, yes. But, there are certain limits that 100% of humans cannot reach naturally. For instance in Gear Change's case, the size he has.. .cannot ABSOLUTELY CANNOT IN A MILLION YEARS be accomplished by anyone naturally. Which is why he opted for the enhanced route. So, he is pushing the human body's boundaries. Which is where I see justifiable use of gear IMO.

But for some ****ty fitness show that just calls for some decent abs and a bit of muscle? NO, I don't think you should be using gear, because those physiques are atainable naturally.


----------



## IGotTekkers (Jun 6, 2012)

pro-hormone-no said:


> THat's not what we're getting at here.
> 
> What we are saying is that it's not worth competing naturally if you've competed enhanced in the past. You'll bring a much worse physique to the stage. And just generally look like a clown. No matter how hard you would have worked.
> 
> Of COURSE it's worth competing naturally IF you're a lifetime natural and never competed enhanced before. Because at least you wouldn't have to worry about looking dramatically worse than before... after all, you'd have been less conditioned BEFORE the show, and most likely would only make improvements on your condition and size in subsequent shows.


Worse physique after steroids? Please explain in detail how post recovery from steroid use your body is less effective at losing bodyfat and water through good prep.


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

gearchange said:


> Andy you already said that,Are we on the same page mate ?


Yes I hope we are mate. It seems you are pushing the dark side as you say. There are some epic nattys out there too.


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

IGotTekkers said:


> You ain't half talking a load of crap mate. Just because you have obvious psychological issues relating to your body imagine made worse by steroids don't push that into others.
> 
> Op, do you need gear to compete? Not at all, are you likely to win without it, probably not.
> 
> People are using steroids in natural and tested shows mate make no mistake.


What you fail to realise is issues can develop due to gear use also. It's not a way for me to scare OP off taking gear. This is me telling him to think past his gains in the gym and look at the broader spectrum.


----------



## gearchange (Mar 19, 2010)

andyhuggins said:


> Yes I hope we are mate. It seems you are pushing the dark side as you say. There are some epic nattys out there too.


You misunderstand me,I am basically saying what Tekkers is saying.


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

IGotTekkers said:


> Worse physique after steroids? Please explain in detail how post recovery from steroid use your body is less effective at losing bodyfat and water through good prep.


We all know gear creates that distinct density and separation that you can't possibly hope to achieve afterwards naturally. You can clearly see huge differences in guys when they are on vs when they are off. WHat you're implying is that if you prepped and came in 190lbs enhanced, you can still come back to the stage 190lbs natural just through diet and training. Think about it.


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

I totally agree with @IGotTekkers


----------



## Frandeman (Mar 24, 2014)

Dont


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

kinda boggles the mind that Tekkers actually thinks in the absence of superphisiological doses of hormones you can still compensate with just a calorie deposit, cardio and weight training alone. Sure you can, if you're just training for the sake of it. But not if you're prepping for a bodybuilding contest.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

pro-hormone-no said:


> Who actually feels happy about competing again and looking probably 100 times worse than they did when they prepped with gear? Seriously, the difference between using and not using is night and day. There's no way you can present anything short of laughable AFTER you have competed using gear... Not only will you come in smaller, but you'll be smoother. The difference will be so distinct, you'd probably be laughed at.


well to say you have not used steroids i don't see how you can have a valid opinion on them, you used a Prohormone, you say it is pretty much gear but they are not, they are far more toxic and more risky than steroids....

and just for the record after 15yrs of competing using steroids i competed in 2006 without any steroids for 12 months and won my first overall title, i was smaller but my condition did not suffer and if you knew anything about anything you would know in general natural athletes are for the most part just as conditioned if not far better than gear users.....

you have said your piece so please do not continue to spout your anti steroid views, if you want to do this then i suggest you go to a forum for natural users or a forum for those who used a Prohormone and fukced themselves up due to the lack of research and knowledge.

to the OP, you have a good base of muscle and do not need to use any drugs to compete, there are many feds that cater for the natural BB, the BNBF is my favourite, i have many natural athletes as clients and the BNBF runs a good federation.....


----------



## IGotTekkers (Jun 6, 2012)

pro-hormone-no said:


> kinda boggles the mind that Tekkers actually thinks in the absence of superphisiological doses of hormones you can still compensate with just a calorie deposit, cardio and weight training alone.


That's not what I said. What you are saying, or what you seem to be saying is that you look worse after steroids than.you do before. That using steroids is a disadvantage to him unless he wants to use forever. What boggles my mind is how you can look worse when you are bigger and stronger than before. Doesn't make much sense


----------



## andyhuggins (Nov 21, 2008)

Pscarb said:


> well to say you have not used steroids i don't see how you can have a valid opinion on them, you used a Prohormone, you say it is pretty much gear but they are not, they are far more toxic and more risky than steroids....
> 
> and just for the record after 15yrs of competing using steroids i competed in 2006 without any steroids for 12 months and won my first overall title, i was smaller but my condition did not suffer and if you knew anything about anything you would know in general natural athletes are for the most part just as conditioned if not far better than gear users.....
> 
> ...


Well put Paul. Each to their own.


----------



## pro-hormone-no (Jun 21, 2014)

Pscarb said:


> well to say you have not used steroids i don't see how you can have a valid opinion on them, you used a Prohormone, you say it is pretty much gear but they are not, they are far more toxic and more risky than steroids....
> 
> and just for the record after 15yrs of competing using steroids i competed in 2006 without any steroids for 12 months and won my first overall title, i was smaller but my condition did not suffer and if you knew anything about anything you would know in general natural athletes are for the most part just as conditioned if not far better than gear users.....
> 
> ...


We're clearly not on the same page because that's not what I'm saying here.

*Pscarb* with all due respect. you say you competed naturally after so many years taking... I'd have to see pictures of your condition on vs off. I just don't believe you could have achieved the same condition off that you did when you were on. *Even if you came in smaller. *Like I said, the level of muscle density and separation you achieve when on vs when you're off is distinct... Otherwise, guys wouldn't prep with gear.

Also I'm not against gear like I keep saying. I'm against people who take without understanding what they are taking.

BTW... when it comes to prohormones... they are definitely just as strong as actual steroids in some cases (when it comes to gains). For instance Superdrol is basically Masteron... Look it up, Superdrol is basically a "dirtier" version of Masteron, but yes more toxic. Other than that, it's just as strong.


----------



## 3752 (Jan 7, 2005)

pro-hormone-no said:


> We're clearly not on the same page because that's not what I'm saying here.
> 
> *Pscarb* with all due respect. you say you competed naturally after so many years taking... I'd have to see pictures of your condition on vs off. I just don't believe you could have achieved the same condition off that you did when you were on. Like I said, the level of muscle density and separation you achieve when on vs when you're off is distinct... Otherwise, guys wouldn't prep with gear.
> 
> ...


all due respect i do not care what you believe, you said that you would be dramatically worse condition wise doing a show without gear which is untrue, the fact you do not believe me is irrelevant.

guys prepping with gear is down to maintaining muscle size more than anything else, if you look at any decent level natural amateur and compare them to a decent level amateur steroid user, the only difference would be the size and 9 times out of 10 the natural will be in better condition.

so superdrol is not like masteron (a week steroid by the way) as it is far more toxic than the steroid masteron, so stronger and more risky to the internal organs.....

edit, seeing as you have edited your response i will address what you just added.......

your knowledge of steroid use is very low, so i fail to see how you can say anyone else does not know what they are doing?

superdrol is a altered molecule away from masteron but it is stronger, this is pretty clear as it is more toxic thus being more toxic makes it stronger as a drug.


----------

