Natural Roundness

[Chemo]

An extract from Opti's introductory thread:

"My physique changed considerably within 4 weeks of going on my first cycle. Natural guys have roundness about their muscle that is lost - forever. If you go to enough shows you can easily identify the guys who are “on” and the guys who “got on” without building a good natural base"

I wanna hear a lil more about this. Could some experienced fullas say the same thing?

At what point (dose/substance) does this happen?

Is there science behind this?

[WANABJAKD]

Your asking the opposite of what he was suggesting. In any case there is no such thing and on cycle your going to be fuller and rounder. All AAS do this, some better than others.

Insulin is the reason why your muscles store glycogen and appear rounder during a cycle. All AAS increase IGF-1, which binds to the insulin receptor.

[Shutupandsquat]

I think he was actually referring to the muscle maturity, and how much of it you've built. For example; if someone was about 19 and have been training at the gym since they were 15, even taking roids then would be bad considering their muscles wouldn't be mature. Whereas, someone of say 23 and has probably filled about 85% of their potential frame, they have a very good base to build from and the muscles are mature. (Hard to explain and I'm only 17, so I'm most likely wrong).

[Riccardo]

I think what Optimass was trying to say is when you jump on the gear your muscle density increases dramatically and you appear alot harder and lose the round, softer shape that a natural guy has.

Therefore If you do not have a sufficient base to work from, muscle imbalances and imperfections in your physique will show up a lot more if you jump on gear too soon. You get that hard juiced up look without the fullness in your physique that is built up slowly from years of training naturally.

[Shutupandsquat]

Along with muscular maturity...

[Chemo]

Interesting how you have different takes on it.

I would have thought that AAS would definitely bring out the roundness no matter where you are with your training.

So really its just an observation of those who have not trained for proportion and shape?

How is this lost forever? You can always train your weak parts

[musclenz]

There are many factors to consider in this discussion. If you are a Big Fat Bastard & start on AAS & do nothing to change your training program, intensity, diet, drugs used etc you will remain a Big Fat Bastard with little if no visible change to your body composition & look. However, if you are a seasoned campaigner 12% bf or less & do the hard yards with your cycle, training & nutrition, recovery etc you tend to harden up & fill out muscle areas like traps, delts, upper back & thighs. The muscle insertions & tie ins become more defined & the skin generally tightens up. Most guys that have been "on" can pick it in others

[Sifo-Dyas]

In particular instances there is a visible difference muscle structure. If a person of a reasonably young age were to start taking AAS before they had reached their maximum growth potential naturally.

The difference in muscle structure is easy to visibly detect on stage when this person is compared against someone who has trained naturally for many years before taking AAS.

It was suggested that this difference in the appearance of the physique is irreversible and permanent, but this is not entirely true. It can be easily reversed through induced mitogenesis from peptide use, in particular IGF1-LR3

[thatwaslight]

can someone find pics of an example of both of these cases?

[WANABJAKD]

In particular instances there is a visible difference muscle structure. If a person of a reasonably young age were to start taking AAS before they had reached their maximum growth potential naturally.

The difference in muscle structure is easy to visibly detect on stage when this person is compared against someone who has trained naturally for many years before taking AAS.

It was suggested that this difference in the appearance of the physique is irreversible and permanent, but this is not entirely true. It can be easily reversed through induced mitogenesis from peptide use, in particular IGF1-LR3

maybe with rIGF, not LR3 :wink:

[train hard]

In particular instances there is a visible difference muscle structure. If a person of a reasonably young age were to start taking AAS before they had reached their maximum growth potential naturally.

The difference in muscle structure is easy to visibly detect on stage when this person is compared against someone who has trained naturally for many years before taking AAS.

It was suggested that this difference in the appearance of the physique is irreversible and permanent, but this is not entirely true. It can be easily reversed through induced mitogenesis from peptide use, in particular IGF1-LR3

had Arnold reached his maximum growth potential when he started on the juice in his teens? we all know what he went on to achieve same goes for guys like shawn ray and you could go on and on im not trying to say its good to start young but there have been alot of things said in this thread that really have no proof to back there statments up other then there opinions which is fair enough but they are far from fact and very general

[thatwaslight]

BroScience for the win a trainhard lol

[musclenz]

My feeling is that there are very few people who decide to use AAS & PEDs that have ever reached their "Maximum Growth Potential". Who would know what their MGP is anyway. It has little to do with age as well although this can be a factor I guess, but more so with genetic structure & time working out under a well designed natural training program.

What the guts of this topic is tending towards again, I would suggest, is the use of AAS by younger & younger athletes. This is something that is happening whether it is socially or morally acceptable & everyone has their opinion on it. In the end it comes down to education & knowledge which should be provided by experienced & informed peers in gyms, trainers, via forums & through research articles & the medical fraternity. In the end we are playing around with medicines & users hormone & endocrine systems & it should be treated as such, not hidden behind closed doors. Unfortunately our society & our law makers choose to treat its use indifferently & as such open & frank discussion & use is taboo.

[Optimass]

Had been meaning to reply to you Chemo ...

Riccardo has it pretty much as I was thinking ...

I think what Optimass was trying to say is when you jump on the gear your muscle density increases dramatically and you appear alot harder and lose the round, softer shape that a natural guy has.

Therefore If you do not have a sufficient base to work from, muscle imbalances and imperfections in your physique will show up a lot more if you jump on gear too soon. You get that hard juiced up look without the fullness in your physique that is built up slowly from years of training naturally.

It's a combination of dense hardness combined with thickness. It takes years and years for average joe trainers to develop thick muscle. (Keeping in mind that genetics like Arnold are few and far between).

There are many factors to consider in this discussion. If you are a Big Fat Bastard & start on AAS & do nothing to change your training program, intensity, diet, drugs used etc you will remain a Big Fat Bastard with little if no visible change to your body composition & look. However, if you are a seasoned campaigner 12% bf or less & do the hard yards with your cycle, training & nutrition, recovery etc you tend to harden up & fill out muscle areas like traps, delts, upper back & thighs. The muscle insertions & tie ins become more defined & the skin generally tightens up. Most guys that have been "on" can pick it in others

Thats exactly right. Seems to be easier the longer you have been around different peeps and at different levels of training.

How is this lost forever? You can always train your weak parts

Yes but you can't polish a turd.

If your genetics and body structure are not symetrical, no matter how hard you try it's never going to be completely offset. Some people just have an ugly base to start with .

The problem being that if you mature the muscle quickly, early on when you are just starting out, you simply over power the opportunity areas of your frame - as our body matures it becomes harder to correct. If it was as easy as just balancing your physique, more than 15% of competitors would have great calf development.

It's not really an age thing altogether though, you can see it more commonly in younger guys in any case as they generally haven't trained as long. If you started out in your 20s as I did and trained for 5 years, or in your thirties - you would see a noticeable change.

Lets use Salah as he example: (maybe a bit contencious but he IMO had a great physique for someone so young).

When I first met him he was a skinny teenager - at 14 years of age he was however training everyday after school and had been for sometime. But because of this he was able to produce densness like this (below) in a short space of time.

[Sifo-Dyas]

In particular instances there is a visible difference muscle structure. If a person of a reasonably young age were to start taking AAS before they had reached their maximum growth potential naturally.

The difference in muscle structure is easy to visibly detect on stage when this person is compared against someone who has trained naturally for many years before taking AAS.

It was suggested that this difference in the appearance of the physique is irreversible and permanent, but this is not entirely true. It can be easily reversed through induced mitogenesis from peptide use, in particular IGF1-LR3

had Arnold reached his maximum growth potential when he started on the juice in his teens? we all know what he went on to achieve same goes for guys like shawn ray and you could go on and on im not trying to say its good to start young but there have been alot of things said in this thread that really have no proof to back there statments up other then there opinions which is fair enough but they are far from fact and very general

A slight misunderstanding in my post.

I am not implying if someone is to start taking AAS young they will not get as big or achieve any less greatness than someone who reaches their natural maximum growth potential before starting AAS.

There is a slight visible difference to the muscle structure between the two, not the size and not that one is "Better" than the other.

Sorry if I implied differently.

[Chemo]

Awesome reply.

So AAS will provide more harsh look?

I've noticed on a few BBrs that the hip area and upperquads are very sharp, due to low bf for sure but could it be more?

For example this fulla gotta be on the roids, is this the kinda of harshness (and ridiculous size) that is expected of AAS?

[musclenz]

That's muscle maturity, genetics, AAS, peptides & a shit load of Squats & Leg Press Chemo

[startinfromscratch]

the other area guys lose roundness is their nutsacks

[Optimass]

Awesome reply.

So AAS will provide more harsh look?

I've noticed on a few BBrs that the hip area and upperquads are very sharp, due to low bf for sure but could it be more?

For example this fulla gotta be on the roids, is this the kinda of harshness (and ridiculous size) that is expected of AAS?

Possibly correct in that assumption :grin: (enter Tom Platz)

[thatwaslight]

Tom platz used to scream at his legs to kill him, could be something in it.

[Luigi]

yes he had some unusual training techniques - but whatever works ey !

[Chemo]

Lol oh my goodness...I would love to try that

"grow you skinny mutthaaa fuckerssss"

Time to get on the leg press with a megaphone I think.

Just to confirm

Good genetics in BBing is ..

The shape, symmetry and muscle insertion?

The ability to gain size, hardness?

A good response to AAS? :pfft:

[Optimass]

I think beauty truely is in the eye of the beholder.

In competitive bodybuilding you have to cater to everything but size doesn't always win - symetry and conditioning are more important at ameteur level - size becomes more of a fator once you hit the elite/pro zone. If you can get it together early on your at a real advantage.

Would be good to hear the opinion of a few judges ...

[mr natural]

lol this debate's a crock of shit.

Get a young guy on gear with good training and diet blah blah blah and in 5 years he'll have fuller muscles that a much older guy thats been on gear for 5 years in comparison to time on gear. The growth potential of a maturing young person is much greater than an older person. Many unknown factors to muscle growth other than just raising testostrone levels.

[teabz]

agree

zyzz is a prime example of this lol