Dave Draper Most Celebrated Ironage Bodybuilder With CLASS

[jacshelb]

Draper, to me, isn't one of my all time favorites.  And, yes, he did have some flaws bodypart wise.  I never thought his triceps were all that, or his hamstrings or quad sweep.  But, for the 60s and 70s had a pretty decent build.  In those days you could win the universe at 6' tall and 220.  So, it was a whole different game.  In fact, I actually like his overall build- kind of the classic "heroic" lines.  So, I definately see the value in what he offered.  And, apparently so did many, many fans over the last 44 years. A lot changes in 44 years.  You could say that the bench press record holder from 1962 wasn't all that great, and by todays numbers you'd be right. 

Is Dave Draper overrated?  Yes and no.  Bodybuilding is a subjective sport.  A lot of people think Dorian or even Ronnie, Lee Haney, Lee Labrada etc. are overrated.  And, yes, he talked about his serious drug addiction on his "E True Hollywood Story" they did on him several years back.  So, he has laid that out there and has moved on from that.

On kind of another note:  I belonged to his yahoo group for awhile and had some problems with the way his wife and he handled certain situations- poor judgement calls.  Quite a bit of sensorship for intelligent, well meaning people, while the pricks just about had free run to say what they liked as long as it didn't go against the Drapers' opinions or overall beliefs.  That's not a personal attack, just narrow sighted leadership in my opinion.  I think the staunch anti-steroid stance is a little bit ironic- especially when Dave used them to be at his best.  But, that's his personal opinion now and I can respect that.  Also, a lot of people like his writing style.  I bought one of his books years ago and I can't make heads or tails of it.  Kind of a lyrical melodic style that doesn't seem to really focus in one direction.  Just not for me.

So that's my take on Dave.  He seems like an ok guy and a good old time bodybuilder, but far from perfect- as he'd tell you himself.  And, basically, he's just one of those dudes that you either agree with and like or you don't- not real well rounded physique wise or politically.


Jacob

[Hedgehog]

omffggggg You are dumb.

He is one of the all time greats.

Fcuking right.

He looks good to this day.

Health freak with a good site.

YIP
Zack

[jaejonna]

So he was on the Herion ?? Is that why he is so vascular ?

[ozman]

dave was awesome

check him out on the beverly hillbillies

http://www.davedraper.com/photo-archive-waves.html

[brianX]

Draper, to me, isn't one of my all time favorites.  And, yes, he did have some flaws bodypart wise.  I never thought his triceps were all that, or his hamstrings or quad sweep.  But, for the 60s and 70s had a pretty decent build.  In those days you could win the universe at 6' tall and 220.  So, it was a whole different game.  In fact, I actually like his overall build- kind of the classic "heroic" lines.  So, I definately see the value in what he offered.  And, apparently so did many, many fans over the last 44 years. A lot changes in 44 years.  You could say that the bench press record holder from 1962 wasn't all that great, and by todays numbers you'd be right. 

No, the bench press record holder from 1962 would still be stronger than almost everyone who ever lifted a weight. Only an idiot would deny the greatness of a past champion just because the current champions are bigger/stronger/faster. You can argue that so an so had a better physique than Dave Draper, but it is pure bullshit to say that he had a mediocre or shitty build. That's like saying Jesse Owens wasn't that great because today's runners are faster, or that Jim Braddock was a shitty boxer because Vladimir Klitchko would destroy him in the ring. These guys are still better than 99.999% of the population, including no-name losers like "dzulboy".

[pumpster]

Draper was one of the top guys in the late 60s in terms of both size & cuts, which is easy to forget now. To be smart you have to compare him with his peers of the time to understand how good he was.

-Most of the available pics aren't great.

-He's flawed ie legs - but this was typical of that era until it started changing just after him, in the late 60s/early 70s.

-Very comparable to Schwarzenegger as can be seen in this pic, but with more flaws. He had density, muscle-separation & leaness-a sinewy look Schwarzenegger never had.



Dave was also on one of the Monkees episodes.

[dorkeroo]

No, the bench press record holder from 1962 would still be stronger than almost everyone who ever lifted a weight. Only an idiot would deny the greatness of a past champion just because the current champions are bigger/stronger/faster. You can argue that so an so had a better physique than Dave Draper, but it is pure bullshit to say that he had a mediocre or shitty build. That's like saying Jesse Owens wasn't that great because today's runners are faster, or that Jim Braddock was a shitty boxer because Vladimir Klitchko would destroy him in the ring. These guys are still better than 99.999% of the population, including no-name losers like "dzulboy".

It's funny you know. He came at you quite respectfully with his opinion, and all you had to give back was a cromagnon, knee jerk, inbred, room temperature I.Q. response. Well done.

I agree wholeheartedly that past greats should be given respect for what they have contributed to the sport, but, insulting and using more profanities than actual english words makes you look stupid.

[brianX]

Draper was one of the top guys in the late 60s, which is easy to forget now. He has to be compared to his peers at the time to understand how good he was for that time, because:

-Most of the available pics aren't great.

-He's flawed ie legs - but this was typical of that era of BBs until about just after him, in the early 70s when that started to change.

-Very comparable to Schwarzenegger in certain areas, but with more flaws. He had density & leaness Schwarzenegger rarely ever had.



Dave was also on one of the Monkees episodes.

You can't always judge a physique from magazine photographs. Guys like Reg Park and Dave Draper would've looked absolutely gigantic in real life. I wasn't very impressed with George Eiferman until I saw an old video of him posing, and was blown away by his thickness and density. Jaejonna thinks he has a better physique than all of these guys because he found a few shitty old photographs. What a clown.

[slummin]

you are just posting the crappy pics...Considering he was one of the founding fathers and that you are completely wrong, I would say this thread is pointless.

Nuff said.

How did you come up with a topic this dumb? Did you sit around for days pondering?

did you start this thread because everyone on ironage.us thinks you're a schmuck?

No i started the thread cause I was..................... .............

in the first post.......

This one is for the Ironage

 

[bmacsys]

def. not one of the all time greats.  he didnt contribute or pioneer any new diet or training strategies to  bbing and didnt have a great physique.  looked ok for a 60's era bber, but nothing special. 

also, i cant recall anyone being inspired by this guy vs. guys like arnold, franco, scott, etc. to take up bbing.


i once heard this remark about draper: "a guy from jersey who liked working out and found some dbol".

That is a brain dead post. How many bodybuilders have "pioneered" anything.

[bmacsys]

one of the most dumbest comments i've heard in a while.


somebody is old.

Why was that post dumb? Your posts border on moronic.

[sarcasm]

i met Dave Draper in the gym one Saturday a few years ago, he was in town signing autographs for his book which came out around 4 years ago or so, really nice guy, borrowed some of my chalk, i've never seen so many veins on someones arms and he was like 62 at the time, he was training arms and was doing very moderately weighted bicep/tricep supersets.

[JOHN MATRIX]

draper is overrated....
he has stated himself that he loved lifting but hated bodybuilding, so that probably explains why he wasnt the most aesthetic guy. he had a great back, good arms and chest, but his legs were nothing and his midsection was probably the worst of any ironager. he looks good in his signature twisting back shot but thats about it.

[pumpster]

he has stated himself that he loved lifting but hated bodybuilding, so that probably explains why he wasnt the most aesthetic guy. he had a great back, good arms and chest, but his legs were nothing and his midsection was probably the worst of any ironager. he looks good in his signature twisting back shot but thats about it.

He did love working out but what's disliking BB got to do with aesthetics?

Besides which, his aesthetics were fine. As far as legs, list the BBs from that era with both great thighs & calves..? Scott's legs were no better. Draper was one of the top guys of the mid-late 60s.

One of the nicest guys, unlike some other BBs. His site's worth visiting for the articles on training, on the golden era of BB in Venice, the gyms and equipment used, etc. I like the line of workout equipment he sells.

http://www.davedraper.com/

[pumpster]

IMO the quintessential Draper shot of the late 60s/early 70s. The best biceps shot of that era, just before Schwarzenegger's prominence. Still comparable to Schwarzenegger because Arnold never had Draper's density,  separation or leaness.

[NarcissisticDeity]

IMO the quintessential Draper shot of the late 60s/early 70s. The best biceps shot of that era, just before Schwarzenegger's prominence.

Neither Schwarzenegger, Scott or Oliva had anywhere near that kind of density or separation, which is still exceptional even today.

 

[pumpster]

Very comparable-Draper's way ahead of him in terms of an unusually sinewy look including separation, density, leaness and detail that's still exceptional even today-he looks like an anatomy chart. Schwarzenegger never had those particular attributes. Draper's peak is under-rated/forgotten-at the time, it was the biceps shot, prior to Schwarzenegger. Also has the advantage re: forearms.

Those two were always neck-and-neck in some areas.

[slummin]

1966 - 8 or 9 years before the Arnold arm shot

I dont know what the hoopla was all about..Maybe cause Draper looked so bad, that............

somebody needs to give you a disciplinary ass beating.

..........that's too obvious to even have to say and I don't waste my life disciplining other people's parenting failures

[JOHN MATRIX]

He did love working out but what's disliking BB got to do with aesthetics?

does it really need explaining? for example-powerlifters.

[pumpster]

Quote from: pumpster on Today at 08:32:52 PM
He did love working out but what's disliking BB got to do with aesthetics?

does it really need explaining? for example-powerlifters.

Yes i think you need to articulate-powerlifters have nothing to do with Draper.

[slummin]

educating

[slummin]

educating

[slummin]

educating

[slummin]

educating

[slummin]

it was the 60's......20 years before most of you wannbe detractors were even spanked on your azz to take a breath