[quote]JAMESROSE666 wrote:
X, did you notice that porkpie isnt the one talking about bloating?
Or were you too caught up by someone having a different point of view than yours?
Read the thred, BantamRunner said that “bloat” word, no one else… and stop posting pics, christ.[/quote]
I know who said what and have even quoted it. You think responding to two different people in the same thread is difficult?
You seem to have highlighted a fact that is pretty irrelevant to the question posed.
Are you telling me that todays guys (and yes i am aware of the fact that the trend is returning slightly to the tighter mid-section and v-taper) are no bigger than the 60s - 70s guys ?
If so, then i suggest you are the person with a lack of knowlege on the subject my friend.
The reason i haven’t responded to all of the ‘questions’ is that the majority of them are irrelevant. I have responded to you, because you seem so damn keen on hijacking the thread.
[quote]porkpie wrote:
You seem to have highlighted a fact that is pretty irrelevant to the question posed.
Are you telling me that todays guys (and yes i am aware of the fact that the trend is returning slightly to the tighter mid-section and v-taper) are no bigger than the 60s - 70s guys ?
If so, then i suggest you are the person with a lack of knowlege on the subject my friend.
The reason i haven’t responded to all of the ‘questions’ is that the majority of them are irrelevant. I have responded to you, because you seem so damn keen on hijacking the thread.[/quote]
What does “bigger” have to do with anything? Arnold was also taller than many bodybuilders today so you might as well have some conditional statement about height. I asked you who these guys were because if you base who looks better only on whether people you don’t even know are “bigger”, then this discussion is over before it begins.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
You seem to have highlighted a fact that is pretty irrelevant to the question posed.
Are you telling me that todays guys (and yes i am aware of the fact that the trend is returning slightly to the tighter mid-section and v-taper) are no bigger than the 60s - 70s guys ?
If so, then i suggest you are the person with a lack of knowlege on the subject my friend.
The reason i haven’t responded to all of the ‘questions’ is that the majority of them are irrelevant. I have responded to you, because you seem so damn keen on hijacking the thread.
What does “bigger” have to do with anything? Arnold was also taller than many bodybuilders today so you might as well have some conditional statement about height. I asked you who these guys were because if you base who looks better only on whether people you don’t even know are “bigger”, then this discussion is over before it begins.
[/quote]
To be honest, i posted a valid question, and you have suddenly realised you look foolish.
So you are now trying to turn this around…well done.
Seriously Prof x, if you aren’t going to try and have a constructive argument (that is understand that some people have opinions different to your own) then don’t just fire off sniping remarks and put downs. Its that sort of attitude that encourages the trolls
why does every thread where X posts about something else than training, turn into shit? This thread was about Arnold, not bloating n shit.
Its like you can’t talk normally unless you’re shouting “EAT MORE TRAIN HARDER”
A real shame.
Arnold got the nod over Olivia and Mentzer/Zane even when not in his prime. Olivia to me particularly had a superior physique but he was not Weider’s polished product like Arnold. Don’t get me wrong, I am a big fan of Arnold and his book The Education of a Bodybuilder was what initially started my interest in bodybuilding.
On an unrelated note: Did anyone purchase the 2008 Mr. Olympia dvd? What was wrong with the lighting? I could not see almost anything on stage when the contestants posed individually because the lighting was so poor/dark.
[quote]porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
You seem to have highlighted a fact that is pretty irrelevant to the question posed.
Are you telling me that todays guys (and yes i am aware of the fact that the trend is returning slightly to the tighter mid-section and v-taper) are no bigger than the 60s - 70s guys ?
If so, then i suggest you are the person with a lack of knowlege on the subject my friend.
The reason i haven’t responded to all of the ‘questions’ is that the majority of them are irrelevant. I have responded to you, because you seem so damn keen on hijacking the thread.
What does “bigger” have to do with anything? Arnold was also taller than many bodybuilders today so you might as well have some conditional statement about height. I asked you who these guys were because if you base who looks better only on whether people you don’t even know are “bigger”, then this discussion is over before it begins.
To be honest, i posted a valid question, and you have suddenly realised you look foolish.
So you are now trying to turn this around…well done.
Seriously Prof x, if you aren’t going to try and have a constructive argument (that is understand that some people have opinions different to your own) then don’t just fire off sniping remarks and put downs. Its that sort of attitude that encourages the trolls
[/quote]
I’m trying to turn this around? You just made a statement in the previous post about today’s guys being BIGGER. What does that have to do with anything? No, the real problem is, this discussion is questioning your own knowledge base now in order to make it relevant and you clearly can not handle this.
It is also clear you don’t know the guys in those pictures so what do you really know about today’s “mass monsters”?
I hope you guys keep debating. I’m getting beer and cornflakes.
[quote]JAMESROSE666 wrote:
why does every thread where X posts about something else than training, turn into shit? This thread was about Arnold, not bloating n shit.
Its like you can’t talk normally unless you’re shouting “EAT MORE TRAIN HARDER”
A real shame.[/quote]
The troll is funny.
This is your post from my thread previously:
[quote]so… anyone seen Professor X’s legs yet?
and how did you rack up so many posts if you got out the army only 2-3 yrs ago? or was it not really actuive duty, just so medical army job?
Thanks for info hypocrite [/quote]
Gee, talk about being a hypocrite.
For the record, a pic of my legs is now up just in case you were losing sleep over this.
Perhaps not the “current” mass monsters, since bodybuilding appears to be shifting to a more esthetic ideal.
However, in the recent past we has men like Sonbaty, Yates, Coleman, Cutler, Baddell etc. etc. All displaying their big belies on stage and getting rewarded for it. Even two years ago Cutler won the Olympia when perhaps he should not. Remember that some pros have recently downsized their belly.
Silvio Samuel for example had a belly when he first was covered in Flex (my source of information), but he does not have a belly anymore.
That being said, right now there are no real Olympia contending mass monsters, except maybe Cutler, like there used to be. Stating that Arnold looks better than “current” mass monsters would therefore be incorrect. And that picture of Freeman pretty much sums up what I want bodybuilding to do for me. Big muscles on a light bone structure, and looking better than ever over 40!
1980 O was won unfairly imo. Did not have the best physique.
All the rest I think he won with the best physique('75 was a tough call). Charisma helped, but Arnold was also a better poser imo.
I don’t see what you’re trying to argue OP.
[quote]hardgnr wrote:
1980 O was won unfairly imo. Did not have the best physique.
All the rest I think he won with the best physique('75 was a tough call). Charisma helped, but Arnold was also a better poser imo.
I don’t see what you’re trying to argue OP.[/quote]
No one does…and when we try to assess his real knowledge base, he gets pissy.
It’s a good thing he has trolls here to defend him.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
You seem to have highlighted a fact that is pretty irrelevant to the question posed.
Are you telling me that todays guys (and yes i am aware of the fact that the trend is returning slightly to the tighter mid-section and v-taper) are no bigger than the 60s - 70s guys ?
If so, then i suggest you are the person with a lack of knowlege on the subject my friend.
The reason i haven’t responded to all of the ‘questions’ is that the majority of them are irrelevant. I have responded to you, because you seem so damn keen on hijacking the thread.
What does “bigger” have to do with anything? Arnold was also taller than many bodybuilders today so you might as well have some conditional statement about height. I asked you who these guys were because if you base who looks better only on whether people you don’t even know are “bigger”, then this discussion is over before it begins.
To be honest, i posted a valid question, and you have suddenly realised you look foolish.
So you are now trying to turn this around…well done.
Seriously Prof x, if you aren’t going to try and have a constructive argument (that is understand that some people have opinions different to your own) then don’t just fire off sniping remarks and put downs. Its that sort of attitude that encourages the trolls
I’m trying to turn this around? You just made a statement in the previous thread about today’s guys being BIGGER. What does that have to do with anything? No, the real problem is, this discussion is questioning your own knowledge base now in order to make it relevant and you clearly can not handle this.
It is also clear you don’t know the guys in those pictures so what do you really know about today’s “mass monsters”?[/quote]
Okay, let me quantify this in the most basic way.
When i said are you implying that the guys nowadays are no bigger than the guys from 60s - 70s, i should have said:-
Are you implying that the guys nowadays are carrying the same muscle mass, and have the same bodyfat levels as the guys from the 60s -70s
Would that be more helpful to you.
And as for posting pictures to ‘test’ my knowledge.
Seriously mate, i am not 12, nor am i at school.
Why in hells name should i respond to petty childish behaviour.
Perhaps i should post some pics, and get you to answer questions ?
[quote]porkpie wrote:
Okay, let me quantify this in the most basic way.
When i said are you implying that the guys nowadays are no bigger than the guys from 60s - 70s, i should have said:-
Are you implying that the guys nowadays are carrying the same muscle mass, and have the same bodyfat levels as the guys from the 60s -70s
Would that be more helpful to you.
And as for posting pictures to ‘test’ my knowledge.
Seriously mate, i am not 12, nor am i at school.
Why in hells name should i respond to petty childish behaviour.
Perhaps i should post some pics, and get you to answer questions ?
[/quote]
You may not be 12 but your logic seems to be not much older than that. What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as how they LOOK?
Is that question simple enough for you?
[quote]hardgnr wrote:
1980 O was won unfairly imo. Did not have the best physique.
All the rest I think he won with the best physique('75 was a tough call). Charisma helped, but Arnold was also a better poser imo.
I don’t see what you’re trying to argue OP.[/quote]
I am not trying to make any point, just wanted to have some healthy debate with people who could discuss their opinions in an adult way?
So let me get this straight you’re saying that out of 7 wins, 2 were down to either his Charisma or Posing, this is the sort of stuff that i was looking for.
So who should have pipped him, looked better in 75 and 80 ?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Okay, let me quantify this in the most basic way.
When i said are you implying that the guys nowadays are no bigger than the guys from 60s - 70s, i should have said:-
Are you implying that the guys nowadays are carrying the same muscle mass, and have the same bodyfat levels as the guys from the 60s -70s
Would that be more helpful to you.
And as for posting pictures to ‘test’ my knowledge.
Seriously mate, i am not 12, nor am i at school.
Why in hells name should i respond to petty childish behaviour.
Perhaps i should post some pics, and get you to answer questions ?
You may not be 12 but your logic seems to be not much older than that. What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as how they LOOK?
Is that question simple enough for you? [/quote]
WHAT???
‘What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as they look?’
Are you kidding me ?
Right here is a very simple test:-
Case 1.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat% of 45%
Case 2.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat of 5%
Which one will look better?
You’re last statement has just destroyed any remnants of intelligence.
[quote]porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Okay, let me quantify this in the most basic way.
When i said are you implying that the guys nowadays are no bigger than the guys from 60s - 70s, i should have said:-
Are you implying that the guys nowadays are carrying the same muscle mass, and have the same bodyfat levels as the guys from the 60s -70s
Would that be more helpful to you.
And as for posting pictures to ‘test’ my knowledge.
Seriously mate, i am not 12, nor am i at school.
Why in hells name should i respond to petty childish behaviour.
Perhaps i should post some pics, and get you to answer questions ?
You may not be 12 but your logic seems to be not much older than that. What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as how they LOOK?
Is that question simple enough for you?
WHAT???
‘What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as they look?’
Are you kidding me ?
Right here is a very simple test:-
Case 1.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat% of 45%
Case 2.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat of 5%
Which one will look better?
You’re last statement has just destroyed any remnants of intelligence.
[/quote]
We are talking about bodybuilders yet you bring up some scenario with people over 45% body fat? Serially?
Let me guess, 10th grade?
Bodybuilders today carry more muscle and less fat than guys in Arnold’s era. WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH LOOKING BETTER ALONE?
Are you saying that because they are bigger they look worse? If that is not what you are saying, then why are you making a point about them being BIGGER?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Okay, let me quantify this in the most basic way.
When i said are you implying that the guys nowadays are no bigger than the guys from 60s - 70s, i should have said:-
Are you implying that the guys nowadays are carrying the same muscle mass, and have the same bodyfat levels as the guys from the 60s -70s
Would that be more helpful to you.
And as for posting pictures to ‘test’ my knowledge.
Seriously mate, i am not 12, nor am i at school.
Why in hells name should i respond to petty childish behaviour.
Perhaps i should post some pics, and get you to answer questions ?
You may not be 12 but your logic seems to be not much older than that. What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as how they LOOK?
Is that question simple enough for you?
WHAT???
‘What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as they look?’
Are you kidding me ?
Right here is a very simple test:-
Case 1.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat% of 45%
Case 2.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat of 5%
Which one will look better?
You’re last statement has just destroyed any remnants of intelligence.
We are talking about bodybuilders yet you bring up some scenario with people over 45% body fat? Serially?
Let me guess, 10th grade?
Bodybuilders today carry more muscle and less fat than guys in Arnold’s era. WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH LOOKING BETTER ALONE?
Are you saying that because they are bigger they look worse? If that is not what you are saying, then why are you making a point about them being BIGGER? [/quote]
You are a fool, going round and round, making no point whatsoever and contradicting yourself ?
Please go onto a different thread and try to bully someone else wee man!
[quote]porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Okay, let me quantify this in the most basic way.
When i said are you implying that the guys nowadays are no bigger than the guys from 60s - 70s, i should have said:-
Are you implying that the guys nowadays are carrying the same muscle mass, and have the same bodyfat levels as the guys from the 60s -70s
Would that be more helpful to you.
And as for posting pictures to ‘test’ my knowledge.
Seriously mate, i am not 12, nor am i at school.
Why in hells name should i respond to petty childish behaviour.
Perhaps i should post some pics, and get you to answer questions ?
You may not be 12 but your logic seems to be not much older than that. What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as how they LOOK?
Is that question simple enough for you?
WHAT???
‘What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as they look?’
Are you kidding me ?
Right here is a very simple test:-
Case 1.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat% of 45%
Case 2.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat of 5%
Which one will look better?
You’re last statement has just destroyed any remnants of intelligence.
We are talking about bodybuilders yet you bring up some scenario with people over 45% body fat? Serially?
Let me guess, 10th grade?
Bodybuilders today carry more muscle and less fat than guys in Arnold’s era. WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH LOOKING BETTER ALONE?
Are you saying that because they are bigger they look worse? If that is not what you are saying, then why are you making a point about them being BIGGER?
You are a fool, going round and round, making no point whatsoever and contradicting yourself ?
Please go onto a different thread and try to bully someone else wee man!
[/quote]
LOL
I’m the one making no point? Why not just answer the question? You are the one who said it. Why not clarify what you meant by making an issue of them being “BIGGER”?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Okay, let me quantify this in the most basic way.
When i said are you implying that the guys nowadays are no bigger than the guys from 60s - 70s, i should have said:-
Are you implying that the guys nowadays are carrying the same muscle mass, and have the same bodyfat levels as the guys from the 60s -70s
Would that be more helpful to you.
And as for posting pictures to ‘test’ my knowledge.
Seriously mate, i am not 12, nor am i at school.
Why in hells name should i respond to petty childish behaviour.
Perhaps i should post some pics, and get you to answer questions ?
You may not be 12 but your logic seems to be not much older than that. What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as how they LOOK?
Is that question simple enough for you?
WHAT???
‘What does carrying more muscle and less fat have to do with someone being better or worse as far as they look?’
Are you kidding me ?
Right here is a very simple test:-
Case 1.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat% of 45%
Case 2.
I am 6ft3 260lbs, with a bodyfat of 5%
Which one will look better?
You’re last statement has just destroyed any remnants of intelligence.
We are talking about bodybuilders yet you bring up some scenario with people over 45% body fat? Serially?
Let me guess, 10th grade?
Bodybuilders today carry more muscle and less fat than guys in Arnold’s era. WHAT DOES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH LOOKING BETTER ALONE?
Are you saying that because they are bigger they look worse? If that is not what you are saying, then why are you making a point about them being BIGGER?
You are a fool, going round and round, making no point whatsoever and contradicting yourself ?
Please go onto a different thread and try to bully someone else wee man!
LOL
I’m the one making no point? Why not just answer the question? You are the one who said it. Why not clarify what you meant by making an issue of them being “BIGGER”?[/quote]
Well, bodybuilders nowadays carry more muscle ?
I however still think the bodybuilders of the 60s - 70s looked better, that is my personal opinion
You enjoy the bodies of todays bodybuilders with their extra muscle mass, that is your opinion.
Now i think even you can understand that right ?