Example Physiques Achievable Naturally (without steroids)

| March 28, 2019 by Truth Seeker |

Hello, fellas

Today, I present to you physiques achievable naturally. Obviously, you can never know whether a man or a woman is 100% natural based on looks and muscle mass alone. You can be small and still on PEDs. However, the keyword here is achievable.

1. John Long /rockclimbers/


Rock climbers do not have a huge incentive to inject. They do not benefit from non-lean mass as it slows them down and makes the maneuvers more difficult than necessary. You will be hard pressed to see a rock climber going full GOMAD.

At the same time, some muscle mass, especially on the back, arm flexors and forearms, is needed to climb effectively. Hence why many rock climbers have decent lats, biceps, wrist flexors and extensors.

Another strike against roid use for climbing is that a lot of the physical adaptation is joint focused. A rock climber needs strong wrists, fingers and elbow ligaments. It’s not an option.

That type of strength is developed slowly over a very long period of time and does not require steroids.

Here’s an excerpt from the book Potential: How Big You Can Get Naturally talking on the subject:

Everything good related to tendons and ligaments happens slowly. A research from 2015 concluded that performance climbers with at least 15 years of experience have finger joints and tendons 62-76% thicker than those of nonclimbers. This is why bodyweight movements like the iron cross and the maltese require many years to master. Even steroids can’t speed up the process significantly. No matter the dose, joint based strength movements take ages to master.

On the good side, tendons lose their strength slowly too. This partially explains why some people take extended breaks without losing strength.

Due to the nature of the sport, it is safe to assume that steroids taken with bodybuilding goals in mind are a rarity in the sport of climbing.

Undeveloped Body Parts

Since the pressing musculature and the lower body are not nearly as dominant in climbing from a strength perspective, those muscles are smaller than what a natural can achieve when the areas are subjected to adequate and targeted training.

source: https://gr8erdays.com/2018/05/23/clint-walker-salute-to-a-he-man/

2. Clint Walker /old school actors/

TRT and even trenbolone could be a part of an actor’s regime for a special superhero/action role. In the past, however, the expectations were lower and PEDs were not as common. Hence why the actors were not abusing nearly as much gear. Many were just regular guys who lift and eat healthy.

Clint Walker is an example of what a gifted natty could look like. He owes the majority if not all of his muscular stats to his skeleton. He was 6 ft 6 in (198 cm) and had pretty decent bone thickness.

In his photos, he is not particularly lean. The 3D shoulders common for tren addicts are missing. He is also holding plenty of water. His physique screams natural.

Many steroids users will quit roids forever in exchange for this man’s skeleton. No amount of roids can create the same presence. If he’s put in a room with the Mr. Olympia guys, women will be looking at him rather than the balding shorties with 22-inch arms.

3. UltraRomance /touring cyclists/

UltraRomance also known as “Big Janet”, “Poppi”, “Poopi”, “Benedict”, “Adult JonBenét Ramsey” is a cyclist who spends six months of the year touring on his bicycle. While he is a pro, his professional incentive to go full Lance Armstrong is exceptionally low. He does not compete against anyone.

Riding a bike for prolonged periods of time and on rough terrain is tough. When you add the weight of an average touring bike loaded with camping gear, you will realize the difficulty of the challenge. Yes, the stress is “marathon-like” for the most part, but your legs cannot help it but get stronger.

The physique of UltraRomance is pretty “naturalesque”.

4. Milko Georgiev – The Low Carb King

image source: spidersport.com;

Milko Georgiev owns a chain of fitness studios operating under the name of SpiderSport. He is famous for his lean physique built through strict low carb dieting and basic barbell and bodyweight movements. Milko Georgiev is 6’1″ tall, weighs 170lbs and maintains 5% body fat. {more}

5. Brad Pitt – The Fight Club Physique /some actors/

via: youtube.com

Brad Pitt’s stats in fight club were as follows:

Height: 5’11″/180cm
Weight: about 166lbs/75kg

Many natural bodybuilders have intuitively realized that this look is as good as it gets drug-free unless you have a freaky bone structure and the insane ability to maintain ultra-low body fat. For that reason, natty lifters have been striving to look just like Brad Pitt or should I say Tyler Durden in Fight Club.

Of course, steroids were widely available at the time, but the movie itself was against “self-improvement” and unnatural tendencies imposed by modern society. A huge roided guy playing the role of Tyler Durden would have been out of place.

Jung Ji-Hoon a.k.a. Rain 

via: youtube.com

Jung Ji-Hoon (born June 25, 1982), better known by his stage name Rain, is a South Korean singer-songwriter, actor, and music producer. He played the leading character in the movie Ninja Assassin.

Jung Ji-Hoon’s look can be achieved naturally. I don’t know how heavy he was in the movie, but his main website says that he is 6’2″ and weighs 176 pounds.

Obviously, on the Internet, there are many people who are 6’2″ @ 240lbs and shredded, but we all know how natural they are.

I would rather look like Rain and be called names than attempt to be a wannabe bodybuilder and become a permabulker instead.

No spam. Unsubscribe at any time.

40 comments

  1. Brick

    This shows that face and money are the actual attraction.
    The muscle will be bonus but the above factors are major.

    Even though, personality can be accounted for long-term relationship with woman.
    It can be overlooked because people are similar but no one accepts.

      1. Brick

        To show that the article focuses on muscle which is about attraction.
        Everything in it seems to related together.

        All pictures represent factors. Naturals can look like one but not be one.
        It might make them understand but can also hurt them.

        You can focus the muscle but in the end, just finishing.

  2. twp

    I would say that most of the street workout guys like Daniel Laizans, Viktor Kamenov, Eryc Ortiz are example of what is achievable natty.
    But there are some like Vadym Oleynik who are obviously juicing or juiced at one point. He even have super obvious gyno on his chest, despite his low body fat.

  3. Hoyos

    There’s that famous photo of Hugh Jackman Wolverine in one of the early X men movies and then ultra mega jacked Wolverine from a later role.

    In the first picture, that’s what an athletic man actually looks like. You see old movies of the La Sierra High program, or modern day American Ninja Warrior style competitions and these are guys that have tremendous real world upper body strength and endurance. They don’t look like cartoon ape men.

    1. Marked Wolf

      I saw that as well. Back during the early xmen movies I thought wolverine was jackes. Then after seeing the latest Wolverine movoes, thanos and Mr. OLYMPIA, I went back to see Hugh Jackman on the first film and boy he look like an average dude.

      Btw you should have included Fortress (Pave) and the Luimarco

  4. David

    Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones would have been a good example. What do you think about the guys in 300? And Henry Cavill in Man of Steel?

  5. E

    Huge Jackman has unquestionably used. There is one scene in one of the Wolverine movies where he is chopping wood, and he has one of the most disturbingly bizarre collection of veins bulging out of his delt that I’ve ever seen. It was a level of vascularity that screamed chemical enhancement.

    Also, I don’t believe Brad Pitt was natural. His skin was just tissue paper thin in that film. It just didn’t look natural. I believe Brad Pitt also used in the film “Fury”, where he shows up in his 50s and all of a suddenhas rather large traps and appeaers to have an extra 30 pound of lean muscle.

  6. E

    If you want to see a good example of a natural looking realistic physique, go to YouTube and search for ‘The Slave” starring Steeve Reeves. While I think Reeves did use, I don’t think he was using in this film. Go to 1 Hour, 36 minutes, 45 seconds.

  7. Glove

    John Long seems to have a really muscular upper body. As you mentioned: no need for anything unnatural. At least what muscle building concerns. Gaining extra muscles would be absolutely contraproductive for his sport. Thumbs up. Would be interesting to know whether he lifts or not.

    Clint Walker has a typical physique of somebody who is lifting and isn´t dieting. He has a big frame. Good muscular look. I think he never had a lack og women…

    UltraRomance has a very low bodyfat level. No lifter. What for? Respect! I admire these guys for their endurance!

    Milko could be clean. But I don´t know whether he is. I say: achievable. If you achieve this shape as a natural: thumbs up! In opposite to the other guys he is somebody I would call him a good natural lifter.

    Brad Pitt: slim. It´s o.k. Personally I think for a lifter he would be too slim.

    Rain: from nature a skinny guy. But with a small amount of muscles you can get an attractive body. On the upper photo left his shoulder looks very good. Too good? I don´t know. But alltogether this muscle size is possible. If he is natural he is born to be shredded. Not born to build big muscles.

    Thanks for these examples, Truthseeker!

        1. CJ

          As a natural, training is training. “Training like a bodybuilder” has little to no meaning. Training like a bodybuilder and looking like a bodybuilder are two different things, and unfortunately drug-free lifters do not find success in the latter. Ultimately, you dont necessarily have to “bodybuild” to reach a certain level of fitness, aesthetics, etc as a natural. While it arguably may not be ideal, other forms of excercise/athletics could get the same or similar results within the natty threshold.

          1. Sam

            Sarcoplasmic vs myofibrillar hypertrophy

            “A recent meta-analysis by Schoenfeld et al looking at the effects of training load on hypertrophy, dynamic strength, and isometric strength helps counter one of the main arguments people use to contend that light, high rep training causes sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. People claim that since strength gains are larger with heavier training, heavy training must be adding more contractile proteins (myofibrillar hypertrophy), while lighter training must be expanding muscle size without adding as many contractile proteins (sarcoplasmic hypertrophy). Earlier in this article I discussed why that’s not an entirely logical argument, but this meta-analysis provides us with some direct evidence to refute it.“

            Bron: https://www.strongerbyscience.com/sarcoplasmic-vs-myofibrillar-hypertrophy/

          2. TheFinisher

            Little to no meaning? The reason naturals don’t look like bodybuilders is what I just said, They do not train like them. Are people training 20 sets per body part twice per week? no, because they believe in overtraining or being a ‘hardgainer’ and are scared of hard work. I’ve never had trouble getting big as a natural using high volume training, HIT and low volume is another story….Everyone trained high volume in the 70’s and 80’s, now it’s abbreviated full body nonsense and people are not growing. Screaming steroids at everyone and making excuses is pathetic.

          3. TheFinisher

            MB, yes overtraining exists, however, doing high volume won’t cause it. training heavy and to failure will fry you for sure. Volume is simply that, lower intensity, multiple sets. I am NOT saying do 50 sets per body part, but you can do a lot more than what is spouted on the internet.

          4. Fatman

            “now it’s abbreviated full body nonsense and people are not growing”

            There is something to this. The rise of “functional training” nonsense in the early 2000s with the likes of Rippetoe and Pavel Tsatsouline, spelled the death of common-sense, productive bodybuilding routines. Instead of using a sensible total-body routine, newbs were encouraged to lift heavy and keep volume limited. None of them got muscular and some did see the size gains promised by Rip, but only in the gut and buttock area.

            This was a backlash against the high-volume “bomb and blitz” routines in the past, which were, admittedly, equally silly garbage promoted by heavy drug users which saw natural trainees gain zero to very little muscle. As it often happens with exercise and nutrition, the pendulum swung all the way to the other end of the bullshit spectrum. Enter 3×5, kettlebell fraud and GOMAD.

            Interestingly, both sides engage in pathetic whining about steroids, claiming the “other way” only works for drug users.

          5. TheFinisher

            ‘Silly garbage’ that worked for everyone lol 4-6 sets per body part is for people who don’t want maximum size, those are the people who come onto the internet and shout steroids at everyone or ‘here is the natural limit’ and my favourite ‘less is more’ because they don’t have the balls to do high volume.

    1. Ed

      “I’ve never had trouble getting big as a natural using high volume training”

      L.O.L. Uncle’s story on the umpteenth birthday, I was …. 😉

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *