|
|
Post by BigMikeReed on Aug 13, 2006 6:36:35 GMT -5
I have to disagree with you guys here. I don't know that Art has done alot to ruin his physique since we saw him compete before. He has never had what anyone would have called an aesthetic look at all. He was/is all-out dense mass.. He'll never win a show though, I have to agree there. His structure is too way out there. You take a guy like Branch Warren or others that aren't "pretty" but dense and they could- Art is just too blocky and over the top.
|
|
|
|
Post by youngblood on Aug 13, 2006 9:50:21 GMT -5
He'll never win a show though, I have to agree there. Sorry Mike, but Art has already won a show! His very first pro show, the Toronto Pro. Not sure of the year, but I'd guess around 2000-2001. I believe he never got paid for that one either. |
|
|
|
Post by bodyfx on Aug 14, 2006 11:15:34 GMT -5
He'll never win a show though, I have to agree there. Sorry Mike, but Art has already won a show! His very first pro show, the Toronto Pro. Not sure of the year, but I'd guess around 2000-2001. I believe he never got paid for that one either. I was just about to say this...I believe it was 2002, and Art was about 245-250 onstage. His waist was tight, abs were carved, and he was dense as a motherf%cker! If would have remained on that path, he could have taken home several more titles. |
|
|
|
Post by GerryT on Aug 14, 2006 11:19:00 GMT -5
True, YB. After Art won the supers at 01 Nationals, he became one of a few to win his pro debut at Toronto in 2002 (beating Markus Ruhl among others). But Art was not as massive then as he is now, believe he was around 250-255 when he won Toronto.
He also got a top 3 in another Grand Prix in 03. But most shows are rewarding the conditioning and aesthetics (Phil Heath, Darrem Chales, etc.). So Art's look places him at a substantial disadvantage.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigMikeReed on Aug 14, 2006 16:11:26 GMT -5
OK OK OK GUYS!!!! #smileybusted4nh#
What I was actually meaning was that there were some pics posted that supposedly are recent. Given what's going on today and the that Art's shape is not waht it was a few years ago, I dont' believe he'd be able to win a show. GEEEZE!!!.. you guys are tough. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by youngblood on Aug 14, 2006 16:14:03 GMT -5
Someone over at MM made a good point awhile back. I think it was Zach_G, and I still think the idea has merit.
He used Ronnie as an example, and I think it works out quite well.
Some of these guys just get so big, and their guts get just as big if not bigger, that the only thing they seem to be able to do to hide the gut, is to get "all out, stupid big." Ronnie was huge in 98, and even bigger in 99. His gut was in check, and he was conditioned. Then in 2001 he was about 10lbs heavier from his 99 showing (whch was about 5-10 heavier than 98), and his crispness was gone. He had a gut, but his back and rear detail were still on the money, so he won. Same thing with 2001. Many believe Cutler won, but if you look at the photos, from the front Jay wins, but from the back Ronnie SLAYS him. Same thing today, and same reason Dorian, Lee Haney, and Arnold (and others) won often and held the title for a long time (not that I agree with dynasties). 2002, everyone begged Ronnie to come in like he did in 98. So he did and look what happened. His arms disappeared. Still had a gut to a certain extent.
In 2003, he was from another planet!!! Gut, yes. Size, plenty for many of the other competitors to be blocked from view. Detail? Yes! Absolutely, frickin' huge. 2004, he comes in another 10-12 pounds over his weight in 2003 (287lbs) and lacks even more detail. The champs body is now getting tired, and needs a break. In 2005, he brought in a much smaller and detailed package, with a gut that seemed to disapear. Down 10lbs from the previous year, he looked incredible.
Who knows what he'll bring this year, but rumor has it that he will be around 300-305lbs, but I don't think he'll look anything like 2003 or 1998.
His body is beaten, and while still king of the hill, the only thing he seems to be able to do is gain mass for mass' sake. When he downsizes, like in 2002, he loses too many things that got him to where he is today....detail, arms, back, crispness etc...
IU'm not sure if I made a point in there at all. I'll have to let the rest of you figure that out! #smileydunno9gx# #bheadbangsmiley7rd#
|
|
|
|
Post by 1705total on Aug 18, 2006 18:35:50 GMT -5
Art won the superheavyweight class in 01 Nationals. Branch Warren won the Heavies, and Johnie Jackson won the lightheavies and overall. We have seen a group of athletes come out of the nationals in the same year that successfull since 1991!
Art needs to return to his Toronto Pro look to do well. In Florida 2 years ago he almost did that.
He's a great guy, and I love the mass he carries and how hard and heavy he trains.
With his structure though, he does need to come in around 255-265 range, and suck the waist in, if he did that everything would take care of itself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maximum6 on Aug 19, 2006 4:39:10 GMT -5
i guess there is a LIMIT in being as big as you can while still having a plzing physique.
|
|
|
|
Post by QuietBob on Aug 19, 2006 14:05:41 GMT -5
IU'm not sure if I made a point in there at all. I'll have to let the rest of you figure that out! #smileydunno9gx# #bheadbangsmiley7rd# I read that last night when I got home from work and couldn't stop laughing... Maybe I can cloud the picture some more... I think one of the reasons Ronnie has dominated is that no matter how much mass he carries ( gut aside ) he is still relatively proportioned. He doesn't have that "body parts thrown together" look that some of the other massive guys have. He's got a great quad sweep that flows, his lat insertions and flair are just right (more high than low, which would give that blocky look), chest is still tight and not droopy. Going back to Atwood, I think those are his problems which give him the totally unsymmetrical, pieced together look. It must all go back to genetics (muscle origin and insertion points, naturally gifted body parts vs. stubborn parts, genetic muscle shape, natural waist/hip ratio, etc.). That's what is keeping the mass guys (Ronnie, Jay) on top right now, the ability to maintain proportion (again, gut aside--remember, if you can hold it together on stage that's all that matters for these guys as far as contest/career) while still carrying insane size, which is why they're on top. They put size on in the right places . If you strip them down to the 240-250lb range, I wonder what happens onstage...? Or, for that matter, put 50 lbs on a mid-level, structurally pleasing contender. Will the muscle go in the right places or will we have another science project gone wrong? |
|
