Author Topic: Lacour-narural or not?  (Read 35983 times)

an123

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3337
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #25 on: July 13, 2006, 09:31:17 AM »
Please explain. Pushing your body to limits it isn't supposed to reach?

Dehydration, low carbs, excessive tanning, etc...

Bodybuilding itself is a very natural thing (in my opinion), that is pushing your body to the true limits.. Competitive bodybuilding isn't.  But to each their own.

bic_staedtler

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
  • That is all.
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #26 on: August 19, 2006, 11:18:22 PM »
It's not so hard to believe that Skip LaCour or Jeff Willet are natural, they both compete around 200 lbs. Skip, the larger of the two was 205 lbs at 5'10'' at his last contest... hardly mass monster territory.

200 lbs is achieveable for a natural, I'm natural and 220 lbs... granted, only about 180 of that is muscle, but remember I'm only 5'5''. That's only about 30 lbs of muscle away from David Henry/Lee Priest/Lee Labrada territory. Lacour and Willet are similarly about 40 lbs away from being roid-monkey big.

The Luke

...dude, this is the point we're trying to make....LOTS of natural trainers can be big and hold fat (sorry, but surely you realize 30 pounds of fat on a 5 foot 5 guy is not going to look like Skip LaCour or any other known bb'er).

It's where you can get big and RIPPED where the drugs come in, for cheating naturals.  Skip is simply not natural, neither is that other guy.  How can you look at those photos and not see this?

I'm not knocking em.  They train hard, but they're NOT naturals.  They've used somthing to help the process.  Those with their heads in the sand will simply keep them there....but when you've seen some seriously gifted guys train, train yourself, and see what can and can't be done then you've GOT to question!

Skip and Willett have simply marketed themselves to the small market of 'believers' and taken just enough to look big, but not outrageously big.  They're still far bigger and ripped than MANY, MANY natural trainers out there!

And remember people...200 pounds "not that big"?  Please!  At their heights, recall that many Mr O competitors in the 70's were competing around that weight ...and looking HUGE!  And they were JUICED!

What is it that people just can't accept about this?  It's hardly difficult to comprehend. 

Do you REALLY need some shining idol who lies about his drug use to give you a reason to train naturally?  If so, then that's really SAD.  I'd like to think most of us here train hard, and those that do it naturally certainly know by now what's realistic.   And these two AREN'T....I don't care how much AST pays em to say so!  And by the way, who the fuck uses AST supps anyway?

SAD. 

Tier

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 396
  • Lift light with sloppy form
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #27 on: August 20, 2006, 08:33:20 PM »
...dude, this is the point we're trying to make....LOTS of natural trainers can be big and hold fat (sorry, but surely you realize 30 pounds of fat on a 5 foot 5 guy is not going to look like Skip LaCour or any other known bb'er).

It's where you can get big and RIPPED where the drugs come in, for cheating naturals.  Skip is simply not natural, neither is that other guy.  How can you look at those photos and not see this?

I'm not knocking em.  They train hard, but they're NOT naturals.  They've used somthing to help the process.  Those with their heads in the sand will simply keep them there....but when you've seen some seriously gifted guys train, train yourself, and see what can and can't be done then you've GOT to question!

Skip and Willett have simply marketed themselves to the small market of 'believers' and taken just enough to look big, but not outrageously big.  They're still far bigger and ripped than MANY, MANY natural trainers out there!

And remember people...200 pounds "not that big"?  Please!  At their heights, recall that many Mr O competitors in the 70's were competing around that weight ...and looking HUGE!  And they were JUICED!

What is it that people just can't accept about this?  It's hardly difficult to comprehend. 

Do you REALLY need some shining idol who lies about his drug use to give you a reason to train naturally?  If so, then that's really SAD.  I'd like to think most of us here train hard, and those that do it naturally certainly know by now what's realistic.   And these two AREN'T....I don't care how much AST pays em to say so!  And by the way, who the f**k uses AST supps anyway?

SAD. 

 ;D I love it!

Anyways yeah who cares whos natural or not , train hard , eat right...if you feel the need to juice...do it...if not then yeah.

Nathan

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 783
  • 5'11 185 lbs
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #28 on: August 20, 2006, 10:04:33 PM »
You have to do and believe what others won't, to achieve what others don't ;)
P

bic_staedtler

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
  • That is all.
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #29 on: August 21, 2006, 12:18:46 AM »
You have to do and believe what others won't, to achieve what others don't ;)

...alright there, Dr Seuss....

I will not do them in a box!

I will not do them with a fox!

I will not hide them on a train,

I will not shoot them on a plane!

I will not inject them in a glute, I won't inject them in the flute!


....ps, the reason I'm saying this is to get through to those people out there who need to believe in liars to get their asses in the gym.  If you need to believe that Skip's physique was built on Raisin Bran and Milk, then, as Joe Perry can attest, "Don't STOP BELIEVIN!!!!!!!"....

...for those in the real world, get over it, and keep training.  Juice, don't juice, who gives a rat's ass.  And for those who feel they need good role models in the world, well...look no further then these greats...AND they're steroid free!


George W Bush

Bill Gates

...well that's all I can come up with now.  HAVE FUN, believers!  Don't forget to say your prayers, eat your vitamins, and DRINK ----  YOUR  ----- MILK!!!!!!!!!!! WOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Nathan

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 783
  • 5'11 185 lbs
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #30 on: September 10, 2006, 05:54:44 PM »
Wow U can read I'm impressed but you need to work on the wisdom thing :D

BTW I love wieght training thats why i do it! just like I play base ball or football ;)
P

hardest core

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 134
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #31 on: September 15, 2006, 06:45:20 PM »
Skip is clean......period.

bic_staedtler

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1209
  • That is all.
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #32 on: September 17, 2006, 04:23:43 PM »
Skip is clean......period.

....WOW.  At least I can sleep at night, as thou has spoketh!...SO it was SAID, and SO it SHALL BE TRUE!

...but in all reality your opinion that he's clean and my stance that he's done steroids, GH and other things are opposites of the spectrum.  But what proof do you need?  Dude, LOOK at the guy.

The only way you could be so sure was if he was 180 with some body fat.

He's on something.  Sorry to ruin your day!

pobrecito

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4851
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #33 on: September 17, 2006, 04:44:02 PM »
haha...use your eyes people and come to your conclusion. This is question is laughable

patrinos2003

  • Getbig I
  • *
  • Posts: 9
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #34 on: September 22, 2006, 05:48:45 AM »
I know 2 guys with similar physiques like La Cour, extra defined, dry and sharp muscled, very good bodies and def not the average Joe, they weigh only 88-90kgs and they could easily be at fitness mags covers...they BOTH train for years,eat right, take some supplements religiously and last but not least THEY USE SOME AAS! just smaller doses than pros! their last cycle consisted of Boldenone,Test,Winny,IGF etc ..go figure!!!

dedicated bb

  • Getbig I
  • *
  • Posts: 4
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #35 on: November 05, 2006, 02:37:38 AM »
Does skip compete in drug tested events if so how does he get past the system? My only concern with these coments is i feel bad for natural bodybuilders who are accused of drug use, i heard a comment that was interesting to me bodybuilding is the only sport where being to good is a bad thing >:(. How can we as naturals better ourselves when anyone with a half way decent physique 'has' to be taking steroids. Supplements are better, routines are better i dont think seing someone skips size is anywhere near impossible unless you believe that. Lets support each other and untill someone fails a test give them the benifit of the doubt. Think about how much supplements skip takes they gota be helping his cause alot. Also to some of the comments that where on here yes it is nice to believe he's natural because it helps motivate us using him as a role model because lets face it who else we got. Everyone here sooks when there considered a steroid user but there ready to jump on the first guy bigger then them and accuse them of use. We all need to do some thinking if natural bodybuilding is ever going to make it and at the moment it seems like it wont.....

MikeThaMachine

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5994
  • WTF Happened, BBing Is Dead. I Didn't Miss A Thing
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #36 on: November 10, 2006, 02:28:19 AM »
Does skip compete in drug tested events if so how does he get past the system? My only concern with these coments is i feel bad for natural bodybuilders who are accused of drug use, i heard a comment that was interesting to me bodybuilding is the only sport where being to good is a bad thing >:(. How can we as naturals better ourselves when anyone with a half way decent physique 'has' to be taking steroids. Supplements are better, routines are better i dont think seing someone skips size is anywhere near impossible unless you believe that. Lets support each other and untill someone fails a test give them the benifit of the doubt. Think about how much supplements skip takes they gota be helping his cause alot. Also to some of the comments that where on here yes it is nice to believe he's natural because it helps motivate us using him as a role model because lets face it who else we got. Everyone here sooks when there considered a steroid user but there ready to jump on the first guy bigger then them and accuse them of use. We all need to do some thinking if natural bodybuilding is ever going to make it and at the moment it seems like it wont.....

Amen brother :)
I

mwbbuilder

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
  • Getbig!
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #37 on: November 21, 2006, 12:04:15 PM »

bigbalddaddy

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2435
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #38 on: November 21, 2006, 06:11:06 PM »
So genetically this clown only grew to a certain weight without going over a higher dose than he feels necessary to warrant him being "natural" so that makes him "natural" because he has only maintained in the last 10 years that he's been "natural".  Money says when he retires he looses 20-30lbs and softens up quickly!

Frauhorn

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 197
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #39 on: November 23, 2006, 02:58:58 AM »
it is defamatory to say lacour is a juicer unless you can prove it is true & in the public interest.
I cannot prove it is true as I have never seen him juice.

however I do "think" he's done a lot of juice. its just my opinion

Super Natural

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1962
  • Repent of Soy liberalism.
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #40 on: November 23, 2006, 06:43:55 AM »
I know it's possible to get that ripped naturally (without drugs) cause I've done it. I don't weigh as much as them but I do think it's possible to be their weight if you're a big guy to begin with. Hell I know guys who play rugby here in South Africa who are massive with just 3 meals a day and don't even go to gym (and don't even know what steroids are.)

I know it's bitter pill for some people to swallow but there's always someone out there with a bigger cigar ;) ..best to dry your eyes , build a bridge and get over it  ;D

Moen

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2863
  • Getbig!
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #41 on: November 24, 2006, 04:45:35 AM »
The problem lies in the definition of natural ofcourse.
Skip and most natural bodybuilders define 'natural' as passing a drug test so generally speaking that would only include steroids

However I know 'natural' competitors here in belgium and they use hgh, clenbuterol, igf-1, basically any non-steroid drug

I dont know what skip uses or does not use but I doubt he's completely natural as in no hgh, no clen for contests and no igf-1, all these things cannot be traced at all or at least not when you stop soon enough before the contest so in his eyes he probably IS natural

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19466
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #42 on: November 24, 2006, 06:52:58 AM »
It has to be possible.

I believe he has very good, but not great, genetics for packing on muscle mass, not unique by any means.

I've seen at least three or four guys that have better genetics, guys that didn't have the heart or the interest for it.

Not a knock on LaCour. It's a mental game as well.

And I cannot think of a BB other than Arnold that could match LaCour's will power.

YIP
Zack
As empty as paradise

Casey Butt

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 47
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #43 on: December 15, 2006, 06:57:24 AM »
Throughout LaCour's career he's competed with a fat-free mass index (FFMI) of 27.5 up to 30. A FFMI over 26 is a practical guarantee of anabolic drug-use. Most people cannot even reach a FFMI of 25 without drug-use. In fact, at a FFMI of 30, LaCour's physique was quite dependent on a fairly heavy level of drug-use.

bigbalddaddy

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2435
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #44 on: December 15, 2006, 12:15:50 PM »
Throughout LaCour's career he's competed with a fat-free mass index (FFMI) of 27.5 up to 30. A FFMI over 26 is a practical guarantee of anabolic drug-use. Most people cannot even reach a FFMI of 25 without drug-use. In fact, at a FFMI of 30, LaCour's physique was quite dependent on a fairly heavy level of drug-use.

Yep, I knew it...















ALL DRUGS!!!

mwbbuilder

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1141
  • Getbig!
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #45 on: December 15, 2006, 06:40:47 PM »
Throughout LaCour's career he's competed with a fat-free mass index (FFMI) of 27.5 up to 30. A FFMI over 26 is a practical guarantee of anabolic drug-use. Most people cannot even reach a FFMI of 25 without drug-use. In fact, at a FFMI of 30, LaCour's physique was quite dependent on a fairly heavy level of drug-use.

How do detrmine all of this? What do the numbers mean and how did you get them?

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19466
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #46 on: December 15, 2006, 09:17:45 PM »
What kind of index is FFI?

Care to explain, mon ami?

-Hedge
As empty as paradise

Casey Butt

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 47
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #47 on: December 16, 2006, 06:57:15 AM »
Several years ago researchers (primarily Dr. Harrison Pope) began doing some research with drug-using and drug-free bodybuilders and lifters. They did a regression based on lean body mass and height. The equation they fit calculates a number called the fat-free mass index (FFMI). Essentially, the FFMI is similar to the BMI, but lean body mass is used instead of body weight.

In that research, and since then, it has been determined that most genetically average people cannot surpass a FFMI of about 24-25 without drugs. A FFMI of 25-26 is a typical "natural" physique champion. It's thought that no champion bodybuilder in history has surpassed a FFMI of 27 without the use of drugs.

LaCour has competed with a FFMI of over 30. Not only is that impossible without drugs, fairly "heavy" drug-use would be necessary. For example, Schwarzenegger competed at a FFMI of about 28.

I'd estimate that LaCour's drug-use was similar to bodybuilders of the early 1980s ...but compared to bodybuilder's of his era he could claim to be "relatively natural". He also mastered how to beat drug tests -- as did Ronnie Coleman, who also claimed to be drug-free for years during his early pro career.

MCWAY

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19227
  • Getbig!
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #48 on: December 16, 2006, 06:24:05 PM »
Several years ago researchers (primarily Dr. Harrison Pope) began doing some research with drug-using and drug-free bodybuilders and lifters. They did a regression based on lean body mass and height. The equation they fit calculates a number called the fat-free mass index (FFMI). Essentially, the FFMI is similar to the BMI, but lean body mass is used instead of body weight.

In that research, and since then, it has been determined that most genetically average people cannot surpass a FFMI of about 24-25 without drugs. A FFMI of 25-26 is a typical "natural" physique champion. It's thought that no champion bodybuilder in history has surpassed a FFMI of 27 without the use of drugs.

LaCour has competed with a FFMI of over 30. Not only is that impossible without drugs, fairly "heavy" drug-use would be necessary. For example, Schwarzenegger competed at a FFMI of about 28.

I'd estimate that LaCour's drug-use was similar to bodybuilders of the early 1980s ...but compared to bodybuilder's of his era he could claim to be "relatively natural". He also mastered how to beat drug tests -- as did Ronnie Coleman, who also claimed to be drug-free for years during his early pro career.

I read the study you referenced in FLEX over 10 years ago. The drug-free bodybuilders being used were Mr. America winners from 1939 to 1959. They estimated what their bodyfat levels were and compared them with some modern bodybuilders believed to be drug-free as well.

My thing is, why in the world would you be motivated to push yourself drug-free, if you believe you can't get any bigger than Mr. Americas from the 1940s? What's the point?

Remember that "experts" said that nobody could run a mile in under 4 minutes. We know how that went.

That's what it's all about: Doing your best and just going for it. Maybe if certain people spend half as much time putting LaCour's advice to work as they do trying to "prove" that he's using anabolics, they'd have a great physiques in their own right.


Casey Butt

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 47
Re: Lacour-narural or not?
« Reply #49 on: December 16, 2006, 07:21:41 PM »
I read the study you referenced in FLEX over 10 years ago. The drug-free bodybuilders being used were Mr. America winners from 1939 to 1959. They estimated what their bodyfat levels were and compared them with some modern bodybuilders believed to be drug-free as well.

My thing is, why in the world would you be motivated to push yourself drug-free, if you believe you can't get any bigger than Mr. Americas from the 1940s? What's the point?

Remember that "experts" said that nobody could run a mile in under 4 minutes. We know how that went.

There have been several peer-reviewed studies published, all concluding essentially the same thing. I haven't read a FLEX since the early 1990s, so I'm not familiar with what they referenced. Park, Eiferman and Delinger, in particular, carried massive amounts of muscle. Unrealistic expectations are what often lead people to steroid use. I don't think that what anybody has accomplished should be viewed as a "limitation" to anybody, but reality is what it is. If someone is determined to build more balanced muscle without drugs, then more power to them.

Bannister broke the 4-minute mile a week after he received his newly designed lightweight (and spiked) racing flats. Several people broke the 4-minute mile shortly after because they also got such racing shoes. If people today had to run in the pre-Bannister era heavy track shoes of the 1950s, believe me, there'd be a lot less 4-minute miles being run. The motivational speakers always seem to leave that tidbit out when they use the 4-minute mile example. Comparing sports across the eras is not always apples to apples.

Quote
Maybe if certain people spend half as much time putting LaCour's advice to work as they do trying to "prove" that he's using anabolics...

LaCour's advice is the advice of a drug-user ...and "proving" that he uses anabolics only takes less than a minute. When drug-users pose as "natural" bodybuilders they do nothing but deceive their fans and create false expectations. That's why it's important to expose these frauds.

Quote
That's what it's all about: Doing your best and just going for it.

I agree 100%. That's probably the truest thing ever written on this board.