Samir Bannout comments on whether or not the modern era of bodybuilding has declined.
Between the past five to ten years, there has been a growing conversation about the quality of modern bodybuilding. While it’s often common to hold the past in higher regard – it seems that fans have become more vocal about bodybuilding physiques declining in quality even compared to the 90s. Alternatively, there are those who believe we are now at the beginning of an upswing after a slight decline. In our latest GI Exclusive interview, Samir Bannout shares his thoughts on modern bodybuilding, super mass monsters, and wether there has been a decline in quality.
Samir Bannout is a diplomatic man. He’s not someone to cast blame on specific people. He’s also not one to make bold statements without all of the facts. So when it comes to something subjective like the quality of bodybuilding physiques – he’s careful with his answer.
During our video interview, we asked if Samir Bannout considers bodybuilding an extreme sport. More specifically, if bodybuilding is more extreme today than it was during his era of competing. This conversation evolved into discussion of the quality of physiques in bodybuilding. Has the increased effort for bigger size led to lower quality physiques overall?
Samir Bannout makes a point first and foremost to highlight that pro bodybuilders today are extremely talented. They work hard, they put in the work, and their ambitions are respectable. So Bannout purposefully avoids saying that physiques have declined. Instead, he comments that certain weak points are becoming more common. He assumes this is likely due to focusing more on size.
[embedded content]
Check out our GI Exclusive segment with Samir Bannout above!
Instead of talking about increase or decrease in quality, Samir Bannout talks about beauty in the sport. Again, this is a subjective term. But Bannout believes that some of the beauty has left the sport. It’s become more favored towards blocky and bulky mass monster physiques. To use an alternate word from beauty, it seems that Bannout is talking about aesthetic and conditioning.
Samir Bannout uses two examples. He points out Frank Zane, who has won multiple Mr. Olympia competitions. He also points out Phil Heath – a man who has seven Olympia titles under his belt.
Bannout comments that Frank Zane was no where near the largest bodybuilder even during his own era. Yet his beauty, aesthetics, and conditioning were so on point that he became a champion. Fast forward to Phil Heath. Bannout believes his first four victories were flawless. Shortly after that, criticism of his gut came to the forefront. Bannout believes this was due to Phil starting to chase more size.
“I think he [Phil Heath] lost his beauty once he started to get super massive,” Samir Bannout states in our interview. He continues:
“Sometimes it’s not about size… Same thing with Flex Wheeler. You know, Flex, it was immanent that he’d win the Olympia. Seriously… It’s a shame that if Flex, if he slowed down a little bit he would have been Olympia no doubt.”
Samir Bannout doesn’t want to demonize massive size. He thinks that massive size can work so long as the beauty remains. He thinks that some bodybuilders are genetically predisposed to handle massive size while maintaining tighter aesthetics and conditioning. He uses Ronnie Coleman’s earlier Olympia victories as an example. Unfortunately, Bannout also thinks that too many bodybuilders fall victim to chasing size and beauty is lost as a result.
You an watch Samir Bannout’s full comments in our latest GI Exclusive interview segment above!
from WordPress https://ift.tt/3ftk7EF
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment