90´s bodybuilders are better than today?

MONSTRO

Well-known member
Bodybuilders in the 90´s vs now

This is probably one of the biggest subjects in fitness industry. And most of the people claim that the 90´s bodybuilders are much better than today and that bodybuilding are getting worst over time . Is this the truth?

I don’t believe. Like anything in life we have bad and good thinks now like in the 90´s. In my opinion the biggest reason why 90´s look better is not the amount of anabolics used, the training , the diets but yes the genetics . I believe that 90´s generation came with so many incredible perfect bodies , round muscle bellies , small waists , amazing symmetry like Flex Wheeler , Ronnie Coleman, Shawn Ray, Lee Priest , Kevin Levrone, Chris Cormier, Dexter Jackson and many others . Tell me from today´s era a name with blessed genetics ( round muscle bellies , amazing symmetry ) other than Phil Heath? Yes you have good structures like Ramy ( small waist , huge legs ) , Cedric ( great shape but needs more muscle some places to look as pretty as 90´s athletes . Other than that you have crazy athletes today like Hunter Labrada, Nick Walker, Hady Chopan , Bonac ( crazy quality and size but blocky look , not pretty) and this is the main reason you think 90´s are better. Yes that guy´s born genetic gifted like Phil Heath not because they train better , eat better and use less drugs . That´s why to be a pro you don’t need genetics but to be a to pro you need perfect genetics .

The 90´s :

Pros:

*Real pharma grade products direct from pharmacy

*More focus on training , no social medias , in that time you receive pay check from Supplements brand and Magazines and you only have to do some photo session for them.

*Without social medias you have more time for naps , rest better and be a bodybuilder 100%.

*Genetics , most of them never achieve is 90% like Flex Wheeler and even without the best condition he always top 3 any show .

*They look dryer ( not more shredded than today, shredded glutes rare back then ) because of using a lot diuretics and low testosterone and also don’t abuse insulin and hgh .

Cons:

*They only have free weights and some bad machines. When they are injured is much harder to keep training .

*They don’t have this new drugs like peptides and sarms and even some anabolics that we have today on UGL

*Pharma grade was very expensive and very limited , so they cant do huge dosages like today , because to much expensive and almost impossible to get huge quantities.

*To be sponsored back then you need to be a top pro winning some good shows , so it was very hard to be a bodybuilder in that era .

*Hard to get PRO card, less competitions and only overall get it.

*You cant promote yourself and be more known , show your potential or gifts like today.

*They are much smaller than bodybuilders today, back then is rare to see someone over 300 pounds , now is so easy even smaller athletes like 5.7ft . Most of them step on stage around 225 pounds and some of them less , now if you are a open you always go over 240 pounds ( even Dexter )

Bodybuilders now:

Pros:

*They have much better conditions of training ( amazing machines that works like free weight ´s without the risk of injury .

*Much better training methods and techniques to grow bigger without injury risk

*Much better knowledge about nutrition ( today we eat more lean and we stay away indigested foods )

*More knowledge and methods for recovery like deep tissue massages, ice machines and many other tricks . back then you don’t see soccer player like Cristiano Ronaldo play at top level at 37 years old . That´s why I always say , we are improving with all this new methods and the knowledge we get over time. So now athletes have all to be bigger and better than before .

*Social Medias take your time to be totally focus on bodybuilding but at same time give you a chance to live from this sport without being a top Olympia Pro. Today you can have sponsors without even competing because the goal today is the more followers you have the more you can sell for that brand , and the only think that matters is sales is money .

*You have many new drugs that can help you improve even more like peptides and sarms and also some new steroids like superdrol, M1T.

*The level is much higher today, you have contrys like China, Iran, Kuwait coming with incredible athletes looking like granite rocks . How can you tell the 90´s are better if today you have much good athletes . look at the level of this middle east athletes , crazy size and hardness .

*Today´s athletes are much better and healthier on stage because they don’t abuse diuretics, yes they look more watery but they are shredded

*It´s easy to get PRO card but much harder to have success on pro level competitions ( because much more good athletes )

Cons:

*Hard to find real pharma grade steroids .

*To much UGL labs and a lot of them with very bad quality , but at same time if you find a good one you can get all you need much cheaper than pharma grade .

*Less time to focus on training because you have to work on social medias, doing videos , pictures and articles every day to keep your sponsors ( you need them to compete at higher level).

*The market is growing every day, more athletes is coming every year , so is harder to be sponsored ( you need to be special ) , you need to do something nobody does and today this is almost impossible to do.
 

Attachments

  • EklVnahUYAE674D.jpg large.jpg
    EklVnahUYAE674D.jpg large.jpg
    157.5 KB · Views: 1
  • f30a2e4d4780caa6f88f4617aa70f165.jpg
    f30a2e4d4780caa6f88f4617aa70f165.jpg
    130.4 KB · Views: 1
The definition of better is open to many interpretations. A potential way to focus this question would be: Have bodybuilders of the '90s exhibited greater aesthetics and symmetry than today's bodybuilders?

It is difficult to answer this question without comparing specific individuals. Factors such as level of training, diet, genetics, drugs (whether they are natural or due to injections), etc. can play into a person being able to exhibit great aesthetics and symmetry - all individually depending on their circumstances. As well, certain training programs may have been more popular back then (i.e., aesthetic-directed weightlifting) as opposed to what we see today which relies on heavy lifts that train mass rather than symmetry for muscle distribution.
 

HGH.to

Well-known member
A potential way to focus this question would be: Have bodybuilders of the '90s exhibited greater aesthetics and symmetry than today's bodybuilders?
even this is highly subjective IMO. I often hear of people saying old-school bodybuilders were better, but others wouldn't ever agree with that.
to me, that's a matter of what each one loves more
 
Top