Maybe this is the wrong forum, or the right one…
If strength athletes like powerlifters, or WSM, or lumberjacks, or offensive lineman had tended to be leaner then would we have a different ideal physique for bodybuilders today?
It seems to me that in the mid 90s we got to the point where everyone just tried to get every muscle as big as possible.
No.
i wouldn’t see the affect it would have
level 4?
joined 2004?
over 2500 posts?
this breaks all the rules!
I don’t understand. What do strength athletes have to do with bodybuilding? The strength spectrum lies on the opposite end of the bodybuilding spectrum. One does not equate with the other. Thus, the answer to your question is no.
I’m interpreting him as saying if instead of traditional bodybuilding ideals, v-taper, leg sweep, etc, if bodybuilding ideals were based on powerlifters and other large athletes only in leaner condition what would be the ideals.
Not really sure I guess thicker waists and more emphasis on torso muscles compared to limbs, but really theres no way to predict preferences so its pretty pointless to guess imo.
[quote]The Greek wrote:
I don’t understand. What do strength athletes have to do with bodybuilding? The strength spectrum lies on the opposite end of the bodybuilding spectrum. One does not equate with the other. Thus, the answer to your question is no. [/quote]
Not sure what this means. How can one spectrum lie on the other side of another spectrum? Did you mean to say that bodybuilding lies on the opposite end of the strength spectrum (or something like that). Because then I would argue that weakness lies on the opposite end of that spectrum and obesity/malnourishment lie on the opposite side of the bodybuilding spectrum. Strength and bodybuilding seem to have a more symbiotic relationship than antagonistic as you define it.
Today’s bodybuilders are the extreme example of ancient Hellenic Ideal.
It’s an ancient Greek aesthetic that emphasizes form that’s based on proportion and balance. The Romans “borrowed” that ideal when they created those awesome statues. Few men back then were actually built like that. But the artists would use parts from several models to create the ideal statue.
I had a similar idea once, but it involved pro-wrestlers rather than “strength/power athletes”.
Skinny (straight) kids lifted weights to get big and strong back in the day, and while everyone assumed he would look “aesthetic” after adding muscle, that wasn’t the goal. And i’d say the bulk of the weight training population that drives the BBing rags and supplement industry has always been the skinny kids trying to “man up”
Of course, there has also been the “aesthetic focus” driven by the gay/overweight/middle-aged men on a fap bender obsessed with “muscle worship” or whatever. And quite a few bbers tried (sometimes unintentionally) to appeal to this segment but BBing rags and supplements got popular ONLY when the skinny kids took to moving weight.
So there has always been a driving focus imo in BBing to “get every muscle as big as possible” or “look like you can move the earth”. (NOTE:The “hawt abz” brigade is a consequence of a bbing trying to break ranks and “connect with the female population”, a subsection of the skinny kids segment is moving out of the “get big and strong” mentality.)
Anyhoo, as far as the big and strong mentality goes…BBing has only really ahd to compete with the pro-wrestling stars and its a losing battle, since prowrestlers have been able to stay mainstream, be financially successful while also looking “big and strong”, demonstrate popularity and sex appeal to women, and the “fighting” aspect of their work has an added appeal to the “skinny weak kids” segment.
BBing on the other hand has been long tormented by its gay origins as well as the gay subculture that surrounds it, unable to demonstrate financial success and popularity (with women) for anyone but the top competitors…but thats a different story.
The one area where Bbing can successfully compete with pro-wrestling is in the SIZE arena…and there has traditionally been a notion that Bbers are just “smoke and mirrors” who can create an illusion of being big on stage with no one else around them yada yada yada, so competitive BBing has had to redouble its efforts to keep up with its closest competitor.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Maybe this is the wrong forum, or the right one…
If strength athletes like powerlifters, or WSM, or lumberjacks, or offensive lineman had tended to be leaner then would we have a different ideal physique for bodybuilders today?
It seems to me that in the mid 90s we got to the point where everyone just tried to get every muscle as big as possible. [/quote]
[quote]Kerley wrote:
level 4?
joined 2004?
over 2500 posts?
this breaks all the rules![/quote]
Here’s the thing, and maybe the athlete comparison was wrong, but I would rather look at pictures of Sergio, Arnold, Franco than Ronnie Coleman, or Jay Cutler.
I’m just trying to figure out why? Their photos catch my attention more. They seem a little less “swole” and more “shape”. There is still the striations but not the extreme vascuarity.
Perhaps what I’m asking is when did “extreme vascularity” become a bodybuilding goal.
In fact, I prefer current guys appearance 10 weeks out of contest shape!
(Except that I haven’t seen a vacuum waist in a while, and I think that that Hercules statue looks a lot more like guys up to about 1992.
I liked Yates (a few weeks out of contest shape, I thought he looked less awesome in contest). I think Haney (who’s arms sucked ass though) was the last winner to be able to do a real vacuum pose, or even stand relaxed without the bloated look).
[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
I had a similar idea once, but it involved pro-wrestlers rather than “strength/power athletes”.
Skinny (straight) kids lifted weights to get big and strong back in the day, and while everyone assumed he would look “aesthetic” after adding muscle, that wasn’t the goal. And i’d say the bulk of the weight training population that drives the BBing rags and supplement industry has always been the skinny kids trying to “man up”
Of course, there has also been the “aesthetic focus” driven by the gay/overweight/middle-aged men on a fap bender obsessed with “muscle worship” or whatever. And quite a few bbers tried (sometimes unintentionally) to appeal to this segment but BBing rags and supplements got popular ONLY when the skinny kids took to moving weight.
So there has always been a driving focus imo in BBing to “get every muscle as big as possible” or “look like you can move the earth”. (NOTE:The “hawt abz” brigade is a consequence of a bbing trying to break ranks and “connect with the female population”, a subsection of the skinny kids segment is moving out of the “get big and strong” mentality.)
Anyhoo, as far as the big and strong mentality goes…BBing has only really ahd to compete with the pro-wrestling stars and its a losing battle, since prowrestlers have been able to stay mainstream, be financially successful while also looking “big and strong”, demonstrate popularity and sex appeal to women, and the “fighting” aspect of their work has an added appeal to the “skinny weak kids” segment.
BBing on the other hand has been long tormented by its gay origins as well as the gay subculture that surrounds it, unable to demonstrate financial success and popularity (with women) for anyone but the top competitors…but thats a different story.
[/quote]
Interesting. The first BB Mag I got had Bob Paris on the front. I didn’t know who he was. In fact I “read” the whole magazine about 5 times without realizing that the article was about him being gay, but
get to the point, the big debate in that article was whether Bob Paris or Lee Haney would become the new ideal.
Then we had Hanye retire and the question was first whether Vince Taylor or Dorian Yates would become the new ideal, then Flex Wheeler or Yates.
Paris/Labrada/Shawn Ray/Vince Taylor/Flex Wheeler all had a chance to become MO and would have been entirely different than the direction it went in. Haney won 8 times despite what Oliva called “no arms.” Yates was deserving but only because he become overwhelmingly stunning in '93 and '94 before the injury, enough “stun” factor to knock off all the smaller guys.
If Yates had not come along, I don’t think that one of the truly huge men could have taken over (ie Nasser). Kevin Levrone might have won, but he’s not IMO in the same “vein” as Haney, Yates, Ronnie, Jay.
BTW I think Cutler and Jackson look pretty impressive. I think they are a huge improvement on Coleman.
[quote]czar14 wrote:
I’m interpreting him as saying if instead of traditional bodybuilding ideals, v-taper, leg sweep, etc, if bodybuilding ideals were based on powerlifters and other large athletes only in leaner condition what would be the ideals.
Not really sure I guess thicker waists and more emphasis on torso muscles compared to limbs, but really theres no way to predict preferences so its pretty pointless to guess imo.[/quote]
But yes, this was really my premise question. There was a time, even up through the 80s I’d say when upper pec development was not considered to be a bodybuilding ideal. The pecs were not supposed to look like “semi spheres” but as Gironda said “armor plates”. All of his chest exercises were decline type movements.
I also think that with earlier bodybuilders you can see the development of the thicker tendons at the insertions. Maybe that’s what I’m subconsciously seeing: muscles without the corresponding thick tendons.
Come on mert, you’re smarter than that. Tendons thicken just as muscles do, in response to heavy weight. Remember back in the 80’s and early 90s when the skinny karatekas and shaolin wannabes took pride in their “thicker stronger tendons”. Their tendons looked thicker relative to their muscles, because they were skinny dudes who trained. The so-called wiry strength ideal Pavel keeps screaming about.
Off-topic but strangely relevant, I have made enough money hustling wannabe Bruce lees, peddling the worthless “dit da jow” oriental linment that would supposedly endow the user with thicker stronger tendons…but that was a different day and age. Kids these days are just as dumb and clueless…AND they are confused because the hustlers themselves have specialised (relative strength hustlers, functional training hustlers, BBing training hustlers, kettlebell crooks, female training hustlers, snake oil salesmen, yada yada yada). So while its an easier crowd to fleece these days, its WAY more competitive.
Anyway, the tendons at the insertions look smaller on modern day Bbers because the competitors have way more thickness in their muscle bellies. Thats all.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
I also think that with earlier bodybuilders you can see the development of the thicker tendons at the insertions. Maybe that’s what I’m subconsciously seeing: muscles without the corresponding thick tendons.[/quote]
[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
Come on mert, you’re smarter than that. Tendons thicken just as muscles do, in response to heavy weight. Remember back in the 80’s and early 90s when the skinny karatekas and shaolin wannabes took pride in their “thicker stronger tendons”. Their tendons looked thicker relative to their muscles, because they were skinny dudes who trained. The so-called wiry strength ideal Pavel keeps screaming about.
Off-topic but strangely relevant, I have made enough money hustling wannabe Bruce lees, peddling the worthless “dit da jow” oriental linment that would supposedly endow the user with thicker stronger tendons…but that was a different day and age. Kids these days are just as dumb and clueless…AND they are confused because the hustlers themselves have specialised (relative strength hustlers, functional training hustlers, BBing training hustlers, kettlebell crooks, female training hustlers, snake oil salesmen, yada yada yada). So while its an easier crowd to fleece these days, its WAY more competitive.
Anyway, the tendons at the insertions look smaller on modern day Bbers because the competitors have way more thickness in their muscle bellies. Thats all.
mertdawg wrote:
I also think that with earlier bodybuilders you can see the development of the thicker tendons at the insertions. Maybe that’s what I’m subconsciously seeing: muscles without the corresponding thick tendons.
[/quote]
Maybe you are right as far as appearance, but you can’t pump up a tendon, and I know from my strength training that some moves build strength (lockouts) while others build pump (pressdowns with a peak contraction) but are easier on the joints. BBers don’t seem to lock out anything, for the sake of avoiding overstress on the joints. What does that mean? There is something that happens at lockout on a bench or squat that doesn’t happen if you do 3/4 movements with constant tension.
Also, when I started this I was also thinking about the trend toward shorter BBers with shorter relative limbs.
I wondered if we would have a different “longer limbed” ideal.
[quote]tribunaldude wrote:
(NOTE:The “hawt abz” brigade is a consequence of a bbing trying to break ranks and “connect with the female population”, a subsection of the skinny kids segment is moving out of the “get big and strong” mentality.)[/quote]
looks like these skinny kids failed at getting big (substituting hard work and experience for internet knowledge") and moved to the hawt abz group. The fucked up part comes when these kids call the worthy big guys “unfunctional meatheads”, just because they read a C… article.
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Kerley wrote:
level 4?
joined 2004?
over 2500 posts?
this breaks all the rules!
Here’s the thing, and maybe the athlete comparison was wrong, but I would rather look at pictures of Sergio, Arnold, Franco than Ronnie Coleman, or Jay Cutler.
[/quote]
you should of just said that instead of going on about lumberjacks, i agree sort of, i like the bodybuilders of today but i wouldn’t wanna look like that, but its damn sure entertaining to see them on stage.
[quote]Kerley wrote:
mertdawg wrote:
Kerley wrote:
level 4?
joined 2004?
over 2500 posts?
this breaks all the rules!
Here’s the thing, and maybe the athlete comparison was wrong, but I would rather look at pictures of Sergio, Arnold, Franco than Ronnie Coleman, or Jay Cutler.
you should of just said that instead of going on about lumberjacks, i agree sort of, i like the bodybuilders of today but i wouldn’t wanna look like that, but its damn sure entertaining to see them on stage.
[/quote]
OK but are they BETTER than Sergio or Arnold? Bigger? Yes, but which would you rather look at? Isn’t that the question?
I’m not even talking about size versus asthetics, but which physiques make you look longer?
[quote]mertdawg wrote:
Kerley wrote:
mertdawg wrote:
Kerley wrote:
level 4?
joined 2004?
over 2500 posts?
this breaks all the rules!
Here’s the thing, and maybe the athlete comparison was wrong, but I would rather look at pictures of Sergio, Arnold, Franco than Ronnie Coleman, or Jay Cutler.
you should of just said that instead of going on about lumberjacks, i agree sort of, i like the bodybuilders of today but i wouldn’t wanna look like that, but its damn sure entertaining to see them on stage.
OK but are they BETTER than Sergio or Arnold? Bigger? Yes, but which would you rather look at? Isn’t that the question?
I’m not even talking about size versus asthetics, but which physiques make you look longer?
[/quote]
you cant really say, 1 is better than the other its different generations, and in a sport that is always changing by what the judges want and now a days was size, but back during Arnold’s time it wasn’t mass monsters that took 1st place. i think most people training for bodybuilding purposes wanna get as big as possible , and its there genetics that will determine how big they can get.
What I was actually getting at was this…by BBing trying to break ranks, I meant the couch-potato fatasses decided to tune in to see if there’s anything they can use.
While there’s a plethora of skinny weak kids (age 13-25), there’s way too many fat men and women in the higher age segments, and the only visual-feature of BBing they can identify with is the 6-pack aspect (since that stands out directly in contrast to their bursting bellies and love handles).
Whiel the skinny young attack the internet with ferocity to look for solutions, the older fat men and women DO control the cash flow into the industry since they’re making MORE money than the skinny kids…so the TV aspect of bodybuilding is all about 6 pack abs since thats all fat (straight and gay) middle aged america cares about at this point.
Expose the afore-described skinny kids (hitherto on a quest for size and strength) to the same television (controlled by fat middle aged americans) and they suddenly realize two things:
Getting bigger and stronger ain’t working out all that well for too many reasons (youtube, fake coaches giving worse advice, steroidzzzz, a growing public dissociation between size and strength thanks to functional gurus and the Rippetoe/Wendler-wannabes as well as emerging MMA).
they THINK they have something that seems to suddenly be craved by everyone and his pet ostrich — HAWWTTT ABZZZ since that seems to be the new spoils of a war well fought with “weights”.
Although most women are as smart as most men, they tend to be easily swayed by propaganda and confused/rattled easily and that characteristic has nothing to do with intelligence or education imo (read the comment by DebraD a few days back where she says she STILL struggles with fear of getting “too big”). So the “scrawny-or-not 6 pack abzz look whats MOST desirable in men” propaganda converts women and teenage girls into almost overnight believers.
Put 1, 2 and 3 together and you see why its so much easier for skinny kids to defect to the “hawt abzz” camp. They’d rather weild a skinny-pack rather than work towards building a foundation of size AND a built 4-12 pack (depending on torso) over the next 10 or so years.
I’ve said it before…if the popularity of college football and pro wrestling ever diminished, this site will be filled with old lifter-relics and little else. Bye Bye supplement industry.
[quote]MEYMZ wrote:
tribunaldude wrote:
(NOTE:The “hawt abz” brigade is a consequence of a bbing trying to break ranks and “connect with the female population”, a subsection of the skinny kids segment is moving out of the “get big and strong” mentality.)
looks like these skinny kids failed at getting big (substituting hard work and experience for internet knowledge") and moved to the hawt abz group. The fucked up part comes when these kids call the worthy big guys “unfunctional meatheads”, just because they read a C… article.[/quote]
I interpreted his question more like if you take a powerlifter and make it lost body fat to the same extend than BB, will he looks like a BB ?