Author Topic: Cutler back shot in better lighting... (Read 5820 times)

jwb · « **on:** October 01, 2006, 03:09:04 PM »

impressive

body88 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 01, 2006, 03:10:16 PM »

Exactly. Hulkster why do you never post this shot?

Weightpit · « **Reply #2 on:** October 01, 2006, 04:46:21 PM »

Quote from: jwb on October 01, 2006, 03:09:04 PM

impressive

Jeezzz...Cutler's back is incredible.........He blew everyone away this year with that back!

HERACLES · « **Reply #3 on:** October 01, 2006, 04:48:05 PM »

His hamstrings look insane too. ... his legs are so thick....amazing....

pobrecito · « **Reply #4 on:** October 01, 2006, 04:49:50 PM »

Compared to Dorian and ROnnie peak thats not impresive at all

Weightpit · « **Reply #5 on:** October 01, 2006, 04:50:30 PM »

Quote from: HERACLES on October 01, 2006, 04:48:05 PM

His hamstrings look insane too. ... his legs are so thick....amazing....

What blows my mind is that I'm the same height as Jay and I can't imagine carrying around that mass - I'm 220 and know there is no way I can function at the size he's at......

The guy is incredible.....

HERACLES · « **Reply #6 on:** October 01, 2006, 04:52:44 PM »

Quote from: Weightpit on October 01, 2006, 04:50:30 PM

What blows my mind is that I'm the same height as Jay and I can't imagine carrying around that mass - I'm 220 and know there is no way I can function at the size he's at......

The guy is incredible.....

220 most of which is fat, hes at what, 5% or less? im 5'8" and stripped to contest shape im 185 max...puts it into perspective...

getfast81 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:00:15 PM »

Quote from: jwb on October 01, 2006, 03:09:04 PM

impressive

Not impressive. Looks almost the same as it did three years ago. He beat Ronnie this year. Not Vic, Dex, and Melvin though.

HERACLES · « **Reply #8 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:01:38 PM »

Quote from: Weightpit on October 01, 2006, 04:59:13 PM

LOL!! Not all fat.....I hit the weights 5 days a week......48"chest....18 +" arms.....34 waist.......27" legs.......and I'm 38!!! I would say I am at about 11-12% fat....a guess......I can just make out my abs........he comes in at about 3% I thought....which is sick!! I can't imagine what he does to get like that.

You sound like you're in awesome shape, dude......I don't compete but if I did I would have to lose about 15 pounds or more.....

Nah, im 213, getting there though.... i didnt mean all fat lol, but you know what i mean, these guys make us all look fat, call eachother fat, lol...you know what i mean...id be content with getting to 200. but 190 id be really polished.

MAXX · « **Reply #9 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:02:39 PM »

Quote from: jwb on October 01, 2006, 03:09:04 PM

impressive

awesome shot!

Weightpit · « **Reply #10 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:08:14 PM »

Quote from: HERACLES on October 01, 2006, 05:01:38 PM

Nah, im 213, getting there though.... i didnt mean all fat lol, but you know what i mean, these guys make us all look fat, call eachother fat, lol...you know what i mean...id be content with getting to 200. but 190 id be really polished.

Trust me...I know what you mean and I really appreciate your note......I am a fat slob compared to these dudes.....I do this to stay in shape and stay healthy...I even got my wife into it.

I think you are right on about the 190 weight.......it just sucks to get to a certain bulk and then know you have to lose it to look better. It blows my mind how guys can have a 30-32" waist and still hang on to 22 inch arms or something.

Keep at it, man....you'll get it!!

Dball · « **Reply #11 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:09:00 PM »

gotta love how you can see his killer quad sweep even in this pose.

tommywishbone · « **Reply #12 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:17:09 PM »

Photoshop out his obliques and it is crazy.

haider · « **Reply #13 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:18:44 PM »

His symmetry was way better than Ron's, and he also edged him out int he back department by virtue of better conditioning and dryness.

natural al · « **Reply #14 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:21:42 PM »

top to bottom that's a great pose, calves, hamstings, detailed thick back....very nice.

jwb · « **Reply #15 on:** October 01, 2006, 05:24:40 PM »

some more... these are from MADMAX's personal camera btw... a little blurry but I'd say dave was a tad excited when he took these...

Hulkster · « **Reply #16 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:41:52 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on October 01, 2006, 04:49:50 PM

Compared to Dorian and ROnnie peak thats not impresive at all

exactly.

Jay's back is still not that great.

eg here is Jay's back comapared to two famous backs, in similar poses:

Unlike many, I am not blinded by the hype. Just because Jay won does not mean his back has become fantastic.

Jay's back has gone from "not that great" to good- that is all.

It is not on a level of other "great backs" like Samir, Haney, Ronnie and Yates. (or Flex or Shawn for that matter)

If you compare shots of 2006 Jay to 2003 or 2004 Jay, his back does not look much different at all. It looks a bit thicker and wider, but thats it. It doesn't have more detail, which is what Jay has needed all along.

haider · « **Reply #17 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:43:42 PM »

Who cares. His back was still better than Ronnie's yesterday. Bodybuilding is a game of comparisons. Comparitively, Jay was very good.

jwb · « **Reply #18 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:46:26 PM »

ronnie was DRY in 98!!!

Hulkster · « **Reply #19 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:49:52 PM »

Quote from: haider on October 01, 2006, 06:43:42 PM

Who cares. His back was still better than Ronnie's yesterday. Bodybuilding is a game of comparisons. Comparitively, Jay was very good.

correct.

but that is totally different than claiming:

"oh my god Jay's back is fantastic!!!!!"

which is what is happening here.

Jay beat Ronnie fair and square.

But that does not mean that his back is suddenly on a level with the other Olympians known for their backs, like Haney, Bannout, Ronnie (in shape) and Yates.

jwb · « **Reply #20 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:51:52 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on October 01, 2006, 06:49:52 PM

Jay beat Ronnie fair and square.

wow the hulkster admits his guy got done over... kudos

slayer · « **Reply #21 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:52:36 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on October 01, 2006, 06:41:52 PM

exactly.

Jay's back is still not that great.

eg here is Jay's back comapared to two famous backs, in similar poses:

Unlike many, I am not blinded by the hype. Just because Jay won does not mean his back has become fantastic.

Jay's back has gone from "not that great" to good- that is all.

It is not on a level of other "great backs" like Samir, Haney, Ronnie and Yates. (or Flex or Shawn for that matter)

If you compare shots of 2006 Jay to 2003 or 2004 Jay, his back does not look much different at all. It looks a bit thicker and wider, but thats it. It doesn't have more detail, which is what Jay has needed all along.

jays back is much wider then both of them!

MAXX · « **Reply #22 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:54:44 PM »

Only flaw with Jays back is that he has some lose skin in his lower back that takes away some detail.

jwb · « **Reply #23 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:55:20 PM »

the 98 ronnie still would have won easily brother!

how dry is the prick!?

HERACLES · « **Reply #24 on:** October 01, 2006, 06:56:02 PM »

Quote from: slayer on October 01, 2006, 06:52:36 PM

jays back is much wider then both of them!

You look like an idiot Slayer. STFU already. Ronnie has the biggest back in bodybuilding, everyone knows that. You post a pic from an angle of ROnnie, compared to a non angle view of Jay? Get real. Jays back is awesome, ROnnies is THICKER and wider though.

Author Topic: Cutler back shot in better lighting... (Read 5820 times)

body88

Dball