Why bodybuilding judges don't care about aesthetics
Вставка
- Опубліковано 10 кві 2020
- Laying out some of the more plausible reasons why pro bodybuilding doesn't seem to place much emphasis on aesthetics.
Don't forget to follow me on Instagram: / tomn8er1 - Спорт
Arnold classic took a good step by paying extra 10K for the best poser.
I can dig it, brother! I always won best poser. :-) Ed Courney, RIP.
tbf, I think some years down the line, Arnold Classic would be bigger than the Olympia, and the World's Strongest Man competitions; given how it has grown and the effect it has had on competition viewerships.
@@DeputyMcNuggets yeah there is definitely more going on at the Arnold . I wonder how the Rock's show will be and how it will beat out the Olympia . His show will have the bodybuilding , strong man , MMA , power lifting and the line ups of wellness all the way through to open . Anything the rock touches turns to good .
Even smaller shows like Shawn Ray's and branch Warren's have beat posing . I was delighted when they brought classic back ( or should I just say bodybuilding ) . They should call the open class something else of its own .
3:15 The Patrick Moore effect: looks amazing individually, gets dwarfed into oblivion when standing in the line-up
one could also call it the reversed steve kuclo effect
Yeah but I can still understand why patrick wouldnt win. While he does look amazing hes still not comparable to a shawn ray, kevin levrone or a flex wheeler. Patrick still needs to work on his condition and legs in my opinion. Like the first year jay cutler placed second to ronnie Coleman. Ronnie was off and super bloated that year, while jay had a small waste and conditioned in pretty much all aspects. In other words patrick while aesthetic, still does need work brother. But I can understand what you saying overall
@@CraZyCatZDogZ not comparable to Shawn ray...... put their pics side by side
Getting "dwarfed" by other bodybuilders usually means the other bodybuilders are taller. And, if getting dwarfed means being at a disadvantage, then the judges are being subjective, unless it's unanimous that taller bodybuilders are superior. And, if taller bodybuilders are favored by judges, well, then, they are not being objective, after all, because height is not something a bodybuilder can control.
@@philmessina476 not necessarily. When you think about it the majority of the top open bodybuilders are from 5'6 - 5'10. Look at phil heath who is only 5'9. And the majority of the top 5 in recent years like roelly winklaar 5'7, dexter Jackson 5'6, william bonac 5'7. Even jay cutler 5'9. Dwarf as in muscle mass over aesthetics brother. Even shawn roden is only around 5'9 1/2 - 5'10. Look them up if in doubt. now if you were talking about the 90s and prior then height did play a factor. But after jay cutler won almost all top guys were or are under 6'0. Tall guys like cedric McMillan for example ain't placing top 5 bro. Think about it. If anything all the short guys are placing well in open. Even the Arab guy last year placed 3rd in the olympia and he was only 5'6 and brandon curry who won is only 5'7. They ain't tall lol.
Interesting point. The golden era physiques were often the biggest, most shredded guys for their time. They’ve just become missed nowadays with the thicker-waisted mass monsters of recent years
Correct.
A very good idea IMO is having a weight cap just like in Men's Phisique and Classic , but the weigh in should be the day of the show not 24 hrs prior( we all know in those 24 hrs they eat a lot and end up on stage maybe 10 lb heavier, that should not be allowed).
And the limits should be very specific , taking into account height and bone structure.
I'm gonna give examples of 4 hall of fame bodybuilders .
Flex wheeler , Ronnie Coleman , Dorian Yates and Nasser El Sonbaty, all were 5 10 ( i've scaled a couple of pictures and they are all 4 the EXACT same height).
Flex in his best condition was 229 -232 in the 98 Iron man Pro /AC -a small structure.His heaviest good condition was the 2000 AC when he was 238 lb.
Ronnie was 247 -50 lb in 98/01 AC- a medium structure.His heaviest very good condition would be 99 when he was a reported 257 lb.
Dorian was 257-60 lb in 93/95-a large structure, and 264 in the German GP of 96 was his heaviest good condition.
Nasser was 270-280 in 95-98 but he wasn't quite as shredded as Yates or 98 Ronnie.
Basically the limits/ranges would be for a 5 10 guy
small structure 230-40
medium structure 245-255
large structure 260-70
Big Ramy is a good example as he is also 5 10 .Chris Aceto brought him down to mid 280's in 2016 and he still wasnt conditioned enough .Everybody kept saying he should come in 20 lb lighter than what he normally was, well that still wasn't enough , not by a long shot as Ramy was 4th in 2016.
Having weight cap will force these guys to streamline their phisiques( especially midsections) but also they will have to be bone dry , otherwise they wont make the weight.And all this fullness game Dexter keeps mentioning recently would go away.The fullness game is good , if you're Phil or Ronnie or Yates and have really thin skin.But it forces those guys to force feed themselves before getting up on stage , and that makes their midsections bloated and distended.King Kamali said in a relatively recent interview how he was sitting in a hotel room with Ronnie before a show, and they had a huge amount of food there at the advice of Chad Nichols,and apparently Ronnie said no way he was eating all that. Ronnie knew eating a lot prior to a show would make his midsection even more distended.
Also ,streamlining is doable.Dorian did it in 96 , Ronnie managed it in 2001 AC, or 2002 Olympia. Levrone did it in in 2000, Kai did it in 2012, Cutler did it in 09 .
It will also force some of them to improve their symmetry and proportions.The fact of the matter is most top pros in this era have too big thighs, that ruin their balance and aesthetics.Their quads are so huge it detracts from their lat width for example, and that is a bad proportion.03 Coleman or Branch should not be the standard for leg size , imo they were more bottom heavy than Tom Platz .Big Ramy should likely lose at least 10 lb of mass in his thighs alone , coupled with 10 lb of water/intramuscular body fat .That would put him in the 265-70 lb range, where Yates and Nasser were..
TheLusianPopa very detailed analysis ahah. Yeah I think weighing in closer would help. The amount of fluctuation you can cause with water/carbs is huge
@@TheLusianPopa I mean did Ronnie really do it for the AC? He did have a gut there still.
I would rather look like frank zane than Arnold, does that mean frank is better bodybuilder than Arnold in my eyes ......no.
This raises an interesting question. What does it mean to be a better bodybuilder? I think we can quite safely say that somebody like Frank Zane worked just as hard and smart as Arnold; but, ultimately, it comes down to genetics. Maybe Zane was a better bodybuilder because he had to overcome more genetic limitations than someone like Arnold. Who knows?
Ultimately, Zane simply could never achieve the level of muscularity, which Arnold achieved, even as an enhanced bodybuilder, who earned the nickname, The Chemist.
Maybe the "open" bodybuilding division should go back to having the over 200 lbs and under 200 lbs categories (or over 212 and under 212), with the winner of each category competing for the overall Mr. Olympia.
Bharat Kaushal I cant disagree but one drawback, I met Zane in the early 80’s and in street clothes unless you were a very keen observer he just looked like and average guy to be honest. I guess I’m vane enough with all the time spent in the gym I still want people to notice I have some muscle mass and just not another average guy if I had my shirt on 💪
You all didn’t got my point ,bodybuilding is a competition of muscle ,thus anyone with better muscles should win of which deciding criteria is size and conditioning and not aesthetic.
Bharat Kaushal everyone has their own opinion, In my opinion aesthetics should play a big part in the judging or else we will just see a huge amount of runway drug use simply to pack on as much muscle as possible without regard to aesthetics and we would then see truly freaky physiques
@@midovinci I think you've totally missed the point 😉
Besides, if aesthetics would count for something, we would have all the same physiques over and over again. Besides, much of what makes a physique aesthetic is more related to genetic structure and muscle format, and you can't controls these things.
On the other hand, conditioning, mass and mandatory poses can be compared.
Actually a good point, i never thought about it
Well written mate.
You must be a Branch Warren fan
Much of what makes a physique massive is genetic too.
You still end up favouring certain physiques, just different ones.
Roper122 Conditioning is genetic too. Some guys naturally have thicker skin like Brandon Curry so it’s harder to come in shredded.
Danny Padilla comes immediately to mind. In 1981 most people would agree was as close to perfection as anyone came. Yet he wound up 5th. Any picture of him from that Olympia looks like he was hands down number one. Yet in the lineup next to the other guys he didn’t stand out as much.
That is when I first began in bodybuilding! Good job!
Gerry Iannuzzi totally agree but in a line up a guy only 5’2” even with as perfect physique as his just gets overshadowed. I didn’t really understand that back in the early 80’s
That's a judging problem...or a lack of guts
Good job. Danny was awesome.
Again, as noted above, if judges are favoring taller bodybuilders, then they are not being objective.
According to the argument advanced in this video, judges want to be objective and judge physiques according to elements, which the bodybuilders can control, such as mass/muscularity and conditioning/leanness. Of course, bodybuilders cannot control height. Yet, if judges are favoring taller bodybuilders, or being punitive in their scoring against shorter bodybuilders, than that contradicts and undermines the whole argument that judges strive to be objective.
Dude your videos are awesome, thanks to your knowlage, I m learning how to read muscles, and positions.
knowledge*
@@karatechap555 o
@@karatechap555 òí
Íiií
Ííi
I think this is part of the reason classic physique is gaining more popularity. A lot more attention to detail, posing and performance instead of how big you are and how much you weigh on stage. Classic picks up where old school left off imo.
it honestly makes sense, thats why we have classic! which is actually a hella good class! obviously they're no open class but still! great video
Agreed.
Colin Wright Classic right now needs bigger prize money. I'd suggest that at a high level Men's Physique prize money should be cannibalized and given to Classic as the division at a high level makes no sense. However Men's Physique at an amateur level can exist to serve as a stepping stone for many.
In a way, Open would be about Mass + Conditioning first, Proportions 2nd. And Classic would be Proportions + Conditioning first, Mass 2nd.
@@vasred4265 Perhaps we should get in touch with the master (Lee Haney) and figure this out. I can raise capital, but we need a true champion of the sport. Lee Haney is the man. Let me see what I can do. I am merely here right now because of this "virus" thing that has knocked our economy out and will apparently, destroy America as we know it. I need to utilize my skills and education right now on a different dimension. But you have a good heart. See if you can get Lee to contact me and we will figure this thing out. Enough of this "monster" crap. Let's get back to Athenia and the real heroes of humankind.
Thank you.
Mark
I will assure you one thing right now, when we restore bodybuilding to what it was meant to be on a "human" dimension, the money will follow. I left the sport because of the drugs. I have come back because of the "virus". LOL What the hell! Smile. I came back to what I really love. Now let's get this show back to humanity, and away from the beasts that sold their souls . . . to win a dinky hocker game.
@@vasred4265 i 100% agree with you, that sounds like a great idea to move that class forward. truthfully? physique gets shit on so much by outside observers that I don't understand why its still a thing on a pro level! totally agree with it being a needed stepping stone for people on an mature level though!
Just gotta say Tomn8er, as a long time subscriber I really appreciate the effort you continue to put into creating videos about new and interesting topics! I genuinely look forward to each video every week, keep it up
True
Yes I certain agree with this comment. I first started looking into bodybuilding via Lui Marco who I think did a tremendous job showcasing & explaining bodybuilding compared toe most UA-cam channel. After seeing people commenting "Tomn8er" on Nick's Strength & Power and that Tomn8er is better and the best BB'ing channel on UA-cam I decided to check Tom's channel and I'm absolutely glad I did b/c Tom blows away Nicks channel. Nick doesn't analyze bodybuilding half as good as Tom, where Tom knows the back ground knowledge/history, overall more knowledge on bodybuilding and can show the evidence as to why.
Literally can't disagree with anything you said here, am pretty drunk tho so my judgement may be impaired slightly :)
It's true what you say. Judging has to be on something measurable....if not it just becomes a beauty contest.....and also people want to see the mass monsters and freaks which is why the open category is much more popular than classic physique...
Not really. People are just looking for "unreal" . . . and they are getting it to the athlete's demise. Bodybuilding will never be as great as it was during the Lee Haney era. At least they tried to hide the anabolics and androgenics. Perhaps, had they exposed them at the time . . . we wouldn't be looking towards monsters to win the game. But what about Lance Armstrong in cycling? Want me to go further? God bless you all. I really love the sport. I just have always wondered how we might be able to pull it back a bit and see what human beings can do on a "stand alone" basis. Without pharmaceuticals. Idealistic as I might be, it didn't stop me academically . . . and i will never stop loving the sport. But let's get real . . we need good support for this thing to go on. Lee Haney is the answer to try and pull things back a bit. He forewarned us all of things that were about to hit the stage. He said, "I am that physique," when questioned about his talent during his day on the throne. But he also said, "Should another one come along that I could not or will not beat, I will step down." And that, my friends, is the truth.
@sam singh Oh, thanks for that "High IQ" response. Now go out and do your street drugs? No, just kidding. I'm just responding on a "one time" basis. Just looking at the quality that is out there now as compared to "then". And you appear to be a little suboptimal. Look it up. Peace.
@@markmayr6151 lee haney in his time was a freak......
Proportion, symmetry, fullness,conditioning and what's most important that phil ushered in was completeness.
@@misternatural1338 Okay. I can see what you are saying. Let's just let them all do what needs to be done to win that 100K or 140K dollars. It is really easier on another domain. But you can't stop diggin' those radical bods, man! Pump em up!
Yo! Judge a show based off that judging system you created before! That would be a great video!
Shawn moved into a new dimension on the block. He had it all . . . but the "new age bodybuilder willing to dope up to new dimensions" came along. Bye, bye . . . Shawn.
Really like this idea, please do!
9:34 levrone picked his trunks to match his tan
Lol
9:02 Ronnie waves the flag patriotically
9:08 Immediately throws it on the ground
🇺🇸
3:22 keon pearson clone!
GAINCHASERS more like the opposite
Nice job clearing up some of the judging thought process. You pulled up some great photo examples too. 👍💪
My biggest issue is I don't know who the judges are and why I should regard their judgement as superior to anyone elses. What qualifications do they have? Are they former-bodybuilders? Have they ever even lifted? I have the same complaint with any judgement scoring sport, like gymnastics, diving, etc..
Yup it's way too shadowy the way they operate. The judges have zero accountability
@@Tomn8er I honestly think men's physique should become that category that holds aesthetics over size. Greg said it on his Jeff Seid natty or not, if you look like Jeff Seid you should win men's physique. Men's physique is "supposedly", more of a beauty contest than classic. Supposed to be more so about aesthetics but they just keep rewarding bigger guys and guys like Jeff's size which is attainable naturally come dead last in Mr. Olympia.
It would be better to have at least ONE category that you may be able to compete in naturally or on minimal gear. Also the judging consistency is bad. Again you can go back to Jeff, he won a pro show. Against other guys that also went to the olympia and then got last place against some of the same guys and guys that had bigger bulky physiques. How does that make sense?
So basically men's physique is classic but with a smaller waist and shorts on. Pretty sad.
Body building should be compared to building a home. Would you rather have a huge McMansion that looks weird and bloated made with cheap material? Or would you rather have a aesthetic home that’s still big (not as) but made of granite and stone, that looks like a work of art.
best channel going! love the holly grail reference this close to easter!
This is possibly your most insightful video. Good job
The best way to ensure aesthetics remain part of the judging criteria is to include waist size, thickness and v taper as part of the judging criteria. As well as also taking into account the delivery of the posing routine and specific poses such as the vacuum. Problem pretty much solved.
Man, one of your best videos! And that’s saying a lot cause you make great content.
Man, this is eye-opening analysis, Tomn8er. The Lusianpopa made an excellent point, which you cited: aesthetics are subjective. That means judging would have to focus on elements which can be controlled by the bodybuilder: mass/muscularity and conditioning.
Now, that you point this out, Tomn8er, I can see how the aesthetics were most likely coincidental throughout the human history of competitive bodybuilding. Virtually every competitive bodybuilder has sought to be the most muscular and simultaneously the leanest, or "most shredded" or "most ripped".
I think this settles the ongoing debate about golden era aesthetics versus later mass monster aesthetics, at least with regard to professional judging.
This is kind of sad, though, from my point of view. It's sad because I think most bodybuilding fans today can agree on which bodybuilder looks more "aesthetic". In such case, when most people are in agreement on the superior aesthetic, or which physique is "prettier" (e.g. Shawn Rhoden beating Phil Heath), then aesthetics seem less subjective and more objective.
I don't want to surrender the Olympia to grotesque physiques just yet, though. In the case of Mr. Olympia 2018, it was patently obvious that distended stomachs are not worthy of Mr. Olympia. Hopefully, fans of "aesthetics", rather than sheer muscularity or size, can continue to hammer on objective features, which ruin popular aesthetics, like distended stomachs. Mass monsters tend to lack symmetry and proportion. Maybe the classic aesthetic can be objectively assessed after all.
Some good points but ultimately it’s not true that people, even ‘in’ bodybuilding, can agree on what is aesthetic. I’ve been following the sport for 20 years and even in that time what is considered aesthetic has changed. This new ‘bubbly’ or ‘three dimensional’ criteria that fans now talk about (I think it was Aceto who used it originally to justify Heaths dominance)...well a lot of people think that looks good. I think it looks terrible and making these guys blow themselves out on insulin and synthol to try to create it is the worst thing for the overall ‘look’ of the bodies
Great vid Tom. Youve come a long way with your commentary.
That Is A Beautiful Explanation, Well Done Tomn8er!
That Y. You Go. To the. Gym To. Work out your gut ti good. Not to see. Body buildier With. Big gut Old. School body builders look better Thanks 🤩
Excellent video, once again, thank you. To my mind you are the most insightful and articulate commentator working in this area on UA-cam. It’s not that I necessarily agree with you in everything all the time (I have been a keen fan and followed the sport closely from buying my first Muscle & Fitness mag in 1979), but I do always recognise your consistent approach, supporting your contentions eloquently with excellent photo/video selections and an often searing eye for pertinent and revealing comparative analysis which has often challenged some of my own convictions and ideas about the sport. Thank you again (and that was a tad of a long sentence?!😂)
Dude this video was just perfect! Amazing how you explained all of that so clearly!👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Another great vid! Thanks Tom!
Aesthetics is subjective. For example, i prefer the aesthetics of Dorian rather than Flex, cause i prefer the strong, grainy look Dorian brings. You can't judge a competition by aesthetics. Mass, conditioning and muscle fullness is objective, and you can judge a contest like that.
Edit: i typed this before watching lol i didn't realize that's exactly what the video is about
They could easily set up criteria which could be objectively evaluated and which would have the effect of bringing the physiques more in line with the sort of aesthetics which more people appreciate.
Think about symmetry- appreciation for it is completely subjective but that obviously doesn't mean it can't be evaluated objectively. And symmetry is a very significant part of aesthetic appeal for most people. The fact that appreciation for symmetry is subjective does not pose any obstacle in objectively evaluating and rewarding it. Appreciation for it is subjective, but the question of whether or not it is present is an objective one
One of the best videos I have seen on bodybuilding judging!
That was a strong and well articulated argument there. Spot on!
Dude you are the most rational and professional bodybuilding channel on UA-cam. Keep up the good work!
Excellent video Tom! Thanks brother
100 percent AGREE! This has to be one of the most important videos made in the Bodybuilding community on youtube right now.
Thanks for mentioning me man , really appreciate it.
You explained it very well.
Judges tend to reward mass and condition more simply because the bodybuilders can control those two to a greater extent.
They cannot really improve on their aesthetics much.You cannot change the insertion/origin points of certain muscles, or the tie-ins.You cannot make your skin thinner to appear grainy either.You cannot change your bone structure either.If you have a wide waist there is nothing you can do, but oh boy you can make your lats and delts huge to make it less of a liability( see Dorian or Cutler).
Modern bodybuilding is largely mass+ size + back poses.I would also add structure and height as being of paramount importance.They are not as mentioned as size and conditioning.
And you really nailed it when you said how only a couple of the mandatories are really aesthetic poses.The front relaxed, front double biceps and abs & thigh. The 2 side poses as well but to a lesser extent, especially the side triceps( probably the 2 best side triceps poses, by modern standards would be Yates and Cutler, two unaesthetic guys).
i think it kinda sucks that it is like this. i get that my utopia of bodybuilding would suck too, bcs i would ONLY STRICTLY want the best competition, but i dont think its the sport of bodybuilding's job, to be pedagogical and have empathy. "Oh youre waist is broad as a barn door, your arms are short, your midsections is worse that lukas osladil, but hey you have the best conditioning and mass so you win" - and then on stage steps a fucking abomination. Fx branch in his late days. So what he had this and that, nobody wants to look like him, and nobody wants to see it. Lets make a freak division then, where u let your waist completely go, blow your lines, throw off your flow, ruin your proportions, that would be cool, but dont give them the title of Mr. Olympia.
Look im not one of those "i only like the 70's" guys or anything - there have been aesthetics on the open stage all the way up till now cus some of them kept their proportions i would just want a world where the judges... well basically ONLY cared about the things that u CANT change, cus that would make the competition much more steeper. I know what ur thinking, it would root out guys like dorian who pushed their bodies to the absolute limit and thats tough competition, but if the IFBB keep handing out procards to ppl who "work hard and diet" but look shit, its all gonna go downhill. Dorian would still be on "my stage"at least in 92 and 3 and 5, but he would beat ANYONE in 97 or 6 nomatter how great mass and conditiong. yes some combinations of mass and conditiong makes the cut, but the judges would appreciate a low lateral tricep head, a long tricep head sweep, a perfectly sweeped vastus lateralis, low calves, short torso, narrow hips, broad shoulder, lowt inserting shoulder, very very high brachioradialis origin point, great round muscle bellies, unblown obleques bcs that would make every guy on that stage beautiful. that judges would appreciate "good" genetics. appreciate aesthetics, nevertheless how immeassureable they are, u can tell if u have them or not. i get it would be a shitty sport, bcs literally every other sport is "work beats talent, mentality over everything, if u work harder u can do it", but here it would be "no matter what u do your potential in this sport was determined the day u were concieved. theres is no amount of hard work that will change it". i get its rough and it sucks, but its not the IFBB's job, to be "correct" and pedagogical about the judging, and reward hard work bcs u cant change genetics - at the expense of the beauty in the sport. bcs this would get rid of every guy on that stage not being suited for it. It would be like taking the nba dunk contest, and allowing the top 5 hardest workers to enter, but it ends up being at the expense of the show bcs theyre all 5'5 and lowers the whole competition, makes no great dunks, but they got picked bcs they had the most hours in the gym. i think it kinda sucks, bcs that bodybuilding judging. yes ofc u still gotta have great genetics and great genetic response to steroids, and im not saying i only want aestheic, bony twigs, i would just wish that bodybuilding judges would STOP RATING hard work like they do, bcs YES mass and conditioning is very very important obviously, but I believe that the things u cant change ARE JUST AS IMPORTANT. it would make the sport more perfect, but if they rate u on the things u can change, theyre gonna keep lowering the competition, allowing ppl who werent born for the sport to win and lower it more, theyre gonna stay pedagogical at the expense of a better outcome, just bcs a guy "Couldnt change" he was born with ass genetics, so he wins on a physique that looks shit, but has the most mass and conditioning. i get this might be unrealistic, might be offensive to a lot of ppl, but i believe it would better the sport. as in doing bodybuilding - no it would ruin millions of dreams, but im not saying get rid of everybody who wasnt born with a 26 inch waist, but maybe place branch a little lower huh, so youngs guys at least knows thats not a look they wanna go for if they wanna win. maybe u should have rewared gaspari as muuch huh? and things like that.
TheLusianPopa, I'm glad you mentioned "height as being of paramount importance" because it shows the contradiction in your argument.
You argued that judges want to be objective and judge bodybuilders on factors they can control, such as mass/muscularity and conditioning. Yet, at the same time, you're pointing out the obvious importance of height in judging, which is not a factor, which bodybuilders can control.
@@philmessina476 Height and width are different.The Mr O is supposedly the "best built man in the world",I've seen this expression used often in old contest reports.The best built man in the world cannot be a guy under say 5 8....If you look at the history of the Olympia the taller guy almost ALWAYS wins
Haney was much taller than Labrada, Gaspari,Makawy, Beckles
Dorian was taller than Levrone, Ray
Ronnie was taller than Levrone, Jay
Phil is taller Kai, Dexter..
Just like when its elections time in US the taller president almost always wins, its kinda the same at the Olympia , at least since the 80s.
Height is also one of the main reasons ppl like Arnold so much
11:23 good god the back double bicep looks absolutely horrible from this angle. Shawn looks like he lost 50 pounds and Dexter's about to have an alien pop out of his stomach.
The only one keeping it tight its this year's mr o, william bonac
Its been like that since late 70s and 80s
Shawn is too small in comparison to dexter. if they were next to eachother it wouldn't be good. still love rays physique tho
if he wasnt too small to be compared to flex levrone and dorian, then dexter’s size aint shit to Shawn ray.
@@MrInzombia But he WAS too small to be compared against Flex and Dorian? He was never even close to beating dorian, and he only beat Flex when he had bad conditioning. In 98-99 Flex stomped the fucking floor with Shawn
@@MrInzombia Too small and too narrow standing next to dexter.
Lauri Kotivuori this ain’t it chief
@@MrInzombia well he was too small... cus he lost - everytime. he got compared to them bcs he competed in the same era as them, not bcs he was as big. so thats a terrible argument.
You make really good, accurate, and objective points in your videos and theyre very well done. Fairly rare to find someone who really grasps and gets the ins and outs of BBing without having a lot of experience themselves competing (at least Idk if you do, you very well could I suppose), I find myself agreeing with a lot of the things you say and appreciate how you dont really miss anything or misconstrue anything. I fully support the size and (especially conditioning. one thing Ive always taken a lot of pride in and every single BBer should as well, you should feel embarrassed to not be shredded as hell on stage), but I feel like they often dont give proportion, symmetry and flow/aesthetics enough weight when comparing a guy whose not quite as big/thick, and they require someone to have those things at incredible levels in order to simply trump a somewhat small different in size. Also, I think you could have touched on how much posing can help not having the most aesthetic physique, BBing is all about showcasing your strengths and hiding your weakness' the best you can, and its not just due to development or thickness that can help you beat someone more structurally aesthetic but knowing how to present your own physique effectively makes a significant difference.
Dear Tomn8er. I think you have one of the best bodybuilding content in youtube if not the best. You are very articulate, give credits for your suscribers when credit is due, have an sharp eye for bodybuilding and you know how to be objective and have perspective when it comes to your preferences. Your videos are well prepared and it's obvious that you take a lot of time to make them and don't worry much about making money because you're passionate and it's a blessing for us, bodybuilding fans. Too bad you do not make as many videos as other bodybuilding channels, but you chose quality over quantity and I salute you for that. Kepp the good work. Greetings from Morocco.
Spot on as always.Arnold was considered a mass monster for his era.Classic physique division is a step in the right direction for sure.Because every fan wants to see amazing aesthetic physiques.But we also want to see the freaks that look like final bosses lol.Like you said even guys like zane would look over the top in terms of attractiveness for the vast majority of people so it only really matters to bodybuilding fans.Like you said rewarding posing more even im the open class would propably be our best bet for achieving the best of both worlds.
This is a nice content men! One of my fav. Lee priest is getting dwarfed compared to other mass monsters, that's why he never won an olympia title. Keep up bruh
Amazing vedio that i have ever seen on your channel. It clears my 50% concepts. 😍
I think what Sergio said on DesktopBodybuildings UA-cam interview was very telling, he said he was the best poser in the open class at the moment, not because he’s a once in a generation poser but because nobody else gives a damn. Feels like most of the top guys have given up on a truly aesthetic package and place priority on the objective points you talked about in the video.
Yup that's a big part of it. But even if they did try, most wouldn't be able to pull it off. Josh Lenartowicz looks frankly ridiculous trying to replicate some of those 80s posing maneuvers despite being big as a house.
It's supposed to be a freak show but there has to be a quality too, if not Markus ruhl would have won every show. If you ever saw a prime Dorian in person or Ronnie at his best you just know nobody is going to beat that. I was at the 98 Olympia when Ronnie won for first time and they were already chanting 'Ronnie, Ronnie, Ronnie' when they were announcing like 6th place. First call out when he turned around and sat down on his glutes the crowd laughed, the show was over he was so much bety
Hey Tom. Another well-made opinion piece. I enjoyed watching it.
Also, I'd like to add a few things, mainly about assessing the physiques we encounter in bodybuilding. There are 3 very important "main elements": MASS, CONDITIONING and AESTHETICS. All of them should be well expressed through the fourth - POSING.
1. Mass is pretty straight-forward. Size and density play a role here but a judge should also asses as to how those muscles fill out the specific frame. Is this bodybuilder displaying an "equal" level of muscle density throughout his body? Or are his kgs (pounds) seemingly all in one spot (Johnnie Jackson as a top heavy vs Tom Platz as a bottom heavy BBer). So, to summarize, are you a truly big guy, or a guy with a, let's say, truly big back?
2. Conditioning encompasses vascularity, separations and detail visibility as well as appropriate levels of subc. water and fat . We can't all have the same feathering and details visible on our bodies but we can do as much as possible to show them. Thinning out the skin and showing off some popping veins can greatly help a guy who otherwise doesn't have deep cuts and clear separations. Vice-versa.
3. Aesthetics are a bit harder to understand but it's not exactly rocket science. In short, no, it's not the same as "beauty" because that would be unquantifiable and therefore just a foolhardy idea of ranking people. Is a small stone cottage with rustic wooden windows more beautiful than a Victorian mansion, a classic duplex with a balcony or a big, high tech glass skyscraper? Hard to say, we wouldn't all pick the same (not the best analogy, I know).
However, there are some things we should have in mind about aesthetics. Shoulder to waist ratio, symmetry from left to right as well as top to bottom, structural defects (an injury maybe) and flow or "flow-breakers". Flow is that statuesque quality of a physique where nothing seems out of place by protruding, hanging out or spilling over. It's very hard to look aesthetic while sporting a flow-breaker gut. Synthol abuse (and other SEOs), lumps or bumps, those are all flow-breakers.
After all that, we can look at the posing routine. Honestly, an argument about not being able to judge a routine just because they are not all the same is just plain bad and lazy (It's the one I often hear,...not saying that you're making it) . It's like saying you can't really know who won a football game because play styles were different.
It's not about what poses and sequences you choose but rather how well are you executing your routine and showing off your strengths while hiding weaknesses. No, I don't see a Branch Warren gently displaying his physique whilst "hold me now" plays in the background. Neither do I think Bob Paris would be a great dynamic poser to the tunes of Limp Bizkit.
Posing routines are individual display of talent and imagination in order to show off a physique in the best possible way. Maybe you can't judge the style, but you can surely say whether it accentuated the physique or if it looked sloppy and generic.
So let's say, considering all the parameters I've mentioned, you give 2 points for posing routines, 1 for mandatory execution (no freestyling or personalising here!), 3 for conditioning, 3 for mass and 3 for aesthetics. It would be an interesting method to pick a winner!
Cheers.
Luka 💪🏻
Aestetics is easy, really. Wide shoulders with a thin waiste. Theres nothing more to it.
Great video and truthful valid points
I hate how people always complain about the mass and lack of aesthetics in modern era bodybuilders. If u want aesthetics there’s freaking men’s physique and class physique
This channel is underrated.
Hitting like and commenting so the algorithm puts this out there more. People today need to watch this video and listen closely because too many don't understand how bodybuilding works. At least when referring to men's open.
Fantastic video. Just one major issue with it: we don't get enough content! We demand more from you!
I wish I had a witty or interesting reply but I agreed with everything. Contests now awarding money to the best poser or the people’s champion are a step in the right direction, ultimately the judges with get tired of the negative feedback and things like esthetics and posing will again be considered more important in my humble opinion. It was interesting meeting some of the golden era bodybuilders back in their primes in the early 80’s. I was expecting to meet giants from looking at the magazines of the day but then
meeting them in street clothes after guest posing routines the majority of them were sub 200 pounds and seemed like rather small guys to me at the time, I’m sure that’s nowhere near true now with many hitting the stage close to 300 pounds
Good stuff.
A big blocky waist will generally help a bodybuilder, interestingly. Also if they can fill out those obliques, they can look even bigger. Not that it's quite as aesthetic. To say the least.
The ones who are just more blocky, can make the small-waisters look small overall. Despite having roughly the same amount of muscle.
And yea Shawn winning was less about rewarding, and more about punishing.
I hope you're trolling because your comment is absolutely stupid
Really good video Tom, one thing to add would be if shows were solely judged on Aesthetics we would always have the same type of physiques with the little waists so there would be no diversity. Just compare Ronnie's physique to Dorian, or Phil's to Haneys.
Damn! This video is objectively solid!
Anybody know what the picture or the cup are called at 1:41? Interested in the history
This must be shown as an awareness vdo to all the bodybuilding fans around the world.
You can't objectively tell what's a
aesthetic, well theoretical you could by applying art&science but that's not my point here, but surely you can tell what's not aesthetic at all.
let's take bloated gut or gynecomastia. at least you could give heavy penalties for gyno or pregnancy guts.
i mean i don't care how shredded you are, if you look like a 7th month pregnant woman than it's a k.o. imho.
i definitly agree with this to an extent. you can often, but not always easily, tell if someone is NOT aesthetic, and bubble guts are a no go
8:49 yoooooo I thought that the first time I seen a Professional BB score card 👏🏽👏🏽😂😂
Very interesting point. Thanks for the vid
I enjoyed this video. You raised many good points that I have also thought about in the past. I argued a little with you about the Shawn vs Dexter video but that had nothing to do with aesthetics, just that I thought Shawn beat Dexter in the majority of poses.
Many things need to be defined clearly however, for example even the word 'aesthetics'. I bet some people think of that term differently (in the world of BB), so until clear guidelines are used for words and definitions given we'll all be bashing our heads with one another. For example, many will argue Flex has better aesthetics than Yates, but it's arguable that this is not the case at all. Look at '93 Olympia, Yates embodies the look of 'Power' in all his poses, Flex does not, he looks more 'curvy' and is actually underdeveloped bottom half to match Yates leg development. In a way Yates looks more like the letter 'X' and Flex 'Y', and it could be that Flex 'flows' better and that having too big a leg development actually doesn't look that appealing. I can think of BB's like Big Ramy where having such massive quad development might even go against them, the quads flare out too much making him look less unbalanced. Did Tom Platz suffer the same problem? Are some other body parts (like Back) just really hard to ever have over developed? Is there such a problem as having too big arms? Probably yes actually.. Lee Priest comes to mind, his arms seemed to overpower his delts and chest and back and penalised those groups. I can't help thinking his arms took too much of the strain in his training which resulted in the inner torso muscles not getting the stimulating growth it required. You certainly seem to see examples of the opposite where weak arms (Yates) and strong core (chest, back and shoulders). Lee Haney was a little like that too. Then you get some guys like Phil that seem to have it all balanced perfectly (including sufficient forearm development, a muscle I think that often gets over looked in competition).
So it's hard to talk of aesthetics without bringing into words like 'proportions', 'symmetry', etc.
I've never blames the judges... ever, but I do wonder which bright sparks think up the WAY in how to judge BB shows. The Symmetry round IS the relaxed round, front and quarter twist turns, which is why Yates with his torn bicep could walk away with straight firsts in all his Mr Olympias, because when he hit the front double bicep he was not then being judged on symmetry at all.
How do we even judged the poses? Do we bother about looking at the thighs at all in the front double bicep? Is this why Yates beat everyone in the front double bicep because we are judging that pose from head to toe, or should we have a cut off point that we are not looking at or taking into account? It starts to get complicated...
I love how you point out that certain BB's on their own look incredible and amazing, but once compared the size differences are hard to overlook, Yates and Shawn Ray being the best examples. Shawn on his own... flawless, next to Yates however his overall size does make him look 'scrawny' and 2D at times. So despite a flawed imperfect Yates (torn left bicep, blockier mid section) it was hard to not still award him the trophy when he just dwarfed Ray in a number of poses... and as I said before it's not like Yates did not have his own style of aesthetics.
I always took the posing round to being nothing to do with routine, but just judges rating them without comparison, in this instance this round would be an example of Ray walking away with straight firsts etc (or should have), and Yates possibly less, however as I already said the 'symmetry round' is spoken for...
I'm not sure we should have a round judged for routine, I think most hardcore BB's don't care about how you transition from one pose to the next, it's the pose itself is all that matters, and for someone like Yates to adopt a Lee Labrada '91 routine (arguably the best routine ever done, bar none)... I dunno... doesn't seem to 'fit' with his style of physique. I think Yates did ok on the routines, finding music that suited his 'power physique'. Scrap the single mandatories round, have the posing round and make sure every athlete knows they must include x, y and z poses in the routine or else. Then let them add the other poses they feel work well for them and call it a day.
I would have a 'best posing routine' prize as well (and make it significant, half the prize money of the winner!), this would take into account not the superiority of the physique but things like transitions and general entertainment. Having a high prize tag on this aspect of the competition might make the competitors really up there routines and entertain the crowd better and bring more 'art' back into BBing. But don't score it in terms of adding points to the other rounds, it's simple, who had the best routine on the night, award that guy (whatever his placing) a fat sum of cash.
You also have a habit of comparing images of BB's at shows when they are not being judged, such as waiting for announcements, so we should technically never use these images to make points as they are simply not judged. The biggest problem with BB is that you can have a guy with a bloated stomach pull his waist in line for the ab and thigh shot and thus navigates around the bloated belly issue entirely. Yates was guilty of this at times. He could look a little bloaty in some of his showings, yet when it came to abs and thigh time he controlled it.
All in all I just think the WAY its being judged right now is part of the problem. A complete overhaul is needed. Scrap the symmetry round and instead have symmetry judged throughout the poses, then perhaps guys with torn biceps can't be winning straight firsts! That would be a sensible place to start...
very good arguments and good explained makes sense
I think of it like the car world:
Super cars were once elegant, beautiful machines and now speed and harsh angles are preferred for the shock factor.
However luckily there still has to be some aesthetic consideration in bodybuilding to get to the biggest stages but not nearly enough to stop the men’s physique mutation.
This is really insightful. How ever frank zane was like 200 lbs and a 3 time winner so aesthetics did have a very important role more so then now.
Great content !
Most interesting bb chanel on youtube !!
I think symmetry is highly tied-in with aesthetics, so I believe that aesthetics are looked at by the judges in that regard.
Can someone tell me who the guy at 3:20 is? Thanks
Would mass and conditioning ruling higher than aesthetics be applied to amateur shows as well?
How come i didnt know this guy earlier??subbing to this!
I also learned from you that its called bob paris kneeling pose! Most favorite when done by zane!
Thanks but didn't mean to imply that was the official name. I just called it that because Paris was the first (or one of the first) to hit that pose. A lot of these non-compulsory shots don't really have names. Arnold had no idea what a victory or mantis pose was, he just called it the "arms overhead" or "straight arm" pose. The fancy names are often coined afterwards by the fans and media.
@@Tomn8er I see man thanks for the info!!! Yeah I agree its a better unofficial name, instead of calling it
"kneeling half victory half lat spread pose"lels 😅😅
Any idea what the criteria for judging is for classic physique? Is it similar as the open but they should be smaller than open bodybuilders hence the weight limit?
From what I can tell it's mostly the same, with maybe a little more focus on posing and keeping a trim midsection. But that kinda comes with the territory when you enforce aggressive weight caps.
Tomn8er thanks for the reply. I feel like classic physique is an interesting division after seeing Bumbstead beating Ansley and Peterson last year. Especially with how dominant Ansley has been. I still think they’re still trying to figure out the direction of classic physique.
you make great videos
Ur right. They don’t operate that way. It became obvious when Yates became Mr. Olympia. I like to call him the death of bodybuilding. But then again bodybuilding is subjective.
2nd best back in history but hes the death of bodybuilding?
Rick Sanchez C137
You don’t understand
@@heavymetalfitness2091 you're right, I have no clue how a bodybuilding fan could say Dorian wasn't monumental in making the sport better.
Lol I had some dumbass the other day tell me 03 Ronnie looked like "doodoo". Literally the greatest physique of all time an these fucktards want to talk shit cause "no vacuum pose waaaa" the shit they love wasn't even mandatory poses back then why should they be mandatory now?
@@whiteroseproject7207
I dislike his physique. Im a 60s-80s bodybuilding fan. Your opinion on the greatest physique isnt the same as mine
11:42 damn dex back looks crazy this year ..
Agree with damn near everything you pointed out, sell said!
2:41 Ronnie Cutler or Jay Coleman
We will NEVER see another true bodybuilding hero. Only those that will sacrifice their lives to drugs on a new dimension. Hey, Bob Paris had it right a long time ago. He saw the drift into the new dimension. He was "gay," (and I didn't know about that when I was competing); but he was correct. Bodybuilding took off in a new dimension.
Can you do a full review of the 2003 Mr. Olympia?
Honestly awesome video ...
Completely agree with this. The only "fix" I can think of is adding in a few more mandatory poses that show aesthetics. Like a vacuum
As for judging, I think this just confirms Shawn Ray's complaints in the early 2000's that the judging panel *never changed*, and it was the same set of judges year-after-year-after-year.......... From a bodybuilding history / judging criteria standpoint, I think the judges actually *did* put a premium on aesthetics, specifically from 1976 - 1983. Just look at all the "short class" under 200 lbs. bodybuilders who won in those years. Then in 1984, Haney kind of ushered in "stage 1" of the mass monster era, but to a lesser degree than Dorian in '92-'93. So, Tomn8er, here's my suggestion... you came up with a common sense quantitative approach to judging awhile back in one of your videos... you should post the link! That makes a lot more sense to put "weights" on things like posing, symmetry, individual muscle groups, etc............. but what kind of sucks is...this will probably never happen. Bodybuilding in general is such a "meathead" fucking sport so I don't see judges thinking analytically...
Can be tough at times to tell who has the better “aesthetics” but there been times in the past when if judges penalised guys who were clearly off bloated guys and whatever they would still give the smaller more aesthetic guys hope. Guys like Shawn Ray shouldn’t have to ruin their aesthetics to simply get bigger. How many guys have we seen get bigger but certainly not better
A great summary analysis of the narrative/principle that really dominates the judiciary - at this level - for decades. As you mention in the video, some poses should be made mandatory as the first step.
Loved The video
Fam like brandon curry is some what aesthetic also shawn rhoden, ronnie in his prime and also phil had great aesthetics in his prime
Ronnie had great aesthetics, lol...do you know what that word means?
beerthug Ronnie did actually have a rather nice looking, aesthetic physique in his earlier days. In my opinion he sacrificed his aestheticism by roughly 99 to 2000
@@angussutton3440 'ronnie in his prime' is what was said. Earlier Ronnie was more 'aesthetic' but his balance suffered. Unfortunately it's an objective decision, thus bodybuilding will never be a sport.
beerthug fair enough, I do agree that in his prime where he was winning Olympia’s he wasn’t aesthetic. Just a shame that it’s so rare that the kind of body that is so obviously more appreciated and valued by the community (flex wheeler, Tom platz pre much anyone who’s aesthetic lmao) isn’t by the judges
@@angussutton3440 The judges are the issue for sure! Shawn Ray has been saying it for years, if they never change than the results will never change either. Steve Weenerberger would disagree, but then he'd be out of a job. I remember years ago, him standing up and arguing with the crowd at the Night of Champions. Guess his ego was hurt that everyone didn't agree with him. We cut out cancer, so why stop there!?
Would love too see more praise and reward for posing its kind of what bodybuilding was all about starting with sandow trying to copy the ancient statues of Greek gods and so on
The problem is a lot of people THINK they r bb fans but it's really not their taste... e.g. if u can appreciate Big Ramy's for being wide af and having freaky looking body parts and still having a good midsection and taper, ur a real fan... but if u say he looks ugly cuz his legs freaky looking or he looks like a *monster*, ur not a real fan and maybe u should follow mens physique cuz u clearly dont really like size or a freak factor
Not sure it's fair to say they aren't real fans, it's more just a difference between casual fans and hardcore fans. Appreciating the freaky physiques is generally more reserved for the hardcore, but everybody's gotta start somewhere! I remember when I first began watching even a prime 98-99 Coleman disgusted me to an extent lol
How about if you don't like how Ramy's legs flow? His thighs are large af, but his calves are too tiny in comparison and just messes up the flow entirely. He either needs bigger calves, or smaller thighs. The way it looks now is really disproportional.
5:29 Well, Arnold was aesthetic though. There's something in his physique that made the judges choose his physique over others. And yes, everyone even to this day, dreamed of having body like Arnold. He literally inspired ordinary people who had no idea or aim of bodybuilding to go to gym
"There's something in his Physique that made the judges choose his Physique over others"
Yes, his muscle mass and conditioning. Look at Arnold 1975. He dwarfs everyone, and those guys dwarf amateur Bodybuilder who dwarf regular people. He was a mass monster for that time and still somehow most aesthetic?
@@MrKid351 1974 was his biggest ever
He was the biggest, besides him being taller makes him dwarf everyone just by standing there without flexing, and also politics because he shouldn't have won the 1980 mr o
Arnolds aesthetics are overrated because of who he is, his good looks( no homo), hie height,weider propaganda etc
The key to stellar aesthetics is a great midsection( tiny waist and clearly defined 6 pack abs), well Arnold had a quite wide waist and asymmetrical 4-pack abs...
He was also very unbalanced, his upper body was that of a 250 lber and his legs belonged on a 220 lber .Im referring to his thighs, his calves were darn good.
His enormous chest dwarfed his delts in the side chest pose.
His upper arms dwarfed his forearms, his biceps was way more developed than his triceps.
There is nothing "magic " about Arnold that would earn him the nod in a contest.He won 7 Olympias but most of the time his competition was PISS POOR.
73-75 Franco, Zane...185 lb next to a 240 lb man .Nubret had even worse legs and back ..and was black, and lived in France( yeah it does matter in that era).Louie? gigantic but no polish and missing size in certain areas.
71 he competed alone
72 was Sergios as Arnold himself admitted, and Zane and Nubret are on record saying Oliva should have won, they both competed in that show.
1980, well we all know
1970 he barely won, and only because Sergio came in off , after bulking up at Arnies advice ....
So he was only really a dominant champ 73-75 when his competition was weak .
@@TheLusianPopa okay it seems i have to clarify some pretty simple stuff. I hate when ppl claim that someone only has a 4-pack: EVERYBODY genetically has a 6-pack. Som 8 some 10, but no human has 4 unless its some very rare genetic muscle mutation. Just find a picture of him stretching his stomach, its easy to see. And yeah (iT wAsNt ViSibLe), yes it was just look more closely, and it was definitly not bcs of fat. The key stellar to aesthetics is far from only determined by the midsection. Its many many factors and a very important one is the FLOW, LINES and PROPORTIONS. Why do cartoon characters always look so crazy, but yet appealing. They have unhumanly proportions. waist small, short stomach, but loong upper torso (chest), wide shoulders, long arms (weird one, but its true. like simeon panda, he looks insane bcs of his proportions too), huge arms compared to the midsection and so on. Its all about how it looks proportionally to eachother. A cartoon guy could be way bigger than the massmonsters on stage today, and still be very aesthetic, so i also dont like when ppl claim size has something to do with aesthetic. NEVER - proportions. (i know u guys didnt claim that)
And Gacha Guy i believe you're wrong, i know exactly what Mohammad Sufian is talking about: arnold had a look. very unorthodox, something ppl hadnt seen before. Now im not gonna claim he per say had a small waist, but the way he showcased himself made up for it, and its not totally big either. Yes big hips, but tight midsection, always sucked in. not a big waist, but wide hips. But arnold had a look. a crazy look, he had that kinda short torso, but only his stomach area was short, his chest hung loow and was huge. He had a huge full ribcage, and when not hitting a full vacuum he would SUCK air INTO the chest and ribcage, to make it explode off the waist. then he had huge arms, and it looked insane compared to his torso. he had very big arms for his time. yes his tri's were somewhat underdeveloped compared to bi's but had great insertions and good potential, and were not bad he just didnt showcase them that often. He had very pleasant lines, a great flow when standing a little slanted he let the lines showcase his aesthetics. He had his totally own look; and Yeah yeah "Everybody has that", but arnolds was much more special and caricatured and cartoonish, and yes sergio was maybe more cartooish in the fdb, but in the side chest arnold arguably still has the best today. (arguably). in his posing routine, in his OVERALL PRESENTATION, he presented himself like never seen before. he had amazing singular bodyparts, some of the best in bodybuilding still to this day: chest, biceps, erector spinae, ribcage: and i know thelusianpapa was arguing for that it was unbalanced and that he was improportionate and some bodyparts where developed more than others, but ITS THE IMPROPORTIONS - THAT MAKE THE PROPORTIONS. Had tom platz "taken" some size from his legs, and balanced it out into the upperbody so it was as big as his legs, he would still just be a guy slightly smaller or less aesthetic than the others. maybe 1 year he would have won, but his legs being IMPORORTIONATELY BIG made him a legend. if your arms are out of proportions to ur torso and body it looks insane, it looks sick, amazing. arnold had plenty of those. plus he was taller, bigger bones, he was a great figure for bodybuilding.
So!! To rap it up.
Aesthetics are far from as simple as a 6-pack and a midsection.
"There's something in his Physique that made the judges choose his Physique over others" is 100% a true statement, he DID have a very special look, and freaky proportions that made him so legendary (we still remember him from his biceps and chest, but if they had been a smaller, and his shoulders and tri's a bit bigger, we probably wouldnt have remembered him for those parts in particular).
And NO, Gacha Guy: its definitly not only mass and conditioning thats the reason in his case.
Idk how you guys are to argue with. Most people get stubborn, they would rather kill their own dog before admitting or agreeing with a random guy on the internet that disagrees with them. I write this so confidently bcs its thoughts ive dwelled immeassureably a lot on. he was magnificent, had many flaws, and far from my favorite bodybuilder. But in case you dont agree with me, or at least never would tell me, then please just google some pictures of arnold and see what im talking about. u dont have to write it, just see if u can see what i see, and appreciate and enjoy the sport of bodybuilding, and the thoughts that follow.
On that note, can you do an analysis of why Frank Zane won when he was in the lightweight division?
It's tough to say. I wasn't alive back then lol and pictures are very scarce for those old Olympias.
Great video
Well. There are a lot of people out there, who says: There were so many better BB at the stage with Arnold, who should have won instead of him. They only forget 1 major thing. Back then, it was not just about, the quality of body, and mass, they really looking for the ideal male. And Arnold had that charisma, above everybody, only by his appearance. He also was very good, as a BB at the stage, maybe 2 guy (Sereg Nubret, and Farnco looked better in today's judges eyes) But to be honest they were 170 cm short "beta males" next to Arnold. What girl want to have a shorter guy next to her? So Arnold had that overall Charisma and appearance, and also a v ery good body proportion, small waist, big, wide chest, shoulders, and back muscles, with symmetry. Today, the judges want to bring objectivity in the competition, but the only thing, they can bring into it, is mass+condiitoning. And this ruined the modern Bodybuilding.
What are you talking about? Arnold's waist was definitely not small by early 70s definition. He deliberately often posed with his side towards the judges to hide the fact that his waist was blocky in comparison to the other competitors. Check literally any pic of him next to Sergio Oliva and you'll see that Sergio has a much, much trimmer waist than Arnold.
@@christianekman Oliva had smaller waist definitely, but woth those flat arms... I am not impressed by them.
@@kristofszekeres1375 you can be impressed or not however you like. The point still stands that Arnold's waist was not his knockout feature at the time. By today's standard, yes, his waist is tiny. Not so by early 70s standard.
Truth it is a shame the IFBB doesn't care to properly jduge about presentation, posing, or even symmetry round. It makes even BB less mainsteeam and a lost art because guys don't pose or try to and just want to show up big, full, and shredded.
lol that pic of dorian and shawn is outrageous!!
Big news for fans of Tombr8er's videos!! A special 12 hour long video solely dedicated to his favourite body part of all-time! Our one and only Tombr8er stayed up for 5 days straight studying this specific body part, and he ended up analyzing and rating every single pro bodybuilder that's ever lived. He also shows the the progression of this body part starting from Arnold's era, straight through to the current crop of bodybuilder's. So make sure your one of the first people to watch Tombr8er's 12 hour special on his all-time favourite body part.....
GLUTEUS MAXIMUS!!!!!
lol 🤣
I don't think that the judging rewarding the mass game was a bad thing. I think them supporting the mass game at the expense of conditioning and bloated midsections was a bad thing. I have no problem with Dorian, but I do have problems with them rewarding 2000, 2004, and 2005 Ronnie Coleman for coming in looking like a water buffalo, and letting Phil come in with a gut every year after 2013 and be rewarded off of conditioning and development of the muscle. All you have to do is reward v tapers and the body relative to the size of the midsection. That will stop guys from using insulin and that will fix the conditioning and gut problem
Amen.It's ok for them to factorvin mass, BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF EVERYTHING ELSE.
@@joe225c I think it's just insulin. You didn't see these muscle guts until guys started taking insulin. Dorian didn't have a gut problem until 1997 and he started insulin in 1996. And that applies to Every bodybuilder that has taken insulin.
If they want to bring aesthetic back, they should bring in bodypart ratios as part of the judging process, ie the waist has to be 1.5 times smaller than shoulders, no gh gut etc..
We talk so much about judging and not the judges of bodybuilding
Who are the Judges and whats their qualifications to be a judge?
I concur with you that was absolutely correct ✊🏿💪🏿👊🏿
I’ll have to agree with ya on this one mann..
Top class video
real shits man, thanks