[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
I wish Skip were a mod here…
[/quote]
LOL
hilarious thread!
[quote]BantamRunner wrote:
Gironda by our standards had an excellent physique back in the day but he never won shit because the judging didn’t award that level of leanness. Arnie wouldn’t win shit today because he doesn’t have the wheels and isn’t cut up enough. They use more “gear” today and that’s the reason you see the top of line guys looking like creatures from another planet. At least Arnie and company looked human. [/quote]
Ridiculous statement. Do you think that random clueless people on the street in the year 1967 didn’t also think guys like Sergio and others looked inhuman? They would get crowds of people standing around them gawking at their development…a level that more and more guys simply training in gyms around the country look more like now whether they compete or not simply making it more common now than it was then.
You can guarantee every disparaging word you are now throwing at current pro bodybuilders was also tossed by your long lost 1960’s doppleganger. That makes the statement itself ridiculous because in 20 years from now, no one is going to be calling Phil Heath a “creature” in some review of 2009.
[quote]
Arnie won '80 because of politics.[/quote]
No shit. I may be the last one here who needs the history lesson but I am glad you at least know about it unlike that other guy who started this thread.
[quote]
He wasn’t even supposed to compete, he was coming as a sort of guest poser and wasn’t even “registered”. Well world got out that Arnie was going to compete and the other competetors were of course pissed. Arnie took BBing to a whole new level and Mentzer with his looks was supposed to carry the flag. Well Mentzer had a recreational drug problem and of course the IFBB didn’t want their next golden boy tarnished as a druggie (but apparently roids are fine…just like all pro sports, but anyway…). You see, I read my history…or at least difference versions of it. [/quote]
I do not believe Mentzer’s drug problem was an issue until AFTER he retired. This was not the reason he was overlooked in 1980 along with everyone else and this wasn’t an issue in public at all before 1980.
But see, we aren’t even discussing Ronnie. We are discussing guys who are competing NOW at the Olympia in October…which does not include Ronnie.
If the best you guys can do to talk about some problem in pro bodybuilding is bring up people NOT competing, why do you expect others more versed to take you seriously?
i quit
will ronnie compete in 2010 do ya think?
Do not buy the Mr. Olympia 2008 dvd - the lighting in the dvd sucks. I want a refund.
[quote]JAMESROSE666 wrote:
majicka wrote:
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.
lol, so Franco has no genitals?
haha dude, no idea.
would have been better if he said arnold = ken, but i dunno. apparently barbie popularity is a reason why blonde blue eyes is a massive attraction still today.
i guess you could say same about arnold, made BBing more popular, accessible, blah blah…[/quote]
Frank Zane is Ken. Arnold is Barbie.
[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]
Sergio was Cuban, Serge was French, Franco was Italian, Samir was Lebanese, etc… I don’t think it really mattered. Arnie was a better poser than anyone except maybe Corney, he dwarfed a lot of guys because of his height, he had an amazing taper and his guns, chest, and back were unreal.
A lot of people knock him for his legs, but if his legs were much bigger he wouldn’t have the same aesthetics. His charisma probably helped a bit, but his posing and physique are what people remember.
I agree Arnold had one of the best bodies of his time, but his charisma and confidence put him over the top. That french dude he beat in pumping iron was pretty freaky…his name escapes me…
[quote]adamhum wrote:
I agree Arnold had one of the best bodies of his time, but his charisma and confidence put him over the top. That french dude he beat in pumping iron was pretty freaky…his name escapes me…[/quote]
I believe you’re referring to Serge Nubret… great physique.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
BantamRunner wrote:
Gironda by our standards had an excellent physique back in the day but he never won shit because the judging didn’t award that level of leanness. Arnie wouldn’t win shit today because he doesn’t have the wheels and isn’t cut up enough. They use more “gear” today and that’s the reason you see the top of line guys looking like creatures from another planet. At least Arnie and company looked human.
Ridiculous statement. Do you think that random clueless people on the street in the year 1967 didn’t also think guys like Sergio and others looked inhuman? They would get crowds of people standing around them gawking at their development…a level that more and more guys simply training in gyms around the country look more like now whether they compete or not simply making it more common now than it was then.
You can guarantee every disparaging word you are now throwing at current pro bodybuilders was also tossed by your long lost 1960’s doppleganger. That makes the statement itself ridiculous because in 20 years from now, no one is going to be calling Phil Heath a “creature” in some review of 2009.
Arnie won '80 because of politics.
No shit. I may be the last one here who needs the history lesson but I am glad you at least know about it unlike that other guy who started this thread.
He wasn’t even supposed to compete, he was coming as a sort of guest poser and wasn’t even “registered”. Well world got out that Arnie was going to compete and the other competetors were of course pissed. Arnie took BBing to a whole new level and Mentzer with his looks was supposed to carry the flag. Well Mentzer had a recreational drug problem and of course the IFBB didn’t want their next golden boy tarnished as a druggie (but apparently roids are fine…just like all pro sports, but anyway…). You see, I read my history…or at least difference versions of it.
I do not believe Mentzer’s drug problem was an issue until AFTER he retired. This was not the reason he was overlooked in 1980 along with everyone else and this wasn’t an issue in public at all before 1980.
To each his own man. If someone thinks Ronnie’s development is “ideal” then more power to them. Just don’t get upset when people disagree.
But see, we aren’t even discussing Ronnie. We are discussing guys who are competing NOW at the Olympia in October…which does not include Ronnie.
If the best you guys can do to talk about some problem in pro bodybuilding is bring up people NOT competing, why do you expect others more versed to take you seriously?[/quote]
Well I was just speaking in general about ‘today’s bodybuilers’ and Ronnie is the best example of otherworldliness…well that and Ruhl’s turmors masquerading as shoulders.
I guess you’re right though…there’s never been a “back step”. It’s always been bigger and bigger, more and more cut, advance, advance, advance. Shit, in 50 years we may see 400lb 5% bf monsters out there.
You bring up a good point. People saw Arnie and company. More and more people started lifting and competing or not competing and that physique becomes not so abnormal anymore. We expect to see more and more. People train, new drugs are found, and more and more limits are broken.
I think the future could be in someone who’s really gigantic, well over 6 foot and competes lean over 350.
Like this guy: http://www.wholefitness.com/bodybuilder.html
Maybe even bigger like is said…375-400. Anything is possible.
[quote]majicka wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Arnold is the Barbie Doll of bodybuilding.
What does that mean? [/quote]
Arnold was used by Weider as a commodity. He was an imported generic prototype subject to supply and demand. Those who bought into his image made Weider money.
He was not a subject of bodybuilding he was an object used by Weider to promote his bodybuilding empire.
I do not dislike Arnold. I dislike what he represents:
The objectification of a man not an edification of one - which is what the essence of bodybuilding is:
To edify, to build a man.
Serge Nubret, for example, is a living representation of that.
[quote]JEATON wrote:
olympianiac wrote:
i think that either sergio olivia, who had an incredible v-taper, and richG gaspari, how was ripped beyond belief and quit vascular too, are some great bodybuilders of that era that rival arnolds physique, IMO.
Don’t forget Lee Labrada, one of the most under appreciated of his era.
Going back to Arnold’s day, Look at old pictures of Boyer Coe. Absolutely near perfect in symmetry and lines.
[/quote]
Boyer’s physique might be rockin, but his hair piece looks like a freaking party wig.
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
majicka wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Arnold is the Barbie Doll of bodybuilding.
What does that mean?
Arnold was used by Weider as a commodity. He was an imported generic prototype subject to supply and demand. Those who bought into his image made Weider money.
He was not a subject of bodybuilding he was an object used by Weider to promote his bodybuilding empire.
I do not dislike Arnold. I dislike what he represents:
The objectification of a man not an edification of one - which is what the essence of bodybuilding is:
To edify, to build a man.
Serge Nubret, for example, is a living representation of that.[/quote]
At first I thought you were joking when you referred to him as the barbie doll of bodybuilding… Maybe I am a dummie but I just don’t get it. Arnold was, is, and always will be his own man. So what if he was heavily marketed by Weider? He was bodybuilding’s greatest champion. Do you think Peyton Manning and Tom Brady care that are plastered all over tv commercials as they count their millions of dollars? If anything, Arnold used Weider and bodybuilding to accomplish his true goals in life, and has more to show for it than anyone in bodybuilding’s history. Arnold was a trailblazer and should be remembered as one.
-
Arnold was a great bodybuilder
-
I prefer the physiques of bodybuilders today. I prefer the thicker look through the upper back, midsections, and the bigger legs.
-
Pies should be ranked in this order Mr. Beans: Chicken, Bacon & Egg, Pepper Steak, Steak & Mushroom, Chicken and Kumara, anytime you put a curry in a pie…then anything else.
-
Trolls should get fucked and die…with bloated stomachs.
[quote]chitown34 wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
majicka wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Arnold is the Barbie Doll of bodybuilding.
What does that mean?
Arnold was used by Weider as a commodity. He was an imported generic prototype subject to supply and demand. Those who bought into his image made Weider money.
He was not a subject of bodybuilding he was an object used by Weider to promote his bodybuilding empire.
I do not dislike Arnold. I dislike what he represents:
The objectification of a man not an edification of one - which is what the essence of bodybuilding is:
To edify, to build a man.
Serge Nubret, for example, is a living representation of that.
At first I thought you were joking when you referred to him as the barbie doll of bodybuilding… Maybe I am a dummie but I just don’t get it. Arnold was, is, and always will be his own man. So what if he was heavily marketed by Weider? He was bodybuilding’s greatest champion. Do you think Peyton Manning and Tom Brady care that are plastered all over tv commercials as they count their millions of dollars? If anything, Arnold used Weider and bodybuilding to accomplish his true goals in life, and has more to show for it than anyone in bodybuilding’s history. Arnold was a trailblazer and should be remembered as one.
[/quote]
No, you are not a dummie. We just have different perspectives.
If you hold that manhood is defined by the size of a man’s penis ( as many men and women do ) or the size of his bank account then your perspective is correct.
[quote]BantamRunner wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BantamRunner wrote:
Gironda by our standards had an excellent physique back in the day but he never won shit because the judging didn’t award that level of leanness. Arnie wouldn’t win shit today because he doesn’t have the wheels and isn’t cut up enough. They use more “gear” today and that’s the reason you see the top of line guys looking like creatures from another planet. At least Arnie and company looked human.
Ridiculous statement. Do you think that random clueless people on the street in the year 1967 didn’t also think guys like Sergio and others looked inhuman? They would get crowds of people standing around them gawking at their development…a level that more and more guys simply training in gyms around the country look more like now whether they compete or not simply making it more common now than it was then.
You can guarantee every disparaging word you are now throwing at current pro bodybuilders was also tossed by your long lost 1960’s doppleganger. That makes the statement itself ridiculous because in 20 years from now, no one is going to be calling Phil Heath a “creature” in some review of 2009.
Arnie won '80 because of politics.
No shit. I may be the last one here who needs the history lesson but I am glad you at least know about it unlike that other guy who started this thread.
He wasn’t even supposed to compete, he was coming as a sort of guest poser and wasn’t even “registered”. Well world got out that Arnie was going to compete and the other competetors were of course pissed. Arnie took BBing to a whole new level and Mentzer with his looks was supposed to carry the flag. Well Mentzer had a recreational drug problem and of course the IFBB didn’t want their next golden boy tarnished as a druggie (but apparently roids are fine…just like all pro sports, but anyway…). You see, I read my history…or at least difference versions of it.
I do not believe Mentzer’s drug problem was an issue until AFTER he retired. This was not the reason he was overlooked in 1980 along with everyone else and this wasn’t an issue in public at all before 1980.
To each his own man. If someone thinks Ronnie’s development is “ideal” then more power to them. Just don’t get upset when people disagree.
But see, we aren’t even discussing Ronnie. We are discussing guys who are competing NOW at the Olympia in October…which does not include Ronnie.
If the best you guys can do to talk about some problem in pro bodybuilding is bring up people NOT competing, why do you expect others more versed to take you seriously?
Well I was just speaking in general about ‘today’s bodybuilers’ and Ronnie is the best example of otherworldliness…well that and Ruhl’s turmors masquerading as shoulders.
I guess you’re right though…there’s never been a “back step”. It’s always been bigger and bigger, more and more cut, advance, advance, advance. Shit, in 50 years we may see 400lb 5% bf monsters out there.
You bring up a good point. People saw Arnie and company. More and more people started lifting and competing or not competing and that physique becomes not so abnormal anymore. We expect to see more and more. People train, new drugs are found, and more and more limits are broken.
I think the future could be in someone who’s really gigantic, well over 6 foot and competes lean over 350.
Like this guy: http://www.wholefitness.com/bodybuilder.html
Maybe even bigger like is said…375-400. Anything is possible.[/quote]
im not a fan of noah steele really i dunno why…fucking love vic richards though now there is one ‘‘mass monster’’
[quote]Alpha F wrote:
chitown34 wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
majicka wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
Arnold is the Barbie Doll of bodybuilding.
What does that mean?
Arnold was used by Weider as a commodity. He was an imported generic prototype subject to supply and demand. Those who bought into his image made Weider money.
He was not a subject of bodybuilding he was an object used by Weider to promote his bodybuilding empire.
I do not dislike Arnold. I dislike what he represents:
The objectification of a man not an edification of one - which is what the essence of bodybuilding is:
To edify, to build a man.
Serge Nubret, for example, is a living representation of that.
At first I thought you were joking when you referred to him as the barbie doll of bodybuilding… Maybe I am a dummie but I just don’t get it. Arnold was, is, and always will be his own man. So what if he was heavily marketed by Weider? He was bodybuilding’s greatest champion. Do you think Peyton Manning and Tom Brady care that are plastered all over tv commercials as they count their millions of dollars? If anything, Arnold used Weider and bodybuilding to accomplish his true goals in life, and has more to show for it than anyone in bodybuilding’s history. Arnold was a trailblazer and should be remembered as one.
No, you are not a dummie. We just have different perspectives.
If you hold that manhood is defined by the size of a man’s penis ( as many men and women do ) or the size of his bank account then your perspective is correct.
[/quote]
I guess so. You keep bringing up the “edification of a man” or someone’s manhood, so I’m guessing that your idea of bodybuilding involves some kind of spiritual journey or character growth, but bodybuilding is just like any other sport. It is a somewhat selfish pursuit (building of one’s body doesn’t exactly help society in any way) in which the athletes end up on stage to pose for a paying audience, and in return they receive monetary compensation. The goal of most pro bbers is to get endorsement deals and use the fame from bbing to springboard into another arena. Arnold understood this. He could have stuck around for another 5-10 years like Sergio, Franco, and Serge, but he had bigger goals in life.
[quote]BantamRunner wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BantamRunner wrote:
Gironda by our standards had an excellent physique back in the day but he never won shit because the judging didn’t award that level of leanness. Arnie wouldn’t win shit today because he doesn’t have the wheels and isn’t cut up enough. They use more “gear” today and that’s the reason you see the top of line guys looking like creatures from another planet. At least Arnie and company looked human.
Ridiculous statement. Do you think that random clueless people on the street in the year 1967 didn’t also think guys like Sergio and others looked inhuman? They would get crowds of people standing around them gawking at their development…a level that more and more guys simply training in gyms around the country look more like now whether they compete or not simply making it more common now than it was then.
You can guarantee every disparaging word you are now throwing at current pro bodybuilders was also tossed by your long lost 1960’s doppleganger. That makes the statement itself ridiculous because in 20 years from now, no one is going to be calling Phil Heath a “creature” in some review of 2009.
Arnie won '80 because of politics.
No shit. I may be the last one here who needs the history lesson but I am glad you at least know about it unlike that other guy who started this thread.
He wasn’t even supposed to compete, he was coming as a sort of guest poser and wasn’t even “registered”. Well world got out that Arnie was going to compete and the other competetors were of course pissed. Arnie took BBing to a whole new level and Mentzer with his looks was supposed to carry the flag. Well Mentzer had a recreational drug problem and of course the IFBB didn’t want their next golden boy tarnished as a druggie (but apparently roids are fine…just like all pro sports, but anyway…). You see, I read my history…or at least difference versions of it.
I do not believe Mentzer’s drug problem was an issue until AFTER he retired. This was not the reason he was overlooked in 1980 along with everyone else and this wasn’t an issue in public at all before 1980.
To each his own man. If someone thinks Ronnie’s development is “ideal” then more power to them. Just don’t get upset when people disagree.
But see, we aren’t even discussing Ronnie. We are discussing guys who are competing NOW at the Olympia in October…which does not include Ronnie.
If the best you guys can do to talk about some problem in pro bodybuilding is bring up people NOT competing, why do you expect others more versed to take you seriously?
Well I was just speaking in general about ‘today’s bodybuilers’ and Ronnie is the best example of otherworldliness…well that and Ruhl’s turmors masquerading as shoulders.
I guess you’re right though…there’s never been a “back step”. It’s always been bigger and bigger, more and more cut, advance, advance, advance. Shit, in 50 years we may see 400lb 5% bf monsters out there.
You bring up a good point. People saw Arnie and company. More and more people started lifting and competing or not competing and that physique becomes not so abnormal anymore. We expect to see more and more. People train, new drugs are found, and more and more limits are broken.
I think the future could be in someone who’s really gigantic, well over 6 foot and competes lean over 350.
Like this guy: http://www.wholefitness.com/bodybuilder.html
Maybe even bigger like is said…375-400. Anything is possible.[/quote]
I think you missed X’s point that guys competing and winning todays shows are not as big as Ronnie. They’re more aesthetic.
I’ve always liked Arnolds physique – I also like Sergio Oliva, Frank Zane, and Dave Drapper.