Late 80s early 90s bodybuilders are small

[GearHeaded]

Ok so you hear lots of guys talking about how great the "golden era" and early 90s bodybuilders are. that they had the best physiques. you also hear that not only are these guys the most aesthetic, but they also had access to only 'real drugs' back then.

you hear guys saying that these "real drugs" from back in the day were super potent and you only needed low doses. and that the modern days use of HGH, Insulin , Peptides, Sarms , etc.. is a waste of time and not needed, all you need is quality pharma AAS.

ok then why the hell are these guys all so damn small ? the video link below is showing OLYMPIA competitors. not average guys, these are the best in the world at that time . but watch a few clips from the video and see how small these guys are in comparison to todays Olmpians. there is no comparison.

so whats changed. why are guys today so much more massive, heck even mens physique guys now days are as big as some of the guys in the vid. diet and training a basically the same . so it can only be the drugs. its gotta be the more advanced AAS protocols of today along with the HGH, Insulin, IGF, Peptides, etc. that are making a huge difference.

see some of these guys weigh in and notice how small they are compared to today. like 14:45 min mark




the only guy in the end that can even compare is Lee Haney . but most these guys couldn't even stand on an Olympia stage today. so I'm not sure why guys are caught up in referring to this time as the best time in bodybuilding or a "golden era".

looking at pics of these guys standing alone in magazines is one thing .. but watching the vid you really get to see how small some of them are.

[charger69]

Ok so you hear lots of guys talking about how great the "golden era" and early 90s bodybuilders are. that they had the best physiques. you also hear that not only are these guys the most aesthetic, but they also had access to only 'real drugs' back then.

you hear guys saying that these "real drugs" from back in the day were super potent and you only needed low doses. and that the modern days use of HGH, Insulin , Peptides, Sarms , etc.. is a waste of time and not needed, all you need is quality pharma AAS.

ok then why the hell are these guys all so damn small ? the video link below is showing OLYMPIA competitors. not average guys, these are the best in the world at that time . but watch a few clips from the video and see how small these guys are in comparison to todays Olmpians. there is no comparison.

so whats changed. why are guys today so much more massive, heck even mens physique guys now days are as big as some of the guys in the vid. diet and training a basically the same . so it can only be the drugs. its gotta be the more advanced AAS protocols of today along with the HGH, Insulin, IGF, Peptides, etc. that are making a huge difference.

see some of these guys weigh in and notice how small they are compared to today. like 14:45 min mark




the only guy in the end that can even compare is Lee Haney . but most these guys couldn't even stand on an Olympia stage today. so I'm not sure why guys are caught up in referring to this time as the best time in bodybuilding or a "golden era".

looking at pics of these guys standing alone in magazines is one thing .. but watching the vid you really get to see how small some of them are.

WTF- I am going to weigh more than Albert Beckles????
I just said the other day what was in the video.... I do not want or crave sweets until on my cutting diet then I just want to eat them. LOL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Proximal]

Definitely hear you GH & more than agree.

Still the old M & F days (pre Flex magazine), were kind of fun. I screwed up, when I moved out here I should have at least worked out at Vince's a couple of times.

[ghettoboyd]

Thanks for posting this video I actually watched the whole thing and besides the cheesy music it was fun seeing how it was back in that era...

[Couchlockd]

Ok so you hear lots of guys talking about how great the "golden era" and early 90s bodybuilders are. that they had the best physiques. you also hear that not only are these guys the most aesthetic, but they also had access to only 'real drugs' back then.

you hear guys saying that these "real drugs" from back in the day were super potent and you only needed low doses. and that the modern days use of HGH, Insulin , Peptides, Sarms , etc.. is a waste of time and not needed, all you need is quality pharma AAS.

ok then why the hell are these guys all so damn small ? the video link below is showing OLYMPIA competitors. not average guys, these are the best in the world at that time . but watch a few clips from the video and see how small these guys are in comparison to todays Olmpians. there is no comparison.

so whats changed. why are guys today so much more massive, heck even mens physique guys now days are as big as some of the guys in the vid. diet and training a basically the same . so it can only be the drugs. its gotta be the more advanced AAS protocols of today along with the HGH, Insulin, IGF, Peptides, etc. that are making a huge difference.

see some of these guys weigh in and notice how small they are compared to today. like 14:45 min mark




the only guy in the end that can even compare is Lee Haney . but most these guys couldn't even stand on an Olympia stage today. so I'm not sure why guys are caught up in referring to this time as the best time in bodybuilding or a "golden era".

looking at pics of these guys standing alone in magazines is one thing .. but watching the vid you really get to see how small some of them are.

I believe alot of people who are on the "golden era" bandwagon, are under the misconception that the guys were drug free

Also yeah the pharma gear argument, lol so it being extremely potent would mean it's completely overdosed according to label statement. Then it in fact would not be legit pharma.

200mg is 200mg.

[i_SLAM_cougars]

I believe alot of people who are on the "golden era" bandwagon, are under the misconception that the guys were drug free

Also yeah the pharma gear argument, lol so it being extremely potent would mean it's completely overdosed according to label statement. Then it in fact would not be legit pharma.

200mg is 200mg.

Well it doesn’t help when you’ve got fucking Arnold Schwarzenegger telling people he took 3 5mg dianabol tablets a day. I’m pretty sure, that just like now, these guys were secretly taking ALL the goods they could, and then bullshitting everyone.

[AR's King Silabolin]

Ok so you hear lots of guys talking about how great the "golden era" and early 90s bodybuilders are. that they had the best physiques. you also hear that not only are these guys the most aesthetic, but they also had access to only 'real drugs' back then.

you hear guys saying that these "real drugs" from back in the day were super potent and you only needed low doses. and that the modern days use of HGH, Insulin , Peptides, Sarms , etc.. is a waste of time and not needed, all you need is quality pharma AAS.

ok then why the hell are these guys all so damn small ? the video link below is showing OLYMPIA competitors. not average guys, these are the best in the world at that time . but watch a few clips from the video and see how small these guys are in comparison to todays Olmpians. there is no comparison.

so whats changed. why are guys today so much more massive, heck even mens physique guys now days are as big as some of the guys in the vid. diet and training a basically the same . so it can only be the drugs. its gotta be the more advanced AAS protocols of today along with the HGH, Insulin, IGF, Peptides, etc. that are making a huge difference.

see some of these guys weigh in and notice how small they are compared to today. like 14:45 min mark




the only guy in the end that can even compare is Lee Haney . but most these guys couldn't even stand on an Olympia stage today. so I'm not sure why guys are caught up in referring to this time as the best time in bodybuilding or a "golden era".

looking at pics of these guys standing alone in magazines is one thing .. but watching the vid you really get to see how small some of them are.

I have yet to hear that They say late 80s early 90s was the prime era.
No... The top era, if not today, was late 90s, especially around British GP 99. Flexes legs were So fucking Great back then. And Levrone and Coleman. And i can understand why some say Heath and maybe Cutler are the only ones who could fit in. Big Ramys weeknessis would make him play 2. Violin.

Sent fra min BLA-L29 via Tapatalk

[Charlie67]

so whats changed. .... so it can only be the drugs. its gotta be the more advanced AAS protocols of today along with the HGH, Insulin , IGF, Peptides, etc. that are making a huge difference.

That's part of it, sure, but I'm also inclined to say that it's natural progression, as it is in nearly any sport. No one gets bigger/faster/stronger until the guy before him does. It's incremental change over time based on the newest champions performance.

Babe Ruth hits 714, Hank Aaron 755, Bonds 762

Arnold goes on state at 230, Lee haney 260, Yates 265, Cutler 275.... Etc.

Climbing a mountain, swimming the English channel.... Things always get better and faster because we know more.

Best,
C-

[GearHeaded]

I have yet to hear that They say late 80s early 90s was the prime era.
No... The top era, if not today, was late 90s, especially around British GP 99. Flexes legs were So fucking Great back then. And Levrone and Coleman. And i can understand why some say Heath and maybe Cutler are the only ones who could fit in. Big Ramys weeknessis would make him play 2. Violin.

it was the era just before the mass monsters (dorian, Ronnie, gunther, Markus ruhl, Nsser, etc, which is the era your referring to).. it was considered a prime era supposedly because of aesthetics. but again, most these guys are all very small compared to todays standards . someone like a Regan Grimes has great classic aesthetics ,yet still weighs 290 in the off seasons and 245 on stage (way bigger then a lot of the guys in the video)

[Octaneforce]

I think modern communication plays a role, especially the internet. Its easy for guys with great genetics to get noticed now a days. You barely even have to sell yourself, just post a pic lookinng fucking huge and when they go viral they basically become celebrities. Back in the 80’s it was much harder to market yourself imo. The FREAKS were probably out there, we just didnt know who they were. Just a thought.

[< <Samson> >]

Sure, now we have this guy around

[Octaneforce]

Sure, now we have this guy around

I wonder if hes on this forum lol. Thats so fuckin insane.

[< <Samson> >]

I don’t even wanna know ^

[Proximal]

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl...cQMyg0egQIARB3

https://www.ironmanmagazine.com/wp-c...o-1971-FDB.jpg


Who ya calling small?

[Beetlegeuse]

Is this assessment of "small" based on actual measurements or just on their appearances in photographs? Because photography always involves a property called "perspective," and perspective can make the small look larger and the large look smaller.


Looks can be deceiving

Where I'm going with this is that in the 80s & 90s, BB was still sort of a fledgling (and fringe) sport. Photographers probably were doing the bulk of their photographing of body-builders with a 'normal' lens. A 'normal' lens is a focal length that is neither fish-eye nor telephoto so it portrays proportions similarly to the way the human eye would. So to the human eye, the proportions of something shot with a normal lens looks ...normal. Back in the days when cameras used this stuff called "film," and the most common camera was 35mm, the 'normal' lens was 100mm (but it's a different focal length with other camera formats). So a 100mm lens was what people like portrait photographers would use, because that portrayed the subject in a perspective similar to what the human eye would see.

Photographers always have tinkered with perspective for dramatic effect but it's especially common since the advent of digital photography. The perfect example is the professional titty model. I'm thinking women like Jordan Carver, Denise Melani and Tessa Fowler. Not that any of them would ever be mistaken for flat-chested but their photographers use special lenses and 'techniques' to make their bazooms look even more gargantuan.

So if you're involved in the business side of bodybuilding -- management, promotion or even photography -- your livelihood is based in part on what the average person views as the "spectacle" of these gigantic men (and women). So why wouldn't you want your photographers twisting perspective a bit to make them look even more gigantic-er ?

In principle it's no different from oiling up. It's all about appearances.

So back to my original question. Have their measurements increased that much or do they just look it in pictures and videos?

[i_SLAM_cougars]

Doesn’t seem extraordinary far off, though Phil Heath is no mass monster...

[Octaneforce]

Doesn’t seem extraordinary far off, though Phil Heath is no mass monster...

Arnolds hip measurement had to of been tighter than 33 inches.

[i_SLAM_cougars]

Arnolds hip measurement had to of been tighter than 33 inches.

I think that’s accurate. He was renowned for having kind of a naturally wide waist

[Family_guy]

I think that’s accurate. He was renowned for having kind of a naturally wide waist

Ya it’s an optical illusion that he has a narrow waist. He just has a huge chest and shoulders. If you see him next to Sergio Olivia it’s not even close. Sergio’s waist makes Arnold look so blocky by comparison

[GearHeaded]

Arnold wasn't really very big either compared to todays standard

[kelkel]

Something to think about is the fact that most guys here have never seen one of the top pro's in person, face to face. Seeing them in pictures only is simply not comparable to in person. Not even close.

[GearHeaded]

Something to think about is the fact that most guys here have never seen one of the top pro's in person, face to face. Seeing them in pictures only is simply not comparable to in person. Not even close.

this is very true . in reality, anyone thats over 200 pounds and very lean like these guys getting on stage in the 80s, is 'big' by all intents and purposes.
this is by no means easy to achieve . guess "big" is a relative term here and we are comparing big to ginormous . 270 pounds on stage and 5% body fat is huge

[i_SLAM_cougars]

This has been my idea of big for the last 15-20 years...


I would say that being white I have a bit of a genetic hurdle to overcome in the muscle building department (that’s what the PEDs are for anyway), but Markus Ruhl wasn’t far off this when he really nailed it. Like at the 2002 night of champions

[MuscleScience]

This has been my idea of big for the last 15-20 years...


I would say that being white I have a bit of a genetic hurdle to overcome in the muscle building department (that’s what the PEDs are for anyway), but Markus Ruhl wasn’t far off this when he really nailed it. Like at the 2002 night of champions

That’s because Ruhl had great Germanic genetics, just like me

[Cuz]

This has been my idea of big for the last 15-20 years...


I would say that being white I have a bit of a genetic hurdle to overcome in the muscle building department (that’s what the PEDs are for anyway), but Markus Ruhl wasn’t far off this when he really nailed it. Like at the 2002 night of champions

Markus was unbelievable. Just unbelievably huge so was Gunter . Ronnie ...and dont get me wrong I love Ronnie, but i think he was a little over exasperated in terms of size. Lots of big guys competed against, ill just leave this here

[Cuz]

Arnold wasn't really very big either compared to todays standard

I agree obviously todays bodybuilder is gonna be bigger than a bodybuilder 40 years ago. Just like a fast car in 1975 is gonna be slower than a fast car of 2019...well alot slower but the analogy remains.

Also thats a very biased picture of Arnold and a very competition ready Coleman. Lol i just har to point that out. Good post and good points