After looking at the two Holyfield pics I think he cheated. I can't really say if Roy blatantly doped the whole time or not. One thing I do know....if you start a witch hunt there will be plenty of boxers in trouble.
Hall-of-Famer Thinks Evander Holyfield is Anything But 'The Real Deal'
Collapse
-
Big strong guys with good genes and muscle development...
But put them next to Jay Cutler and do you think they are in the same league? Stratosphere even?
I'm a big bodybuilding fan, especially of the early years...Sandow, Reg Park, LArry Scott etc...but those guys can't possibly mess with the super steroidally induced modern bodybulder.Comment
-
Well, right. But put any of these today's in that era, using their training methods and their knowledge of nutrition, and not using any oharmaceuticals, hell not even protein powder, and they would be comparable to the old guys.
To me those guys look a lot stronger P4P. Their muscles look denser than most contemporary bodybuilders who have a "hollow" inflated look.Comment
-
Big strong guys with good genes and muscle development...
But put them next to Jay Cutler and do you think they are in the same league? Stratosphere even?
I'm a big bodybuilding fan, especially of the early years...Sandow, Reg Park, LArry Scott etc...but those guys can't possibly mess with the super steroidally induced modern bodybulder.
For the Cutler comment, you can't compare because Cutler and the rest are known steroid users.Comment
-
Well, right. But put any of these today's in that era, using their training methods and their knowledge of nutrition, and not using any oharmaceuticals, hell not even protein powder, and they would be comparable to the old guys.
To me those guys look a lot stronger P4P. Their muscles look denser than most contemporary bodybuilders who have a "hollow" inflated look.
I've never seen someone so pro-old school. Not a bad thing, just an observation.Comment
-
Well, right. But put any of these today's in that era, using their training methods and their knowledge of nutrition, and not using any oharmaceuticals, hell not even protein powder, and they would be comparable to the old guys.
To me those guys look a lot stronger P4P. Their muscles look denser than most contemporary bodybuilders who have a "hollow" inflated look.
Tougher times and circumstances increase hormone levels.
This is also why they found that military soldiers have higher testosterone levels.
I remember talking with a few teachers about the Greek and Roman Statues and one mentioned, "That is just Art, they didn't look like that"...I said "really, how did they know to carve such a physique?"
The Greeks did tend to exaggerate and make someone look better, however, I read the Romans didn't do this.
We do have a lot of benefits in today's world however.Last edited by Benny Leonard; 03-13-2007, 05:21 PM.Comment
-
It's funny you ask because I'm extremely ******* and progressive politically (I don't think I'd be able to survive in the 40's or 50's....60's woulda been awesome however), but when it comes to athletics I've always like the older guys.
I just have more faith in mental strength, endurance, and cleverness over speed and flash. Substance over style, and all that.Comment
-
Noone has a problem with muscles per se. The problem lies with athletes who lead a very high cardiovascular lifestyle. Muscle works in very specific ways. Why do you think the smaller fighters are way faster? High cardiovascular training and high speed movement as is necessary in boxing is incompatible with muscular bulking up.
Truly big fighters like Foreman were never small. Lewis could not be much smaller than he is. Wlad is lean and despite having fairly decent sized arms has no 'bulk' to him.
Briggs bulges and can barely move. He might just be training with weights and therefore has no stamina or speed. No steroids needed.
But Holyfield went from lean and slim and fast to huge and bulky and still quite fast.
That I find very hard to accept.
He is innocent in a court of law but in my opinion he has used steroids. One cannot have a high cardiovascular rate and still carry huge, bulky muscle.Comment
-
It's funny you ask because I'm extremely ******* and progressive politically (I don't think I'd be able to survive in the 40's or 50's....60's woulda been awesome however), but when it comes to athletics I've always like the older guys.
I just have more faith in mental strength, endurance, and cleverness over speed and flash. Substance over style, and all that.Comment
-
Noone has a problem with muscles per se. The problem lies with athletes who lead a very high cardiovascular lifestyle. Muscle works in very specific ways. Why do you think the smaller fighters are way faster? High cardiovascular training and high speed movement as is necessary in boxing is incompatible with muscular bulking up.
Truly big fighters like Foreman were never small. Lewis could not be much smaller than he is. Wlad is lean and despite having fairly decent sized arms has no 'bulk' to him.
Briggs bulges and can barely move. He might just be training with weights and therefore has no stamina or speed. No steroids needed.
But Holyfield went from lean and slim and fast to huge and bulky and still quite fast.
That I find very hard to accept.
He is innocent in a court of law but in my opinion he has used steroids. One cannot have a high cardiovascular rate and still carry huge, bulky muscle.Comment
Comment