agreed. This is not a matter of someone not reaching their 'potential'...she has the potential to be huge, thats good for her, but she competes in figure, and if they aren't going for huge, then don't get huge...if that means not taining heavy, then that is what it means - it's not archaic.
It bugs me when people think figure or bodybuilding rules for that matter or 'archaic' or discriminating against women or whatever you wanna call it. It is a sport (well, a beauty pagent) and there are criteria to follow, and if that means not training heavy, thats what it means. Same can be said about the drugs a figure girl might take vs. a bodybuilder...is it archaic that figure girls don't need as much as a bodybuilder to reach elite? same comparison to training....figure girls don't need to train as heavy as bodybuilders. Bikini girls don't need to train as heavy as figure girls. But that doesn't mean they aren't reaching their 'potential'....
Not only that, 1 girl training as hard and as heavy and as often as a male bodybuilder may actually only genetically get to the size of a bikini competitor...whereas another girl could barely train and still have the muscle size to be an elite figure girl. Genetics dictate what these girls need to do in and out of the gym...and how to eat and what supplements to take. Ava Cowan in this example likely falls into a category of needing to take it easier in the gym than someone else to reach her potential as an elite figure competitor.
These sports are NOT about who trains the hardest or diets the most, or takes the most supplements. It's about who looks best on stage given the criteria. If the criteria were who looks like they train the heaviest, then the sport they would enter might be powerlifting. This again, is a beauty contest. Beauty defined specifically to a certain body type. Athletes do what they need to given their genetics to get to that certain look they might be judging for.



Reply With Quote
I know your dieting (no attack here).


