Thread: Bodybuilding Has Gone Bad.
-
11-19-2007, 03:21 AM #1Junior Member
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- Anaheim
- Posts
- 108
Bodybuilding Has Gone Bad.
I dont care if this has been discussed before. Im trying to prove a point.
If you compare body builder of the 50's, 60's and 70's/80's to the recents ones, you notice a HUGE differance here. Back then, bodies looked amazing and hero-like. Now These competitor looks like they got an air pump,stuck it in their skin, and inflated their muscles before shows. Its that nasty. Dont you all agree? I think they should banned all those current MONSTERS and and let heros compete again. These new bodies you see dont even look like HUMAN bodies anymore. what happen to greek gods? Comparison pics below.
Heres the HEROS:
The MONSTERS
Whats really the point of bodybuilder getting tests before shows? If you compare those guys to a man in the military, its obvious that EVERY PRO BODYBUILDER is on gear. The human body cannot get that big alone.
-
11-19-2007, 08:49 AM #2Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2004
- Location
- the dirty
- Posts
- 907
the super dry and striated muscles dont look like they are full of air, they look rock hard. banning the greatest bodybuilders on the earth is ridiculous. they arent that big because of drugs alone, its because their bodies allow the drugs to take them to a level that you cant get to. thats like saying lebron james shouldnt be able to play because he has better instincts than his competitors. pretty lame. you dont like bb'ing (i dont) that is cool but dont hate on the success of others. drugs didnt get these people to this level. decades of training and eating did.
-
11-19-2007, 04:59 PM #3
its subjective. someone like flex wheeler is a 'monster' but he had the most asthetically pleasing physique ive ever seen.
guys like victor martinez look great in this day and age
-
its all relative, years ago arnold would have been considered a freak and a monster by some.
-
11-19-2007, 06:11 PM #5
I think jay looks solid that year that photo was taken
-
11-19-2007, 08:32 PM #6
Although I can identify with your point, the "monsters" draw a crowd. On the other hand, I'm sure X-men have their own niche. Solution? We should call a truce and have two different competitions in one event: One of the "aesthetics" and one of FREAKS!
-
11-19-2007, 08:38 PM #7
i couldn't agree more gumby
-
11-19-2007, 08:40 PM #8
Thanks sugar britches!
-
11-20-2007, 06:50 PM #9
-
11-21-2007, 12:03 PM #10
FYI! Arnold took Steroids . Yeah the man has good genetics but he still took steroids. I personally wouldnt want to be as big as Jay or Ronnie, however; I respect those men for doing what they do. They didn't get like that over night. When you see someones physique, it shows how much dedication and devotion along with discipline that person has. Not like the cats that have muscle but about 80pounds of fat above it. Thats not discipline, thats lifting weights just to say you do. IMO
-
11-21-2007, 12:03 PM #11
BTW Jay has a freakin HUGE HEAD!!! I just noticed that.
-
11-21-2007, 05:17 PM #12
If arnold was around today he would look exactly the way these "monsters" do, why you ask?? Because the drugs taken today are different, if you put Cutler in Arnolds era he would have had the "Arnold" look. Allowing drugs are a touchy subject, When somethng new comes out to get people bigger and stronger, and the majority of people are taking them, then if u wanna keep up you gotta take them, its that simple.
Ohh yea, its 100!!!! percent the drugs that make them look the way they do. I am not saying these people don't work hard, they doo. But without the use of drugs NONE of them would look anywhere near as big as they do
-
11-21-2007, 09:51 PM #13
-
11-21-2007, 11:14 PM #14
I agree, but the point of that post was that if arnold was around today he would look like the "monsters" also. Its just the drugs today are different. Im sure people back in arnolds day were pissed he was on juice n thought it was unfair to the natural bodybuilders. Bottom line is these guys need to take these drugs to keep up. Bottom line.!!! and the new drugs have a diff look. I should add i prefer the "old" look over most BB'rs today.
-
11-21-2007, 11:14 PM #15
To be a pro bodybuilder you have to assume great genetics, thats a given
-
11-23-2007, 03:56 AM #16Junior Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
- Not, not UK :)
- Posts
- 103
Hey i don't mean to sound idiotic but do you think it has something to do with the availibility of gear...
for instance, back in the 60s,70s and 80s maybe it was harder to get ahold of gear, 80s probably less so - but certainly what was available would have been limited, maybe if arnold coulda got ahold of some more beastly compounds he'd have been a bigger freak and maybe with the knowledge that's now common place but wasn't so common back then.
I think that bodybuilding itself is a freakshow, and i enjoy it - these guys are almost super human in physique and it's great to watch, the average guy looks nothing like that even with a few cycles under there belt and although yea they probably are pumped to the eyeballs they still train ungodly amounts, eat well and do all the right things - to me it's just such dedication this is the life they live - gear or no gear, they are dedicated.
Sometimes i feel disheartened that i'll never be that size... but then again i don't devote the whole of my life doing it!Last edited by brianfantana; 11-23-2007 at 03:58 AM.
-
02-02-2008, 01:06 PM #17
Totally agree with this. We need to break BBing into an aesthetics contest stressing the look of the classical Greek statue, and also into a "bigness" contest where the freaks could compete.
I think the ideal body is something around the look of the late 1970s / early 1980s.
-
02-02-2008, 01:15 PM #18
I agree - Arnold is the perfect size, he manages to look awesomely massive without looking ridiculous. I dunno what it is, some of pics he looks as huge as some of the modern day monsters, but just looks better.
However, they were all on gear, just nowadays it's truck loads of gear and all sorts of other chems as well.
-
02-02-2008, 01:20 PM #19Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- mississauga
- Posts
- 703
i think these guys look friking nasty,, in a good way,, the look your going for you will find in natural shows,,if the bodybuilder's from the past were in times of present there is no doubt they would be amoung the nasty freaks
-
02-02-2008, 02:05 PM #20
When u meet them in person they look a lot better..
These are just selected pics, where u just happen to think they look disgusting, but they really don't.
-
02-02-2008, 09:30 PM #21
-
02-03-2008, 04:15 AM #22
-
05-06-2008, 12:34 PM #23
welsh warrior have you ever competed mate look awesome in avator.
-
05-06-2008, 01:40 PM #24
I agree in a way...i mean remember guys like berry Demey???...Bob paris..Lee labrada..Ron Love...trust me bro's..They drew a crowd too..
-
05-06-2008, 01:46 PM #25
I agree that 70s physiques are better looking than the actual ones, but we have to consider ONE thing:
Genetic Evolution.
If Arnold would have 27 years TODAY, he'd probably look even more a monster than a Cutler of a Henry.
No "heroes" bodies will be shown anymore imo
-
05-06-2008, 02:04 PM #26
Its just sport evolution. Records are meant to be broken no matter if its the most home runs or who is the biggest on stage. Its human nature to go bigger. From airplanes to buildings to cars to tv's to......you get my point
-
11-04-2008, 02:08 PM #27
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Location
- Scamming my brothers
- Posts
- 11,286
- Blog Entries
- 2
matter of preference i guess. I prefer the physiques without the, IMO, nasty distended ab look. The turtle tummy thing isnt aesthetically pleasing to me. I think your chest should stick out farther than your abs. I think cutler looks pretty awesome in the pic above.How far will it go (or should i say grow?) Guess we will see.
-
11-04-2008, 04:04 PM #28Associate Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Posts
- 250
arnold juiced.So did every1 in the 70s wow read up
-
11-04-2008, 07:44 PM #29
i dont know how much farther the bigness factor will progress, considering what ronnie did for the sport, the body can only get so big, until there are new drugs presented which will change the field. All crap aside, i believe all these guys deserve respect, everyone looks at them and says "STEROIDS ", they dont consider what kind of commitment is required to get to that level, not to mention dedication and sacrifice.
-
11-04-2008, 08:17 PM #30New Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Posts
- 9
steve reeves ! 1950
what you guys think of mr reeves ?, check his best stats out 29" waist 52" chest 18 1/2 "arms, calfs 18 1/2", neck 18 1/2", all in the 50s superb! this guy got his physique without juice, wow.
Last edited by REMO; 11-04-2008 at 08:23 PM.
-
11-04-2008, 08:29 PM #31
1st off nice old bump
Secondly, yes they all trained and had their diets in check and yes with the new drugs that were introduced the body was able to get bigger then what was thought to be possible. And you guys have to realize that when time goes on there will be new products/enhancement drugs out there that will allow the human body to achieve something never thought possible. Im sure back in the 70's they didnt abuse the crap out of HGH, slin, and other peptides either as they do now. Also using those substances would allow the body to want more food and also have you train just a little bit harder making it possible to grow that much more IMO.
-
11-04-2008, 08:33 PM #32Associate Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Posts
- 250
so what?who cares how big he was he was the best natural and not many naturals got to 18 inch.
-
11-05-2008, 01:01 PM #33
yeah bump this, thats the first thing people always say, steroids , they dont have a clue what goes into diet,time spent in gym,dedication and sacrifice for many years,most people cant workout consistantly for over 2 or 3 months and stay out of the fast food drive thru for more than a week,with that being said i dont care for the gh gut but i cant wait to see what the monsters will look like 20 years from now.
-
12-06-2008, 12:57 PM #34
i think guys like stan mcquay look good, that type of build..... all the big monster are just for the freak show, but not appealing to anyone, esp women...
but yes to each their own... and even when your natural people still call ya a juice head!! wtf!!!!
it is what it is.....
-
01-12-2009, 01:16 AM #35
I don't think anyone is questioning the hard work and genetics but rather the look. To some extent the mid sections on these mass monsters just looks sloppy. BB'ing, to me,has always exemplified a healthy lifestyle (yes even while on juice). But these days 1/2 the guys look terrible in the off season. How healthy is it ballon up to 70lbs over the weight you compete at?
-
01-16-2009, 03:03 AM #36New Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2008
- Posts
- 26
would you not call dexter jackson a freak? yea he was undersized compared to jay and others but i think i would label dex as a "freak." and he has one of the best midsections if not the best in the sport. not only has the sport evolved in the drugs, it has evolved in the way the competitors are perceived and judged. aesthetics are still present in pro bb'ers who are more massive than those of the 70's. just because these guys strive to be the biggest and best in the sport does not mean that u can perceive them as being unpleasant looking. its at first glance that u notice the monster size of the new generation of competitors but once u look closer and evaluate the proportion (genetics) and conditioning (discipline) of these individuals, IMO one could say that they have just as aesthetic qualities as those "heroes"
Last edited by thebigo5659; 01-16-2009 at 03:08 AM.
-
03-20-2009, 10:37 PM #37New Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Posts
- 12
I say the judges should just make sure all the parts of bodybuilding judging are in place.
Size proportion definition tone symmetry.
Personally, I am not a fan of Coleman or Yates.
Cutler maintains the best of what I mentioned in my opinion.
Coleman lacks in all but size. Legs are too large. Stomach is bloated and I see chest sag.
Yates was missing biceps in the back pose and his chest was too small or out of proportion.
Yea both Coleman and Yates are enormous but at what cost.
Arnold was close in size to both Coleman and Yates but maintained
an artistic look.
-
03-21-2009, 01:08 AM #38
I think I can agree with brown ninja and planes. I mean, I'm not hating on Coleman or Cutler or any of those guys, but they are just so ridiculously big and out-sized. When I look at Arnold, it's like "man that dude is huge, but if I work hard enough I may be able to get kinda close to that." Dude when I look at Cutler, Coleman, Yates, etc., there's no way I'll ever be able to look like that. Nor do I want to.
-
03-21-2009, 08:26 PM #39New Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Posts
- 12
-
03-25-2009, 12:30 AM #40New Member
- Join Date
- Mar 2009
- Location
- AUS
- Posts
- 20
imagine if Sergio was competing in this era. OMG.!. would be freaking insane!
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
First Test-E cycle in 10 years
11-11-2024, 03:22 PM in ANABOLIC STEROIDS - QUESTIONS & ANSWERS