As I wrote a lot of time so here, to me, Dorian Yates is the best bodybuilder that ever lived. Hence why I have his video and both of his books and have memorized everyone of his training programs from '83 to '97. I also believe that he was one of, if not the most articulate bodybuilders - someone who could actually explain in print and in speech why he does what he does.
This is why I also got so hot when Scott Abel said that Dorian trained his back the wrong way (this actually was one of the most hysterical things I ever read - no lie) and that “perhaps Dorian could have progressed and looked better with a different training system”. (I’m actually giggling as I type this.)
I’m just all disappointed that Scott didn’t say those things to Dorian’s face during a 300+ pound offseason condition. [/quote]
x2. Dorian is by far my favorite bodybuilder because of his training intensity, huge back, and methodical approach to lifting. Of the guys competing today, Kai and Branch are my favorites.
And speaking of mass monsters, I met Markus Ruhl over the weekend at the LA FitExpo. He is so wide its unbelieveable. [/quote]
Nice. I met Dorian Yates back in 1998 when he was clothes shopping with Steve Weinberger at Roosevelt Field Mall in Long Island
This is the only goddamn field in which OUTSIDERS tell INSIDERS NOT to follow what the most successful do (eg, don’t do what the pros do; they’re pros).
What kind of shit is that? Imagine saying to an aspiring financier, “Don’t look to Warren Buffet, for you might learn something from him.”
Really, we actually have a field in which OUTSIDERS tell us that we can’t learn anything from the likes of Dorian Yates, Ronnie Coleman, or Jay Cutler - because they’re good. What kind of asinine reasoning is this?
I think the golden era of basketball is over. I mean guys are so tall nowadays and they jump so high. It’s freaky. I much prefer the white dudes from the 40’s.
Golden era of basketball was not the 40s but nice try. My question is why wouldn’t people like the golden age of bodybuilding. People thought it was cool or manly to have big muscles and people idolized Arnold and the crew, nowadays not so much many people associate big muscles with being a douche.
[quote]drewh wrote:
Golden era of basketball was not the 40s but nice try. My question is why wouldn’t people like the golden age of bodybuilding. People thought it was cool or manly to have big muscles and people idolized Arnold and the crew, nowadays not so much many people associate big muscles with being a douche.[/quote]
I think everyone on here holds the “golden age” bodybuilders in the highest regard. But when people not interested in bodybuilding come here, they always seem to spout the same rubbish about old school vs new bodybuilders, how they were more “symmetrical and natural” etc etc thats why everyone gets annoyed.
Make no mistake about it, Arnold was considered a FREAK in his day, I would wager the same proportion of people in those days liked it as today with modern bodybuilders i.e. not many.
When you have seen the extremes, such as Jay and Coleman, then looking at Arnold and co suddenly seems less freakish, so people see it as more “normal looking” but they dont realise that they were still freakishly huge, they trained to be freakishly huge, they didnt want to be seen as normal people!
I looked Charles Atlas up in google. He might have been considered to have the best physique during HIS time, his body could not even be considered to be a bodybuilder with today’s standard (I am judging this from the picture linked above). A lot of things have advanced since then and your problem is not your liking of Old School BB’s but your false criticism of stating that today’s bodybuilders are all bloated and all that.[/quote]
“Worlds” most perfectly developed man"
Hard to believe. When I see the Nat Geo documentary on tribesmen I see better developed and muscular men. And I don’t even think they have access to Hammer Stength machines or Grow! Whey.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Just for fun, would the OP please give the rest of us a list of all that is wrong with this bodybuilder’s physique.
You know, tell us about where the bloat is…and all of the other things you find wrong with bodybuilding today compared to the 60’s…since you no doubt follow it closely.[/quote]
This guy is 1 in a millon! There is nothing wrong with the bb’s physique. He’s awesome, but most don’t look like this. Most are bloated & what IS wrong with BB today. There’s a few like this, not many. And it’s nothing most of us on here can shoot for.
Guys of yesteryear as well! But a lot closer to then as to now physiques.
I wonder if kids playing b-ball on the playground these days say “I don’t look up to Lebron James for inspiration. He’s on the creatine and I’ll never be as good as him. I wanna ball like Pistol Pete. He was smooth as shit”.
[quote]sam_sneed wrote:
I wonder if kids playing b-ball on the playground these days say “I don’t look up to Lebron James for inspiration. He’s on the creatine and I’ll never be as good as him. I wanna ball like Pistol Pete. He was smooth as shit”.[/quote]
Your relating measurable performance in a sport to personal choice of aesthetics in professional bodybuilding… Your logic is clearly flawless.
Your relating measurable performance in a sport to personal choice of aesthetics in professional bodybuilding… Your logic is clearly flawless.[/quote]
My scenario is meant to show that I think it’s funny that someone aspiring to be the best in the sport would admire an era of people that were inferior in that said sport. The “Golden Age” bodybuilders were smaller, weaker, and less conditioned.
My logic is as flawless as your claim that most pro bodybuilders of today are bloated.
Here’s the top 5 from 2009 Olympia. Which ones are bloated:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Just for fun, would the OP please give the rest of us a list of all that is wrong with this bodybuilder’s physique.
You know, tell us about where the bloat is…and all of the other things you find wrong with bodybuilding today compared to the 60’s…since you no doubt follow it closely.[/quote]
This guy is 1 in a millon! There is nothing wrong with the bb’s physique. He’s awesome, but most don’t look like this. Most are bloated & what IS wrong with BB today. There’s a few like this, not many. And it’s nothing most of us on here can shoot for.
Guys of yesteryear as well! But a lot closer to then as to now physiques.
X, your never wrong are you? [/quote]
Care to list 5 ‘bloated’ bodybuilders who won a national level NPC show or a pro show?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Just for fun, would the OP please give the rest of us a list of all that is wrong with this bodybuilder’s physique.
You know, tell us about where the bloat is…and all of the other things you find wrong with bodybuilding today compared to the 60’s…since you no doubt follow it closely.[/quote]
This guy is 1 in a millon! There is nothing wrong with the bb’s physique. He’s awesome, but most don’t look like this. Most are bloated & what IS wrong with BB today. There’s a few like this, not many. And it’s nothing most of us on here can shoot for.
Guys of yesteryear as well! But a lot closer to then as to now physiques.
X, your never wrong are you? [/quote]
WTF? We just discussed MOST of the crew who is winning lately. Please point out all of the “BLOATED” ones. You claimed he is one in a million. That’s Toney Freeman, a man who is now in his 40’s yet winning the Iron Man. We also discussed several other top guys like Curry, Heath, Greene and others…and NONE of these people look the way you just described.
So what the fuck are you talking about?
Please list the others who are winning and look the way you described. I’ll wait.
It is like this forum attracts jackasses for no other reason than so they can try their best to discredit anything that gets typed by people who do actually stand out.
[quote]sam_sneed wrote:
I wonder if kids playing b-ball on the playground these days say “I don’t look up to Lebron James for inspiration. He’s on the creatine and I’ll never be as good as him. I wanna ball like Pistol Pete. He was smooth as shit”.[/quote]
Your relating measurable performance in a sport to personal choice of aesthetics in professional bodybuilding… Your logic is clearly flawless.[/quote]
You can’t measure size now? You can’t measure leanness?
His analogy fit perfectly…this seems to be the only pursuit where people act like no one should look up to the best at it.
[quote]sam_sneed wrote:
I wonder if kids playing b-ball on the playground these days say “I don’t look up to Lebron James for inspiration. He’s on the creatine and I’ll never be as good as him. I wanna ball like Pistol Pete. He was smooth as shit”.[/quote]
Your relating measurable performance in a sport to personal choice of aesthetics in professional bodybuilding… Your logic is clearly flawless.[/quote]
Bodybuilding is about aesthetics during contest time. You really think Arnold or most from his ear could squat, deadlift, bench, etc… what Ronnie Coleman or Dorian Yates could in their prime? Comparing strength on all major lifts IS measurable.
Your relating measurable performance in a sport to personal choice of aesthetics in professional bodybuilding… Your logic is clearly flawless.[/quote]
My scenario is meant to show that I think it’s funny that someone aspiring to be the best in the sport would admire an era of people that were inferior in that said sport. The “Golden Age” bodybuilders were smaller, weaker, and less conditioned.
My logic is as flawless as your claim that most pro bodybuilders of today are bloated.
.[/quote]
First of all your assuming that stomach bloat (Ronnie coleman, 8 time mr. olympia) is the only issue. Fundamentally the issue most people have with the build of modern bodybuilders is the amount of mass. They are simply stupidly large and usually very short.
In any case, it all depends how you define what exactly is superior. Obviously the judging for bodybuilding comes down to certain criteria, one of which is mass. However, these judging requirements were also developed at a time when someone being to big or disgusting to look at was never an issue as it is today. Therefore it’s unfair to simply say that “bigger is always better” when clearly many unnatural forces have shaped and affected bodybuilding today.
I’ll say this: if bodybuilding is simply about maximizing certain characteristics like size, leanness, and symetry than the bodybuilders of today blow the old ones out of the water. I think it’s a little more than that.
I’ll say this: if bodybuilding is simply about maximizing certain characteristics like size, leanness, and symetry than the bodybuilders of today blow the old ones out of the water. I think it’s a little more than that.
[/quote]
You’re confusing bodybuilding with a beauty pagent. Bodybuilding IS about building the biggest, leanest, most proportional and symmetrical body possible. It’s not a show for you to judge which men you find more attractive.
I’ll say this: if bodybuilding is simply about maximizing certain characteristics like size, leanness, and symetry than the bodybuilders of today blow the old ones out of the water. I think it’s a little more than that.
[/quote]
Well, then we simply disagree. The above is exactly what I understand bodybuilding to be.
I’ll say this: if bodybuilding is simply about maximizing certain characteristics like size, leanness, and symmetry than the bodybuilders of today blow the old ones out of the water. I think it’s a little more than that.
[/quote]
Well, then we simply disagree. The above is exactly what I understand bodybuilding to be. [/quote]
Wait a second, so people think bodybuilding is NOT about [quote]maximizing certain characteristics like size, leanness, and symmetry[/quote]???
[/quote]