Continuing from part one, comparing and contrasting Paul Dillett with Arnold Schwarzenegger, take a look at Dillett’s double biceps pose. There are many dissimilarities to Arnold but torso length and ribcage size stand out. To drive this home more, let’s put Arnold’s head on Dillett. His torso immediately looks even longer because you are used to associating Arnold’s head with a shorter torso. Dillett’s style of posing trunks factor in with this but even with the addition of trunks more in keeping with Arnold’s posing trunks, it still looks like Dillet has a longer torso. And likely, to some degree, shorter femur bones.
On a side note, Paul Dillett has been consistently listed as 6 foot one inch and Arnold Schwarzenegger’s height was often given as 6 foot two, although Arnold’s peak height has been debated as being slightly shorter. But Dillett has always looked taller in photos than his listed height of six one. Part of that may be due to his overall proportions and head size. It was suprising when first reading that he was only six one because he always towered over fellow competitors. Of course, body position, camera angles, perspective and other factors play into this, but Dillett easily looks 5 inches taller than 5 foot ten inch Dorian Yates in this photo. About nine inches taller than five foot nine Kevin Levrone in this image. Or, at least five inches taller than Levrone here. Here he is close to Lou Ferrigno’s height. Looking five inches taller than five foot eleven Nasser El Sonbaty. But here, Paul is only about three inches taller than five foot 10 Chris Cormier in this group shot. And he’s roughly Musclemag publisher Robert Kennedy’s six foot height. And notice how much bigger Kennedy’s head is than Dillett’s. Comic book artists incorporate heads that are smaller in proportion to the rest of their bodies to illustrate heroic proportions. So, Paul Dillett may be six foot one but he often photographs as taller and, to top it of, has, what some artists call heroic proportions.
Back to the photo of Arnold’s head on Paul Dillet’s body, take a look at this image of Schwarzenegger’s double biceps, different angle, lens, etc… but you can clearly see that Arnold had much greater lower lat development. Arnold’s lats are seen from the front at as low as navel level. He also had a bigger ribcage and performed stomach vacuums which gave his double biceps pose a more majestic look. Arnolds chest was more three dimensional whereas Dillet’s chest was wider, mirroring his wider shoulder structure.
Dillett’s glute-ham muscles had much greater development than Arnold’s and this development discrepancy is bodybuilding era related. Glute ham development is even more of a trend now with current bodybuilders like Chris Bumstead and Big Ramy training their gluteus maximus and medius like any other muscles.
Dillett’s shorter looking lats, longer torso, and smaller ribcage are noticeable in this back shot. Arnold’s lats start tapering outward right above the iliac crest. Dillet wears his trunk higher in back but this is the same area, the iliac crest, on Arnold and Dillett. Dillett’s scapula and associated scapula muscles are what’s stuck out on his sides. Under his scapula is almost straight down to his waistline, whereas with Arnold, there is a continuous taper.
Finally, Dillett had a lot more deltoid mass but Arnold displayed a higher level of detail. Arnold’s pec, delt, and lower back striations were more evident. Dillett had more striated triceps, glutes, and ironically more striations across the lower lats specifically, independent of the lower back, partly because he did dedicated Christmas tree poses, designed for displaying striations in the lats, and lower back, as opposed to just the rear double biceps which incidentally brought out lats and lower back striations. Although lower back striations have always been around, the Christmas Tree pose, as we know it, was popularized by, if not invented by, 1983 Mr Olympia, Samir Bannout.
Be the first to comment