Training Ways/Frequency Alters Muscle Shape

[GreenEggsnHam]

Is there any correlation between frequency, volume and muscle shape. If you look at all the pre-70's bodybuilders the have a completely different look in comparison to the bodybuilders of today. I do realize that things like HGH, insulin and the amound of steroids play a big role in this. But I am referring more to the muscle shape than the size. If you look at any magazine of today you will notice that bodybuilders of today seem to all do one bodypart a week 4-5 day splits. Pre 70s guys all did frequencys of 2 or 3x per week full body or upper/lower splits. Now bodybuilders of today have more round and popped shoulders, smaller chests, wider backs and traps that are more round and lumpy when relaxed. If you look at pre 70's bodybuilders their physiques seem to flow more, there shoulders arent so round and popping, chests are bigger or atleast fit them better, and there traps hang more like a coat hanger than a bent one. The reason I dont think this is just because of drugs, is because I myself have always done a one bodypart a week, 4-5 day split. I am 100% natural and notice my physique looks very very similar to bodybuilders of today just smaller obviously.

Here some examples of what I mean, and dont just look at the muscle size look at the shape of the muscles as obviously bbers are bigger today.

Arnold looks bigger than cutler here in a smaller way

 

[kc17]

my personal experience is that training one muscle group heavy once a week will get the job done !! if you hit it heavy theres no need to over work your muscles , at first you might grow a little bit but after a month or so you'll be fatigued and your body will brake down and injuries will start to appear !!!! muscles grow out of the gym !!!

 

[Voxide3]

my personal experience is that training one muscle group heavy once a week will get the job done !! if you hit it heavy theres no need to over work your muscles , at first you might grow a little bit but after a month or so you'll be fatigued and your body will brake down and injuries will start to appear !!!! muscles grow out of the gym !!!

Wow, good job. That post had absolutely no relevance at all to the original topic.


I see exactly what you mean, and to be honest, the only explanation that truly makes sense to me is the one that new drugs were introduced onto the scene. Muscle shape is dependent on genetics. If it isn't, then I'd really like to know what else it's dependent on, because training style sounds like a load of horseshit to me. Chests were bigger and nicer because frankly, old school pros focused more on them. It's not rocket science. No doubt that Arnold and Frank looked better than Jay and Ronnie, anyone who doesn't think so is an idiot, but people have learned a decent amount about muscle since those days.

 

[markh7]

Good point!

 

[Nelson Montana]

It may be a small factor, but a factor nevertheless -- the old timers concentrated more on nuance -- sculpting the muscles -- working on weak parts (perhaps with overtraining) and emphasizing certain parts such as shoulders and abs. Guys do more leg work today and more trap work, which was kept to a minimum back then.

They also trained mostly natural, using drugs to bump things along or in preparation to a contest. Over the years, that makes a difference in the "look."

Pumping was more popular and that creates more shape than size.

A lot of guys weren't as big to start out. Every Mr. Olympia before Arnold was under 6' and barely 200 pounds.

The drugs of course and yes, synthol, implants, etc are factors as well.

As many of you may know, I prefer the old time look, but motherfucker Cutler looks amazing in that shot. Absolutely incredible. AND...proof that it's possible to shape your physique (to a degree). He looks a lot less blocky than he used to.