Modern or Old school bodybuilders?

[UKBoss]

I held this pole on my site and was very surprized by the results so thought id see how it goes here?
Which do you think is the better ?
99% went with old school when i did this vote?

**broken link removed**

 

[JohnnyPro]

I held this pole on my site and was very surprized by the results so thought id see how it goes here?
Which do you think is the better ?
99% went with old school when i did this vote?

**broken link removed**

I prefer the old school look, although their leg development could have been better

 

[Tom]

old school for me

70's and 80's physiques are more appealing

 

[Jello]

Old school for me. I would like to hear from some of you IFBB Judges as to how you would critique the two, and who you would give the Oly to.

 

[Chrysler]

I prefer the old school look, although their leg development could have been better

I concur. Bodybuilders looked healthy then.

 

[UKBoss]

yep old school too as 99% of my site said,i think the upper leg area could be a bit better but then saying that it does make the calfs look better and bigger like that so id not want to much more size or it would draw away from the form of the calfs?

 

[bigguns078]

Old school.. Gotta luv that vaccuum abs pose..

 

[JohnnyPro]

I was talking to Albert Beccles who goes to my gym, he was a competitive bodybuilder in the 60's 70's and 80's, and he told me that the difference is that in the old days you would see a bodybuilder and you'd want to look like him, and you know you could if you trained hard. But today, you see a bodybuilder, and you admire his huge size but his development just seems out of reach for most people. So you think you can never look like that, and you might not even want to.

 

[Jimbo]

gotta be the 70's. I know he isint talked about much but I think that coolest build of the time belonged to Ken Waller.

 

[Jello]

I was talking to Albert Beccles who goes to my gym, he was a competitive bodybuilder in the 60's 70's and 80's, and he told me that the difference is that in the old days you would see a bodybuilder and you'd want to look like him, and you know you could if you trained hard. But today, you see a bodybuilder, and you admire his huge size but his development just seems out of reach for most people. So you think you can never look like that, and you might not even want to.

I think that is a very good point.

 

[maldorf]

I was talking to Albert Beccles who goes to my gym, he was a competitive bodybuilder in the 60's 70's and 80's, and he told me that the difference is that in the old days you would see a bodybuilder and you'd want to look like him, and you know you could if you trained hard. But today, you see a bodybuilder, and you admire his huge size but his development just seems out of reach for most people. So you think you can never look like that, and you might not even want to.

Its hard too to believe that the difference in development is due to better training methods and diet and it cant be genetics. A species doesnt evolve that fast lol! I guess it all comes down to the "supplements"

 

[Fa Seeshus]

gotta be the 70's. I know he isint talked about much but I think that coolest build of the time belonged to Ken Waller.

Waller had great legs and conditioning too.

the year after pumping iron he won the Olympia tall class, but was edged out by Columbu for the overall.

 

[LATS]

well.. if ya think about it, adding hgh, slin and a few other peptides can make a good 30 pound difference in some guys.. add that 30 pounds to the physiques of the late 70's and you have todays physqiue, give or take...

 

[massnup]

well.. if ya think about it, adding hgh, slin and a few other peptides can make a good 30 pound difference in some guys.. add that 30 pounds to the physiques of the late 70's and you have todays physqiue, give or take...

Taking that into consideration then that would make Arnold 255-260 in competition shape. Now that would be something to see!

 

[JohnnyPro]

Its hard too to believe that the difference in development is due to better training methods and diet and it cant be genetics. A species doesnt evolve that fast lol! I guess it all comes down to the "supplements"

Pretty much, although we know more better ways to diet now. But look at some of the guys like Sergio Oliva, he was huge and compares to some of the pros today.

 

[UKBoss]

Well this mleads me to my next point,if as it seems most say old school why is it then we dont see as meny pro-bodybuilders looking more like they did in days gone by? and would the judges let them win if they did?

 

[chris250]

How about more old school like in the early 90's - Levorne at 228 (first pro wins, 2nd at the Mr.O to Yates) Wheeler at 216 (rookie year wins), Dennis Newman at 93 Nationals or 94 USA's, Or even newer guys, like Dennis James at 226-228 winning the USA's in 98 ???

That would be my idea look...

chris

 

[UKBoss]

wow i did not relise they were just that weight?what hieght are they then as i am 230lbs now but at 6'3 i need alot more size packin on?

 

[Jello]

Well this mleads me to my next point,if as it seems most say old school why is it then we dont see as meny pro-bodybuilders looking more like they did in days gone by? and would the judges let them win if they did?

You hear it said regularly that judges are rewarding mass over perfect symmetry now. Just look at the last three Mr. O's, and the time span that they have held that spot.

 

[emeric delczeg]

How about more old school like in the early 90's - Levorne at 228 (first pro wins, 2nd at the Mr.O to Yates) Wheeler at 216 (rookie year wins), Dennis Newman at 93 Nationals or 94 USA's, Or even newer guys, like Dennis James at 226-228 winning the USA's in 98 ???

That would be my idea look...

chris

What is amazing that Levrone was useing very little gear.