Author Topic: Shane Carwin VS Brock lesnar - WHO IS THE BETTER BODYBUILDER? (Read 10150 times)

OneManGang · « **on:** July 01, 2010, 03:26:17 AM »

Assuming Carwin and Lesnar dressed in thongs, all oiled up and on a stage (no homo), who would is the better bodybuilder?

Brock Lesnar
Strength: Best chest, back and waist in MMA. Shoulders and arms also very muscular and defined. Good symmetry. Could win real BB competitions.
Weakness: Few, but perhaps the legs could have a bit more size, but not too much as it would damage the symmetry

Shane Carwin
Strength: Solid legs. Abs ok.
Weakness: Bad overall symmetry. Tiny forearms. Back too small. Pencil neck.

In my opinion Brock would beat Carwin in a bodybuilding competition. He will also beat Carwin in UFC116

spinnis · « **Reply #1 on:** July 01, 2010, 03:30:16 AM »

and he doesnt even train for size and owns most bodybuilders

and when he was juici'n LIGHTS OUT.

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #2 on:** July 01, 2010, 03:36:50 AM »

I'm going with Brock, the deciding factor is better hair, Carwin is a horeshoe head.

OneManGang · « **Reply #3 on:** July 01, 2010, 03:43:51 AM »

Quote from: Mr Nobody on July 01, 2010, 03:36:50 AM

I'm going with Brock, the deciding factor is better hair, Carwin is a horeshoe head.

Don't forget that Carwin is a horseshoe head on top of a pencil neck.

Parker · « **Reply #4 on:** July 01, 2010, 04:31:34 AM »

Brock has good traps, neck. Had a good chest. Arms too small, compared to traps, chest, legs...waist too wide, legs too small.

Can't say much about Carwin. He may have the better aesthetic look, but Brock is built for size.

OneManGang · « **Reply #5 on:** July 01, 2010, 04:46:25 AM »

Quote from: Parker on July 01, 2010, 04:31:34 AM

Brock has good traps, neck. Had a good chest. Arms too small, compared to traps, chest, legs...waist too wide, legs too small.

Can't say much about Carwin. He may have the better aesthetic look, but Brock is built for size.

Waist too wide? You prefer the bloated gut instead? Wide waist + Wide shoulder = perfect symmetry

Parker · « **Reply #6 on:** July 01, 2010, 05:01:37 AM »

Quote from: OneManGang on July 01, 2010, 04:46:25 AM

Waist too wide? You prefer the bloated gut instead? Wide waist + Wide shoulder = perfect symmetry

No one said anything about bloated gut. Wide waist=lack of V taper=lack of aesthetics. And not all dudes who have wide waists have wide shoulders. Also Brocks traps negate his shoulder width. Huge traps give the illusion of less width. See JOJ as a prime example. Even Baby Big Head Melvin Anthony notes this about himself.

Having a wide waist is good moving heavy things. A small waist is good for running, and other athletic ventures. Possibly due to torque transfer, or the motion of running. All animals built for speed have small waists, including humans---but we run upright. All animals build for size have thick waists and torsos. They tend to have that heavy look to them, like Brock.

jaejonna · « **Reply #7 on:** July 01, 2010, 06:51:20 AM »

Lesnar has Phil Heath type obliques

spinnis · « **Reply #8 on:** July 01, 2010, 06:55:10 AM »

spinnis · « **Reply #9 on:** July 01, 2010, 06:57:02 AM »

and people still think hes on the juice LOL

UPINTHEMGUTS · « **Reply #10 on:** July 01, 2010, 09:56:57 AM »

juice or no juice, Brock is one insanely strong MF'er.

ChristopherA · « **Reply #11 on:** July 01, 2010, 10:17:33 AM »

Quote from: Swede! on July 01, 2010, 06:57:02 AM

and people still think hes on the juice LOL

He looks sick there but like Parker said his shoulders don't look as wide because of his huge traps. His waist is wide too not bloated, but wide. Obviously all this doesn't matter in the cage but the topic was bb. Even with all that, yes he's a beter bb than Carwin. Hope Carwin knocks him the F out though. If Brock wins this one I will start believing the hype.

Flexb · « **Reply #12 on:** July 01, 2010, 08:19:39 PM »

Brock's physique is much better than Carwins

OneManGang · « **Reply #13 on:** July 01, 2010, 11:29:16 PM »

Looks like the members of the gallery have all voted in favor of Brock. He is therefore the best bodybuilder and possibly the best fighter.

MONSTER_TRICEPS · « **Reply #14 on:** July 02, 2010, 02:10:47 AM »

Carwin = better atlete.
Carwin = better fighter.

spinnis · « **Reply #15 on:** July 02, 2010, 06:18:11 AM »

Quote from: MONSTER_TRICEPS on July 02, 2010, 02:10:47 AM

Carwin = better atlete.
Carwin = better fighter.

Not even one working brain cell = MONSTER_TRICEPS

Playboy · « **Reply #16 on:** July 02, 2010, 06:25:37 AM »

Quote from: OneManGang on July 01, 2010, 03:26:17 AM

Assuming Carwin and Lesnar dressed in thongs, all oiled up and on a stage (no homo), who would is the better bodybuilder?

Brock Lesnar
Strength: Best chest, back and waist in MMA. Shoulders and arms also very muscular and defined. Good symmetry. Could win real BB competitions.
Weakness: Few, but perhaps the legs could have a bit more size, but not too much as it would damage the symmetry

Shane Carwin
Strength: Solid legs. Abs ok.
Weakness: Bad overall symmetry. Tiny forearms. Back too small. Pencil neck.

In my opinion Brock would beat Carwin in a bodybuilding competition. He will also beat Carwin in UFC116

When Lesner was with the WWE, he had a huge massive build. He leaned out for MMA and I honestly think he looks better now.

OneManGang · « **Reply #17 on:** July 02, 2010, 12:03:15 PM »

He was more muscular in WWE. Now he is smaller with more bodyfat, but he would still own 99% of the bodybuilders on stage.

I will be taking extra notice of the physiques of these two guys before and during the fight, to determine if Brock in fact is the better bodybuilder as well