Where's the definition? Look at Freeman's bis, at least you see the separation. Nunn's are just plain round and have neither definition nor any kind of vascularity.
have you ever seen a bicep?
compare nunns to arnolds, buchanans, and everyone else, then compare to synthol users.
the definition is present at the separation between the muscles, not the muscles themselves. there is nothing different between nunns and buchanan's, and arnies bis are also round but clearly defined between bis and tris.
now look at synthol users like kamali for instance. the bis are lumpy and the muscles are not clearly defined. whats more, synthol users often use for imbalances, which have a tell tale sign of an imbalance elsewhere- for an arm to be equally strong, but have inbalanced bis, then the tris are usually out of whack also, or one pec is larger, or a delt, whatever...
now point out the rest of the wrong-ness and we'll go point by point shall we?
shall we start with the fanboys and go gooey about flex wheeler?
or maybe the concept that a waist can be too small? (talk about ridiculous)
oh, sorry, i forgot, this is getbig- home of the illiterate, under qualified, ignorant and plain stupid...dont know why i waste my time..
