[quote]forbes wrote:
The1andOnly wrote:
I think their shape has gone from being the V shape to now the X shape. Back then they were less informed about nutrition as well ate the whole egg whole cuts of meet etc.
Whats wrong with eating whole eggs or whole cuts of meat?[/quote]
Did I say anything was wrong with it!?
[quote]The1andOnly wrote:
forbes wrote:
The1andOnly wrote:
I think their shape has gone from being the V shape to now the X shape. Back then they were less informed about nutrition as well ate the whole egg whole cuts of meet etc.
Whats wrong with eating whole eggs or whole cuts of meat?
Did I say anything was wrong with it!?[/quote]
Thats how you made it sound. You said they were less informed about nutrition, and then say they ate whole eggs and whole cuts of meat. Put together, and it sounds like you think these food choices are wrong. I could be wrong, and I wasn’t trying to attack you, I genuinely thought that you had something against such foods.
So ironic, I was just talking to people about this yesterday. I too, think the bodybuilders of the 70s are much more aesthetic than the modern day bodybuilders. I respect how big some of these guys are these days, but its just not appealing. From a personal standpoint, I like the 70s guys much much better
[quote]waylanderxx wrote:
Now Serially, you guys like the old physiques because you feel like that’s something you have a chance of obtaining. You see the pro’s of today and are so in awe of their development that it discourages you, so you bitch about it.
[/quote]
Eh - I can’t agree with that. I prefer the old-school look as well. It’s not really about what I feel is attainable or unattainable, I just prefer the look of bodybuilders from the 60’s and 70’s (as well as some of the 80’s guys) to some of the pros today.
That’s not to say that I’m not impressed with today’s scene, but I honestly prefer the guys in the NPC these days, as opposed to the gargantuan size they work up to after landing a pro card…
It’s just personal preference.
[quote]GluteusGigantis wrote:
It’s ignorant for posts above to be attributing the changes over the years to increased substance use.
If you take ignorance in a negative way, tough.
And again, I find it hard to believe people don’t think modern bodybuilders have a V-taper…pay attention, of course they do, they’re just bigger, and have bigger legs (hence the X look).
Oh no, I mentioned the letter X…does that mean you’re going to go all nutty and psycho porkie pie person?
Can you not accept that your fetish with stalking X is a bit stale and alot of people here are sick of it?
Actually, on that note you can go on my ignore list too (joining such distinguished contributors as Stringer, Lt Kilgore, Headhunter)
[/quote]
You know what I tried last night? Old school T bar rows.
I’m a fan so far, but I feel like I should still mix in chest supported rows now and again, but really slack on them…
I can’t wait to get back home so I can chime in on this one, these threads make my head wat to explode! The original question in and of itself shows such a lack on thought that its rediculous.
[quote]SkyNett wrote:
waylanderxx wrote:
Now Serially, you guys like the old physiques because you feel like that’s something you have a chance of obtaining. You see the pro’s of today and are so in awe of their development that it discourages you, so you bitch about it.
Eh - I can’t agree with that. I prefer the old-school look as well. It’s not really about what I feel is attainable or unattainable, I just prefer the look of bodybuilders from the 60’s and 70’s (as well as some of the 80’s guys) to some of the pros today.
That’s not to say that I’m not impressed with today’s scene, but I honestly prefer the guys in the NPC these days, as opposed to the gargantuan size they work up to after landing a pro card…
It’s just personal preference. [/quote]
That’s a little different, and you don’t go bitching about it every time you are bored.
Some of these guys are the same people who go into a SAMA thread about a porn star and try to argue that they aren’t attractive to them because they don’t look “real.”
People see pictures of Ronnie and see the incredible amount of muscle he had as well as his conditioning and immediately think that’s impossible without steroids and get discouraged. Then for some reason they then see a picture of arnold/franco/mentzer and believe they can achieve that naturally with just lots of hard work. As I said before, for 99% of people any of the above physiques will never be achieved, even with drugs, but for whatever reason people see the bodybuilders of the 70’s as something more attainable.
That just seems to be the trend when I’m observing threads like these.
Bingo, there’s WAY too many 5’10 180 pound fucknuts on this site who imagine they look like frank zane.
[quote]waylanderxx wrote:
Now Serially, you guys like the old physiques because you feel like that’s something you have a chance of obtaining. You see the pro’s of today and are so in awe of their development that it discourages you, so you bitch about it.
[/quote]
[quote]langankyl wrote:
So ironic, I was just talking to people about this yesterday. I too, think the bodybuilders of the 70s are much more aesthetic than the modern day bodybuilders. I respect how big some of these guys are these days, but its just not appealing. From a personal standpoint, I like the 70s guys much much better [/quote]
That is not ironic, it is coincidental. Learn the difference.
And I agree with your point.
“golden age” vs. “current mass monsters” v.2924921431392421519434295
Yay.
[quote]Bodyguard wrote:
I can’t wait to get back home so I can chime in on this one, these threads make my head wat to explode! The original question in and of itself shows such a lack on thought that its rediculous.[/quote]
Agreed. No matter how many times we mention the guys actually winning lately, they will immediately turn to the ones who have the least overall shape just to have something to bitch about…as if Toney Freeman has no V-taper. As if Brandon Curry has no V-taper. As if Joel Stubbs has no V-taper.
People who don’t even follow bodybuilding closely should probably avoid bitching about its shortcomings constantly.
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
“golden age” vs. “current mass monsters” v.2924921431392421519434295
Yay.
[/quote]
I just wanted to thank you again for the dead stop extensions… Good stuff.
Pretty sure I hit my chest when I bench because if your posts too.
You are like the encyclopedia of swole. Thanks for hanging around here man.
[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
Bingo, there’s WAY too many 5’10 180 pound fucknuts on this site who imagine they look like frank zane.
[/quote]
Exactly. How small do they think Zane was anyway? The man was causing road blocks and traffic jams if he walked outside in a tank top so I am not sure how he suddenly became the poster-boy for people who have 15-16" arms.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
“golden age” vs. “current mass monsters” v.2924921431392421519434295
Yay.
I just wanted to thank you again for the dead stop extensions… Good stuff.
Pretty sure I hit my chest when I bench because if your posts too.
You are like the encyclopedia of swole. Thanks for hanging around here man.[/quote]
My pleasure.
Here’s a quick comparison pic I made of Dexter Jackson, and Serge Nubret. Obviously Dexter is bigger than Serge, it’s a sport based off of baving muscle mass, and there’s a 30 year difference between the two, but what the hell “different shape” does Dexter have compared to Serge? Dexter is flexing his chest, otherwise it would look more like Serge’s, but for the most part, he’s just a larger version.
*Edit: I guess it would help if I uploaded the pic.
Seems like the pic isn’t uploading, let me try one more time.
Dexter has a crap ton more mass, that’s what.
Dexter looks better in all senses.
Agreed except for Serge’s calves look a little better than Dexter’s.
[quote]MEYMZ wrote:
Dexter looks better in all senses.[/quote]
I think anyone truly judging them without the “all drugs” bs mentality can see that. The bodybuilders today have improved greatly…and if the only way these guys can complain is to keep bringing up faults they thought they saw in Ronnie Coleman, then these arguments are pointless to start with.
Ronnie Coleman was amazing and expecting someone near 300lbs at 5’10" to have a tiny wasp waist is just retarded. The standards have also clearly changed since he was last on stage.