|
-
11-26-2008, 02:59 PM #31
-
11-26-2008, 03:19 PM #32
-
-
11-26-2008, 03:40 PM #33
-
11-26-2008, 03:42 PM #34
- Join Date: Jul 2008
- Location: California, United States
- Posts: 2,160
- Rep Power: 1972
Sorry man, I was going to write more but I had to leave to the gym. I wrote it and planned on elaborating. I would say that it's partially due to genetics in that some bone structures make it easier to build a more classic look. In that I would say that having a good proportion of width to height and a naturally smaller waist definitely helps. However it you train with aesthetics and balance in mind and not just mass you can have a more classic look. Think about it, what's a big difference between pros then and pros now? They were smaller, and not as lean. Sure there was the exception but for the most part pros then were smaller then pros now. It's easier to have a small waist and pleasing aesthetics when your 220 as opposed to 260. Especially when the average pro bodybuilder is somewhere between 5'7 and 6' tall. Look at how small Ronnie Colemans waist was when he first turned pro. Then look at him at his last Mr. O. Quite a change right? But what changed, his genetics? No, he got bigger.
Have you ever red REPS Magazine? It's my favorite because it shows bodybuilders who are either elite amateurs or smaller pros. The body's in that magazine are more pleasing to the eye in my opinion.
Shawn Ray was awesome because in his time he knew he looked best at 205 or around there. Most of the modern era guys have succumb to the pressures of being gigantic so they put on more mass. There are guys who are Shawn's height competing around 240 now and 40 pounds of extra meat on a frame that size is a huge difference. It makes it much more difficult to maintain a small waist and symmetry.
I hope that with Dex winning the O smaller bodybuilders will work on looking their best more than just their biggest. Even guys with big waists can look really nice and classic like Franco Columbo if they really focus on it.
Remember genetics determine where you start in a race but your heart and mind determine where you finish.Last edited by Chococat; 11-26-2008 at 03:45 PM.
-
11-26-2008, 04:11 PM #35
- Join Date: Apr 2006
- Location: Binghamton, New York, United States
- Age: 34
- Posts: 7,879
- Rep Power: 8244
Hes got a pro card. I think somebody in here stated that he'd be great in the pro ranks. He was featured in MD a few issues back and had a spread on him. Really lacks in back width/thickness along with his legs. Has a very very similar look to Arnold though.
Said he only eats 2-3 times a day and when getting ready for a show does barely any cardio considering he teaches ballet lolwww.youtube.com/flexxinator
www.3dmusclejourney.com
www.blogtalkradio.com/nattytalk
-
11-26-2008, 05:18 PM #36
-
-
11-26-2008, 05:40 PM #37
Awsome build. Legs aren't too big yet still really ripped and defined. Back is wide enough and doesn't lack detail. Overall this guy has a perfect build in my opinion. It's not top 5 olympia worthy, but it's not like any normal person would want that look anyway, a competitor thats a different story.
-
11-26-2008, 09:30 PM #38
-
11-27-2008, 03:11 PM #39
-
11-27-2008, 04:04 PM #40
-
-
05-02-2009, 08:41 PM #41
-
05-02-2009, 09:27 PM #42
-
05-03-2009, 12:45 AM #43
-
05-03-2009, 01:35 AM #44
Actually he does have his pro card and he will be doing the NY Pro. I saw him at the Olympia Expo last year at a booth with Roland Kickinger. He does have good aesthetics, but compared to the other pros that will be competing in the NY Pro, he will need to add a little more mass. Kind of reminds me of a smaller version of Dennis Wolf.
-
-
05-03-2009, 02:02 AM #45
-
05-03-2009, 04:24 AM #46
-
05-03-2009, 06:25 AM #47
-
05-03-2009, 06:33 AM #48
He is packing a great physique, but will get annialated at the NY PRO, more of a fitness model look. If he want to compete seriously he has got to bring up the legs and back alot. But im sure there is alot more money in it for him to do mainstream meadia magazine ads then get huge enough to win shows
-
-
05-03-2009, 08:31 AM #49
-
05-03-2009, 09:28 AM #50
-
05-03-2009, 10:02 AM #51
-
05-03-2009, 10:10 AM #52
-
-
05-03-2009, 01:24 PM #53
-
05-03-2009, 01:59 PM #54
-
05-03-2009, 03:26 PM #55
-
05-05-2009, 09:16 PM #56
-
-
05-05-2009, 11:13 PM #57
Bookmarks