His arms were good, his back was decent (had great traps too) and his, they were about the standard for back then. Everybody had "undersized" legs back then.
Points taken.
I'm still not blown away by his arms. They DID look enormous hanging by his side, but didn't have the height and "pop" in a front double-biceps that many 70s dudes had (Arnold, Sergio, Bill Grant, Kal Szkalak, etc., etc.).
And I certainly don't contend that guys in that decade usually had great wheels, but there were a good many bodybuilders with decent thigh development. Arnold at his peak had good legs -- well, quads and calves. Sergio had some wheels on him. Mentzer, Casey, Roy Callendar and Ken Waller, too.
Perhaps I overstated my case, but I never said I looked better or that his training was worthless. Nonetheless, my points stand. If his delts and arms were 7 or 8 out of 10, his pecs and abs were 10/10. Just as I said, that = lack of balance. Why a seemingly reasonable chap, like Galeniko, with whom I've always been decent and complimentary, finds that so objectionable ... ?
