Alot of people say they aspire to an arnold style physique, but.................

............can you get this physique while utilising current sports technology?

What i mean by this is guys back then had access to less injectables and orals, there was no HGH and no one was using slin. Igf-1 pg2fa etc etc was not available.
If you watch an 80's or 70's Mr olympia the guys look different then today. It's not just their size though, they have a different look. They may not be as big but they have more detail, there not just one mass of muscle, plus they look harder and you can see the muscle maturity.

So does using these other drugs effect how the body appears? HGH is reputed to cause the skin to become thicker, igf-1 and hgh cause hyperplasia etc etc.

So if guys want to get the 70's and 80's look why are they messing with these other compounds? Are they taking a shortcut to that physique or actually shooting themselves in the foot by copying current pros instead of those they want to emulate?

thas deep if your right then ive definitely released a whole clip into my feet

why wouldnt it be possible to look like that? arnold is the ultimate example of symetry and proportion, statuesk(is that how u spell it?) why would you want to look like ronnie coleman, very un- aesthetic, stomach protruding, organs and head bulging. the pros these days are a circus freak show.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdh

why wouldnt it be possible to look like that? arnold is the ultimate example of symetry and proportion, statuesk(is that how u spell it?) why would you want to look like ronnie coleman, very un- aesthetic, stomach protruding, organs and head bulging. the pros these days are a circus freak show.

---

It's funny that you use those words, like "circus freak." These same words were used against Arnold and his colleagues back in the day. Imagine what people are going to be saying about Ronnie in 20 years if bodybuilding doesn't make some kind of dramatic shift in the aesthetics department.

your right. even going back to the early 1900s bber's were regarded as freaks and even homosexual. but i dont think in 20 years from now bber's are going to be double the size they are now. give me arnolds, frank zanes, dave draper, even bill pearl back in the 50s or any other guys physiques of that era any day over todays pros.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdh

your right. even going back to the early 1900s bber's were regarded as freaks and even homosexual. but i dont think in 20 years from now bber's are going to be double the size they are now. give me arnolds, frank zanes, dave draper, even bill pearl back in the 50s or any other guys physiques of that era any day over todays pros.

---

The next generation of freaks are going to be so unbelievably huge and ripped it will blow your mind. The drugs are already in testing. Imagine this, getting insanely huge and ripped with only 4 shots of test and 1 shot of myostatin-blocking virus per year...

...Yeah. It made me pop a boner too... and I'm still natural! :lol:

im doubting that one , sorry. unless genetic altering is somehow approved where you can predetermine how your kids are going to look i cant see them being much larger. i mean your body can only carry so much weight even if it is musle. obese people eventually die and i think the same would be true if there was lets say a 6'2'' 450lb ripped to shreds bber. your body can only handle so much.

[QUOTE=PrimeIf you watch an 80's or 70's Mr olympia the guys look different then today. It's not just their size though, they have a different look. They may not be as big but they have more detail, there not just one mass of muscle, plus they look harder and you can see the muscle maturity.

[/QUOTE]

This happens to be how I perceive BBing.I honestly don't care for the look of BBers these days(Pro heavyweights/super heavyweights).The symmetry they possessed(in the 70's) was nothing short of awesome.IMO bigger is not better.It's all about symmetry.......


~Pinnacle~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdh

im doubting that one , sorry. unless genetic altering is somehow approved where you can predetermine how your kids are going to look i cant see them being much larger. i mean your body can only carry so much weight even if it is musle. obese people eventually die and i think the same would be true if there was lets say a 6'2'' 450lb ripped to shreds bber. your body can only handle so much.

---

Imagine Ronnie Coleman with a 28" waist and an extra 30lbs. That is the future of bodybuilding. :) They have created a myostatin blocking virus that only attacks the muscle it is injected into, or something like that. We will soon have walking freaks among us! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdh

im doubting that one , sorry. unless genetic altering is somehow approved where you can predetermine how your kids are going to look i cant see them being much larger. i mean your body can only carry so much weight even if it is musle. obese people eventually die and i think the same would be true if there was lets say a 6'2'' 450lb ripped to shreds bber. your body can only handle so much.

---

i don't think that any of the top level pros are to concerned about there health or they wouldn't be pumping themselves full of drugs. there is always going to be someone that comes along that will be willing to put more on the line to be on top then the next even if that means having a shortened life span. how long do you think that ronnie coleman will live to? i would say no more than 12 years from now. dieing at 52, that would suck but he chose that lifestyle to be on top.

i totally agree that ronnie will probably be dead before the age of 60. how the hell would someone say 6'2'' even walk if he weighed a ripped 450+lbs? his joints would be immobilized. its not possible for these guys to be much bigger. how the hell would someone do a squat or a bicep curl with their muscle in the way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdh

i totally agree that ronnie will probably be dead before the age of 60. how the hell would someone say 6'2'' even walk if he weighed a ripped 450+lbs? his joints would be immobilized. its not possible for these guys to be much bigger. how the hell would someone do a squat or a bicep curl with their muscle in the way?

---

you also have to think of the strain on someones heart... everytime you put on a pound of mass whether it be muscle or fat, your body needs to produce literally miles of blood vessels to supply the new tissue with oxygen and nutrients, thats just that much more vessels that your heart has to work to pump blood through, yes it is true that its better for the heart if its muscle and not fat. still depending on your height and frame when you start getting in the upper 200's in weight fat or muscle your going to be putting quite a strain on your heart and body. to get people considerably larger than some of these pro bb's are today would pretty much require a complete redesign of the human genetic code... at least if you want these people to be able to "healthily" support all that muscle.

thats exactly what im trying to say. i mean youd have to also be able to make the bone structure grow as well. you cant have 400lbs of muscle on a 6 foot frame. not possible.

Time and time again new generations have acheived what the previous generation's scientists deemed to be impossible, in all fields not just bodybuilding.
Gene therapy will lead to human beings that we can barely imagine, it is already underway....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdh

why wouldnt it be possible to look like that? arnold is the ultimate example of symetry and proportion, statuesk (is that how u spell it?) why would you want to look like ronnie coleman, very un- aesthetic, stomach protruding, organs and head bulging. the pros these days are a circus freak show.

---

statuesque. that'll be 50 cents please.

KeyMaster, that'll be 50 pence please

i realize generation by generation were advancing farther then once thought, but come on use some logic here. how the hell would someone the previous size i mentioned function? how would he even be able to lift weights? there would be so much muscle mass his range of motion would be non existent. and as far as gene therapy, once it is possible it will never be done, at least legally. and those who try it in some underground lab in a foreign country or wherever will not be looked at as someone who did something great. its liking creating a monser, like frankenstein. and that is playing with something that shouldnt be played with.

Im a little worse for wear now so please bare with me. Im not talking symmetry or aesthetics. Im talking about the actual bodybuilder presented.
If i took Jay cutler and Mohammed Makawwe and they were both in their primes and i got them to stand next to one another. Apart from jay having about 100lbs on Mo, you would notice Jay looks inflated, his muscles are not defined like Mo's, his midsection is filled out with little detail. They you look at Mo and yes he's smaller, but he looks different. Like he's a different kind of human being. His midsection is not filled out but ripped and highly defined.
http://www.fitnesspont.hu/mass-shop/.../jayvisit1.jpg http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/aaron6abig.jpg
He looks smaller but denser. Jay looks almost like he's been inflated.
My point which i seem to have gone around the houses about and in the prosess have lost everyone it seemes was this.
By using alternative means can the same result be acheived, or by using slin, hgh etc is the 80's physique unnatainable due to the effects these specific compounds have on the body?

todays BBs are so full of synthohol or some kind of mct oil that its just not funny... I would take a frank zane body over ronnies any day... easier to mantain and better on the heart...

also chicks like muscle, but not freaky bloated guys

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jdh

i realize generation by generation were advancing farther then once thought, but come on use some logic here. how the hell would someone the previous size i mentioned function? how would he even be able to lift weights? there would be so much muscle mass his range of motion would be non existent. and as far as gene therapy, once it is possible it will never be done, at least legally. and those who try it in some underground lab in a foreign country or wherever will not be looked at as someone who did something great. its liking creating a monser, like frankenstein. and that is playing with something that shouldnt be played with.

---

Alot of people would consider playing around with hormones as playing with something that shouldnt be played with, gene therapy is the inevitable next step.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotSmall

Alot of people would consider playing around with hormones as playing with something that shouldnt be played with, gene therapy is the inevitable next step.

---

Spot on. Humans are crazy creatures. They always bring up the past but never the complete past, only what they want to remember. They always look towards the future but only the future that is applicable to today.

Whenever I think that something is impossible to do with science I always think back to good old Bill Gates and his famous quote.

640K ought to be enough for anybody.
--Bill Gates, 1981

Bill Gates is a homo.

I agree exactly on what was said about how bodybuilders back when ARE better than the builders of today. It's because all this shit they pump into themselves today.

Back then, Im not sure how much they would inject, but today it sounds to me like it's a lot. And bodybuilders of the FUTURE, will have more tragedies when trying to defeat bodybuilders of today. I garantee there will be a death or two and many health issues in the future because people aren't bodybuilding, they are bodygrowing.
And if there are some deaths in the future from overroiding (if this is possible) then that makes more trouble for everyone else to use them properly.

However, there is a way to make the GIANTS of the future not exist. By we ourselves changing our looks into PROPER building. Then once these retards we see today are gone, there will jsut be us, and nothing more to compete with.

Anyhoo, anyone else agree with me besides the thread starter.. who, by the way, has a very good point.
Good job man! :wg:

Quick little edit:

What DID arnold and all them use for cycles. Im curious. Like to see a comparison of how much juice was used then and now.

Lots of dbol back in those days. But that was just part of it. They had injectables and about every AAS we have today. Almost all AAS is pretty old stuff dating back to the 50's, it hasn't changed much. It's the growth factors and the use of slin that has changed BB'n. Vet AAS is usually the cutting edge stuff, not human grade.

I know a Chinese dude up in my area that is bigger than a house. No way his genetics were going to make him 250lbs ripped, natty. This guy is a freak show at about 7-8% bf too. He looks good IMO cause he seems to have a very good diet. But then again he's a GH/slin junkie that is too far gone to where he may cause himself future health problems? But then again, there is no solid proof of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnaX

However, there is a way to make the GIANTS of the future not exist. By we ourselves changing our looks into PROPER building. Then once these retards we see today are gone, there will jsut be us, and nothing more to compete with.

---

Eh? :scratch:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NotSmall

Eh? :scratch:

---

Precisely.

ive seen and read some stuff arnold and the other greats of his said they did and i really dont remember them ever really mentioning using injectibles of any kind. i do remember them stating they used lots of orals like dbol but dont recall anything else.

Prime u still want those pics of me oild up?

I would say Frank Zane has a great body. The modern day BB are so animal like. Huge and thick, they're like some underground lab test subject gone wrong. 70's and 80's had one of the finest breed of BB IMO.

Dbol and test were the drugs back then. No need for comlicated cycles and ungodly dosages! Dbol was used at 10mgs ED, now newbs are jumping right onto 50mgs ED!

frank zane was pretty awesome. id have to agree with the bodybuilders of the 70s and 80s as being the best. but id even go back a little further and look at guys like bill pearl, steve reeves and guys of that era and say that they looked pretty impressive despite hardly having any type of supplements and the advanced science we have now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Prime

Im a little worse for wear now so please bare with me. Im not talking symmetry or aesthetics. Im talking about the actual bodybuilder presented.
If i took Jay cutler and Mohammed Makawwe and they were both in their primes and i got them to stand next to one another. Apart from jay having about 100lbs on Mo, you would notice Jay looks inflated, his muscles are not defined like Mo's, his midsection is filled out with little detail. They you look at Mo and yes he's smaller, but he looks different. Like he's a different kind of human being. His midsection is not filled out but ripped and highly defined.
http://www.fitnesspont.hu/mass-shop/.../jayvisit1.jpg http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/aaron6abig.jpg
He looks smaller but denser. Jay looks almost like he's been inflated.
My point which i seem to have gone around the houses about and in the prosess have lost everyone it seemes was this.
By using alternative means can the same result be acheived, or by using slin, hgh etc is the 80's physique unnatainable due to the effects these specific compounds have on the body?

---

Prime...I see what you are getting at.Let's take Chris Cook for an example.He was natty for many years til he admittedly went to steroids to make the step into pro level competition.But look at his physique.He has a very narrow waist and large upper body similar to the BBers of yesteryear.So IMO you can achieve that physique even with all the newer drugs available on the market these days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darkness

Dbol and test were the drugs back then. No need for comlicated cycles and ungodly dosages! Dbol was used at 10mgs ED, now newbs are jumping right onto 50mgs ED!

---

I think that is total BS that Arnold said they used low amounts of dbol. I don't think so, you know they used more than 10mgs ed. I would say their diet and training was perfect with a moderate-high amount of AAS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seattle Junk

I think that is total BS that Arnold said they used low amounts of dbol. I don't think so, you know they used more than 10mgs ed. I would say their diet and training was perfect with a moderate-high amount of AAS.

---

has anyone in this forum ran 600mg/week of primo for an entire year

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seattle Junk

I think that is total BS that Arnold said they used low amounts of dbol. I don't think so, you know they used more than 10mgs ed. I would say their diet and training was perfect with a moderate-high amount of AAS.

---

you would be correct. they used to have the "bowl" a candy dish filled with orals. Hit the "bowl", grabbing a handfull of "goodies" and then hit the gym

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinnacle

Prime...I see what you are getting at.Let's take Chris Cook for an example.He was natty for many years til he admittedly went to steroids to make the step into pro level competition.But look at his physique.He has a very narrow waist and large upper body similar to the BBers of yesteryear.So IMO you can achieve that physique even with all the newer drugs available on the market these days.

---

Chris Cook to me looks nothing like the bodybuilders of yesteryear, i think he doesnt even look as good as the current crop.

how can you compare chris cook with the likes of arnold, dave draper, dave katz, etc? he looks nothing like them. i personally think there is something about him that makes him look stupid as hell, well i guess id say that about all the pros.

I think even Dorian Yates looked better than guys like Ronnie and Cutler!

So, they took dbol and other orals.... hmmm