Author Topic: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win  (Read 2465 times)

HowieW

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3785
  • Getbig!
In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« on: May 15, 2007, 09:57:04 AM »
Granted , many of us here may prefer the type of physique Wolf put on stage at the recent NY pro.
The reality is however, that rock hard freaky mass rules the day in modern bodybuilding. Branch may not have the most asthetic lines of any pro, but he did NOT have a bloated waist and sports one the best overall set of legs in the history of the sport. He was rock hard and ripped to the bone.See live in person he is very impressive.
Howard
Kelly Ryan married well!  Free Titus!

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #1 on: May 15, 2007, 10:02:45 AM »
Granted , many of us here may prefer the type of physique Wolf put on stage at the recent NY pro.
The reality is however, that rock hard freaky mass rules the day in modern bodybuilding. Branch may not have the most asthetic lines of any pro, but he did NOT have a bloated waist and sports one the best overall set of legs in the history of the sport. He was rock hard and ripped to the bone.See live in person he is very impressive.
Howard

Except that Wolf had more upper body size to go with far better balance & aesthetics.

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #2 on: May 15, 2007, 10:15:11 AM »
So legs and calves arent a part of bodybuilding anymore?The differeance between their upper bodies wasnt near as dramatic as the differance between their lower bodies.

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #3 on: May 15, 2007, 10:16:21 AM »
So legs and calves arent a part of bodybuilding anymore?The differeance between their upper bodies wasnt near as dramatic as the differance between their lower bodies.
Size isn't the only criteria with a pear-shaped bod that lacks balance, aesthetics or flow.

Camel Jockey

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16711
  • Mel Gibson and Bob Sly World Domination
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #4 on: May 15, 2007, 10:42:02 AM »
So legs and calves arent a part of bodybuilding anymore?The differeance between their upper bodies wasnt near as dramatic as the differance between their lower bodies.

branch had disproportioned lats.

BM OUT

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8229
  • Getbig!
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #5 on: May 15, 2007, 11:57:01 AM »
The point is that no one is perfect.Ronnie has lat problems,Jay has one leg bigger then the other,Dennis has small calves.This is a sport where the best package wins and you have judges using their personal opinions of what that means.If you and I judged a show,we could have totally different views on whos the best.Thats bodybuilding.

HowieW

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3785
  • Getbig!
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #6 on: May 15, 2007, 01:36:01 PM »
Size isn't the only criteria with a pear-shaped bod that lacks balance, aesthetics or flow.

My original point here was that the  present pro scene is a place where sheer mass is the most important factor when all is said and done. Do I agree with that? NO! Is it the reality? Yup.
Branch has produced a body with a lot of sheer mass and that is what wins now in the pros.
I remember hearing Jay Cutler saying something about how he felt he liked how he looked better at a shredded/ripped 235-240 then 270, but, he knew the lighter version would not win the big shows.
Kelly Ryan married well!  Free Titus!

natural al

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6309
  • like it or don't, learn to live with it..whooooooo
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #7 on: May 15, 2007, 01:46:35 PM »
anyone who thinks they can justify BW winning the show jsut doesn't know what BB is supposed to be.  bigger is not better in all cases and especially not in this case.  Is Branch big?  Yes.  Is he proportionate?  Not even close, Platz and Gaspari look like Bob Paris comapred to him and they were considered blocky in thier time.  Branch's seperation is starting to go away, his back is not very good, his madatories aren't very good IMO, his skin tone sucked, he has blatant injuries...I mean c'mon.  I understand he's huge but it's about more than that.
nasser=piece of shit

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #8 on: May 15, 2007, 02:07:54 PM »
Wolf was just as big, probably bigger so any claims that Warren won on size don't add up. Wolf's thighs are plenty big AND they balance, it's just the calves that need to be brought up.

EL Mariachi

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6019
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #9 on: May 15, 2007, 02:09:04 PM »
Granted , many of us here may prefer the type of physique Wolf put on stage at the recent NY pro.
The reality is however, that rock hard freaky mass rules the day in modern bodybuilding. Branch may not have the most asthetic lines of any pro, but he did NOT have a bloated waist and sports one the best overall set of legs in the history of the sport. He was rock hard and ripped to the bone.See live in person he is very impressive.
Howard
his legs overpower his whole phisique.

natural al

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6309
  • like it or don't, learn to live with it..whooooooo
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #10 on: May 15, 2007, 02:17:18 PM »
this front relaxed from branch is the worst one I've ever seen, even worse than kovacs, back lacks definition, skin tone is terrible, one lat is bigger than the other:
nasser=piece of shit

stomper

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 198
  • Getbig!
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #11 on: May 15, 2007, 02:20:03 PM »
i think branch even though he has some flaws just out masses dennis i think he deserved his win

natural al

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6309
  • like it or don't, learn to live with it..whooooooo
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #12 on: May 15, 2007, 02:24:27 PM »
i think branch even though he has some flaws just out masses dennis i think he deserved his win
ok, someone call up Greg Kovacs cause he's "bigger" than just about everyone that competes, he'll win everything.
nasser=piece of shit

The Squadfather

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25840
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #13 on: May 15, 2007, 03:55:56 PM »
ok, someone call up Greg Kovacs cause he's "bigger" than just about everyone that competes, he'll win everything.
actually he's not, he may weigh the most on the scale but his arms and legs are tiny compared to other guys, Branch is ridiculously big in every bodypart and his waist is as small as Wolf's.

SWOLETRAIN

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2159
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #14 on: May 15, 2007, 04:00:47 PM »
I think branch just out matured him. When dennis brings up his back width,quad sweep and calves a little bit he'll be a force to be reckoned with. But honestly i dont think anybody would have bitched if he won
-

Matt C

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12752
  • The White Vince Goodrum
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #15 on: May 15, 2007, 04:08:50 PM »
One of Branch's flaws: he is just TOO muscular.

Sounds weird, but it is true.  Even pro bodybuilders who are 5'6 are not meant to be THAT big.  Muscularity is a flaw in and of itself sometimes.  Lee Haney himself would not look good at 300 pounds.
Bodybuilding Pro.com

The Squadfather

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 25840
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #16 on: May 15, 2007, 04:10:36 PM »
One of Branch's flaws: he is just TOO muscular.

Sounds weird, but it is true.  Even pro bodybuilders who are 5'6 are not meant to be THAT big.  Muscularity is a flaw in and of itself sometimes.  Lee Haney himself would not look good at 300 pounds.
there's some truth to that, look at the comparison shots with him and Wolf, Branch has so much muscle that you just want to take him and stretch him out, just ridiculously massive.

corinth

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1325
  • Team Wolf
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #17 on: May 15, 2007, 04:22:51 PM »
One of Branch's flaws: he is just TOO muscular.

Sounds weird, but it is true.  Even pro bodybuilders who are 5'6 are not meant to be THAT big.  Muscularity is a flaw in and of itself sometimes.  Lee Haney himself would not look good at 300 pounds.

Exactly.

Bodybuilding isn't about piling as much muscle onto one's frame as possible with no thought whatsoever to balance, symmetry, proportion and separation.

Branch has size and condition. That's it.

GroinkTropin

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3138
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #18 on: May 15, 2007, 04:43:42 PM »
Man I can't believe wolf looks that good, just get those hams and calves up and we're looking at top 3 at the olympia for sure.

Iraclese

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 185
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #19 on: May 15, 2007, 04:45:08 PM »
I don't see how anyone with 20/20 vision
could place branch in front of Dennis.  Branch's
build is not balanced at all, he looks completely
not healthy.  He's not polished at all.  He has no
flow and no lines. His lat is torn. And his skin tone
is no good at all.  Dennis Wolf is what bodybuilding is all
about.  Size, condition, shape, flow, and he is polished.
Period! Far superior. And those pics are not in proportion,
Dennis is 6"1 Branch is like 5'8 tops.

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #20 on: May 15, 2007, 05:01:58 PM »
One of Branch's flaws: he is just TOO muscular.

Sounds weird, but it is true.  Even pro bodybuilders who are 5'6 are not meant to be THAT big. 
His upper body's very thick, the size isn't so much for his height. He's lacking in flow, aesthetics, refinement and shape, as in ugly. Lee Priest has more size & is shorter than him and doesn't look that way.

If his upper body was so muscular his legs wouldn't be completely out of proportion.

His legs don't look great because they are way too big, lack cuts and the calves don't balance at all.

Matt C

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12752
  • The White Vince Goodrum
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #21 on: May 15, 2007, 05:07:44 PM »
Exactly.

Bodybuilding isn't about piling as much muscle onto one's frame as possible with no thought whatsoever to balance, symmetry, proportion and separation.

Branch has size and condition. That's it.

Yep - but another point I'm driving at is that there is a point where too much muscle in and of itself is a flaw, even if you have great aesthetics.  For example, Lee Haney at 5'11 and 300 pounds, even if he maintained his great aesthetics, would still be too muscular.  Aesthetics also include not overwhelming the frame you have with muscularity.  There is a point where even if you keep your lines, you will be too muscular, because simply having so much muscle is ugly.

Dennis is 6"1 Branch is like 5'8 tops.

Funny thing is, Dennis looks 6'1 but is only 5'11 and 1/4 (181 cm).  His arms look like they belong on a guy who is 6'2 and that is why he looks so tall (long limbs).  Not to mention he still has a dainty waist and people tend to follow physiques up - starting at the waist and following the taper up, making him look taller.

Branch I don't think is even 5'6.
Bodybuilding Pro.com

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #22 on: May 15, 2007, 05:11:29 PM »
Yep - but another point I'm driving at is that there is a point where too much muscle in and of itself is a flaw, even if you have great aesthetics.  For example, Lee Haney at 5'11 and 300 pounds, even if he maintained his great aesthetics, would still be too muscular.  Aesthetics also include not overwhelming the frame you have with muscularity.  There is a point where even if you keep your lines, you will be too muscular, because simply having so much muscle is ugly.


Ya but more size and aesthetics are not always mutually exclusive as you've claiming; case by case depending on shape, aesthetics, flow, etc. The less of these the more the size becomes problematic. Dillet was huge and didn't have issues like this. Priest is short and doesn't look as cramped as Warren.

GroinkTropin

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3138
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #23 on: May 15, 2007, 05:53:07 PM »
I don't see how anyone with 20/20 vision
could place branch in front of Dennis.  Branch's
build is not balanced at all, he looks completely
not healthy.  He's not polished at all.  He has no
flow and no lines. His lat is torn. And his skin tone
is no good at all.  Dennis Wolf is what bodybuilding is all
about.  Size, condition, shape, flow, and he is polished.
Period! Far superior. And those pics are not in proportion,
Dennis is 6"1 Branch is like 5'8 tops.

Branch is like 5ft7 or 5ft6 i believe.

Vince B

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 12946
  • What you!
Re: In defense of Branch Warren's NY win
« Reply #24 on: May 15, 2007, 06:21:27 PM »
Those defending the judges in NY have to dig deep to find justification. The consensus on Getbig, and that is coming across the board, favours Dennis Wolf. Dennis James has a superior physique, too, if we go by the photos on Milos' site.

Most of us have no idea who those judges are. That is a problem in bodybuilding. Those virtually unknown judges don't have to be accountable in any public sense. Sure, we all enter contests and then have to accept the decision. If the result is really unpopular and continues to be then there has to be something wrong with the system or criterion. I have said that before and the main factor nowadays is this silly conditioning business. How on earth did that evolve? In the old days having cuts was just one factor.

Bodybuilding contests are still aesthetic events and surely body beauty has to be the most important factor? Many can argue about physiques and criterion but whatever happened in NY was bizarre. Branch won the contest but can't feel like a winner. Who would have thought that another contest would be so controversial after all the debates on Getbig and elsewhere?

Seems like the IFBB has to revamp their whole judging process.

On that subject I have finally worked out why Chick takes the position he does with the IFBB. Oh, we know the deal. What I overlooked is the raw business setup. He needs the IFBB and not the other way around. If he doesn't perform the way they want he will be history. He knows exactly what he has to do. When you have guys like Paul Graham and Steve Weinburger involved in bodybuilding is it any wonder that it sucks. Add Paul Chua to that list.