Rule #1 of Classic Physique Building: Don't Ruin a Perfectly Good Physique!

(Photo Above: Classic Physique Building Champ - Reg Park)

The key to building a classic physique is that you must know what a classic physique is in the first place! How many people train with weights and yet could not describe the characteristics of a classic physique? Such knowledge was fairly common in the pre-roid, Golden Age (the 1940s and 50s), but gradually was forgotten as bodybuilding entered into its dark ages (from the 1960s until today).

Without knowledge of what a classic physique is, a weight trainer goes to the gym, does some exercises, builds some muscle, and perhaps ruins what could have been a perfectly fine physique! Just yesterday at the gym, there was one fellow with nicely developed delts and arms. But his shoulder width was naturally narrow. So what was he doing? - Sets of shoulder shrugs with heavy weights on a Smith machine! He apparently didn't realize that if he developed the mass of his traps, his already narrow shoulders would look even more narrow! Clearly, he did not have a clue as to what to do and what not to do to build a classic physique.

Then there is the guy with the very well developed upper body, that I see from time to time, who walks around the gym proudly doing set after set of arm exercises. His arms must be 17-18 inches! But his thighs are thin and calves couldn't be more than 13 inches! He is walking around on "toothpick" legs! I never see him working his thighs or calves. His body is way out of proportion. yet he doesn't seem to have any sense that his physique is flawed! How many of you have seen similar things in your gym? (And I don't mean to fault these people. Where are they supposed to go to get info about classic physique building? They certainly can't get it from the modern, roid-based muscle mags!)

So, the take-home lesson is this: Don't go to the gym and do exercises without a clear idea of what kind of physique you want to develop and how to get it. Learn what a classic physique is (reading Classic Physique Builder Zine and CPB Blog will help). Have a clear understanding of what classic proportion/symmetry is! Could you quickly summarize the characteristics of a classic physique if someone asked you at the gym?

- CPB

P.S. For a free 1 year subscription to Classic Physique Builder Zine (CPBzine) - a pdf "zine" (do-it-yourself magazine) that is patterned after the muscle mags of the pre-roid Golden Age of Bodybuilding (the 1940s and 50s) - just email your name (first and last), the name of your city (not your actual address), state/province, and country to cpbzine@gmail.com. That's it! Any info you send us is strictly confidential. We don't share info with anyone. So you won't get on any lists or receive any unwanted, automated email (even from us)!

Classic Physique vs Hulk-Like Physique: Waist Size

(Photos Above: Steve Reeves - Mr America, Mr World, Mr Universe on the cover of Your Physique magazine Jan 1949 issue; Below: Ronnie Coleman - Mr Olympia)

Another big difference between the classic physique of the Golden Age (the drug and hormone-free 1940s and 50s) and the "Hulk-Like" physique of mainstream bodybuilding is in the waist size. For classic physique builders, the ideal was to have broad shoulders and narrow waist and hips. They placed particular importance on this in achieving their classic symmetry.

For the drug and hormone-using mainstream bodybuilders of today, this ideal is gone. In the quest for sheer, extreme size, the amounts of drugs and hormones taken cause all muscle in the body to get larger - including that of internal organs in the gut. The consequence is "roid gut." As you can tell from the photo of Mr. Olympia (Ronnie Coleman) above, the huge waist is not because of fat. He has more muscular definition (lower body fat) than Steve Reeves. Yet the waist is huge because of the hypertrophic internal body organs (which have smooth muscle which grows in response to drugs and hormones).

In this post, we are focusing on waist size. But there are other differences in abdominal rectus size and shape between classic physique builders and mainstream (drug & hormone using) bodybuilders that we will save for another time.

So looking at Steve Reeves and Ronnie Coleman above, which body would you rather have?

CPB

Classic Physique Definition

Above left photo: Rich Gaspari - mainstream bodybuilder. Above right: Steve Reeves - classic physique builder

There is a real difference between in definition between the classic physique builder and a mainstream, chemically-enhanced, bodybuilder.

In the Golden Age, muscular definition was valued, but it was also expected that the skin should have a healthy glow and look about it. As Vince Gironda once found out in a competition he lost, the judges were not impressed with an "overly-defined" physique. According to their standards, it was in-fact possible to have "too much definition." Here is what Joe Weider said in an article on "Bulk and Cuts for the Legs" regarding definition in 1961 "The 'cuts' must be carved where they will enhance the esthetic appearance of the leg without making the bodybuilder look like a skinless cadaver used for anatomical instruction in a Medical College."

With the advent of steroids and other pharmaceuticals (e.g., diuretics), it was possible to achieve paper-thin skin with a very low percentage of body fat. This led to the "shredded" or "ripped" look where every muscle striation and every cutaneous vein could be seen. So what happenned? Mainstream, drug-enhanced, bodybuilders began to go to the extreme in definition (as they did with size) so that the "healthy glow of the skin" (which is due to a healthy degree of body fat) was lost and "the more ripped they were the better." So they all began to look like dissecting room cadavers. (See above left photo of Rich Gaspari - mainstream bodybuilder).

For classic physique builders, muscular definition is valued, but not the overly "ripped" or "shredded" look. Muscles should be well-defined, with muscle separation, and some natural vascularity. But the skin should have a healthy glow - which cannot be achieved with excessively low levels of body fat. The classic physique ideal embodies the look of "radiating health and vitality." This is not the dead look of a dissecting room cadaver. (See above right photo of Steve Reeves - classic physique builder).

Classic physique builders are not impressed with seeing striations in someone's gluts. They are not impressed with seeing every cutaneous vein popping out. They have no need of NO boosters to increase vascular size to the extreme. The classic physique builder look is a natural, vital, muscular, powerful, symmetrical, and atractive one. They may carry a higher degree of body fat (than modern mainstream, chemically-dependent, bodybuilders) - but that is what is necessary and desirable to truly have a classic physique that radiates with "health and vitality!"

Muscular definition - yes! Overly "ripped" and "shredded" - no need! - CPB

Mainstream Bodybuilding Ideal - Cartoons!

Above: Ronnie Coleman - Mr Olympia (Left), He-Man Cartoon Character (Right)

Check out our new video on mainstream bodybuilding's ideal (see the video side bar)! We weren't kidding in our last post when we said that the goals and ideals of classic physique building are totally different from that of mainstream, drug-enhanced, bodybuilding. Hear for yourself that the drug-users' idols are cartoon characters like "He-man," the "X-men," and "The Thing" (from the Fantastic Four).

No wonder their physiques look "cartoonish" (see photos above)! And to think that the only way they can achieve this worthy (?) goal is by pumping their bodies full of steroids, HGH, insulin and other health-destroying drugs! What are they thinking?

At the beginning of the clip, you can see the large "roid guts" of the top contendors. At the end of the clip, you get a few seconds of the tradegy of women's mainstream bodybuilding and fitness competition.

To our point - classic physique building and modern, mainstream bodybuilding are very different in their ideals and goals! It is said that Steve Reeves not only aspired to attain a classic physique, but he also wanted to be the healthiest man alive! By the way, his idol was John Grimek - another classic physique champion. What a difference indeed! - CPB

The Classic Physique vs. The "Hulk"-like Physique: Traps and Neck Appearance

Another point to consider in comparing the classic physique with the "Hulk"-like physique is the development of the traps and its effect on neck appearance. Not only do over-developed traps make the shoulders appear "rounded" and more narrow, but they also "swallow" and hide the neck making the head appear to be directly attached to the torso.

Compare the photos above (left: Ronnie Coleman, Mr Olympia; right: Steve Reeves, Mr Universe). Who has a neck and who doesn't? Which physique is naturally more attractive? Whose physique would you rather have?

A column-like neck that measures the same as the upper arm and calves is one of the hallmarks of a classic physique.

The Classic Physique vs. The "Hulk"-like Physique: Traps and Shoulder Width

Another important difference between the classic physique and the "Hulk"-like physique is in the development of the traps and the appearance of shoulder width. In the chemically-enhanced, cartoonish "Hulk"-like physique (remember the "Hulk" was a cartoon/comic before they made it into a TV series and film), the traps are almost always vastly overdeveloped compared to the classic physique.

The problem with overdeveloped traps is that they make the shoulders appear more "rounded" and narrow rather than square and broad. One of the hallmarks of the classic physique is broad shoulders. So to enhance the appearance of broad shoulders, classic physique builders would intentionally not overdevelop the traps. In some instances, upper traps would not have to be exercised at all.

In his book, Building the Classic Physique The Natural Way (p. 70), Steve Reeves explains "Don't misunderstand me, the trapezius is a good muscle to develop - for supreme strength. If you're a competitive weightlifter or powerlifter, then you need that trapezius development to generate the extreme power required to make heavy lifts. But if your goal is to have a good physique, and be strong (if not necessarily the world champion in a strength sport), then you don't need that extra development in the trapezius."

Take a look at the photos above (left: Steve Reeves - Mr Universe 1950, right: Ronnie Coleman - Mr Olympia 1998-2005) and judge for yourself. Whose physique looks as if the shoulders are broader? Whose physique would you rather have?

The Classic Physique vs. The "Hulk"-like Physique: Leg Shape

There are many differences between the classic physique and the over-developed, chemically-enhanced "Hulk"-like physiques of today. An important difference is in leg shape and proportion.

Look at the photos above. Leg shape in the classic physique (above photo: left) is what Vince Gironda - the Iron Guru - calls "straight." In other words, there is not much of a difference in measurement between the upper and middle thigh. Leg shape in the "Hulk"-like physiques of today (e.g., above photo: right) are what he calls "turnip-shaped" or "carrot-shaped." In other words, the upper thigh is much larger than the middle thigh, giving the thigh the shape of a carrot or turnip.

In the"Hulk"-like physique, overdevelopment of the thigh (specifically the adductors and lateral aspect of the quads) makes the calves look proportionately smaller thus destroying the balance between the thigh and lower leg. In the classic physique, the straight, properly developed thigh does not dwarf the calves, so that the flare of the calves is more prominent and adds more to the attractiveness of the physique.

In the above photo, take a look at the classic physique on the left (Steve Reeves, Mr. Universe 1950) and compare it to the "Hulk"-like physique on the right (Jay Cutler, Mr. Olympia 2006) in terms of leg shape and proportion. Which do you think is more attractive?