Proportional.

[TheMM]

I have a simple question:

What do you all consider to be "proportional" muscle?

I keep this question very open, because I'm really rather curious. I myself am not sure what I consider to be "proportional", in terms of muscle on a man's body.

[suma]

??? your question is not clear, what are you asking?
Besides, proportional would probably mean looking like a gymnast, most of us are into much larger muscle

[TheMM]

Originally Posted by suma

??? your question is not clear, what are you asking?
Besides, proportional would probably mean looking like a gymnast, most of us are into much larger muscle

I suppose I was a bit too open with my question.

What I met was...How big should a muscle be, as compared to other muscles?

Examples:

1. Calves can be as big as, but not larger, then the biceps.
2. Pecs (as in the distance around the entire chest) should not be anymore then double whatever the waist is.
3. Quads can be bigger then the waist, but smaller then the upper chest.

Does that help?

[Username3]

I guess it's propertinal if it looks alright.
Not something like tiny arms, with a huge chest.
I'm not even sure

[Ogun]

Hey, I don;t mind gymnasts either... :P

[nypup2train]

Long, long ago, in an age all but lost to the endless, relentless march of time... (actually, it was 2003 -- same thing!)

Someone posted, to the MGS Yahoo group, the following chart. (It's still available in the Photos section of the group, but I've mirrored it over at my photobucket account for those who may not be members of the Group.)

http://s76.photobucket.com/albums/j1...roportions.jpg

It later came out, it seems, that the chart was taken from one of Stuart McRobert's books, "Brawn" or "Beyond Brawn".

Also in the Yahoo Group, in the Files section, is a Perl script I wrote that will apply the Ideal Proportions formulae -- mathematically extrapolating, in two different ways, based on math another member provided in the course of the discussion -- and generate a set of measurements for any given bodyweight. This was in response to complaints that the chart didn't actually go all the way up to "bodybuilder" weights, forget beyond (for MGS-topical fantasy purposes).

Also of interest, perhaps, are the ravings of some wacko named Richard Jasper, who chimed in on the topic. ([COLOR="Red"]*[/COLOR]) I'll include the text of HIS posting at the bottom of this post.

So, yeah, a few people have been known to put forth some theories on what it means to be "proportional", from time to time.

-Pup

[COLOR="Red"]*[/COLOR] = Once it's revealed that Richard's middle initial is P, it becomes more apparent that said wacko is our own, inimitable arpeejay doing his Clark Kent thang.

Originally Posted by arpeejay to MuscleGrowthStories Yahoo Group, a ver'longtimeago

Re: Follow-Up to Ideal Proportions Chart

Great to hear it, Tom. In the meantime, let me offer some handy tips
for calculating how big body parts should be:

1. You can come up with a realistic chest measurement by multiplying a
guy's bodyweight by a factor of .2-.25. For example, you'd expect a
muscular guy who weighs 200 lbs. to have at least a 44 inch chest,
possibly as much as 50 inch chest if he's really incredibly built.
Anything more than 50 inches is improbable. Ditto, anything less than
44 inches would suggest an endomorph not a mesomorph.

2. Biceps on muscular guys are usually somewhere between .08 and .10
of bodyweight. So you'd expect for the 200 lb. muscular guy to have an
arm no less than 16 and no more than 20 inches. As with the 50 inch
chest, the latter number represents EXTREME hypertrophy and anything
above it would be wildly improbable.

3. Waists are a bit harder to calculate in terms of percentages. The
best thing to do is derive it from the chest measurement. Obviously
the bigger the drop (difference between chest and waist measurement)
the better. One wants to employ a sliding scale of some sort. A guy
with a 40 inch chest won't have a 20 inch waist (waist = 0.5 chest)
but a guy with a 60 inch chest MIGHT have a 30 inch waist (Sergio
Oliva did.) Likewise, a 28 inch waist on a guy with a 40 inch chest
(waist = 0.7 chest) is GREAT but the same ratio on a guy with a 60
inch chest (42 waist) ain't so hot.

4. Quads are almost NEVER more than waist size on even the most
muscular bodybuilder and anything more than 0.1 or even 0.05 is kinda
silly.

5. Ditto calves and neck should be within +/- an inch of biceps.

6. Forearms aren't usually more than 80% of biceps. Lou Ferrigno's
were amazing and they were only 19 inches (just about 80% of his 23
1/2 inch biceps)

Then there's the question of relative sizes. If Lee Priest is 5'4 and
competes at 220 lbs., how big would he be if an exactly proportioned
Lee were 6 ft or 7 ft tall? I always employ "Richard's Rule of 10"
(TM), namely 10 additional pounds per 1 inch of additional height. The
6 foot equivalent of the 5'4 / 220 Lee would be 300 lbs. The 7 foot
equivalent of Lee would be 420 lbs.

Of course, the purpose of envisioning Lee at 7 ft is to make him even
MORE monstrous than he is already, so the factors tend to get bigger
and bigger. At 15 lbs. per inch instead of 10 lbs. the 6 ft Lee is 340
lbs. At 20 lbs. per inch the 6 ft Lee is 380 lbs. and at 7 ft he's 620
lbs.

:-)

Can you tell I've been playing with these numbers for a LONG, long time?

Muchas smoochas...

rpj

Richard Jasper
Houston (for another 2 weeks, then it's Detroit)

[Bull]

I'm not good with percentages, so I'll just give you an example I would consider pretty close to perfect proportions:

Neck, arms, calves: 18".
Quads: 27"
Waist: 33"
Chest" 48"
Hips: 39"

[RPM]

I think there's room for variety depending on the base the person has to work with. On the subject of gymnasts, I think Jason Gatson takes the physique crown there. For strongmen, Maruisz Pudzianowski and Tom Owen are personal favorites. Bodybuilding has the most possible variety, Shane Giese is one of my favorites in the teen arena along with bodybuilding.com's Joe Schmo (I don't think he ever did give his full name) and Antoine and a few others whose names elude me, also can't forget the last banner boy at Teen Muscle Guys, then of course there's the pro ranks where just about anything I find great which isn't bloated (to that extent I think the top natural competitors have the most ideal physiques). I suppose this is kinda pointless to discuss without pictures, but I'm short of a functional gallery at the moment. Basically as long as there's no obviously weak or over-developed points, I'm good. Extra kudos for giant calves and forearms though.