I have to disagree a bit, DC. While you can never look at a person and know they have the genetics to be a top 10 bodybuilder, what I see is a very consistent body type when you look back at early pictures of the pros.I dont agree with the above bolded in the least. Any pictures of any person before they have lifted weights should be disregarded totally. Its how the human body responds to lifting weights that is the key. I see people do this all the time and point to Dorians teenage pics, or Dennis James 14 year old pic or Cutlers 15 year old pic and say "see not the greatest genetics" and its a bunch of BS....... what happened when Dorian started lifting? HE EXPLODED. He was asked to do the World games something like 18 months after he started lifting!!!! Thats like going for your pro card a year and a half after you start lifting. Cutler looked like a normal kid and then started lifting and a little bit of time over a year later he is teenage national champion in the heavyweights! Dillett looked like a stringbean before lifting....and then started lifting and became a monster. When these pro bodybuilders are competing up at national level shows 2 years after lifting while everyone else is trying to be top 5 best bodybuilders in their gym....thats where the divide in genetics is.
Noone should ever look at anyone previous to training with weights and say "look at their genetics"....2 years later will surely prove out their response.
What you call a stringbean for Dillet, to me looks like an above average musculature and bodyfat. The same from what I have seen from Cutler and Coleman. 9 times out of 10, I bet this will be the body type you find for pros vs the fat kid or skinny fat body type.
Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk