Steve Reeve's weight guidlines Natty. Gh15, accurate?

[Reeves]

215lbs at 6'1 and 9-10% would actually be less size than GH15 outlined for naturals lol.

The guy is a confused, jealous, bitter individual, who tends to contradict himself every other post.

There is nothing to suggest that Reeves was on anything. End of story.

I agree , I have no problem with steroids and I think that anyone who wants to take them should be able to legally. with that being said what he types is just utter bullshit , he's not only claiming Reeves predates the established timeline of test use in this country , he's also claiming to know what he was on , how long he was on what he used together it's an impossibility for him to know even if it were true , so in the end he's full of shit as usual. 

Gentlemen I agree.  It's like I said, those that are jealous and take dope will often try to justify their drug habit by stating someone like Steve Reeves also used drugs to build his physique.  This is a common tactic used by many people across many areas, e.g.,  " If Reeves used drugs to build what is arguably the finest, most classically inspired physique ever, then it's perfectly justifiable that I do so."

As to the body fat level of Steve, I am unaware of anyone knowing this much less if it was ever tested back then but I suppose one could try and make an educated guess via photographs.  All I do know is that his physique type is what I strive for and this in spite of my lack of that type of height, structure and good looks.  When I was younger I trained to bulk up so that when I walked into a room, people would freak out at my relative size.  Now I want only to be admired by my fellow man and have women furtively glance with desire.  Bill Pearl once said that when Reeves walked into a room, everyone looked because you knew that what was before you was what man was meant to look like.

I have nothing really against gh15.  He and I will always differ on drug use but I suspect we agree on a variety of other topics.  It could be that I know him and have trained alongside him at one time or another.  I recognize the writing style and there are cues contained therein, but I respect his desire for anonymity and will abide by it.

[dj181]

Once again, Reeves wasn't 9-10% bodyfat, from his "in shaped and conditioned photos, aka at his peak" he was 6-7% so therefore, he doesn't fit into gh15's "natural limit guidelines"

[Jaime]

Once again, Reeves wasn't 9-10% bodyfat, from his "in shaped and conditioned photos, aka at his peak" he was 6-7% so therefore, he doesn't fit into gh15's "natural limit guidelines"

Find a picture of him at 6%, i won't hold my breath. He stll fits in to the imbeciles guidlines anyway if memory serves.

[gh15]

There you go trying to prove your point by using the status quo for this day and age and think it applies 70 years ago , you do that when you type that all bodybuilders lie about their use , there would be no reason what so ever for Reeves to lie because they wouldn't have been illegal your claims just don't make any sense

We have an established time-line of drug use in the United States and you're claiming ( without any proof what so ever ) that Reeves predates all of this

ll reliable sources - publications by Terry Todd, John Fair, Randy Roach, Bill Starr, etc, as well as interviews and letters from John Ziegler, John Grimek, Bill March, etc - indicate that experimentation with testosterone for athletic purposes began in the U.S. sometime in either late 1954 or 1955. These 'trials' were short-lived, however, as the results were disappointing and testosterone use was deemed ineffective and carried the risk of harmful side-effects. A statistical analysis of Olympic-style Weightlifting performances published in the International Journal of the History of Sport concluded that Soviet athletes likely first used testosterone sometime between 1952 and 1956.


Ziegler learned from the Russians that they were using test on their weightlifters in 1954 ( still years after Reeves retired ) and he was the first one to attempt to use inject-able testosterone on weightlifters were ' deemed ineffective ' and carried ' harmful side-effects ' which is why he created Dianbol to have the same advantages and without the harmful side-effects

If you have any proof you would have posted it by now but as we established many times over you don't have anything and other than rumors , innuendo , lies and conspiracy theories , which is why the morons of this site like you , it's par for the course on GetBig

but you have an he say too,,its he say written in a book but it is stil he say because you never been with reeves or lived in his house,,follow me? ,,you cant know anything same as you say i cant because you never lived with him,,but the problem is that i thikn even if you lived with him he would have found a way to balonie you lol,,like today fellas do all the time,,all the time i hear friend of friend saying his friend is natural because he got good genetics,,he just sometimes 183 and sometimeew 198 btu due to good genetic remain 8% lol ,, its just when you walk the walk you know hormonized bodybuilder like yoru hand just like a fella that has printing houe will be able to smell paper and touch it for a secod and tell you all about it as in quality and the way it was printed and done,,

gh15 approved

[shiftedShapes]

Only because he said so? not accurate lets also factor in that we know for a fact anabolics weren't created in the United States until years after he retired and there is NO record what so ever of any strength athlete in the United States using test before doctor John Ziegler , who abandoned the use of testosterone because it yielded no results what so ever , it's more than just his word you should try and pay attention to the thread but my speculation is you're not hear following just trolling which is nothing new for you.

Did you miss this because you never responded to it, despite requesting it and it directly contradicts what you are saying above:

here is some more info about the book I mentioned:

http://nsrc.sfsu.edu/article/testosterone_dreams

Testosterone became a charismatic drug during the 1940s because it promised sexual stimulation and renewed energy. Physicians described the optimal effect of testosterone drugs as a feeling of “well-being,” a term that has been used many times since the 1940s to characterize their positive effect on mood. In the early 1940s testosterone was hailed in pharmaceutical advertising as a mood-altering drug whose primary purpose was the sexual restoration and reenergizing of aging males. It appeared at that time that an inexpensive supply, widespread demand, and favorable medical opinion would soon produce a major market for testosterone products.

The first public advocate of testosterone therapy for aging men was the popular science journalist Paul de Kruif, whose manifesto The Male Hormone was published with some fanfare in 1945. Excerpted in Reader’s Digest and promoted by a full-page review in Newsweek (“Hormones for He-Men”), The Male Hormone was in some respects a prophetic book. The potential market for a rejuvenating male hormone seemed to be enormous: “How many millions of American males, not the men they used to be, would flock to the physicians and the druggist, a bit shame-faced and surreptitious, maybe, but hopeful, murmuring: ‘Doc, how about some of this new male hormone?’”

Testosterone did not become a mass market drug in the 1940s due to the sexual conservatism of most American physicians and the society they served. The belief that testosterone was a stimulating drug made it a potential threat to sexual morality as well as a promising therapy. Sensational coverage had given the male hormone a quasi-pornographic image that its female counterpart estrogen had never acquired. Commenting on testosterone’s unsavory reputation in 1946, Science Digest reported that “the uninformed continue to believe that the sole use of this innocent chemical is to turn sexual weaklings into wolves, and octogenarians into sexual athletes.”

The 1940s also saw the use of testosterone therapy as an experimental “cure” for homosexuality. The medical view of homosexuality as a type of endocrine deficiency made the use of testosterone propionate to reverse homosexual orientation virtually predictable. As one physician in 1940 put it: “If homosexuality is merely the result of an endocrine disturbance, the prospect for its cure must be excellent today.”

The idea that the bodies of homosexuals contained less male hormone and more female hormone than those of heterosexuals first appeared in 1935. By 1940 a number of investigators were confident enough in their ability to assay hormone levels to claim that homosexuality was rooted in abnormal sex hormone ratios rather than the psychological complexes hypothesized by Freud and others. “It seems,” one research team wrote, “that the constitutional homosexual has a different sex hormone chemistry than the normal male.” The fallacy of this therapeutic rationale became evident soon enough. Testosterone propionate combined with chorionic gonadotropin was not curing homosexuals, even in studies that encouraged belief in the drug and did not compare its effects with those of a placebo. In fact, it was becoming increasingly clear that androgens did not reverse but actually intensified homosexual libido, so that “sometimes instead of helping one gets a worsening of the condition.”

Prescription for women?
Testosterone drugs were also the favored pharmacological technique of the 1940s for treating sexual “frigidity” in women. Testosterone propionate ointment could be applied to the vulva or clitoris to increase genital sensitivity. Testosterone could be injected or pellets implanted under the skin to intensify libido. By 1943 testosterone propionate was reported to be in widespread use to treat women with sexual and other endocrine disorders

Incredible still ignoring this ND?  I didn't think you would resort to such cheap tactics to win an argument.  I guess Hulkster was right about you.

[First Blood]

215lbs at 6'1 and 9-10% would actually be less size than GH15 outlined for naturals lol.

The guy is a confused, jealous, bitter individual, who tends to contradict himself every other post.

There is nothing to suggest that Reeves was on anything. End of story.

there are guys who weigh 150lbs who use drugs. drug use is not only connected to the weight of the person.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Did you miss this because you never responded to it, despite requesting it and it directly contradicts what you are saying above:



Incredible still ignoring this ND?  I didn't think you would resort to such cheap tactics to win an argument.  I guess Hulkster was right about you.

Ignoring what? this has what to do with strength athletes? this has what to do with weightlifting & bodybuilding? this is an attempt to draw a conclusion based on a reference to something non-related and I'm not even sure if that information is accurate

Show me proof that strength athletes were using it in the 1940s and then I'll say you're onto something but this proves zero.

[gh15]

there are guys who weigh 150lbs who use drugs. drug use is not only connected to the weight of the person.

plenty of fellas use gear and 160 lb ,,PLENTY,,they just dotn eat,,they work out,,they party ,,they see it as beach body for girls,,they dont have enough caloric intake to grow,,they just dont eat period,,1-2 meals a day if ,usually junk,,those fellas stil use aas and the results with them since they dont eat much and work out and drink alcohol and party and girls and school and etc ,,result with them is 165lb of little harder muscle that has some kind o swole to it ,,or more  defined thin/muscles,,the main idea behind their juice is more socially,, more scuplted muscles with some minor thickness and overall buff feeling,,you call it in bodybuilding swole,,its reaction of body to drugs before anything really happens persay as in the illusion/side effect before the drug take affect subsentially if training and eating enough,,

gh15 approved

[shiftedShapes]

Ignoring what? this has what to do with strength athletes? this has what to do with weightlifting & bodybuilding? this is an attempt to draw a conclusion based on a reference to something non-related and I'm not even sure if that information is accurate

Show me proof that strength athletes were using it in the 1940s and then I'll say you're onto something but this proves zero.

The point is that BBers are willing to try anything, and the quote suggests that testosterone was readily available in the 40s.  Therefore we should assume that they were experimenting with it.  Don't you think that BBers today use a lot of PEDs that other strength athletes have never tried?

[dj181]

I knew a "bench press specialist" who stood bout 5'9" and weighed not more than a buck 45 and the dude looked like he never touched a weight in his life, and this was a black dude as well. Anyways, his bp was around 325, with a full competition-style pause at the chest. I know that he was on something, coz my dealer friend told me that this fella was one of his clients. At the time I was at my peak, 5'11" a buck 55 and sub-5, and I was 10 times more buff than him even though I was completely natural. But, as far as strength went, I got smoked by dis fella lol

[NarcissisticDeity]

The point is that BBers are willing to try anything, and the quote suggests that testosterone was readily available in the 40s.  Therefore we should assume that they were experimenting with it.  Don't you think that BBers today use a lot of PEDs that other strength athletes have never tried?

The point is you're using toady's perspective and attempting to apply it to yesterday. I don't thing it suggests it was readily available in the 40s although it appears it was being marketed towards the medical community for a host of reasons , including the cure for homosexuality

This is you drawing your own conclusions because of a non-related medical reference , and assuming it was available to any bodybuilder who wanted it and it somehow worked for them , recall Ziegler a Medical Doctor mind you had ZERO luck testosterone injections at first and abandoned them , the test subjects noted NO benefits other than one claiming he felt more horny and Grimmick who actually felt the injections hindered his progress

So you're talking huge leaps in assuming it was readily available to any Joe-blow on the street , and it worked effectively and doctors knew about the advantages in strength/muscle building , there is NO record of anyone using testosterone in weightlifters and bodybuilders before 1954 and Ziegler if there were I would be the first to admit so , people just assume on this subject because it fits their point of view , I don't.

[shiftedShapes]

The point is you're using toady's perspective and attempting to apply it to yesterday. I don't thing it suggests it was readily available in the 40s although it appears it was being marketed towards the medical community for a host of reasons , including the cure for homosexuality

This is you drawing your own conclusions because of a non-related medical reference , and assuming it was available to any bodybuilder who wanted it and it somehow worked for them , recall Ziegler a Medical Doctor mind you had ZERO luck testosterone injections at first and abandoned them , the test subjects noted NO benefits other than one claiming he felt more horny and Grimmick who actually felt the injections hindered his progress

So you're talking huge leaps in assuming it was readily available to any Joe-blow on the street , and it worked effectively and doctors knew about the advantages in strength/muscle building , there is NO record of anyone using testosterone in weightlifters and bodybuilders before 1954 and Ziegler if there were I would be the first to admit so , people just assume on this subject because it fits their point of view , I don't.

I'm not drawing any conclusions, just offering evidence that Reeves could have been on roids.  It is erroneous I think for you to think of him as any joe blow off the street.  The guy was making money off of his looks, and already invested in doing everything he could to enhance them.

[NarcissisticDeity]

I'm not drawing any conclusions, just offering evidence that Reeves could have been on roids.  It is erroneous I think for you to think of him as any joe blow off the street.  The guy was making money off of his looks, and already invested in doing everything he could to enhance them.

You absolutely drawing your own conclusions , if some doctors were using it as a cue for frigidity in women and a cure for homosexuality in men , therefore Reeves could have been using it  it's reaching really that's not evidence in the least it's speculation

he was doing everything to enhance his looks?  looks are genetic and ever see his physique at 15? he was already ahead of the same or was there a possibility he was using back then? where does this train of thought end?

we have evidence of when test was first used in the United States for strength athletes anything that predates this isn't evidence it's wishful thinking and assumption.

[shiftedShapes]

You absolutely drawing your own conclusions , if some doctors were using it as a cue for frigidity in women and a cure for homosexuality in men , therefore Reeves could have been using it  it's reaching really that's not evidence in the least it's speculation

he was doing everything to enhance his looks?  looks are genetic and ever see his physique at 15? he was already ahead of the same or was there a possibility he was using back then? where does this train of thought end?

we have evidence of when test was first used in the United States for strength athletes anything that predates this isn't evidence it's wishful thinking and assumption.

so I'm willing to consider the possibility and you are not, and you say I'm the one jumping to conclusions? 

[NarcissisticDeity]

so I'm willing to consider the possibility and you are not, and you say I'm the one jumping to conclusions? 

I like evidence , you don't

is it possible? perhaps is it probable? highly unlikely

[Jaime]

He could have been using. I wouldn't say 100% that he wasn't, it's really not something that means that much to me, whether or not a guy took low dose test 70 odd years ago.

It's just a bit out of line to throw around accusations when there is nothing to substantiate such claims.

I look at his physique and see someone with a good skeletal structure who was carrying decent mass. He wasn't ripped to shreds and he wasn't huge. Just someone with good genetics that had been training since he was about fourteen.

[shiftedShapes]

He could have been using. I wouldn't say 100% that he wasn't, it's really not something that means that much to me, whether or not a guy took low dose test 70 odd years ago.

It's just a bit out of line to throw around accusations when there is nothing to substantiate such claims.

I look at his physique and see someone with a good skeletal structure who was carrying decent mass. He wasn't ripped to shreds and he wasn't huge. Just someone with good genetics that had been training since he was about fourteen.

He is talked about as one of the most aesthetic BBers of all time, despite not having access to modern training methods and supplementation (I mean not even decent protein powder), considering this unusual combination of great product and substandard input we have to consider that we might not be seeing the whole picture.  Then you have the additional fact that testosterone was available and widely known, talked about even in Newsweek, and it seems to provide a clear explanation.  The alternative is genetics that we don't even see in naturals today (at least according the the consensus view of Reeves, to me he is nothing special).  Which explanation is more plausible.

[Jaime]

He is talked about as one of the most aesthetic BBers of all time, despite not having access to modern training methods and supplementation (I mean not even decent protein powder), considering this unusual combination of great product and substandard input we have to consider that we might not be seeing the whole picture.  Then you have the additional fact that testosterone was available and widely known, talked about even in Newsweek, and it seems to provide a clear explanation.  The alternative is genetics that we don't even see in naturals today (at least according the the consensus view of Reeves, to me he is nothing special).  Which explanation is more plausible.

They knew about progressive resistance training in the late 1800's, over the counter supplamentation is of no real value whatsoever. Protein powder is about the only product of any use and it isn't a substitute for real food.

I think people referance Reeves because of his structure, the fact that he was in the movies and because he was a good looking guy. The fact that he is a known name and the main guy from the golden era is important, it wouldn't be good to referance guys that nobody else is really aware of. I have seen a lot of guys who i would put down as having better builds, but it's all subjective.

Genetics is the number one factor in building your physique. I think he had a very good response to training, as evidenced in his pictures when he was about 16 years old.

[Palpatine Q]

Reeves took steroids.

He is also the single most overrated BBer of all time....he was a twink with defined pecs and a small waist....fuck him

[gh15]

They knew about progressive resistance training in the late 1800's, over the counter supplamentation is of no real value whatsoever. Protein powder is about the only product of any use and it isn't a substitute for real food.

I think people referance Reeves because of his structure, the fact that he was in the movies and because he was a good looking guy. The fact that he is a known name and the main guy from the golden era is important, it wouldn't be good to referance guys that nobody else is really aware of. I have seen a lot of guys who i would put down as having better builds, but it's all subjective.

Genetics is the number one factor in building your physique. I think he had a very good response to training, as evidenced in his pictures when he was about 16 years old.

if genetic was number one factor than everyone would walk 150 6%,,its the GENETIC RESPONE TO HORMONES,,YOU at 6'1 with the best natural genetic in the fuckin world with amazing muscle shape that steevre reeves DID NOT HAVE BY THE WAY,,you maybe!! wil be 6'1 200lb at 6-8%,,im saying maybe because you will have to have no life other than bodybuilding and only food training sleep,,no disturbances what so ever inorder to see 200lb aT 6'1 AT 6-7%

so my dear friend,,genetic persay has nothing to do with it,,testosterona on the other hand,,.has a lot to do with it


im amazed at how goolible so many kids are and even old timers,,amazing how they think that good genetic structure will lead you to be 200lb at 6% at 5'11,,good genetic strcture gets you to be 5'10 180 9-10% ,,6'1 200lb 9-10% at the absolute best cases which are very very very rare maybe down to 6% at 180 and 200 respectivly to the heights mentioned


the diff between 6% and 9-12% isi huggggggggggggggge,,you need to lose about 30lb to get from 12% to 6% ,,30 fuckin lb!


the fella at 230-235 12-13 % walk on stage 190 4-5%,,think about it ,,and this is ALWAYS ON AAS DRUGS! unles there is gh in there then it changes with time

gh15 approved

[First Blood]

if genetic was number one factor than everyone would walk 150 6%,,its the GENETIC RESPONE TO HORMONES,,YOU at 6'1 with the best natural genetic in the fuckin world with amazing muscle shape that steevre reeves DID NOT HAVE BY THE WAY,,you maybe!! wil be 6'1 200lb at 6-8%,,im saying maybe because you will have to have no life other than bodybuilding and only food training sleep,,no disturbances what so ever inorder to see 200lb aT 6'1 AT 6-7%

so my dear friend,,genetic persay has nothing to do with it,,testosterona on the other hand,,.has a lot to do with it


im amazed at how goolible so many kids are and even old timers,,amazing how they think that good genetic structure will lead you to be 200lb at 6% at 5'11,,good genetic strcture gets you to be 5'10 180 9-10% ,,6'1 200lb 9-10% at the absolute best cases which are very very very rare maybe down to 6% at 180 and 200 respectivly to the heights mentioned


the diff between 6% and 9-12% isi huggggggggggggggge,,you need to lose about 30lb to get from 12% to 6% ,,30 fuckin lb!


the fella at 230-235 12-13 % walk on stage 190 4-5%,,think about it ,,and this is ALWAYS ON AAS DRUGS! unles there is gh in there then it changes with time

gh15 approved

yes I agree BF% changes alot at a specific weight; people need to understand that when comparing the weight X to weight Y.

[dj181]

In my personal experience the "magic number" is 7, once I hit sub-7 the difference in my appearance is like night and day, and I'm speaking from a natural twink perspective So, in my opinon, I'm thinking that a hormonized fella could be a bit higher, say 9-10% and still look outstanding. Coz how could a thickly-muscled specimen have to get down to sub-7 to look outstanding, when that is the actual requirement for a natural twink like me?

[Jaime]

if genetic was number one factor than everyone would walk 150 6%,,its the GENETIC RESPONE TO HORMONES,,YOU at 6'1 with the best natural genetic in the fuckin world with amazing muscle shape that steevre reeves DID NOT HAVE BY THE WAY,,you maybe!! wil be 6'1 200lb at 6-8%,,im saying maybe because you will have to have no life other than bodybuilding and only food training sleep,,no disturbances what so ever inorder to see 200lb aT 6'1 AT 6-7%

so my dear friend,,genetic persay has nothing to do with it,,testosterona on the other hand,,.has a lot to do with it


im amazed at how goolible so many kids are and even old timers,,amazing how they think that good genetic structure will lead you to be 200lb at 6% at 5'11,,good genetic strcture gets you to be 5'10 180 9-10% ,,6'1 200lb 9-10% at the absolute best cases which are very very very rare maybe down to 6% at 180 and 200 respectivly to the heights mentioned


the diff between 6% and 9-12% isi huggggggggggggggge,,you need to lose about 30lb to get from 12% to 6% ,,30 fuckin lb!


the fella at 230-235 12-13 % walk on stage 190 4-5%,,think about it ,,and this is ALWAYS ON AAS DRUGS! unles there is gh in there then it changes with time

gh15 approved

I generally agree with you, i just think your numbers are a little out.

[MAXX]

Hey Gh15 what do you think of the weight guidlines that Steve Reeves put in to his book in regards to natural training?

Height    Ideal Weight
5’5”            160lbs
5’6”            165lbs
5’7”            170lbs
5’8”            175lbs
5’9”            180lbs
5’10”            185lbs
5’11”            190lbs
6’0”           200lbs
6’1”           210lbs
6’2”           220lbs
6’3”           230lbs
6’4”           240lbs
6’5”           250lbs

So most guys off the juice and sitting at a reasonable lean weight are going to be around this ballpark? They knew this shit fifty odd years ago...

well depends on bodyfat% like gh15 said. at 4% doubt it.