New IFBB Pro Rules :The posing routine will not be scored?

[mrusa85]

For years it has been widely known that the posing was judged on the physique and not on the posing itself. The IFBB has decided to make a rule change because it was realized that it was pointless to judge another round based on the physique.

When every competitor is seen individually, how do you do comparisons? By memory? It always seemed like a pointless round to me.

By the way, does the NABBA score a posing round based on actual posing ability? What about the WABBA?

[erics]

They decided to make the rule change, fair enough, but I think that this rule change lacks vision. Surely there is more long term benefit to be had in having a posing round - or at least in having posing ability judged - than in not?

By reducing the number of competitive variables, you also decrease the number of elements that can be marketed and by extension, the number of possible points of attraction.

Like I said, it feels as if bodybuilding is drinking all of the water from its own pond...

[Alex23]

They decided to make the rule change, fair enough, but I think that this rule change lacks vision. Surely there is more long term benefit to be had in having a posing round - or at least in having posing ability judged - than in not?

By reducing the number of competitive variables, you also decrease the number of elements that can be marketed and by extension, the number of possible points of attraction.

Like I said, it feels as if bodybuilding is drinking all of the water from its own pond...

You seem very technical.

Are you a technician?

[jwb]

don't judge the posing round but have the main comparisons for the top ten after it (lots of 3 men comparisons like the old days not 5 or 6 men callouts) and you'd see guys pose better since they know they still haven't be placed yet... that would work

[Chick]

They decided to make the rule change, fair enough, but I think that this rule change lacks vision. Surely there is more long term benefit to be had in having a posing round - or at least in having posing ability judged - than in not?

By reducing the number of competitive variables, you also decrease the number of elements that can be marketed and by extension, the number of possible points of attraction.

Like I said, it feels as if bodybuilding is drinking all of the water from its own pond...

LOL

[io856]

They decided to make the rule change, fair enough, but I think that this rule change lacks vision. Surely there is more long term benefit to be had in having a posing round - or at least in having posing ability judged - than in not?

By reducing the number of competitive variables, you also decrease the number of elements that can be marketed and by extension, the number of possible points of attraction.

Like I said, it feels as if bodybuilding is drinking all of the water from its own pond...

just cause you gave that sample of No Xplode jacked up with caffiene a go don't mean its ok to go sprouting horseshit on here 

[webcake]

Does this mean kai greene will stop dry humping the stage?

[io856]

Does this mean kai greene will stop dry humping the stage?

nope it means he will hopefully get rewarded for it i.e. cash prizes...

[Chick]

Does this mean kai greene will stop dry humping the stage?

Why...will you be disappointed?

[webcake]

Why...will you be disappointed?

Once again, chickendildo has gay on the brain.....

[Chick]

YOU'RE the one talking about Kai dry humping, and YOU'RE the one using "dildo" in my name (like a 9 year old)....and IM the one gaying it up???

LOL....right

[io856]

Is it wrong for this young fella to watch his Olympia and Arnold classic DVDs with some semblance of respectability and see an actual display of contest i.e not feel ashamed and embarrassed when his mum or dad takes an interest to the screen to find what appears to be deviant

[webcake]

YOU'RE the one talking about Kai dry humping, and YOU'RE the one using "dildo" in my name (like a 9 year old)....and IM the one gaying it up???

LOL....right

I asked a legitimate question, and you once again had to go and put a gay spin on it, implying that i would be dissapointed if he stopped doing said act.

So yes, chickendildo, you are the one gaying it up.....

[Chick]

I asked a legitimate question, and you once again had to go and put a gay spin on it, implying that i would be dissapointed if he stopped doing said act.

So yes, chickendildo, you are the one gaying it up.....

And I asked a legitimate question back...would you be disappointed?  As your question made no reference to your preference either way...

Little defensive are we?  perhaps you need to look a little deeper as to why you automaticly think "gay" and start defending your manhood...next thing, you'll be posting pics of naked chicks saying..."see?  I like girls..."

[webcake]

And I asked a legitimate question back...would you be disappointed?  As your question made no reference to your preference either way...

Little defensive are we?  perhaps you need to look a little deeper as to why you automaticly think "gay" and start defending your manhood...next thing, you'll be posting pics of naked chicks saying..."see?  I like girls..."

Why would i be dissapointed? Funny question for someone who always claims everyone else brings up/starts the gay stuff.  I know you have been parading around in a thong on stage for men for most of your life, but not all of us are gay, bobert.

[erics]

You seem very technical.

Are you a technician?

Not at all, but in this case, with soundbites being expressed as if they were a rationale, I tried to make my points clear and concise so that people wouldn't mistake what I wanted to say.

Adult-level discussions seem to go missing in many discussions in bodybuilding.

I noticed Chick laughing at what I wrote which is a shame really, as I tried to approach the discussion in an adult fashion.

You can either make it easy for people outside of bodybuilding to turn away from it, or you can find ways that can be used to attract them.

From a marketing perspective, that is the crux of it all.

And from an athletic/sports perspective, it would be interesting to hear how improving the standard of posing as well as the judging process and its accountability would be detrimental to the sport.

[karu]

Chick,

do you enjoy Kai Greene humping the stage?

And I asked a legitimate question back...would you be disappointed?  As your question made no reference to your preference either way...

Little defensive are we?  perhaps you need to look a little deeper as to why you automaticly think "gay" and start defending your manhood...next thing, you'll be posting pics of naked chicks saying..."see?  I like girls..."

[karu]

who is hank wood?

Looks like it's back to being banned for you Hank Wood...

Enjoy your last night

[Topskin69]

Code Duello: The Rules of Dueling

Reprinted from "American Duels and Hostile Encounters," Chilton Books, 1963.


The Code Duello, covering the practice of dueling and points of honor, was drawn up and settled at Clonmel Summer Assizes, 1777, by gentlemen-delegates of Tipperary, Galway, Sligo, Mayo and Roscommon, and prescribed for general adoption throughout Ireland. The Code was generally also followed in England and on the Continent with some slight variations. In America, the principal rules were followed, although occasionally there were some glaring deviations.



Rule 1. The first offense requires the first apology, though the retort may have been more offensive than the insult. Example: A tells B he is impertinent, etc. B retorts that he lies; yet A must make the first apology because he gave the first offense, and then (after one fire) B may explain away the retort by a subsequent apology.

Rule 2. But if the parties would rather fight on, then after two shots each (but in no case before), B may explain first, and A apologize afterward.

N.B. The above rules apply to all cases of offenses in retort not of stronger class than the example.

Rule 3. If a doubt exist who gave the first offense, the decision rests with the seconds; if they won't decide, or can't agree, the matter must proceed to two shots, or to a hit, if the challenger require it.

Rule 4. When the lie direct is the first offense, the aggressor must either beg pardon in express terms; exchange two shots previous to apology; or three shots followed up by explanation; or fire on till a severe hit be received by one party or the other.

Rule 5. As a blow is strictly prohibited under any circumstances among gentlemen, no verbal apology can be received for such an insult. The alternatives, therefore -- the offender handing a cane to the injured party, to be used on his own back, at the same time begging pardon; firing on until one or both are disabled; or exchanging three shots, and then asking pardon without proffer of the cane.

If swords are used, the parties engage until one is well blooded, disabled, or disarmed; or until, after receiving a wound, and blood being drawn, the aggressor begs pardon.

N.B. A disarm is considered the same as a disable. The disarmer may (strictly) break his adversary's sword; but if it be the challenger who is disarmed, it is considered as ungenerous to do so.

In the case the challenged be disarmed and refuses to ask pardon or atone, he must not be killed, as formerly; but the challenger may lay his own sword on the aggressor's shoulder, then break the aggressor's sword and say, "I spare your life!" The challenged can never revive the quarrel -- the challenger may.

Rule 6. If A gives B the lie, and B retorts by a blow (being the two greatest offenses), no reconciliation can take place till after two discharges each, or a severe hit; after which B may beg A's pardon humbly for the blow and then A may explain simply for the lie; because a blow is never allowable, and the offense of the lie, therefore, merges in it. (See preceding rules.)

N.B. Challenges for undivulged causes may be reconciled on the ground, after one shot. An explanation or the slightest hit should be sufficient in such cases, because no personal offense transpired.

Rule 7. But no apology can be received, in any case, after the parties have actually taken ground, without exchange of fires.

Rule 8. In the above case, no challenger is obliged to divulge his cause of challenge (if private) unless required by the challenged so to do before their meeting.

Rule 9. All imputations of cheating at play, races, etc., to be considered equivalent to a blow; but may be reconciled after one shot, on admitting their falsehood and begging pardon publicly.

Rule 10. Any insult to a lady under a gentleman's care or protection to be considered as, by one degree, a greater offense than if given to the gentleman personally, and to be regulated accordingly.

Rule 11. Offenses originating or accruing from the support of ladies' reputations, to be considered as less unjustifiable than any others of the same class, and as admitting of slighter apologies by the aggressor: this to be determined by the circumstances of the case, but always favorable to the lady.

Rule 12. In simple, unpremeditated recontres with the smallsword, or couteau de chasse, the rule is -- first draw, first sheath, unless blood is drawn; then both sheath, and proceed to investigation.

Rule 13. No dumb shooting or firing in the air is admissible in any case. The challenger ought not to have challenged without receiving offense; and the challenged ought, if he gave offense, to have made an apology before he came on the ground; therefore, children's play must be dishonorable on one side or the other, and is accordingly prohibited.

Rule 14. Seconds to be of equal rank in society with the principals they attend, inasmuch as a second may either choose or chance to become a principal, and equality is indispensible.

Rule 15. Challenges are never to be delivered at night, unless the party to be challenged intend leaving the place of offense before morning; for it is desirable to avoid all hot-headed proceedings.

Rule 16. The challenged has the right to choose his own weapon, unless the challenger gives his honor he is no swordsman; after which, however, he can decline any second species of weapon proposed by the challenged.

Rule 17. The challenged chooses his ground; the challenger chooses his distance; the seconds fix the time and terms of firing.

Rule 18. The seconds load in presence of each other, unless they give their mutual honors they have charged smooth and single, which should be held sufficient.

Rule 19. Firing may be regulated -- first by signal; secondly, by word of command; or thirdly, at pleasure -- as may be agreeable to the parties. In the latter case, the parties may fire at their reasonable leisure, but second presents and rests are strictly prohibited.

Rule 20. In all cases a miss-fire is equivalent to a shot, and a snap or non-cock is to be considered as a miss-fire.

Rule 21. Seconds are bound to attempt a reconciliation before the meeting takes place, or after sufficient firing or hits, as specified.

Rule 22. Any wound sufficient to agitate the nerves and necessarily make the hand shake, must end the business for that day.

Rule 23. If the cause of the meeting be of such a nature that no apology or explanation can or will be received, the challenged takes his ground, and calls on the challenger to proceed as he chooses; in such cases, firing at pleasure is the usual practice, but may be varied by agreement.

Rule 24. In slight cases, the second hands his principal but one pistol; but in gross cases, two, holding another case ready charged in reserve.

Rule 25. Where seconds disagree, and resolve to exchange shots themselves, it must be at the same time and at right angles with their principals, thus:

If with swords, side by side, with five paces interval.

N.B. All matters and doubts not herein mentioned will be explained and cleared up by application to the committee, who meet alternately at Clonmel and Galway, at the quarter sessions, for that purpose.

Perhaps instead of a posing round, we can simply have competitors issue forth "Duels" ... I Will refer everyone to the aforementioned example.

[nycbull]

For years it has been widely known that the posing was judged on the physique and not on the posing itself. The IFBB has decided to make a rule change because it was realized that it was pointless to judge another round based on the physique.

When every competitor is seen individually, how do you do comparisons? By memory? It always seemed like a pointless round to me.

By the way, does the NABBA score a posing round based on actual posing ability? What about the WABBA?

But they are overlooking the fact that the posing round was the place that inspired countless young people to become lifelong bodybuilding fans. The ones who will buy the mags, and products.

Also, It is the posing round that offers any chance of ever seeing bodybuiling back on TV, it is the posing round that will get ratings not the pre-judging. It is the posing round that can bring viewers back to bodybuilding.  But if they chose to de-value it then bodybuilding will stay in highschool gymnasiums and cheap web casts.

[Topskin69]

But they are overlooking the fact that the posing round was the place that inspired countless young people to become lifelong bodybuilding fans. The ones who will buy the mags, and products.

Also, It is the posing round that offers any chance of ever seeing bodybuilding back on TV, it is the posing round that will get ratings not the pre-judging. It is the posing round that can bring viewers back to bodybuilding.  But if they chose to de-value it then bodybuilding will stay in highschool gymnasiums and cheap web casts.

Bull,

You are quite on point with this, (as myself and a few others have been), but trying to have an intelligent discourse with Bob Chick, is akin to banging one's head against a wall, and being surprised that the only thing that you have to show for it, is some lacerations, and a headache.

Bob Chick is incapable of:
1. Conceding a point under any circumstances whatsoever, regardless of how absurd he will come off in the process.
2. Admitting when he is wrong/misinformed/etc.
3. Cordially disagreeing with fellow Getbiggers. Instead he resorts to insults, accusations of being homosexual, stupid, etc.
4. Rationally constructing arguments.

I wish this wasn't the case, as being able to intelligently discuss bodybuilding issues with someone with his clout in the industry could be a productive endeavor, but he instead just opts to be a shill, and of course nothing gets changed for the better, as a result.  

[Chick]

Bull,

You are quite on point with this, (as myself and a few others have been), but trying to have an intelligent discourse with Bob Chick, is akin to banging one's head against a wall, and being surprised that the only thing that you have to show for it, is some lacerations, and a headache.

Bob Chick is incapable of:
1. Conceding a point under any circumstances whatsoever, regardless of how absurd he will come off in the process.
2. Admitting when he is wrong/misinformed/etc.
3. Cordially disagreeing with fellow Getbiggers. Instead he resorts to insults, accusations of being homosexual, stupid, etc.
4. Rationally constructing arguments.

I wish this wasn't the case, as being able to intelligently discuss bodybuilding issues with someone with his clout in the industry could be a productive endeavor, but he instead just opts to be a shill, and of course nothing gets changed for the better, as a result.  

Other than your own perspective and opinion...what do you bring to the table? I've gotten 95% of my proposals passed through making things better for the sport and the athletes...

You have constantly acted like a complete douchbag to me from day 1, and now you want to start talking like you're the all wise, insightful, respectful poster?  LOL...right. Your problem is, you're unwilling to listen to any counter argument or give it any creedence because it doesnt make sense to YOU, who has nothing to do with, or any ties to the industry...I speak from knowledge and fact as someone in the business...you speak as an anonymous toolbag on the internet....big difference.

You want to have an intellectual debate?  I'm all for it....conduct yourself like someone who should be responded to in-kind. 

[jwb]

chick,

how does the new system give the guys out of the top 6 a fair shake?

prejudging will still be dominated by callouts for the top placings with a few extra callouts for the other guys but not against the top guys.

posing round isn't judged so a guy who may shine in his signature poses doesn't get any points for it (a great example was berry demey... wasn't the strongest in the compulsories but had so many signature poses where he looked awesome and it often brought him up in the ranks during the night show)

only the top 6 will be judged at all at night now.

how will a guy on the fringes get the chance to be compared to the top tier?

[erics]

Other than your own perspective and opinion...what do you bring to the table? I've gotten 95% of my proposals passed through making things better for the sport and the athletes....

That in itself means nothing. You can't infer that your ideas are necessarily better than another person's's simply because you are in a position to have the IFBB accept them. The only thing you can infer is that you are in a better position to have ideas accepted. After all, on what basis does the IFBB accept such proposals?

As for the proposals themselves, on what basis are they necessarily making things better? Are they short-term benefits? What direction will they take the sport? These are things that professionals, consultants, marketers, planners etc consider. You and the IFBB may very well have considered them, but judging by what has been posted, the fans would never know.

You want to have an intellectual debate?  I'm all for it....conduct yourself like someone who should be responded to in-kind.

I'm up for it.

[karu]

how many of your proposals were voted on and approved by the athletes you claim to represent?

zero

Other than your own perspective and opinion...what do you bring to the table? I've gotten 95% of my proposals passed through making things better for the sport and the athletes...

You have constantly acted like a complete douchbag to me from day 1, and now you want to start talking like you're the all wise, insightful, respectful poster?  LOL...right. Your problem is, you're unwilling to listen to any counter argument or give it any creedence because it doesnt make sense to YOU, who has nothing to do with, or any ties to the industry...I speak from knowledge and fact as someone in the business...you speak as an anonymous toolbag on the internet....big difference.

You want to have an intellectual debate?  I'm all for it....conduct yourself like someone who should be responded to in-kind.