Judging physiques is hardly an easy task. The process involves assessing competitors against some ideal. Various components are considered and this is where it becomes difficult because different competitors have strengths and weaknesses. For example, how much importance does conditioning have in a contest? Today there is probably too much importance to conditioning. This has occurred because the judges finally have something tangible they can base their decisions on.
The overall impression should be paramount. The qualities should be headed by size, then shape, proportions, definition, minus flaws and negative things such as skin texture, tattoos, etc.
How so many black competitors have won with virtually average calves is unknown. In the distant past it was important to have all bodyparts in proportion. Therefore the calves should be similar in size to the upper arms and neck. If there is a disparity of several inches between these parts then the competitor should not win a title.
What bothers me is some competitors have some size in calves but there is hardly any separation in the gastrocnemius. What is going on there? Again, those competitors shouldn't win major titles.
The presence of swollen breasts on men should prevent them from ever winning a bodybuilding title.
The exaggerated muscles like rear deltoids should be examined to see if they are free of artificial additives to get that size. Ditto for calves, triceps, etc.
Well, when it is all said and done this process is untenable for professional competitors. It is a sham. Howie knows there has to be something done but he is all over the place and nowhere consistent about the drugs issue. Add the injectable substances and you really have a mess to deal with.
I don't mind coming up with criteria for judging physiques but how on earth can we judge unnatural bodies? Whatever is the point?
