Author Topic: The "genetics thread" explained in pics (Read 1871 times)

Boost · « **on:** May 01, 2009, 10:01:11 AM »

Here is why genetic muscle shape is 1 of the most important aspects of being a good bb.

Kamali is 290+ in these pics, and Lockett is around 220-230

Look at the arms.

Lockett has the long, round, full muscle bellies for bi's tri's and forearms.

Kamali has the complete opposite, with short bi's and forearms.

This is why Lockett's arms, even at a 60-70lb weight difference still look better than Kamali's/

GENETIC SHAPE/LENGTH/INSERTIONS RULE ALL

Fatpanda · « **Reply #1 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:04:15 AM »

Quote from: Boost on May 01, 2009, 10:01:11 AM

Here is why genetic muscle shape is 1 of the most important aspects of being a good bb.

Kamali is 290+ in these pics, and Lockett is around 220-230

Look at the arms.

Lockett has the long, round, full muscle bellies for bi's tri's and forearms.

Kamali has the complete opposite, with short bi's and forearms.

This is why Lockett's arms, even at a 60-70lb weight difference still look better than Kamali's/

GENETIC SHAPE/LENGTH/INSERTIONS RULE ALL

i agree, but don't forget the power of twizzlers and a myostatin mutation

Deicide · « **Reply #2 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:04:54 AM »

Locket...has the pocket! For sure!

El Diablo Blanco · « **Reply #3 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:07:33 AM »

Side by Side , Kamali probably dwarfs him. Kamali may not look better but he is probably a lot larger

bodybuilding25 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:07:48 AM »

Quote from: Boost on May 01, 2009, 10:01:11 AM

Here is why genetic muscle shape is 1 of the most important aspects of being a good bb.

Kamali is 290+ in these pics, and Lockett is around 220-230

Look at the arms.

Lockett has the long, round, full muscle bellies for bi's tri's and forearms.

Kamali has the complete opposite, with short bi's and forearms.

This is why Lockett's arms, even at a 60-70lb weight difference still look better than Kamali's/

GENETIC SHAPE/LENGTH/INSERTIONS RULE ALL

epic admission you a) will never be the size of Kamli, and b) are smaller and in worse shape than the purse snatching Lockett.

haha

Boost · « **Reply #5 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:16:56 AM »

Quote from: bodybuilding25 on May 01, 2009, 10:07:48 AM

epic admission you a) will never be the size of Kamli, and b) are smaller and in worse shape than the purse snatching Lockett.

haha

not really,

I'm simply stating facts about genetic shape> pure size when it comes to bb

Boost · « **Reply #6 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:19:01 AM »

And I will never be the size of kamali, and I'm smaller than lockett.

I'm losing sleep over it.

Meso_z · « **Reply #7 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:20:24 AM »

Kmali is the type of bodybuilder who would look amazing with clothes but like shit standing onstage.

Boost · « **Reply #8 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:24:08 AM »

Quote from: Meso_z on May 01, 2009, 10:20:24 AM

Kmali is the type of bodybuilder who would look amazing with clothes but like shit standing onstage.

He is a very good example to use when People on here claim that massive amounts of drugs can make anyone a Mr Olympia.

Van_Bilderass · « **Reply #9 on:** May 01, 2009, 10:25:57 AM »

Genetics!

Quote

A visual comparison of SHORT and LONG calf muscles: The gastronemius muscle on the right is 50-percent longer than the one on the left. As a result of the 50-percent greater length, the muscle on the right is more than three times the volume of the muscle on the left.