Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Randomum on September 28, 2010, 11:37:28 PM

Title: If you were a PRO
Post by: Randomum on September 28, 2010, 11:37:28 PM
If you were a bb pro would you refer to yourself as an athlete? I would prob. specify and say bodybuilder.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: ~UN_$ung~ on September 28, 2010, 11:55:08 PM
if we live in a world where tiger woods is called an athlete, and golf is called a "sport"


bodybuilders are certainly athletes
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Matt C on September 29, 2010, 12:07:56 AM
If you were a bb pro would you refer to yourself as an athlete? I would prob. specify and say bodybuilder.

In my reviews, I try to refer to the competitors as "bodybuilders" and bodybuilding itself as "the bodybuilding industry".  I just think that philosophically, a sport is an event where points can be scored in an objective way.  No matter how you cut it, bodybuilding is subjective.  Some things are "subjectively objective", i.e., the colour spectrum for example.  But even though what distinguishes red from auburn from brown is subjective, once established, placement in that group is NOT subjective.  For example, if we subjectively decide that six feet is "tall" you are then either "tall" or "not tall" based on that definition, and we can extend the definition further.  So although the initial categorization is subjective, placement in or out of that category after they are established is not.

But how points are scored in bodybuilding is neither objective or subjectively objective - It is simply a subjective matter.  Granted, I would not win the Mr. Olympia so presumably there is some degree of objectivity, but it is still subjective overall.  Of course using this definition of a "sport", we would have to call ping pong a sport, so it would leave something to be desired.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: ~UN_$ung~ on September 29, 2010, 12:10:40 AM
In my reviews, I try to refer to the competitors as "bodybuilders" and bodybuilding itself as "the bodybuilding industry".  I just think that philosophically, a sport is an event where points can be scored in an objective way.  No matter how you cut it, bodybuilding is subjective.  Some things are "subjectively objective", i.e., the colour spectrum for example.  But even though what distinguishes red from auburn from brown is subjective, once established, placement in that group is NOT subjective.  For example, if we subjectively decide that six feet is "tall" you are then either "tall" or "not tall" based on that definition, and we can extend the definition further.  But how points are scored in bodybuilding is neither objective or subjectively objective - It is simply a subjective matter.  Granted, I would not win the Mr. Olympia so presumably there is some degree of objectivity, but it is still subjective overall.  Of course using this definition of a "sport", we would have to call ping pong a sport, so it would leave something to be desired.

even if bodybuilding doesnt fit historic parameters that we use to define a "sport"



bodybuilders are still athletes...........
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Matt C on September 29, 2010, 12:17:17 AM
even if bodybuilding doesnt fit historic parameters that we use to define a "sport"



bodybuilders are still athletes...........

The definition of "athlete" is another matter and I have never really thought about that.  Bodybuilders definitely go through harder training than a lot of athletes in other sports so I don't think I have a problem calling them that.  However, some like Markus Ruhl would not appear to be "athletic" so then my question would be: Would being an "athlete" mean that by necessity, those in groups called athletes would have to be athletic?

I.e., is athleticism a necessary but insufficient condition for being called an "athlete"?

Markus Ruhl proves that bodybuilders do not necessarily have to be athletic.  Does that mean that active "athletes" do not need to be athletic?  But anyway, these matters are more for philosophers to decide.  I just call them bodybuilders because it is a more specific term and because to be honest, I am not entirely sure what the consensus is on these questions.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: _bruce_ on September 29, 2010, 12:35:41 AM
The definition of "athlete" is another matter and I have never really thought about that.  Bodybuilders definitely go through harder training than a lot of athletes in other sports so I don't think I have a problem calling them that.  However, some like Markus Ruhl would not appear to be "athletic" so then my question would be: Would being an "athlete" mean that by necessity, those in groups called athletes would have to be athletic?

I.e., is athleticism a necessary but insufficient condition for being called an "athlete"?

Markus Ruhl proves that bodybuilders do not necessarily have to be athletic.  Does that mean that active "athletes" do not need to be athletic?  But anyway, these matters are more for philosophers to decide.  I just call them bodybuilders because it is a more specific term and because to be honest, I am not entirely sure what the consensus is on these questions.

 :D
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: ~UN_$ung~ on September 29, 2010, 12:44:47 AM
The definition of "athlete" is another matter and I have never really thought about that.  Bodybuilders definitely go through harder training than a lot of athletes in other sports so I don't think I have a problem calling them that.  However, some like Markus Ruhl would not appear to be "athletic" so then my question would be: Would being an "athlete" mean that by necessity, those in groups called athletes would have to be athletic?

I.e., is athleticism a necessary but insufficient condition for being called an "athlete"?

Markus Ruhl proves that bodybuilders do not necessarily have to be athletic.  Does that mean that active "athletes" do not need to be athletic?  But anyway, these matters are more for philosophers to decide.  I just call them bodybuilders because it is a more specific term and because to be honest, I am not entirely sure what the consensus is on these questions.


shot putters and sumo wrestlers do not look "athletic" either


we dont define athletes as people who bodies are "fit" and perform activities that are of strenght or cardiovascular benefit................a thletes are people who use their body and naturally aquires traits and movements to perform in some kind of physical or competitive context 
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: TRIX on September 29, 2010, 01:43:36 AM
Bodybuilders are athletes. It takes skill to tickle ones balls with ones tongue. Hard work and dedication
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: TEsticles on September 29, 2010, 01:49:28 AM

shot putters and sumo wrestlers do not look "athletic" either


we dont define athletes as people who bodies are "fit" and perform activities that are of strenght or cardiovascular benefit................a thletes are people who use their body and naturally aquires traits and movements to perform in some kind of physical or competitive context 

when i was 13 i won the australian boomerang throwing championship against older competitors and some americans who came over..........athlete? doubt it
but under this reasoning i guess i am.......nice
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Tito24 on September 29, 2010, 01:57:07 AM
Bodybuilders are athletes. It takes skill to tickle ones balls with ones tongue. Hard work and dedication

haha.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: ~UN_$ung~ on September 29, 2010, 01:57:45 AM
when i was 13 i won the australian boomerang throwing championship against older competitors and some americans who came over..........athlete? doubt it
but under this reasoning i guess i am.......nice



well once again they call golfers athletes

how is throwing a boomerang and less "athletic" then golf
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: TEsticles on September 29, 2010, 02:18:41 AM
i just can't bring myself to say athlete and golf in the same sentence......
or that annoying crap of darts championships ...... on cable tv these fat gronks one beer in left hand whilst lining up the shot and the commentator saying ' pressure on these athletes is intense'..... ffs
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Meso_z on September 29, 2010, 02:23:12 AM
even if bodybuilding doesnt fit historic parameters that we use to define a "sport"



bodybuilders are still athletes...........

i agree 100%. as long as jokes like golf and such are called sport, bodybuilding IS a sport.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: roccoginge on September 29, 2010, 02:47:25 AM
I think the label is "contestant", this is a muscle pagaent.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: saucetradomous on September 29, 2010, 07:15:22 AM
ATHLETE

(http://www.buzzpirates.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/joh.jpg)
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Tito24 on September 29, 2010, 07:16:08 AM
(http://i56.tinypic.com/2v96qn9.jpg)
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: MB on September 29, 2010, 07:51:29 AM
When dieted down for competition bodybuilders look very athletic.  But, when you see many of the European guys sitting outside smoking cigarettes, it makes you wonder if you'd see the same thing at an event like the Olympics? 
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: 240 is Back on September 29, 2010, 07:52:37 AM
LOL TITO
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Jaime on September 29, 2010, 08:08:52 AM
if we live in a world where tiger woods is called an athlete, and golf is called a "sport"


bodybuilders are certainly athletes



Pretty much. In it's purest form there are not a lot of sports that i would deem athletic.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Lundgren on September 29, 2010, 08:16:25 AM
 There is no skill involved in bodybuilding, its a genetics and drug game. Atleast golf takes the development of talent.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Coach is Back! on September 29, 2010, 08:48:23 AM
 ::)


(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e196/Intenseone/oxygenron.jpg)
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Coach is Back! on September 29, 2010, 08:49:25 AM
There is no skill involved in bodybuilding, its a genetics and drug game. Atleast golf takes the development of talent.

Yup......BTW, this gimmick started this threat to bait me.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: ~UN_$ung~ on September 29, 2010, 09:00:41 AM
There is no skill involved in bodybuilding, its a genetics and drug game. Atleast golf takes the development of talent.


your an idiot

how can one person be responsible for SO MANY ridiculous observations
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Coach is Back! on September 29, 2010, 09:02:34 AM

your an idiot

how can one person be responsible for SO MANY ridiculous observations

What kind of skills does it take? I think it's a great observation.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Lundgren on September 29, 2010, 09:02:53 AM

your an idiot

how can one person be responsible for SO MANY ridiculous observations
responsible ???
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: medz zeppelin on September 29, 2010, 09:03:15 AM
There is no skill involved in bodybuilding, its a genetics and drug game. Atleast golf takes the development of talent.
is flexing and prancing around looking like a homo a talent?
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Lundgren on September 29, 2010, 09:11:38 AM
Yup......BTW, this gimmick started this threat to bait me.
Dude your borderline autistic, you have no understanding of politics yet you insist Im a gimmick. When my Ip will show I from the Canada. To say this is a sport is a joke, its a contest. But I digress you can call men in thongs whatever you want, there just words everyone in the realing world knows what its about when they see photos.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Devon97 on September 29, 2010, 09:14:21 AM
if we live in a world where tiger woods is called an athlete, and golf is called a "sport"


bodybuilders are certainly athletes

Wrong.

In order to be a sport the activity must be PERFORMANCE based, not aesthetically based.

bbing is a contest not a sport and the lugs that compete can hardly even make it out on stage, they are anything but athletes.

Just like a swimsuit contest or beauty pageant.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Pollux on September 29, 2010, 09:18:28 AM
If you were a bb pro would you refer to yourself as an athlete? I would prob. specify and say bodybuilder.

So you'd rather be laughed at?  ;D
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Coach is Back! on September 29, 2010, 09:26:04 AM
Dude your borderline autistic, you have no understanding of politics yet you insist Im a gimmick. When my Ip will show I from the Canada. To say this is a sport is a joke, its a contest. But I digress you can call men in thongs whatever you want, there just words everyone in the realing world knows what its about when they see photos.

WTF are you talking about?? You didn't start this thread. You're in school..seriously? How the fuck did you get into a college with your lack of comprehension? I was AGREEING with you.....but now....well.......fuck you!
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Lundgren on September 29, 2010, 09:27:14 AM
Yup......BTW, this gimmick started this threat to bait me.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Coach is Back! on September 29, 2010, 09:29:21 AM


I meant to write threaD. Regardless, I was referring to the THREAD STARTER as a gimmick. How fucking hard is that to understand?
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Lundgren on September 29, 2010, 09:32:27 AM
I meant to write threaD. Regardless, I was referring to the THREAD STARTER as a gimmick. How fucking hard is that to understand?
I know but I think its comical how you think your opinions on anything matter.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Stavios on September 29, 2010, 10:11:22 AM
I am a competitive bodybuilder and I don't see myself as an athlete in any shape or form.

I suck at every sport anyway
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: The Showstoppa on September 29, 2010, 10:12:40 AM
Are racecar drivers and jockeys athletes?
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Pollux on September 29, 2010, 10:15:16 AM
Are racecar drivers and jockeys athletes?

They're quicker to be considered athletes before bodybuilders.  :D
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: The Showstoppa on September 29, 2010, 10:16:25 AM
They're quicker to be considered athletes before bodybuilders.  :D

I agree 100%.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: dov on September 29, 2010, 10:30:52 AM
I meant to write threaD. Regardless, I was referring to the THREAD STARTER as a gimmick. How fucking hard is that to understand?
gotta agree with "Lundgrngisod"...........you're accusing someone of "lack of comprehension"? Oh brother
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Lundgren on September 29, 2010, 10:38:00 AM
gotta agree with "Lundgrngisod"...........you're accusing someone of "lack of comprehension"? Oh brother
Hes easier to set off than a vet in china town.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Coach is Back! on September 29, 2010, 12:36:02 PM
I know but I think its comical how you think your opinions on anything matter.

As if a 21 year old college kid who admits he doesn't pay his bills. bitches he can't put on muscle and is a closet lib has a say so in anything....now he thinks he knows anything about bodybuilding...hahahahah aha!
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Earl1972 on September 29, 2010, 03:31:50 PM
yes i would refer to myself as an athlete because they are athletes and bodybuilding is a sport

E
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Lundgren on September 29, 2010, 03:35:08 PM
As if a 21 year old college kid who admits he doesn't pay his bills. bitches he can't put on muscle and is a closet lib has a say so in anything....now he thinks he knows anything about bodybuilding...hahahahah aha!
No I bitched that I will never be famous  or important, getting in a thong aint gonna make you something. Note the Olympia comment was put in by mods. I aint no liberal either, I just anti wack job cough cough you. I dont know much about men in thongs ill admit maybe if I had a mentor or a coach Id be a bonerfide expert.
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: myt1 on September 29, 2010, 03:35:30 PM
if we live in a world where tiger woods is called an athlete, and golf is called a "sport"


bodybuilders are certainly athletes

Thread should've ended right here
Title: Re: If you were a PRO
Post by: Captain Equipoise on September 29, 2010, 03:39:05 PM
In my reviews, I try to refer to the competitors as "bodybuilders" and bodybuilding itself as "the bodybuilding industry".  I just think that philosophically, a sport is an event where points can be scored in an objective way.  No matter how you cut it, bodybuilding is subjective.  Some things are "subjectively objective", i.e., the colour spectrum for example.  But even though what distinguishes red from auburn from brown is subjective, once established, placement in that group is NOT subjective.  For example, if we subjectively decide that six feet is "tall" you are then either "tall" or "not tall" based on that definition, and we can extend the definition further.  So although the initial categorization is subjective, placement in or out of that category after they are established is not.

But how points are scored in bodybuilding is neither objective or subjectively objective - It is simply a subjective matter.  Granted, I would not win the Mr. Olympia so presumably there is some degree of objectivity, but it is still subjective overall.  Of course using this definition of a "sport", we would have to call ping pong a sport, so it would leave something to be desired.

Excellent post, agreed completely.. bodybuilding is no more a sport then the miss america or miss universe pageants are.