For me this one shot shows the back of best conditioned bodybuilder ever to step on a stage.
Disagree? Lets see who you think achieved better.
Edit: If the mods could make this shot bigger I would appreciate it.
I’ll have to search up the pic…but imo size + definition is a big factor.
There are a lot of bantomweights that come in peeled…but the more size you carry the harder it is to be completely shredded.
Dexter Jackson is up there along with Phil Heath.
I still give it to 2003 Ronnie Coleman.
287 lbs and he had striations on striations in his christmas tree and even glutes.
To carry that much lbm is just insane!
Is that a shot of Franco?
DG
I’m guessing that is Samir Bannout.
Awesome conditioning in the '83 olympia.
I would say the late Andreas Munzer has most people beat.
.
Also, Aykutlu Hamdullah for honorable mention.
That’s Bannout winning the 79 Olympia. The reason I like this shot in particular is that there are many pros who just can’t seem to get that level of definition in their lower back despite their best efforts, in fact many of todays top pros even in contest shape still carry some fat in this area and it shows as wrinkles. Dexter is awesome but I still don’t think even he touches this level of conditioning.
Munzer is very impressive his quads are perfect.
Geez, Haven’t heard anyone mention Munzer in a long time. That guy was just insane. I remember reading in one of the mags after his death about how he used to carry suitcases full of his ‘stuff’ on planes with him in case they lost his checked luggage.
Sammir was the 1st Pro BBer (I think) to sport a ripped christmas tree, just as Gaspari is credited with being the 1st with shredded glutes. Still, Gaspari didn’t have the size to topple Haney, and while Sammir looked great the one year he won, he didn’t have the overall package (size) to hold of the bigger dudes who were able to nail their conditioning. Hell of a pic though!
S
that level of conditioning is why bb isn’t popular…
[quote]JamFly wrote:
That’s Bannout winning the 79 Olympia.[/quote]
Bannout won the 83 olympia, Zane won from 77-79. You mean the 79 Mr. Universe that Bannout won.
[quote]jtg987 wrote:
that level of conditioning is why bb isn’t popular…[/quote]
How do you figure that? That’s the level of conditioning most strive to attain.
[quote]jtg987 wrote:
that level of conditioning is why bb isn’t popular…[/quote]
Bullshit. It’s not popular because it’s never been hugely popular. Probably never will be. Oiled up dudes flexing in thongs is not going to take on mass appeal. If any part of the current look is detracting from bodybuilding’s popularity, its the preganant belly look, not conditioning.
[quote]BlackSabbath wrote:
JamFly wrote:
That’s Bannout winning the 79 Olympia.
Bannout won the 83 olympia, Zane won from 77-79. You mean the 79 Mr. Universe that Bannout won.[/quote]
Well spotted you are correct this is from the 79 Universe.
[quote]Qaash wrote:
jtg987 wrote:
that level of conditioning is why bb isn’t popular…
How do you figure that? That’s the level of conditioning most strive to attain.[/quote]
when most people look at photos from the 60’s-70’s they aren’t repulse yes they were lean but not this incredibly ridiculous paper thin look, now I know it’s my personal preference but say when watching pumping iron I won’t cop shit about the bodybuilders being gross when compared too some of the current competition, coming from both male and females.
I respect anyone that can achieve that look even though I may have sounded condescending however when most people look at pictures like the ones posted and go gross, yet 9/10 people when they see ‘golden era’ bodybuilders dont have that knee jerk reaction
Phil Heath, the future Mr. O. He’s making such quick progress its scary. I was thinking Vic Martinez had the '09 Olympia in the bag, but I don’t know anymore. Phil’s a walking anatomy chart and is steadily adding more mass with each passing contest.
[quote]jtg987 wrote:
Qaash wrote:
jtg987 wrote:
that level of conditioning is why bb isn’t popular…
How do you figure that? That’s the level of conditioning most strive to attain.
when most people look at photos from the 60’s-70’s they aren’t repulse yes they were lean but not this incredibly ridiculous paper thin look, now I know it’s my personal preference but say when watching pumping iron I won’t cop shit about the bodybuilders being gross when compared too some of the current competition, coming from both male and females.
I respect anyone that can achieve that look even though I may have sounded condescending however when most people look at pictures like the ones posted and go gross, yet 9/10 people when they see ‘golden era’ bodybuilders dont have that knee jerk reaction[/quote]
In my experience, its not the level of conditioning that the average person finds gross. I find, most people feel today’s BB’ers are “too big”. With that said, I think most average people end up seeing a pic of Ronnie (b/c he is (was) the most popular guy in the sport) towards the end of his career and see his wide waist/gut.
They then get the impression that BB’ing is about huge gigantic bloated gut looking guys and that the “golden era” was ideal because people had small waists. People take one example (a bad one too. See Ronnie in his prime) and make generalizations.
[quote]elusive wrote:
jtg987 wrote:
Qaash wrote:
jtg987 wrote:
that level of conditioning is why bb isn’t popular…
How do you figure that? That’s the level of conditioning most strive to attain.
when most people look at photos from the 60’s-70’s they aren’t repulse yes they were lean but not this incredibly ridiculous paper thin look, now I know it’s my personal preference but say when watching pumping iron I won’t cop shit about the bodybuilders being gross when compared too some of the current competition, coming from both male and females.
I respect anyone that can achieve that look even though I may have sounded condescending however when most people look at pictures like the ones posted and go gross, yet 9/10 people when they see ‘golden era’ bodybuilders dont have that knee jerk reaction
In my experience, its not the level of conditioning that the average person finds gross. I find, most people feel today’s BB’ers are “too big”. With that said, I think most average people end up seeing a pic of Ronnie (b/c he is (was) the most popular guy in the sport) towards the end of his career and see his wide waist/gut.
They then get the impression that BB’ing is about huge gigantic bloated gut looking guys and that the “golden era” was ideal because people had small waists. People take one example (a bad one too. See Ronnie in his prime) and make generalizations.
[/quote]
Gotta say that most normal people around me seeing pics of bb’ers in contest shape are grossed out by the veins and striations rather than the size… Most think Matt Kroc looks better than a contest-shape bb’er due to that. That goes for normal people, mind you. Beeing “too big” is always a problem for them, moot point.
[quote]elusive wrote:
They then get the impression that BB’ing is about huge gigantic bloated gut looking guys and that the “golden era” was ideal because people had small waists. People take one example (a bad one too. See Ronnie in his prime) and make generalizations.
[/quote]
Bloated guts are no longer a valid argument. Unless you think that one or two guys out of more than a dozen are all people see.