Arnold: Great Bodybuilder or Great Charisma?

Training Bodybuilding
61

[quote]porkpie wrote:

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 ?

[/quote]

It took an entire page for you to state that?

Like has already been pointed out though in your responses, you really don’t even follow current bodybuilding and don’t know who these people are so your opinion of who is better doesn’t hold much water.

When you only know the color blue, no one cares that you think blue is better than yellow.

62

[quote]Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:

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 ?

It took an entire page for you to state that?

Like has already been pointed out though in your responses, you really don’t even follow current bodybuilding and don’t know who these people are so your opinion of who is better doesn’t hold much water.

When you only know the color blue, no one cares that you think blue is better than yellow.

[/quote]

No, i said that way back, but you were being either very dim or pedantic, so i had to write it in-very-simple-english.

Who says i don’t follow current bodybuilding, because i don’t bow to some little internet warrior demanding i answer his questions ?

The odd thing is, i can have a discussion without just dismissing someone elses opinion, i believe its called ‘learning’ its how people grow !!

63

nah, i doubt it.

you disagreed with him.

does not compute for abused child with inferiority complex.

64

What I think PorkPie is saying:

Bodybuilders of the 60’s and 70’s looked better overall. Less gut, more V-taper, muscle didn’t look as bulky, so they looked leaner.

What Prof X is saying:

Bodybuilders of the 60’s and 70’s had competitors who had big guts, crappy V-tapers, but you wouldn’t know them unless you truly studied bodybuilding past, present, and future.

He’s also saying that there are bodybuilders of today who have a ton of muscle mass but maintain a nice V-taper, a slim abdomen, and have a learn but powerful look. Its just that they’re not very popular and too many people who look at bodybuilding use Ronnie Coleman, Markus Ruhl, and Dexter Jackson as reference points instead of looking deeper into the sport.

This is what I think is being said. I think. BUDWEISER!

65

[quote]porkpie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
porkpie wrote:

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 ?

It took an entire page for you to state that?

Like has already been pointed out though in your responses, you really don’t even follow current bodybuilding and don’t know who these people are so your opinion of who is better doesn’t hold much water.

When you only know the color blue, no one cares that you think blue is better than yellow.

No, i said that way back, but you were being either very dim or pedantic, so i had to write it in-very-simple-english.

Who says i don’t follow current bodybuilding, because i don’t bow to some little internet warrior demanding i answer his questions ?

The odd thing is, i can have a discussion without just dismissing someone elses opinion, i believe its called ‘learning’ its how people grow !![/quote]

Hey, you wanted a discussion. The first rule of a discussion in a public forum is that once it starts, you do not control everywhere that discussion goes.

Answering a relevant question is “bowing to little internet warriors”?

Really?

Hell, I even answered your question about Arnold and, frankly, if you don’t already know about the controversy of the 1980 Olympia that you asked about above, then this discussion is about as one sided as it can get considering that is common knowledge among people who actually follow this sport.

66

[quote]WolBarret wrote:
What I think PorkPie is saying:

Bodybuilders of the 60’s and 70’s looked better overall. Less gut, more V-taper, muscle didn’t look at bulky, so they looked leaner.

What Prof X is saying:

Bodybuilders of the 60’s and 70’s had competitors who had big guts, crappy V-tapers, but you wouldn’t know them unless you truly studied bodybuilding past, present, and future.

He’s also saying that there are bodybuilders of today who have a ton of muscle mass but maintain a nice V-taper, a slim abdomen, and have a learn but powerful look. Its just that they’re not very popular and too many people who look at bodybuilding use Ronnie Coleman, Markus Ruhl, and Dexter Jackson as reference points instead of looking deeper into the sport.

This is what I think is being said. I think. BUDWEISER![/quote]

Just to add to that, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have an in-depth discussion about this with people who don’t even follow it closely. They don’t know key details that would even make this interesting…like his question of the 1980 Olympia.

67

[quote]Professor X wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
What I think PorkPie is saying:

Bodybuilders of the 60’s and 70’s looked better overall. Less gut, more V-taper, muscle didn’t look at bulky, so they looked leaner.

What Prof X is saying:

Bodybuilders of the 60’s and 70’s had competitors who had big guts, crappy V-tapers, but you wouldn’t know them unless you truly studied bodybuilding past, present, and future.

He’s also saying that there are bodybuilders of today who have a ton of muscle mass but maintain a nice V-taper, a slim abdomen, and have a learn but powerful look. Its just that they’re not very popular and too many people who look at bodybuilding use Ronnie Coleman, Markus Ruhl, and Dexter Jackson as reference points instead of looking deeper into the sport.

This is what I think is being said. I think. BUDWEISER!

Just to add to that, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have an in-depth discussion about this with people who don’t even follow it closely. They don’t know key details that would even make this interesting…like his question of the 1980 Olympia.[/quote]

I don’t think there’s anyone who you can have an in-depth discussion with. People would have to go beyond Flex, Muscle Media, and Muscle & Fitness. No one is that interested. MMA is too hot and poppin.

But I digress, back to trolling.

68

[quote]porkpie wrote:
Now, i am sure i am going to get flamed but i have been looking at Arnold and whilst he had a great upper body, did he actually have a ‘balanced’ physique ?

Personally i prefer the old school build than the current mass monsters but did Arnold win the majority of his Mr Olympias through charisma and personality ? (as well a being one of the top bodybuilders of his time)

I appreciate what he has done for bodybuilding etc. and am a fan of his style BUT if you looked at the overall package, was he really that far ahead of other guys of his era…

Apologies if i have irritated but i would just like a decent debate about this ?[/quote]

He was a both a great bodybuilder and had great charisma - legs could have been better. Charisma probably got him a couple of titles towards the end of his career - 1975 and 1980 imo.

Its a subjective sport so placings will always be different - people/judges like the look of different body types. I prefer mostly 1960- mid 80’s physiques but i admire and appreciate anyone who quite frankly hasthe balls to get into that shape and step on stage - i know i could’nt do it.

a few guys were comparable to arnold - lots of great physiques back then - but then there are and always will be great bodybuilders - theres only one first prize at each competition, people will always get overlooked - arnold was special though.

just my 2pence.

69

Arnold is the Barbie Doll of bodybuilding.

70

[quote]Professor X wrote:
WolBarret wrote:
What I think PorkPie is saying:

Bodybuilders of the 60’s and 70’s looked better overall. Less gut, more V-taper, muscle didn’t look at bulky, so they looked leaner.

What Prof X is saying:

Bodybuilders of the 60’s and 70’s had competitors who had big guts, crappy V-tapers, but you wouldn’t know them unless you truly studied bodybuilding past, present, and future.

He’s also saying that there are bodybuilders of today who have a ton of muscle mass but maintain a nice V-taper, a slim abdomen, and have a learn but powerful look. Its just that they’re not very popular and too many people who look at bodybuilding use Ronnie Coleman, Markus Ruhl, and Dexter Jackson as reference points instead of looking deeper into the sport.

This is what I think is being said. I think. BUDWEISER!

Just to add to that, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have an in-depth discussion about this with people who don’t even follow it closely. They don’t know key details that would even make this interesting…like his question of the 1980 Olympia.[/quote]

Why do you assume i have no knowledge ?
Its really odd, why do you have a god given right to believe that because i don’t spend day and night posting on threads that my knowledge is any less than yours ?
Arrogance my friend.

And as for your continual egging on to display my knowledge, i will say no, beacause:-
a) i am a grown-up
b) we are not in the playground
c) i am happy with my knowledge, i do not need to waltz around message boards giving it the big i am

71

[quote]Ryu wrote:
porkpie wrote:
Now, i am sure i am going to get flamed but i have been looking at Arnold and whilst he had a great upper body, did he actually have a ‘balanced’ physique ?

Personally i prefer the old school build than the current mass monsters but did Arnold win the majority of his Mr Olympias through charisma and personality ? (as well a being one of the top bodybuilders of his time)

I appreciate what he has done for bodybuilding etc. and am a fan of his style BUT if you looked at the overall package, was he really that far ahead of other guys of his era…

Apologies if i have irritated but i would just like a decent debate about this ?

He was a both a great bodybuilder and had great charisma - legs could have been better. Charisma probably got him a couple of titles towards the end of his career - 1975 and 1980 imo.

Its a subjective sport so placings will always be different - people/judges like the look of different body types. I prefer mostly 1960- mid 80’s physiques but i admire and appreciate anyone who quite frankly hasthe balls to get into that shape and step on stage - i know i could’nt do it.

a few guys were comparable to arnold - lots of great physiques back then - but then there are and always will be great bodybuilders - theres only one first prize at each competition, people will always get overlooked - arnold was special though.

just my 2pence.

[/quote]

I think you;re right, bodybuilding has never really been mainstream and at that time Arnold was the perfect pin-up boy, when you combine his physique with his undoubted charisma and charm (was this also a product of his desire to achieve goals?) then you had the perfect model to push the sport of bodybuilding into the public domain.

72

arnold was austrian.

most ppl in USA at that time probably didn’t even know where that was. (well might be applicable today too)

HENCE, he gets much more attention, like any “exotic” or “different” dude

73

[quote]JAMESROSE666 wrote:
arnold was austrian.

most ppl in USA at that time probably didn’t even know where that was. (well might be applicable today too)

HENCE, he gets much more attention, like any “exotic” or “different” dude
[/quote]

As i said earlier, you have that ‘intrigue’ coupled with his charm!

74

none of the americans will chime in now cos they don’t want to admit how crap their schooling is

75

[quote]JAMESROSE666 wrote:
none of the americans will chime in now cos they don’t want to admit how crap their schooling is[/quote]

Dude, its 6:52 am on the East Cost of America. And its 3:42 AM on the Pacific coast of America. One half of America is starting to wake up and get ready for the work.

The other half is still sleeping. I’m only awake because I beer, insomnia, and I don’t have to work today.

America will be back to kick your ass in a few hours. Just rest for now.

76

impressive. I mildy respect you for taking my insult up the ass, round the corner, and still not getting angry.

You must have travelled extensively outside the USA to be so tolerant.

77

[quote]Alpha F wrote:
Arnold is the Barbie Doll of bodybuilding.[/quote]

What does that mean?

78

[quote]majicka wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Arnold is the Barbie Doll of bodybuilding.

What does that mean? [/quote]

i think it means his male counterpart doesnt have any genitals.

It also means, Arnold has boobs.

Therefore, I think AlphaF is makign some sly comment about gyno here. fucking anti-bb dicks.

79

[quote]JAMESROSE666 wrote:
majicka wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Arnold is the Barbie Doll of bodybuilding.

What does that mean?

i think it means his male counterpart doesnt have any genitals.

It also means, Arnold has boobs.

Therefore, I think AlphaF is makign some sly comment about gyno here. fucking anti-bb dicks.[/quote]

lol, so Franco has no genitals?

80

[quote]JAMESROSE666 wrote:
impressive. I mildy respect you for taking my insult up the ass, round the corner, and still not getting angry.

You must have travelled extensively outside the USA to be so tolerant.[/quote]

You sir, are doing more to harm your own cause(whatever that may be), by being a total assclown.
The only thing you have proved here is that… nope, cant think of anything apart from the aforementioned. Oh and for such an educated person you would think your spelling would be a little better.