What bodybuilders achieved naturally without the use of cell tech (pics)

[vazquez]

more reeves





look at how he's deadlifting .... how much weight is this?

[Getting_Cut22]

I'm sorry, I forgot bodybuilders don't use drugs that aren't FDA approved or prescribed to them. Good argument, brah.

you have to be trolling... the post explains the supply of the world was being used for research and that if a person wanted it they would have to make the chemical themselves AKA probably WORK at the lab and have a PhD in biochemistry.

[omac]

Scott was on gear, this is known, and is in the open.

Park, and Reeves were not, as has been discussed many times. You can choose to believe whatever you want. If you could provide your source to your info that would be helpful.

If your truely interested in facts let me know and I'll put together some more info. Anything is possible, however, at this time my best sources say they were clean.

I'm cool dude, I wish I was built like the golden era mofo's, or at least I'm tryin.
Scott, Pearl, Howorth where some bad mofos's.

[Casey Butt]

more steve reeves




mr casey , can you comment on this pic here?


steve reeves/george eiferman/armand tanney/clancy(clarence) ross

The top photo is of Reeves posing by lake Michigan in Chicago when he won the 1947 Mr. America. The bottom one is the line-up of the 1949 Mr. USA contest. John Grimek is to the left of Reeves but was cut out of that photo. In '47 Ross was smaller and lighter than he eventually peaked in the early '50s. The same could be said of Eiferman. Reeves was not in as good a condition as he was for the 1947 Mr. America (or 1950 Mr. Universe, which he won). Notice that they are all truly relaxed, not the fully flexed "relaxed" that they call "standing relaxed" at contests today. The flexed "relaxed" stance didn't start developing until the late 1970s and '80s. They placed as follows at that contest...

1 John Grimek
2 Clarence Ross
3 Steve Reeves
4 George Eiferman
5 Armand Tanny

Some of the competitors competed in a bench press for reps contest at that show. Eiferman won with 250 lbs for 20 reps and appeared to have a few more in the tank if needed.

[Power_Strike92]

Rob Riches, One of my favorites

[Amsterdammerr]

Wow this thread is awesome
Honestly it has changed my view on what is possible natty, because im pretty sure they didnt have steroids in 1912...and that dude looks fkin jacked...if I didnt knew any better id call fraud and roid..

[muscleholic]

By all means VIN DIESEL, not a competing bb-er but amazing natural physique,my goal.

[Loctus]

I honestly think he was on Test of some sort...but he had def not started HGH.


It is more likely he was taking "a little" gear, and then stepped it up to a pro-level stack

He was a natty drugtested competitor there. What you think he was on or not on is completely irrelevant.

[R1ppedbrah]

Bob Paris

ntsureifsrs, I have Bob paris's book Beyond Built and he states he has used the cell tech. Great physique none the less

[Casey Butt]

i think it's just that diet has gotten better over time, we know more then we did back then

It's true that we know more than they did back then, but they certainly had a better food supply. Today's foods, especially in the west, are terrible - 95% of foods in the grocery stores are processed garbage made of genetically modified and partially hydrogenated soy oil. Next ingredient? Some species of corn modified to have more fructose and then heavily processed. Next ingredient? Again, processed soy in some form. Next ingredient? Some form of processed wheat, devoid of almost any nutrition. Next ingredient? A lab-cooked artificial flavour, etc, etc, etc.

Nutrition knowledge was comparatively primitive back then, but the raw materials were good and intricate knowledge really wasn't necessary. They knew animal proteins helped build muscle, starches gave them energy, and fats, fruits and vegetables kept them healthy. They were aware of the basic vitamin and mineral profiles of most meats, vegetables, fruits and fats. Typical fare for a bodybuilder would have been oatmeal (organic by today's standards, but just normal back then), full-fat unpasterurized and non-homogenized milk, free-range eggs (again, that was normal), beef from cows free of any hormone injections or anti-biotics in their feed, orange juice from oranges with unmodified genetics and actually allowed to rippen and sweeten on the tree rather than being injected with modified corn syrup as a sweetener and then plucked off the tree when still green (but that's still allowed to be called "unsweetened" orange juice today, because the oranges were still on the tree when they were injected with sugar). In comparison, today's food industry is borderline poisonous and hardly qualifies to be called "food" at all.

We may know more today, but for building drug-free muscle 99% of our diets are far behind what they were eating back then. Given the choice, when it comes to health and muscle building, I'd take the 1940s food market over the modern supermarket any day.

and for a lot of these guys looks like they were lagging with chest muscles, wonder why

Don't forget that before bodybuilding developed in the 1940s these people were all lifters first and how they looked was secondary to that. Sandow, the Saxons, Pandour, etc, all made their livings by giving strength shows. Many of them, such as Hackenschmidt, were wrestlers first, lifters second and bodybuilders not at all. And lifting back then wasn't Squats, Bench Presses and Deadlifts. It was what you could put over your head or lift off the ground with your hips and legs (i.e. "hip lifts"). That required very little in the way of chest development. It wasn't until Doug Hepburn popularized the Bench Press as an assistance exercise for increasing the overhead press (which was still an Olympic lift at that time) in the 1950s that such a piece of equipment even became available in typical "health studios". Steve Reeves was one of the first true "bodybuilders" who deliberately sought to isolate and develop his pecs to a certain ideal. And you must realize that the world was still reeling from tuberculosis and pleurisy and many people, physicians included, thought that pec development would hamper the lungs and interfere with rib cage expansion during breathing. We know the difference now, but in the post-tuberculosis days people were very sensitive about lung volume and rib cage expansion and that was their main indicator of good health and vitality - not big pecs. Even Grimek refused to over-develop his pecs because he thought it looked "un-natural".

By the late 1940s, however, bodybuilders such as Eiferman and Ross were showing off big pecs and in the '50s people like Park came along and it eventually developed into the type of physique standards that we have today (or at least had until bodybuilding turned into a chemistry trade show).

[DanielBeauchamp]

Most chest muscles on BBers today are overdeveloped, IMO. Back then they prized obliques/shoulders more highly than chest/abs.

Old-time strongmen/BBers/PLers were kick-ass and the motherfuking sh!t. A lot stronger than most people nowadays, too. And it was because they went in every day and lifted heavy sh!t repeatedly without worrying about peak contraction/extensions/MMC. They just smashed heavy weights on the regular.

[Casey Butt]

Old-time strongmen/BBers/PLers were kick-ass and the motherfuking sh!t. A lot stronger than most people nowadays, too. And it was because they went in every day and lifted heavy sh!t repeatedly without worrying about peak contraction/extensions/MMC. They just smashed heavy weights on the regular.

Very true. The focus back then was almost purely on simply lifting more. They weren't distracted by BS and flashy confusing contradictions in every issue of bodybuilding magazines. Strength in and of itself was as much a goal as the "body beautiful". IMO, many people today know too much (or at least think they do), to the point that they have no clear focus in the long term and end up achieving little as a result.

When your goals and methods were "simple" you were left with nothing but hard work and dedication as the means to that end, no excuses because your only tool and form of feedback were simply lifting more weight. If you didn't succeed it was because you didn't apply yourself, not because you didn't know the "secrets" because there were none, and nobody believed there were. In the end, that's exactly the type of environment and focus that genetically typical trainees need to succeed.

[DanielBeauchamp]

Very true. The focus back then was almost purely on simply lifting more. They weren't distracted by BS and flashy confusing contradictions in every issue of bodybuilding magazines. Strength in and of itself was as much a goal as the "body beautiful". IMO, many people today know too much (or at least think they do), to the point that they have no clear focus in the long term and end up achieving little as a result.

Agreed 100%, man. Which is one of the things that caused me to abandon modern BBing in general in favor of pure strength training. I just find it more enjoyable and less complicated; plus, you will get a good-looking body if you train hard enough. Look at John Grimek.

Most of it is Weider's fault, I'll tell you. He really fuked-up the entire sport.

[Jem777]

There were no black BBers in the 1950s?

[Casey Butt]

Most of it is Weider's fault, I'll tell you. He really fuked-up the entire sport.

Well, he made "bodybuilding" a sport in the first place. Before that "bodybuilding" contests were equal parts physique and athletic ability. That's why Reeves had trouble in many of the AAU contests - he'd lose the athletic points to "bodybuilders" who were also lifters. Grimek won his early contests not only because of his physique, but because his strength and lifting prowess allowed him to gain points in the athletic round. That's why sometimes the best physique didn't necessarily win the Mr. America contest - it was a combination of physique plus athletic ability that got the most points. Of course, many people cried foul when someone with an inferior physique beat someone who clearly looked better. But the lifters felt the same way when a much stronger and better conditioned athlete lost to someone with less lifting or gymnastics ability (yes, even gymnastics could get athletic points) simply becaue the other guy was "prettier". In fact, even hygiene - grooming and teeth, etc - were judged in early bodybuilding contests.

Weider saw this as an injustice to the people who weren't lifters, but were pure bodybuilders (such as Reeves). Hoffman saw strength and athleticism as being just as important to being able to call yourself "Mr. America" as simply being a "pretty boy" - or as Vasily Alexeyev said, "looks like Tarzan, lifts like Jane".

It was a split in ideologies. When steroids came along, and with Weider's bodybuilders-only IFBB in place, it was inevitable what would eventually happen. I think everyone had good motives, but it deteriorated with the introduction of anabolic drugs.

[malfee]

ITT no one believes current natural professional bodybuilders are indeed natural, despite several years of passing a myriad of tests, as well as weighing more often than not 80-100lbs lighter than top IFBB pros.

[Casey Butt]

There were no black BBers in the 1950s?

Sure there were. In fact, Melvin Wells' loss to John Farbotnik for the 1950 Mr. America was one of the factors that gathered support for Weider's "fair" "bodybuilding" federation...



Was it racism or athleticism that got Farbotnik the victory? Or was his physique simply better? Or was it all or some combination of the above?

[Pepsi88]

By all means VIN DIESEL, not a competing bb-er but amazing natural physique,my goal.

lol get this **** out of here

[DanielBeauchamp]

Well, he made "bodybuilding" a sport in the first place. Before that "bodybuilding" contests were equal parts physique and athletic ability. That's why Reeves had trouble in many of the AAU contests - he'd lose the athletic points to "bodybuilders" who were also lifters. Grimek won his early contests not only because of his physique, but because his strength and lifting prowess allowed him to gain points in the athletic round. That's why sometimes the best physique didn't necessarily win the Mr. America contest - it was a combination of physique plus athletic ability that got the most points. Of course, many people cried foul when someone with an inferior physique beat someone who clearly looked better. But the lifters felt the same way when a much stronger and better conditioned athlete lost to someone with less lifting or gymnastics ability (yes, even gymnastics could get athletic points) simply becaue the other guy was "prettier". In fact, even hygiene - grooming and teeth, etc - were judged in early bodybuilding contests.

Weider saw this as an injustice to the people who weren't lifters, but were pure bodybuilders (such as Reeves). Hoffman saw strength and athleticism as being just as important to being able to call yourself "Mr. America" as simply being a "pretty boy" - or as Vasily Alexeyev said, "looks like Tarzan, lifts like Jane".

It was a split in ideologies. When steroids came along, and with Weider's bodybuilders-only IFBB in place, it was inevitable what would eventually happen. I think everyone had good motives, but it deteriorated with the introduction of anabolic drugs.

True. Mostly I don't like some of his training principles; Weider was a big advocate of split routines while Hoffman and most of the more experienced lifters at that time were doing full-body routines; even for bodybuilding purposes. Till Weider came along, most bodybuilders were as strong as they looked; now most of them are not only treating split bodypart routines (which, to me, never showed much results) like the holy grail, but the introduction of anabolic drugs makes modern bodybuilding more of a freak show than anything else.

It is also worth noting that the bodybuilders who trained with more power routines in their sessions/had a back ground in strength training (Ronnie Coleman, Arnold, etc.) kept their strength for longer even after retirement and had the more impressive physiques.

Also interesting is the fact that Arnold only ran d-bol during his contest prep; most of his off-season musculature was built through 6x per week routines with a lot of heavy power movements as well as isolations.

[Casey Butt]

look at how he's deadlifting .... how much weight is this?

Looks to be 285 to 300 lbs. Reeves deadlifted with his fingers grabbing the lips of the plates because he believed the very wide grip work widened his shoulder structure.

[safi connection]

i think it's just that diet has gotten better over time, we know more then we did back then

and for a lot of these guys looks like they were lagging with chest muscles, wonder why

i think it's just that diet has gotten better over time, we know more then we did back then

and for a lot of these guys looks like they were lagging with chest muscles, wonder why

I love the pics of the old days, some these guys had amazing physiques not only without good supplements or diet but without fancy equipment

wtf is up with these retarded posts. 'yeah we know a lot more about diet now then we do then'. um can you explain what please? it's funno every 2nd post on bb.com is always "IT'S NOT HARD TO GET BIG, LIFT A LOT AND EAT OVER YOUR MAINTENANCE CALORIES" then the next post you'll have people trumpeting that the reason pros are much bigger now is because 'knowledge of diet and training has improved'. what a joke. diet is pretty much the easiest thing in the world. eat.. a lot.. of food


as for the OP, good pics, i don't find it that hard to believe these guys are natural. sure they are carrying good mass, but gaining mass is never the hard part of natural bbing. it is cutting down to contest condition whilst maintaining that mass.. and none of these older guys are particularly conditioned. they are down to 9-10% bodyfat max, a few of them are quite vascular but that's mainly genetics anyway. they are all lacking in seperation and striations etc etc compared to the 'natural' pros of today.

[jafomofo]

For a bodybuilder to attain testosterone pre-1950 he would had to have known someone at the research level who could isolate it and supply him with it. And he would had to have known more about it's athletic potential than anyone in the world at that time. Highly unlikely. .

No they would have had to have had a source just like today. They wouldn't have had to stroll into the research clinic, that's beyond dumb to suggest. With all the steroid related research that happened during ww2, anyone after 1940 is suspect. This thread is beyond retarded.

[ildevilon]

Rob Riches, One of my favorites

He may use nothing few weeks b4 contest, but i think he ran cycle or few in the past

[Mickles]

very cool thread

[Casey Butt]

No they would have had to have had a source just like today. They wouldn't have had to stroll into the research clinic, that's beyond dumb to suggest. With all the steroid related research that happened during ww2, anyone after 1940 is suspect. This thread is beyond retarded.

There was very little steroid related research done during WW2 that anyone in this world is aware of. Research publication ground to a halt during the war, as did funding. It has been speculated that the Germans continued testosterone reseach during the war, but that is completely unsubstantiated by anything more than speculation. Before and after the war the Germans published their research in international journals, as did researchers in the west who were working with testosterone suspension and esters. There were no big "Nazi steroid secrets" that mis-informed and otherwise ignorant gym-rats like to tell mysterious stories about.

What's beyond dumb to suggest is that anybody in the west outside of research settings had a source of testosterone before it was FDA approved in 1950 and not a single lab in the west was producing it in quantity - Searle, Ciba, none of them.

[DanielBeauchamp]

There was very little steroid related research done during WW2 that anyone in this world is aware of. Research publication ground to a halt during the war, as did funding. It has been speculated that the Germans continued testosterone reseach during the war, but that is completely unsubstantiated by anything more than speculation. Before and after the war the Germans published their research in international journals, as did researchers in the west who were working with testosterone suspension and esters. There were no big "Nazi steroid secrets" that mis-informed and otherwise ignorant gym-rats like to tell mysterious stories about.

What's beyond dumb to suggest is that anybody in the west outside of research settings had a source of testosterone before it was FDA approved in 1950 and not a single lab in the west was producing it in quantity - Searle, Ciba, none of them.

Furthermore, anabolics weren't even as highly concentrated/effective when they were first utilized. "Big" doses back then were idiotically small by today's standards.

[mainguy]

Looks to be 285 to 300 lbs. Reeves deadlifted with his fingers grabbing the lips of the plates because he believed the very wide grip work widened his shoulder structure.

Interesting. I don't doubt there is some truth to that, as Reeves had very wide shoulders.

[joen270]

its funny, i never think of anyone from the 30's or 40's being all huge like that.

[Casey Butt]

Interesting. I don't doubt there is some truth to that, as Reeves had very wide shoulders.

23.5 inches from delt-to-delt, as measured by a caliper.

[Casey Butt]

its funny, i never think of anyone from the 30's or 40's being all huge like that.

The media likes to portray that era as being kooky and foolish - makes us feel better about how "intelligent" we are today. I've noticed for years that the Weider magazines seem to deliberately select the puniest most unimpressive photos of Grimek, etc, they can get whenever they publish old-timers photos - makes us believe how far we've advanced because of the "modern" industry-promoted methods. If readers see that Reg Park was just as big in 1951 as any of today's top natural bodybuilders, but with no "sophisticated" training equipment, routines or supplements, then they just might make the next step and ask whether all that stuff is necessary or is just bunk. Obviously, that's not the impression the media or their advertisers want to give.

Reg Park, 1951


Of course, in reality, none of that is actually true. Every era has produced its very impressive physiques - by the standards of any time.