Author Topic: Bicep shape, what looks better to you? (Read 41442 times)

Parker · « **on:** October 25, 2010, 12:44:38 PM »

After the Phil Heath, Jay Cutler and D.Henry photos and thread, and the comments about Phil's arms
I had noticed that Phil's biceps are like Sergio's or Levrone's--- slightly...which begs the question, which type of biceps "looks" more impressive, and which are good for a "volume" look?

Peaked biceps like Arnold, Robby Robinson look cool, and double peaked biceps like Ronnie and Marko look even freakier. Biceps with their insertion closer to the elbow, resulting in less peak, seem less "impressive", but allow for more muscle volume it seems. Examples of these are Sergio, Levrone, Phil, Dillett, Dorian Yates
And then there are the ones who are in between, these would be Flex Wheeler, Melvin Anthony, Larry Scott, Eddie Robinson.

So which one to you is aesthetically the best, or what seems to be the best in terms of gaining mass?

Nirvana · « **Reply #1 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:46:46 PM »

Nails · « **Reply #2 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:50:12 PM »

Nirvana · « **Reply #3 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:52:28 PM »

JP_RC · « **Reply #4 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:54:47 PM »

Parker · « **Reply #5 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:56:29 PM »

Quote from: Nirvana on October 25, 2010, 12:46:46 PM

I always thought Mike's arms particularly his biceps were overrated. Basically it was just a mass of muscle, no real shape and in that shot, the split between bis and tris is very poor. Mike had poor genetics when it came to muscle shape, except for calves...his lats, back, etc was of poor shape. And his tris had vey little detail or pop as well, his arms were all mass, no cuts, no real semblance of decent shape.
They always looked like that even on contest time vs
this...see that split between bis and tris...

monstercalves · « **Reply #6 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:56:52 PM »

im a huge dorian fan ...but his biceps were fucked b4 any tears .... they inserted/tied to the bone fat to early....not long enough muscle bellies .......

maybe worst biceps of any top pro nevermind mrO.... except dickerson maybe

dorian does not get mentioned in a thread about biceps just like coleman dosnt get mention in a thread about a calves....unless we are takin the piss

robbyR is the earliest bb i can think of with both heads of the bicep looking seperated like an anatomy chart... boyer coe aswell

do we all realise that changing the angle of the wrist can create more of a peak or create more of a fuller longer look

ray and wheeler obviously knew this (among the handfull of best posers ever) and they ang;ed their wrists to make the biceps appear longer and fuller

phill has some of the most complete arms ever ...... mr priest is there aswell .... but phil more so coz height and more muscle seperation

Nirvana · « **Reply #7 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:57:27 PM »

somebody post method101 in the green shirt

Nasty Nate · « **Reply #8 on:** October 25, 2010, 12:59:01 PM »

Markus has cool biceps... Ronnie too.

mesmorph78 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:01:28 PM »

Peaked all the way.. The most impressive part of the arm in the bi peak
that's why ronnie would be mentioned in a greatest arm of all time list over levrone ... Bi density and peak
no contes flat bis
suck

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #10 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:04:27 PM »

The end all be all of biceps?

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:06:56 PM »

Quote from: Parker on October 25, 2010, 12:56:29 PM

I always thought Mike's arms particularly his biceps were overrated. Basically it was just a mass of muscle, no real shape and in that shot, the split between bis and tris is very poor. Mike had poor genetics when it came to muscle shape, except for calves...his lats, back, etc was of poor shape. And his tris had vey little detail or pop as well, his arms were all mass, no cuts, no real semblance of decent shape.
They always looked like that even on contest time vs
this...see that split between bis and tris...

The ironic thing is biceps are tried to all back poses yet his back sucked as did his back poses despite the biceps

Cableguy · « **Reply #12 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:09:05 PM »

Phil has just about the perfect combination of size, shape, length, and peak in his bi's. His tri's are long, full, and striated. I think Roelly has even better tri's, maybe the best of all time as far as shape, length, and fullness. Titus had awesome tri's as well, IMO.

Parker · « **Reply #13 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:12:43 PM »

Quote from: mesmorph78 on October 25, 2010, 01:01:28 PM

Peaked all the way.. The most impressive part of the arm in the bi peak
that's why ronnie would be mentioned in a greatest arm of all time list over levrone ... Bi density and peak
no contes flat bis
suck

Dillett at the talks about his "flat bis"

ND, Marko had the same type of biceps as Ronnie did. Marko could have been the shit, had he not gone overboard, I actually think he is one of the most underrated pros. He should have gotten the spotlight, instead of Ernie Taylor. And I am disappointed in Dorian for not calling out Ernie for his obvious use of Synthol, even though he was a fellow Briton and trained at Dorian's gym.

Immortal_Technique · « **Reply #14 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:14:07 PM »

Phil, like Lee priest has great tris and forearms, so his biceps look slightly better than they actually are. This looks cool in a t-shirt though, just less cool in the front doube bi than crazy peaks.

Wiggs · « **Reply #15 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:15:54 PM »

Darrem Charles should be in the running for greatest upper arms....Complete bi's and tris.

che · « **Reply #16 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:19:35 PM »

I think a peaked bicep looks better than a flat one

wild willie · « **Reply #17 on:** October 25, 2010, 01:21:52 PM »

I apologize for not having pictures but here are some names to consider for best bis.......

Larry Scott

Arnie S

Robby Robinson

Ricky Wayne

Beckles

Thierry Pastel