ok, let me get this screwy logic straight then..
if you are massive, and in great condition, and look ok..then you beat a not so massive, great condition, perfectly pleasing competitor?
or, maybe u are massive, in good condition and look ok, you beat a not so massive, perfectly proportioned, good conditioned competitor?
BB is about perfect proportions..thats what it is derived from- the greek god's ideal of the perfect physical specimen..not the biggest, and not the most conditioned, but the most pleasing. now to be pleasing you DO NOT have to be huge, but you should be conditioned, and have enough muscle to appear well balanced.
Branch Warren is no where near the ideal or anything close to being well proportioned, or pleasing. he is well conditioned, and massive...but the mass is at the expense of aesthetics.
thats why flex wheeler did win , and thats why levrone shouldve won an O..and thats why gaspari never won an O, and its why labrada shouldve won 2 mr.os..and its why nasser never one a mr.o.
its why Jay was lucky to win as many as he has..
the judging is not about BB anymore, since perhaps the late 80s. No one could go past haney, and they got Zane right but messed up arny and franco, but got it right before that. they got yates right once or twice. and they got ronnie right a couple of times.
but most of the rest of the comps they havent got it right at all.
they need to revamp the judging process and apply a weighting to the criteria and decide once and for all what is deemed more important.
