Large Natural Bodybuilders

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Mara Ermogemous

unread,
Aug 3, 2024, 5:19:16 PM8/3/24
to terpmasrimorr

Zane also said in his interview with golden era aesthetic that he has 6.5 inches wrists. It is clear that guys like Steve Reeves and Bill Pearl are big-boned guys but the fact that none of the other guys had 6" wrists seems to indicate that the measurement are skewed.

The only fact that indicates is that no one with a 6-inch wrist won the Mr. America. Like Lonnie said, definitely post the other chart for smaller wrists/calves. It might be interesting for other little fellas to see.

This article is going to present you with a neutral look at the science of natural genetic potential. Please understand that before we move forward, I encourage you to look at natural expectations as goals, not restrictions. The reality is that few natural lifters ever reach these standards. Therefore, they are presented to set the bar high, not low.
I will start by taking a look at the greatest natural bodybuilders of all-time.

Moving on down the list, we have John Grimek and Ty Dinh. Ty is a half inch taller, but carries a lower lean body mass than Grimek. Because of this body mass difference, John also has a slight arm size advantage. Ty Dinh is much leaner in contest shape, but appears to sacrifice some lean body mass to achieve this level of conditioning.

Finally we have the shortest lifters in the group: George Eiferman and Stu Yellin. Stu has a slight height advantage, but like his other modern counterparts features a leaner physique. George Eiferman carries around more lean body mass, but this is likely a product of the competition standards from his era. George did not have to be ultra shredded to win.
So what can we learn from these comparisons? Despite any proclaimed advancements in training, nutrition and supplementation science over the last 60 years, modern lifters do not carry around any more muscle mass or arm size.

In this section we will look at the models and formulas of other prominent voices in the lifting realm. While some of these viewpoints are opinion, the cumulative conclusion that natural limitations exist should be at least considered.
To ignore some of the most intelligent and experienced industry experts would be foolhardy. The following section contains their opinions, quotes, formulas and tables.

Lyle McDonald on natural genetic limitations:
I??d note that while I do believe trainees should simply get into proper training and not worry up front what they may or may not accomplish, I also believe that there are genetic limits set by underlying biology (again, modulated by behavioral choices and patterns). That??s just reality and recognizing them can save people from a lot of mental anguish about what they think they should be able to or could be able to accomplish if they just worked hard enough.

Here are yearly expectations for a lifter with a 7 inch wrist:
? Year 1 - 14.7 pounds
? Year 2 - 7.35 pounds
? Year 3 - 3.68 pounds
? Year 4 - 1.84 pounds
? Year 5 - 0.92 pounds
Mathematically you only need to calculate your first year expectations, and then halve then each year thereafter. To do so you can utilize this simplified formula to calculate year one gains only:
First year muscle gains = 0.3 ?? wrist2

It should be noted that for underweight individuals first year gains may come at a more rapid pace. It is logical to assume that your body wants to seek a healthy weight for your age and frame, and may allow for additional first year muscle mass increases.

Berkham, Perry, McDonald and Aragon each provide you with a goal somewhere in the 80 to 90% of your maximum natural physiological muscle building potential. This is reasonable for 95% of you who are not after the maximum amount of muscle mass humanly possible. For the other 5% of you that want more, there is nothing holding you back but time and effort.

There is enough proof in the natural bodybuilding world to destroy this belief without getting into the science of natural physiology. I have talked to dozens upon dozens of natural champions in my day. Most of these men have trained anywhere from 10 to 25 years.

To a man they will tell you that gains slow down dramatically after the first several years. If you look at their contest weights, you will find a trivial difference year in and year out.
Furthermore, if you analyze the competition weights of natural pro bodybuilders you will find they mostly compete within 170 to 185 pounds on stage. Some of the taller lifters and elite champions push beyond 190 pounds on stage, but this is somewhat rare.

Compare this to the Mr. Olympia and you find that the natural competitors are weighing in about 100 pounds less. 100 pounds. Let that sink in for a moment.
Drugs permeate the muscle building world for one reason and one reason only: they work, and work well.

Natural Testosterone & Human Growth Hormone Levels
Steroids increase bodily testosterone levels to supra-natural, helping to create elevated protein synthesis levels. This allows for greater muscle size.
Human growth hormone creates new muscle cells. This, in concert with elevated protein synthesis levels supplied by steroids, can create cartoon-like levels of muscle mass that no natural can possibly come close to.

Flipping this coin over, it is logical to assume that natural testosterone levels will only allow for a finite level of protein synthesis and muscle tissue growth. Testosterone has a direct impact on muscle protein synthesis. Protein synthesis promotes muscle growth and repair.

Anabolic steroids also work to block some of the impact of cortisol on muscle tissue, which works to slow the rate at which existing muscle tissue is broken down. Also, steroids work to increase creatine phosphate synthesis. This allows lifters to train longer and harder.
This benefit in and of itself does not directly cause growth, but it can work to stimulate or repair damaged muscle tissue receptors, thus allowing for improved mass gains. A quote from An Interview With Dharkham, an expert on the workings of anabolic steroids:
When too much androgen is present in the blood, androgen receptor levels will decrease. But we have many studies showing that training a muscle will renew those receptors. This is why why there is a synergy between androgen and training in bodybuilders while steroids only work to a limited extent in untrained persons.

A bodybuilder who has never taken steroids does not suffer much androgen receptor downregulation. Training will simply increase the number of ready-to-work androgen receptors. He will have far more receptors than the average untrained Joe. This is why the first cycle of anabolics is very often the best. Plenty of receptors. As the cycle continues, the number of androgen receptors will go down. But with proper training targeted at re-opening the androgen receptors, we can prevent the stagnation we see in numerous western bodybuilders after several drug cycles.

Long story short, steroid use over time downregulates muscle cell receptors, decreasing results. Intense contractions and/or high volume training sessions can work to re-open these desensitized receptors, working to create better gains. Therefore, improved creatine phosphate synthesis allows a steroid using bodybuilder to increase his likelihood of re-opening these receptors.

Natural Myostatin Levels
Myostatin is a protein found mainly in muscle tissue cells. Myostatin deficiencies, or substances that are able to block the activity of myostatin, would allow for greater muscle tissue size.

These natural bodybuilders have won state titles, pro cards and even the prestigious Yorton Cup, yet not a single one of them has busted beyond their lean body mass potential range as predicted by Dr. Casey Butt. They also have not exceeded the lean body masses of naturals who competed 40, 50 and even 60 years ago.

Times have changed, and while modern physiques are leaner, they are not bigger.
Natural Arm Size Potential
Natural arm size potential is another very heated topic. When reasonable standards are presented they are often ridiculed as being too small. It seems everyone on the Internet claims to know someone who is lean and has 20" natural arms.
Despite these claims, pictures never surface. If they do the individual is typically over 35% body fat and far from lean.
The arm size standards in this section are presented as reasonable goals for lifters who are at 15% body fat or lower. As your body fat levels increase, so will your arm size. Add the following adjustments to your arm size goal if your body fat percentage is above 15%:
? 15% - No adjustment
? 20% - Plus 0.5"
? 25% - Plus 1.0"
? 30% - Plus 1.5"
? 35% - Plus 2.0"
? 40% and over - Plus 2 to 3"
These adjustments will help you to create reasonable goals based on body fat percentage.

Here are the areas of circles ranging from 10 to 22 inch circumferences. This example will reveal how much additional arm area is required to gain an extra inch depending on your current arm size.
? 10 inch arm = 7.94 area
? 11 inch arm = 9.62 area
? 12 inch arm = 11.46 area
? 13 inch arm = 13.46 area
? 14 inch arm = 15.62 area
? 15 inch arm = 17.94 area
? 16 inch arm = 20.42 area
? 17 inch arm = 23.06 area
? 18 inch arm = 25.77 area
? 19 inch arm = 28.71 area
? 20 inch arm = 31.81 area
? 21 inch arm = 35.07 area
? 22 inch arm = 38.49 area
Plotting the data, we see that the ratio of arm size to arm area is not linear. Simply stated, with each additional inch you are required to add more arm area. When growing from 13 to 14" arms, your arm size area must increase by about 2.16. When growing from 19 to 20" arms, your arm size much increase by about 2.94.
If you consider the fact that gains slow dramatically over time for naturals, it becomes apparent that moving beyond a 16 to 17" arm in a lean body state is test of patience. It will take time, time and more time to see small but noticeable increases in size.

In 1954, William Herbert Sheldon released his book Atlas Of Men which presented the concept of somatotyping. Somatotypes were a method of describing the human body based on several characteristics including:
? Muscle length
? Muscle belly size and shape
? Limb length
? Fat storage tendencies
? Muscle building tendencies
? Waist size
? Shoulder size (broad/narrow shoulders)
? Bone size
Sheldon went on to detail 3 very distinct somatotypes. Here are the definitions via Wikipedia:
? Ectomorphic: characterized by long and thin muscles/limbs and low fat storage; usually referred to as slim. Ectomorphs are not predisposed to store fat nor build muscle.
? Mesomorphic: characterized by medium bones, solid torso, low fat levels, wide shoulders with a narrow waist; usually referred to as muscular. Mesomorphs are predisposed to build muscle but not store fat.
? Endomorphic: characterized by increased fat storage, a wide waist and a large bone structure, usually referred to as fat, or chunky. Endomorphs are predisposed to storing fat.

c80f0f1006
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages