Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: BayGBM on May 24, 2007, 01:26:04 PM

Title: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on May 24, 2007, 01:26:04 PM
Is he getting better... or worse?  :-\
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: davidpaul on May 24, 2007, 01:28:45 PM
from those pics better,
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: The Squadfather on May 24, 2007, 01:29:22 PM
the arms look better in the first shot but he looks awesome in both pics IMO.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: BigSexy50 on May 24, 2007, 01:29:32 PM
Is he getting better... or worse?  :-\

The role HGH and IGF are playing in BBing is obvious.  What you get is a much more massive BBer, but what you are sacrificing is the crispness of the physique.  Look at all these guys as they earn their pro cards, they look hard and crisp, tkae Kamali for instance, then they load up on the HGH, IGF, and other peptides in odrer to size up.

Branch looked better before.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: michael arvilla on May 24, 2007, 01:30:45 PM
Branch is much bigger/better now


Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: The Squadfather on May 24, 2007, 01:31:57 PM
Branch is much bigger/better now



yeah with the exception of the arms i agree, he's bigger everywhere and his waist is just as small now.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: The Squadfather on May 24, 2007, 01:34:22 PM
He had better color and more hair. He looks like a red hot dog.

(http://www.wdez.com/readonlydir/WNUpload/WDEZ/Nikki%20Montgomery/red%20hot%20dogs.jpg)
yeah but both of those are fixable, he could just grow some hair and ease up on the pro tan, the only thing i see is that his skin is thicker now.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: Saxon on May 24, 2007, 01:35:42 PM
He looks better with hair  :D

Physique wise, looks good in both.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: tu_holmes on May 24, 2007, 01:36:04 PM
Abs and Arms are better in the first.

Chest and veins are better in the second... I guess it's a toss up.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: donrhummy on May 24, 2007, 01:37:29 PM
Worse. He's thicker but not immensely so and his abs are not as tight as before. He had really good shape/thickness in 99. The only thing he needed was a thicker back - nothing else. And he hasn't done that.

His back actually is in better propertion here than it is today.
(http://www.repetrope.com/assets/content/Media01/galleries/12015/fullsize/12015-warren05.jpg)

Today
(http://www.graphicmuscle.com/~photos/754/Men/754rb0393.jpg)

Looked really thick, well proportioned and awesome waist-shoulder ratio.
(http://www.repetrope.com/assets/content/Media01/galleries/12015/fullsize/12015-warren-bertram.jpg)
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: timfogarty on May 24, 2007, 01:40:10 PM
Chest and veins are better in the second... I guess it's a toss up.

veins are not muscles, and should have no relevance in bodybuilding competitions
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: BigSexy50 on May 24, 2007, 01:40:20 PM
Abs and Arms are better in the first.

Chest and veins are better in the second... I guess it's a toss up.

Much more detail in the older pics. Mass monsters are cool, but the drug use is out of control with some of these guys.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: bigdumbbell on May 24, 2007, 01:46:45 PM
to me? better today but what do i no?
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: donrhummy on May 24, 2007, 01:48:13 PM
to me? better today but what do i no?

Certainly not how to spell.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: tu_holmes on May 24, 2007, 01:48:49 PM
veins are not muscles, and should have no relevance in bodybuilding competitions

The Veins are a byproduct of his SOMETHING...

Whatever that IS... it makes him look more defined in that area, which is relevant to a bodybuilding competition.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: donrhummy on May 24, 2007, 01:49:35 PM
veins are not muscles, and should have no relevance in bodybuilding competitions

Agreed. There are only two veins that don't look like crap: the big bicep vein and the big calf vein.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: BayGBM on May 24, 2007, 01:55:29 PM
2001/2007
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: Saxon on May 24, 2007, 02:00:17 PM
2001/2007

He looks better in the first picture.  I think when a guy waist gets wider it really throws a physique off, even if the rest of his body gets bigger.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: Victor VonDoom on May 24, 2007, 02:00:48 PM
2001/2007

Notice the change in the shape of his head.  Bah!

Doom disapproves.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: tu_holmes on May 24, 2007, 02:02:19 PM
2001/2007

Now those photos tell a completely different story... He look SO much better in 2001.

Wow... he looks very disproportional in the 2K7 photo versus the 2K1.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on May 24, 2007, 02:13:32 PM
good vs. better :-\
2007/2006
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: beatmaster on May 24, 2007, 02:16:21 PM

he's a big mofo, getting freaky!
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: donrhummy on May 24, 2007, 02:17:10 PM
2001/2007

He lost biceps peak, his lats are no longer equal in size (left is larger than his right lat), his waist is wider - his proportion just isn't as good anymore.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BroadStreetBruiser on May 24, 2007, 02:17:49 PM
We went from Turbo Lover Halford to Pain Killer Halford very quickly
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: wordy on May 24, 2007, 02:34:08 PM
2001/2007

Looks bigger today I'd say, especially his ears :P
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on May 24, 2007, 02:50:16 PM
worse. same old story. they fuck it up.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BM OUT on May 25, 2007, 06:03:30 AM
He looks better today.One of the most freaky guys out there today.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: pumpster on May 25, 2007, 06:04:56 AM
He looks better today.One of the most freaky guys out there today.

He looks to have aged decades in a relatively short time. A little leaner & more defined now at a cost of leathery horrible looking skin.

Upper body's a little bigger and more refined but looks grotesque and inhuman, while he's let the lower body imbalance get worse. Legs too big and unrefined. Last several years should've been about bringing them down & defining while working on improving the calves. Lower body neglect is similar to Coleman.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: HowieW on May 25, 2007, 06:07:01 AM
Sadly  :'( the reality is that in order for him to win in the pros he had to mass up and make his body look freaky.
Like Ronnie and even Jay, if ya wanna win big time ya gotta go big and freaky.
Do I agree with that? NO!!! No! no!!
But I am just Joe Blow fan
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: phyxsius on May 25, 2007, 06:17:46 AM
He looked bigger but shorter span of life
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: The Coach on May 25, 2007, 06:27:01 AM
The role HGH and IGF are playing in BBing is obvious.  What you get is a much more massive BBer, but what you are sacrificing is the crispness of the physique.  Look at all these guys as they earn their pro cards, they look hard and crisp, tkae Kamali for instance, then they load up on the HGH, IGF, and other peptides in odrer to size up.

Branch looked better before.

Thats exactly right, there are VERY few exeptions when it comes to a pro being "ripped" and the IGF has played a huge role in ruining physiques, I could be wrong, but I think it was Milos that first introduced the use of insulin into the drug programs and by doing that (along with the encouragment of the poor judging) has dangerously ruined the industry physiques that USED to be good.

These pics are perfect example of how drugs ruined a physique, I'm not aginst the use of it for competition, but to take it to the point that it totally ruins people is a total step backwards from where it used to be...........bottomline, Branch looks like shit!
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: HowieW on May 25, 2007, 06:40:13 AM
Thats exactly right, there are VERY few exeptions when it comes to a pro being "ripped" and the IGF has played a huge role in ruining physiques, I could be wrong, but I think it was Milos that first introduced the use of insulin into the drug programs and by doing that (along with the encouragment of the poor judging) has dangerously ruined the industry physiques that USED to be good.

These pics are perfect example of how drugs ruined a physique, I'm not aginst the use of it for competition, but to take it to the point that it totally ruins people is a total step backwards from where it used to be...........bottomline, Branch looks like shit!

But why do these pros do it? They need to in order to win. I agree it looks worse, compared to a leaner , sharper look,
amd dare I say healthier look. Jay Cutler remarked during a seminar that he prfered how he looked 25 lbs lighter, but was told he needed to be BIGGER to ever win.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: pumpster on May 25, 2007, 06:41:33 AM
But why do these pros do it? They need to in order to win. I agree it looks worse, compared to a leaner , sharper look,
.

No, they're leaner, sharper and bigger on, at the expense of a natural, healthy and less cramped look.
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: The Coach on May 25, 2007, 06:51:47 AM
But why do these pros do it? They need to in order to win. I agree it looks worse, compared to a leaner , sharper look,
amd dare I say healthier look. Jay Cutler remarked during a seminar that he prfered how he looked 25 lbs lighter, but was told he needed to be BIGGER to ever win.

You could probably start with the judging standards and take it from there, I've always said with the amount of gear some of these guys are on it's easy to get big.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on May 25, 2007, 07:02:43 AM
warren looks 100 times better from the pics from back in 99-01. more sharp, better proportions, better skin tone etc
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on May 25, 2007, 07:08:21 AM
warren looks 100 times better from the pics from back in 99-01. more sharp, better proportions, better skin tone etc

Yes, Branch has shocking skin. 

As a matter of fact, the skin is the largest organ in the human body.  The quality of the skin is a reflection of one's overall health.

Branch's overall health is evidently in appalling condition, if you go by the look of his skin.

I hope the guy will live past his 50th birthday!
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: pumpster on May 25, 2007, 07:10:50 AM
I wonder if Warren reads this stuff?  :D
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on May 25, 2007, 07:12:23 AM
Yes, Branch has shocking skin. 

As a matter of fact, the skin is the largest organ in the human body.  The quality of the skin is a reflection of one's overall health.

Branch's overall health is evidently in appalling condition, if you go by the look of his skin.

I hope the guy will live past his 50th birthday!

branch skin looks like he has sandpapered it
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on May 25, 2007, 07:13:35 AM
Branch is an ignoramus.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on May 25, 2007, 07:15:23 AM
Branch is an ignoramus.


mr warren is totally hardcore.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Laura Lee on May 25, 2007, 07:17:49 AM
He's becoming what he wants...a mass monster.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on May 25, 2007, 07:18:56 AM
He's becoming what he wants...a mass monster.

laura, how is the street corner?
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on May 25, 2007, 07:22:27 AM
He's becoming what he wants...a mass monster.

Laura, i think he has already gotten there.  He is a mass monster!

Are women in general attracted to these behemoths?  I dont think so!
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Laura Lee on May 25, 2007, 07:31:31 AM
laura, how is the street corner?
I heard it's gone downhill since your girl took it over.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Laura Lee on May 25, 2007, 07:33:41 AM
Laura, i think he has already gotten there.  He is a mass monster!

Are women in general attracted to these behemoths?  I dont think so!
He doesn't have anything to worry about regarding women liking or disliking his physique.  He's got a girl already.

And some women like it, some don't.  Just like some like skinny men, some don't.  ;)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: The Squadfather on May 25, 2007, 07:34:13 AM
I heard it's gone downhill since your girl took it over.
hahahahahaha, classic.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: natural al on May 25, 2007, 07:34:56 AM
I think he looks terrible in the shots from the NY Pro, looked waaay better a couple of years ago.  Again it's a case of a guy going for size for the sake of going for size at the cost of everything else.  Leg imbalance is horrible, skin tone is horrible, back lacks refinement, waist is getting huge.  The judges seem determined to push this look and I don't understand why but whatever, it's thier "sport" not mine.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on May 25, 2007, 07:40:30 AM
He doesn't have anything to worry about regarding women liking or disliking his physique.  He's got a girl already.

And some women like it, some don't.  Just like some like skinny men, some don't.  ;)

Laura, i think Branch would be concerned whether women are attracted to his physique or not!  Afterall, he is in the 'physique business' and for him it is all about appearance/vanity.  The fact that he has a girlfriend is irrelevant.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Laura Lee on May 25, 2007, 07:57:07 AM
Laura, i think Branch would be concerned whether women are attracted to his physique or not!  Afterall, he is in the 'physique business' and for him it is all about appearance/vanity.  The fact that he has a girlfriend is irrelevant.
I think most bber's who want to be, or are mass monsters don't care if a woman is attracted to his physique or not...otherwise they wouldn't become such.  Their main focus is get as big as they can.  The fact that his girlfriend is in the industry helps because she understands and obviously finds him and his body attractive.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: hifrommike on May 25, 2007, 02:58:00 PM
Branch got married in 2006.  Don't you guys read the mags?

He is still pretty new as a pro.  Consider what he'll look like when he's been a pro as long as Ronnie has been. 
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: phyxsius on May 25, 2007, 03:14:58 PM
Is his wife a freak lover? Or a 90 year old woman?
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: pumpster on May 25, 2007, 03:21:59 PM

He is still pretty new as a pro.  Consider what he'll look like when he's been a pro as long as Ronnie has been. 

Warren's projected look in 2010.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: HeartofSteel on May 25, 2007, 03:25:19 PM
I thought he looked way better 2 years ago, looks burnt out now.

-HOS
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: The Ugly on May 25, 2007, 03:27:51 PM
And some women like it, some don't.  Just like some like skinny men, some don't.  ;)

Are there really non-bb women out there who see a Branch or Ruhl and think, 'Oh, yeah, I gotta have that'?

Really?
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: tleilaxutank on May 25, 2007, 04:48:53 PM
The people that thinks he looks better now are fags that want to be choked out by him on a wrestling mat in their living room...
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on May 25, 2007, 04:56:13 PM
The people that thinks he looks better now are fags that want to be choked out by him on a wrestling mat in their living room...

ha ha ha  ;D
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: tleilaxutank on May 25, 2007, 04:58:35 PM
ha ha ha  ;D

no offense  :)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Big N on May 25, 2007, 05:08:06 PM
His symmetry was better when he was younger
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: hifrommike on May 25, 2007, 05:15:45 PM
Branch's wife is a fitness pro: Trish Mayberry, now Trish Warren.  Here's info on the marriage:

http://www.flexonline.com/news/114

Here are MD's pix of her at the New York Pro Fitness Classic earlier this year. 

http://www.musculardevelopment.com/browse/index.php?mode=browse&id=3064&eventcode=1037
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on May 25, 2007, 06:39:46 PM
no offense  :)

None taken. 

Actually, that was very funny and you’re exactly right.  As a muscle fantasy, he is better now; as a bodybuilder, I think he was better then.  :-\

Of course, there is nothing wrong with a little muscle fantasy.  ;D
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Matt C on May 25, 2007, 08:05:47 PM
http://forum.bodybuildingpro.com/showthread.php?t=976

Keep in mind that Branch was under Tom Prince's guidance for diuretics use for this show and wanted to go to the hospital but the idiot who was in the hotel with him wouldn't let him go as Branch lay cramping on the floor in severe pain:
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: climber on May 25, 2007, 08:09:16 PM
WTF is a muscle fantasy.. that sounds pretty cuban
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Rami on May 25, 2007, 09:33:55 PM
Way freakier and bigger. So in Pro bodybuilding terms better. I think he is a nice guy and work very very hard at what he does. Not sure the same can be said about some of his training partners tho... (I'm thinking about that video of his big friend throwing weights in the gym!)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on May 27, 2007, 02:13:22 PM
The fantasy continues...  :-\

http://www.musculardevelopment.com/browse/index.php?mode=browse&id=629
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Camel Jockey on May 27, 2007, 02:18:27 PM
His wheels are fucking huge..  :o
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: donrhummy on May 30, 2007, 10:09:46 AM
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=150704.0;attach=167941;image)


Reminds me of Demayo.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: johncena69 on May 30, 2007, 01:54:21 PM
My idol Branch Warren look better today then in the past. The Branch Warren of now is on of the reason that I go to the gym to get bigger.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: pumpster on May 30, 2007, 02:08:10 PM
His wheels are fucking huge..  :o

Big, too big. Lacking refinement; by now like Coleman he should've put a good amount of time into bringing them down in size both to better balance with the upper body and calves and to look better they're big but not quality.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: allpumpedup on May 30, 2007, 06:10:36 PM
if you look at the pics, like the front double bi's, he doesnt seem to stand up strait anymore.  like he is sort of hunching over.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: phyxsius on May 30, 2007, 06:35:19 PM
if you look at the pics, like the front double bi's, he doesnt seem to stand up strait anymore.  like he is sort of hunching over.

he's working hard to flex his abs like Ahmed Haidar
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: gordiano on May 30, 2007, 06:48:47 PM
Much better before............ :-\
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Kwon on May 30, 2007, 06:57:20 PM
Is his wife a freak lover? Or a 90 year old woman?

Not bad at all!
(http://www.graphicmuscle.net/photos/transferred/_DAN2305.jpg)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: benchmstr on May 30, 2007, 07:03:23 PM
Not bad at all!
(http://www.graphicmuscle.net/photos/transferred/_DAN2305.jpg)
i would smash :D

bench
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: whitewidow on May 31, 2007, 02:33:46 AM
Is he getting better... or worse?  :-\

lord thank god. I was worried. I thought maybe branch turned to G4P.  baygbm scares me with his threads sometimes
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on September 19, 2007, 09:37:29 AM
the happy couple.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on September 19, 2007, 09:42:17 AM
2001 (I think) vs. 2006
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: adipo8 on September 19, 2007, 12:35:48 PM
The future for Dennis Wolfe -TRUE STORY
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Captain Slin on September 19, 2007, 12:52:32 PM
hey branch had to do what he had to do to start winning. he needed more condition and a  lil more size and balance. the best way to do that now a day is throw gh/more gh in the mix.

most competitors face this one day and have to do it. not judging fault.. the judging is right. its just everyone has to go through it to achieve that level and then they push themselves to take it further until they dont look good/as good anymore. thats just the way it goes and it should go that way.

when ur times up its up, if you dont look good n e mroe you dont look good. in order to look phenomenal at one point your going to have to see how far it can go and you will take it too far mroe often thn not because you have no way of knowing if ur going to look better or worse. then when you do look worse, you cant just stop, because you need the gh for conditioning. you arent going to win any pro shows without it most likely.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: affy on September 19, 2007, 01:04:23 PM
http://forum.bodybuildingpro.com/showthread.php?t=976

Keep in mind that Branch was under Tom Prince's guidance for diuretics use for this show and wanted to go to the hospital but the idiot who was in the hotel with him wouldn't let him go as Branch lay cramping on the floor in severe pain:

jesus...thats the thickest chest i've seen since arnold

(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=150704.0;attach=167964;image)

he looked so much better back in 99
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: mitchyboy on September 19, 2007, 04:01:42 PM
Damn. He looks so much older :o and his pecs are getting smaller
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on September 19, 2007, 04:08:26 PM
Damn. He looks so much older :o and his pecs are getting smaller

he def looks worse nowdays! but his pecs arent getting smaller...its just an illusion as his proportions have changed.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: WOOO on September 19, 2007, 04:09:27 PM
much better.. he is getting muscle maturity IMO... he looks denser all over
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: The Coach on September 19, 2007, 06:14:42 PM
much better.. he is getting muscle maturity IMO... he looks denser all over

He look hard but smooth, lost his separation, detail and symmetry, back looks even worse.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Dballn247 on September 19, 2007, 06:50:35 PM
He look hard but smooth, lost his separation, detail and symmetry, back looks even worse.

The GH and the IGF are not what is ruining physiques.  It can actually make you really, really lean.  Throw slin into the cocktail and you've got gut. ;D

On a serious note, Insulin if used correctly can add good size and not give you a distended gut.  Like everything else the key is moderation, which is something that almost every pro seems to be lacking these days.  Slin makes getting big affordable, you can get sick gains using slin with half the amounts of Roids that you would normally use.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: The Coach on September 19, 2007, 07:15:10 PM
The GH and the IGF are not what is ruining physiques.  It can actually make you really, really lean.  Throw slin into the cocktail and you've got gut. ;D

On a serious note, Insulin if used correctly can add good size and not give you a distended gut.  Like everything else the key is moderation, which is something that almost every pro seems to be lacking these days.  Slin makes getting big affordable, you can get sick gains using slin with half the amounts of Roids that you would normally use.

Oh no, don't get me wrong, I know it's not the GH and IGF-1, it's 100% insulin, I've said it before, insulin has ruined bodybuilding, Milos and I had this discussion on the phone about a month ago.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: gh15 on September 19, 2007, 07:17:55 PM
its abuse of igf and insulin,,growth at 15units a day will not do you what 100-200mcg a day of igf will,,200mcg of igf a day = 30 units growth a day taken as straight igf! that grows everything and that creates kamalis and branches to a lesser degree since branch has better genetic response to begin with

but you get the idea behind it all,,slin and igf = big guts,,all the rest = smaller guts or no guts

branch of 2000 was still on everything in the aas department fully loaded,,  but the use of slin gh and igf and diff oils was at alower level.. it has nothing to do with training or food by the way
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Stavios on September 19, 2007, 07:21:13 PM
GH15, I have never seen someone actually get results from IGF-1 but from GH they change like crazy
they get bigger, rounder and super veiny on GH
while on IGF-1 they look the same

speak on this
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: YoungBlood on September 19, 2007, 07:23:30 PM
Milos and I had this discussion on the phone about a month ago.

How much did it cost you? :P
Sometimes...just sometimes, to be a fly on the wall at Koleseum....:)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: gh15 on September 19, 2007, 07:27:39 PM
because they didnt have enough money to go with gropep and insted went through the yellow chinese ,,ausralian = big chinease = small ;)

more serious now,,the mostly used fake shit,,igf3 does what gh does in 1/3 the time if not faster,,inaddition to make you hold less water,,its a matter of continues use with both and a matter of preference,,i think gh is the way to go but many fella pros think igf3 is the way to go,,i prefer to let the body do the change from gh to igf in liver rather than play with such a crazy molocule such as igf which is less stable than gh,,

never the less they most likley used fake since igf grows everything and grows it LEAN while with time add you a nice big ole gut since the bello grows too same as everything else including parts of the head and face and no im not joking
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Stavios on September 19, 2007, 07:34:07 PM
why is GH so fucking expensive in Canada compared to the US ?

it's like 600-700$ a box around here and you mofos in the USA pay like half if not less >:(
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: affy on September 19, 2007, 07:34:16 PM
because they didnt have enough money to go with gropep and insted went through the yellow chinese ,,ausralian = big chinease = small ;)

more serious now,,the mostly used fake shit,,igf3 does what gh does in 1/3 the time if not faster,,inaddition to make you hold less water,,its a matter of continues use with both and a matter of preference,,i think gh is the way to go but many fella pros think igf3 is the way to go,,i prefer to let the body do the change from gh to igf in liver rather than play with such a crazy molocule such as igf which is less stable than gh,,

never the less they most likley used fake since igf grows everything and grows it LEAN while with time add you a nice big ole gut since the bello grows too same as everything else including parts of the head and face and no im not joking

that would explain don longs big ass head
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Stavios on September 19, 2007, 07:34:57 PM
that would explain don longs big ass head

I think Don is a good looking dude
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Captain Slin on September 19, 2007, 07:38:36 PM
that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard. insulin DOES NOT cause a distended gut.
I dont know where that rumor started but its 100% bullshit. It is ALL GH and IGF that gives the current look besides the mass becase you get that when combined with insulin.

The GH and IGF is the cause of the big guts and the look where they dont have s much seperation. They are VERY lean, as lean as they can be, but the GH makes the skin thicker and thats why you can not see as much detail. For people who already have thick skin.. eg mostly white skinned people, it makes it even worse.

Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Stavios on September 19, 2007, 07:42:12 PM
that is the stupidest thing i have ever heard. insulin DOES NOT cause a distended gut.
I dont know where that rumor started but its 100% bullshit. It is ALL GH and IGF that gives the current look besides the mass becase you get that when combined with insulin.

The GH and IGF is the cause of the big guts and the look where they dont have s much seperation. They are VERY lean, as lean as they can be, but the GH makes the skin thicker and thats why you can not see as much detail. For people who already have thick skin.. eg mostly white skinned people, it makes it even worse.



most people I know who use a lot of GH seems to have paper thin skin all year long with crazy veins comming out of everywhere

there arms looks like 2 big fat veiny cocks

someone can quote this for the gayest post of the year
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Captain Slin on September 19, 2007, 07:49:21 PM
most people I know who use a lot of GH seems to have paper thin skin all year long with crazy veins comming out of everywhere

there arms looks like 2 big fat veiny cocks

someone can quote this for the gayest post of the year

at first they are going to be insane looking. But long time GH use will blur out definitino because of skin thickness.

i knew a guy on GH, amauter but huge super heavyweight, he looked more lean as a natural than he did on GH because he took so much his skin got too thick. at one point when he started he was pretty good but after that he never got back in shape.

Why do you think Jay cutler is 3% bodyfat with no veins on his entire body? dont you think there is a connection??? if jay wasnt blessed with such a well structured mid section his gut would be huge looking too.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Stavios on September 19, 2007, 07:54:21 PM
at first they are going to be insane looking. But long time GH use will blur out definitino because of skin thickness.

i knew a guy on GH, amauter but huge super heavyweight, he looked more lean as a natural than he did on GH because he took so much his skin got too thick. at one point when he started he was pretty good but after that he never got back in shape.

Why do you think Jay cutler is 3% bodyfat with no veins on his entire body? dont you think there is a connection??? if jay wasnt blessed with such a well structured mid section his gut would be huge looking too.

you look like you know your shit my man !  :)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: wylllis100 on September 20, 2007, 05:03:32 AM
If you put branch before he turned pro on stage with branch today then branch today would smoke the old version.

Thats what its all about.  In terms of bodybuilding competition he has gotten better.  He is more dense (much more), bigger and better balanced now.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: affy on September 20, 2007, 05:19:27 AM
I think Don is a good looking dude

my bad...did i saw don long?

hahaha i meant wong hong...the asian guy with the cartoon like body

jesus his head is huge
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on September 20, 2007, 05:46:31 AM
because they didnt have enough money to go with gropep and insted went through the yellow chinese ,,ausralian = big chinease = small ;)

more serious now,,the mostly used fake shit,,igf3 does what gh does in 1/3 the time if not faster,,inaddition to make you hold less water,,its a matter of continues use with both and a matter of preference,,i think gh is the way to go but many fella pros think igf3 is the way to go,,i prefer to let the body do the change from gh to igf in liver rather than play with such a crazy molocule such as igf which is less stable than gh,,

never the less they most likley used fake since igf grows everything and grows it LEAN while with time add you a nice big ole gut since the bello grows too same as everything else including parts of the head and face and no im not joking

the guys who use insulin seem to have problems getting ripped and get a thick skinned look (atleast after a couple of years of use) but the thick skin is probably from gh.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on September 20, 2007, 05:53:27 AM
most people I know who use a lot of GH seems to have paper thin skin all year long with crazy veins comming out of everywhere

there arms looks like 2 big fat veiny cocks

someone can quote this for the gayest post of the year

it seems to be a case of dosage and how long you use the stuff...first it looks great but after prolonged heavy use of gh..you start looking like shit because the thick skin effect...and the gut growth...add insulin to the mix which makes it even harder to get ripped.

not to forget the igf which does the same things as gh...

+lots off food with stretches the belly+heavy squats or legpresses which makes abs grow because the stabilize the heavy weight

thats why i stay natural, no need to worry about all that shit.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: nycbull on September 20, 2007, 09:51:28 AM
because they didnt have enough money to go with gropep and insted went through the yellow chinese ,,ausralian = big chinease = small ;)

more serious now,,the mostly used fake shit,,igf3 does what gh does in 1/3 the time if not faster,,inaddition to make you hold less water,,its a matter of continues use with both and a matter of preference,,i think gh is the way to go but many fella pros think igf3 is the way to go,,i prefer to let the body do the change from gh to igf in liver rather than play with such a crazy molocule such as igf which is less stable than gh,,

never the less they most likley used fake since igf grows everything and grows it LEAN while with time add you a nice big ole gut since the bello grows too same as everything else including parts of the head and face and no im not joking

gh15, how exactly does the waist get bigger on slin igf gh, is it the actual stomach organ that enlarges,jor just all the connective tissue and muscle sheethting that surrounds every muscle?  If it was just the stomach why not get a stomach reduction surgery...

Also we never here about cosmetic surgery with bodybuilders. But do any of them get liposuction around the waist and lower back. It would seem to make sense to me to remove all those fat cells?
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on September 20, 2007, 09:56:37 AM
Evolution?
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Archer77 on September 20, 2007, 09:59:04 AM
Evolution?

Way worse. 
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Trev on September 20, 2007, 10:01:58 AM
Better before for me - Symmetry and shape win every time in my book. HOWEVER, He's an IFBB pro and so the way he is now is where its at if the dude wants to earn a living Im afraid !!! He's a great bodybuilder.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: nycbull on September 20, 2007, 10:10:00 AM
I dont get it, the way he looked before would be called old school by you guys, and the judges dont like that anymore, so he masses up and gets "conditioned" and now you say he looks bad...How can the guy win?
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on September 20, 2007, 10:10:33 AM
 :-\
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: nycbull on September 20, 2007, 10:26:41 AM
he is the same in every picture...the first picture has a yellow caste to it so he looks flaccid and sickly the second pic has very poorly designed high contrast spot lighting making him look smaller, plus the pic looks to have been sharpened or high contrasted in photoshop.  The third pic has perfect lighting and he looks great. How can anyone compare them. Not knocking you Bay, just making a point.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on October 29, 2007, 07:12:51 AM
2001 vs. 2007   Worse.  :-[
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: gymguy on October 29, 2007, 07:19:26 AM
Just as was the case in 2001, in some shows he looks better and in some he looks worse...Like all comptetitors.  Branch is still one the biggest fan favorites.  Looking forward to his 08 season.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Mars on October 29, 2007, 08:22:40 AM
hes a drug machine, these guys make me sick.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: tom joad on October 29, 2007, 08:29:05 AM
hes a drug machine, these guys make me sick.

how do you know that he's not natural?
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: McFarland on October 29, 2007, 12:02:44 PM
hey branch had to do what he had to do to start winning. he needed more condition and a  lil more size and balance. the best way to do that now a day is throw gh/more gh in the mix.

most competitors face this one day and have to do it. not judging fault.. the judging is right. its just everyone has to go through it to achieve that level and then they push themselves to take it further until they dont look good/as good anymore. thats just the way it goes and it should go that way.

when ur times up its up, if you dont look good n e mroe you dont look good. in order to look phenomenal at one point your going to have to see how far it can go and you will take it too far mroe often thn not because you have no way of knowing if ur going to look better or worse. then when you do look worse, you cant just stop, because you need the gh for conditioning. you arent going to win any pro shows without it most likely.

"Striving to better, oft we mar what's well."
                                        --William Shakespeare (1564-1616)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on October 29, 2007, 03:52:59 PM
Branch is regarded as Pro Bodybuilding's 'obnoxious son'.

His behaviour in the gym and at Expos is truly vile.  This angry man, who stands at only 5 foot 6 inches, has had a damaging influence on this so-called sport!  It may have something to do with his unresolved 'aggression issues' and poor-personal-hygiene-standards....just to list a few.

Lift your game Branch!  It is time to join the human race.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: The Squadfather on October 29, 2007, 03:55:42 PM
Branch is regarded as Pro Bodybuilding's 'obnoxious son'.

His behaviour in the gym and at Expos is truly vile.  This angry man, who stands at only 5 foot 6 inches, has had a damaging influence on this so-called sport!  It may have something to do with his unresolved 'aggression issues' and poor-personal-hygiene-standards....just to list a few.

Lift your game Branch!  It is time to join the human race.
hahahhaa, another bowl of hate washed down with a nice big glass of bitterness for breakfast, Hank? ;D
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Old-Skool on October 29, 2007, 04:08:35 PM
How can anyone honestly look at those pics and say he looks better now. This may as well be a golf forum......... ::)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on October 29, 2007, 04:23:48 PM
Poor little Branch.

How is this 'Neanderthal of MetroFlex' going to solve the problems of burnt-out-receptors, a bad attitude and distorted-lines? 

Branch, all the pharmaceuticals in the world could not solve your body-image issues.  Maybe it is time to look in a 'new sewer' for that ever elusive solution?
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: The Squadfather on October 29, 2007, 04:31:21 PM
He is getting uglier and his ears are much bigger now.
as opposed to you who is a pusssy wrecking chiseled male model. ::)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on October 29, 2007, 04:34:24 PM
How can anyone honestly look at those pics and say he looks better now. This may as well be a golf forum......... ::)

I'm glad it's not just me.  Does anyone here thinks he looks better in the second picture above?  ???
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: McFarland on October 29, 2007, 04:41:36 PM
I'm glad it's not just me.  Does anyone here thinks he looks better in the second picture above?  ???

What do you think he should have done differently from his prior form? 
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on October 29, 2007, 04:46:14 PM
There has been so much written about how ugly Branch is!

He is described as a simple man with rancid body odour, poor lines and bloated abdomen who is always making an 'ass of himself' in every gym he trains in!

For Christ sake Branch, grow up!  You were born ugly with appalling genetics but this no reason to continually act in such anti-social ways!

Not hating, just my opinion.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on October 29, 2007, 05:02:49 PM
What do you think he should have done differently from his prior form? 

That's a fair question.  I don't know that I can provide a compelling answer, but as Saxon said on page one of this thread, "when a guy's waist gets wider it really throws a physique off, even if the rest of his body gets bigger."

Branch got bigger but his aesthetics were ruined in the process.  Aesthetically speaking, a bodybuilder at a given height can only carry so much weight (get so big) before his lines get ruined.  That weight will vary from person to person (depending mainly on their height, length of limbs, shape of head, etc) but once that line is crossed the body doesn't look good anymore--even if it has more muscle, as the two pix above demonstrate.  :(

McFarland do you think he looks better in the first or second pic above?

I'm no BB judge, but I think his legs overpower his upper body in the second pic.   :-\
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Radical Plato on October 30, 2007, 12:38:30 AM
There has been so much written about how ugly Branch is!

He is described as a simple man with rancid body odour, poor lines and bloated abdomen who is always making an 'ass of himself' in every gym he trains in!

For Christ sake Branch, grow up!  You were born ugly with appalling genetics but this no reason to continually act in such anti-social ways!

Not hating, just my opinion.
There has been so much written about how ugly Hank is!

He is described as a simple man with rancid body odour, poor lines and bloated abdomen who is always making an 'ass of himself' in every gym he trains in!

For Christ sake Hank, grow up!  You were born ugly with appalling genetics but this no reason to continually act in such anti-social ways!

Not hating, just my opinion.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: webcake on October 30, 2007, 12:46:09 AM
2001 vs. 2007   Worse.  :-[

Yes he does look worse, but his mid section hasn't really gotten any worse. And you have to admit, the baldness mixed with the very dark tan doesn't do Branch any favours. If Branch in the 2nd pic had the same tan as in the 1st pic he would look a lot better.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on October 30, 2007, 12:49:04 AM
Branch is regarded as a pro who has one of the most vascular heads in the sport. 

What a pity 'cranium vascularity' is not part of the judging criteria.

Hang in there Branch, women may find you repulsive but i know that only 'makes you stronger'.....hahahahaha.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Radical Plato on October 30, 2007, 12:51:30 AM
Branch is regarded as a pro who has one of the most vascular heads in the sport. 

What a pity 'cranium vascularity' is not part of the judging criteria.

Hang in there Branch, women may find you repulsive but i know that only 'makes you stronger'.....hahahahaha.
Hank is regarded as a schmo who has one of the most vascular heads in the sport. 

What a pity 'cranium vascularity' is not part of the judging criteria.

Hang in there Hank, women may find you repulsive but i know that only 'makes you stronger'.....hahahahaha.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: New Hank Wood on October 30, 2007, 12:59:24 AM
Branch share some of those war stories. 

How about the time you ate 4 roast chickens in a sitting and your stomach nearly exploded from the hormones....
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: omg on October 30, 2007, 03:08:52 AM
veins are not muscles, and should have no relevance in bodybuilding competitions

true
 
but veins could be considered part of conditioning. u only get them if u get lean enough
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: slaveboy1980 on October 30, 2007, 08:21:33 AM
palumboism + elf syndrome
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on November 08, 2008, 01:04:43 PM
He doesn't even look like the same person now.  :'(


Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: vice1 on November 08, 2008, 01:05:51 PM
branch warren is a crazy looking mofo
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/151515785_83dbde806a.jpg)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: m8 on November 08, 2008, 01:45:19 PM
Branch Warren 1999 = James Dean look-alike.

Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: spinnis on November 08, 2008, 01:53:52 PM
He doesn't even look like the same person now.  :'(




I think I would kill a fat innocent man to look like he does there.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: arce377 on November 08, 2008, 06:49:19 PM
 NO Hair and 200/200  :(
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Jeffro on November 08, 2008, 07:54:01 PM
Branch Warren 1999 = James Dean look-alike.
Ridiculously thick chest on that athlete.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: alnassak on November 08, 2008, 08:50:08 PM
do you know guys that Branch at age 18 beat cutler at age 19  ???

Moreover, in my opinion he looked at his best in 2001 just like cutler did.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: vice1 on November 09, 2008, 12:26:44 AM
Ridiculously thick chest on that athlete.
bodybuilders are not athletes young one
Title: Re: Better or worse?
Post by: Bear on November 09, 2008, 05:46:52 AM
Worse. He's thicker but not immensely so and his abs are not as tight as before. He had really good shape/thickness in 99. The only thing he needed was a thicker back - nothing else. And he hasn't done that.

His back actually is in better propertion here than it is today.
(http://www.repetrope.com/assets/content/Media01/galleries/12015/fullsize/12015-warren05.jpg)

Today
(http://www.graphicmuscle.com/~photos/754/Men/754rb0393.jpg)

Looked really thick, well proportioned and awesome waist-shoulder ratio.
(http://www.repetrope.com/assets/content/Media01/galleries/12015/fullsize/12015-warren-bertram.jpg)

If he was already Olympia stage material in '99, why was he still a couple of years away from even turning pro? He didn't have delts to speak of back then and he was too small in the upper body to make an impact. It's all very well digging up old pics when people are smaller but have better abs then denouncing their years of progress since. However, anyone who understands BODYBUILDING knows it's about building your body, not shying away from putting on size because your waist might get imperceptibly bigger. Check his 2nd place at the Arnold 2 years ago, he looked better than those early bigs. Whoever said he hasn't got much bigger just worse is a pointless waste of space.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Jeffro on November 09, 2008, 03:41:43 PM
bodybuilders are not athletes young one
It was a sarcastic remark, gay one.  ::)
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Victor VonDoom on November 10, 2008, 09:35:55 AM
Bah! He looks worse now!  Doom disapproves.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Stavios on November 10, 2008, 09:38:00 AM
branch warren is a crazy looking mofo
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/151515785_83dbde806a.jpg)

homo-erotic picture
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: vice1 on November 10, 2008, 02:36:26 PM
homo-erotic picture
I am not a homosexual >:(
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Permabulker on November 10, 2008, 02:39:49 PM
Branch lifts weights!   :D
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Stavios on November 10, 2008, 02:47:16 PM
I am not a homosexual >:(

Gaygbm said so
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: wavelength on November 10, 2008, 02:48:45 PM
I am not a homosexual >:(

what is it then you do on a board about oiled-up men in thongs ???
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: Stavios on November 10, 2008, 02:49:34 PM
we are all gay
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on November 10, 2008, 02:55:54 PM
Gaygbm said so

That is not what I said.  My rhetoric focuses on people's behavior not what they say or on labels.
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on October 16, 2010, 08:19:56 AM
Is he getting better... or worse?  :-\
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: littleguns on October 16, 2010, 11:05:10 AM
Branch is the man! Many disagree but he continues to get better and truly hasn't let his stomach get out of control. Super nice guy as well....Truly cares about his fans
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: BayGBM on October 16, 2010, 11:07:07 AM
Branch is the man! Many disagree but he continues to get better and truly hasn't let his stomach get out of control. Super nice guy as well....Truly cares about his fans

Really?  Look at the front double bi pix on page one.  You honestly think he looks better in the second pic than in the first?  :-[
Title: Re: Better or worse?: Branch Warren
Post by: _bruce_ on October 16, 2010, 01:30:34 PM
His gains are debatable but that's what it took to get noticed.