T Nation

New Interview Online

It’s been a while since my competitive days and the various online bodybuilding sites profiling me but these folks reached out recently, curious about what I’ve been up to and my thoughts on this and that.

Figured I’d share. Note the obvious plug of my favorite supplement company :wink:

S

10 Likes

Good interview Stu. when I read your comments about people disparaging or discrediting the experts of yesteryear I had a good chuckle to myself. Oh and nice art work on IG too mate.

2 Likes

Really nice artwork Stu! Do you own, or have you considered, getting an écorché reference model? Anatomy Tools puts out some great ones.

1 Like

Very nice! thanks for posting.

1 Like

Thanks guys. Yeah, @simo74 it blows my mind how many current individuals trying to make a name for themselves trash some of the old school greats whose physiques (and actual applicable knowledge?) are so far ahead of their “modern” ones. Really makes it hard to argue their flawed or sub-optimal training approaches when they were working 50 years ago -lol.

@Allberg I actually picked up one of those last Summer, but haven’t had time to reallky make much use of it. I have sketched from skull and small scale skeletons before, but most of my anatomical knowledge comes from years of drawing classes (I do have an MFA with my other degrees!), and likely all the science work I did for my undergrad which was Pre-Med. Back when I started teaching (local college and Art League), I actually taught an anatomy class for artists that was a ton of fun to do.

Yeah, my IG has become much more about just sharing my daily doodles done during lunch or coffee breaks. Occassionally you’ll find a flexing shot here and there :slight_smile:

S

1 Like

Good stuff, thanks for sharing!

1 Like

It shows in your work that you know your anatomy

Thank you, I appreciate that. Something I tell my students is that you can tell which artists really know how to use anatomy in their work and which ones try to show off how much they know and create characters who look like their skin has gotten torn off -lol.

I actually love doing anatomical studies. Those few sped-up videos on my IG of muscular studies were a lot of fun for me to do (just sitting in a coffee shop listening to my headphones and drawing on my tablet -lol)

S

You know I’ve been reading up on some old school guys (Sandow, Bobby pandor, among others) and these guys built some impressive physiques with limited knowledge compared to today. A lot of these guys did this before it was possible to be on any gear. To me it just shows how over complicated ppl will make things to pedal products. You could seriously pick up these old school techniques and do them as written and gain muscle over time. They may not be optimal but they worked.

I still think the 70s were the best looking physiques in body building. Huge pecs, narrow waste big arms and legs that looked big and strong but not mutant. Truly the days where aesthic ruled.

2 Likes

You know, that’s the crazy thing,… some truly knowledgeable folks can argue that we’ve since learned better methods of reaching our goals quicker, or easier,… but when you’ve got someone trying with every breath to make a name for themselves, and their own physique is nowhere near as good as any of the “old school” competitors they’re dismissing, it’s just laughable to me.

I gotta agree with you on that. Sure I love my 90’s era because that’s when I really came up following the sport, and those guys were just so intense with everything (and their results showed it!!!), but I think if you asked anyone if they could look like any bodybuilder from any era, most would go for the 70’s/80’s.
@BrickHead ?

S

2 Likes

Is it possible to say what defined the different decades in terms of training and methodologies or is asking such a question a huge faux pas and not doing ones due diligence?

Serge nubrute would be my choice. Dude was a monster and looked much bigger than he actually was. Very aesthetic. And imo one of the most well conditioned bodybuilders of the 70s

1 Like

I agree. As much as we praise the guys from the 90’s, they were ridiculously big and most people don’t aspire to get like that and it’s unfeasible for most. As much as we thought they were awesome, I don’t think most men actually want to look like Mike Francois or Nasser.

1 Like

I wonder if I’ll get flamed for suggesting that the training methodologies and effort didn’t change THAT much, and that drug use ramped up, leading from big and aesthetic to big and freaky?

1 Like

There’s no doubt that this has something to do with it.

Well, I hate the whole “bodybuilders are just using steroids and it’s easy to get jacked if you’re on gear blah blah blah” bullshit. So even bringing up gear is a touchy subject. But one of the things that continues to amaze me is how little things have actually changed when you look at how people trained effectively then vs now. Then you hear about the absolutely insane dosages that even amateur bodybuilders are on now, and it makes you wonder - did people go from looking like Grecian Gods to Ninja Turtles because of anything other than the drugs?

1 Like

I hate to just blanketly state it’s one thing, but if you look at the dosages used by top competitors in the 70’s, compared to the 80’s (where we saw GH use rise in the mid-later years according to several books I’ve read), and ultimately to the 90’s (where we saw a huge reliance on diuretics and insulin),… it’s indeed difficult to ignore the PED factor.

IMO (and this is solely MY opinion, so feel free to disagree with anything I say -lol), 70’s - 80’s competitors seemed to have a healthy fear of what they were doing. I’m not saying they barely touched the stuff, but what was considered normal usage for a top level IFBB competitor in the 80’s is now less than what some amateur competitors who can’t even win their class at a local show are taking right off the bat.

Sure we have learned more about the science of bodybuilding, but at the end of the day, IMO (again, in MY opinion), most modern day discoveries or things the latest authors are writing about are so minor and almost irrelevant to most gym goers that it’s laughable to consider it making the difference to 99% of the people unhappy with their progress.

S

1 Like

Yeah, look at the vacuum those guys could hold. I believe Arnold had a 34 in here waist in his prime. Now stomach sucked in these guys look like they’re 1 months from dropping a shorty. And it’s every competitor. (Roden has always kept an aesthetic look) I read an article defending GH use basically and saying it’s because they’re timing their carbs incorrectly…so he was saying EVERY mr Olympia and lower level bodybuilder using growth hormone also just happened to time their carb intake in every competition incorrectly? :thinking: also it seems like later in these guys careers that gut gets out of control.

I don’t know a ton about PED but I do know something about GH on a Medical level. It doesn’t just target muscle cells. It’s given to kids at young ages (including a friend of mine we called little Bobby) to spur total growth if they aren’t growing and it’s hormone related.

So I agree the “ninja turtle” look isn’t training methodology but PED related. Ultimately I don’t care what these guys do to themselves though. I’m just saying from my perspective 70-80s look was much more appealing.

1 Like

That’s pretty much it.

1 Like

Interesting that no one has mention the introduction of oils like synthol. Are they a factor or something top pros stay away from ??

1 Like