The genetic limit on ultimate size and strength

[IronLion2]

Not to be dismissive but I'm with the crowd that this is the largest moot point not only in bb but all of athletics. The ceiling for growth is constantly evolving over time, it's silly to think other wise. As population grows and specificity becomes more defined you see better athletes. In ten years we'll see someone top Ronnie. Someone will beat him soon after. There will be a better QB that Peyton (Tom sucks.) The world turns and adaption continues.

 

[emeric delczeg]

The limit increases with your dose. If you have bad genetics you up the dose if you're already doing everything right. How big would McCarver be if he only did 500 test 1 dbol? Ultimately the price is just higher if you don't have the genes.

We would know only if he would train and stay on 500mg for many years.

 

[nihilixm]

We would know only if he would train and stay on 500mg for many years.

... Let's be real... How many people get to 300 lean on 500 test at 6'?

 

[hawkmoon]

Some good insight shared here.

To break this down I think each person has their own range of "ability" in terms of food processing, drug utilization, and response to training.
When all these things converge in the best ways, we have a top pro. Most people are no where near optimal in all these areas.

I don't know if myostatin plays a real role, or the ACTN3 gene (which I am negative for).

Since I started competing in the late 80s-90s a lot of people felt it was access to secret drugs that was the key.
It used to be Bolasterone, then GH, the IGF-1 that was the secret.
Yet I was positioned in the community as such to know what was used by some people as well as how they trained, and had some insight into their eating.
I saw some people do alright, but many just stalled after a point.
This hasn't changed.

Most people top out pretty quick, they hit a wall. More dosing brings more sides and discomfort, while the gifted get by on 1/4 dose.
Some people can grow on not so much food, whereas others have to force it down.

Of course we can see this in the national and pro levels. We all know some pros who work incredibly hard and are missing nothing in their bodybuilding tool kit, yet cannot grow to the level needed. Some grow in weight, and get heavy as we tend to chase the scale in modern BB, but really we see the waists getting thicker, not the desired areas.

It would be wonderful to see research on all the factors that comprise success for bodybuilding within the lens of genetic potential.
While we are learning a lot from people like Schoenfeld, no one is going to force feed people and administer potentially high doses of drugs to find the limits.
As such I appreciate hearing your stories, personal and indirect as well.

 

[hawkmoon]

Not to be dismissive but I'm with the crowd that this is the largest moot point not only in bb but all of athletics. The ceiling for growth is constantly evolving over time, it's silly to think other wise. As population grows and specificity becomes more defined you see better athletes. In ten years we'll see someone top Ronnie. Someone will beat him soon after. There will be a better QB that Peyton (Tom sucks.) The world turns and adaption continues.

IMO this will be because we are discover more and more genetic elite.
As you say, population - and thus bodybuilding participation - grows over time. We will be exposed to more freaks.

I do not doubt we may see another Ronnie, but what I am getting at is more along the lines of those guys who do everything right for years and hit a wall which cannot be broken. This is some kind of limitation that cannot be surpassed with more of everything; the body simply does not respond.

+++

Let's take it up a further level: There are several pros who will never be top 10 at the Arnold or Olympia.
Do we think they aren't training, eating, and dosing optimally? Yes of course as the competitive level ascends structure and shape of muscle bellies and insertions come into play increasingly, but even more so quality muscle mass accumulation stops at a certain point.

 

[Elvia1023]

It's a great topic and could be discussed in great length. Of course there is a genetic limit and that is different for everyone. However if this topic is about ultimate size and strength it changes things. Ultimate size and muscle mass are very different to looking great or "proportional". Of course there is still a genetic limit for just sheer size but 99.9% of us are nowhere near that. Who can honestly say they have tried to get as big as humanly possible on here. As big as possible with a tight waist is a much different thing... most guys haven't even done that either. There are guys who have barely broke 200 stating they have which is laughable. Now if your post was about looking proportional at the same time like a competitive bb that is different and of course many (loads of great bb's such as yourself on this forum) are closer to their limits but most could still push much more if their life depended upon it.

Unless someone is a legit midget they can get to approx 300 pounds. The reason we don't is because we don't want to. Even if you wanted to it may not be enough because it would be extremely hard and not a comfortable life. It would also be a much shorter life than if you had stayed at 160. It would be a full time job eating that much food, taking the drugs and training etc and the amount of dedication it would take would be huge. There are not many people who have lived who have said I want to get as big as humanly possible. If that was your goal you would be eating over 10,000 calories per day. No questions asked it would be as much as you could fit in to get as big as humanly possible. None of this high protein is not needed you would literally be stuffing your face and force feeding daily if your goal was to get as humanly big and muscular as possible. It would be a crap life and that's why we obviously don't do it. Look at some of the strongman and powerlifters at their biggest (3-450 pounds) that is closer to carrying as much muscle mass as possible compared to most on here. I don't even eat half of what I would need to get to 300 pounds so I am exactly the same. Again there are not many humans who are even close to this.

I have seen a few guys on the internet who are legit 350 pounds and lean so they are pushing the boundaries. I am talking about guys like Illia "Golem" Yefimchyk but there are a few. It's a weird world because even guys on here who want to be big and ripped they see guys like that and the 1st thing they think is he is going to die soon. We all love to see the mass monsters but they are looked at like circus freaks. If a guy posts about pushing things to the extreme he is bombarded with posts about health or he doesn't need that much protein or that much test etc. Nothing is healthy about being as big as humanly possible and they are pretty much guaranteed to die in their 40-50's if they stay that size. The fact some of these guys have such low esteem is what pushes them to the extreme as no rational minded person would likely want to do what they do. Me personally if it makes someone happy then go for it and I don't get all the hate some of these guys get. Went a bit of topic there but just something I have noticed.

 

[sazo75]

GENETICS are 100% EVERYTHING in this sport. I'm someone who has found out over the years that I have TERRIBLE genetics, most don't want to admit they have terrible or sub par genetics but I've learned that I definitely do. I'm going to make a thread about this at another point in time, but I've done more AAS and experimenting than most people here and have logged basically every workout for the last 8-9 years and I've learned that no matter how much I take, how much I eat, how much I know, I'll never be anywhere near the top when it comes to bodybuilding.

I do plan on making a video about this as well and posting about all the experiments that I've done and methods I've tried, I think you guys would honestly be shocked, but basically genetics are EVERYTHING in life from what I've learned. Think about other things that people are genetically blessed with, on one side of the spectrum you have someone who can be a genius and be taking college courses and excelling at them at age 10, meanwhile you have others who are born with down syndrome or some other learning disability, or can study there ass off and just barely get by algebra.

 

[Elvia1023]

I just read your last 2 posts and that is very different. Obviously the genetic spectrum is huge. There really is such a massive difference between the likes of Phil Heath compared to a your standard guy in the gym. He could look better in 6 months on 400mg test than the other guy could after 20+ years of hard training, perfect eating and massive doses.

Regarding good pro's who will never be in the top 10 when that's mainly just genetic. Most of those guys simply don't have the shape and structure. A great example of this and he ties in well with this thread topic is Morgan Aste. He came in shredded at the Arnold Classic and even him at his best ever placed low because he was competing against guys who are simply structured better for bodybuilding. He couldn't have looked much better for his body but it will never be good enough.

Of course other pro's simply don't diet or train optimally. Often when it comes very easy they often struggle to remain consistent with Flex and Chris being prime examples. Both of them still placed high but they could have done better if they were more consistent. I hear of other pro's who never win shows and how they can't stick to their diets so they have the potential but they just don't execute like they need to. Most of the time it's just genetics though and many simply have a better look/shape/structure for the judges. Phil Heath even at 80-90% will always beat Lukas Osladil or Charles Griffen for example.

 

[IronLion2]

IMO this will be because we are discover more and more genetic elite.
As you say, population - and thus bodybuilding participation - grows over time. We will be exposed to more freaks.

I do not doubt we may see another Ronnie, but what I am getting at is more along the lines of those guys who do everything right for years and hit a wall which cannot be broken. This is some kind of limitation that cannot be surpassed with more of everything; the body simply does not respond.

+++

Let's take it up a further level: There are several pros who will never be top 10 at the Arnold or Olympia.
Do we think they aren't training, eating, and dosing optimally? Yes of course as the competitive level ascends structure and shape of muscle bellies and insertions come into play increasingly, but even more so quality muscle mass accumulation stops at a certain point.

Genetics in sports often arent genetics at all, more often the summation of internal and external environment. So for those guys who cannot crack the top 10 despite in a vacuum doing EVERYTHING (or at least what they believe) in their power to close the gap by influencing that environment, will eventually have the ability to better close that gap, because as specificity increase it will eventually highlight what it is they lack, what separates those two classes of competitors. Over time we figure out what drives success and how/who can obtain it in what way, failure forces those to adapt in that way.

 

[IronLion2]

Simply put I think it's more likely to take an average joe off the street in 2020 and let him compete at the O after three to five years of training rather than back in the 50's or 60's pulling a rando to compete against arnold with the same amount of time. As time goes on we have more tools to better identify the problem.

 

[Bio]

Not to be dismissive but I'm with the crowd that this is the largest moot point not only in bb but all of athletics. The ceiling for growth is constantly evolving over time, it's silly to think other wise. As population grows and specificity becomes more defined you see better athletes. In ten years we'll see someone top Ronnie. Someone will beat him soon after. There will be a better QB that Peyton (Tom sucks.) The world turns and adaption continues.

I don't think that's what he's saying. Athletes including bodybuilders will improve. I think his point is geared more toward the masses thinking that drugs are the ultimate answer and will overcome everything. We'll all move beyond our genetic potential using AAS and other things but ultimately to compete at the top level in any given sport, there has to be a great genetic potential to go along with everything else.

Simply put I think it's more likely to take an average joe off the street in 2020 and let him compete at the O after three to five years of training rather than back in the 50's or 60's pulling a rando to compete against arnold with the same amount of time. As time goes on we have more tools to better identify the problem.

??? I'm not sure what you're saying here?

 

[hawkmoon]

I don't think that's what he's saying. Athletes including bodybuilders will improve. I think his point is geared more toward the masses thinking that drugs are the ultimate answer and will overcome everything. We'll all move beyond our genetic potential using AAS and other things but ultimately to compete at the top level in any given sport, there has to be a great genetic potential to go along with everything else.

Thank you. I understand this is a limitation of a written conversation vs. spoken as it can be hard to convey nuance.
Perhaps this is a limitation of my writing style

Putting this in a greatly simplified and personal context for clarity:

Take Kevin Levrone and myself at 20 years old and put us on the same drug protocol, training regime, diet, etc.
Ensure complete consistency of effort and regularly monitor and evaluate progress.

I will probably max out at 230-240 lean
Kevin will hit 260-275, at least.

No amount of drugs, food, or training styles will move me closer to him.
If I went to 5 grams of gear and 30iu of GH I'd probably look worse and get quite sick.
I could force more food down, but just get fat.
I would probably get overall worse, rather than improve after a point.

I'm not missing any secret, I'm just genetically limited.

This is an extreme example, but it illustrates my point because in reality the genetic gap will often be just as large.

 

[IronLion2]

Thank you. I understand this is a limitation of a written conversation vs. spoken as it can be hard to convey nuance.
Perhaps this is a limitation of my writing style

Putting this in a greatly simplified and personal context for clarity:

Take Kevin Levrone and myself at 20 years old and put us on the same drug protocol, training regime, diet, etc.
Ensure complete consistency of effort and regularly monitor and evaluate progress.

I will probably max out at 230-240 lean
Kevin will hit 260-275, at least.

No amount of drugs, food, or training styles will move me closer to him.
If I went to 5 grams of gear and 30iu of GH I'd probably look worse and get quite sick.
I could force more food down, but just get fat.
I would probably get overall worse, rather than improve after a point.

I'm not missing any secret, I'm just genetically limited.

This is an extreme example, but it illustrates my point because in reality the genetic gap will often be just as large.

So that's an absolute? He has something you dont. Or is that a practical statement? He has something, and you dont understand what? Practically there's nothing to be done at this point to close the gap but thats not say it is not plausible, it very much is.

for those guys who cannot crack the top 10 despite in a vacuum doing EVERYTHING (or at least what they believe) in their power to close the gap by influencing that environment, will eventually have the ability to better close that gap, because as specificity increase it will eventually highlight what it is they lack, what separates those two classes of competitors.

If you want the TL;DR @Bio over the century that is body building (since we're using body building as an example) we've gone from witch craft and sorcery to calculations and formulas. Over time this will become even easier and easier for the common AAS users. The invention of the internet's already shown us that, before forums guys had no idea how to get big now you go to any rec gym and theres three teens on tren. We see identical trends of changing external environments across sports and development. I've sat through a shit ton of similiar debates from sports and strength coaches.

 

[thethinker48]

Thank you. I understand this is a limitation of a written conversation vs. spoken as it can be hard to convey nuance.
Perhaps this is a limitation of my writing style

Putting this in a greatly simplified and personal context for clarity:

Take Kevin Levrone and myself at 20 years old and put us on the same drug protocol, training regime, diet, etc.
Ensure complete consistency of effort and regularly monitor and evaluate progress.

I will probably max out at 230-240 lean
Kevin will hit 260-275, at least.

No amount of drugs, food, or training styles will move me closer to him.
If I went to 5 grams of gear and 30iu of GH I'd probably look worse and get quite sick.
I could force more food down, but just get fat.
I would probably get overall worse, rather than improve after a point.

I'm not missing any secret, I'm just genetically limited.

This is an extreme example, but it illustrates my point because in reality the genetic gap will often be just as large.

And you're someone with upper tier genetics already

Kevin got 2nd on the Olympia stage a year after winning the nationals. Take an average guy, train them for the same period of time, they couldn't win Mr. Maryland.

Most average guys if they put their head down, and train progressively for 8-10 years, they can get really really big. But they will KNOW right away what genetics mean when they bump into Kai Greene guest posing backstage.

 

[hawkmoon]

So that's an absolute? He has something you dont. Or is that a practical statement? He has something, and you dont understand what? Practically there's nothing to be done at this point to close the gap but thats not say it is not plausible, it very much is.

I believe it is absolute.

The convergence of genetics traits for optimal muscle growth when stimulated combined with genetic advantages in processing of food and response to drugs.

Each one of these aspects is rare.
To have all traits at superior levels in a single being is exceedingly rare.

 

[maldorf]

I believe it is absolute.

The convergence of genetics traits for optimal muscle growth when stimulated combined with genetic advantages in processing of food and response to drugs.

Each one of these aspects is rare.
To have all traits at superior levels in a single being is exceedingly rare.

Frustrating thing is that every once in a blue moon you meet a guy that seems to have all the traits to allow him to reach high levels in the sport but they could care less about it. I met a college running back like that. He was built really well like a bodybuilder and put on size/ strength easy. He could eat like crap and had washboard abs all year. He only really lifted because the team made him. Everything seemed to come easy for him. He looked like he was on the sauce but wasn't. We had a bodybuilding show for our college and he could have entered and beat us all. He didn't care about it.

That's where the desire to be a good bodybuilder comes in. There are probably guys out there in third world countries that could be champion pros, but don't even train.

 

[Bio]

Thank you. I understand this is a limitation of a written conversation vs. spoken as it can be hard to convey nuance.
Perhaps this is a limitation of my writing style

Putting this in a greatly simplified and personal context for clarity:

Take Kevin Levrone and myself at 20 years old and put us on the same drug protocol, training regime, diet, etc.
Ensure complete consistency of effort and regularly monitor and evaluate progress.

I will probably max out at 230-240 lean
Kevin will hit 260-275, at least.

No amount of drugs, food, or training styles will move me closer to him.
If I went to 5 grams of gear and 30iu of GH I'd probably look worse and get quite sick.
I could force more food down, but just get fat.
I would probably get overall worse, rather than improve after a point.

I'm not missing any secret, I'm just genetically limited.

This is an extreme example, but it illustrates my point because in reality the genetic gap will often be just as large.

Exactly! LATS, one of the Mods here, always says...take Kevin Levrone for instance..."You can eat like him, train like him, take what he takes, and you're still not going to look like him!" Most don't have the COMPLETE genetic package to become the upper 1%.

 

[sazo75]

Frustrating thing is that every once in a blue moon you meet a guy that seems to have all the traits to allow him to reach high levels in the sport but they could care less about it. I met a college running back like that. He was built really well like a bodybuilder and put on size/ strength easy. He could eat like crap and had washboard abs all year. He only really lifted because the team made him. Everything seemed to come easy for him. He looked like he was on the sauce but wasn't. We had a bodybuilding show for our college and he could have entered and beat us all. He didn't care about it.

That's where the desire to be a good bodybuilder comes in. There are probably guys out there in third world countries that could be champion pros, but don't even train.

Exactly, I really started thinking about this when I started learning about calisthenics, and just watching some of the local different ethnicities/races in the gym progress CRAZY fast. I could use GRAMS of gear, that were all legit stuff, 5grams + of test, 300 mgs anadrol, 2grams + of tren etc etc, log my workouts, be consistent, log my foods, and while I have decent strength, they will pass me in strength and in size NATURALLY with even decent genetics. It really sucks, because growing up I've always admired big powerful physiques, I grew up watching tons of Arnold movies, obviously Pumping Iron, Predator, Terminator, Conan, etc. Always wanted to be the big guy, and I just wont ever be. I've done stupid crazy amounts, and tried different things, logged it all, and I just don't really respond well to both drugs, and muscle hypertrophy as well as others. I've not tried slin or hgh though, I've tried tren, test, dbol, anadrol, superdrol, deca, epistane, h-drol, anavar, winstrol, masteron, different esters of each ones as well, no matter how much or what type of these I take I just don't respond well, time and time again, even with different sources, and blood work, I'll experience some of the negative side effects, but not really the positive ones.

Dr Scott Stevenson, talked about this type of stuff on a podcast/youtube video a few times actually, I remember he described people like me how he will have them as clients and how sometimes we want it more than anyone else and yet we just don't respond well at all. Meanwhile you can just have the Levrone, the Coleman, the Cutler, the O' Hearn, barely watch their diet, barely know how to train, and just GROW like a weed if they're even halfway consistent, but when they nail it all, they're TOP notch.

 

[maldorf]

Exactly! LATS, one of the Mods here, always says...take Kevin Levrone for instance..."You can eat like him, train like him, take what he takes, and you're still not going to look like him!" Most don't have the COMPLETE genetic package to become the upper 1%.

Heck, most don't have what it takes to turn pro in bodybuilding. I knew a few guys that tried for 10 years at nationals and never placed higher than about 5th place. Some these days are able to turn pro once they can compete in masters.

 

[alfresco]

Genetics aren't what you start with, genetics are what you end up with. (That's an original quite)

Or to put it another way is to say; genetics means you ain't with a shit . . . yet.

BTW, lots of good, non-judgmental, constructive conversation here.