natural vs enhanced genetics

[hollaatyaboyy1]

i was just wondering being that the top pros are in that .001 genetic percentile ..... do you think had they not taken any aas,gh,slin and still dedicated themselves to the sport the way they do now they would be dominant natural competitors?

i tend to think that you dont have to be "that" gifted in putting/ maintaining tons of muscle in order to be a great bodybuilder ..granded you can handle a shit ton of aas and have a good structure....

im in no way saying that i or most any joe shmo could be a top level ifbb pro... butttt rathe would somone like branch warren, jay cutler or kai green be dominate natural competitors

 

[aussiebulldog]

I think for some , their genetic superiority is their superior response / tolerance to the chemicals involved. this would not give them advantage while drug free.

 

[Hiitsmichael]

Before kai went to the ifbb he was a natural pro too, so I think its definitely possible. Theres no doubt that without aas pros would still look fantastic, but most probably wouldnt be in the upper echelon of natural pros

 

[Designbuilt]

I doubt it... Here's a good example, I'm not sure how many of you remember the WBF. (Vince McMahon formed a bodybuilding federation and aired it on weekends then would hold yearly shows) He had a few top level IFBB contenders from the late 80's early 90's go to his organization... I remember Danny Padilla, The Quins, Eddie Robinson, Gary Strydom, David Dearth, Arron Baker and a few others...

One year he decided to make it drug free and was serious about it, well most of his guys ended up looking like shit... Mike Quinn look like hell, Eddie Robinson was about the same size, but smooth as a baby's ass... David Dearth was ripped but small... Point is, that in order to have the size that some like Jay Cutler and Branch Warren has, a lot of calories and drugs are needed, otherwise those calories will become fat, some bodybuilders on the other hand, can eat a ton of calories but have a hard time gaining weight naturally... The latter in my opinion will be those who dominate natural bodybuilding, since the former, will most likely not be able to get lean enough drug free, even if the diet is in check...

However, that's just my opinion and pure speculation, there are far too many variables in each person's individual chemistry to know who can do what... However, it's self-evident that determination, science and having the right coach will definitely help, that goes for both natural and enhanced...

 

[Elvia1023]

The answer in my eyes is pretty simple. To be pro standard you need to be genetically gifted in numerous ways (shape, structure, ability to gain/hold muscle, excellent response to drugs and an ability to take huge amounts of drugs without getting sick... the list is long).

So some pro's are great natural bodybuilders. They have great muscle building capabilities and great shape etc. If they done it the correct way they would have looked great naturally before embarking on drugs. Others may have been great naturally but started drugs early regardless. They would have been competitng naturally at a high standard regardless of drugs.

Then you have bodybuilders who need the drugs more than anyone. They tend to use much higher doses to get to their level of development. If they stayed natural they would struggle at shows.

So the answer is different for everyone. Some could and some couldn't be dominant in natural bodybuilding.

Do you really think every pro is in the .001 percentile? Some will be of course. But most aren't imo.

 

[thatbloke]

all good responses above

really in the end, some could have been good bodybuilders, and some might not have

just take a look at phil heath before he started bodybuilding, no way in hell he ever would be successful in natural bodybuilding

even jay natural wasnt much