How would the 90s bodybuilders have done in today's era?

[artDDP]

Joe Weider I guess.

Weider always had a huge ego.

[Screwtape]

It's not a size thing separating 90s bodybuilders from today's guys, it's the granite-like hardness many 90s guys had. You just don't see this as much.

[Vomitory]

90s guys had better genetics.

I mean let's compare



vs



And then there's poses he just wouldn't even dare to try







Phils just not that freaky, nor are the mass monsters really that big. They have bigger bones, bigger organs, bigger waists, hips and guts but not really more muscle mass, they're more watery aswell. The real mass monsters were in the 90s without the non-muscle based mass that just takes away from the physique. 280lbs with small waist > 250lbs with huge guts. Heath doesn't even have a single signature pose, there's only so much 3Dness can be interesting until people realize you have no real original pose yourself. He basically just does mandatories during his posing then leaves. Not that impressive in a historic spectrum.

And I was just comparing him to a guy who can't pose, never won a Mr.Olympia yet still has signature poses and has better pics than Heath due to superior genetics and more mass with a tiny waist...the competition just isn't that high nowadays, let's be realistic.

[Jaixs]

I'm not sure why people tend to look at the 90's through rose colored glasses. I guess the same people existed during the 90's, looking back at the 70's and talking about aesthetics.
Let's be realistic for a second. The sport is waaay different from back then. Even the judging criteria changed. You can't really compare the two. Even less so taking in to account how much the photo quality differs.

But I will say that bodybuilders during the 90's were not harder than bodybuilders are now, that would be a bit naive to think seeing as technology hasn't regressed and athletes are still pushing themselves to the absolute max. Subjectively better? Maybe. But not harder.

[deathmetal1992]

I'm not sure why people tend to look at the 90's through rose colored glasses. I guess the same people existed during the 90's, looking back at the 70's and talking about aesthetics.
Let's be realistic for a second. The sport is waaay different from back then. Even the judging criteria changed. You can't really compare the two. Even less so taking in to account how much the photo quality differs.

But I will say that bodybuilders during the 90's were not harder than bodybuilders are now, that would be a bit naive to think seeing as technology hasn't regressed and athletes are still pushing themselves to the absolute max. Subjectively better? Maybe. But not harder.

People need to understand this. Compare physiques that have similar builds; comparing Paul to Phil is dumb. Put Roelly or Ramy next to Paul and suddenly Dillet would not look as impressive; he would only be holding his own from the front and side; turn them around and lights out

[Vomitory]

People need to understand this. Compare physiques that have similar builds; comparing Paul to Phil is dumb. Put Roelly or Ramy next to Paul and suddenly Dillet would not look as impressive; he would only be holding his own from the front and side; turn them around and lights out

I tend to disagree, only arguably agree with the back part and that's not even due to muscular development, rather than lazyness to improve posing. We can also compare more guys with similar builds of the past vs today and they still get beat rather easily. Let's try Phil and Ramy vs Levrone and Dillett



vs



You can play the same game with Rhoden vs Wheeler if you want



vs



Then there's simply shots that indicate a much higher level in general



Even if they're similar structurally the guys of the past had more of a wow-effect due to narrower waist/hips and a more polished look as a result, too many guy on the Mr.O stage look too washed out in the abdominal area whereas the 90s BBers had a great midsection. We have to consider aesthetics to a certain degree even for mass-monsters. Beeing shredded to the bone and having almost no visible abs, less separation and lines in most areas and needing to control your gut is not what BBing is all about. You can't really adress size and conditioning without looking at the actual physiques themselves.

Of course one could also argue that the lightning and tan has also been better in the past, I don't think the presentation at the Mr.O is really worthy of the biggest show of the Year, I've seen much better conditions during some of this Years Arnold Classic shows.

[Glenn Gould]

Where the modern era exceeds, in my opinion, is in the quality of the mid-field. These days the 5th-10th places are normally VERY good, while in the 90s the quality is great for the top 5 and then starts dropping off dramatically. This year, you had someone as good as Josh Lenartowicz in 9th. In 1996, it was Aaron Baker.

Dude, Aaron Baker had one of the best backs ever.