Frank Zane

[gogz]

Frank Zane did juice. And anyone who says Zane sucks needs their head examined - He had the perfect physique, so symetric.

gogz

[Uriel_da_man]

But anyways saying he's ridiculously small is probably too extreme...You also have to consider that this is 1980's, knowledge since then has improved even further.

Sergio Oliva, 10 years (!!) before him was much bigger than him. Arnold, the previous champ, was considerably bigger aswell. He came after them so if anything he had better resources.

You can be sure that if you walked past Zane in the street back in the day you could be

Sure I would "WOW". But I classify as "normal". Zane is pretty big...by normal standards. But I'm absolutely sure there are amateurs out there (as in the kind that doesn't even compete) that would make WOW! See the difference between "WOW" and "WOW!"?

Plus the pic of him with the shirt on just proves my point - he looks like a model, not a bodybuilder.

[S.C.]

Really, you hate it? What is wrong with it? He is in very good condition in that video, and perfect proportions. You have every right to like or dislike whatever you want, but man Zane is in great shape there. If you are into bodybuilding (and i understand many are not and find us to look wierd) I just wonder what you dislike about him?

I think Frank Zane was a fitness athelete, not a bodybuilder (to put it short). And of course Im into bodybuilding, I've been on these very forums for 2 years before you signed up lol. Im not "one of those people". I don't like Arnold very much, but I think Arnold shamed him.

[S.C.]

but I think Arnold shamed him.

I should add, to put this more into perspective, Sergio shamed Arnold too in my opinion.

Zane was:

1. Small.

2. Not INCREDIBLY proportional. Flex Wheeler was incredibly proportioned. Theres a difference.

3. Talking about ripped? Not really. Hes OKAY. Hes what any bodybuilder of his time would have been, in terms of fat percentage.

I think what attracts people to him is the idea that he may have a physique that one could attain. Or maybe that one wouldn't get stares with his physique. Dunno.

[BodySculpting]

Most people that are saying Zane was small, and that he didn't have Pro's physique are surely measuring him up against people like Coleman and the rest of the today's Olympia circus. Not only that, they are judging him on size and size alone. That is the problem...bodybuilding has become about size. Look at the man's symmetry and grace, look at the thickness and fullness of his muscles, the proportion and definition...the conditioning...not just the circus act size.

No, he wasn't the biggest but its not all about size and he was one to prove it...although I bet he's 10x bigger than all the people hating on him on this thread put together. 18" arms on a 5'9 frame is nothing to be called small.

[Uriel_da_man]

Most people that are saying Zane was small, and that he didn't have Pro's physique are surely measuring him up against people like Coleman and the rest of the today's Olympia circus. Not only that, they are judging him on size and size alone. That is the problem...bodybuilding has become about size. Look at the man's symmetry and grace, look at the thickness and fullness of his muscles, the proportion and definition...the conditioning...not just the circus act size.

I'm all pro for aesthetics, but AS A BODYBUILDER YOUR FIRST CONCERN SHOULD BE BIG MUSCLES.

I'll say it again: the guys who think that it's like:

1) Aesthetics
2) Conditioning
3) Size

ARE THINKING LIKE MODELS, NOT LIKE BODYBUILDERS!

There are plenty of guys who were very aesthetic and would completely dwarf Zane. See Shawn Ray, for example. One of the most aesthetic bodies this business has ever seen. BUT HE STILL FILLS IN A SHIRT!

[bongd]

Uriel, I think what people are arguing is that looking at an ugly pile of muscles isn’t very entertaining. Despite his small stature, Zane had an AMAZING physique. No one in the right mind can say “oh yeah, so he’s a little ripped, big deal”. It is a big deal. There’s a difference between being a little ripped and having a fantastic physique. And this is what Zane embodied (no pun intended).

It’s not particularly hard to bulk up as you probably know. But to carry muscle, hold your conditioning and have great symmetry is what makes professional bodybuilding something else. Zane was a great poser and seemed like a God on stage. His music and posing routines were very dramatic and theatrical. It’s no wonder why people get starry eyed when Zane’s up on stage. He’s easily admirable.

I do agree with some of what you’re saying though. I wouldn’t particularly put aesthetics and conditioning above size. But sheer size isn’t all that matters. You can look at pro’s like David Henry and Phil Heath no one’s going to tell you that they suck because they’re 20lbs lighter than other pro’s on stage. Naw, I don’t think so, that’d be taking your words out of context and I’m not all about that.

Size, symmetry, genetics, conditioning and posing… they’re all extremely important and this is why we have experts judging contests at professional organizations. While people certainly have the right to their own opinion, they can think that Zane was small by their standards, but in no way was he not a great professional bodybuilder. He got up there and ruled the stage with his aesthetics, symmetry and grace. He didn’t have any calves or a freakish amount of muscle, but he was obviously a deserving Olympia champion in my books.

[Uriel_da_man]

But that's just it. People put Zane on the same bucket as Phill Heath or David Henry. They're just not the same. Heath and Henry carry their mass with aesthetics. Zane didn't have that much mass to carry.

There are two types of bodybuilders today: there are mass monsters, and there are those who manage to build a large, yet still aesthetic physique. Zane is neyther. Zane is the exact oposite of a mass monster. Zane is borderline Abercrombie model.

[Uriel_da_man]

I'll put this as simple as I can:


|--------------------------------------------------------|
_^_____^_____^__________^_______^______^_____^__
Ruhl_Coleman_Cutler_____DJackson__Heath___Zane__Mo del

[bongd]

Yeah, I suppose I can appreciate that. I personally won’t go as far as calling him a bitch AKA Ambercrombie model *shudder*, but that’s true that he didn’t have much mass.

Some pictures like the one on the last page, he did carry a respectable amount of muscle. The quality of his muscle too is what saves him in my eyes. His genetics and muscle maturity was awesome

[Uriel_da_man]

Bitch?

[BodySculpting]

I'm all pro for aesthetics, but AS A BODYBUILDER YOUR FIRST CONCERN SHOULD BE BIG MUSCLES.

I'll say it again: the guys who think that it's like:

1) Aesthetics
2) Conditioning
3) Size

ARE THINKING LIKE MODELS, NOT LIKE BODYBUILDERS!

There are plenty of guys who were very aesthetic and would completely dwarf Zane. See Shawn Ray, for example. One of the most aesthetic bodies this business has ever seen. BUT HE STILL FILLS IN A SHIRT!

I agree, Zane was smaller than the average...even at his time.

But how can you say bodybuilding is all about size? Break down the words...body...building, you are building your body up. It's a shame when moderately decent big guys are called small and useless because they dont have freaky size...bodybuilding HAS BECOME about freaky size...that's not how it started.

[gguerrero775]

you have 18 inch arms, and still come nowhere cose to the symmetry or proportion or overall masculinity as zane. sorry you are just an average ass body. dumbass think he can actually compete with zane. Embarrassing.

[gguerrero775]

some people have mentioned flex wheeler, don't forget he was the most aesthetically pleasing in his 220 pound form. Since 1996 he has changed to a 246 lb form off and on which a lot of people seem to think was a bad idea. or am i wrong on this? flex wheeler is also 5' 9" and he eventually wanted to compete with the mass monsters, which to me he doesn't look as good. he look bloated all the time.

[jdmalm123]

Frank Zane, age 65




Ronnie Coleman, now

[adam247]

I'm all pro for aesthetics, but AS A BODYBUILDER YOUR FIRST CONCERN SHOULD BE BIG MUSCLES.

I'll say it again: the guys who think that it's like:

1) Aesthetics
2) Conditioning
3) Size

ARE THINKING LIKE MODELS, NOT LIKE BODYBUILDERS!

There are plenty of guys who were very aesthetic and would completely dwarf Zane. See Shawn Ray, for example. One of the most aesthetic bodies this business has ever seen. BUT HE STILL FILLS IN A SHIRT!

So because someone believes aesthetics should come first you are suggesting we are thinking like models? Whats your definition of a model? Yes magazines are more attracted to aesthetically pleasing physiques, but a lot of the guys modelling for those fitness and muscle magazines are bodybuilders also as the two come hand in hand. Yes it is BODYBUILDING, does that mean size should come first? So a person that is a architect (builder) and constructs a house - do they just build the biggest thing possible? Does a painter throw as much paint as they can at a picture? Does a sculpture use as much material as possible? As eventually this hunger for size will have no where to go before it starts to dramatically harm health. Arnold quoted that bodybuilding is like sculpturing, and when training shoulders it is like putting clay on your shoulders, it just takes much longer. To define what something is is to look back at where it came from. Bodybuilding was not born purely based on size, it has only turned into that due to the subculture it has become, and with most of its fans being extreme, and wanting to see extreme things. Rather than see it in an artistic light they like the see the shock factor. I believe this is patronising to the great sport it could be, as a few hundred years ago that same shock factor sold tickets to 'freak' circus'. My point is clarified by the discussions on this forum, as people can only relate and understand why people are pro based on their size, and seem to miss the other details which make a great physique. If size is the number 1 criteria, with this ideal let me ask you this - where do you see the sport in 50 years?

[ssir9]

Frank Zane, age 65
Ronnie Coleman, now

WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! where and when was this taken?

[curt_james]

Here's his 1980's olympia... fricken awesome look, and really great posing. I like how he builds it up slowly then executes the pose quickly at the last second.



So, do you think Zane used steroids? To me, he doesn't look that "massive", like his body could be achieved by just lots of hard work. This is defently the kind of look i'm shooting for.

Fixed the YouTube if it hasn't been fixed already. Either way, I definitely agree that Zane looked incredible. And, yeah, there were many who had a similar build, but Zane had the benefit of being Arnold's training partner, one of the few to have actually defeated Arnold (although he was a relative "noob" at the time), and the Weider publicity. Richard Baldwin looked great and competed in the same time frame but never achieved the fame of Zane.

Who knows why some got the press while others didn't.

Regardless, I don't get "the hate."

Zane's structure was great. Triceps, calves, narrow waist to broad shoulders, and he had a certain movie star face. Good looks and marketability have never hurt.

[TJ2000]

That ronnie pic is disgusting, no offense.
I prefer the frank zane look, way better on the eyes and still rather big. 18 inch arms is not small! Strong e standards.

[espoleta]

Frank Zane, Mike Mentzer, Serge Nubret, Ken Waller. My four favorite bodybuilding physiques.

I think Zane had outstanding proportions, and he was also a good-looking dude. (Here's my first time saying it...NO HOMO!) He had the kind of physique that is highly desirable to women. His name also sounds like it could be a comic book superhero (the non-super-version...Peter Parker, Clark Kent, Steve Rogers, Frank Zane!)

[JOHN GARGANI]

But that's just it. People put Zane on the same bucket as Phill Heath or David Henry. They're just not the same. Heath and Henry carry their mass with aesthetics. Zane didn't have that much mass to carry.

C'mon, URIEL, you have been around this forum for way too long to be saying what you are saying!

you CAN'T compare Frank Zane to Phil Heath!

first of all, get one thing straight: YES, Zane took "steroids'...he has admitted this himself in print several times.....

but if you were to look at the "menu" of stuff that Zane took back then, compared to what HEATH recently had to take in order to make the jump in size that he did at the Olympia, you would be shocked out of your skin!

They are different times and eras and Zane was a small boned man who built himself to certain proportions as best he could with what was available at the time......


don't think for one second, that if Zane were competing today and was willing to take all the ridiculous stuff that modern day top bodybuilders are taking, that he would also have the "mass" you say he is lacking.......


back then, it was pop a few DBols or Anavars, and if you were really lucky, score an occasional injection of DECA.....

there was no Growth hormone, and Insulin and thyroxin and Clen and all of the other multitudes of chemicals that go into these wonderful physiques that you are comparing him to.....


if both Phil Heath or Dexter Jackson were to come on here right now and HONESTLY lay out ALL of the junk they took before the Olympia and then you saw what Zane took, you wouldn't be talking the way you are......

and another thing: there is something called RESPECT when you participate in a sport...respect for your fellow competitors , past and present.....

Zane has earned his many times over......


There are a lot of guys on this forum who compete in natural events and their physiques would probably be compared to a "model" to you, but they have put in incredibly hard work to get into stage presentation by hard work, diet and no drugs......

have respect for fellow successful bodybuilders, then and now.....

[BigChamp89]

Frank Zane, age 65




Ronnie Coleman, now

lol @ picking the best photo of zane and the worst guestposing pic of coleman

[visionz1234]

lol @ picking the best photo of zane and the worst guestposing pic of coleman

+1. Funny post though.

[espoleta]

Frank Zane, age 65

Hah, he looks kind of like Clint Eastwood's bodybuilding brother.

[A.G.220]

yeah great points there, u really got me.......

i didn't know the judging criteria was based on how healthy they looked??? well u learn something everyday, nice one mate.

by natural i mean no roids. i said i have been training for a year and a half.

My point is that if i can get in the same ball park, sizewise, without being on juice (i admitt i look no way near as good as zane) how can he be given a Mr O??? its not about how nice ypur lines are or how cut u are, at the end of the day it is who is the biggest and most muscular. conditioning and cutting are to make the muscles look bigger, create an illusion, after all the goal is to look as big as possible

well apparently you don't know as much about bb as you thought.
Conditioning and symmetry are categories in judging when it comes to bodybuilding...so zane's unrivaled conditioning and symmetry is what gives him his god-like status

[Alfz]

well apparently you don't know as much about bb as you thought.
Conditioning and symmetry are categories in judging when it comes to bodybuilding...so zane's unrivaled conditioning and symmetry is what gives him his god-like status

Lots of guys have decent symmetry and conditioning now, just a quick example how does Frank beat Phil on symmetry and conditioning? I'm saying it could probably be the same, but Phil holds more mass than Frank

[streetlethaleg6]

i've seen bigger underwear models. FRANK ZANE IS TINY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why does everyone like this guy??? he is sooooo much smaller than everyone else, he sticks out like dogs balls when looking through the past O winners. So u only need 18" arms to win an O, i have 18's i'm a natural and have been training for a year and a half!!!

Its body BUILDING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First off your are RETARDED to compare your pathetic self to zane's physique so please STFU and go sit in the corner and think about what you said...............okay now back to the topic YES ZANE DID USE STEROIDS that is fact he admittted to it. just because you use steroids doesn't mean you willl blow up into a monster. And whoever was the dumbass that comparted him to stalone, stalone Also Used steroids and HGH

[goodasgold]

Zane used steriods, like Arnold, moderate amounts compared to what is used today but nonetheless, he used them. He also consumed huge amounts of protein via beef and eggs and also took 150 dessicated liver tablets a day. Evenw ith steriods, Zane indicated he had to take massive amounts of supplements or he wouldn't.

Zane and Nubret were to my way of thinking the two greatest bodybulders of the 1970s and possibly of all time. They were also 2 of the most inteligent trainers along with Larry Scott and Vince Gironda.

[Storenfried]

Boy, someone introduce Zane to shrugs asap!!

[mike8190]

yeah great points there, u really got me.......

i didn't know the judging criteria was based on how healthy they looked??? well u learn something everyday, nice one mate.

by natural i mean no roids. i said i have been training for a year and a half.

My point is that if i can get in the same ball park, sizewise, without being on juice (i admitt i look no way near as good as zane) how can he be given a Mr O??? its not about how nice ypur lines are or how cut u are, at the end of the day it is who is the biggest and most muscular. conditioning and cutting are to make the muscles look bigger, create an illusion, after all the goal is to look as big as possible

But lines and conditioning have A LOT to do with bodybuilding...Judging is not only about size, but symmetry, aesthetics, conditioning, posing, etc are all part of the judging criteria as well.

I'm all pro for aesthetics, but AS A BODYBUILDER YOUR FIRST CONCERN SHOULD BE BIG MUSCLES.

I'll say it again: the guys who think that it's like:

1) Aesthetics
2) Conditioning
3) Size

ARE THINKING LIKE MODELS, NOT LIKE BODYBUILDERS!

There are plenty of guys who were very aesthetic and would completely dwarf Zane. See Shawn Ray, for example. One of the most aesthetic bodies this business has ever seen. BUT HE STILL FILLS IN A SHIRT!

I agree, size is arguably the most important aspect of bodybuilding. But it is arguable...Bodybuilding is very subjective. It's all based off of opinion. One person might think Zane is the GOAT, while another thinks Ronnie is. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of Zane, but I admit he had a very admirable physique, and was ONE of the greatest of HIS time. I'm sorry, but you just can not compare Zane to Shawn Ray. They are two completely different times. Practically all of the bodybuilders Ray competed against dwarfs anyone from Zane's era. Plain and simple. He probably wouldn't have even qualified for the O if he was Zane's size.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is bodybuilding has changed over time (obviously). Size was definitely a factor when Zane competed, but not as much as it is today. Zane projects what bodybuilding used to be. He was symmetrical, proportionate, conditioned, and presented his physique very well. The judging criteria was not based off of size as much back then as it is now, so comparing Zane to Shawn Ray, or any other recent bodybuilder is kind of pointless.