Pages: 1
IFBB Modifies Female Muscle Crudentials
(CLICK HERE here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: shutupntra1n
In light of all the new steroid arguments in sports, the IFBB has taken a step towards changing the face of Bodybuilding. 20% decrease in size 
Date:
December 6, 2004
From:
Office of the Vice Chairman
IFBB Professional Division
To:
All IFBB Professional Female Athletes
Re:
FEMALE MUSCULARITY
For aesthetics and health reasons, the IFBB Professional Division requests that female athletes in Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure decrease the amount of muscularity by a factor of 20%.
This request for a 20% decrease in the amount of muscularity applies to those female athletes whose physiques require the decrease regardless of whether they compete in Bodybuilding, Fitness or Figure.
All professional judges have been advised of the proper criteria for assessing female physiques.
Sincerely,
Posted by: Robboe
How the hell are they going to enforce and measure that?
Posted by: shutupntra1n
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TCD
How the hell are they going to enforce and measure that?
|
Basically, the judges are instructed to look for a different size and/or definition of the physique. Same reasons why Monica Brant did not place as good as I think she should have and why she filed a complaint. She was told before after not placing on top that she was too muscular. This is a small way of saying lay off the juice IMO so that it seems like they care. 
I think this is rediculous. When you are talking bodybuilding for some of these females, 20% of mass is a lot of size 
Posted by: Robboe
But how do they measure it? Or is it just each individual judge's opinion?
Posted by: shutupntra1n
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TCD
But how do they measure it? Or is it just each individual judge's opinion?
|
It's very hard b/c they are told what to look for and then it's all discretion. That's why competing can get tricky. Jodie could tell ya. She just did one. But that's anything that has subjective judging I guess.
Posted by: Velvet
Ya, like this sport wasn't subjective enough
Posted by: shutupntra1n
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Velvet
Ya, like this sport wasn't subjective enough |
That's what I'm saying 
This sux
Posted by: musclepump
Probably just means they're looking more for symmetry and definition rather than size, a la Ronnie.
Posted by: Prince
what about male bodybuilding?
shouldn't they be just as concerned with that?
Posted by: Luke9583
Quantity over quality is just the american mentality. It wont hold water.
Posted by: Mudge
That is just stupid IMO.
Posted by: Luke9583
I think your opinion is pretty much shared by anyone with a brain.
Posted by: Dale Mabry
I don't really think it is going to change anything, except maybe some chicks will come in a little smaller, one will come in huge, and the huge one will win. They tried to do essentially the same thing with the men 2 years ago and Ronnie is still winning every year.
Posted by: Jodi
I don't necessarily see this as a bad thing. Losing hard earned muscle sucks but still........
Posted by: Prince
I would like to see the same thing happen in men's bodybuilding.
Posted by: musclepump
I'd like to see people the size of Dareem Charles, Shawn Ray, Kris Dim, etc... win some big shows. They're successful, but without the size of Jay/Ronnie/Markus their odds, as is, on winning the O aren't good.
Posted by: shutupntra1n
I will have to find out where, but someone I know that passed the info on to me said it was directly related to the current steroid controversy. Don't know how legit that is but it does say it was in part due to "aesthetics and health reasons".
Posted by: shutupntra1n
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Robert DiMaggio
I would like to see the same thing happen in men's bodybuilding.
|
I heard through the grape vine that that is likely to be next 
All in do time. I don't know if it's a good thing or not. I suppose it would be nice to set more of a realistic achievable standard for some of the people who want to compete in the IFBB. 
Posted by: PreMier
2 posts down 
http://www.ironmagazineforums.com/sh...ad.php?t=40104
Posted by: LAM
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shutupntra1n
I suppose it would be nice to set more of a realistic achievable standard for some of the people who want to compete in the IFBB. |
that kind of defeats the purpose of the IFBB. the IFBB is supposed to be the cream of the crop...
Posted by: shutupntra1n
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by LAM
that kind of defeats the purpose of the IFBB. the IFBB is supposed to be the cream of the crop...
|
I already said I didn't agree with it... I was giving another side in reference to Rob's post 
Posted by: musclepump
The cream of the crop, but to be there you've got to make yourself all kinds of unhealthy. Coleman's GH gut isn't overly appealing, and it'd be nice to see guys without that win some shows.
Posted by: Prince
I saw Lee Labrada guest pose back in the early 90's, and I just saw Ronnie Coleman guest pose last weekend. Lee Labrada was around 5' 6" 185lbs, Ronnie is/was 5' 10" 320lbs. Lee Labrada was far more impressive to see. His physique was perfection, his posing was to custom music and he actually did a routine. Ronnie walked out looking about 7 months pregnant, continued to hit the same poses over and over and pumps his hands in the air. Don't get me wrong Ronnie is impressive, the biggest I have ever seen, but is that really what bodybuilding is about? I would much rather see the sport go back to the way it was in the 80's and early 90's.
Posted by: musclepump
Amen Robert!
(CLICK HERE here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
IFBB Modifies Female Muscle Crudentials
Article Archives
