Forum Saradas
gfxgfx
 
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
clearskypharmacy
 
gfx gfx
blaster steroidify
ugfreak parapharma
gfxgfx
 
Welcome to Forum Saradas! Female Bodybuilding, Fitness, Figure & Bikini
 
gfx gfx
gfx
483344 Posts in 62349 Topics by 26541 Members - Latest Member: Jimmypop987 July 02, 2020, 11:41:08 am
*
gfx* Home | Help | Login | Register | gfx
gfx
Forum Saradas  |  News and Discussion  |  Wrong decision  |  Ms Olympia 1991
gfx
gfxgfx
 

Author Topic: Ms Olympia 1991  (Read 19795 times)

Offline the_arbitrage

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • Activity:
    0%
  • KARMA: -106
  • Female Bodybuilding, Physique, Fitness, Figure & Bikini
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #15 on: April 26, 2015, 09:01:02 pm »
The problem is that there are no universal definitions of "better" when it comes to bodybuilding. It's all subjective and based on whatever guidelines are being used. That's why as things continue to evolve there are various divisions for different looks/sizes and a greater emphasis on aesthetics. The big turning point was right around 1990 when Cory departed. Up to that point WBB was still very much mainstream-friendly being aired regularly on ESPN with the 6-time Ms. O even hosting her own workout shows on prime time network tv. And if you look back at the 87-89 NPC Nationals footage it was about the same standard as the Physique division we now have in place today. So essentially Physique is a throwback to Cory's standard and Figure/Bikini = Rachel's. The criteria dictates and regulates whatever the standard will become in any given division.       

Offline M7

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
  • Activity:
    33.33%
  • KARMA: 2768
  • Gender: Male
  • never too big for me
    • imagevenue
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #16 on: October 01, 2015, 07:56:36 am »
I don't think there has ever been a bigger slap in the face in the history of female bodybuilding competition than when Bev Francis was denied the title of the '91 Ms.Olympia. She had a superior physique and was clearly the winner. She was the most symmetrical and nailed her conditioning. Her muscles were the biggest and most impressive, just look at her abs for pete's sake!

The fact that the judges did not award her the title screams of male chauvinism. When the clear winner doesn't get the deserved victory. It's called bodybuilding! Why do they think it's ok for men to get as big as possible and not women? It's a double standard. I'm not buying health reasons either because it's not like it's healthy for men to be massive bodybuilders. Instead of trying to limit how big a woman can be, why not add a superheavyweight division for them? Get a grip on your insecurities and let these women build their bodies anyway they want to, as they see fit. And don't penalize them for being the best! Or for being too big!!

Cas

  • Guest
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #17 on: October 02, 2015, 03:13:30 am »
M7,

I have to agree with you on your take, and remember this came  two years after Sandy Riddell should've been the clear,hands down winner in that Ms. O.

Offline M7

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
  • Activity:
    33.33%
  • KARMA: 2768
  • Gender: Male
  • never too big for me
    • imagevenue
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #18 on: October 02, 2015, 06:44:54 am »
M7,

I have to agree with you on your take, and remember this came  two years after Sandy Riddell should've been the clear,hands down winner in that Ms. O.


Yeah I hear ya. Also, their habit of awarding the title to the same person over and over again, year after year is just as frustrating.  :-[

Offline the_arbitrage

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • Activity:
    0%
  • KARMA: -106
  • Female Bodybuilding, Physique, Fitness, Figure & Bikini
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #19 on: November 14, 2015, 07:54:18 am »
Because at the end of the day it's still a subjective process, also why as things continue to evolve there are now more and more divisions. And the same also does apply on the men's side where a top open division men's bodybuilding competitor wouldn't place top 10 in a men's classic bodybuilding division, or vice versa. The problem back in the 90's was that there were no other divisions and the guidelines were also a lot more vague.

Offline M7

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
  • Activity:
    33.33%
  • KARMA: 2768
  • Gender: Male
  • never too big for me
    • imagevenue
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #20 on: November 16, 2015, 02:43:57 am »
Because at the end of the day it's still a subjective process, also why as things continue to evolve there are now more and more divisions. And the same also does apply on the men's side where a top open division men's bodybuilding competitor wouldn't place top 10 in a men's classic bodybuilding division, or vice versa. The problem back in the 90's was that there were no other divisions and the guidelines were also a lot more vague.


On the one hand, I'd say I agree with you completely.

On the other hand, the more I see footage of this contest, the more painfully obvious it is that Bev was the clear winner. I don't mean her being the biggest either. She was the most balanced and symmetrical and had the best conditioning. In a word, she was the most 'complete' bodybuilder on that stage that night.

Offline the_arbitrage

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • Activity:
    0%
  • KARMA: -106
  • Female Bodybuilding, Physique, Fitness, Figure & Bikini
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #21 on: November 18, 2015, 12:49:06 am »
Because at the end of the day it's still a subjective process, also why as things continue to evolve there are now more and more divisions. And the same also does apply on the men's side where a top open division men's bodybuilding competitor wouldn't place top 10 in a men's classic bodybuilding division, or vice versa. The problem back in the 90's was that there were no other divisions and the guidelines were also a lot more vague.


On the one hand, I'd say I agree with you completely.

On the other hand, the more I see footage of this contest, the more painfully obvious it is that Bev was the clear winner. I don't mean her being the biggest either. She was the most balanced and symmetrical and had the best conditioning. In a word, she was the most 'complete' bodybuilder on that stage that night.

I hear ya, but then that's *IF* the guidelines were limited to that criteria. Back then we still basically had (as Lori Bowen said it best)..."complete opposites" competing against eachother, which made it even that much more difficult boarder-lining on the ridiculous. Yes I know the hardcore extreme mass faction see it more simple and concise from their perspective, but outside of that it really isn't.

Put it like this, let's say we had a custom vehicle building contest and had only 1 division which included..sportscars, classics, rat rods and jacked up 4x4s. Is a Hummer "better" than a Ferrari? A 67 GTO better than a Welderup Diesel Custom? Trained human bodies with various aesthetics combinations are even more complex and individual. This is why it's far better to at least have more divisions for differing body types, genetics and goals...but even then it's still highly subjective and dependent on what criteria is being used.

Offline M7

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 867
  • Activity:
    33.33%
  • KARMA: 2768
  • Gender: Male
  • never too big for me
    • imagevenue
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #22 on: November 18, 2015, 10:51:56 am »
Because at the end of the day it's still a subjective process, also why as things continue to evolve there are now more and more divisions. And the same also does apply on the men's side where a top open division men's bodybuilding competitor wouldn't place top 10 in a men's classic bodybuilding division, or vice versa. The problem back in the 90's was that there were no other divisions and the guidelines were also a lot more vague.


On the one hand, I'd say I agree with you completely.

On the other hand, the more I see footage of this contest, the more painfully obvious it is that Bev was the clear winner. I don't mean her being the biggest either. She was the most balanced and symmetrical and had the best conditioning. In a word, she was the most 'complete' bodybuilder on that stage that night.

I hear ya, but then that's *IF* the guidelines were limited to that criteria. Back then we still basically had (as Lori Bowen said it best)..."complete opposites" competing against eachother, which made it even that much more difficult boarder-lining on the ridiculous. Yes I know the hardcore extreme mass faction see it more simple and concise from their perspective, but outside of that it really isn't.

Put it like this, let's say we had a custom vehicle building contest and had only 1 division which included..sportscars, classics, rat rods and jacked up 4x4s. Is a Hummer "better" than a Ferrari? A 67 GTO better than a Welderup Diesel Custom? Trained human bodies with various aesthetics combinations are even more complex and individual. This is why it's far better to at least have more divisions for differing body types, genetics and goals...but even then it's still highly subjective and dependent on what criteria is being used.


I basically agree with what you're saying, but I also think there was enough of a criteria in place. The criteria for the contest was to bring the most balanced, symmetrical and conditioned physique and there's no question it was Bev. I've rarely seen a contest where the winner was so obvious. Don't get me wrong, Lenda had an amazing and very beautiful physique, but she lacked in her calves and abs. I think it's a shame that Bev was denied the title simply because they felt she wasn't feminine enough.

Offline the_arbitrage

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 100
  • Activity:
    0%
  • KARMA: -106
  • Female Bodybuilding, Physique, Fitness, Figure & Bikini
Re: Ms Olympia 1991
« Reply #23 on: November 18, 2015, 04:06:48 pm »
Because at the end of the day it's still a subjective process, also why as things continue to evolve there are now more and more divisions. And the same also does apply on the men's side where a top open division men's bodybuilding competitor wouldn't place top 10 in a men's classic bodybuilding division, or vice versa. The problem back in the 90's was that there were no other divisions and the guidelines were also a lot more vague.


On the one hand, I'd say I agree with you completely.

On the other hand, the more I see footage of this contest, the more painfully obvious it is that Bev was the clear winner. I don't mean her being the biggest either. She was the most balanced and symmetrical and had the best conditioning. In a word, she was the most 'complete' bodybuilder on that stage that night.

I hear ya, but then that's *IF* the guidelines were limited to that criteria. Back then we still basically had (as Lori Bowen said it best)..."complete opposites" competing against eachother, which made it even that much more difficult boarder-lining on the ridiculous. Yes I know the hardcore extreme mass faction see it more simple and concise from their perspective, but outside of that it really isn't.

Put it like this, let's say we had a custom vehicle building contest and had only 1 division which included..sportscars, classics, rat rods and jacked up 4x4s. Is a Hummer "better" than a Ferrari? A 67 GTO better than a Welderup Diesel Custom? Trained human bodies with various aesthetics combinations are even more complex and individual. This is why it's far better to at least have more divisions for differing body types, genetics and goals...but even then it's still highly subjective and dependent on what criteria is being used.


I basically agree with what you're saying, but I also think there was enough of a criteria in place. The criteria for the contest was to bring the most balanced, symmetrical and conditioned physique and there's no question it was Bev. I've rarely seen a contest where the winner was so obvious. Don't get me wrong, Lenda had an amazing and very beautiful physique, but she lacked in her calves and abs. I think it's a shame that Bev was denied the title simply because they felt she wasn't feminine enough.

Yes and that's exactly where the problem was because female aesthetics were also a major factor in the guidelines. So (under that given set of criteria) it does make more sense that Lenda got the win...but, that's also the whole point and root of the problem. Since there were no other divisions they were left trying to cram everything together into one. Just like it obviously wouldn't sit well with jacked up 4x4 lovers who believe bigger is better & badder.. if they also included Ferrari's aesthetics in that set of judging criteria...which, is exactly why the separate divisions were needed and where things continue to evolve.   

Forum Saradas  |  News and Discussion  |  Wrong decision  |  Ms Olympia 1991
 

gfxgfx
Forum Saradas does not host any files on its own servers.
gfx
It only points to various links on the Internet that already exist.
It is recommended to buy Original Video, CD, DVD's and pictures only.
gfx
Mobile View