Author Topic: Arnold at 210, big enough?  (Read 10438 times)

Tarantula157

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 721
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #25 on: June 18, 2015, 08:40:04 AM »
Morons? you know nothing. You also don't know what i was trying to say. I'm comparing his 70's physique to physiques now...He would not win and it's a FACT because not only is there different criteria he is also not size and condition enough like i said i understand that..I know that if he grew up 30 years ago he would be on more drugs now and be a better bodybuilder..but that is not the point..HIS physique THEN..To the physiques now it is not even a contest there is no debating on that he just wouldn't win it's simple and it's being misunderstood
So what's your point in comparing a physique from 40 years ago build under different circumstances and upon a different criteria to the physiques of today and judging it by the criteria of today?It's just plain stupid.When people say he had better physique than today's pro's they don't mean it's by today's criteria but rather by the original criteria and bodybuilding ideal.

Tarantula157

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 721
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #26 on: June 18, 2015, 08:42:13 AM »
Palumbo is a piece of shit how do you like that answer?
So size and condition is not everything then...

muscleman-2013

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4620
  • Team Trump
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #27 on: June 18, 2015, 09:26:06 AM »
I would argue arnold had one of the most overrated physiques in history..It's just the name behind it...If arnold never existed and bodybuilding was what it is now someone looking like arnold would just not cut it..To put it in perspective..Not enough condition+not enough size

Ψ

hench

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8434
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #28 on: June 18, 2015, 09:35:14 AM »
Where's this magical condition today's lots have then? Peak Arnold was shredded enough, had good vascularity, an Xmas tree lower back that many can't achieve today and well developed thighs with cuts so deep most can only dream about. Most of today's lot have inferior arms, chest and calves while increased belly size, thinner, flatter chests and oversized thighs. Most of the extra weight today is in gut, thighs and glutes.
of course Arnold's hams from the rear and his butt cheeks weren't sliced, but who decided we needed to start seeing ass cheeks anyway

Rudee

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6088
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #29 on: June 18, 2015, 10:04:07 AM »
He looks at least 215-220 there.

Papper

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10323
  • Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #30 on: June 18, 2015, 11:07:37 AM »
I would argue arnold had one of the most overrated physiques in history..It's just the name behind it...If arnold never existed and bodybuilding was what it is now someone looking like arnold would just not cut it..To put it in perspective..Not enough condition+not enough size

hahahaha!

pretty good trolling =)

Davidtheman100

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1180
  • Kill it
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #31 on: June 18, 2015, 12:29:40 PM »
hahahaha!

pretty good trolling =)

No trolling here

Davidtheman100

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1180
  • Kill it
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #32 on: June 18, 2015, 12:30:31 PM »
So what's your point in comparing a physique from 40 years ago build under different circumstances and upon a different criteria to the physiques of today and judging it by the criteria of today?It's just plain stupid.When people say he had better physique than today's pro's they don't mean it's by today's criteria but rather by the original criteria and bodybuilding ideal.

I'm saying he's overrated because people do that..they say he'd still win today with same conditioning and same criteria..I'm here to say he's overrated for that because i've heard so many people say that..That's IT

thegamechanger

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4669
  • King of Cybex Glute Machine
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #33 on: June 18, 2015, 12:31:29 PM »
arnold would have a pretty good chance in mens physique

funk51

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42806
  • Getbig!
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #34 on: June 18, 2015, 12:31:59 PM »
Here's arnold at 210 pounds for stay hungry. At his biggest i think he was 240-250 pounds.



Notice that freddy kruger is helping arnold before he goes on stage  :D
230-240.
F

funk51

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 42806
  • Getbig!
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #35 on: June 18, 2015, 12:33:32 PM »
 :o 235 lbs
F

Skylge

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2835
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #36 on: June 18, 2015, 12:33:52 PM »
Not only was Arnold big enough at 210 but he could say he was 280 and no one would've dare to doubt it ....It was the 70's !

People was utra skinny back then .... 

WoooSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHH

200 = natural
240 = on gear

thegamechanger

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4669
  • King of Cybex Glute Machine
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #37 on: June 18, 2015, 12:44:30 PM »
one has to wonder why anyone would want bigger legs than that

Royalty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 33126
  • Nasser Endorses Trump 🇺🇸
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #38 on: June 18, 2015, 01:38:05 PM »
I would argue arnold had one of the most overrated physiques in history..It's just the name behind it...If arnold never existed and bodybuilding was what it is now someone looking like arnold would just not cut it..To put it in perspective..Not enough condition+not enough size

Fuck this hypothetical bullshit

Try living in reality please

K A N N I B A L

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 290
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #39 on: June 18, 2015, 01:40:53 PM »
one has to wonder why anyone would want bigger legs than that

Why wouldn't anyone want bigger legs than that is what I'd question. They look too lanky in my opinion.
Paul DeMayo had legs.

Hulkotron

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 29906
  • Expunged
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #40 on: June 18, 2015, 01:52:52 PM »
Why wouldn't anyone want bigger legs than that is what I'd question. They look too lanky in my opinion.
Paul DeMayo had legs.

Your legs must be colossal.

doriancutlerman

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1397
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #41 on: June 18, 2015, 01:59:03 PM »
Why wouldn't anyone want bigger legs than that is what I'd question. They look too lanky in my opinion.
Paul DeMayo had legs.

He did, and Paul had other awesome bodyparts.  His arms were frickin' amazing.

But to answer your question, in two words:  heterosexual women.  The vast majority of them would be utterly repulsed by gigantic wheels like Tom Platz, Demayo and ilk had.  Chicks like a lean waistline, good arms, pecs and delts -- and generally only on a middle to lightheavy level at that.  Dudes strutting around with stupid-big anything might turn heads but don't get chicks in their beds.  Not the kind of "chicks" most men would like, anyway :D

Incidentally, and at the risk of sounding "all homo," do you have pics of your own legs that show up Arnold's best?  Even so, pretty much everybody admits stupid-big quads are the norm these days .... along with big bellies, shittier conditioning and overall WANK dimensions.  The only exception in the pro ranks is Big "Mo," and even he has calves that better befit a ten-year-old girl.

Arnold still owns minds because current bodybuilders know they'll NEVER inspire people to take up training the way Arnold did.  Heath is a jealous little bitch and legend in his own mind.  I bet he has nightmares about competing against Jay, Coleman and Martinez at 90% of their respective bests.

Tennisballz

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3203
  • You CANNOT be serious!
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #42 on: June 18, 2015, 02:37:39 PM »
Arnold at 210 was better than any of the pros today.  He had a good muscular physique.  No one needs to be 4% bodyfat, it looks shitty.  He had good arm and chest genetics and stood well over 6 feet.  He had a physique we would all aspire to have and was in decent shape year round.  He also didn't need growth and slin and whatever else these guys use today.  Bodybuilding has sure taken a nose dive.

K A N N I B A L

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 290
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #43 on: June 18, 2015, 02:43:44 PM »
He did, and Paul had other awesome bodyparts.  His arms were frickin' amazing.

But to answer your question, in two words:  heterosexual women.  The vast majority of them would be utterly repulsed by gigantic wheels like Tom Platz, Demayo and ilk had.  Chicks like a lean waistline, good arms, pecs and delts -- and generally only on a middle to lightheavy level at that.  Dudes strutting around with stupid-big anything might turn heads but don't get chicks in their beds.  Not the kind of "chicks" most men would like, anyway :D

Incidentally, and at the risk of sounding "all homo," do you have pics of your own legs that show up Arnold's best?  Even so, pretty much everybody admits stupid-big quads are the norm these days .... along with big bellies, shittier conditioning and overall WANK dimensions.  The only exception in the pro ranks is Big "Mo," and even he has calves that better befit a ten-year-old girl.


While I never claimed to have legs to show up Arnold, I certainly aspire to have bigger legs than him. What chicks want doesn't bother me, I wouldn't be wasting time in the gym if banging chicks was my goal...skinny dudes slay just as easily as muscular dudes. I lift for me :)



Tennisballz

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3203
  • You CANNOT be serious!
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #44 on: June 18, 2015, 02:49:45 PM »
While I never claimed to have legs to show up Arnold, I certainly aspire to have bigger legs than him. What chicks want doesn't bother me, I wouldn't be wasting time in the gym if banging chicks was my goal...skinny dudes slay just as easily as muscular dudes. I lift for me :)



is your goal to bang men?

K A N N I B A L

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 290
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #45 on: June 18, 2015, 02:56:18 PM »
is your goal to bang men?
Why, you keen?
Training to impress chicks is pretty much pointless...why work so hard when picking up isn't exactly hard for all but the most physically deficient. Spend years building a physique just to pick up someone a cpl of cheesy lines could also pull?

njflex

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 32201
  • HEY PAISAN
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #46 on: June 18, 2015, 02:57:47 PM »
While I never claimed to have legs to show up Arnold, I certainly aspire to have bigger legs than him. What chicks want doesn't bother me, I wouldn't be wasting time in the gym if banging chicks was my goal...skinny dudes slay just as easily as muscular dudes. I lift for me :)



U HAVE GREAT LEGS BRO 'NO HOMO'...

thegamechanger

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4669
  • King of Cybex Glute Machine
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #47 on: June 18, 2015, 03:13:56 PM »
matter of taste i guess, im not a fan of big legs

Davidtheman100

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1180
  • Kill it
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #48 on: June 18, 2015, 03:21:47 PM »
Fuck this hypothetical bullshit

Try living in reality please

I'm living in the reality where he would get crushed in 212 class at his own classic

SOMEPARTS

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16628
Re: Arnold at 210, big enough?
« Reply #49 on: June 19, 2015, 12:37:54 AM »
I would argue arnold had one of the most overrated physiques in history..It's just the name behind it...If arnold never existed and bodybuilding was what it is now someone looking like arnold would just not cut it..To put it in perspective..Not enough condition+not enough size



Hi Mike Mentzer's ghost!