Is calf development now penalised?
Posted by Asian Fitness Fan at 5/25/2007 6:17 PM and is filed under Fitness,Photographer,Images,General 
It is undeniable that
the United States is the center of the universe
when it comes to fitness, bodybuilding, and figure. What
happens
there affects the rest of the fitness community throughout the world.
In 2005, IFBB rules were changed in
response to charmain Jim Manion's request "that female athletes in
Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure decrease the amount of muscularity by
a factor of 20%." (This has been called the "20% rule.") This
caused a lot of confusion as to what a winning physique should look
like. After a couple of years, it finally seems that there is some concensus as to what judges expext in terms of leanness and muscularity. Maybe. Am I the only one to notice, at least in the area of figure competitions, that the current trend is toward less calf development? Not only less development, but more of a tapered look. This could be a bad thing. A woman can always try to further develop her calves, but it is pretty difficult to "un-develop" them, especially if she is genetically gifted in this area.
My argument here is not exactly scientific (but we know that the judging in figure contests is not exactly scientific, either). I will try and present the evidence as best as I can. . .
Exhibit A: Juliana Malacarne. A good case for comparison is Juliana Malacarne, from Brazil. In the fitness scene in Brazil, leg and glute development is definitely highly esteemed. The leg and glute development that wins contests in Brazil will lose a contest in the United States. In an interview at HardFitness.com, Ms Malacarne states:
". . . coming from Brazil competitors over there veer more towards harder physiques. The competitors in the USA are different genetically from Brazilians thus in my case it becomes very hard to loose muscle and to get softer for the new criteria."
Later in the interview:
". . . Brazilian judges prefer a harder physique with more emphasis on muscle density but not a extra muscular physique. While competitors here (USA) have less muscle and seem to stray away from lifting heavy and building quality muscle. . . The posing in Brazil gravitates towards flexing the muscles on stage while in the United States judges want you to relax."
Look at these images of Juliana Malacarne after she first began competing in the U.S., at the 2006 Europa Supershow, where she did not place:
 |
 |
 |
Now, look at winner Amanda Savell, paying attention to the calves:
 |
 |
 |
(I am sure you will start to see less leg development in Brazil if this continues in the United States).
Exhibit B: Misty Green. Another example is figure competitor Misty Green, who has legs coming close to perfection. In another interview at HardFitness.com, the interviewer asks:
"I think everyone really liked your physique at Jr. Nationals 2006, what can you tell other girls about dealing with getting a lot of compliments from everyone yet judges not placing you as high? It takes a lot of discipline to put it in the back of your mind and then come out again to the next show."
Misty Green responded, in part:
". . . Figure, fitness and bodybuilding competitions are very subjective. . . Sometimes, you get lucky and you end up being what they [judges] are looking for and sometimes you're not. But I think it is very important to have a positive self image and to do what makes you happy."
Look at these comparison images from the "D Class" at 2006 NPC Jr. Nationals:
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| MaryJo Cooke 1st Place |
Danielle Rouleau 4th Place |
Misty Green 10th Place |
|||
Very clearly, the judges preferred a tapered look in the calves. Seems like the more angular the legs, the lower the competitor will place.
Exhibit C: Huong Arcinas. The most recent example is figure competitor Huong Arcinas. She won her class a the 2007 Junior USA in Charleson, but she did not win the overall. Look at a comparison of her physique with that of the overall winner, Paola Almerico:
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Huong Arcinas | Paola Almerico Overall winner |
||
If Huong Arcinas were not involved in fitness and figure, she would still, without a doubt, have beautiful calf development. How thin and tapered should "ideal" calves be in a figure competition, particularly on women who tend to have naturally muscular leg development? (Many Asian women think that their calves are too big, but I will save this topic for a different day).
One of the great things about fitness, figure, and bodybuilding is that any woman in good health can get involved. If these sports begin favouring a certain build or body type, then this sends a nasty signal. These sports have historically included many different types, and I hope they continue to do so. The bias against calf development may not be a step in the right direction, and I hope that the almighty judges in the United States take this into consideration when they decide the "ideal" figure aesthetic.
All comments are welcome! Am I the only one who has observed this phenomenon? What do you think about it?
More soon,
Previous items:
. . . Huong Arcinas
Thanks to HardFitness.com for the images and interview material used in this post.
[Note: This entry was corrected after posting: the overall winner of the 2007 Jr. Nationals in Charleston was Paola Almerico. Thanks to BH for catching the error.]
Just a correction: Paola Almerico won the overall and Valerie Haynes got the 2nd pro card at the Jr. USAs.
But yeah, I am all for a variety of physiques instead of conformism. Great calf pics!
Reply to this
Thanks for the correction! (Now I have to fix the entry . . . no time right now).
Your commentts are always appreciated, bh!
Reply to this
Thank you, AF. Your blog is extremely well done. Let me correct my correction-- it is Valerie Haines, not Haynes.
Reply to this
The entry is now corrected. (Better late than never, right?)
Reply to this
This is bad. Someone should kick that Jim Manion fella in the balls.
Reply to this
You are very subtle, LvC.
Reply to this
I don't know how much of it has to do with calf development, infact, the picture linked for Amanda Savell shows lack of symmetry in the calves. If anything, the bigger difference in the two is that Juliana Malacarne has a very muscular (and very nice personally speaking) compared to Amanda's.
All in all its probably not too much of a bad thing to have some size reduction in bodybuilding, hopefully, it will cut down on the steroid/drug abuse.
Reply to this
I am not sure about the steroid abuse being linked to size. I think the size reduction is to keep bodybuilding and figure from becoming too similar. Anyway, to keep it simple, I chose to conccentrate on figure. I am not sure about steroid abuse in the sport. However, I am sure that testing would make it more difficult to use such substances.
Reply to this
I agree with your argument. Their are gifted athletic females with natural development in the leg area. Unfortionately you have to get rid of the bias judges. If not the women with the best legs will be eliminated before the competition is over. It's very sad. Maybe there should be a competition for the contestants with the best over all appeal including their legs. A women with great legs/calves always have an edge.
Reply to this
Fascinating article!I happen to be obsessed with muscular female calves, but only if they're on a woman who has LESS upper body size, but which still has toned,balanced,clearly defined (not too big or fat, but not 'ripped') muscle shape!
I prefer dancer/gymnast/skater/track-athlete type size. Early female bodybuilding was more aware of this,and avoided 'gender bending'.There were some really great 'overall' physiques! The women were 'rewarded' for better,fuller,more muscular & shapely calves.Traditionally muscular female calves are very sexy,even on untrained women.Just look at some 50-60 year old Classic films with Vera Ellen or Alexi Smith. Rachel McLish, Donna Olivera, even Cory Everson had great calves. There was a better sense of balance between 'upper' and 'lower' body symmetry.But there is also a perverse notion among some people that 'more' or 'bigger' is 'always' better.But this causes lose of context and proportion.Unfortunately,our culture has generally accepted this adolescent and exaggerated misjudgment.So since then (and the split female Bodybuilding into 'Fitness', and then 'Figure'),.. the gender lines were morphed, and with the help of steroids, women bodybuilders became 'men with bikinis'. At the same time our post-modern American culture was radically 'bending' traditional views of beauty and culture. This has resulted in cultural degradation spawned from 'cultural relativism' in my opinion. So it's no surprise that there's no set standard of what is 'good', 'beautiful', or 'balanced'. I happen to think that women such as Juliana Malacarne and Misty Green are THE BEST EXAMPLES of the ideal women's physique(excepting unnecessary breast implants)!They have the best proportional shape,balance,& their CALVES ARE PERFECT!
My only complaint is, WHY the 'artificial breasts'? Juliana and Misty have natural advantages regarding the shape of their calves,.... SO BE IT! No matter how much we work on some body,there are 'pre-programmed genetic parameters'. Now that doesn't mean that muscle can't be improved,.. because it CAN be improved with training & technique.BUT EACH IS BORN WITH CERTAIN GIFTS, and that's just the way life is! We're not supposed to be 'equally' endowed,:o). Wherher with calves or breast shape. So Please ladies,don't resort to false breasts!You already have great calves,:o).Should everyone should get 'calve implants' so they can look like you? Obviously NOT,:o)! NO TATTOS & NO excess body-piercing,just natural beauty.
Some people, like myself, still hold to 'traditional' notions of beauty. PROPORTION, BALANCE, GRACE, AND SYMETRY ARE STILL IMPORTANT TO US,:o). NATURAL,HEALTHY BEAUTY, enhanced only with training and discipline,...but let's keep it BALANCED! Yes, there's a decline in 'judgment' regarding what is a beautiful female physique. But it reflects the decline in 'GOOD JUDGMENT' for our whole 'popular' culture. So let's begin turning it around by becoming wiser & supporting traditional 'muscular' beauty,:o)
Reply to this