Which Would You Choose?

Quote
In the Golden Age, muscular definition was valued, but it was also expected that the skin should have a healthy glow and look about it. As Vince Gironda once found out in a competition he lost, the judges were not impressed with an "overly-defined" physique. According to their standards, it was in-fact possible to have "too much definition." Here is what Joe Weider said in an article on "Bulk and Cuts for the Legs" regarding definition in 1961 "The 'cuts' must be carved where they will enhance the esthetic appearance of the leg without making the bodybuilder look like a skinless cadaver used for anatomical instruction in a Medical College."

With the advent of steroids and other pharmaceuticals (e.g., diuretics), it was possible to achieve paper-thin skin with a very low percentage of body fat. This led to the "shredded" or "ripped" look where every muscle striation and every cutaneous vein could be seen. So what happenned? Mainstream, drug-enhanced, bodybuilders began to go to the extreme in definition (as they did with size) so that the "healthy glow of the skin" (which is due to a healthy degree of body fat) was lost and "the more ripped they were the better." So they all began to look like dissecting room cadavers. (See above left photo of Rich Gaspari - mainstream bodybuilder).

For classic physique builders, muscular definition is valued, but not the overly "ripped" or "shredded" look. Muscles should be well-defined, with muscle separation, and some natural vascularity. But the skin should have a healthy glow - which cannot be achieved with excessively low levels of body fat. The classic physique ideal embodies the look of "radiating health and vitality." This is not the dead look of a dissecting room cadaver. (See above right photo of Steve Reeves - classic physique builder).

Classic physique builders are not impressed with seeing striations in someone's gluts. They are not impressed with seeing every cutaneous vein popping out. They have no need of NO boosters to increase vascular size to the extreme. The classic physique builder look is a natural, vital, muscular, powerful, symmetrical, and atractive one. They may carry a higher degree of body fat (than modern mainstream, chemically-dependent, bodybuilders) - but that is what is necessary and desirable to truly have a classic physique that radiates with "health and vitality!"

Muscular definition - yes! Overly "ripped" and "shredded" - no need!
But even assuming that the vast majority of NBB'ers are natural (which we believe), remember that "natural' is defined differently by the different NBB organizations. So it might be that one qualifies as "natural" if they were off the drugs and hormones for the last 5 years (meaning that they could already have acquired a steroid-enhanced physique and look before going "natural"). There are very few "natural for life" NBB organizations and contests. This makes NBB a sort of "half-way" house for former "juicers" (which is still a good thing).

However, in our view, there is no doubt that the NBB world has been and continues to be very influenced by the mainstream BB'ing world in terms of their physique ideals. They strive for the same kind of overly-defined physique as well as try to emulate the same kind of proportions.

Just look at the difference in leg shape between many NBB'ers and the classic physique champs. Many NBB'ers have the same over-developed adductors (inside thigh muscles) which give the legs a "carrot" or "turnip-shaped" look. This is very different from the "straight-legged" appearance of the classic physique champs.

Also, just take a look at the NBB mags and you will see ads from the same modern supplement companies using the same steroid-enhanced physiques which promote the mainstream BB physique look. Surprisingly, in the NBB mags, you will NOT find any reference, articles, etc, to the classic physique champs of the Golden Age. It's as though the NBB world itself acknowledges no connection with the Golden Age.

NBB could have een a sort of U-turn in mainstream body building, instead it was a sort of missed shot (with respect to restoring the classic physique building ideal).

But that's OK. That just means there is an opportunity for others (like all of us) to take up the mantle of classic physique building!

Classic Physiques are all about balance and that never goes out of style

Click to expand...

Shrek said:

Is this a joke?
You chose a cartoon for Kai.

You are not asking a question here but giving your point of view.

I prefer me.

Click to expand...

To better understand our answer, it might be helpful if we list what we like and what we don't like about "natural bodybuilding" as we find it today. Before we do, however, we must say that natural bodybuilding is the one bright spot on the fringes of mainstream bodybuilding. So we are sympathetic, in general, to their movement. But natural bodybuilding is not, in general, the same as the "classic physique building" of the Golden Age (1940s and 50s).

What we like about natural bodybuilding (NB):

1. NB promotes drug-free weight training and lifestyle.

2. NB preserves and provides contest opportunities for those interested in drug-free competition.

3. NB can act as a kind of "half-way house" to rehabilitate former drug & hormone-using mainstream bodybuilders who want to give up the "juice" but still compete in bodybuilding competitions.

What we don't like about natural bodybuilding:

1. NB over-emphasizes the use of supplements and their mags feature the same drug & hormone enhanced physiques in the same supplement ads that appear in the mainstream bodybuilding mags.

2. NB does not have the "classic physique ideal" in terms of body symmetry and definition.

3. NB competitions try to mimick the mainstream bodybuilding competitions and so there is an abundance of "classics" and "internationals" and "championships" instead of the Golden Age "Mr. City", "Mr. State", "Mr. Regional", "Mr. America" - type system. So it is hard for the general public to follow NB competitions and to have a sense of the hierarchy of "who is best."

4. NB mags ("Natural Bodybuilding & Fitness" and "Fitness & Physique") are too "contest-oriented" (thus they have limited ability to attract a wider audience).

5. NB history seems to begin with Chet Yorton. In the NB mags, there seems to be no acknowledgement or "connection" with the Golden Age. The Golden Age seems as little valued in the NB mags as it is in the mainstream mags.

6. NB tries to exist within the mainstream bodybuilding world and so you might find an NB article or column here or there in some of the mainstream mags, or you might find an NB forum here or there among the mainstream bodybuilding websites. But the reality is that NB'ers are "marginalized" within the mainstream BB world. They are referred to as "natties" (a diminutive) and are tolerated, but not really valued in that mainstream BB world.

So while we (at CPB) are sympathetic to the NB movement, we have to say that natural bodybuilding and classic physique building are not the same thing. Among the things discussed above, perhaps the clearest difference is in the ideal that each holds with respect to "physique." From our perspective, the NB ideal seems to be a smaller version of the mainstream bodybuilding ideal. So among NB'ers we often see (from our perspective) over-developed traps, quads & adductors, the same air-brushed tans, and the same "ripped, cadaver"-overly defined look which doesn't give the skin that "healthy glow" look of the Golden Age champs.

Despite everything, our hearts go out to the NB'ers. They, at least, have the courage to forsake the drugs and hormones. We wish, however, that instead of trying to exist within the fringes of the mainstream world, they would divorce themselves from that world, adopt the classic physique ideal, and help us rebuild a new Golden Age of Classic Physique Building.

Click to expand...

Perhaps the most destructive aspect of roid-based, mainstream bodybuilding today is its glorification of extreme, unnatural size! When some unfortunate person begins to accept the propaganda of the mainstream, roid-based magazines that Hulk-like physiques are something to admire and attain, then sooner or later this necessitates an acceptance of the associated, unhealthy, "drug/pharmaceutical culture" that makes such extremism possible.

Fortunately, in pre-roid Golden Age Classic Physique Building (of the 1940s and 50s), there was no glorification of extreme size! Instead, the goal was to attain an aesthetically-pleasing size and symmetry that was reminiscent of the beauty of the statues of the Ancient Greek and Roman gods! This necessitated an acceptance of a "culture of health and vitality" - which is why Reeves and the other champs of the pre-roid Golden Age (of the 1940s and 50s) were proud of their health and strength as well as their physiques! (Reeves would often say that his goal was to be the healthiest person alive!) What a difference in goals and cultures!

For classic physique builders of the Golden Age and today, this freedom from being obsessed with extreme size is liberating! Why? Because our size goals are realistic and attainable while pursuing health and vitality at the same time! Take a look at the photo above of the great Monty Wolford. This photo appeared in Fall 2009 issue of Classic Physique Builder (CPBzine). Who would not want a physique like his? It is healthy, full of vitality, with classic muscular size and symmetry! Is this kind of physique attainable and realistic? Let's look at his measurements:

Height: 5'8"
Weight: 168 lbs
Neck: 16"
Arms: 16"
Calves: 16"
Chest: 44"
Forearm: 12.5"
Waist: 28.5"
Thigh: 23.5"
Wrist: 6.6"

Monty did not need 18 inch arms like Reeves to look great. Why? Reeves was 6'1", Monty was 5 inches shorter. So to achieve a classic physique like Reeves, Monty's measurements needed to be smaller to match his height (and bone structure).

Neither Reeves or Wolford obssessed about extreme size. What for anyway? Do you want to look like a cartoon (i.e., "The Hulk") or would you rather look like a Greek god?! For modern classic physique builders (CPB'ers), the choice is not a hard one. Reeves and Wolford pursued classic size & symmetry, health and vitality! So do we!

So to achieve your classic physique, you need to follow a "culture of health and vitality" along with following pre-roid Golden Age methods of proper training, proper nutrition, proper rest, and persistence. Such a "culture of health and vitality" is not only good for the body, but it is good for your spirit and character and will set you apart and enable you to be a good example for others. In this way, classic physique building not only benefits you, but also will have a positive effect on those around you. What more could you ask for?

Click to expand...

for the last month Ive been doing a steve reeves workout that Ive changed a bit (before that I was doing P90X and eating fruit and vegys for 2 months)

Click to expand...

Goosey said:

"Which Would You Choose? "

For what?

To root?

Click to expand...

oldcorollas said:

kai with Reeves level of fat?

regardles of your personal preference in men he's still a f#cking big unit! and deserves respect for that

why has Steve now become a "classic physique builder" rather than a "Natural body builder"??

Click to expand...

Goosey said:

Where do you live?

Click to expand...

dc1138 said:

Why?, because he pumped 30 different kinds of roids into his ass. He deserves NO respect. Only gullible fools like u would look up to this ugly FREAK and the glorification of extreme, unnatural size! .

Click to expand...

Not counting calories, eating 20 bananas a day, a water melon, 4 mangoes, and a salad or juice for lunch, and a huge meal of potatoes and pumpkin at night. I am guessing its about 3000 calories a day or more mostly from carbs(suger), I dont touch protein or fats.
My brain certainly feels sharper and my memory is better on fruit.
Digestion is better.Skin has improved

I feel great! Its all about dietary thermogenesis...Humans are designed to be trim creatures. We are designed to consume excessive amounts of carbohydrates daily as adult animals.
I eat almost 100% carbs and all the fat I had on my body is melting away. It's all about the right carbs
Raw food diet vegan high carb low fat style based on fruit keeps you slim naturally

Click to expand...