T Nation

Deadlifts Ruin Aesthetics

is it true that building up a lower back can ruin one’s image of an aesthetical appearance? when i look at david gulledge he sure as hell looks aesthetical from the front but from the back, its a bit distorted and i can just imagine what he looks like from the side.

it seems like ive always had a pretty huge midsection when bulking because i did deadlifts religiously, but when i started cutting up, some of that image was taken away.

another question: did any of the old school bodybuilders do deadlifts or any other lower back builder?

arnold

[quote]B.b. in stress! wrote:
is it true that building up a lower back can ruin one’s image of an aesthetical appearance? when i look at david gulledge he sure as hell looks aesthetical from the front but from the back, its a bit distorted and i can just imagine what he looks like from the side.

it seems like ive always had a pretty huge midsection when bulking because i did deadlifts religiously, but when i started cutting up, some of that image was taken away.

another question: did any of the old school bodybuilders do deadlifts or any other lower back builder?[/quote]

You’re saying the guy in the pic is looks distorted?

Fuck, man, are you really so jealous of him you have to make sure up to find flaws?

If you train really hard and have great genetics, you’ll be lucky to be so “distorted.” LMAO.

franco columbo did a ton of deadlifts. i do deadlifts on a weekly basis and i dont think there is any other exercise that works the lower back better. i have never thought of them ruining looks though…

[quote]Scott aka Rice wrote:
arnold[/quote]

do you have a pic of him from the back so when can see what your’re talking about?

do you have a pic of him from the back so when can see what your’re talking about?

[quote]CaliforniaLaw wrote:
You’re saying the guy in the pic is looks distorted?

Fuck, man, are you really so jealous of him you have to make sure up to find flaws?

If you train really hard and have great genetics, you’ll be lucky to be so “distorted.” LMAO.
[/quote]

Thats not even close to what im trying to say u egotistical bitch.

im just saying that if the lower back was built up like gulledge’s then it may have the appearance of making the midsection look bigger from the side. its just my observation.

but then again, i dont recall seeing arnold with a great lower back, so i cant really attest to that. however, nooing that columbo did it is enough for me.

but heres another question: how in the hell did they (old-school bodybuilders) keep their midsections so small?

heres a pic i forgot to post of gulledge from the back

[quote]B.b. in stress! wrote:
but heres another question: how in the hell did they (old-school bodybuilders) keep their midsections so small?
[/quote]

I am not arguing with you here, I know very very little about pretty much everything, but could you show me a picture of what you mean by bodybuilders with small waists?

I don’t think a “bigger” lower back looks any less aesthetic if it’s bigger from muscle.

Bigger from fat, and bigger from muscle is a lot different.

Even any of the bodybuilders who were know for their tiny mid sections, and their vacuum poses wouldn’t look worse with a more muscular lower back.

do you have a pic of him from the back so when can see what your’re talking about?

[quote]Taran wrote:
I am not arguing with you here, I know very very little about pretty much everything, but could you show me a picture of what you mean by bodybuilders with small waists?[/quote]

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=866980

look through every picture of an old school bodybuilder and ull never find one with a gut, but pretty much all of the waists r small

[quote]caneman wrote:
Scott aka Rice wrote:
arnold[/quote]

Arnolds got some shitty form in that pic.

I do see what you mean about his lower back but I dont think you can say that just bc he did a lot of d’ling, his lower back now looks like that. I know Ronnie, Johnnie Jackson and many other pro BB’ers do deads, I know many amateur BB’rs and friends that do them and dont seem to have that lower back “issue” you refer to. I guess it is an individual thing you are going to have to find out for yourself.

As far as the smaller waist, the GH gut definetly has a lot to do with that in today’s top pros. But there are still a lot of BB’ers out there who have both the size and the waist of the old school cats. I am not saying they werent doing any gear back in the day but I think the amount and kind have a lot to do with it.

A

[quote]B.b. in stress! wrote:
CaliforniaLaw wrote:
You’re saying the guy in the pic is looks distorted?

Fuck, man, are you really so jealous of him you have to make sure up to find flaws?

If you train really hard and have great genetics, you’ll be lucky to be so “distorted.” LMAO.

Thats not even close to what im trying to say u egotistical bitch.

im just saying that if the lower back was built up like gulledge’s then it may have the appearance of making the midsection look bigger from the side. its just my observation.

but then again, i dont recall seeing arnold with a great lower back, so i cant really attest to that. however, nooing that columbo did it is enough for me.

but heres another question: how in the hell did they (old-school bodybuilders) keep their midsections so small?

heres a pic i forgot to post of gulledge from the back[/quote]

A cut Gulledge has a perfectly fine midsection from any view. Even from the side, a moron could tell his back has thick slabs of muscle. I don’t see how that is unaesthetic. Arnold also did have a great lower back. He was pre- hardcore diuretics.

I dont know if the moron comment was in response to my post but let me clarify, I can obviously see that he has thick slabs of muscle on his lower back but I think compared to other BB’rs, it looks impressive but different.

Oh and if it was in response to my post…fuck you…haha.

[quote]Limo Driver wrote:
A cut Gulledge has a perfectly fine midsection from any view. Even from the side, a moron could tell his back has thick slabs of muscle. I don’t see how that is unaesthetic. Arnold also did have a great lower back. He was pre- hardcore diuretics.[/quote]

[quote]keaster wrote:
caneman wrote:
Scott aka Rice wrote:
arnold

Arnolds got some shitty form in that pic. [/quote]

Yeah, you should have trained him.

I can understand what you are saying in regards to his low back, but honestly, I think it is primarily due his individual make-up.

I also think that his spinal erector and trapezius bulk overpowers the thickness of his lats, which may also contribute to a look of imbalance in regards classical bodybuilding standards (not that it matters since he is a powerlifter).

It makes me think of Mike Francios who was a pro bodybuilder who competed primarily in the 90’s. He actually trained at Westside Barbell club with competitive powerlifters and did some very heavy deadlifting. While he was able to maintain a small waist, his spinal erector mass was tremendous. Early on in his career, though, he was criticized for having lats that were relatively less developed and he had a look similar to Gulledge. Over time, though, I remember he really brought up his lats to match the thickness of his erectors and it looked sensational.

If only I could find the pictures I remember seeing back then…

[quote]B.b. in stress! wrote:
look through every picture of an old school bodybuilder and ull never find one with a gut, but pretty much all of the waists r small[/quote]

You are suffering from an optical illusion.

Their waists aren’t small. Their upper backs and shoulders are just huge.

Think about contrast.

I think David Gulledge’s back is awesome. The powerlifter physique in general (as in, when they are sitting at moderate body fat levels, not unlike Dave Tate currently) is just “it” IMO.

Anyways, I think deadlifts are fine for a bodybuilder and can do nothing but good for the physique. Ronnie does them, so they MUST be good…hehe! How else you gonna get an overall massive back though besides chins/pullups?