Author Topic: Peter McGough vs. John Romano  (Read 16441 times)

Bast175

  • Guest
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #50 on: May 02, 2006, 08:57:17 PM »
Yea but wouldn't the special guests be the only ones who could post on there?  Probably nothing decent on that board.

Bast175

  • Guest
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #51 on: May 02, 2006, 08:58:00 PM »
Given your involvement with the industry, why are you not a special guest? :-\

you're "special" lucius.

LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #52 on: May 02, 2006, 09:02:24 PM »
you're "special" lucius.

 Thanks, I think ;D

Unchained81

  • Guest
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #53 on: May 03, 2006, 04:25:42 PM »
nice topic, and typically I don't get on here to post anything that isn't somehow constgructive...but some of you guys are idiots.

Peter McGough knows more about BB then any of you ever will, but instead of treating him with respect for what he has done for this industry, you make stupid comments about him and another well respected industry writer. I wonder why it is that so many of us industry people find many of the people that post here immature and not worth our time.

Everyone has different tastes as far as the magazines go, and that's why they have the freedom to choose which one they want on the newsstand, each has a different approach at how to view BB, and each has a different fan base. This whole FLEX vs MD battle is such a load of crap.

I can't speak for MD, but FLEX doesn't blast the internet boards in our pages, and in fact, in some ways we find that there are things to be learned from many of the posters on this and other sites. We want to know what the fans are thinking. It is only when things degenerate into baseless name calling of each other and people in the industry that you've never met that we wonder why we would even bother.

You have it at the point now where Jay Cutler is willing to post here (among other pros)...why don't you not try to screw it up with crap like this, and maybe more pros and other people in the sport will start to become more accessible. (I'm sure some of you will just say you don't want the mags here anyway, but you should realize that the majority of the mag staffs are BB fans also).

This thread was just too much.

C



Man, I want to preface what I am going to type here with this- I know that Peter Mcgough is an older man.  But, that being said, so is Dave Draper, Clarence Bass and other guys who are still in great shape.  It just seems kinda creepy when you have an old man, totally out of shape(and I would wager that he never was in shape) writing muscle worship articles and posing as the all-knowing writer of BBING.  The whole Weider empire is just creepy to me.  A bunch of business men who never have had physiques(Joe going to the extreme measures of photo shopping his head onto others' bodies in the mags ::))  BBing is one sport or industry where you need to play the game yourself to get credibility as the business figurehead, or magazine writer.  Otherwise people assume you are either a con-man making money off of the bbers or a homosexual.  Or both. :-X

kmhphoto

  • Expert
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #54 on: May 03, 2006, 05:03:49 PM »
(and I would wager that he never was in shape)

How much?
$10?
$100?
$1000?

How about $10,000

Unchained81

  • Guest
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #55 on: May 03, 2006, 05:29:23 PM »
How much?
$10?
$100?
$1000?

How about $10,000

Well he isn't now.  I was using "wager" kinda as a figure speech more than actually implying gambling about PM's physique.  If he was in shape, and I mean bbing in shape, not just average, then post a clearly un-photo shopped pic and that will prove it.  I'm not calling you a liar, or trying to flame PM or Flex, I just have a hard time believing the guy was ever in great shape.

kmhphoto

  • Expert
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #56 on: May 03, 2006, 05:58:41 PM »
Well he isn't now.  I was using "wager" kinda as a figure speech more than actually implying gambling about PM's physique.  If he was in shape, and I mean bbing in shape, not just average, then post a clearly un-photo shopped pic and that will prove it.  I'm not calling you a liar, or trying to flame PM or Flex, I just have a hard time believing the guy was ever in great shape.

Third page of this thread

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=69391.0

LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #57 on: May 03, 2006, 06:52:20 PM »
Man, I want to preface what I am going to type here with this- I know that Peter Mcgough is an older man.  But, that being said, so is Dave Draper, Clarence Bass and other guys who are still in great shape.  It just seems kinda creepy when you have an old man, totally out of shape(and I would wager that he never was in shape) writing muscle worship articles and posing as the all-knowing writer of BBING.  The whole Weider empire is just creepy to me.  A bunch of business men who never have had physiques(Joe going to the extreme measures of photo shopping his head onto others' bodies in the mags ::))  BBing is one sport or industry where you need to play the game yourself to get credibility as the business figurehead, or magazine writer.  Otherwise people assume you are either a con-man making money off of the bbers or a homosexual.  Or both. :-X

    His writing is excellent. Why would having larger muscles or being leaner improve his writing? ::)

Unchained81

  • Guest
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #58 on: May 03, 2006, 08:33:33 PM »
Third page of this thread

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=69391.0

Decent development, I take my earlier statements.  I still think if he were in better shape now it would send a better message.  But, I think the pic in the other thread proves he is not just a schmoe.  I was proven wrong here.

Unchained81

  • Guest
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #59 on: May 03, 2006, 08:37:28 PM »
    His writing is excellent. Why would having larger muscles or being leaner improve his writing? ::)

It wouldn't obviously.  But, bbing is an endevour where ones opinion seems to only be taken seriously if they have participated themselves.  I think Martial Arts is the same way.  If a writer for a Martial Arts magazine has no training experiance then there is a large section or readers who just will not respect his opinions or tips.  That is just how it is, it doesn't reflect one's journalism skills.

LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #60 on: May 03, 2006, 09:54:20 PM »
It wouldn't obviously.  But, bbing is an endevour where ones opinion seems to only be taken seriously if they have participated themselves.  I think Martial Arts is the same way.  If a writer for a Martial Arts magazine has no training experiance then there is a large section or readers who just will not respect his opinions or tips.  That is just how it is, it doesn't reflect one's journalism skills.

 This is completely irrational. If you agree with the point a writer is making, then you agree with it. If making good points doesn't impart credibility, then one's assignment of credibility is unimportant.

Unchained81

  • Guest
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #61 on: May 04, 2006, 04:20:15 AM »
This is completely irrational. If you agree with the point a writer is making, then you agree with it. If making good points doesn't impart credibility, then one's assignment of credibility is unimportant.

I didn't say this was even my personal opinion.  It is not irrational.  To prove my point, look how many bbing magazine readers(posters on this site) have posted in this thread in others showing no respect for PM.  That is what I am saying.  Look how many people have called him fat, out of shape, etc.  If he were a football writer no one would care, bbing is different.

kmhphoto

  • Expert
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 1546
  • I'm a llama!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #62 on: May 04, 2006, 05:16:10 AM »
I didn't say this was even my personal opinion.  It is not irrational.  To prove my point, look how many bbing magazine readers(posters on this site) have posted in this thread in others showing no respect for PM.  That is what I am saying.  Look how many people have called him fat, out of shape, etc.  If he were a football writer no one would care, bbing is different.

So when you said "old man", "creepy", "writing muscle worship articles" ,"i would wager, he never was in shape", "conman" "homosexual" etc. these were not your personal opinions?
So what was the last piece of his you read and what is your personal opinion of his writing ability?

Naked4Jesus

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1598
  • You can save a IFBB Pro today by donating a kidney
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #63 on: May 04, 2006, 07:30:51 AM »
So when you said "old man", "creepy", "writing muscle worship articles" ,"i would wager, he never was in shape", "conman" "homosexual" etc. these were not your personal opinions?
So what was the last piece of his you read and what is your personal opinion of his writing ability?


He looks to be in pretty decent shape and that's the only thing anyone can really comment on since most of us don't know the guy on any level.   I also happen to think he's  a pretty decent writer, but bashers will bash.


LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #64 on: May 04, 2006, 02:16:48 PM »
I didn't say this was even my personal opinion.  It is not irrational.  To prove my point, look how many bbing magazine readers(posters on this site) have posted in this thread in others showing no respect for PM.  That is what I am saying.  Look how many people have called him fat, out of shape, etc.  If he were a football writer no one would care, bbing is different.

  If you are saying that irrational people think he lacks credibility, then I agree with you.

Joe Roark

  • Expert
  • Getbig III
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
  • Getbig!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #65 on: May 04, 2006, 02:44:39 PM »
I suspect, that if Peter set his mind, and workouts, to it, he could get into shape within a year or so, if he chose to.

I also suspect, that with a year's concentrated effort, no one here could match his ability to write, even if he chose to.

Peter came to America because Weider noticed the McGough writing in Pumping Press. It may be (I don't know) that at the time, Joe had never seen what Peter's appearance was. Peter has been in Weiderville several years now, Joe has seen him, and for some inexplicable reason, keeps him on the payroll.

Go figure.

snarky

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 18
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #66 on: May 04, 2006, 02:59:56 PM »

Peter came to America because Weider noticed the McGough writing in Pumping Press. It may be (I don't know) that at the time, Joe had never seen what Peter's appearance was. Peter has been in Weiderville several years now, Joe has seen him, and for some inexplicable reason, keeps him on the payroll.

Go figure.


PM is kept on the payroll because he's damn good at what he does, and what he does is run two very successful magazines—in fact, Muscle & Fitness is doing better now that he's taken over, than it has in years.

brianX

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2810
  • Kiwiol has 13" arms!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #67 on: May 04, 2006, 03:06:17 PM »
Joe had never seen what Peter's appearance was. Peter has been in Weiderville several years now, Joe has seen him, and for some inexplicable reason, keeps him on the payroll.

Go figure.

Joe Weider never had any size or strength. ::)
hahahahahahahahahahahaha

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83346
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #68 on: May 04, 2006, 03:16:17 PM »
Joe Weider never had any size or strength. ::)

Joe had a decent build not huge but he looked good , he looked better when he stole Robbys body lol

brianX

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2810
  • Kiwiol has 13" arms!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #69 on: May 04, 2006, 03:22:46 PM »
epic 12" arms
hahahahahahahahahahahaha

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #70 on: May 04, 2006, 03:24:26 PM »
Joe had a decent build not huge but he looked good , he looked better when he stole Robbys body lol


Joe Roark

  • Expert
  • Getbig III
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
  • Getbig!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #71 on: May 04, 2006, 03:48:13 PM »
Joe Weider competed in weightlifting and did okay in Canada. Even Charles A. Smith, editor for Weider 1950-1957, but who remained objective about Joe, acknowledged that Joe, in certain lifts, was quite strong, so it is not accurate to say Joe never had any strength.

Purge_WTF

  • Guest
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #72 on: May 04, 2006, 05:23:18 PM »
Romano is NOT Dirk Diggler.


    YES HE IS! ! ! !

brianX

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2810
  • Kiwiol has 13" arms!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #73 on: May 04, 2006, 06:46:41 PM »
Joe Weider competed in weightlifting and did okay in Canada. Even Charles A. Smith, editor for Weider 1950-1957, but who remained objective about Joe, acknowledged that Joe, in certain lifts, was quite strong, so it is not accurate to say Joe never had any strength.

I think it's funny that you try to discredit Paul Anderson's strength claims, but will defend a bullshit artist like Joe Weider. Have you ever been on Weider's payroll?
hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Joe Roark

  • Expert
  • Getbig III
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
  • Getbig!
Re: Peter McGough vs. John Romano
« Reply #74 on: May 04, 2006, 06:51:16 PM »
I think it's funny that you try to discredit Paul Anderson's strength claims, but will defend a bullshit artist like Joe Weider. Have you ever been on Weider's payroll?

I have checked on Anderson's feats and have defended his amateur record, which is quite certain and proveable. His pro status and feats are quite vague, and witnesses vanish under scrutiny, reported weights are lighter than claimed, etc. There is a thread on my forum inviting proof for some of his unsubstantiated feats. Feel free to join and provide the proof. So far, no one has- you'll be a first!

I have worked for Joe Weider since 1992.