This may be the wrong forum, but I want objective views (not a tirade with a hidden agenda to defend its use), on exactly the title question.
I watched some football this weekend (American football, not those skinny wimps kicking a ball around), and I noticed these guys are incredibly fit, and look just like a professional bodybuilder. Runningbacks, DEs, Fullbacks, DBs, LBs, and sometimes WR, all exhibit great lean muscle mass. Like Saquon Barkley, Josh Adams, Odell, Leighton Vander Esch, Brandin Cooks, etc.
I understand that these guys are the top 1% of athletes, and it might just boil down to genetics. But what I can't wrap my head around is, why bother with anabolic peds even outside of this? It seems like you can build great lean muscle mass without them, so why sacrifice your body's long-term health? Is it just quickness to get there, i.e. bb in the op. I think they bodybuilders generally look similar to pro ballers in terms of having size and clear fit, but didn’t mean “look just like”. Wrote this on my morning commute so I doubt I was paying close attention. But whatever.. I’m over it.
You can't reach the sheer muscle mass pro bodybuilders have without roids. Take a look at the differences between natural bodybuilding competitions and normal competitions and you'll see a clear difference in size between the competitors. There's a genetic limit to how big you can get, and roids surpass that limit.
Other users are gonna have to shed light on the likelihood top athletes are using.
The way I look at it, the insane athletic ability boils down to genetics. You can make a case that LeBron and Zion are (or more likely, were) on something, but the Greek Freak is basically a longer KD if he put the time and effort into building muscle. LeBron and Zion simply have bodies capable of storing more muscle while maintaining top level agility and endurance (think top .001% mesomorph genetics).
Username checks out.
Agree with this.
Also, to normal people, athletes like Lebron / Saquon / etc compared to IFBB pro's might look the same, and people just throw around "oh, yeah they're jacked"
But the difference between Lebron / Saquon vs roided IFBB champions / powerlifters is night and day in terms of strength / agility.
Yeah, those athletes are elite but they can't squat / bench / DL 700-800lbs.
On the flip side the IFBB pros / power-lifters can't run 40 yards in 4.5 seconds or hit 41 inch verts... Different classes altogether.
Well, I'll chalk not caring or seeing how this "size" really matters up to being outside of that world.
I know it's like 'fair' because everyone does it, but when everyone starts on third and third is crowded, I'm not sure why it matters at that point?
Well I would argue that not everyone starts on third. Listen, it's a given that you need the genetics to even have a shot at being an IFBB champion, but let's just consider those genetics as even being selected to play on the team. Now, once on the team what people might not understand is all these users really have achieved their natural muscular capacity (or come very close to it, let's say 95%). They can train months / years to get to 96, 97, 98% of their potential, a difference that might not even be noticeable. Or they can start using to then continue to grow. And remember, there is a big difference in athletes training to be strong yet small to keep agility vs. just simply training for size / power.
I think another good way to look at steroid use is it effectively increases the "scale" from, for example, a 1-10 scale to a 1-100 or 1-1000 scale.
Someone can be either a 9 or a 10 on the first scale, but what makes that 1 point jump? Better striations? Vascularity? the way the light happens to hit you?
But when we move to the 1-100 or 1-1000 scale (ie, increasing growth potential using roids) it becomes a bit easier to judge / differentiate candidates that are a 91, 92, 93, etc, even if relatively they are still ranked the same).
Honestly no idea if that made sense, kinda rambling here. (Obviously I'm just pointing out one viewpoints, I don't condone steroid use for the average joe or even use without a doctor / trainer's input).
Don't steroids shrink your testicles? I can't imagine what life would be like without having huge ass balls :(
The hookers wouldn't charge you any more for having tiny balls so I don't think you'd be affected in any significant way.
WheyOfLife is spot on. I do have to agree with you in that I'm especially shocked at some of the RB's we see today. The two that really blow my mind are Kareem Hunt (5'11" 201 lbs) and Alvin Kamara (5'10" 215). These are not big guys yet they are absolute fucking beasts and I see them shatter tackles from linemen and big ass LB's on the reg. It's all about that long lean muscle, and these dudes are like 100% that. Kamara got "only" 15 reps at the combine.
I think breaking tackles has a lot to do with momentum and not just size too. Guys that know how to run well, elite backs, will attack holes with such force vs a DE/back maybe somewhat stagnant coming off a block trying to make tackles. I think it's the momentum with guys breaking tackles more than sheer power alone.
You're definitely right on that. We saw a lot of that in the game last night.
B O D Y D Y S M O R P H I A
Dom Mazzetti said it best: "you compare yourself to every guy, and are constantly unhappy with yourself... you are now huge, but you also now have full-blown image issues. your need to be bigger than everybody has led you to experiment with 'extra-curriculars' and um, other risky methods scored from the fanny packs of shady locker room trolls."
Professional football players look nothing nothing nothing like an IFBB pro. You're a normie and anyone who lifts look the same to you. It is absolutely impossible to achieve what top bodybuilders are doing these days without world-class genetics, training, nutrition, and drug/hormone regimen. These guys are working with doctors and cycling dozens of drugs year-round. Also, these days, it's largely a drug race. Not only do you need exceptional genetics, but your genetics need to be receptive to the most effective current drugs and you need to be able to tolerate relatively high doses for sustainable periods.
Is this what you call anyone who is not on roids?
No, but anyone who's even moderately info fitness wouldn't ask what you did.
No. Non-roiders are referred to as "natty" in the lifting community.
![https://cdn2-thevladarcompany.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06…]
[https://cdn2-thevladarcompany.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06… https://cdn2-thevladarcompany.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06… Like dude, case closed, argument concluded, done. If this doesn't answer your question, you're fucking dumb.
Lol, are you roided up right now?
No dude. You're just dumb.
Like the others said, and NFL player looks tiny next to a pro level bodybuilder taking multiple G's of test on a weekly basis.
Re: general opinion on PEDs...I think it's stupid to risk your health for something that doesn't really matter. You might impress some gym-bros but beyond that nobody really cares.
If all it took to be a successful NFL player was muscle mass, bodybuilders would be all over that sport.
Bodybuilders use steroids more as a recovery method than an muscle building method. Steroids definitely help to build muscle, but the main affect is being able to train hard day in and out.
If you ever watched 30 for 30 on ESPN, the one titeled "9.79*" they get into good steroid discussion on that. One trainer (believe he works for the US Olympic team) says without steroids you can physically lift your max once every 3 days. With steroids, you can lift your max twice a day, everyday.
Bodybuilders use it because it helps them go past what they would physically capable of on their own, or more than their genetics allow. Remember though, pro bodybuilders are a small percentage of steroid users; mainly people use it purely for comestic reasons, i.e. what to look a certain way but don't care about competing. It's basically like every other medicine or pill, which are created as actual solutions to problems. For example, steroids were first used for cancer patients who had trouble keeping weight on, but give it to a non-chemo patient, and it takes them to new heights.
Problem really isn't with the steroids, its more what people will do to reach a level. A while back Sports Illustrated interview Olympic competitors, and when asked if they would take a pill that would make them win gold, but kill them in 5 years, 1/2 said yes. People in all walks do this as well. I'm sure people in finance would take something if they knew it would make them smarter or better at their job. In a way, it's kinda like a ponzi scheme, you know it wouldn't go good in the end, but you're focused on the here and now.
I feel like the recovery method thing you mentioned may be the best explanation. That would make sense, because everyone on this thread is talking about size alone, but I was including guys like Dan Bilzerian or Jon Skywalker in "bodybuilders", your typical can't run from them IG male with the ripped body. Cool
Dan would be one of the people using it for "purely cosmetic reasons" He's a big dude for sure but something similar could be achieved without steroids. It would obviously take longer / more consistent effort but hey, when you're an egotistical billionaire you can cut corners. Yeah you're right in your initial post. I have no idea why people like that would take roids at the cost of shortening their life.
if you really believe that all of the athletes you mentioned are not using steroids then you are delusional
90% of pro athletes / olympians take some kind of PED.
This is what I wanted to avoid without detail, evidence, or more of an explanation than just a number you use which feels subjective. Other than the way bodies look, I'm not sure where people like you get these numbers and just throw them around.
I’ll agree with you on throwing a random number out there, but the reality is, it’s extremely prevalent in any type of athletics. I have friends that played in both college and the pros.
The minorities are the non-users.
“But the olympics drug test”
... hi Lance Armstrong
Why is the title of the thread asking about bodybuilders but the OP is about football and basketball players? That's my main question here.
Your right.
The point is that most bodybuilders probably couldn't obtain the body they have without steroids. Maybe, maybe they could, but it would take discipline, hard work (they work hard regardless), pin point eating/training and some luck and time. Or, you can take a pill that will get it for you with less discipline and quicker.
I think we're talking about other sports, because body building is essential a sport (?). Look at cycling, baseball, football, you get banged up, you get worn down. Look at Lance Armstrong, or Andy Petite, both accused of steroids. Think they were trying to get big? It's also your career, and how you provide for yourself. At the end of day, people will cheat if they can get money. Imagine if they outlawed coffee, but people could still get their hands on it.
No, they absolutely couldn't. Have you seen top tier natural bodybuilders? These guys have EVERY aspect of their fitness down to a science. You could compare those dudes to bodybuilders who are on gear and don't have their diet or training down to a science and they blow the nattys out of the water. You have a natural genetic potential. You NEED steroids to get past that. There are natural guys who have everything down perfectly at their near genetic potential and it takes literal YEARS and YEARS to make slight progress once you hit that point. Both top tier natural and non-natural bodybuilders work their ASS off in every aspect of training, nutrition, sleep, and rest time. At the highest levels of bodybuilding a lot comes down to drug experimentation.
Source: read/watch bodybuilding content for years, best friend's father former professional IFBB pro and still competes in older men's divisions.
Because says it right in the first line after the preamble. I misstated--should've said football players have similar shape to delineate from size alone. But my main point was in the way people are roided up to achieve a shape and look that I think football players achieve without roids.
But was also leaving it open to being wrong about pro football players not being roided up. I typically assume that testing does a good job of weaving that behavior out, which is why there are "test" bodybuilding contests and "no test" contests, not natural contests vs juiced up to the max contests.
Also, you would hear more on the conversation if 90% was the realistic rate at which people are juicing up these days. But, the point is, I am looking at football/basketball players and seeing remarkable stats that I would think most would want to hit, and never really got why people are juicing up to look ridiculously big in the bodybuilding world or just to get an aesthetic body.
There's no denying that actual real bodybuilding is a extreme (as in the sport/competition, not just people generally weight training). The people taking PEDs for the purpose of bodybuilding have no interest in looking like a football or basketball player. Their goal is basically to get their muscles as big as they can while getting their body fat level as low as they can. It's just a different goal than an NFL player using PEDs.
It's kind of like wondering why a marathon runner doesn't just run a single mile when Saquon Barkley can probably run a mile pretty fast too.
You do realize that bodybuilding is the term used outside of Kai Green and those extremes, right? Generally, any weightlifting done to improve the look and size of muscles is called bodybuilding. Unless I'm wrong, that is the most mainstream term for weightlifting outside of powerlifting.
I mean yes, the term bodybuilding is used in a casual context by peope who don't know anything to mean weight training in general. But nobody actually involved in any of these activities mixes thoses terms up. I don't know how you can be condescending right now if you don't know enough to understand this. Are running, jogging, and sprinting all the same thing? Am I supposed to call Usain Bolt a jogger now because he propels himself with his legs? Wtf are you even trying to argue? That NFL players are as muscular as anybody should ever strive for?
No. Weight training/weightlifting is typically the general term of any use of weights for exercise which includes HIIT/cardio intensive workouts. Whereas bodybuilding is the activity with the goal of improving muscle look/shape/thickness etc etc and powerlifting the activity with a goal in mind to lift as heavy as possible.
EDIT: that’s how I’ve come to understand it. Maybe you were reading into the title “professional body building”, which btw, in the sport, those lifters use a combination of both powerlifting and bodybuilding techniques. They’re only “bodybuilders” because of the contest they enter into.
Anyone who gets paid to play sports at an elite level is going to be on steroids or has used steroids in the past.
Why wouldn't you be? Your job is to be the best athlete you can be.
What a shitshow of an intro. This is most definitely off-topic, so it's in the right forum, and football players look nothing like bodybuilders, much less professional bodybuilders.
Recovery and exceeding natural genetic potential.
You really can't, and because of million of dollars.
[quote="iBankedUp"]Is it just quickness to get there, i.e.
Nah dude OP benches 225x5+ without even trying at all. You don't even understand how little effort he gives, bro.
"Why don't poor people just work harder for a longer course to make more money, instead of robbing/dealing drugs?"
That is analogous to what you are asking now. The difference between having normal and supernormal testosterone levels is night and day. And that is only one of the many effects of PEDs.
Think of testosterone levels like height. You can be the best at boxing out, rebouding, and technically sound lay ups, but if you're 5'6" you're not going to be a center in the NBA.
Why? It's simple: because they work wonders beyond the normal abilities of growth and recovery. Not one single bodybuilding pro on stage is clean (minus the tested contests).
This is my favorite thread this week. Wasn't there one a couple years ago where guys were saying it wasn't that big a deal to bench 185 20x or something like that?
I'm not hating OP, I think people jumped on you a little too aggressively (it's the juice) although I did know the answer to your question.
Scott Irish all I learned from this thread is that it's the same circle jerk of losers on the internet no matter what forum you go to. I don't have an account on bodybuilding/bodybuilder but it has the most relevant information when doing a quick google search.
At the end of the day, you gotta put up in the gym and that's all that matters. People on here clearly are memed out thinking they're yoked, but probably look like they could use a ped or two.
The football players are in great shape, but they don't look like bodybuilders (Ronnie Coleman, Jay Cutler, etc.). They are strong and have a lot of functional muscle for their sport.
Bodybuilders may use steroids because it reduces recovery time and allows them to "build" their bodies beyond naturally what is possible. Bodybuilders don't win competitions with a 40 yard dash or vertical jump, they win by having a cartoonish amount of muscle on their bodies.
Football players look closer to natural bodybuilders.
Anyone who is interested in body building should check out the new documentary on Netflix about Ronnie Coleman. Crazy to see how his body is doing after all those years of working out.
moderation is key, bro went too ham. good on him for reaching the pinnacle of the sport, but if he lives normal life expectancy, he's got over 3 decades of being crippled, and that sucks.
How is he doing?
is he torn up -
Pretty torn up. In the beginning of the movie he was using crutches to walk. At the end they showed Ronnie getting another back surgery so he was in a wheel chair. There is a chance he may never walk again. Even before his surgery he was working out everyday lifting at the same gym he went to since his Mr. Olympia days. On a bright note it seemed like he was doing well financially at least from what the movie portrayed.
A vast majority of the people in professional sports are doping. You have to be naive to think otherwise. The kind of drug testing they do in the NFL and especially the MLB is more IQ testing than PED testing. You want to see what natural guys look like in a professional sport; look at most of the post USADA UFC; and even now many guys are using and beating drug tests (most common method of testing is a carbon isotope ratio test which tests the metabolites of the compounds in your system, not just the levels; and guys can still beat that by using compounds USADA has not developed a test or a list for, 100s of steroids tested in the 60s never got approved by the FDA, but can still be pulled in a merc index and have a chemist make them for you with the raws).
Genetics reign supreme; many of these pro ball players (Hershel Walker, Reggie Bush...etc) have elite genetics. They could've been professional bodybuilders to had they gone down that route; but played ball instead (smarter move, bodybuilders are broke mostly).
Most people sit on a bell curve. They are average. They are not special like the people you mentioned above. People nowadays are so goddamn naive when it comes to learning about human potential. You can take an average person, juice them to the tits, and they would still look like a kid standing next to Khalil Mack.
Millions of guys around the country use steroids mostly for cosmetics; How many freaks do you see in day to day life? Taking steroids won't turn a poodle into a rotweiller; just a bigger poodle.
What in the hell did this thread turn into?
At great risk of being lambasted by either side, I will cautiously wade into this dick measuring contest (maybe not a great analogy considering ED problems caused by the 'roids).
OP, if by bodybuilder you are just referring to people that weight lift in order to develop muscular physiques, then yes I'd probably agree as it relates to some players on the NFL field. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know if backs all have low enough body fat percentages to really look good. A lot of players have more body fat, so in reality they look more like an olympic lifter or strongman competitor. For those that do have low body fat percentages, they look more like IFBB physique competitors rather than bodybuilders. Even amateur bodybuilders in your local Gold's are probably on roids and are too bulky to function well on a football field.
As it relates to pro bodybuilders, they are significantly heavier than football players (except for linemen) even at contest weight which involves being at a low single-digit body fat percentage. And yes, they use steroids. Lots of them. In many combinations, as was discussed above. These days, they are also using HGH, insulin and newer things like IGF. HGH started in the 1980s and insulin started in the 1990s. You can observe material changes in IFBB pro bodybuilding physiques through each of these transitional periods. Bodybuilders pre-1980s were more aesthetic. With each decade, they've become bulkier. The biggest, and I think worst change, came once insulin started to be used heavily because it has caused distended midsections (at least that's what those are attributed to. Used to be attribute to HGH but Dorian Yates I think disproved that). You can see it in the shot of Phil Heath and Kai Greene above where their abdomens look like turtle shells even though their body fat percentages are low enough to yield deep abdominal cuts. That issue is even worse on other bodybuilders. But the result is huge amounts of mass, which, in my opinion, is unfortunately the way that pro bodybuilding has gone. The IFBB has even introduced a classic bodybuilding competition for those that don't want to go to that extreme and want to emulate the more aesthetic physiques of the past.
Got off on a tangent there, but maybe some people will find it interesting.
Repudiandae sed quasi expedita quo eum nihil dolor. Voluptas aut consectetur sed. Similique autem assumenda quibusdam dolore natus non.
Itaque dolorum quibusdam dolor velit qui perferendis. Occaecati numquam voluptas enim. Aut molestias accusamus delectus. Quam rem ut officia voluptatem. Ut corporis alias tenetur iste officia.
Voluptas perspiciatis itaque alias. Dolore tenetur nisi eligendi molestias. Magni sint optio id amet omnis eligendi hic. Porro molestiae repellendus qui aut quod natus. Sed aperiam ea fuga commodi.
Rerum et consequatur architecto nesciunt temporibus et. Aut aut eaque ex praesentium. Soluta fugit consequatur velit sit quis. Aut quia commodi sed maiores quos ut. Nemo nesciunt asperiores provident quia harum officia qui.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Velit iste est numquam voluptas reiciendis quod blanditiis. Dolores culpa amet quia placeat tenetur sit molestiae. Qui adipisci fuga architecto inventore. Aut et qui tenetur at.
Nemo in quasi pariatur quis commodi voluptas minima. Occaecati libero reprehenderit quas optio ut ut officia. Dolores unde dolorum in dignissimos cupiditate quo incidunt.
Repellendus eum unde veritatis dolorem maiores porro ut. Enim necessitatibus reprehenderit at perferendis. Exercitationem est voluptas quam eius et. Voluptatem consequatur nostrum repellendus nobis aut ullam. Veritatis minus velit voluptate.
Quaerat et officiis laboriosam molestiae. Architecto deserunt dignissimos qui veniam modi sint.