- There is no such thing as “bad genetics” or “good genetics”. There are genetic predispositions that are better for one thing and others that are suited for different stuff. As bodybuilders we tend to limit “genetics” to the capacity to build muscle. The truth of the matter is that not everybody is designed to be hugely muscular. Some have the “starting material” to be better at endurance activities, others at motor skill work, etc. I’m 5’8", I do not have the “genetics” to be an NBA star… but that doesn’t mean that I have “bad genetics”.
This was actually the REAL strength of the former Soviet sport system (and now the Chinese one): they would determine what your body is designed to be good at and forced you to take part of that sport.
- Okay with that out of the way, let’s talk “bodybuilding genetics”… basically how your body will respond to growth-producing stimuli and how easily it can get and stay lean. YES some people have better predispositions than others. But just because you look buff without training doesn’t mean that if you trained hard you would become a freak. On the other hand, just because you are small before training doesn’t mean that you don’t have huge growth potential.
I know a lot of naturally big guys who actually didn’t become much bigger when they started training hard. I also know plenty of guys who where muscular, lean and strong looking in high school without even training, who actually look worse now even though they are training.
I have also encountered plenty of guys who were smallish when they were young, but are now huge. A good example of this is Training Lab athlete Alex Raymond. At one point in high school he was something like 140 on 5’9". He told me a funny story; a woman added him on Facebook (she was friend of one of his contact) and told him how amazing he looked (on his pic he is 230 in contest shape).
It turned out that Alex knew the girl because they actually went to high school together and she was part of a group that made fun of him for being small and geeky looking! Went he confronted her, she did not believe that it was the same guy.
Anyway, now with his size and especially width, everybody thinks that he is a genetic freak. At 140 nobody would have thunk that!
But it turns out that when he was 140, he was barely eating (anorexic). Even at 18 he barely went up to 160. Sometimes you might have the right genetic predisposition (genotype) to be big and muscular but the things he is doing prevent him from attaining his potential (phenotype).
It doesn’t mean that everybody has great muscle building genetics, but it means that unless you do everything right FOR LONG ENOUGH TO SEE SIGNIFICANT RESULTS you cannot know how good your genetics are.
Another good example of this is my friend Pascal Caron who was a 2-times member of the Canadian Olympic Bobsled team. In high school he was a cross-country runner and 135 on 5’7". When he switched to running track and lifting heavy weights he went up to 187 with one of the thickest chest I’ve seen on a guy that size and less than 8% body fat year round. At one point he was bench pressing 435lbs. When he would stop training he drop down to 140-145 then would go back up to 180 within months of training again. Again, you would never believe that he had good genetics when he is at his smallest.
On the other hand of the spectrum, I played football with guy who was 267 on 5’11", ran a 4.65 and bench pressed 315 x 5 reps at 19 years of age. He also sounded as dumb as heck. Well, I saw him 5 years later, he was now 190 and finishing his Ph.D.!!!
My own little brother is a good example of good size genetics, but not doing anything with it. When he was 17 he trained with me for 6 months. After 6 months he was 290 on 5’10" and deadlifted 550 for 5 reps. He stopped training altogether, focused on golf. Now he is a skinny fat 190.
Genetics is one thing, but what you make of it is another.