This is the natural limit

>>42770400
Really though? There's debate that Steve Reeves was actually on roids. Someone enlighten me, please.

i fucking wish son, those are god tier genetics if natty.

>>42770416
Even if he was, which is HIGHLY DOUBTFUL, I think based on modern training methods and knowledge about diet and what not, this is incfact acheivalbe naturally for the highest responders

Not even as impressive as dem facial genetics

>>42770400
enough for me

>>42770416
It took quite a long time for roids to actually become what they are today. At the beginning they did basically nothing

>>42770421
>>42770455
Thanks. So essentially Reeves fell into the top 1% of top-tier genetics.

>>42770607
Or he just worked hard. Realistically that shouldn't be THAT hard to achieve given our modern greater understanding of diet and exercise

>>42770416
There's no debate, the dude was using hormones.

>>42770421
Wrong.

>>42770455
>testosterone did basically nothing
Testosterone is testosterone.

File: kuva2.jpg (50KB, 450x600px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 450x600px

Ah so thats what ill look in a year. Thanks for the motivation boost!

>>42770400
Even Sergio Olivia said he was on roids, including everyone else

>>42770829
Wrong how? High responders should be able to get this naturally. If you're training effectively. Dorian Yates looked just like this at 21.

>>42770893
Dorian is a manlet, Steve isn't

File: Steve-Reeves-main.jpg (52KB, 462x614px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 462x614px

>>42770400
Steve Reeves is to me by far the most aesthetic bodybuilder in history. I find most modern bodybuilders to be unaesthetic and many times simply gross looking. Notice how Reeves also doesn't have 'vascularity'? That shit is completely disgusting, don't know why some want it.

That being said, while Reeves had 0.1% top genetics, I do believe he took some type of testosterone. Obviously not like Rich Piano, but I don't think he was fully natural.

>>42770969
>Vascularity is disgusting
Your opinion.

>Don't know why some want it
Because aesthetics are to some degree subjective you fuck.

File: 1nhh3gf9bpfy.jpg (180KB, 670x1541px) Image search: [Google]

180KB, 670x1541px

>>42770969
Same, arnold and the other looks disgusting and had small legs. Steve Reeves ftw

>>42771092
Arnold had bigger legs than Steve Reeves, proportionally as well.

File: zane.jpg (94KB, 1090x614px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1090x614px

>>42770969
if he was natty, fuck yes, probably one of the very best physiques and certainly abnormal-tier genetics.

if considering him not natty, for me, zane has the best physique, and I am not even into body-building.

>>42771092
never did like arnold's body that much too t bh

>>42770421
>>42770455
>>42770607
>>42770893
wrong and monger

steve reeves was john ziegler's guinea pig (fellow who started ciba pharma which invented dianabol)

people have been injected testosterone since the 1940s (including hitler) long before reeves' time

in all seriousness can we get a list of natural bodybuilders by height?
>specifically looking for 5'9 because manlet

>>42771890
Show me anything that said Ziegler and Reeves even knew each other, much less that Reeves was Zieglers Guinea pig.

Ziegler started his work on dbol in the mid to late 50s. Reeves defining pictures are from 1947-1952. He may have taken some test, but there is literally 0 confirmation on that. It's all just bullshit bro rumors. The fact is he honestly was probably natural, with great genetics and a fantastic work ethic.

File: lalanne-natty-king.jpg (42KB, 400x545px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 400x545px

I like LaLanne's physique as an aspiring natty. It's pretty clear that he didn't dabble much, if it all.

>>42772762
Yeah that's beyond easily naturally attainable. Honestly if you just convince yourself on every single rep that you're a piece of shit and need to work harder, you'll achieve grade a results