Harold Johnson - Frightenly Muscular

[TheGreatA]

Originally Posted by TBooze

They were developed in the 40s and used by some in the 50s and 60s, when Harold Johnson was also around.

I am not going to come out with a straight yes or no answer, as the evidence I have given was pure speculation and here say, without nothing to back it up, other than a hunch.

He could have used them but the fact that he was around since the mid 1940's when steroids weren't used in sports (to my knowledge) and looked the same since a very young age proves to me that he didn't.

I believe the first picture is of a young Harold Johnson sparring with Joe Louis, he was just a remarkable athlete.

[Seamus]

This Topic - Frightenly Gay

[john garfield]

Originally Posted by TheGreatA

He could have used them but the fact that he was around since the mid 1940's when steroids weren't used in sports (to my knowledge) and looked the same since a very young age proves to me that he didn't.

I believe the first picture is of a young Harold Johnson sparring with Joe Louis, he was just a remarkable athlete.

I'd put a fine point on that, TGA, and make it a remarkable physical specimen. Great athletes come in many shapes.

[Seamus]

You people fall for the eye test too much.

I suppose Frank Bruno and Mike Grant were the best HW's ever, also.

If you want to stare at mens' bodies and draw conclusions on their performances, there are many websites which will indulge your proclivity.

[Russell]

Originally Posted by Seamus

You people fall for the eye test too much.

I suppose Frank Bruno and Mike Grant were the best HW's ever, also.

If you want to stare at mens' bodies and draw conclusions on their performances, there are many websites which will indulge your proclivity.

Someone's very sexually secure. Go cry like a child about shirtless men somewhere else, you've obviously stumbled into the wrong sport if such a thing bothers you.

Ignorant people throwing at the word gay when there's a picture of a shirtless guy.

[PetethePrince]

Originally Posted by john garfield

It's the myth, PP, that's fueled the body-building industry and every young boy since the bully first kicked sand in the kid's face in Charles Atlas ads on comic books.

You can ONLY be what your genetics will allow, or every dedicated fighter would look like Johnson and punch like Julian Jackson.

That's total BS. Genetics play a big part, yes. But you can get big and strong and look good. No you might not look like Mr. Olympia or Frank Zane but you sure as hell will look lean, ripped, and muscular if you train and diet right. Genetics is important and can only take as far as your capabilities but it doesn't discriminate towards people from looking fit, that's just ridiculous. You get these lazy cop-outs from usually fat and lazy people who are unwilling to train and improve their body. This is the loser's mentality/attitude. I'm not trying to knock on you as I don't know you but when I hear shit like this its from the unfit, lazy, fat mofo and not the guy who's working out twice a day with a calorie & protein intake twice as yours while eating less fat than the average person. I have known scrawny ass kids that have gotten hugely built.

And of course steroids will help you. The only thing open to question is how far it can push beyond your potentially. It definitely helps you build muscle faster. This can't even be debated.

[mr. magoo]

Originally Posted by TheGreatA

I don't think steroids were used in sports during the 1940's.

They may have been around, but I don't think they were readily available to most athletes, particularly not contenders who didn't have a lot of money in those days. Steroid use from what I'm told was far more prolific in Eastern European countries before making their way to the states.

[john garfield]

[quote=PetethePrince;4386838]That's total BS. Genetics play a big part, yes. But you can get big and strong and look good. No you might not look like Mr. Olympia or Frank Zane but you sure as hell will look lean, ripped, and muscular if you train and diet right. Genetics is important and can only take as far as your capabilities but it doesn't discriminate towards people from looking fit, that's just ridiculous.

Who said anything about not looking fit and huge, if that's the goal, with the right diet 'n exercise, PtP. You just don't get to look like Johnson, Hagler 'n Mundine Sr., for example, if it wasn't in your genes.

The thing that really bothers me (and would keep kids from feeling failures) is that nobody responsible tells 'em they can only reach their maxim physical potential with diet 'n exercise, not clone Harold Johnson.

[Seamus]

Originally Posted by Russell

Someone's very sexually secure. Go cry like a child about shirtless men somewhere else, you've obviously stumbled into the wrong sport if such a thing bothers you.

Ignorant people throwing at the word gay when there's a picture of a shirtless guy.

what bothers me is the sport of boxing being mistaken for bodybuilding.

gay.

and have fucking sense of humor, by the way.

[PetethePrince]

[quote=john garfield;4387119]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

That's total BS. Genetics play a big part, yes. But you can get big and strong and look good. No you might not look like Mr. Olympia or Frank Zane but you sure as hell will look lean, ripped, and muscular if you train and diet right. Genetics is important and can only take as far as your capabilities but it doesn't discriminate towards people from looking fit, that's just ridiculous.

Who said anything about not looking fit and huge, if that's the goal, with the right diet 'n exercise, PtP. You just don't get to look like Johnson, Hagler 'n Mundine Sr., for example, if it wasn't in your genes.

The thing that really bothers me (and would keep kids from feeling failures) is that nobody responsible tells 'em they can only reach their maxim physical potential with diet 'n exercise, not clone Harold Johnson.

You're wrong. You can look like Harold Johnson or Marvin Hagler. Obviously everyone can't but most people can if they work hard and diet down. Some people just have to do intense dieting and training. It comes much easier for others, and much harder for some but most anyone can look like Harold Johnson or Hagler with 15 years of training. Some people might have trouble getting as big into a 220ish pound frame without performance enhancers but you can get there. While genetics probably helped Foreman, Norton, and Tyson have awesome builds just be being genetic freaks it doesn't mean you can't achieve that a similiar build without tons of work. Heck, look what weights did for Holyfield. Guy wasn't a freak as a kid and started weights and got much more massive.

[john garfield]

[quote=PetethePrince;4387271]

Originally Posted by john garfield

You're wrong. You can look like Harold Johnson or Marvin Hagler. Obviously everyone can't but most people can if they work hard and diet down. Some people just have to do intense dieting and training. It comes much easier for others, and much harder for some but most anyone can look like Harold Johnson or Hagler with 15 years of training. Some people might have trouble getting as big into a 220ish pound frame without performance enhancers but you can get there. While genetics probably helped Foreman, Norton, and Tyson have awesome builds just be being genetic freaks it doesn't mean you can't achieve that a similiar build without tons of work. Heck, look what weights did for Holyfield. Guy wasn't a freak as a kid and started weights and got much more massive.

If you believe that, PtP, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Why do think only a handful of fighters look like Johnson? Not because they don't train hard and eat right; it ain't in their genes!!...But there are wineos livin' outta garbage cans shredded like Johnson.

[PetethePrince]

[quote=john garfield;4387345]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

If you believe that, PtP, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you. Why do think only a handful of fighters look like Johnson? Not because they don't train hard and eat right; it ain't in their genes!!...But there are wineos livin' outta garbage cans shredded like Johnson.

You've said nothing I haven't already explained. Johnson could've been a genetic phenom like Tyson or Shavers all I know. Some people are, but don't sell short hard work. Johnson probably lifted weights while most fighters didn't. I'm sure if more did they could be carrying more bulk if they wanted to, but that wasn't considered entirely effective or smart in those days... mostly everyone wanted to keep trim.

Boxing training which mostly consist of cardiovascular and endurance based muscle strength comparably to a long distance runner rather than the bulk needed for a short distance runner. Besides, too much bulk is provenly somewhat ineffective. Too much muscle takes too much oxygen up. In a 12 round fat infested HW division, bulk can become more useful. Developing fast-twitch muscle for explosiveness can be effective for developing your punching power, but within limits.

[fists of fury]

I'm with John Garfield here.

I have no doubt Harold Johnson had the genetic pedigree that, aided by hard work in the gym, made him a physical specimen.

Yes, anyone can look 'ripped' and muscular if they work on it, but they won't have the in-built structural superiority of a Harold Johnson. That's either in you or it isn't.

There was a guy who I worked with once who had a very muscular, ripped look not a mile off Harold Johnson's phyique, and he only dabbled with weights and never took it seriously. It looked like he spent all day in the gym, but he didn't.
I was extremely envious, especially since I had to work twice as hard to look half as good.

[PetethePrince]

Originally Posted by fists of fury

I'm with John Garfield here.

I have no doubt Harold Johnson had the genetic pedigree that, aided by hard work in the gym, made him a physical specimen.

Yes, anyone can look 'ripped' and muscular if they work on it, but they won't have the in-built structural superiority of a Harold Johnson. That's either in you or it isn't.

There was a guy who I worked with once who had a very muscular, ripped look not a mile off Harold Johnson's phyique, and he only dabbled with weights and never took it seriously. It looked like he spent all day in the gym, but he didn't.
I was extremely envious, especially since I had to work twice as hard to look half as good.

Of course genetics is important. As diet & hard work is too. However, the idea that you "can't achieve" that status or a Harold Johnson status because of limited genetics is simply untrue. It may take 5-20 years, but you will get there. And adding steriods/supplements you definitely will. Trust me, I've known skinny kids that looked like they could be scrawny forever but they built themselves and much bigger/stronger in just a short period of time (A few years). You'd be surprised what hard work/consistency can do.

[fists of fury]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

Of course genetics is important. As diet & hard work is too. However, the idea that you "can't achieve" that status or a Harold Johnson status because of limited genetics is simply untrue. It may take 5-20 years, but you will get there. And adding steriods/supplements you definitely will. Trust me, I've known skinny kids that looked like they could be scrawny forever but they built themselves and much bigger/stronger in just a short period of time (A few years). You'd be surprised what hard work/consistency can do.

I agree with some of that, namely that you can improve radically beyond what you once were, but genetics play a massive role in your ultimate development.
Yes, with training and absolute dedication one can pack on a lot of muscle, but genetics will still ultimately determine how you look.

Pete, go read some of Stuart McRobert's books. It's a bit of an eye-opener as he writes specifically for typical hard gainers. (ie 95% of us) Robert Kennedy is another author who doesn't beat about the bush.
Both state flatly and in no uncertain terms that the genetically average will always be confined to a lesser physique, though one that is still reasonably impressive if 100% dedication is apllied.
Bodybuilding magazines have finally admitted to it as well.

The notion that anyone can look like a Harold Johnson or an Arnold Schwarzenegger if enyielding effort is applied, only that it may take longer, is 100% false.

Oh sure, you may get as big or even bigger, but you won't look the same. You won't look as symmetrical, as proportioned or as vascular. It's just the way it is.