Getting a Physique Like Eugen Sandow

Training
41

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:

I didn’t mean to come across as defensive,(but then it doesn’t help when you have an idiot cousin over trying to talk you into going back to partying and drinking after 1 full year away from it…that can get you kinda aggrivated).

[/quote]

LOLWUT

I just read through this whole thread, and after I read this comment, in conjunction with how obstinate and strange you’ve been, I assumed you were 23 at the oldest. YOU’RE 39???[/quote]

Hmm because someone has diffrent training goals that makes them strange???

LOL!!To qoute my 6 year old neice “shame shame you shouldn’t pick on people just cause they are diffrent.”

it’s funny when she says it but it’s smart too![/quote]

Did I say your training goals were strange? No, your goals are reasonable. You have a particular look, measurements, and strength that are absolutely attainable. Your entire approach to the subject is strange, and I DON’T think you have a firm grasp of how muscular development is achieved. I think it was weird that you went straight to the ‘some people want to look like Jay Cutler but I don’t!’ argument. Nobody’s talking about that. It’s not as if everyone wants to look like Eugene Sandow or Jay Cutler, with no middle ground. What’s strange is that you seem to think the best way to achieve these results is by 100 year old methods in a book you came across.
Furthermore, I don’t understand the point of the thread. If nothing was going to change your mind about how to reach your goals, then why even start a thread asking for input? Just looking for affirmation? Why don’t you just start a training log, show all of us naysayers how foolish we really are! lol.

42

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:

I didn’t mean to come across as defensive,(but then it doesn’t help when you have an idiot cousin over trying to talk you into going back to partying and drinking after 1 full year away from it…that can get you kinda aggrivated).

[/quote]

LOLWUT

I just read through this whole thread, and after I read this comment, in conjunction with how obstinate and strange you’ve been, I assumed you were 23 at the oldest. YOU’RE 39???[/quote]

Hmm because someone has diffrent training goals that makes them strange???

LOL!!To qoute my 6 year old neice “shame shame you shouldn’t pick on people just cause they are diffrent.”

it’s funny when she says it but it’s smart too![/quote]

Did I say your training goals were strange? No, your goals are reasonable. You have a particular look, measurements, and strength that are absolutely attainable. Your entire approach to the subject is strange, and I DON’T think you have a firm grasp of how muscular development is achieved. I think it was weird that you went straight to the ‘some people want to look like Jay Cutler but I don’t!’ argument. Nobody’s talking about that. It’s not as if everyone wants to look like Eugene Sandow or Jay Cutler, with no middle ground. What’s strange is that you seem to think the best way to achieve these results is by 100 year old methods in a book you came across.
Furthermore, I don’t understand the point of the thread. If nothing was going to change your mind about how to reach your goals, then why even start a thread asking for input?

Just looking for affirmation? Why don’t you just start a training log, show all of us naysayers how foolish we really are! lol.
[/quote]

well i have looked allover this site and I don’t se anywhere I can keep track of my results at
=(

43

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:

[quote]flipcollar wrote:

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:

I didn’t mean to come across as defensive,(but then it doesn’t help when you have an idiot cousin over trying to talk you into going back to partying and drinking after 1 full year away from it…that can get you kinda aggrivated).

[/quote]

LOLWUT

I just read through this whole thread, and after I read this comment, in conjunction with how obstinate and strange you’ve been, I assumed you were 23 at the oldest. YOU’RE 39???[/quote]

Hmm because someone has diffrent training goals that makes them strange???

LOL!!To qoute my 6 year old neice “shame shame you shouldn’t pick on people just cause they are diffrent.”

it’s funny when she says it but it’s smart too![/quote]

Did I say your training goals were strange? No, your goals are reasonable. You have a particular look, measurements, and strength that are absolutely attainable. Your entire approach to the subject is strange, and I DON’T think you have a firm grasp of how muscular development is achieved. I think it was weird that you went straight to the ‘some people want to look like Jay Cutler but I don’t!’ argument. Nobody’s talking about that. It’s not as if everyone wants to look like Eugene Sandow or Jay Cutler, with no middle ground. What’s strange is that you seem to think the best way to achieve these results is by 100 year old methods in a book you came across.
Furthermore, I don’t understand the point of the thread. If nothing was going to change your mind about how to reach your goals, then why even start a thread asking for input?

Just looking for affirmation? Why don’t you just start a training log, show all of us naysayers how foolish we really are! lol.
[/quote]

well i have looked allover this site and I don’t se anywhere I can keep track of my results at
=(
[/quote]
http://tnation.T-Nation.com/free_online_forum/blog_sports_body_training_performance_bodybuilding_log?pageNo=1&s=forumsNavTop

44

You said you’re 39 right? You can also start one in the Over 35 Lifter fourm. I’m thinking of starting one in there after I heal up from my surgery.

45

Seriously, if by the age of 39 you don’t at least have the size equal to Sandow and more, I doubt your genetics to ever look even that impressive.

Sandow wasn’t working with the weakest genetics. He would be Lee Priest if he was born in this era.

46

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Seriously, if by the age of 39 you don’t at least have the size equal to Sandow and more, I doubt your genetics to ever look even that impressive.

Sandow wasn’t working with the weakest genetics. He would be Lee Priest if he was born in this era.[/quote]

Most people dont have great genetics for powerlifting or bodybuilding or whatever, but most people can if they put in enough effort build a BETTER physique for tomorrow than they have today. I dont know what he means with a physique like Sandow, but my guess is that he want a lean and muscular body, that shouldnt be impossible for him.

47

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Seriously, if by the age of 39 you don’t at least have the size equal to Sandow and more, I doubt your genetics to ever look even that impressive.

Sandow wasn’t working with the weakest genetics. He would be Lee Priest if he was born in this era.[/quote]

Most people dont have great genetics for powerlifting or bodybuilding or whatever, but most people can if they put in enough effort build a BETTER physique for tomorrow than they have today. I dont know what he means with a physique like Sandow, but my guess is that he want a lean and muscular body, that shouldnt be impossible for him.

[/quote]

He seems to think training like Sandow will make him look like Sandow. I do believe most of us have written that he needs to focus on the basics of building muscle instead of focusing on 100 year old training routines.

Also, lets get serious, if by 39 you have never even held an “athletic build” and think routines from 100 years ago haven’t been manipulated and perfected since, I am thinking looking like Sandow is going to be a way harder task than it needs to be.

48

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Seriously, if by the age of 39 you don’t at least have the size equal to Sandow and more, I doubt your genetics to ever look even that impressive.

Sandow wasn’t working with the weakest genetics. He would be Lee Priest if he was born in this era.[/quote]

Most people dont have great genetics for powerlifting or bodybuilding or whatever, but most people can if they put in enough effort build a BETTER physique for tomorrow than they have today. I dont know what he means with a physique like Sandow, but my guess is that he want a lean and muscular body, that shouldnt be impossible for him.

[/quote]

He seems to think training like Sandow will make him look like Sandow. I do believe most of us have written that he needs to focus on the basics of building muscle instead of focusing on 100 year old training routines.

Also, lets get serious, if by 39 you have never even held an “athletic build” and think routines from 100 years ago haven’t been manipulated and perfected since, I am thinking looking like Sandow is going to be a way harder task than it needs to be.
[/quote]

I see your point and I agree.

49

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]florelius wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Seriously, if by the age of 39 you don’t at least have the size equal to Sandow and more, I doubt your genetics to ever look even that impressive.

Sandow wasn’t working with the weakest genetics. He would be Lee Priest if he was born in this era.[/quote]

Most people dont have great genetics for powerlifting or bodybuilding or whatever, but most people can if they put in enough effort build a BETTER physique for tomorrow than they have today. I dont know what he means with a physique like Sandow, but my guess is that he want a lean and muscular body, that shouldnt be impossible for him.

[/quote]

He seems to think training like Sandow will make him look like Sandow. I do believe most of us have written that he needs to focus on the basics of building muscle instead of focusing on 100 year old training routines.

(The basics exercsies and principles today was the basic exercises and prinicples 100 years ago)

Also, lets get serious, if by 39 you have never even held an “athletic build” and think routines from 100 years ago haven’t been manipulated and perfected since, I am thinking looking like Sandow is going to be a way harder task than it needs to be.

(Look they worked fine then they’ll work now! Maybe a tad bit slower but all that matters is they work!

Does it really matter that much to you people that I should “get with the program” i.e; use todays pump ,blitz,blast and tone programs,and shoot for a physique based on 21st century physique ideals,instead of training ollllld school and aiming for a Victorian era style muscular physique?

Because thats the vibe I keep getting dudes: it’s like give up that old school phsyique and training goal,get with the 21st century physique ideals and training methods. I mean Jesus Christ on a jumped up chariot driven sidecar,you’d think I was in Bodybuidling.com from the reactions,I avoid them because I am well aware from friends how they are over there.

Only 1 person that posted in here right off the bat said it was nice goals I had set and wished me luck,everyone else instead I feel has tried to stear me toward a 21st century style physique goal,and training methods,honestly if i had of known thats what would have happened i’d have never even chirped my goal on this site,because I feel like peeps are trying to pressure me into changing my goal to conform to their ideas on the type phsyqiue i should shoot for and the type of training for that type of physique! Just saying thats how I feel peeps are doing!)
[/quote]

And honestly part of the reason i am training on the old milo routines is i like those old lifts and you can’t exactly work them into a modern training routine to good effect,and when I said “like” and I should have made this clear from the beginning I meant a phsyique similar to his based on the old Grecian ideal,I didn’t meant literaly it look exactly like his.

50

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:
I was wondering if anyone here could give me some advice on training to get a physique similar to Mr.Sandow. I mena I realize i’ll prbably have to go with older training medthods then what is used now to replicate a phsyique similar to the Sandow Physique.[/quote]

This was part of your original post to which most of us replied that the 100+ year old methods would not get you to your goal, i.e. a well proportioned, muscular, low body fat physique. You asked for advice and most people told you that you would probably be better off following a more modern split than a program designed before squat racks and weight benches.

You seem to be offended that we did not tell you what you want to hear and ignored almost all the advice you were given. I personally don’t care how you want to train and I think it is great that you want improve your physique. The problem is that you asked about a method that is less than optimal, meaning you probably won’t achieve your goal, will get discouraged, and quit.

You were also told if you disagree then start a training log and prove us wrong. I would add to take before and after pictures. No one is trying to discourage you, but there is a reason that basically NO ONE trains that way anymore. Either way, good luck (in all seriousness).

51

[quote]ryno76 wrote:

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:
I was wondering if anyone here could give me some advice on training to get a physique similar to Mr.Sandow. I mena I realize i’ll prbably have to go with older training medthods then what is used now to replicate a phsyique similar to the Sandow Physique.[/quote]

This was part of your original post to which most of us replied that the 100+ year old methods would not get you to your goal, i.e. a well proportioned, muscular, low body fat physique. You asked for advice and most people told you that you would probably be better off following a more modern split than a program designed before squat racks and weight benches.

You seem to be offended that we did not tell you what you want to hear and ignored almost all the advice you were given. I personally don’t care how you want to train and I think it is great that you want improve your physique. The problem is that you asked about a method that is less than optimal, meaning you probably won’t achieve your goal, will get discouraged, and quit.

You were also told if you disagree then start a training log and prove us wrong. I would add to take before and after pictures. No one is trying to discourage you, but there is a reason that basically NO ONE trains that way anymore. Either way, good luck (in all seriousness).[/quote]

Well I didn’t think people would start trying to tell me I should go for a boigger physqiue either.
NO ONE trains that way anymore?/ if that was true then Bill Hinbern would have his website and people wouldn’t be saying this about the Henry Higgins muscle and strength course.

Thanks for The Henry Higgins Strength and Muscle Course. It sure is different! I’ve trained with barbells for years. Training with dumbbells is different. It requires more balance and develops better coordination. Thanks, again, Bill."
Charles P.
Hartford, Maine

Just received The Henry Higgins Strength and Muscle Course and canâ??t wait to start training like the old time strong men.â??
Mark H.
Norwalk, Connecticut

and from the York Courses on that site:

Hello Bill, I have been doing the York Barbell and Dumbbell System Course Number 3… it is amazing! I find it unbelievably energizing. I am sweating like I never have before, and it is like you all of a sudden realize, man I am breathing pretty hard and the sweat is rolling down my back. I also noticed that my shoulders feel a lot better. The exercises are more functional in nature. Being a Doctor of Chiropractic I see so many people losing function, it is nice to see something that has the ability to restore function. Which means that while performing these exercises you may find area’s of weakness that when strengthened will improve how your body functions. Your’s In Health, Dr. Michel"
Dr. Michel Dupuis D.C.
Good Day Chiropractic
Ontario, Canada

So yes i’d say after checking that site there are people still training that way,but then at one time I would have also said the same thing that no one trains that way anymore

Oh and I do plan on keeping a log on here i just have to go back through this thread ad find that link.

52

Good luck on your road to looking like sandow. It’s a nice thing that you’re bringing up an old routine to go by to get there, but training methods have been improved and advanced for your benefit, why not use them? Training exactly like one person will not make you look like them. Plus what if he took steroids? lol i kid.

53

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:

Well I didn’t think people would start trying to tell me I should go for a boigger physqiue either.
NO ONE trains that way anymore?/ if that was true then Bill Hinbern would have his website and people wouldn’t be saying this about the Henry Higgins muscle and strength course.

[/quote]

Okay, a couple things here then I’m done. No one is telling you to go for a bigger physique. Just because you do a split routine doesn’t mean you will suddenly look like Ronnie Coleman. At least not without years of training, a boatload of drugs, gifted genetics, and you would’ve had to started training about 20 years ago. Anyway, if Sandow was actually a lean 180lbs as you stated, you will have to add A LOT of muscle mass. A very lean 180lbs is harder to achieve than you think.

As far as my comment about no one training that way, I think you know what I meant. No bodybuilder, strongman, athlete, or powerlifter even at the amateur level follows those old routines. So if guys looking to get stronger, bigger, or more athletic aren’t doing it what does that tell you?

There have been many advancements in weight training and nutrition since the 19th and early 20th century. Just because a method is old doesn’t mean it is automatically good. I just had surgery last week on my back. If my surgeon had said he was going to use surgery methods from the early 1900s to do it I would have punched him in the face before I walked out of his office. If a friend of mine wanted to be wealthy and told me he was going to move to Alaska and dig for gold because that’s how some people got rich in 1896 I would tell him it was a bad idea.

Another thing to consider is that Sandow had good genetics so training like him will not necessarily make you look like him. I could train exactly like Arnold did and take the same doses of D-bol and still never look like him.

So anyway, to bring my short novel to a close, you asked for advice when you really just wanted confirmation. You disagreed with the advice which is fine, but the only reason any of us replied was in an effort to help you. If you find it fun to do the old York courses then go for it because if you don’t enjoy your lifting you won’t keep doing it. The only difference of opinion is that most of us don’t believe it will help you reach your physique goal. Either way, I truly wish you luck in whatever you decide to do.

54

[quote]Joseph Sandow wrote:
Oh and I do plan on keeping a log on here i just have to go back through this thread ad find that link.[/quote]
This is a very good idea. Do what you want, follow the plan for 6 or 8 weeks straight, but record what happens. Strength, body comp, bodyweight, pics, etc.

Worst case scenario, you spend time exercising a half-hour a day, three or four days a week. Plus, and most importantly, you’ll hopefully learn some stuff about your body and about training in general.

Earlier this year, I followed an old program from the '60s from Complete Keys to Progress by John McCallum which I bought from Hinbern’s site. :wink: I did it because I wanted to experiment, knowing it might not be an ideal 6-week plan, but I did learn a few things, so for me, it was worth the time and energy spent. You need to decide if it’s worth the time and energy for you to spend a few weeks training the way you’ve explained.

The thing is, though, if you’re 39 years old and trying to get back into shape, why would you purposely choose what could be a slower method? I think that’s what some people are trying to point out. It touches back on what I just said about making sure it’s worth the time and energy you’re investing.

Out of curiosity, if a young dude was planning to join the Army, do you think it would be best (“best” as in most effective and efficient) for him to follow Sandow’s recommended training for the military - the one the British Army talked about adopting in the 1890s? Things that make you go hmmmm.

Ahem… … … ROFLMAO! Okay, sorry. Had to get that out of my system.

Entirely incorrect.

Exactly what old lifts do you think can’t be worked into a more modern routine? I spent three months last year training with the bent press as regular part of my routine. Exercises are exercises. They do a job, good or bad depending on how you choose to use them.

55

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:

The thing is, though, if you’re 39 years old and trying to get back into shape, why would you purposely choose what could be a slower method? I think that’s what some people are trying to point out. It touches back on what I just said about making sure it’s worth the time and energy you’re investing.[/quote]

This is exactly what we’ve been trying to get across to him, but, no offense to the OP, I don’t think he will listen.

56

[quote] Chris Colucci wrote:
If a friend of mine wanted to be wealthy and told me he was going to move to Alaska and dig for gold because that’s how some people got rich in 1896 I would tell him it was a bad idea.
[/quote]

My uncle just lost his job and moved to Alaska to dig for underwater gold. Off topic, just thought I’d mention it.

57

[quote]louiek wrote:

My uncle just lost his job and moved to Alaska to dig for underwater gold. Off topic, just thought I’d mention it.[/quote]

Well, good luck to him (seriously). Let me know if he strikes it rich and I will edit my original statement.

58

I think you’ve missed the point here.

The point is that you don’t necessarily need to use “old school” methods of training to achieve that type of physique. Just train with enough intensity and manipulate your diet to achieve your desired level of leanness.

Or have I missed the point too?

59

[quote]Alipereira wrote:
I think you’ve missed the point here.

The point is that you don’t necessarily need to use “old school” methods of training to achieve that type of physique. Just train with enough intensity and manipulate your diet to achieve your desired level of leanness.

Or have I missed the point too?[/quote]

No, you haven’t. I don’t think it matters, though, because I think the OP is now ignoring this thread altogether.

60

This guy reminds me of a hipster. But older. And not in touch with the T Nation community at all. Chris, the pump blitz blast tone thing got me too. That’s a program you wrote, right? And it involves a thigh master, total gym, and shake weight? Because that’s what writers on this site promote, right?