Author Topic: overgrown legs look like SHIT (Read 24964 times)

Steve Namat · « **Reply #25 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:31:44 PM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 10, 2012, 03:29:33 PM

ronnie coleman's legs were ideal but this is too much

Nothing is good on that guy anyways...

OptimusPrime1980 · « **Reply #26 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:38:36 PM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 10, 2012, 03:44:28 PM

big legs are not overgrown

ronnie coleman is ideal size and shape

but has to match the body

this guy has disgusting shape, just meatblocks, like andreaz munzer but bigger

and his upper body cant even begin to match

nowadays he looks a lot better i heard, legs decreased

bro,
are you comparing an elite pro to this national level competitor?
munzer was ELITE!!! was a freak, talk about conditioned.... never again did we see that on a stage.... SICK!!

WOOO · « **Reply #27 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:43:22 PM »

left side of his body is much bigger than the right... he's going to die soon... sad

20inch calves · « **Reply #28 on:** February 10, 2012, 08:31:39 PM »

to me it looks like his legs shrunk from this. sadly this is the best he looked and will never look like that again. but i personally would rather have this than a huge upper body and chicken legs. this just looks better to me if you are going to compete anyway

lf i had a choice i would chose to have a dominate lower body than upper body

BayGBM · « **Reply #29 on:** February 10, 2012, 08:39:18 PM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 10, 2012, 03:33:18 PM

i'm worrying from a shmoe point of view obviously you vain bastard

Don't worry. You'll never get to touch legs like that.

Rhino · « **Reply #30 on:** February 10, 2012, 09:04:05 PM »

nocalfzilla.

Heywood · « **Reply #31 on:** February 10, 2012, 09:09:33 PM »

that don't look real....the joints are too thin to support that much muscle.

Looks photoshopped (or synthol) -- not real.

Big N · « **Reply #32 on:** February 10, 2012, 11:49:27 PM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 10, 2012, 03:29:33 PM

ronnie coleman's legs were ideal but this is too much

He seem like a nice guy, was always humble. Or seemed to be.

20inch calves · « **Reply #33 on:** February 11, 2012, 12:17:49 AM »

Quote from: Steve Namat on February 10, 2012, 07:31:44 PM

Nothing is good on that guy anyways...

he looked good back then..come on. give the dude his props. he HAD pro potential

Papper · « **Reply #34 on:** February 11, 2012, 12:21:05 AM »

Quote from: the trainer on February 10, 2012, 04:49:53 PM

I wonder who looks worst a bottom heavy guy or a top heavy guy.

a bottom heavy guy always looks like total shit imo. top heavy looks good

Tito24 · « **Reply #35 on:** February 11, 2012, 12:22:35 AM »

the lunch can never get in that shape again anyway

20inch calves · « **Reply #36 on:** February 11, 2012, 12:31:52 AM »

Quote from: papercut on February 11, 2012, 12:21:05 AM

a bottom heavy guy always looks like total shit imo. top heavy looks good

i can't agree. a top heavy guy says to me that he;s lazy..that he hasn;t put in the time at the squat rack
put it this way..why is that you see the squat rack empty at the gym yet every bench is taken. the bench is comfortable. having 500lbs on your shoulders sitting down and coming back up is not.

i can't stand a tank top bodybuilder

aesthetics · « **Reply #37 on:** February 11, 2012, 12:34:37 AM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 10, 2012, 03:29:33 PM

ronnie coleman's legs were ideal but this is too much

coleman's legs were bigger.

i find what really really ruins a physique is having large inner thighs. completely ruins the aesthetics and makes someone look stumpy and short

Kulutues · « **Reply #38 on:** February 11, 2012, 12:35:10 AM »

actually trey is perfect there, just no lats

purenaturalstrength · « **Reply #39 on:** February 11, 2012, 12:41:30 AM »

his legs look a lot better here

i wonder which pic came first

Steve Namat · « **Reply #40 on:** February 11, 2012, 12:59:28 AM »

Quote from: 20inch calves on February 11, 2012, 12:17:49 AM

he looked good back then..come on. give the dude his props. he HAD pro football player potential

Fixed

Papper · « **Reply #41 on:** February 11, 2012, 01:10:26 AM »

Quote from: 20inch calves on February 11, 2012, 12:31:52 AM

i can't agree. a top heavy guy says to me that he;s lazy..that he hasn;t put in the time at the squat rack
put it this way..why is that you see the squat rack empty at the gym yet every bench is taken. the bench is comfortable. having 500lbs on your shoulders sitting down and coming back up is not.

i can't stand a tank top bodybuilder

i get your point about laziness and i agree. but the squat rack is also empty because tree trunk legs arent on the average guys wish list, nor on girls'.

Cleanest Natural · « **Reply #42 on:** February 11, 2012, 02:02:01 AM »

purecrap strength is either the most persistent gimmick ever or too retarded and naive

purenaturalstrength · « **Reply #43 on:** February 11, 2012, 02:04:44 AM »

Quote from: Cleanest Natural on February 11, 2012, 02:02:01 AM

purecrap strength is either the most persistent gimmick ever or too retarded and naive

what about the most persistent retard?

Cleanest Natural · « **Reply #44 on:** February 11, 2012, 02:08:32 AM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 11, 2012, 02:04:44 AM

what about the most persistent retard?

you said it

aesthetics · « **Reply #45 on:** February 11, 2012, 02:29:24 AM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 11, 2012, 02:04:44 AM

what about the most persistent retard?

by the end of 2012 i hope you are on some gear. i really really really really don't understand, at all. why not just 40mg of anavar? so easy and simple and you will lose less hair than you are naturally.

purenaturalstrength · « **Reply #46 on:** February 11, 2012, 02:33:46 AM »

Quote from: aesthetics on February 11, 2012, 02:29:24 AM

by the end of 2012 i hope you are on some gear. i really really really really don't understand, at all. why not just 40mg of anavar? so easy and simple and you will lose less hair than you are naturally.

well as good as that sounds

i googled it and a lot of guys report accelerated hair loss on any hair safe steroid that doesnt make you impotent

closeline · « **Reply #47 on:** February 11, 2012, 03:03:46 AM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 10, 2012, 03:29:33 PM

ronnie coleman's legs were ideal but this is too much

100 percent correct

too big legs are 100 percent gay

aesthetics · « **Reply #48 on:** February 11, 2012, 03:22:49 AM »

Quote from: purenaturalstrength on February 11, 2012, 02:33:46 AM

well as good as that sounds

i googled it and a lot of guys report accelerated hair loss on any hair safe steroid that doesnt make you impotent

40mg is pretty low

you won't be impotent though just have no sex drive

aesthetics · « **Reply #49 on:** February 11, 2012, 03:55:12 AM »

anyways, at 200mg/wk of tren i don't notice a difference in hair loss from being natural, so man, i don't really see why you are so hesitant. it's tren and a decent amount at that, you could run var or deca and probably get less hair loss than as a natural since you will lower your bodies dht levels to nothing.