Harold Johnson - Frightenly Muscular

[PetethePrince]

Originally Posted by fists of fury

But it doesn't happen like that. Meta5 has pretty much summed it up already, and I agree with what he said.

Even pro bodybuilders will struggle to put on just 20 pounds of muscle a year after several years, and they're the genetic elite.

Cast your mind back to 1992. Dorian Yates enters the Mr. Olympia weighing 242 pounds, if memory serves. The next year he came in at 257, which represents only a 15 pound gain in muscle mass.
People could not believe he had put on that much size in only a single year.
Yes, guys like Coleman and Cutler have also done it. but it's rare...very rare. And again, these guys are the absolute elite in building muscle and are also taking copious amounts of steroids. They were never, at any stage of their lives, the proverbial 98 pound weakling. Never.

No Coleman nor Culter have done it. Yates looked terrible with that weight gain. He wasn't as lean, cut or as vascular. Obviously there is a platue but the one guy basically said you are either born to look like Harold Johnson. The truth is most people can get that look. Jay Cutler is another thing. Cutler and Coleman are just a protegy of more gut and size infested group of bodybuilders that are more roid infested. Also nutrition/supplementation and knowledge is even more than it was in the early 90's than what it is now. Who says that you can continiously put on 15 lbs of muscle each year?

Seriously, I can't believe you think any old body can just ingest a lot of protein and do weight training and get big. Bigger yes, but that's relative to the person concerned.

Any old body? Okay, now you're really stretching from the main thesis/point of the original guys argument. He said young people are being fooled into think they can look like Harold Johnson... they're just born like that. Genetics play a part but hard work can get you to look that good. Not everyone can be Jay Cutler or Ronnie Coleman of course, but those guys couldn't be that without the hard work and tons of riods.

If that were the case, there would be legions of big, muscular guys walking around. The opposite is the case. Most gyms have a small minority of big guys, while the vast majority of trainees are struggling to add just 5 pounds of muscle to their physiques, let alone 48.
Thousands upon thousands of guys flock to gyms every year to get big, yet how many big guys do you see walking around?
The percentage is tiny compared to the amount of people trying their butts off.
I'm talking about people not on steroids.

Right, genetics is important. People have headstarts, some people gain far quicker. Doesn't mean hard work won't pay off. The people who got discouraged don't get that. The people who are usually huge get it with much more persistance/dedication (Not all of them). People in terms of nutrition and getting to understand their bodies is also other factors that people negligent or don't understand.

Sure, in a lot of cases you can write it off to lack of effort or a bad routine or both, but many are ticking all the right boxes yet still struggle to add serious size.

You sound like this is an instant want from people. That's the problem. I said hard work of years. Nobody struggles to gain size in years.

As Meta5 said already, the gains become harder to come by year by year. Almost anyone can gain muscle pretty quickly initially, but after 3 or 4 years you hit a plateau and thereafter it is that is extremely difficult to add meaningful size without resorting to drugs.

Wow... I'm done with this conversation if you actually believe that. I am living proof that this is total bs.

In addtion, I've yet to meet anyone who gained significant size without gaining a fair amount of bodyfat. There are few exceptions, in my experience.
So you may after a number of years have the size, but not the shape. That's another story.

Well. That deals with genetics too. Diet, or how hard and how much training the person does. If they go hard with cardio while really cutting carbs and calories the way bodybuilders do for competetions they can get that look. Most people can look like guys on the front of magazine with years and years of hard work. And this is without steroids. The guy you agree with thinks that guys are born a certain way and nobody can look like them with hardwork or steriods. It's foolish and lazy attitude occupied by usually lazy, undedicated people who justify and give excuses for their lack of work. You notice it's usually people who don't look good who say these things. Obviously genetics play a part, but seriously.

Then they were juicing, simple as that. The myth that scrawny guys can get huge, big muscles without drugs is just that.

To be truthful to you. I know scrawny kids that did juice to help them. But they got far without it. And I know scrawny kids that got big without juicing. This isn't a "myth" you view is just a tad narrow-minded.

Either way, do you realize that John guy said that steroids or anything won't do anything. It's "all genetics." Unless I read that wrong, this was the whole argument. Anybody with years of hard work and steroids could probably achieve a profession as a bodybuilder type model. Genetics won't disable this. Genetics just allow for things to come easier for people or for others to be naturally strong/big. Sometimes genetics give you great capacity, but it's more likely you just reach farther since you have solid genes. And I know these gene freaks but I couldn't keep up with in terms of gains. But I could hold my own with them even when they worked half as hard as me.

[john garfield]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

No Coleman nor Culter have done it. Yates looked terrible with that weight gain. He wasn't as lean, cut or as vascular. Obviously there is a platue but the one guy basically said you are either born to look like Harold Johnson. The truth is most people can get that look. Jay Cutler is another thing. Cutler and Coleman are just a protegy of more gut and size infested group of bodybuilders that are more roid infested. Also nutrition/supplementation and knowledge is even more than it was in the early 90's than what it is now. Who says that you can continiously put on 15 lbs of muscle each year?

Any old body? Okay, now you're really stretching from the main thesis/point of the original guys argument. He said young people are being fooled into think they can look like Harold Johnson... they're just born like that. Genetics play a part but hard work can get you to look that good. Not everyone can be Jay Cutler or Ronnie Coleman of course, but those guys couldn't be that without the hard work and tons of riods.

Right, genetics is important. People have headstarts, some people gain far quicker. Doesn't mean hard work won't pay off. The people who got discouraged don't get that. The people who are usually huge get it with much more persistance/dedication (Not all of them). People in terms of nutrition and getting to understand their bodies is also other factors that people negligent or don't understand.

You sound like this is an instant want from people. That's the problem. I said hard work of years. Nobody struggles to gain size in years.

Wow... I'm done with this conversation if you actually believe that. I am living proof that this is total bs.

Well. That deals with genetics too. Diet, or how hard and how much training the person does. If they go hard with cardio while really cutting carbs and calories the way bodybuilders do for competetions they can get that look. Most people can look like guys on the front of magazine with years and years of hard work. And this is without steroids. The guy you agree with thinks that guys are born a certain way and nobody can look like them with hardwork or steriods. It's foolish and lazy attitude occupied by usually lazy, undedicated people who justify and give excuses for their lack of work. You notice it's usually people who don't look good who say these things. Obviously genetics play a part, but seriously.



To be truthful to you. I know scrawny kids that did juice to help them. But they got far without it. And I know scrawny kids that got big without juicing. This isn't a "myth" you view is just a tad narrow-minded.

Either way, do you realize that John guy said that steroids or anything won't do anything. It's "all genetics." Unless I read that wrong, this was the whole argument. Anybody with years of hard work and steroids could probably achieve a profession as a bodybuilder type model. Genetics won't disable this. Genetics just allow for things to come easier for people or for others to be naturally strong/big. Sometimes genetics give you great capacity, but it's more likely you just reach farther since you have solid genes. And I know these gene freaks but I couldn't keep up with in terms of gains. But I could hold my own with them even when they worked half as hard as me.

Lemme try 'n clarify, PtP:

With weights, juice and diet a guy should pack on pounds, muscle, 'n get much much much stronger. In some cases, get enormous. But his basic shape, separation 'n muscle bellies will never change.

If he had narrow shoulders -- the frame -- when he started, they'll always be narrow, albeit massive.

In short, unless you have the GENETICS, no amount of exercise, weight lifting, juicing 'n diet will get you to look like Marvin Hagler or Harold Johnson.

[fists of fury]

Originally Posted by john garfield

Lemme try 'n clarify, PtP:

With weights, juice and diet a guy should pack on pounds, muscle, 'n get much much much stronger. In some cases, get enormous. But his basic shape, separation 'n muscle bellies will never change.

If he had narrow shoulders -- the frame -- when he started, they'll always be narrow, albeit massive.

In short, unless you have the GENETICS, no amount of exercise, weight lifting, juicing 'n diet will get you to look like Marvin Hagler or Harold Johnson.

Exactly.

This topic had deviated to a fair degree, but let's get back to the crux of the argument, which is what you outlined above.

It's the genetics that ultimately determine how you look and your growth potential.

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by fists of fury

But it doesn't happen like that. Meta5 has pretty much summed it up already, and I agree with what he said.

Even pro bodybuilders will struggle to put on just 20 pounds of muscle a year after several years, and they're the genetic elite.

Cast your mind back to 1992. Dorian Yates enters the Mr. Olympia weighing 242 pounds, if memory serves. The next year he came in at 257, which represents only a 15 pound gain in muscle mass.
People could not believe he had put on that much size in only a single year.
Yes, guys like Coleman and Cutler have also done it. but it's rare...very rare. And again, these guys are the absolute elite in building muscle and are also taking copious amounts of steroids. They were never, at any stage of their lives, the proverbial 98 pound weakling. Never.

Seriously, I can't believe you think any old body can just ingest a lot of protein and do weight training and get big. Bigger yes, but that's relative to the person concerned.

If that were the case, there would be legions of big, muscular guys walking around. The opposite is the case. Most gyms have a small minority of big guys, while the vast majority of trainees are struggling to add just 5 pounds of muscle to their physiques, let alone 48.
Thousands upon thousands of guys flock to gyms every year to get big, yet how many big guys do you see walking around?
The percentage is tiny compared to the amount of people trying their butts off.
I'm talking about people not on steroids.

Sure, in a lot of cases you can write it off to lack of effort or a bad routine or both, but many are ticking all the right boxes yet still struggle to add serious size.

As Meta5 said already, the gains become harder to come by year by year. Almost anyone can gain muscle pretty quickly initially, but after 3 or 4 years you hit a plateau and thereafter it is that is extremely difficult to add meaningful size without resorting to drugs.

In addtion, I've yet to meet anyone who gained significant size without gaining a fair amount of bodyfat. There are few exceptions, in my experience.
So you may after a number of years have the size, but not the shape. That's another story.

I exagerated the amount someone will stack on but for the record Dorian came into the gym first weighing 12stone (168lb) and ofcourse not ripped, he was basically average. Flex Wheeler FYI who arguably has the best bodybuilding physiqe ever was a 100lb weakling

In the first few year of training, gaining 20lbs a year is possible without steroids, then maybe it drops to 5-10lb as your body has already filled out. Still over 10years of that you can still add 70lbs of muscle to a 140lb frame. Its actually pretty normal to gain muscle from the teenage years into manhood anyway, so when you add training/nutrition to it you gain, simple. Especially if you add supplements

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by john garfield

Lemme try 'n clarify, PtP:

With weights, juice and diet a guy should pack on pounds, muscle, 'n get much much much stronger. In some cases, get enormous. But his basic shape, separation 'n muscle bellies will never change.

If he had narrow shoulders -- the frame -- when he started, they'll always be narrow, albeit massive.

In short, unless you have the GENETICS, no amount of exercise, weight lifting, juicing 'n diet will get you to look like Marvin Hagler or Harold Johnson.

Again NO, with the right dedication anyone can have a 6pack, huge full muscles with plenty of definition. And you dont need steroids to do it

[fists of fury]

Powerpuncher, you seem to be arguing about a seperate topic altogether.

Of course anyone (or nearly anyone) can get a six-pack, be ripped and have decent muscle mass. I don't see anyone disputing that. For some it's harder to obtain, but sure if everything is done right and massive effort is applied, it's possible.

What John and I are saying is that you cannot alter your basic shape and structure. That's genetically encoded.
In the above example, a narrow shoulder width can only be enhanced by added muscle to the shoulder region, but structurally you will always have comparatively narrow shoulders. (Next to someone who has done the same routine as you, and had wider shoulders to start with.)

You can't alter where your muscles attach to your tendons, any more than you can change your height. It is what it is and no training can change that.
That's why some guys can have really peaked biceps and some guys have comparativey long, less peaked biceps.
Maybe certain exercises can help some (although I'm dubious of that claim) but a Dorian Yates could not have a biceps peak like Ronnie Coleman because it's simply not possible. That is genetically determined.

And yes, some guys just can get more ripped looking than others. Andreas Munzer being a good example. (RIP) He just had that incredibly ripped, striated look that nobody could quite attain, not even the best of them, no matter how hard they tried.

[fists of fury]

Originally Posted by PowerPuncher

I exagerated the amount someone will stack on but for the record Dorian came into the gym first weighing 12stone (168lb) and ofcourse not ripped, he was basically average. Flex Wheeler FYI who arguably has the best bodybuilding physiqe ever was a 100lb weakling

In the first few year of training, gaining 20lbs a year is possible without steroids, then maybe it drops to 5-10lb as your body has already filled out. Still over 10years of that you can still add 70lbs of muscle to a 140lb frame. Its actually pretty normal to gain muscle from the teenage years into manhood anyway, so when you add training/nutrition to it you gain, simple. Especially if you add supplements

I agree with all of that, pretty much.

The only thing I want to add though is that Yates looked like he had spent years in the gym after really only spending only a few months there.
I'm sure you've seen pictures of him after only nine months training - very impressive. He was not a huge guy before, but he was no weakling either.

PS-Flex a weakling? Since when?

[john garfield]

Originally Posted by fists of fury

Powerpuncher, you seem to be arguing about a seperate topic altogether.

Of course anyone (or nearly anyone) can get a six-pack, be ripped and have decent muscle mass. I don't see anyone disputing that. For some it's harder to obtain, but sure if everything is done right and massive effort is applied, it's possible.

What John and I are saying is that you cannot alter your basic shape and structure. That's genetically encoded.
In the above example, a narrow shoulder width can only be enhanced by added muscle to the shoulder region, but structurally you will always have comparatively narrow shoulders. (Next to someone who has done the same routine as you, and had wider shoulders to start with.)

You can't alter where your muscles attach to your tendons, any more than you can change your height. It is what it is and no training can change that.
That's why some guys can have really peaked biceps and some guys have comparativey long, less peaked biceps.
Maybe certain exercises can help some (although I'm dubious of that claim) but a Dorian Yates could not have a biceps peak like Ronnie Coleman because it's simply not possible. That is genetically determined.

And yes, some guys just can get more ripped looking than others. Andreas Munzer being a good example. (RIP) He just had that incredibly ripped, striated look that nobody could quite attain, not even the best of them, no matter how hard they tried.

Stated PERFECTLY, fof

[Sweet Pea]

Originally Posted by PetethePrince

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.

That's because Holyfield had the natural genetics to look like that once his mass potential had been unearthed. Most people don't. You're saying anyone can get big/ripped and look like Harold Johnson, Garfield's saying pretty much anyone can get in shape, but if their genetics don't allow it, they won't look similar to perfectly proportioned muscular specimens like Johnson. That is not debatable. If you think otherwise, you're simply mistaken.

[Sweet Pea]

Great post fists of fury. PowerPuncher will probably continue to argue against it though, even when he's been slaughtered like a lamb in this debate.

[spittle8]

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.

Just looking at Harold you're already speculating the man did steroids? Are you serious?

Ridiculous. We've got guys as well built if not better in the gym who don't lift. If you get your body-fat percentage low enough ANYONE will look ripped. Shit, if my BF% was low enough I'd look like Brad Pitt in Fight Club. It's all a matter of how fat you are... sub-cutaneous fat covers your muscles. It is for this reason that someone like myself with good abdominal strength can lack a six-pack whereas some skinny little bitch with inferior conditioning can look all ripped in the gut.

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.

Yes, ANYONE can get like Harold Johnson if they train hard enough. He isn't a specimen by any means... he's not even particularly muscular. The ONLY thing I see in him that is exceptional is his low BF%. Genetics only give you a ceiling, they don't force you not to maximize your potential, and no, a Harold Johnson build is not unattainable for many of us.

There's a big difference between looking ripped and powerful and actually being powerful, fast and strong. Bodybuilders are much weaker than power lifters, yet power lifters look like shit. Same with Olympic lifters, many of those guys look downright small at the mid levels of competition, yet they're impossibly strong.

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by fists of fury

Powerpuncher, you seem to be arguing about a seperate topic altogether.

Of course anyone (or nearly anyone) can get a six-pack, be ripped and have decent muscle mass. I don't see anyone disputing that. For some it's harder to obtain, but sure if everything is done right and massive effort is applied, it's possible.

What John and I are saying is that you cannot alter your basic shape and structure. That's genetically encoded.
In the above example, a narrow shoulder width can only be enhanced by added muscle to the shoulder region, but structurally you will always have comparatively narrow shoulders. (Next to someone who has done the same routine as you, and had wider shoulders to start with.)

You can't alter where your muscles attach to your tendons, any more than you can change your height. It is what it is and no training can change that.
That's why some guys can have really peaked biceps and some guys have comparativey long, less peaked biceps.
Maybe certain exercises can help some (although I'm dubious of that claim) but a Dorian Yates could not have a biceps peak like Ronnie Coleman because it's simply not possible. That is genetically determined.

And yes, some guys just can get more ripped looking than others. Andreas Munzer being a good example. (RIP) He just had that incredibly ripped, striated look that nobody could quite attain, not even the best of them, no matter how hard they tried.

While I won't disagree ofcourse muscle insertions and body structure can'tbe altered. That doesn't change the fact that physiques similar in terms of muscularity

I have heard the example 'Marciano could never look like Johnson because he trained as hard and didn't', which is bollox, he could have had a lower bodyfat percentage and could have fuller, denser muscles if he isolated muscle groups in intense bodyduilding training. He didnt need to ofcourse and it wouldnt necessarily harbour him any improvements

BTW Andreas Munzer got so ripped partly due to his extreme use of diuretics amongst other things, not sure if it was diuretics or insulin that did him in

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by fists of fury

I agree with all of that, pretty much.

The only thing I want to add though is that Yates looked like he had spent years in the gym after really only spending only a few months there.
I'm sure you've seen pictures of him after only nine months training - very impressive. He was not a huge guy before, but he was no weakling either.

PS-Flex a weakling? Since when?

Dorian did put on mass quickly, he may have had good gentics but he may have been juicing from the start. There are allot of crazy rumours about Dorian's drug use and he may well have been a boundary pusher with the drugs.

I remember in a Flex video he stated he was very skinny when he started out. If you see his first comp he looks around 140-150 I think

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by Sweet Pea

Great post fists of fury. PowerPuncher will probably continue to argue against it though, even when he's been slaughtered like a lamb in this debate.

Can you read? Fist of Fury agreed with me twice

Obviously you'll never quote me because you don't have the interlect or knowledge to challenge any statement I've made in this thread

[PowerPuncher]

Originally Posted by spittle8

Just looking at Harold you're already speculating the man did steroids? Are you serious?

Ridiculous. We've got guys as well built if not better in the gym who don't lift. If you get your body-fat percentage low enough ANYONE will look ripped. Shit, if my BF% was low enough I'd look like Brad Pitt in Fight Club. It's all a matter of how fat you are... sub-cutaneous fat covers your muscles. It is for this reason that someone like myself with good abdominal strength can lack a six-pack whereas some skinny little bitch with inferior conditioning can look all ripped in the gut.


Yes, ANYONE can get like Harold Johnson if they train hard enough. He isn't a specimen by any means... he's not even particularly muscular. The ONLY thing I see in him that is exceptional is his low BF%. Genetics only give you a ceiling, they don't force you not to maximize your potential, and no, a Harold Johnson build is not unattainable for many of us.

There's a big difference between looking ripped and powerful and actually being powerful, fast and strong. Bodybuilders are much weaker than power lifters, yet power lifters look like shit. Same with Olympic lifters, many of those guys look downright small at the mid levels of competition, yet they're impossibly strong.

This is what I've been saying all true Spittle, except I would say Johnson is a specimen, he looks good on film too (ie actually fighting, not posing )