[quote]Professor X wrote:
Thanks for trolling.[/quote]
No problem, sweet cheeks.
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
[quote]Mr.Jeannay wrote:
dennis wolf mentioned it in a flex magazine, markus ruhl talked about it in a long german interview and milos mentioned his amazing genetics in an interview too and im sure they can identify much better someone who uses “more” synthol than other people[/quote]
Missed this before, but even if they are arguably capable of recognizing usage better than armchair experts arguing on an internet forum, no way are they going to ‘out’ the guy publically. It’s a common thing in the sport these days, and to mainstream America, bodybuilding is enough of an oddball past time without people investigating the apparently accepted practice of injecting a synthetic substance under your skin to create the illusion of puffier muscles.
S
[/quote]
Ofc they wouldnt point the finger at him and say he uses more synthol, but do you think they would still say of him having the best genetics in the sport, when they know he just used more :S?
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I like Phil’s physique too, but I also liked the way it looked better a couple of years ago, even if it wasn’t considered Mr. Olympia worthy.
S[/quote]
Agreed.
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I like Phil’s physique too, but I also liked the way it looked better a couple of years ago, even if it wasn’t considered Mr. Olympia worthy.
S[/quote]
Agreed.[/quote]
Glad I’m not the only one
I could be mistaken, but 22sec into the vid, Bob Chick calls him Flex Heath, he says Oh boy look at Flex Heath. I just thought that was kind of funny with the other comparisons. Froidian slip. lol
[quote]AnytimeJake wrote:
I could be mistaken, but 22sec into the vid, Bob Chick calls him Flex Heath, he says Oh boy look at Flex Heath. I just thought that was kind of funny with the other comparisons. Froidian slip. lol[/quote]
Haha! That is too funny.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]IamMarqaos wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Can someone explain to me what they see when they say Phil is so pumped of full of oil? I’m sure a lot (possibly all) of the pros use synthol to some extent but I just don’t see the tell tale signs that point to synthol abuse (no definition, no striations, no contraction of the muscle, etc.).[/quote]
Dude, I have asked the same question a half dozen times and I just don’t see it.[/quote]
Internet gossip mill.
If you repeat it enough times, it becomes true.
if you tweet it, it becomes law.
Bullshit rules the world now.[/quote]
Agreed. Honestly… what this thread has turned into - a bunch of fucking armchair internet heroes speculating with no evidence other than the great achievements of the athletes to try to convinces us they are faking it - is making me sick to my stomach.
To those looking at a muscle that looks a little round and immediately saying ‘oil’… go back to the 70’s and 80’s before synthol was even around and see if there’s a big difference in the actual shape of the muscles… because to me it just looks like the difference is the size…
[quote]bigjoey wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]IamMarqaos wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Can someone explain to me what they see when they say Phil is so pumped of full of oil? I’m sure a lot (possibly all) of the pros use synthol to some extent but I just don’t see the tell tale signs that point to synthol abuse (no definition, no striations, no contraction of the muscle, etc.).[/quote]
Dude, I have asked the same question a half dozen times and I just don’t see it.[/quote]
Internet gossip mill.
If you repeat it enough times, it becomes true.
if you tweet it, it becomes law.
Bullshit rules the world now.[/quote]
Agreed. Honestly… what this thread has turned into - a bunch of fucking armchair internet heroes speculating with no evidence other than the great achievements of the athletes to try to convinces us they are faking it - is making me sick to my stomach.
To those looking at a muscle that looks a little round and immediately saying ‘oil’… go back to the 70’s and 80’s before synthol was even around and see if there’s a big difference in the actual shape of the muscles… because to me it just looks like the difference is the size…
[/quote]
You sound butthurt bro :D.
do u read bodybuilding magazines… a lot of the rumors comes from industry insiders…people who know more than you.
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
Maybe it’s just his genetics (doubtful) but the round “puffed up” bulbous look is what I think people are referring too with their SEO talk.[/quote]
Nope, no synthol at all…;)[/quote]
Look at his newest video on the last page. Again, I’m not saying he doesn’t use synthol as I have no idea, but I see no signs of it in his newest video. [/quote]
. In the Phil Heath thread a year or two ago a picture of his calf with a golfball of oil was posted and yet people still didn’t believe.
[/quote]
How is what appears to be a “golfball of oil” indication of SEO?? I’ve had sterile abscesses from local igf injections that look exactly the same or worse. Proper administration of SEO is more likely to cause pooling of oil around the ankle//elbow as a sign of SEO use, than the symptoms you described.
EDIT:The majority of guys are going to be using SEO in the offseason, REGARDLESS of whether they come into the show with any oil left in them. Depending on the oil used, you can have full clearance in 6 weeks or less, using year round allows for more pliable fascia and better muscle growth. Dunno why everyone cries so hard about it, its probably one of the few legal things a bodybuilder can do.
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]bigjoey wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]IamMarqaos wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Can someone explain to me what they see when they say Phil is so pumped of full of oil? I’m sure a lot (possibly all) of the pros use synthol to some extent but I just don’t see the tell tale signs that point to synthol abuse (no definition, no striations, no contraction of the muscle, etc.).[/quote]
Dude, I have asked the same question a half dozen times and I just don’t see it.[/quote]
Internet gossip mill.
If you repeat it enough times, it becomes true.
if you tweet it, it becomes law.
Bullshit rules the world now.[/quote]
Agreed. Honestly… what this thread has turned into - a bunch of fucking armchair internet heroes speculating with no evidence other than the great achievements of the athletes to try to convinces us they are faking it - is making me sick to my stomach.
To those looking at a muscle that looks a little round and immediately saying ‘oil’… go back to the 70’s and 80’s before synthol was even around and see if there’s a big difference in the actual shape of the muscles… because to me it just looks like the difference is the size…
[/quote]
You sound butthurt bro :D.[/quote]
‘butthurt’? what are you, like twelves years old? did somebody make your butt hurt and that’s why you’re tossing the phrase around?
[quote]ronald1919 wrote:
do u read bodybuilding magazines… a lot of the rumors comes from industry insiders…people who know more than you.[/quote]
Actually, yes. Name me an ‘industry insider’ who isn’t a bitter ex-competitor who never quite made it who has made an allegation against Phil Heath or Jay Cutler or Kai Greene, and if in a bodybuilding magazine give me an issue and page reference because I may well have it.
I’m not saying SEO use never happens… but it’s good to have better evidence than “he has really big muscles that aren’t as jagged as some people” before accusing particular athletes.
[quote]bigjoey wrote:
I’m not saying SEO use never happens… but it’s good to have better evidence than “he has really big muscles that aren’t as jagged as some people” before accusing particular athletes.[/quote]
Yeah. Anyone complaining about Phil’s “oil filled arms” (or whatever retarded nonsense it was) and then goes on to give props to ANY other IFBB Pro is probably not worth listening to anyway.
[quote]BigJJ88 wrote:
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]gregron wrote:
Maybe it’s just his genetics (doubtful) but the round “puffed up” bulbous look is what I think people are referring too with their SEO talk.[/quote]
Nope, no synthol at all…;)[/quote]
Look at his newest video on the last page. Again, I’m not saying he doesn’t use synthol as I have no idea, but I see no signs of it in his newest video. [/quote]
. In the Phil Heath thread a year or two ago a picture of his calf with a golfball of oil was posted and yet people still didn’t believe.
[/quote]
How is what appears to be a “golfball of oil” indication of SEO?? I’ve had sterile abscesses from local igf injections that look exactly the same or worse. Proper administration of SEO is more likely to cause pooling of oil around the ankle//elbow as a sign of SEO use, than the symptoms you described.
EDIT:The majority of guys are going to be using SEO in the offseason, REGARDLESS of whether they come into the show with any oil left in them. Depending on the oil used, you can have full clearance in 6 weeks or less, using year round allows for more pliable fascia and better muscle growth. Dunno why everyone cries so hard about it, its probably one of the few legal things a bodybuilder can do.[/quote]
Interesting, what more do you know about SEO?
Check out those biceps! Pure synthol.
More ‘oil bag arms’
[quote]Highjumper wrote:
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:
I like Phil’s physique too, but I also liked the way it looked better a couple of years ago, even if it wasn’t considered Mr. Olympia worthy.
S[/quote]
Agreed.[/quote]
Glad I’m not the only one[/quote]
I remember when I saw his Ironman prep and photos, I was blown away. Now he is looking ridiculous and a far cry from his ideal physique.
I’d say Phil is going to win, as he is the poster boy of bodybuilding at the moment. He is a college graduate, well spoken and doesn’t have a criminal record or shady past. Kai has done too much damage to his public image, with more and more people aware of his shenanigans in his earlier days. Then again, if Phil turns up soft (unlikely) Kai could take the title.
Top six is probably going to be, in no particular order:
Jay
Ramy
Phil
Kai
Shawn
Victor or Dexter (depending on if Vic brings his A-game)
It seems like a lot of the names won’t get a look in. Names such as Wolf, Freeman, Pakulski and Warren are going to find it tricky to get a look in. It’s going to be a good Olympia line-up.
[quote]bigjoey wrote:
[quote]RATTLEHEAD wrote:
[quote]bigjoey wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]IamMarqaos wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
Can someone explain to me what they see when they say Phil is so pumped of full of oil? I’m sure a lot (possibly all) of the pros use synthol to some extent but I just don’t see the tell tale signs that point to synthol abuse (no definition, no striations, no contraction of the muscle, etc.).[/quote]
Dude, I have asked the same question a half dozen times and I just don’t see it.[/quote]
Internet gossip mill.
If you repeat it enough times, it becomes true.
if you tweet it, it becomes law.
Bullshit rules the world now.[/quote]
Agreed. Honestly… what this thread has turned into - a bunch of fucking armchair internet heroes speculating with no evidence other than the great achievements of the athletes to try to convinces us they are faking it - is making me sick to my stomach.
To those looking at a muscle that looks a little round and immediately saying ‘oil’… go back to the 70’s and 80’s before synthol was even around and see if there’s a big difference in the actual shape of the muscles… because to me it just looks like the difference is the size…
[/quote]
You sound butthurt bro :D.[/quote]
‘butthurt’? what are you, like twelves years old? did somebody make your butt hurt and that’s why you’re tossing the phrase around?
[/quote]
How can you say such hurtful things?
Do you even know what he has been through in his life?
[quote]bigjoey wrote:
Check out those biceps! Pure synthol.[/quote]
Hey, now you get it!
It’s fun to joke around and not be so serious 
and now the thread has turned because some people disagree, or even seem to take personal offense to contemplating the level (I say level because let’s just assume all the top guys use to some degree) of SEO use an individual MAY have due to the look their physique has taken in recent years?
This isn’t new though. You can read the magazines even back in the 90’s and see the writers discussing ‘suspicious looking lumps’ in various competitors, and how the judges marked them down ‘accordingly’. These writers certainly weren’t experts on SEO use, and yet they could see potentially awkward the changes in competitors’ physiques over a relatively short time period (and I think that’s one of the reasons people seem to react the way they do, as these are already very advanced athletes). In the current status of the sport, regardless of genetics, hard work, anything else you wanna attribute success to, you cannot deny that use of methods of expansion, or “enhancement” are being used to gain every possible upper hand (there is money on the line, and livelihoods at stake). If you do, then you’ve really got your head in the sand. This doesn’t discount any of the other traits needed to reach the top though, so PLEASE make peace with that point that gets repeatedly brought up.
Now again, I’m no expert myself, and I certainly can’t say for certain whether I think Phil abuses or not, because I honestly don’t know, and seriously, I don’t really care. I like the guy’s physique, I like other top guys’ physiques, and of course I have my own personal preferences when I judge amateur contests.
You guys getting angry or upset about people voicing their suspicions have to realize though that it’s not just a few guys on here, because let’s face it, TN isn’t exactly a central hub for competitors and people with real insider knowledge of the intricacies of the professional level of the sport (no matter how much some people may think they are). On any number of the other sites I frequent, you’re gonna find what seems to be a pretty major component of the posters making remarks about Phil’s current (last year or so) look and the possible (probable?) reason for it. Calling other people internet experts, or “heroes” is just silly, because unless someone can truly speak from their own experiences with SEO, or is one of Heath’s inner circle, they’re just an internet jockey as well. I have my own opinions, but hell, I know I can’t prove 'em one way or another.
If anyone has real info about SEO use, then by all means, I’m sure we’ll all listen eagerly. But the direction this thread is going (the last day with people getting… “butthurt” and seeming personally offended)… let it go guys, this was a great thread with people giving their breakdowns and predictions up until a page ago. I happen to love when we get more BBing oriented posts in here. The Olympia’s in 6 days, and a handful of guys all have the serious potential/ability to take it. Instead, some people would rather argue the degree that one competitor makes use of a practice that appears to be accepted, and common across the board (as one poster pointed out, it is legal).
S