More isn't always better

Spooky · #1 February 12th, 2009, 07:12 PM

How many people out there find this body type
http://z.about.com/d/pilates/1/5/9/4...edAbs2Crop.jpg

more attractive than this?
http://bp1.blogger.com/__aQQm19auJI/...builder001.jpg

Just curious. Didn't know if I was the only one.

Spooky · #2 February 12th, 2009, 07:40 PM

Yeah, I think #2 is quite clearly a morph.
I would feel bad for his cardiovascular system if that was his actual body size.

But, I've been lurking for the past few weeks, and it seems to me that the majority on this site are into the really huge guys.

But me, I much prefer the "skinny" guys, as you called him.

Just curious

Spooky · #3 February 12th, 2009, 07:41 PM

Hmmm... that makes me want to ask another question.

How many out there would like to be the size of #1?
#2?

wolfotehmoon · #4 February 12th, 2009, 08:02 PM

#2, aaaaaand #2. Though, I don't think that's quite a fair question; 2's an extreme.

Now, excuse me while I become a hypocrite and post my ideal ;3 Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Grant Pitts!

YouTube - Grant Pitts training

Spooky · #5 February 12th, 2009, 08:30 PM

Yeah, well, #2 is an extreme, but it was intentional.

It's easier to identify how someone leans by telling someone to choose between two opposite ends of the spectrum.

Nice vid.

philat99 · #6 February 13th, 2009, 11:43 AM

I've always leaned more toward the bigger power-lifter type, so I guess I'd have to go with #2. The skinny guys seem too emaciated. But then, I'm an endomorph.
Mike

falseyedee · #7 February 13th, 2009, 12:09 PM

as this is a muscle growth site, it almost seems like an odd question. but "muscular" is a relative term and we all have different preferences for size on ourselves and others.

in some of my recent stories, i've been exploring that relative nature of "muscular". what is big to some is small to others and visa versa.

and, as an old bear said to me once, if we were all attracted to the same thing, it would be a very dull world indeed.

abbraxis · #8 February 13th, 2009, 03:55 PM

Well, I'll be the black sheep and say I personally don't prefer pic #2. With that said, I'm not a big fan of pic #1 either, but it's actually closer to what I prefer.

I'm a fan of smaller, ripped-er bodies, which may be why I like stories of people being stronger then they look.

With #2, even though he has veins, he's not "ripped" to me. He's roided... and that just doesn't appeal to me.

My ideal preference:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_R5iaTUcxWh...splashpage.jpg

Geek2Jock · #9 February 13th, 2009, 05:13 PM

I'm totally in agreement with abbraxis. IMO bigger isn't always better if the quality of the mass isn't there. It is a matter of personal preference, so since this isn't a right-or-wrong discussion but rather simply a personal preference discussion, I figure there's no firestorm to start here!

RPM · #10 February 13th, 2009, 05:13 PM

Honestly, something in-beween the two would be ideal for me. Adam above is a good example, also that big gymnast, Gatson I think it was, looks just Godly in some of his competition pics from 2002-2004.

Mad Dog · #11 February 13th, 2009, 05:28 PM

I'd rather have #2.

worshipper · #12 February 14th, 2009, 01:37 AM

To each their own, but I like the Scott Klien (?) morph (big guy) better. Also, that powerlifter video is hot. Any off-season type seems so strong.

SmallWeakGuy · #13 February 14th, 2009, 05:04 AM

i'd have to lean towards number 2, but its a morph so again i agree slightly unfair to have to pick between these two.
my ideal is definately a HUGE guy, i mean i wouldn't kick skinny alternatives outta bed but my preference is definately a very large bodybuilder (think Brad Holligbaugh)

giantw · #14 February 14th, 2009, 08:11 AM

How about somewhere between 1 and 2...like 1.5

boricua1 · #15 February 14th, 2009, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spooky

How many people out there find this body type
http://z.about.com/d/pilates/1/5/9/4...edAbs2Crop.jpg

more attractive than this?
http://bp1.blogger.com/__aQQm19auJI/...builder001.jpg

Just curious. Didn't know if I was the only one.

To a lot of people would say #2 would be too much... as most people stated here #2 is a morph but I have to tell you giant size muscle like that is a turn on for me. Size, mass, and power is hella sexy ... a guy like that should just be naked and flex with a hard on.

Do some cocky poses , then just start j.o. to show the world the thick hard lined curves of his body, panting.

Spooky · #16 February 14th, 2009, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boricua1

To a lot of people would say #2 would be too much... as most people stated here #2 is a morph but I have to tell you giant size muscle like that is a turn on for me. Size, mass, and power is hella sexy ... a guy like that should just be naked and flex with a hard on.

Do some cocky poses , then just start j.o. to show the world the thick hard lined curves of his body, panting.

Great answer

Spooky · #17 February 14th, 2009, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by giantw

How about somewhere between 1 and 2...like 1.5

Smart .

Spooky · #18 February 14th, 2009, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by falseyedee

as this is a muscle growth site, it almost seems like an odd question.

I don't think so. Not everyone here has the same likes or aspirations.

nj. · #19 February 14th, 2009, 03:03 PM

I enjoy both; it just really depends on the guy! If a huge guy can pull off looking good while being huge, I'm all for it.
Frank McGrath for instance
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g1...ds10/Frank.jpg

But I also like a good looking smaller guy, as long as they still have at least some fat. I'm not entirely too fond of the "I can count the striations of my muscles"-look.

And I'm closer to that smaller muscular guy look myself, so it's also a good inspiration for myself!

ushersdick · #20 February 14th, 2009, 04:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by boricua1

To a lot of people would say #2 would be too much... as most people stated here #2 is a morph but I have to tell you giant size muscle like that is a turn on for me. Size, mass, and power is hella sexy ... a guy like that should just be naked and flex with a hard on.

Do some cocky poses , then just start j.o. to show the world the thick hard lined curves of his body, panting.

hell yeah!

bigbearny · #21 February 14th, 2009, 06:19 PM

i'd go for #2 although i'd settle for Frank McGrath or Branch Warren offseason

or this guy http://uk.youtube.com/user/bigguns6339

ARCHEON · #22 February 14th, 2009, 10:39 PM

I'd be inclined to say the one who looks more like a genetic freak. So, that would mean more towards #2. For me, 6' or taller dudes with full-blown muscle bellies are utterly hypnotic.

Username3 · #23 February 15th, 2009, 12:05 AM

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Since I got a fetish for big muscle such as the 2nd pic, I'm going to have to say the 2nd pic is more attractive in my eyes.

BIGJOEY · #24 February 24th, 2009, 06:12 AM

first is skinny , second is morphed. so its hard to judge giving thouse 2 as the material to judge buy. i compete and i still want to get bigger all the time. 245 right now at 5-9 now want 265. so it depends on the person

philat99 · #25 February 24th, 2009, 10:07 AM

but definitely not everyone's cup of tea, posted on another thread by Bigjoey, is

YouTube - Ed Van Amsterdam - Training Video (3/3)

Mike

abbraxis · #26 February 25th, 2009, 01:49 AM

See, even though I liked the smaller guy in the original post, I like the vid, cause although he's "big", he's VERY well conditioned. Maybe that's what I gravitate to. Conditioning...

Amazed · #27 February 25th, 2009, 02:39 PM

Da-yum, Ed Van Amsterdam's looking HUGE these days. Made me fing hot to hear him grunting out those heavy rows, torturing that big muscle back of his. YEAH!