# Mike and Ray Mentzer, what happened?



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

I was just thinking about if there has been any programs,books ect (even for sensational purposes) that have been made about the deaths of both Mike and Ray mentzer, I'm sure most of you have heard of these bodybuilders, especially Mike, I thought there would have been more of a buzz of gossip about their deaths

and countless theories, and claims, but suprisingly I have seen little or nothing.

Is there anyone out there with any thoughts on the subject?


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

At the time, the media said - credibly - that Ray Mentzer died of a familial kidney disease.

Whether this was exacerbated by gear use was never mentioned.

I met Mike Mentzer once and while perfectly mannered, he seemed rather disappointed and morose. He was largely self-educated, had become a known self-expert in HIT and was rather pedantic - as in his videos on YouTube.

But he had suffered at the hands of the big bodybuilding media moguls who feared his training régimes endangered their repeatedly published routines and supplement income.

It was said he committed suicide shortly after Ray died out of lonliness - they were apparently very close. Others thought he may have known or feared he had the same prognosis.

And, dare I say it, though he had occasional girlfriends, some thought he may have been gay - difficult then...


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

Mike my fav body builder of all time. Id seriously love to have his shape and condition.










Actually today i was reading up on him. Read he died of Bergers disease what ever that is, and shortly before he had kidney failure and clots in his bloody as did Ray who was to give him a kidney.


----------



## Guest (Jun 5, 2009)

Interesting^^^^

Mike drank/smoked/was overweight/took amphetamines, some how i dont think aas had much to contribute. An extremely smart man and some one i have always looked up to due to his ability to think out side of the box....


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

pariah said:


> Mike my fav body builder of all time. Id seriously love to have his shape and condition.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Aha! So they both had kidney disease and neither was suicide?

Great bodybuilders, both.


----------



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

I'm a bit confused I thought Mike died first, found by Ray then three days later Ray was found dead, and it was Ray who had the Bergers disease?

can you see why i thought that there would have been more media interest, I mean I bet David caradine will have been assasinated by the Kung Fu masters,like Bruce Lee theoryists


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> Aha! So they both had kidney disease and neither was suicide?
> 
> Great bodybuilders, both.


Mike died in his sleep of a heart attack(his second)Ray died a few days later of kidney failure, related to bergers disease.Heart disease was prevalent in the Mentzers family, killing their father in his his forties.Mike was a tortured soul.It has been said that his never recovered from the defeat at the 1980 olympia, which was a "stitch up" if ever there was one.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

freddee said:


> I'm a bit confused I thought M*ike died first, found by Ray then three days later Ray was found dead, and it was Ray who had the Bergers disease*?...


Yes I've just done some reading and have apparently been under a misapprehension all these years.

But at the time it was def said that Mike had committed suicide.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

essexboy said:


> Mike died in his sleep of a heart attack(his second)Ray died a few days later of kidney failure, related to bergers disease.Heart disease was prevalent in the Mentzers family, killing their father in his his forties.Mike was a tortured soul.It has been said that his never recovered from the defeat at *the 1980 olympia, which was a "stitch up" if ever there was one.*


Yes! Thanks for the info...


----------



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

yes I have only seen, the 1980 show on youtube,but Arnold was not at his best, but at the time it was a real boys own story for him to train for just six weeks and then come back and win.

Mike Mentzer had just had a couple of perfect tens and was fancied to win by his fellow competiters I believe


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Arnold 6ft 3? 230lbs. Mentzer 5ft8 -230lbs.Dont take a genius!!


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

Mike confronting Arnold after the 1980 show.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

So if had "gone off" who wolud have won? would Arnies height been an advantage? or would Mike have slipped in a tasty uppercut?


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

I'm going to ask this question again, but it seems on forums most dont see what im seeing... Does anyone notice how different the 'look' is from 70`s bbers. Its how natural, but dry their skin and muscles are.

Like smooth yet deeply chiselled or as if they havent dieted as their muscles look full and chunky. I cant explain it.


----------



## John Wood (Apr 13, 2008)

Pariah;;

I was competing at top level in the UK & Europe in the 70's/80's and to get that fuller muscel apperance I would for 10-14 days depleat to zero carbs and protein only and light workouts almost then for the last 10 days up to comp days I'd reverse v/little protein and start bang'n the sustainable carbs back in to fill out all the m/bellies to get afuller look ..this work well for me ...John


----------



## stow (Jun 5, 2007)

Interesting John.

What else did you do back then and how do you see things have changed?

Maybe we should start a thread for your comments?

Sounds like good reading.

Stow


----------



## bigchris85 (Oct 30, 2008)

excellent idea!


----------



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

i have total respect for the BB of years gone because they just didn't have the gyms with all the advanced resistance machines of today,nor the supplements and what there was cost a fortune for only small amounts, they truely blazed a trail for those of today.

I remember reading an interview with Bertil Fox and when asked what he thought of a leg ex/ curl machine, he replied that his gym did not have one!!!


----------



## powerlifter8 (Jan 28, 2007)

The forearms on mike mentzer are insane, they literally look like they're going to rip his skin open!


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

Ohh look what i found.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

freddee said:


> i have total respect for the BB of years gone because they just didn't have the gyms with all the advanced resistance machines of today,nor the supplements and what there was cost a fortune for only small amounts, they truely blazed a trail for those of today.
> 
> I remember reading an interview with Bertil Fox and when asked what he thought of a leg ex/ curl machine, he replied that his gym did not have one!!!


 Mentzer used the best, most advanced equipment when he trained, which hasnt been supassed today-1st generation nautilus.(Save maybe medx)


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

nice pic Pariah, not seen that one!! Have you seen the pic of Arnold and a few of his mates in the Gym prior to the 80 olympia? someone posted a sign over a mirror , in which you can see Arnolds reflection.The sign said "Mentzers coming" . cant sem to find it again, was very amusing.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Mentzer at 15.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

essexboy said:


> Mentzer used the best, most advanced equipment when he trained, which hasnt been supassed today-1st generation nautilus.


Couldn't agree more, essexboy! :thumb:

Very few gyms in the UK ever had any of this awesome equipment - let alone the full set. The Aberdeen Nautilus was one of the few.

The intensity of workout you could get from Nautilus equipment was almost frightening because of the correct contuinuous force generated by the patented cams. And the biceps twist machine, for instance, was unique.


----------



## Galtonator (Jul 21, 2004)

Big fan of Mike. Whatever happend in his life. He had a fantastic physic and came across as very intellegent


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

essexboy...havent seen it, I guess that would have been quite amusing lol.

a 70's leg press. Bloody scary or what?!?!










Mentzer looks young in this to me.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> Couldn't agree more, essexboy! :thumb:
> 
> Very few gyms in the UK ever had any of this awesome equipment - let alone the full set. The Aberdeen Nautilus was one of the few.
> 
> The intensity of workout you could get from Nautilus equipment was almost frightening because of the correct contuinuous force generated by the patented cams. And the biceps twist machine, for instance, was unique.


ive got 6 machines in my yard waiting to be used. not 1st gen though, although one is the duo-squat my mate in sunderland has the compound bicep machine you speak of.I train exclusively on nautilus nitro, still very good. the cam profiles are less agressive.When arthur built the first gens, he didnt have the luxury of computers!


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

essexboy said:


> ive got 6 machines in my yard waiting to be used. not 1st gen though, although one is the duo-squat my mate in sunderland has the compound bicep machine you speak of.I train exclusively on nautilus nitro, still very good. the cam profiles are less agressive.When arthur built the first gens, he didnt have the luxury of computers!


Where are you located, essexboy? Any chance of opening a Nautilus gym mid-Essex? :laugh:


----------



## John Wood (Apr 13, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> Couldn't agree more, essexboy! :thumb:
> 
> Very few gyms in the UK ever had any of this awesome equipment - let alone the full set. The Aberdeen Nautilus was one of the few.
> 
> The intensity of workout you could get from Nautilus equipment was almost frightening because of the correct contuinuous force generated by the patented cams. And the biceps twist machine, for instance, was unique.


I was once introduct to Nautilus equipment back in the late 70's somewhere near Wakefield and was v/imprest with the way it worked this the owner had around 10+ differant machines, the only one I did'nt try was the tricep foward extention only cause I could'nt fit in the dam thing impresive all the same


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> Where are you located, essexboy? Any chance of opening a Nautilus gym mid-Essex? :laugh:


im in brentwood.Not sure if my garage would qualify!!


----------



## John Wood (Apr 13, 2008)

pariah said:


> essexboy...havent seen it, I guess that would have been quite amusing lol.
> 
> a 70's leg press. Bloody scary or what?!?!
> 
> ...


Use one very simalar in the 1st gym I trained in early 70's but it was own made out of re bar and scaffold tubing v/effective


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Jesus! looks a bit shakey!!!


----------



## shauno (Aug 26, 2007)

essexboy said:


> Mentzer at 15.


interesting pic


----------



## shauno (Aug 26, 2007)

1980 olympia

if you check that link you can see arnold turning back and asking 'what have you won?'


----------



## freddee (Mar 2, 2009)

I have an old BB mag with Casey Viator training on nautilus equipement from 1979, I remember thinking at the time this is the way to go but I have never seen or used any myself.


----------



## Goose (Jan 29, 2009)

Bodybuilders in those days had awesome physiques, they seem so different to the physiques of today.. is this purely because of AAS? Mike was a top bodybuilder, great shape


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

Goose said:


> Bodybuilders in those days had awesome physiques, they seem so different to the physiques of today.. is this purely because of AAS? Mike was a top bodybuilder, great shape


I suspect that then they popped an awful lot more orals than we do today.

I was told then that they were taking "handfulls" of D-bol and Winstrol...


----------



## strongasanox (Mar 14, 2008)

what i thought was crazy in that olympia was tom plats not being picked for the final line up,,i thought he was in great condition


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> I suspect that then they popped an awful lot more orals than we do today.
> 
> I was told then that they were taking "handfulls" of D-bol and Winstrol...


This is in contrast to what a poster on Ironage.us said in a post once. He maintains that Dbol was stronger back then, but they only popped a few tabs but stayed on all year round.

Said person maintains that he has trained with all the golden champions, saying he remembers the day Franko Columbu walked fresh unassisted into gold gyms and within a few months was packed with size using Dbol.

Of course how much of that is true is...


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

freddee said:


> I have an old BB mag with Casey Viator training on nautilus equipement from 1979, I remember thinking at the time this is the way to go but I have never seen or used any myself.


if you ever do, and used it as it was intended, you wont go back to free weights. :thumb:


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

Somewhere I have the Nautilus Training and Nutrition Manuals, plus the book explaining Arthur Jones's experiments and the design of the cams and machines...


----------



## chrisj22 (Mar 22, 2006)

The very first gym I trained at had a reverse leg press, or 'vertical leg press' - absolutely batters the quads.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

pariah said:


> This is in contrast to what a poster on Ironage.us said in a post once. He maintains that Dbol was stronger back then, but they only popped a few tabs but stayed on all year round.
> 
> Said person maintains that he has trained with all the golden champions, saying he remembers the day Franko Columbu walked fresh unassisted into gold gyms and within a few months was packed with size using Dbol.
> 
> Of course how much of that is true is...


yeah i read this as well. ive been trying to join, but they wont let me??the original Ciba Dinabol, was far purer.Was it ken Waller who used to wear a t shirt stating "Dinabol, breakfast of champions":thumb:


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

essexboy said:


> yeah i read this as well. ive been trying to join, but they wont let me??the original Ciba Dinabol, was far purer.Was it ken Waller who used to wear a t shirt stating "Dinabol, breakfast of champions":thumb:


Forgotten him! Yes, I think it was...

I suspect the D-bol's "purity" was irrelevant providing they took enough milligrams.

Question is, does anyone know what the results are from taking so much of those orals rather than today's injectables: were they responsible for the look then, or did they favour a different comp prep régime, or both?


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> Forgotten him! Yes, I think it was...
> 
> I suspect the D-bol's "purity" was irrelevant providing they took enough milligrams.
> 
> Question is, does anyone know what the results are from taking so much of those orals rather than today's injectables: were they responsible for the look then, or did they favour a different comp prep régime, or both?


Pro, earlier in this thread John Wood, explains this.


----------



## anabolic ant (Jun 5, 2008)

i saw somewhere ,pretty sure it was on this board,cycles of yesteryear....and i think the old very bad very strong badboy of all tests which the old russians used with ease,was methyl testosterone...as well as the said orals....think there was test available and some stuff avalable from cadavers....scary stuff eh!!!!

milk and egg protein drinks...and good old food n some vits n min supps!!!


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

essexboy said:


> Pro, earlier in this thread John Wood, explains this.


Yes - he explained the method that worked well for him, but did all the top blokes do the same?

And I still wonder whether there's a difference in the quality of muscle put on with huge doses of orals from that with mainly injectables...


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

i think guys from thirty plus years ago, looked better because a larger % of the muscle was "real" as opposed to "drug built"in other word the muscle was of better quality, as it was gained through training not drugs. Most of my friends, 20 years ago, used the same stacks, as Mentzer.The most commonly used oral(and the most effective was anadrol.im not sure if this is still available, as i ahve no interest .It was very effective and extremely toxic.In fact it was the choice of a guy who we knew , who died of a massive liver tumour, at 27.I saw Mentzer in 1979, he candidly spoke of drug useage. it was a mix of d/bol and deca. that was it.i cant remember the dose but it wasnt super high,and it was not year round.ok her could have been lying, but as a man of the highest integrity, which i believe he was, i believed him.Im not sure as to pre-contest diets, but as far as i recall my aquantances used to carb deplete /load.im not sure if that is still the way its done today?


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

anabolic ant said:


> i saw somewhere ,pretty sure it was on this board,cycles of yesteryear....and i think the old very bad very strong badboy of all tests which the old russians used with ease,was methyl testosterone...as well as the said orals....think there was test available and some stuff avalable from cadavers....scary stuff eh!!!!
> 
> milk and egg protein drinks...and good old food n some vits n min supps!!!


Before synthetic hgh, it was recovered from cadavers.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

essexboy said:


> i think guys from thirty plus years ago, looked better because a larger % of the muscle was "real" as opposed to "drug built"in other word the muscle was of better quality, as it was gained through training not drugs. Most of my friends, 20 years ago, used the same stacks, as Mentzer.The most commonly used oral(and the most effective was anadrol.im not sure if this is still available, as i ahve no interest .It was very effective and extremely toxic.In fact it was the choice of a guy who we knew , who died of a massive liver tumour, at 27.I saw Mentzer in 1979, he candidly spoke of drug useage. it was a mix of d/bol and deca. that was it.i cant remember the dose but it wasnt super high,and it was not year round.ok her could have been lying, but as a man of the highest integrity, which i believe he was, i believed him.Im not sure as to pre-contest diets, but as far as i recall my aquantances used to carb deplete /load.im not sure if that is still the way its done today?


I'm persuaded you've got this right, essexboy, and Mentzer was known for his honesty.

So I suppose the muscle then prob actually had greater density.

If so we might expect bodybuilders then to have been smaller overall, or had less muscle, but to have been about the same weight as now - to have had less bulk for a given weight...


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> I'm persuaded you've got this right, essexboy, and Mentzer was known for his honesty.
> 
> So I suppose the muscle then prob actually had greater density.
> 
> If so we might expect bodybuilders then to have been smaller overall, or had less muscle, but to have been about the same weight as now - to have had less bulk for a given weight...


Pro, they were smaller/lighter. mentzer was one of the heaviest at 230lb, but, Casey Viator(who still looks great) was only 210lb i believe,at his biggest.these were two of the most heavily muscled guys around.i think Padilla competed at 165Lbs! granted hes only 5ft.2in.

Also, most of these guys, are still around(save the mentzers)do you think it will be the case with the top guys now in 20 years? :confused1:


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

essexboy said:


> ...
> 
> Also, most of these guys, are still around(save the mentzers)do you think it will be the case with the top guys now in 20 years? :confused1:


Hmmm... I wonder!


----------



## drago78 (Oct 1, 2007)

To the OP , most peoples deaths are messy.

I think it is more relevant to remember what people did in their life. Mike Mentzer's legacy in bodybuilding is to be seen in his writing and theories which still have weight to this day.

And he was robbed in 1980!


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

essexboy said:


> i think guys from thirty plus years ago, looked better because a larger % of the muscle was "real" as opposed to "drug built"in other word the muscle was of better quality, as it was gained through training not drugs. Most of my friends, 20 years ago, used the same stacks, as Mentzer.The most commonly used oral(and the most effective was anadrol.im not sure if this is still available, as i ahve no interest .It was very effective and extremely toxic.In fact it was the choice of a guy who we knew , who died of a massive liver tumour, at 27.I saw Mentzer in 1979, he candidly spoke of drug useage. it was a mix of d/bol and deca. that was it.i cant remember the dose but it wasnt super high,and it was not year round.ok her could have been lying, but as a man of the highest integrity, which i believe he was, i believed him.Im not sure as to pre-contest diets, but as far as i recall my aquantances used to carb deplete /load.im not sure if that is still the way its done today?


Now this is golden information!

So you saying it was only dbol and deca?

Wow, thats interesting. No test in that mix at all which leads me to this. Years ago I read about some german/russian power lifters etc who stated they used tiny amounts of testosterone (quantify that) but for longer periods, and stated that western body builders looked bloated and 'artifcial' because they used way to much test in once go stacked with other meds.

The 'look' i was on about earlier essexboy/Pro..., youve nailed it. The quality of the muscle to me at least looks denser or different than what people have today. Btw the guy on Ironage is called "Clayton" i believe.


----------



## Prodiver (Nov 14, 2008)

pariah said:


> Now this is golden information!
> 
> So you saying it was only dbol and deca?
> 
> ...


So contrary to today's accepted practice, might we see some very solid gains on quite low doses of test, but reasonable doses of injectable D-bol and bigger doses of Tren?


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

Id be willing to try if someone wants to sponsor it LOL.


----------



## marso (May 31, 2006)

While Mentzer was more outspoken and forthcoming with his information regarding steroids etc he was A: a body builder (who down play there steroids use and amounts) and B: a human (who lie) so I doubt that he only used Dbol and Deca, bottom line is we'll never know...and lets face it he had to take them to compete on a so called level playing field, although one can't beat politics no matter how gifted or drugs you take...

Also one only has to look at that picture of him at 19 years of age, he's nearly as big there as his pro days and all without using HIT or later his Heavy Duty principles as strong case for genetic potential if ever there was one....


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

pariah said:


> Now this is golden information!
> 
> So you saying it was only dbol and deca?
> 
> ...


Im pretty sure that was what he said. however, i was only there by default,i didnt lift weights i merely took the place of someone who cancelled, But i did take notice of what my lifter friends did, i remember the dicussion on the d/bol deca stack in the car on the way home.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

marso said:


> While Mentzer was more outspoken and forthcoming with his information regarding steroids etc he was A: a body builder (who down play there steroids use and amounts) and B: a human (who lie) so I doubt that he only used Dbol and Deca, bottom line is we'll never know...and lets face it he had to take them to compete on a so called level playing field, although one can't beat politics no matter how gifted or drugs you take...
> 
> Also one only has to look at that picture of him at 19 years of age, he's nearly as big there as his pro days and all without using HIT or later his Heavy Duty principles as strong case for genetic potential if ever there was one....


He was 195lbs at the 71 america i believe.in 1977 he competed at m/weight, yet the following year he was a heavy weight.He was 230lbs at the 80 olympia.As you say though Paul, genetics are the overiding reason.


----------



## marso (May 31, 2006)

essexboy said:


> He was 195lbs at the 71 america i believe.in 1977 he competed at m/weight, yet the following year he was a heavy weight.He was 230lbs at the 80 olympia.As you say though Paul, genetics are the overiding reason.


I recall Mentzer saying in his journals that he competed at 210-215lbs, not 230...but still even at 210lbs he was massive!


----------



## Galtonator (Jul 21, 2004)

Does anyone have a copy of the Mentzer journals?


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

freddee said:


> I remember reading an interview with Bertil Fox and when asked what he thought of a leg ex/ curl machine, he replied that his gym did not have one!!!


 LOL - Bertil trained in Del Martins, which was a tiny garage in (someone elses) back yard in the back streets of Southall.

I remember being there on Sunday mornings back in the 80's/90's were you would meet all the best bodybuilders in the country.Just before contests, it was almost surreal, with all these huge guys (sometimes queuing out of the back garden, on to the street) in this tiny little garage. The best piece of equipment in there was the bench press , which I donated. If I remember correctly, Del didnt even have an Olympic bar.


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> Couldn't agree more, essexboy! :thumb:
> 
> Very few gyms in the UK ever had any of this awesome equipment - let alone the full set. The Aberdeen Nautilus was one of the few.
> 
> The intensity of workout you could get from Nautilus equipment was almost frightening because of the correct contuinuous force generated by the patented cams. And the biceps twist machine, for instance, was unique.


I have the MedX Biceps supination machine, which is exactly the same as the Nautilus version, but without the weight stack guide rods (plus belt, instead of chain). This gives it a friction-free feel over the old Nautilus, and makes it far better (IMO)


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

essexboy said:


> im in brentwood.Not sure if my garage would qualify!!


 Your gym is super high tech compared to Del Martins and Del had all the best bodybuilders in the country, or even those visiting the country from abroad. (on Sundays).


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

John Wood said:


> I was once introduct to Nautilus equipment back in the late 70's somewhere near Wakefield and was v/imprest with the way it worked this the owner had around 10+ differant machines, the only one I did'nt try was the tricep foward extention only cause I could'nt fit in the dam thing impresive all the same


It wasn`t called New Life Health Spa was it?

All the Nautilus machines where blue and cam driven IIRC, everything from adductor/abductor, to obliques, triceps, biceps and abdominal and lower back machines. In fact a machine for any and every bodypart.

Great gym, miss the atmosphere and too young (at the time) to appreciate the true value of the machines.


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

John Wood said:


> Pariah;;
> 
> I was competing at top level in the UK & Europe in the 70's/80's and to get that fuller muscel apperance I would for 10-14 days depleat to zero carbs and protein only and light workouts almost then for the last 10 days up to comp days I'd reverse v/little protein and start bang'n the sustainable carbs back in to fill out all the m/bellies to get afuller look ..this work well for me ...John


I trained under the late Dave Williams for my first show and he had me do something similar.


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

pariah said:


> a 70's leg press. Bloody scary or what?!?


First 2 gymnasiums I trained in had those, great devices but you needed to have a good spotter on hand to replace the safety pin in holes on rods when set finished. No forced reps or you got squashed.


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

Prodiver said:


> Couldn't agree more, essexboy! :thumb:
> 
> The intensity of workout you could get from Nautilus equipment was almost frightening because of the correct contuinuous force generated by the patented cams. And the biceps twist machine, for instance, was unique.


Heres my MedX biceps twist machine


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

gb666 said:


> First 2 gymnasiums I trained in had those, great devices but you needed to have a good spotter on hand to replace the safety pin in holes on rods when set finished. No forced reps or you got squashed.


That machine is High tech and luxury compared to the one that was in my gym in the 80's. Ours had thick axle grease on the scaffold poles and it still used to bind. We all squatted instead I remember the spotter having to put the stack pin in at the end of the set - health safety?? LOL


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

physcult said:


> That machine is High tech and luxury compared to the one that was in my gym in the 80's. Ours had thick axle grease on the scaffold poles and it still used to bind. We all squatted instead


Oh they were not very luxurious and the weights were placed on either side not on top like picture, which made it grind as it ran over rods.


----------



## SALKev (Feb 28, 2009)

This thread has been a great read, I was disappointed when I reached the end. Have learnt alot from this.


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

SALKev said:


> This thread has been a great read, I was disappointed when I reached the end. Have learnt alot from this.


 well here a bit of gossip for you - Mike and ray were suppose to have been messing with DNP shortly before they died.


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

Galtonator said:


> Does anyone have a copy of the Mentzer journals?


I have some books of his but unsure which ones, one did have his supposed pre contest drug regime in along with diet.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

physcult said:


> well here a bit of gossip for you - Mike and ray were suppose to have been messing with DNP shortly before they died.


 He mentions getting some at the end of the heavy duty video.


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

essexboy said:


> He mentions getting some at the end of the heavy duty video.


 Their deaths are claimed to be compatible with DNP abuse according to Miike Zumpano, the co-author of the Underground Steroid Handbook. I would imagine he also has a close source to the original rumor.

I think they were trying to get into shape for promo, purposes but were both past their 'best-before' dates, physically and mentaly. The off scene footage from the last DVD is a little sad and its a shame it was posted. In the old days nobody would of known how bad he got. Its a shame, as Mike was a great BB


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

Prodiver said:


> Forgotten him! Yes, I think it was...
> 
> I suspect the D-bol's "purity" was irrelevant providing they took enough milligrams.
> 
> ...


A powerlifter told me that in his days of competing the top guys in bodybuilding never used testosterones, only Dianabol, Deca and Primobolan during dieting, they avoided its use because of the bloat it gave.

Arnold is supposed to be in an old issue of Playboy admitting to using Dianabol during his pre contest dieting.


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

gb666 said:


> A powerlifter told me that in his days of competing the top guys in bodybuilding never used testosterones, only Dianabol, Deca and Primobolan during dieting, they avoided its use because of the bloat it gave.
> 
> Arnold is supposed to be in an old issue of Playboy admitting to using Dianabol during his pre contest dieting.


When? Perhaps the 60's and 70's?

From the 80's onwards till now , everybody uses everything available - obviously there is personal preference and individuality, but in general people will use whatever is available that works.


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

physcult said:


> When? Perhaps the 60's and 70's?
> 
> From the 80's onwards till now , everybody uses everything available - obviously there is personal preference and individuality, but in general people will use whatever is available that works.


Yes 60`s and 70`s, some even used cadaver growth hormone.


----------



## Judas (Jan 21, 2009)

I've really enjoyed reading this thread and I just checked on Waterstones website for books related to Mike Mentzer...Has anybody actually read any of his books 'The Wisdom of Mike Mentzer: The Art, Science and Philosophy of a Bodybuilding Legend' and 'High-intensity Training the Mike Mentzer Way'? Are they worth buying?


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)




----------



## hilly (Jan 19, 2008)

ive read one of them very good IMO. check amazon their pretty cheap on their.


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

Judas said:


> I've really enjoyed reading this thread and I just checked on Waterstones website for books related to Mike Mentzer...Has anybody actually read any of his books 'The Wisdom of Mike Mentzer: The Art, Science and Philosophy of a Bodybuilding Legend' and 'High-intensity Training the Mike Mentzer Way'? Are they worth buying?


Read most of them and worth buying, amazon or ebay should have them at decent prices. Most people though are put off by his ideas of training so infrequently.


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

physcult said:


>


Watch 2 minutes and no more, the pair looked too spaced out, a sad reflection of past images and glory.


----------



## Guest (Jan 5, 2010)

> Most people though are put off by his ideas of training so infrequently.


It can put people off- but I have my workouts down to ten minuets once per month


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

romper stomper said:


> It can put people off- but I have my workouts down to ten minuets once per month


What do your workouts look like, that is some time between sessions?


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

gb666 said:


> Watch 2 minutes and no more, the pair looked too spaced out, a sad reflection of past images and glory.


if you listen to the things they are saying, they sound spaced out as well. Mike looks like a chain smoking crack whore


----------



## Guest (Jan 5, 2010)

> What do your workouts look like, that is some time between sessions?


is is but its a very speacial romper version of HIT


----------



## BigDom86 (Jul 27, 2008)

10minutes a month? lol. explain please


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

Ok I am not going to be liked by many and will go against the grain somewhat

could it be that if mike did die of a heart attack it could be that his total training time per week wasnt enough to offer the health benefits of exercise? :whistling:

also steroids started surfacing in the 50's, so surely by 70's and early 80's it was rampantly used by the top guys

also i find it highly amusing that many HIT advocates berate volume programs as marketing by supplement firms/magazines yet when you look at it HIT is nothing more than a marketing tool for nautilus equipment :lol:

lets be honest mediocrity/middle ground doesnt sell half as well as something extreme as such to gain trainees and people buying there books alot of HIT trainers advocate the extreme of once a week which is just the opposite end of the spectrum of someone like poliquin who advocates the GVT or one day arm cure high volume routines in much the same way.

alot of HIT state people are brainwashed by media to follow volume training - Pot calling the kettle black?

last thing I love the way that people who class themselves as hardgainers latch on to HIT, yet the poster boy for HIT from those pics must be the easiest gainer going, look at mentzer in his teens!!!


----------



## Guest (Jan 5, 2010)

> so surely by 70's and early 80's it was rampantly used by the top guys


eeeeerrr yes


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

romper stomper said:


> eeeeerrr yes


so why the talk about what they used as if there look then was due to their usage? IMO the reason they have that hard but full look is because they did not diet down as hard then as they do now - until gaspari showed up with his conditionign it was OK to be a little soft and full


----------



## SALKev (Feb 28, 2009)

gb666 said:


> Watch 2 minutes and no more, the pair looked too spaced out, *a sad reflection of past images and glory.*





physcult said:


> if you listen to the things they are saying, they sound spaced out as well. Mike looks like a chain smoking crack whore


That just about sums it up, it really is sad watching them there.


----------



## gb666 (Mar 14, 2006)

physcult said:


> if you listen to the things they are saying, they sound spaced out as well.*Mike looks like a chain smoking crack whore*


He does



romper stomper said:


> is is but its a very speacial romper version of HIT


 :cool2:



> Ok I am not going to be liked by many and will go against the grain somewhat
> 
> could it be that if mike did die of a heart attack it could be that his total training time per week wasnt enough to offer the health benefits of exercise?
> 
> ...


Swings and roundabouts, each comes into vogue every so often to be replaced by the other, but the basis of both is pre drug era, strength being built as a base (low volume/sets) with the trainees programs evolving overtime to incorporate more sets as and when they could handle the extra workloads. Volume fails so often due to individuals starting at too high a level that their CNS/recovery capabilities cannot handle the work placed on it.


----------



## Guest (Jan 6, 2010)

> so why the talk about what they used as if there look then was due to their usage?


mate usage has been around since bodybuilding began- and when comps started- from talks with older builders they could not use as much as they do now as Pct was not as advanced so could not counter the sides so well. Now we have more advanced Pct therapies and higher usage /doses more available compounds many beyond normal steroids larger builders and competitors.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

glen danbury said:


> Ok I am not going to be liked by many and will go against the grain somewhat
> 
> could it be that if mike did die of a heart attack it could be that his total training time per week wasnt enough to offer the health benefits of exercise? :whistling:


Glen.Mentzers father died at 47, from heart issues.He spent many years using speed, and heavy boozing.When he was being tested for a tissue match , so he could donate one of his kidneys to Ray,It was apparent that he had an issue with his blood (clotting ability,i believe.)As we know he became a heavy smoker, too.I dont think any amount of exercise would indemnify anyone against that lot.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

essexboy you must be thinkiong I have something against you now as i seem to persistantly take the opposite stance - i am not deliberately

indemnify - no, improve your odds, yes

even with other risk factors for CHD exercise (at the appropriate levels) has been shown to be an independent protective effect (morris 1994)

the problem is that doing ten minutes a week doesnt cut it, its known that for exercise to have health benefits theres a certain amount each week neccessary (i.e why the national recommendations for phycial activity are put out)


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

glen danbury said:


> essexboy you must be thinkiong I have something against you now as i seem to persistantly take the opposite stance - i am not deliberately
> 
> indemnify - no, improve your odds, yes
> 
> ...


I agree that exercise may be preventative,or improve odds, but only if you limit, the destructive factors.

No amount of prevention would have help Mentzer(imho).For the record my heart condition was exacerbated by exercise, And many distance athletes develop it.(far above statistical levels).


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

no essexboy thats what was meant by 'independent protective effect' - even if other risk factors are not dealt with there is a protective element

I cant find the study but there was one with three groups of monkeys - veggie diet, high saturated fat no exercise and high saturated fat with exercise

those with high fat and exercise showed the same limited athersclerosis as those on the veggie (normal) diet whilst those with the high fat diet and no exercise showed significant negative increases in athersclerosis

obviously conditions are not all the same and CHD is a large umbrella term but the majority of the time significant exercise levels has a major impact


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

glen danbury said:


> no essexboy thats what was meant by 'independent protective effect' - even if other risk factors are not dealt with there is a protective element
> 
> I cant find the study but there was one with three groups of monkeys - veggie diet, high saturated fat no exercise and high saturated fat with exercise
> 
> ...


Im with you on this.However, exercise wont protect you against poisioning your system, with speed and nicotine,or prevent genetic anomolies from surfacing.(in most cases)


----------



## stonecoldzero (Aug 30, 2009)

Essex -

No offense buddy, but I don't think you truly understand the basic principles of gene / environment interaction, specifically gene expression and epigenetics. This misunderstanding manifests itself in many of your posts where genetics come into play.

It's perfectly understandable - it's a complex subject area. I am fortunate in that I have to deal specifically with subject matter relating to this.

BUT .......

genes are not destiny.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

stonecoldzero said:


> Essex -
> 
> No offense buddy, but I don't think you truly understand the basic principles of gene / environment interaction, specifically gene expression and epigenetics. This misunderstanding manifests itself in many of your posts where genetics come into play.
> 
> ...


That wasnt my point.My contention was that no amount of exercise, clean living,diet etc, will do much in the way of protecting the individual from health issiues, if said individuals, use copious amounts of nictone, speed, & alcohol, irespective if a genetic condition exists as well.

Do you not agree?


----------



## stonecoldzero (Aug 30, 2009)

No. 

ps - Keith at his eccentric best.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

stonecoldzero said:


> No.
> 
> ps - Keith at his eccentric best.


Ok lets here your argument.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

stonecoldzero said:


> Essex -
> 
> No offense buddy, but I don't think you truly understand the basic principles of gene / environment interaction, specifically gene expression and epigenetics. This misunderstanding manifests itself in many of your posts where genetics come into play.
> 
> ...


Your going to die.We all are,unless we can find the genetic code that causes aging.Genes are destiny.


----------



## nibbsey (Feb 12, 2008)

stonecoldzero said:


> Essex -
> 
> No offense buddy, but I don't think you truly understand the basic principles of gene / environment interaction, specifically gene expression and epigenetics. This misunderstanding manifests itself in many of your posts where genetics come into play.
> 
> ...


 What a read this has turned out to be..

If genes are not destiny as you state. What is then, the relevance of gene testing folk who have high rates of cancer/s in their family.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

essexboy said:


> That wasnt my point.My contention was that no amount of exercise, clean living,diet etc, will do much in the way of protecting the individual from health issiues, if said individuals, use copious amounts of nictone, speed, & alcohol, irespective if a genetic condition exists as well.
> 
> Do you not agree?


possibly, but we do know that exercise has a beneficial effect on mood and mental health so maybe more exercise would have prevented a person making those decisions to smoke, do speed ect?


----------



## stonecoldzero (Aug 30, 2009)

Here you go - answers all your questions. I had to go back and look through a bunch of bloody papers I'd written to find this reference .... so knock yourselves out. 

Gottesman, I. & Hanson, D. (2005). Human development: Biological and genetic processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 263-286.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

glen danbury said:


> possibly, but we do know that exercise has a beneficial effect on mood and mental health so maybe more exercise would have prevented a person making those decisions to smoke, do speed ect?


Maybe Glen.I think in Mentzers case the seeds had been sown a lot earlier.He didnt recover from the 80 olympia, and spent most of the 90s, in a haze apparently.Not training, and his habits, combined with a few episodes of bizzare behaviour.

His speed habit I believe began, as an aid to dieting, whilst competing.Perhaps if had managed to chanel his bitterness into the arena again he may have saved hinself.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

nibbsey said:


> What a read this has turned out to be..
> 
> If genes are not destiny as you state. What is then, the relevance of gene testing folk who have high rates of cancer/s in their family.


Apparently Nibsy, its all a waste of time! :confused1:


----------



## SALKev (Feb 28, 2009)

stonecoldzero said:


> Here you go - answers all your questions. I had to go back and look through a bunch of bloody papers I'd written to find this reference .... so knock yourselves out.
> 
> Gottesman, I. & Hanson, D. (2005). Human development: Biological and genetic processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 263-286.


Couldn't you just explain it? I havn't the foggiest as of what to do with that^ :confused1:


----------



## nibbsey (Feb 12, 2008)

So stonecold. Are we to understand then that out bodies are not ruled by our genes as we can manipulate then via our envirinment and lifestyles to a point? Because if that is so, it does make sense to me. As with bodybuilding as an example.

Skinny Ectomorph guy feels need to beef up and so undergoes a life almost gene/physical destiny altering transfomtion and becomes a 1250lb mosterous bb'er. Therefore environment, diet and lifestyle change alters the otherwise inveitable destiny of his life.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

essexboy said:


> Apparently Nibsy, its all a waste of time! :confused1:


see essexboy thats what is meant its all or nothing with yourself - yes test people for genes for certain diseases etc as they have a higher risk and should do more to avoid risk factors which will put them at a greater risk

but just because someone has the genes doesnt automatically mean they will get it


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

stonecoldzero said:


> Here you go - answers all your questions. I had to go back and look through a bunch of bloody papers I'd written to find this reference .... so knock yourselves out.
> 
> Gottesman, I. & Hanson, D. (2005). Human development: Biological and genetic processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 263-286.


Sorry SC.i have no questions.I am confident in my conviction.You have made a statement.The onus is on you to give evidence supporting this claim.Your statement is incorrect.You know it is.

You are dismissing a whole area of medical science in one sentence.Merely posting links, does not constitute a response,with all respect.

Am i now to believe the heart condition that afflicted my father, his two brothers, and myself to be a strange quirk of fate, and no more?


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

glen danbury said:


> see essexboy thats what is meant its all or nothing with yourself - yes test people for genes for certain diseases etc as they have a higher risk and should do more to avoid risk factors which will put them at a greater risk
> 
> but just because someone has the genes doesnt automatically mean they will get it


Agreed. however the incidence rises if there is a link.Some conditions are not subject to control from outside influences.


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

essexboy said:


> Sorry SC.i have no questions.I am confident in my conviction.You have made a statement.The onus is on you to give evidence supporting this claim.Your statement is incorrect.You know it is.
> 
> You are dismissing a whole area of medical science in one sentence.Merely posting links, does not constitute a response,with all respect.
> 
> Am i now to believe the heart condition that afflicted my father, his two brothers, and myself to be a strange quirk of fate, and no more?


he he this could go on forever

whilst i dont doubt there is a genetic predisposition to it, could there not also be enviromental issue which is the bigger issue (i.e your fathers habits such as diet, activity etc etc through him bringing you up become yours and your brothers habits even subconsiously such as making you more of a type A person etc)


----------



## stonecoldzero (Aug 30, 2009)

Ok - basic HYPOTHETICAL (example) ......

IF there was a gene specific to alcoholism - does that mean someone who has that gene is destined to become an alcoholic?

NO.

Unless he or she drinks enough alcohol to activate that particular expression of that particular gene.

For example, if they never ever drank alcohol ...... = no alcoholic. 

Seriously, go read Gottesman and Hanson .... unless you're not interested in the unbiased scientific evidence.

I'm not here to impress or bull$hit you. The evidence is there if you're willing to look at it. Otherwise, all you've got is an opinion that has no basis in fact.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

glen danbury said:


> he he this could go on forever
> 
> whilst i dont doubt there is a genetic predisposition to it, could there not also be enviromental issue which is the bigger issue (i.e your fathers habits such as diet, activity etc etc through him bringing you up become yours and your brothers habits even subconsiously such as making you more of a type A person etc)


Actually it was my fathers brothers not mine.There is a well defined genetic predispostion for this condition.It generally runs through the male line only, and will on occasions skip a generation.Only recently has technology advanced enough to cite definate causes and diagnosis.In fact my father and his brothers could not have lived different lives.My father lived here, and was an engineer,one brother lived in south africa, and owned a tobacco farm, and one was in the navy! hard to find any causal link!


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

stonecoldzero said:


> Ok - basic HYPOTHETICAL (example) ......
> 
> IF there was a gene specific to alcoholism - does that mean someone who has that gene is destined to become an alcoholic?
> 
> ...


Ok agreed.However, in some medical conditions, the genetic link will be expressed, despite any outside influence.


----------



## stonecoldzero (Aug 30, 2009)

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to leave a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation".

Herbert Spencer.


----------



## SALKev (Feb 28, 2009)

> Originally Posted by essexboy View Post
> 
> That wasnt my point.My contention was that no amount of exercise, clean living,diet etc, will do much in the way of protecting the individual from health issiues, *if said individuals, use copious amounts of nictone, speed, & alcohol*, irespective if a genetic condition exists as well.
> 
> Do you not agree?





> Ok - basic HYPOTHETICAL (example) ......
> 
> IF there was a gene specific to alcoholism - does that mean someone who has that gene is destined to become an alcoholic?
> 
> ...


I'm no genius but looking at that, essexboy has said the abuse of drugs is already a factor and you're just repeating what he said apart from the choice made to go into alcoholism/whatever :confused1:

Correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

stonecoldzero said:


> "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to leave a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation".
> 
> Herbert Spencer.


Thats no answer SC.do you agree with the above statement?im not comtemptous, im hoping your not.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

SALKev said:


> I'm no genius but looking at that, essexboy has said the abuse of drugs is already a factor and you're just repeating what he said apart from the choice made to go into alcoholism/whatever :confused1:
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong.


We sort of drifted away from the Mentzer thing! we now have me and SC in a verbal joust about genes!


----------



## SALKev (Feb 28, 2009)

Aah ok, that's understandable :laugh:


----------



## stonecoldzero (Aug 30, 2009)

You've worn me out. You win. You're perfectly entitled to believe what you choose to. I'm not "offended" or anything of the sort. It's become a fruitless endeavour.

I've spent countless hours studying for advanced degrees and doing post-grad research in a variety of areas inseperable from these issues. It really makes no difference to me what you believe or don't.

I'll still be doing my best to advance scientific advancement in my specific area. Whether or not that "proves" me right or wrong, I'm interested in finding out knowable truths.


----------



## essexboy (Sep 7, 2008)

stonecoldzero said:


> You've worn me out. You win. You're perfectly entitled to believe what you choose to. I'm not "offended" or anything of the sort. It's become a fruitless endeavour.
> 
> I've spent countless hours studying for advanced degrees and doing post-grad research in a variety of areas inseperable from these issues. It really makes no difference to me what you believe or don't.
> 
> I'll still be doing my best to advance scientific advancement in my specific area. Whether or not that "proves" me right or wrong, I'm interested in finding out knowable truths.


Thats an unsatisfactory conclusion to this debate.However I concur that the effort we are both expending in attempting to make each other slip, is not healthy or particularly rewarding.Therefore lets consider case closed.Im going out to play in the snow...........till the next time..


----------



## glen danbury (May 23, 2006)

essexboy said:


> Actually it was my fathers brothers not mine.There is a well defined genetic predispostion for this condition.It generally runs through the male line only, and will on occasions skip a generation.Only recently has technology advanced enough to cite definate causes and diagnosis.In fact my father and his brothers could not have lived different lives.My father lived here, and was an engineer,one brother lived in south africa, and owned a tobacco farm, and one was in the navy! hard to find any causal link!


On surface level no - but when you consdering the myriad of factors which can contribute to a disease just job and location isnt a definative list

I dotn doubt that there is a genetic component but not that it is the be all and end all


----------



## physcult (Apr 6, 2008)

I think its likely the rumor about cooking himself with DNP from Mike Zumpano is fairly legit. As rumors go, its a pretty good source

Family history, drug abuser, type A personality, etc etc would of got him eventually anyway, you can see he looks far from healthy - he looks like a 70 year old in the last HIT dvd.

Best to remember Mike as the uncrowned Mr O - he was awesome, and thats how he should be remembered. The later stuff is just the ramblings of a man suffering.


----------



## abdullah sarwar (Sep 4, 2010)

Hi everybody i am looking for the del martin gym in southall can anybody please tell me the exact address of the gym or any contact number , i want to train really hardcore but i cannot find any hardcore gym where i can train like a pro lol , i live near bath road.

Cheers and kind Regards,

Abdullah Sarwar Faridi,

email: [email protected] .


----------



## DarkTranquility (Jul 30, 2010)

Think you're about 20 years too late, mate...


----------



## Simon m (Apr 3, 2008)

pariah said:


> Now this is golden information!
> 
> So you saying it was only dbol and deca?
> 
> ...


Holly Thread Resurrection Batman!

This is Mentzer's 1979 Olympia drug us as per his Heavy Duty Journal:

*"I started my steriod regimen for the Olympia by taking a 100mg shot of Deca-durabolin, 50mgs of Durabolin and 2 Dianabol Pills......*

*
*

*
*

*
The 100mgs of Durabolin a week was the most effective in up to 4 Dianabols a day. More than 100mgs. with the D-bol caused water retention problems....."*


----------



## pariah (May 8, 2008)

Interesting if true. How long was he on that?


----------



## Propper Joss (Aug 22, 2009)

essexboy said:


> i think guys from thirty plus years ago, looked better because a larger % of the muscle was "real" as opposed to "drug built"in other word the muscle was of better quality, as it was gained through training not drugs. Most of my friends, 20 years ago, used the same stacks, as Mentzer.The most commonly used oral(and the most effective was anadrol.im not sure if this is still available, as i ahve no interest .It was very effective and extremely toxic.In fact it was the choice of a guy who we knew , who died of a massive liver tumour, at 27.I saw Mentzer in 1979, he candidly spoke of drug useage. it was a mix of d/bol and deca. that was it.i cant remember the dose but it wasnt super high,and it was not year round.ok her could have been lying, but as a man of the highest integrity, which i believe he was, i believed him.Im not sure as to pre-contest diets, but as far as i recall my aquantances used to carb deplete /load.im not sure if that is still the way its done today?


Sergio Oliva said that he only ever used deca and d-bol in what we today would call quite low doses and also not year round.


----------



## Guest (Sep 5, 2010)

I still think Steve Reeves looked the best...


----------



## Simon m (Apr 3, 2008)

pariah said:


> Interesting if true. How long was he on that?


 3 months according to the journal I have


----------

