Paul Dillett at his best is better than Phil Heath says Lee Priest

[Kim Jong Bob]

Everyone is forgetting the one simple fact that the amount of drugs Phil is on when compared to Francois in the early 90's is HUGELY different.

insulin and  gh yes, anabolics and androgens no. They  took huge amount  back then to. Its a general misconception that people took much less roids back then but its not true

[Bevo]

In the picture posted that started this discussion ALL of the guys that went pro retired after about 3 years because of failing health: Don Long, Dennis Newman and Mike Francois. See a trend, here?

Yep. Add in momo and muntzer dying and flex having problems, a long with matarazzzo, and a handful of others from that era

Only difference between now and back then is the higher dosaging of gh and insulin

[K A N N I B A L]

It doesn't matter.

The drugs today are more powerful and more advanced.

WTF?
Please explain

[Kim Jong Bob]

WTF?
Please explain

yeah please explain this, i would rather  say that the drugs  today are less potent then before cause now its 99% ug shit  and not real pharmacy stuff

[SF1900]

insulin and  gh yes, anabolics and androgens no. They  took huge amount  back then to. Its a general misconception that people took much less roids back then but its not true

That's what I meant. More stuff is available. .......insulin and gh. 

[Al Doggity]

That's what I meant. More stuff is available. .......insulin and gh. 

Serious question: if you look at today's guys and feel they look worse across the board than guys from the relatively recent past, but when you compare the two groups there seems to be less of a health epidemic,isn't it reasonable to hypothesize that the modern set of guys might be using LESS potent drugs? I mean, we know that it doesn't really come down to ALL of the current guys training like pussies while all of the old school guys trained balls to the wall. We have multiple examples of video evidence proving that's not the case. Isn't it possible that modern guys have backed off of that type of protocol  because the risk/reward ratio is just too dicey, even for a bunch of professional beauty pageant contestants playing russian roulette for a plastic trophy?

[NarcissisticDeity]

Serious question: if you look at today's guys and feel they look worse across the board than guys from the relatively recent past, but when you compare the two groups there seems to be less of a health epidemic,isn't it reasonable to hypothesize that the modern set of guys might be using LESS potent drugs? I mean, we know that it doesn't really come down to ALL of the current guys training like pussies while all of the old school guys trained balls to the wall. We have multiple examples of video evidence proving that's not the case. Isn't it possible that modern guys have backed off of that type of protocol  because the risk/reward ratio is just too dicey, even for a bunch of professional beauty pageant contestants playing russian roulette for a plastic trophy?

The problems back then were mainly diuretics which could kill you fast , abuse of steroids would take years. I highly doubt guys today are taking less gear just less diuretics. Diuretics were for guys who were last minute and needed to drop water quickly .

[Al Doggity]

The problems back then were mainly diuretics which could kill you fast , abuse of steroids would take years. I highly doubt guys today are taking less gear just less diuretics. Diuretics were for guys who were last minute and needed to drop water quickly .

You've stated that 90s bodybuilders looked better than current, right? Do you think it's that they were simply genetically superior? Do you think that the top 80s and 90s guys would look pretty much the same if they were competing now?

[Mr.1derful]

Dillett was an absolute freak, but had several glaring flaws, the most notable of course being his back.  Phil is actually much better than people give him credit for.  However, people generally have a dislike of his online persona, in addition to having a lack of respect for his training style and his perceived over reliance on drugs.   Frankly speaking, I'm not sure I care for him much due to these factors either, but it's hard to deny his genetic aptitude and success thus far.  The caliber of competition today is far below that of the 90's, but if Shawn Ray could place well back in the day, I suspect Phil at his best would place well also, even though he would not win.  

[NarcissisticDeity]

You've stated that 90s bodybuilders looked better than current, right? Do you think it's that they were simply genetically superior? Do you think that the top 80s and 90s guys would look pretty much the same if they were competing now?

Genetically superior? That's a good question. I don't think so per sa. I think guys today rely more on drugs than on training and I think the advent of machines have changed physiques as well. Obviously insulin combined with GH have reeked havoc and obscured definition , and density

I think guys with great genetics will probably go into more mainstream sports because let's face it bodybuilding doesn't pay worth the shit and it's to time intensive.

[Rudee]

[Al Doggity]

Genetically superior? That's a good question. I don't think so per sa. I think guys today rely more on drugs than on training and I think the advent of machines have changed physiques as well. Obviously insulin combined with GH have reeked havoc and obscured definition , and density

I think guys with great genetics will probably go into more mainstream sports because let's face it bodybuilding doesn't pay worth the shit and it's to time intensive.

So, someone like Vince Taylor- I think he had one of the best physiques of the pre-millenium superstars. But he was renowned for training light, even in comparison to non-bodybuilders- doesn't he seem to exemplify all that is wrong with current bodybuilders. IMO, he looked as good as anyone competing at the time.

Are there any current bodybuilders that you think would have done well in previous eras? Genetics and conditioning, or even just genetics?