Why do the muscles look so different?

pinch yves

New member
Arnold had a 56" chest, 22" arms, and a 34" waist at the height of his career. They guys out there today have similar measurements, but their bodies look so different. Where you could see that Arnold had a massive chest, the guys today have equally massive chests but they dont hang the way Arnold's did, nor do they look as big. Is it the juice the guys are taking? Why did Arnold have such smooth muscles?
 
pinch yves said:
Arnold had a 56" chest, 22" arms, and a 34" waist at the height of his career. They guys out there today have similar measurements, but their bodies look so different. Where you could see that Arnold had a massive chest, the guys today have equally massive chests but they dont hang the way Arnold's did, nor do they look as big. Is it the juice the guys are taking? Why did Arnold have such smooth muscles?

I would have to guess pure genetics
 
pinch yves said:
Arnold had a 56" chest, 22" arms, and a 34" waist at the height of his career. They guys out there today have similar measurements, but their bodies look so different. Where you could see that Arnold had a massive chest, the guys today have equally massive chests but they dont hang the way Arnold's did, nor do they look as big. Is it the juice the guys are taking? Why did Arnold have such smooth muscles?

I have read article's on Arnold saying that he had the most portional body to ever exsist. Photographers have said that from absolutly every angle, he looks perfect. He just had the genetics. Genetics play a HUGE part in it. As far as the guys today, you have to understand that its 2007, arnold was in his prime when he was like 25yrs old or something like that (not sure on that.) Think about how advanced everything has gotten in the past 30yrs. Not only in the world of bodybuilding but everything in general. its insane. 30yrs ago, they could simply not even come close to building some of the sky scrapers that they can now days....same thing applies today with bodybuilding. Bodies are born with hormons, genetics, jeans, and shit like that due to things that people eat and take now days which make their bodies develop much differently than they did 30yrs ago. Suppliments, steroids, diets, training, etc... everything has just developed so much more, therefore the bodybuilders of today, are going to be so much more developed than they did 30yrs ago. Thats my personal opinion.
 
Onswoll said:
I have read article's on Arnold saying that he had the most portional body to ever exsist. Photographers have said that from absolutly every angle, he looks perfect. He just had the genetics. Genetics play a HUGE part in it. As far as the guys today, you have to understand that its 2007, arnold was in his prime when he was like 25yrs old or something like that (not sure on that.) Think about how advanced everything has gotten in the past 30yrs. Not only in the world of bodybuilding but everything in general. its insane. 30yrs ago, they could simply not even come close to building some of the sky scrapers that they can now days....same thing applies today with bodybuilding. Bodies are born with hormons, genetics, jeans, and shit like that due to things that people eat and take now days which make their bodies develop much differently than they did 30yrs ago. Suppliments, steroids, diets, training, etc... everything has just developed so much more, therefore the bodybuilders of today, are going to be so much more developed than they did 30yrs ago. Thats my personal opinion.
Sure, but you also have to keep in mind that back then there wasnt that many bodybuilders to even make a close comparison to todays bodybuilders.
 
I thinit also has to do with the way the athletes prepare for shows. In my opinion, i believe bodybuilders today suck out alot more then they did back then, i thkn there competition weight and body fat are much lower today. I might be completely wrong but it seems that bodybuilders in the 70's weight didnt fluctuate between in season and off season as much as today. Plus he use of different hardening agents that are availible today but not back then. in the 70's roid selection waspretty limited. But this is all just my own specualtion. I may be completely wrong
 
Some of them have weird faces from either gh or androgens not sure. But people like dave palumbo are very odd looking and u see some similiar traits in a lot of them.
 
Onswoll said:
I have read article's on Arnold saying that he had the most portional body to ever exsist. Photographers have said that from absolutly every angle, he looks perfect. .

i have always thought his legs were lacking
 
dirtybird your completely right they came on stage back then around 4 0r 5 % bf but they didnt use duretics they have more compounds available now, and their diets are different. And as far as arnolds legs they were lacking in my opinion also.
 
Warmachine said:
i have always thought his legs were lacking


thats all well and good, and I actually agree, but like i said. i have read articles by photographers who have said that. Its not like I said that.
 
yea your right ive heard the same thing but everytime someone says arnold was portioned perfectly im like give me a break look at his legs. hahaha just a little controvery bro.
 
mikeyt869 said:
yea your right ive heard the same thing but everytime someone says arnold was portioned perfectly im like give me a break look at his legs. hahaha just a little controvery bro.
:redhot: All of you are wrong about the legs...Quit trying to impose todays standards on the past! The look then was the "V-Taper", not the "X-Frame", and they had great legs for that ideal...I still think the V looks better and more in keeping with the greco-roman sculpture ideal vs. the mass-monster look...Quit comparing apples and oranges, these are two different standards...:rant:
I'd rather look like these dudes (Collras and Amato) than Jay Cutler any day, and yes thats a "smooth" 007 himself in posing trunks back in the old days, these physiques qbviously would not cut it today, so get real, Bros...
 
Last edited:
pinch yves said:
The guys out there today have similar measurements, but their bodies look so different.

The main difference from Arnold's day to modern pros is HGH, Slin, IGF.
 
Greg Kovaks is the worst! Young guy with endorsement after endorsement,,,,,now he looks like a dried up Turkey.

No offense Greg as I know you stop by but you had it all in the palm of your hand.

gator

PM me if I offended you or I can help...no offfense intended man.
 
Repticilous, your def right about the stamdard look changing, and i definitley agree with you, the bodyb uilding world back then wa about physical aethetics (spellin?). Today is all mass, i am a much bigger fan of the v shapes of back then then the mass monsters of today, i would personalaly like to see v shapes liek mark dugdale, and Dexer jackson bringing home more titles.
 
Onswoll said:
I have read article's on Arnold saying that he had the most portional body to ever exsist. Photographers have said that from absolutly every angle, he looks perfect. He just had the genetics. Genetics play a HUGE part in it. As far as the guys today, you have to understand that its 2007, arnold was in his prime when he was like 25yrs old or something like that (not sure on that.) Think about how advanced everything has gotten in the past 30yrs. Not only in the world of bodybuilding but everything in general. its insane. 30yrs ago, they could simply not even come close to building some of the sky scrapers that they can now days....same thing applies today with bodybuilding. Bodies are born with hormons, genetics, jeans, and shit like that due to things that people eat and take now days which make their bodies develop much differently than they did 30yrs ago. Suppliments, steroids, diets, training, etc... everything has just developed so much more, therefore the bodybuilders of today, are going to be so much more developed than they did 30yrs ago. Thats my personal opinion.

Far from it. He used a lot of twisting shots to make his waist appear smaller than it was, add to this the sloping shoulder structure. The key was that he was the master of posing, by posing properly he could expose his strengths while hiding the weaknesses. Few today could do what he could.
 
Back
Top