OK…my first post…SHEESH! I do realize that the word could be spelled “esthetics” or “aesthetics” (after I looked it up…LOL). Shit for a minute I thought the debate had gone to the fingernail people, known as Estheticians…I’m clear on it now…
BUT what has me tongue-the-fuck-tied is how to pronounce AESTHLETICS! DAMMIT! HELP!
[quote]JeeKeu wrote:
BUT what has be toungue the fuck tied is how to pronounce AESTHLETICS! DAMMIT! HELP![/quote]
I’m sorry, what?
[quote]Nikki9591 wrote:
[quote]JeeKeu wrote:
BUT what has be toungue the fuck tied is how to pronounce AESTHLETICS! DAMMIT! HELP![/quote]
I’m sorry, what?[/quote]
Ask Maiden 3.16…HE SAID IT!..
Maybe Paco would fair better in a competition that really did judge on sheer “beefy-ness”! It doesn’t even have to be Esthetic, or Aesthetic, or (what the hell) Aesthletic, either! OR even taste good for that matter! The bigger the BESTEST!
NO! NO!..MAYBE HE’S A “Double Muscle” MUTANT! and his sidekick is WENDY THE WHIPPET! YEAH?..COULD BE…
[quote]JeeKeu wrote:
[quote]Nikki9591 wrote:
[quote]JeeKeu wrote:
BUT what has be toungue the fuck tied is how to pronounce AESTHLETICS! DAMMIT! HELP![/quote]
I’m sorry, what?[/quote]
Ask Maiden 3.16…HE SAID IT!..[/quote]
Lol
“EAT CAT…GET BIG!”
Branch Warren, Flex Wheeler, Jay Cutler, Johnny Jackson, Paco Bautista, Victor Martinez, Hidetada Yamagishi…and yes, EVEN YOU, Professor X…must delight yourselves with being 1st LOSER (second place, for the slower ones), and so on. When Bruticus gets his Pro Card…IT’S A WRAP!
Arms like Paco??? WHAT??? DOWN BOY!
(i tried to cover as many ethnicities as I could…I read the “R-word” bein tossed around here pretty heavily. And I ain’t “retarded”!
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
No doubt conditioning is a huge factor in bodybuiding. thats why cutler and warren can beat freeman and dexter who might look prettier(aesthletics).
Not to say Cutler and Warren dont have aesthletics.
I just dont think conditioning is that much of a factor regarding aesthletics on the pro level. they are all conditioned enough to allow their symmetry and proportion show through. You hear many times that guys like freeman have good aethletics, but they didnt “nail it” regarding conditioning. But you dont hear very often that someone is in good condition, but they didnt nail their aethletics.
[/quote]
Bingo. I agree 100%.
But be careful…I got called “pathetic” for saying the exact same thing.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
But you dont hear very often that someone is in good condition, but they didnt nail their aethletics.
[/quote]
Of course you dont. Because ‘aesthetics’ is not part of the criteria of bodybuilding. Aesthetics is COMPRISED of conditioning, size, etc.
Conditioning is on the scorecard. Aesthetics is not.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
Aesthetics is COMPRISED of conditioning, size, etc.
[/quote]
More correctly:
“Aesthetics COMPRISES conditioning, size, etc.”
</grammar police>
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
But you dont hear very often that someone is in good condition, but they didnt nail their aethletics.
[/quote]
Of course you dont. Because ‘aesthetics’ is not part of the criteria of bodybuilding. Aesthetics is COMPRISED of conditioning, size, etc.
Conditioning is on the scorecard. Aesthetics is not. [/quote]
I understand Aesthetics (got the spelling right i believe) is not on the scorecard.
Reason that guys that arent as pretty can win because they are bigger and more conditioned while still having good shape and symmetry.
But I do not think that on the pro bodybuilding stage conditioning compromises someones aesthetics. Flex will always be seen as a bodybuilder with good aesthetics. He might have come into shows more conditioned or less, but never does anyone say “well, he didn’t have good aesthetics tonight.” Cutler on the other hand, no matter how conditioned he is, people will always say something about his refrigerator look. (I do think he deserved every Olympia)
Any comparison between Flex Wheeler and Branch Warren should be a federal offense…
A good ol’ fashioned parody thread - “Taco, Taco, Taco” would be a good addition to this nonsense. You know, before I decided to ban parody threads.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
But you dont hear very often that someone is in good condition, but they didnt nail their aethletics.
[/quote]
Of course you dont. Because ‘aesthetics’ is not part of the criteria of bodybuilding. Aesthetics is COMPRISED of conditioning, size, etc.
Conditioning is on the scorecard. Aesthetics is not. [/quote]
I understand Aesthetics (got the spelling right i believe) is not on the scorecard.
Reason that guys that arent as pretty can win because they are bigger and more conditioned while still having good shape and symmetry.
But I do not think that on the pro bodybuilding stage conditioning compromises someones aesthetics. Flex will always be seen as a bodybuilder with good aesthetics. He might have come into shows more conditioned or less, but never does anyone say “well, he didn’t have good aesthetics tonight.” Cutler on the other hand, no matter how conditioned he is, people will always say something about his refrigerator look. (I do think he deserved every Olympia)
[/quote]
Good post.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
But you dont hear very often that someone is in good condition, but they didnt nail their aethletics.
[/quote]
Of course you dont. Because ‘aesthetics’ is not part of the criteria of bodybuilding. Aesthetics is COMPRISED of conditioning, size, etc.
Conditioning is on the scorecard. Aesthetics is not. [/quote]
But I do not think that on the pro bodybuilding stage conditioning compromises someones aesthetics. Flex will always be seen as a bodybuilder with good aesthetics. He might have come into shows more conditioned or less, but never does anyone say “well, he didn’t have good aesthetics tonight.” Cutler on the other hand, no matter how conditioned he is, people will always say something about his refrigerator look. (I do think he deserved every Olympia)
[/quote]
Yea. Iheard you the first time. You didnt realy understand what I was saying, I maybe I didnt explain it clear enough.
Flex Wheeler competing at 3% bodyfat vs Flex Wheeler competing at 6% bf (literally competing against himself for the sake of this example). Who wins? Obviously Flex at 3% because his aethetics will be superior.
You can be the most perfect guy in the world but if youre carrying too much fat you will lose points. The points on a scorecard are a numerical representation of how aesthetically pleasing the judge finds the competitor.
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
But you dont hear very often that someone is in good condition, but they didnt nail their aethletics.
[/quote]
Of course you dont. Because ‘aesthetics’ is not part of the criteria of bodybuilding. Aesthetics is COMPRISED of conditioning, size, etc.
Conditioning is on the scorecard. Aesthetics is not. [/quote]
But I do not think that on the pro bodybuilding stage conditioning compromises someones aesthetics. Flex will always be seen as a bodybuilder with good aesthetics. He might have come into shows more conditioned or less, but never does anyone say “well, he didn’t have good aesthetics tonight.” Cutler on the other hand, no matter how conditioned he is, people will always say something about his refrigerator look. (I do think he deserved every Olympia)
[/quote]
Yea. Iheard you the first time. You didnt realy understand what I was saying, I maybe I didnt explain it clear enough.
Flex Wheeler competing at 3% bodyfat vs Flex Wheeler competing at 6% bf (literally competing against himself for the sake of this example). Who wins? Obviously Flex at 3% because his aethetics will be superior.
You can be the most perfect guy in the world but if youre carrying too much fat you will lose points. The points on a scorecard are a numerical representation of how aesthetically pleasing the judge finds the competitor. [/quote]
LOL!
Yes, because there are people entering the Olympia contest with pounds of extra fat to lose.
Dude, seriously? At that stage, “conditioning” has much more to do with manipulation of body water. It does NOT usually come down to huge differences in the levels of body fat someone is carrying…because no one is going into a contest like that out of shape. Even Greg Kovacs didn’t get on stage FAT even though his proportions and shape were fucked.
There are pics of Flex NOT in contest shape but near it held as some of the most ideal images of bodybuilding. Conditioning WILL help you win a contest…but when history has the last word, it does not define who is seen as the more ideal representation of bodybuilding.
Most of the images people see of past “Golden Era” bodybuilders are off stage but near contest shape. Arnold was NEVER as lean as pros today but is STILL held as an ideal.
But then…you will probably call this “pathetic” or some other name even though it would appear I am not the only one with this opinion.
