Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: 240 is Back on August 02, 2011, 01:20:46 PM

Title: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: 240 is Back on August 02, 2011, 01:20:46 PM: [/youtube]
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: gh15 on August 02, 2011, 01:29:07 PM: ofcourse,, he has fibers shown in the places that need to be ,,still chestless as in narrow narrow narrow but...condition was much better,, he just wasnt meant to be mass monster as simple as that..then again this day and age you wotn get o title with out being one

gh15 approved
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: BiGHer on August 02, 2011, 01:30:44 PM: Looks like the insulin use wasn't blown out yet and SEO too. Muscle looks more conditioned but as GH15 would say, it's still blown from within.
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: makaveli25 on August 02, 2011, 01:34:06 PM: They all look better as amatuers. Check out Dennis Wolf. Even Kai Greene. The pressure to build tons of rubbery mass is what ruins these guys.
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: Parker on August 02, 2011, 01:35:58 PM: Check the detail of the arms....
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: mesmorph78 on August 02, 2011, 01:44:02 PM: Quote from: GangstaLean on August 02, 2011, 01:35:58 PM
Check the detail of the arms....
espexially in the tricep lateral head
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: Parker on August 02, 2011, 01:53:27 PM: Quote from: mesmorph78 on August 02, 2011, 01:44:02 PM
espexially in the tricep lateral head
And the Brachs
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: GroinkTropin on August 02, 2011, 01:55:51 PM: Have to say yes he did. Could just be the quality of the vid here, superior lighting etc. Not sure really.
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: Stark on August 02, 2011, 02:40:51 PM: yes, yes he did ::)
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: Ex Coelis on August 02, 2011, 05:42:38 PM: ...
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: decadurabolin on August 02, 2011, 06:02:12 PM: look at the difference on his waist :D god i love bodybuilding magazines.. they have amazin photoshop skills :P
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: whitewidow on August 02, 2011, 06:08:10 PM: iM JUST GLAD HE BEAT THE MATAWAN MUSCLE MACHINE. I WON A $20 SPOT OFF MO CAUSE HE SAID HE WAS BETTER AND WOULD WIN. WE ALL DISAGREED HE SAID HE NOT THE MATAWAN MUCLES MACHINE BOOM,BOOM,BOOM AND THEN PLACED 13TH. HE WENT ON TO TEAR A PEC TRAINING WITH FAKHRI MUBARACK BENCHING 405. LAST WE HEARD FROM THE MATAWAN MUCLE MACHINE HE WENT NOWHERE IN THE SPORT BUT PHIL TURNED PRO AND HAS DONE QUIT WELL.
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: The_Iron_Disciple on August 02, 2011, 06:28:47 PM: Quote from: makaveli25 on August 02, 2011, 01:34:06 PM
They all look better as amatuers. Check out Dennis Wolf. Even Kai Greene. The pressure to build tons of rubbery mass is what ruins these guys.

THIS x1000000000000. Branch Warren and Victor Martinez are REALLY good examples of this.
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: 240 is Back on August 02, 2011, 06:35:43 PM: Quote from: Ex Coelis on August 02, 2011, 05:42:38 PM
...

but but but one of their photogs told getbig that the pics aren't shopped.

Hmmmmmm maybe he forgot to 'suck in' those obliques?
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: KevinP85 on August 02, 2011, 06:40:24 PM: Quote from: whitewidow on August 02, 2011, 06:08:10 PM
iM JUST GLAD HE BEAT THE MATAWAN MUSCLE MACHINE. I WON A $20 SPOT OFF MO CAUSE HE SAID HE WAS BETTER AND WOULD WIN. WE ALL DISAGREED HE SAID HE NOT THE MATAWAN MUCLES MACHINE BOOM,BOOM,BOOM AND THEN PLACED 13TH. HE WENT ON TO TEAR A PEC TRAINING WITH FAKHRI MUBARACK BENCHING 405. LAST WE HEARD FROM THE MATAWAN MUCLE MACHINE HE WENT NOWHERE IN THE SPORT BUT PHIL TURNED PRO AND HAS DONE QUIT WELL.

I remember that. Dude was full of himself! After that, pretty much never heard from him again....
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: DK II on August 02, 2011, 06:42:15 PM: Quote from: Ex Coelis on August 02, 2011, 05:42:38 PM
...

LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote from: makaveli25 on August 02, 2011, 01:34:06 PM
They all look better as amatuers. Check out Dennis Wolf. Even Kai Greene. The pressure to build tons of rubbery mass is what ruins these guys.

x2
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: 240 is Back on August 02, 2011, 06:48:06 PM: Mo was the best 21-year old in America at one time, I think he said.
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: BayGBM on August 02, 2011, 07:45:01 PM: Quote from: decadurabolin on August 02, 2011, 06:02:12 PM
look at the difference on his waist :D god i love bodybuilding magazines.. they have amazin photoshop skills :P

My god! There ought to be a law against this kind of manipulation! ;D :-[ :'(
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: erics on August 02, 2011, 09:45:12 PM: If the physiques were not too big, you wouldn't need to photoshop smaller waists on magazine covers.

These covers are proof of how far bodybuilding has sunk.
Title: Re: Did Phil Heath look better as an amateur?
Post by: Pet shop boys on August 02, 2011, 09:50:09 PM: Quote from: erics on August 02, 2011, 09:45:12 PM
If the physiques were not too big, you wouldn't need to photoshop smaller waists on magazine covers.

These covers are proof of how far bodybuilding has sunk.

If Phil Heath wins the O, bodybuilding will sink even further down.

WOOOSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH