again, Lee haney 18-19inch arm, Zane: you decide
Printable View
again, Lee haney 18-19inch arm, Zane: you decide
[QUOTE=JoeDirtBody]id agree with that. 83 olympia bannout is a great physique.[/QUOTE]
I agree to, and Zane didn't win anyway
yeah well having ran igf twice it does cause local growth, end of story
I just read the different comments about arm size on here. First, measurements do matter, judging solely by appearance isn't that wise, measurements give you the plain truth. i have a friend who is 6' ft, 210lbs, same height and weight of serge nubret, and my friend is a pro too. His measurement, bc i was there when they were measured were 16.5 '' arms when pumped, and like a 45-46'' chest pumped. But bc he has a low bf%, like 8%, he looks huge, i mean huge. He looks bigger than Frank Zane, not by much though, but for Frank Zane to have 16.5'' arms is probably accurate, considering his height and weight. they were probably bigger in his prime, but arms decrease in size with time. plus, pros lie about they measurements all the time. The lower the bf%, the bigger you look, period. Saying that Frank Zane had bigger than 18'' arms is like saying that Van Damme had 17'' arms, Vin Diesel has 17.5'', etc., if you can really judge by appearance, they don't at all.
[QUOTE=4themostHIGH]I just read the different comments about arm size on here. First, measurements do matter, judging solely by appearance isn't that wise, measurements give you the plain truth. i have a friend who is 6' ft, 210lbs, same height and weight of serge nubret, and my friend is a pro too. His measurement, bc i was there when they were measured were 16.5 '' arms when pumped, and like a 45-46'' chest pumped. But bc he has a low bf%, like 8%, he looks huge, i mean huge. He looks bigger than Frank Zane, not by much though, but for Frank Zane to have 16.5'' arms is probably accurate, considering his height and weight. they were probably bigger in his prime, but arms decrease in size with time. plus, pros lie about they measurements all the time. The lower the bf%, the bigger you look, period. Saying that Frank Zane had bigger than 18'' arms is like saying that Van Damme had 17'' arms, Vin Diesel has 17.5'', etc., if you can really judge by appearance, they don't at all.[/QUOTE]
while I agree with all your points, your numbers are a bit off...I am no where near a pro, and I have 16.5 inch arms, at about 10% bf, at 15% bf they are 17inch arms...van damme and vin diesel both probably have 17 inch or higher arms, and frank zane probably had about 17inch arms
[QUOTE=Quelly]he had 18 to 19inch arms at his prime, 28inch waist, 200lbs at his heaviest and normally around 180-190, 5'9, and in contest condition which for him was as ripped as anyone got at that time.
also i believe that pic was from the 1980 olympia, where he was in poor form (for him) by his own admittance....he lacked the 5lbs-10lbs of mass and the conditioning that won him the olympia title the 3 previous years
despite what trolls and mass addicts here may say, he was not a swimmer compared to other bodybuilders of his time, he was smaller than them, but his conditioning, aesthetics, proportions and his posing and presentation were far superior to his competitors. I have included a comparison pic of him next to Franco Columbo, a "mass monster" of his time and a mr olympia winner[/QUOTE]
You're absolutely right. I'm glad to see someone sticking up for Zane like that.
Zane's arms were 17.65 cold at contest
if I had to guess
Zane #1 lol he had wonderful sym.. awsome conditioning... at his heaviest 200ish man thats perfect... for that hight any bigger than that would be too big...
firstly, it irritates me the amount of people who do not know the meaning of the word "symmetry". Symmetry refers to the equality between the left and right respective sides of the body, NOT the proportions of muscle groups.
secondly, as some people have stated, there is much missconception regarding arm sizes around here. By my guesses i would say Zane was around the 18" mark, he was not small, 18" arms are very big, especially when brought in with such conditioning. There are plenty of fat average joes out there with 17-18" arms, but chop down their bodyfat and they will be 15" chumps or less.
Quelly, the comparative pic you showed with Arnold and Zane was from the 1967 Universe i believe, this was not in Arnold's prime (he peaked in 75), nor was this Zane's prime, i think it is a poor basis to compare. And also Arnold did have 23" FLEXED and PUMPED arms in his prime, this has been shown in many publications. Look at his bicep peak, it was just bull****.
And finally, have fun finding a Natty that has an OVERALL PHYSIQUE equal to what Zane had obtained IN HIS PRIME.
Please take note of the capitalised words here people, read it good and hard before you make a stupid comment.
[QUOTE=The Man Rake]firstly, it irritates me the amount of people who do not know the meaning of the word "symmetry". Symmetry refers to the equality between the left and right respective sides of the body, NOT the proportions of muscle groups.
secondly, as some people have stated, there is much missconception regarding arm sizes around here. By my guesses i would say Zane was around the 18" mark, he was not small, 18" arms are very big, especially when brought in with such conditioning. There are plenty of fat average joes out there with 17-18" arms, but chop down their bodyfat and they will be 15" chumps or less.
Quelly, the comparative pic you showed with Arnold and Zane was from the 1967 Universe i believe, this was not in Arnold's prime (he peaked in 75), nor was this Zane's prime, i think it is a poor basis to compare. And also Arnold did have 23" FLEXED and PUMPED arms in his prime, this has been shown in many publications. Look at his bicep peak, it was just bull****.
And finally, have fun finding a Natty that has an OVERALL PHYSIQUE equal to what Zane had obtained IN HIS PRIME.
Please take note of the capitalised words here people, read it good and hard before you make a stupid comment.[/QUOTE]
I agree with everything you said, except that pic is from the 80' olympia, notice boyer coe standing next to arnie there
[QUOTE=Quelly]I agree with everything you said, except that pic is from the 80' olympia, notice boyer coe standing next to arnie there[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.musclememory.com/showArticle.php?mb671136[/url]
just some proof, arnie didn't compete in the 67 universe
EDIT: correction, he didn't compete in the IFBB Universe, which Zane did, he competed in the NABBA Universe....and yes I'm confused too
van damme 17''? i don't think so. vin diesel 17'' maybe. a cut 17'' is pretty big.
yeah im not sure about van damme...hes fluctuated in size...he was pretty big in street fighter....eh I dunno, I havent seen a flick of his since I was like 14 lol
[url]http://www.musclememory.com/showArticle.php?sh670124[/url]
Zane's measurements are at the bottom of the article.
Measurements are a good way to check progress but, judges at shows don't use measuring tape so...
I have a hard time believing that zane's waist is anything bigger than 30, I would have guessed less than that...
[QUOTE=timmy47]im having trouble finding his measurements. ive been looking for them because my goal is to be his size. does anyone know where i can find them?
this pic is what im aiming for.[/QUOTE]
I have a few of his books, "Mind, Body & Spirit" and the "Zane Body." I don't think either really give his exact measurements, but talks a lot about his competitive weight at each contest, and a few bodypart measurements. He says his arms were 19" at it's largest, in contest shape. I"ll look again to see if I missed anything...
I also have Steeves Reeve's "How to Build a Classical Physique - the Natural Way." He talks a lot more about his measurements, I found it very interesting. He also lists the perfect proportions for a body, with percentages (i.e. forearm should be X% of upper arm, etc.), along with ideal weights for the classical physique (I believe he states a 6'0 person should be 200 lbs., add 10 lbs if he has heavy bones and subtract 10 lbs if he is light boned). He provides a chart in his book...
how old is frank?
[QUOTE=TRICK D]I have a hard time believing that zane's waist is anything bigger than 30, I would have guessed less than that...[/QUOTE]
its those wings, and also hes one of the best posers of all time, he was a master of showing his body in the best way possible, he almost always shows his waist at an angle, or with a twist to give more of a v taper
[url]http://www.musclememory.com/showArticle.php?sh670124[/url]
[QUOTE=colinoday]Zane's measurements are at the bottom of the article.
Measurements are a good way to check progress but, judges at shows don't use measuring tape so...[/QUOTE]
18" that's what I figured....end of debate
I totally know what you mean about him being a great poser and all, but at 5'8, 32 inch waist really isn't that impressive. I mean Melvin rocks a much smaller waist at a lot bigger, Dexter has a lot smaller waist too. I just can't look at zane and see a 32 inch waist...
I emailed Frank Zane, and he told me that he never had his measurements taken, so i don't know where that info could have came from? Also, the Rock has about 18'' arms now, and a 50'' chest, and he, though not a bodybuilder, looks much thicker than Zane.
for zanes armsize. you guys say its 18.5 ish right? is that flexed or not flexed?
You guys need to keep in mind that Zane was a force when guys like Sergio, Arnold, Draper, Robinson, and Columbu, dominated the scene. Ferrigno was a late comer, but the point is that this guy was not a small man. Look at pictures of him in the off season.
The difference is that when he cut down and his genetics were revealed he had smaller bones, joints and bellies than a lot of the other pros.
The reason he is so revered today is that most guys with average or ecto genetics can relate to him so well. They feel that if he could do it why can't they. I'd be shocked though if his arms in contest shape were over 18" no matter how good he looked.
Zane was a balanced muscular physique. In 1980, coming off a very serious injury he was vulnerable to Arnold and frankly Arnold knew it. Had Zane NOT had that injury, I put my money that Arnold would never even have competed. Zane was never able to get back his previous form even after that. But, he is still one of the greats.
[QUOTE=coldfusion71;9171380]when people are talking about his size they are talking in relation to other bodybuilders. alot of natural guys look better than him and have the same weight, so in that way his physique is not impressive, nor does it stand the test of time.[/QUOTE]
i disagree man. natural guys do not have that conditioning. they may have some more mass on their frames but no natural guy beats frank zane. lets see a comparison. i totally agree that natural guys can be bigger. but that cut, i mean jesus his skin looks like a cm thick
[QUOTE=Delta1;43053691]for zanes armsize. you guys say its 18.5 ish right? is that flexed or not flexed?[/QUOTE]
flexed. i dont think anybody measures their arms "unflexed." the usual distinction made in arm measurements is cold or pumped.
[QUOTE=rocco421;43083381]flexed. i dont think anybody measures their arms "unflexed." the usual distinction made in arm measurements is cold or pumped.[/QUOTE]
thanks. pm me and remind me to rep you. im all out at the moment.
[QUOTE=maverick000;43067511]i disagree man. natural guys do not have that conditioning. they may have some more mass on their frames but no natural guy beats frank zane. lets see a comparison. i totally agree that natural guys can be bigger. but that cut, i mean jesus his skin looks like a cm thick[/QUOTE]
natural guys these days can get as cut as non nattys easy....in fact having competed in both tested and untested shows I can say that natty shows these days focus more on conditioning because freaky size isnt as attainable, and thus were seeing an era of super conditioned naturals...look at str8flexed or semper the new scivation sponsored natural bodybuilder here on the forums, better conditioning than most IFBB pros
[QUOTE=coldfusion71;9171380]when people are talking about his size they are talking in relation to other bodybuilders. alot of natural guys look better than him and have the same weight, so in that way his physique is not impressive, nor does it stand the test of time.[/QUOTE]
Are you kidding...Frank Zane's physique isnt impressive?
It doesnt stand the test of time?
He has an almost perfect physique from a proportionality POV.
He looks way better than anyone on this site...Sorry Chic.
And his genetics for a snaller man are flawless.
[QUOTE=Quelly;43151151]natural guys these days can get as cut as non nattys easy....in fact having competed in both tested and untested shows I can say that natty shows these days focus more on conditioning because freaky size isnt as attainable, and thus were seeing an era of super conditioned naturals...look at str8flexed or semper the new scivation sponsored natural bodybuilder here on the forums, better conditioning than most IFBB pros[/QUOTE]
You compete? Like in bodybuilding?
Im not flaming....but like 6"1 178...looks like a normal everyday person who went on a superclean diet and does some bodyweight work. Is that what nattie bbing is like...
IM HONESLTY ASKING AND NOT FLAMING...IM A BIG GUY SO SOME PHYSIQUES JUST ARENT IMPRESSIVE TO ME AND I AM SIMPLY EXPRESSING MY OWN OPINION.
I always thought Zanes physique was amazing for a smaller dude.
[QUOTE=zaxx19;43154231]You compete? Like in bodybuilding?
Im not flaming....but like 6"1 178...looks like a normal everyday person who went on a superclean diet and does some bodyweight work. Is that what nattie bbing is like...
IM HONESLTY ASKING AND NOT FLAMING...IM A BIG GUY SO SOME PHYSIQUES JUST ARENT IMPRESSIVE TO ME AND I AM SIMPLY EXPRESSING MY OWN OPINION.
I always thought Zanes physique was amazing for a smaller dude.[/QUOTE]
well, you can look at the picture of me, its right above the weight and height....I don't think I look like an everyday guy...I certainly get outmassed by big guys and my placings suffer for it, and I'm actually a tad bit small even for natty comps, but they don't weigh you on stage, I dont think I look like a swimmer in my shots, but hey I definitely acknowledge I need more mass....I'm an ecto it aint like I'm not trying.
[QUOTE=zaxx19;43154231]You compete? Like in bodybuilding?
Im not flaming....but like 6"1 178...looks like a normal everyday person who went on a superclean diet and does some bodyweight work. Is that what nattie bbing is like...
IM HONESLTY ASKING AND NOT FLAMING...IM A BIG GUY SO SOME PHYSIQUES JUST ARENT IMPRESSIVE TO ME AND I AM SIMPLY EXPRESSING MY OWN OPINION.
I always thought Zanes physique was amazing for a smaller dude.[/QUOTE]
dude, did you see his pic?? obviously he competes, and hes shredded
but i dont really agree that nattys can get as shredded as steroid users
ive never sen a natty with the level of conditioning of an IFBB pro, and that is cause all the **** they use