T Nation

Did Eugene Sandow Use Supps?

[quote]Chris Colucci wrote:
Magarhe wrote:
Check the video

It’s funny. I was going to post the exact same video.

The stats you posted earlier (which you got from where, by the way?) are supposedly Sandow in 1902, but that video was shot in 1894. In 1893, when he was much closer to the peak of his performing career, a Doctor in New York measured Sandow’s stats as being:

Height: 67.7 inches (5’7 1/2")
Weight: 180 pounds
Right wrist: 7.3
Left wrist: 7.1
Right forearm: 13.4
Left forearm: 13.0
Right biceps: 16.9
Left biceps: 16.1
Neck: 15.5
Shoulders: 20.3
Chest, normal: 44.1
Chest, expanded: 46.9
Waist: 32.7
Hips: 38.0
Right thigh: 23.2
Left thigh: 22.8
Right calf: 15.4
Left calf: 15.6

sorry, he is frikking tiny even by normal standards.

If you keep getting hung up on the numbers, I have to think you don’t really know how to appreciate the sport/art of bodybuilding. The measurement numbers are secondary to the physique that’s being presented.

Guys on the site here like Stu and OneMoreRep might, technically, be called “tiny,” but they have damn solid physiques.

Without a doubt, the build that Sandow displayed in that video is, from a bodybuilding standpoint, on par and as impressive as the top 10% of well-built members on this site. Are there some flaws and weaknesses, yes. But it sounds like you’re really underestimating what he accomplished.[/quote]

Well said…also, they modeled their own physiques back then according to Greek sculptures. They didn’t even consider the idea of getting WAY bigger than that. Sandow would pass the fuck out if he saw Ronnie Coleman winning an Olympia contest.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
In fact, even the clothing from 1960 belies how much smaller the average person was. I don’t even think they had XXXL shirts of regular styles back then in stores right next to the smaller clothes.[/quote]

(I just found this pic the other day. Seems appropriate.)

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The Mighty Stu wrote:
If his above measurements are correct,… then we’re talking about a lean, just under 17" bicep, which I will admit is very repectable on most people’s frames (especially Sandow at 5’9). If his wrists were to be considered ‘large’, then it would undermine a bit how impressive his biceps actually appeared (my wrists are on the smaller side, and if anything add to the bodybuilding illusion of bigger arms). You have to look at the whole picture. Scrolling through the 18" and 19" guns thread, while I repect the effort people put forth, there’s always the few additions were someone’s easily above 15%, if not 20% bodyfat. If that’s the case, you can’t tell me that Sandow’s build isn’t more impressive.


Even more than thought though, you can NOT ignore what year this is or the accomplishments of most other athletes in the same period.

Bottom line, if I walked around even in the year 1960 looking like I do right now, people would have a fucking fit upon seeing some guy weighing damn near 300lbs. I mean, today they may look or stare a little, but because there are other big people walking around in everyday life, it isn’t that damn special. In fact, even the clothing from 1960 belies how much smaller the average person was. I don’t even think they had XXXL shirts of regular styles back then in stores right next to the smaller clothes.

In the early 1900’s, you would have to be very naive to think that a muscular ripped arm over 16-17" wouldn’t stand out about as much as a 21" arm does right now.

People looked up to Arnold because no one was much bigger than that back then. Today, most of the guys in NPC as heavy weights look better than he did but don’t get anywhere near the same notoriety for it.

You can not simply look at numbers and compare one of the most developed people of the year 1900 to people today. The standards were different and no one even thought about someone weighing 255lbs in contest shape at 5’9".

They would have laughed at the very idea of it just like people today seem to think you can’t build arms over 18" without steroids.[/quote]

Exactly. It’s like how Lincoln used to actively look for other “Six Footers” because he was about 6’3" and the rest of the population was so much shorter. Now, being over 6’0 is nothing special.

And, I might add, that was only about three decades BEFORE Sandow himself.