Curry wins the OLYMPIA

[Mike Hunt]

i personally think moore shld have won, if we really want to get back into what bodybuilding really shld be its nice symetry great lines CONDITIONED body, cross striations and full muscle bellies, hes it. like i said before, every yr it gets more and more disappointing that these 'professionals' cant even come in peeled. some guy said to me today well the pros nowadays are way bigger than the past lol...hahahaha dorian yates was not small and he got nasty conditioned. cutler did it, dont tell me it cant be done.

 

[Mike Arnold]

No, Curry wasn't the most conditioned guy on stage, but his shape, lines and overall structure is phenomenal (in other words, his overall "look") and in my opinion, that should count for a LOT.

A lot of people talk about the "old days" and how conditioning mattered more, but has it always been this way? You had guys like Flex who would often place 2nd at the Olympia while being in no better shape than many of the guys in the O' line-up today...simply because his overall look was unbelievable.

If you really want to talk about the "old days" and what bodybuilding was originally intended to be, look back to the 80's, 70's and even the 60's, 50's, and 40's. Back then shape, lines and overall structure were of paramount importance. These days, many fans believe that size, balance and condition are all that really matter...and should be the primary prerequisites on which the judging is based. I used to feel the same in years past, but not anymore.

While size, balance and condition are important, they don't do you much good when you look like a pile of relative dogshit. While I am not saying Hadi looked like dogshit, his overall appearance was CLEARLY inferior to Curry...by a large margin...and it isn't like he dominated Curry on size, either. In fact, Curry's front torso (chest, delts and arms) packed a noticeably larger amount of round, full mass than did Hadi's. His roundness and fullness were incredible--similar to a Phil Heath in his prime.

Should it be primarily about size, balance and condition? Or, do do shape, lines and overall structure take precedence? This is where the sport is split in terms of opinion.

On the one side, you have fans who think that size, balance and condition are the three most important prerequisites for judging a physique, but you have other fans who place shape, lines and overall genetic structure at the top of the heap. It wasn't that long ago that shape, lines and structure were considered the most important attributes--the foundation on which everything else was judged. If you didn't have the former, the latter didn't mean much.

Guys like Steeve Reeves used to beat guys like Grimek, who was MUCH more heavily muscled (and just as ripped and balanced) as Reeves was. Yet, Reeves would win because they considered his overall appearance (i.e. shapes, lines, and overall structure) to be superior. His physique simply "looked" better from an aesthetics point of view.

Haney used to win the same way. Sure, he was a big man with sometimes great conditioning, but his legs were nowhere close to a Tom platz...or many of the other competitors of his day. Yet, he won the Olympia 8 years in a row...because he had superior shape, lines and structure. In other words, he possessed the "CLASSIC" bodybuilding attributes that the sport was originally based off of...and this is where some of today's fans disagree. The question is...do classic attributes take precedence? Or, has the sport become all about being as big, ripped and freaky as possible?


It's up for you to decide. I am going with Curry's look over Hadi's any day of the week.

 

[thethinker48]

No, Curry wasn't the most conditioned guy on stage, but his shape, lines and overall structure is phenomenal (in other words, his overall "look") and in my opinion, that should count for a LOT.

A lot of people talk about the "old days" and how conditioning mattered more, but has it always been this way? You had guys like Flex who would often place 2nd at the Olympia while being in no better shape than many of the guys in the O' line-up today...simply because his overall look was unbelievable.

If you really want to talk about the "old days" and what bodybuilding was originally intended to be, look back to the 80's, 70's and even the 60's, 50's, and 40's. Back then shape, lines and overall structure were of paramount importance. These days, many fans believe that size, balance and condition are all that really matter...and should be the primary prerequisites on which the judging is based. I used to feel the same in years past, but not anymore.

While size, balance and condition are important, they don't do you much good when you look like a pile of relative dogshit. While I am not saying Hadi looked like dogshit, his overall appearance was CLEARLY inferior to Curry...by a large margin...and it isn't like he dominated Curry on size, either. In fact, Curry's front torso (chest, delts and arms) packed a noticeably larger amount of round, full mass than did Hadi's. His roundness and fullness were incredible--similar to a Phil Heath in his prime.

Should it be primarily about size, balance and condition? Or, do do shape, lines and overall structure take precedence? This is where the sport is split in terms of opinion.

On the one side, you have fans who think that size, balance and condition are the three most important prerequisites for judging a physique, but you have other fans who place shape, lines and overall genetic structure at the top of the heap. It wasn't that long ago that shape, lines and structure were considered the most important attributes--the foundation on which everything else was judged. If you didn't have the former, the latter didn't mean much.

Guys like Steeve Reeves used to beat guys like Grimek, who was MUCH more heavily muscled (and just as ripped and balanced) as Reeves was. Yet, Reeves would win because they considered his overall appearance (i.e. shapes, lines, and overall structure) to be superior. His physique simply "looked" better from an aesthetics point of view.

Haney used to win the same way. Sure, he was a big man with sometimes great conditioning, but his legs were nowhere close to a Tom platz...or many of the other competitors of his day. Yet, he won the Olympia 8 years in a row...because he had superior shape, lines and structure. In other words, he possessed the "CLASSIC" bodybuilding attributes that the sport was originally based off of...and this is where some of today's fans disagree. The question is...do classic attributes take precedence? Or, has the sport become all about being as big, ripped and freaky as possible?


It's up for you to decide. I am going with Curry's look over Hadi's any day of the week.

I’m very split on this.

Muscle, proportioned and conditioned are of utmost importance in bodybuilding. And being someone of average genetics, you kind of root for the guy whose worked his ass off to build the muscle and bring the conditioning to the stage; the Branch Warren types.

But I also want our Mr Olympia to be a literal comic book character like Phil, and Ronnie were. Shape, roundness and structure that is out of this world and NOT seen regularly anywhere. That kind of freaky roundness is just so out of this world.

There are plenty of big ripped guys walking around; but few have that crazy He Man look.

So I’m not mad at Curry being Mr Olympia. He looks like a cartoon character. BUT he has the potential to be SO much better (especially his legs). A lot of these guys do...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Beti ona]

When Haney won, the legs were still not of supreme importance, that changed in the 90s and 00s. Dorian, Ronnie, Jay, Dexter, Phil and Rhoden had quite remarkable legs, at the level of their upper body.

Curry in the Arnold was more balanced and his condition was slightly better, just had to repeat what he brought in the Arnold, but instead, he and his team pumped water to his upper train to come heavier but also more watery, softer and more unbalanced.

**broken link removed**
**broken link removed**

**broken link removed**
**broken link removed**

**broken link removed**
**broken link removed**

It seems to be what they wanted to do, a very bad and dangerous strategy when we all know that the show is decided on Friday.

Last night was an incredible experience, but my work is not yet done. I will be sharping my physique for tonight leaving no room for questions. We came in really round and full for prejudging expecting to to be worked throughly by Big Steve @bevsgym. Seeing the gain made since the @arnoldsports win we can see now that with a bit more dryness this physique will really be even more impressive and the title within our grasp.

 

[Big A]

This is the first Olympia where the winner doesn't have the "it" factor.

 

[TripppleP]

^
I agree

I feel the same way. I always liked Brandon but his legs are not Mr.Olympia legs. His upper half, yes, lower half, no.

 

[Marky Boy]

Hadi can’t speak English, it’s shit to imagine and think but this probably played a part too.

 

[Elvia1023]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfHEHeb6Oso&app=desktop

 

[Beti ona]

About Currys biceps possible SEO use

AC 2019 MO 2019

What do the experts on this board think?

 

[Rogue]

I think lots is being done with hylauronic acid (HA). Sometimes Glycerol injections for SEO, but if in the biceps, why did Brandon leave out the calves??

 

[johnjuanb1]

I think lots is being done with hylauronic acid (HA). Sometimes Glycerol injections for SEO, but if in the biceps, why did Brandon leave out the calves??

Me needs some of those Flex Wheeler calf implants.
Obviously had them taken out after retiring because there were no calves on Flex at his last show.

 

[doublebicep]

This is the first Olympia where the winner doesn't have the "it" factor.

Well put. I always enjoy the show but this one was unremarkable.

 

[Elvia1023]

Half the guys on the stage had used seo. The more videos/pics I see the less impressive Curry actually looks. It was a disappointing Olympia in terms of quality (men's bodybuilding).

Did you see what Kai posted? I thought it was a bit out of order and showed a lot. Basically congratulating Curry but with a pic of the two of them on stage were he was completely dwarfing him.

 

[marshallmadman]

He probably figured that Dexter won with absolutely zero calves so no one was looking at them.

Brandon's legs are fine. Symmetry is simply opinion. In my opinion, Hadi's legs overpowered his upper body by the same margin that Brandon's looked symmetrically smaller than his upper body. Basically, that was a draw. Brandon's structure and X frame won the day.

Bonac's physique just looks weird. I don't think he deserved second at all. Just really strange looking waist, narrow shoulders and seemed to be much smaller (size wise). He's always going to be 5'5" tall.

If Kuclo could locate a back, he would be top 3 without question...maybe even would have won this show if he had a back at all. Prejudging, he had the best condition on stage.

Trouble with a lot of these guys is that they try to eat 1000g of carbs every day right up to show time. Times have changed and cutting carbs is no longer in vogue. They are "handling" the carbs with drugs which results in the look we see. The 90's/early 2000's guys were suffering the last few weeks of prep by cutting carbs and then carbing up without spilling over. There's much more margin for error if you are depleted than if you are already nearly topped off with glycogen. 212 class is where the depletion still takes place to make the weight cut.

It's already setting up a very interesting scenario coming in to next year. Phil's already making noise on social media.

I think lots is being done with hylauronic acid (HA). Sometimes Glycerol injections for SEO, but if in the biceps, why did Brandon leave out the calves??

 

[Mike Arnold]

He probably figured that Dexter won with absolutely zero calves so no one was looking at them.

Brandon's legs are fine. Symmetry is simply opinion. In my opinion, Hadi's legs overpowered his upper body by the same margin that Brandon's looked symmetrically smaller than his upper body. Basically, that was a draw. Brandon's structure and X frame won the day.

Bonac's physique just looks weird. I don't think he deserved second at all. Just really strange looking waist, narrow shoulders and seemed to be much smaller (size wise). He's always going to be 5'5" tall.

If Kuclo could locate a back, he would be top 3 without question...maybe even would have won this show if he had a back at all. Prejudging, he had the best condition on stage.

Trouble with a lot of these guys is that they try to eat 1000g of carbs every day right up to show time. Times have changed and cutting carbs is no longer in vogue. They are "handling" the carbs with drugs which results in the look we see. The 90's/early 2000's guys were suffering the last few weeks of prep by cutting carbs and then carbing up without spilling over. There's much more margin for error if you are depleted than if you are already nearly topped off with glycogen. 212 class is where the depletion still takes place to make the weight cut.

It's already setting up a very interesting scenario coming in to next year. Phil's already making noise on social media.

See bold above: I agree. I GREATLY prefer the aesthetics/symmetry of a Haney or Arnold over today's top bodybuilders. Curry's look was more reminiscent of yesterday's Champs, but with way more overall size. Proportions are very similar.

I think the upper legs of today's bodybuilders (in general) overpower their upper-bodies. It just isn't a good look (IMO). Even guys like Ronnie (98'-99') and Dorian had a ratio of upper to lower bodymass that was appealing.

In my opinion, if someone has giant quads (like many BB'rs today), they better have humongous calves (most don't) and an even bigger upper body (most don't), or their proportions are going to suffer.

With a guy like Dorian (who still carried more upper-body mass relative to his lower body), his calves were absolutely massive, but his quads weren't (not by today's standards) and he looked better for it. His quads did not overpower the rest of him. Look at Ronnie in 98'-99'. That body KILLS any bodybuilder on stage today, yet, in 98' in particular, his quads were nowhere near as bulbous as today's pros. In 99' his quads were a bit bigger, but so was his upper-body...so he retained basically the same overall proportions.

After the 90's things got out of hand and proportions changed. Just because the quads have the "potential" to become massive, doesn't mean they should be.

 

[johnjuanb1]

Half the guys on the stage had used seo. The more videos/pics I see the less impressive Curry actually looks. It was a disappointing Olympia in terms of quality (men's bodybuilding).

Did you see what Kai posted? I thought it was a bit out of order and showed a lot. Basically congratulating Curry but with a pic of the two of them on stage were he was completely dwarfing him.

Hahahaha
That’s actually pretty funny. I’m laughing reading it.
But you’re right, it’s not very nice.

 

[Beti ona]

I think Hadi had a better balance than Curry, and above all, he had greater hardness and condition.

I love the look of Curry that he brought in the Arnold, much drier and more proportionate.

 

[FK86]

Trouble with a lot of these guys is that they try to eat 1000g of carbs every day right up to show time. Times have changed and cutting carbs is no longer in vogue. They are "handling" the carbs with drugs which results in the look we see. The 90's/early 2000's guys were suffering the last few weeks of prep by cutting carbs and then carbing up without spilling over. There's much more margin for error if you are depleted than if you are already nearly topped off with glycogen. 212 class is where the depletion still takes place to make the weight cut.

Interesting observation and would explain why conditioning seems to be such an issue in the open division while 212 and Classic Physique don't have that problem to the same degree.

Let's go back to 1999. I think this is the best Coleman ever looked. Better than the following night even though he still won the show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhZT8l9Lmjs

I get that this is twenty years ago and time is no longer on his side, but Dexter looked crazy too (sound off for this one).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dm7fJmqL3NE

And the top 6

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeTlF0nXY0c

They all have that skin-splitting, hard, fully separated look that no one has had in years. Whatever the protocol was to get stage ready back then is what they need to go back to today.

Also from '99, Cutler looked insane and this isn't even on stage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K7RgDzueFG0