I see a lot of these kind of quotes and am curious what exactly one thinks is the style "bodybuilders have been doing (SUCCESSFULLY) for decades is" and whether it's truly as uniform as people make it out to be. And surprisingly, Brick's "Bodybuilding Bible" style of the flat pyramid ramp up to top set is not, and I paraphrase, "used by all the top amateurs, natural competitors, pros, real bodybuilders, blah blah blah". Far from it. There's variation in terms of straight sets, to-failure vs. shy of failure, # of work sets, frequency, etc. all across the board.
Muscle, smoke, mirrors gives a nice historical/expansive perspective. Drugs can also obfuscate training for an otherwise natural competitor.
I don't mean to attack with this post but even using this forum as a sample size, truly look at the physiques of the members who are bodybuilding "worthy", or more realistically speaking, look as lean/muscular/aesthetic as you'd like to be in real life. Stu, synergy, paragon, bhwhitwell, CT, modok all make ample use of "non-traditional" methods. Paragon went so far as to say the "traditional" bodybuilding style didn't work very well for him. Synergy, similiary, said he got the best gains training for performance/explosively (i.e. multiple sets of lower reps, not too different from the '30 rep' method CW talks about).
I'm sure there are many posters lurking who have great physiques doing "traditional" bodybuilding, whatevrer that may be, but I've seen several that just look chunky. I'm sure that's a big function of diet as well but it'd be nice to hear how actual members who have competed in bodybuilding and/or have the leanness/size to compete NOW (not as in give me 5 years so I can cut lol) comment on how exactly they're training. I imagine you'd find quite a diversity of routines/philosophies.