SLIMMERS WORLD BIKINI BODIES 2005 2006 REVIEW and PREVIEW
Mood:
irritated
READ BEFORE JOINING SLIMMERS WORLD BIKINI BODIES 2006 OR GREAT BODIES 2005
*Update 5/8/2005* A friend of mine spoke to two of the judges. They said that their picks for the top 5 in both the men and womens categories were in-line with what I described below. Furthermore, these two judges said that it was their opinion that their scores were thrown out by Helen Camacho, OIC of Slimmers World, and also a judge. They basically said that Ms. Camacho is the one who picks the winners. That would make sense since it is my experienced opinion that Ms. Camacho has no competence in picking athletes based on accomplishment...it is more on potential marketability. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED. SLIMMERS WORLD COMPETITIONS ARE NOT FOR SERIOUS ATHLETES. YOU ARE ROLLING THE DICE WHEN YOU ENTER!! *End update*
A few friends of mine asked me to visit them to watch
them compete in Slimmers World Bikini Bodies 2005. I've
been in the Philippines again for the last 3 months so I
figured I'd take the trip to Subic to support them. In
past years when I watched Slimmers World Bikini Bodies
2003 and 2004, the contests seemed fairly well organized
and at least objective for the most part. Being involved
with fitness and bodybuilding for the last 20 years and
being a judge educated in judging legitimate and fair
bikini/figure shows, usually my pics would place in the
Top 5, more or less in-line with my predictions.
This year the exact opposite was true for Bikini Bodies
2005. There was no rhyme or reason for the judging.
When I watched as the judges were introduced, I felt
myself getting sick as I knew my friends were basically
screwed out of a non-biased and objective opportunity to
compete. Furthermore, people were already grumbling
about a feeling of the competition being "fixed", seeing
it was being held in Subic and Slimmers World was trying
to promote its branch there.
Before I go further, I realize and I understand that
Simmers World holds Great Bodies and Bikini Bodies in
efforts to promote their gyms. They use their actual
members in the competition as a means for them to both
show off their successful clientele as well as promote
their services and facilities. Nobody has ever faulted
Slimmers World on marketing their clubs based on these
competitions. But the "specticle" they hold is at the
emotional expense of the candidates competing. The
outcome is about as predictable as a scripted WWE
wrestling match and it's my opinion that they basically
pick their "winners" based on marketability far more than
they do on accomplishment.
Furthermore, my problem is also with the judges. When
you are holding a bikini/figure competition based on
FITNESS as was Slimmers World supposedly trying to do
with Bikini Bodies 2005, why the hell would you invite a
Ms. Philippines contestant and a fashion mogal to be
judges? If anyone has watches a Ms. Philippines pageant,
it will be clear that actual fitness criteria is not in
their vocabulary. Almost all Binibinis are thin, but are
definitely not fit. Hard-line Filipino beauty contest
patrons are absolutely against muscles on women. Just
look at some of the discussion boards on websites such as
Mabuhay Beauties if you need to be convinced.
Furthermore, you have a business bias against fitness
personalities with those judges. It's no secret that the
fashion industry hates the fitness industry. During and
after a fitness boom, people begin wearing workout
clothes instead of high-fashion apparel. The fashion
industry experiences a plummet in their sales. To
counter this, the fashion designers come out with their
own line of fitness wear. For the most part, this has
been a failure. Personally, if I was in the fashion
industry, I'd pick the "Winners" of the contest based on
who would be friendliest to the image of my industry.
Therefore, for the candidates, I'd pick the finalists
based on height, weight, or past experience with fashion.
That's what happened on the night of Slimmers World
Bikini Bodies 2005. With luck it will never happen again
starting with Bikini Bodies 2006.
So as it went, I saw the 26 candidates as they came out.
It was immediately apparant who were my top 5 for both
the men and the women. The host of the event, I believe
his name was Robert, made it clear that this was not a
bodybuilding show. To me, that was already clear since
figure/bikini shows are not about big muscles. In fact,
they are defined just as Slimmers World described their
criteria:
Definition, Symmetry, Asthetic Harmony, Balance
(basically the same as symmetry), Stage Presence, and
Skin Quality. Audience perception is a throw-away for
any professional judge, since it was clear that most of
the people would cheer for their friends since the crowd
was 95% from Slimmers World in Manila.
To a trained and competent bikini/figure judge, you
define the criteria as follows from your vantage point:
Definition: Does the individual have abs, mild muscle
maturity, and a low bodyfat %? If so, to what degree?
Everyone knows that Slimmers World tells the candidates
that abs are the most important thing. If this is true,
why did only one girl in the top 5 have mild abs? Why
did the only girl with clearly defined abs (but not
ripped) NOT make the top 5? What's worse, the WINNER not
only didn't have abs, but you couldn't see an ounce of
muscle development on her entire body! Does she even
work out?
Symmetry: Does muscle development create nice lines and
flow for the body? Again, we have a case where both the
winners of the men and women were clearly not the best,
symmetrically speaking. Only two of the top 5 women had
symmetry based on bikini criteria. Two others of the top
5 had very poor symmetry with their large (one with butt
implants) rears and clearly fat stomachs that they tried
to conceal by hiking up their bikini bottoms. Again, the
best girls with respect to symmetry didn't make the top
5. For the men, the winner also had poor symmetry. His
waist was too large for his upper body. His thighs were
also too big for this calves.
Balance: Do opposing muscle groups of the body create
proper proportion in the body? For example, does the
indivdiual have very well developed arms, but have a
poorly developed chest? For both the men and women,
again, the winners were very unbalanced as were several
other members of the top 5 for each group. Furthermore,
the two best balanced candidates for the men and women
were not included in the top 5. In the case of the male
winner, his quads were huge when compared to the rest of
his body. In the case of the female winner, she didn't
have an ounce of muscle on her body that could be assed
for balance. Even a couple of the other top 5 were very
unbalanced.
Asthetic Harmoney: Similar to symmetry, in creating the
"look" of a winner. Again, this is something a trained
judge can see immediately. As I said earlier, the two
winners for both the men and women didn't catch my eye in
a positive manner.
Skin Quality: From your vantage point as a judge, does
the person have visible blemishes or uneven skin tone? I
have 20/10 vision (50% better than 20/20) and from what I
could tell, the winners didn't have the best skin
quality. Furthermore, nobody had glaring skin faults.
This % of the score is also a throwaway like audience
perception.
Stage presence: Does the person appear confident and
poised on creating a winning atmosphere? Is their voice
clear and their words strong? This criteria seemingly
wasn't considered at all by the judges. Both of the
winners, and many of the top 5 had very poor stage
presence. The routines of the winners for both the men
and women were weak at best. In the case of the men,
pathetic would be a better word. The male winner looked
as if he had not prepared at all and was goofing off
during his routine. The female winner looked tentative.
When she spoke at the microphone, her voice was very
weak. The BEST male creative posing candidate didn't
make the top 5. Again, for the most part, this should
have been a throwaway category and only considered in the
case of a tie with respect to the condition of the body.
So what was the aftermath?
In my educated opinion, neither of the best candidates
made the Top 5. In addition, in the case of the
finalists, the most underserving of all of the female
candidates placed in the top 3, and she wasn't the
winner. The winner was weak herself however, and
shouldn't have placed any higher then 9th place.
For the men, again, the best male candidate didn't place
in the top 5. There were at least 2 other male
candidates that were better than the Top 5 male
finalists. As was the case of the female winner, the
male winner should have only placed in the bottom half.
The winners, including many of the Top 5, were shocked at
the decision of the judges. Many of the candidates were
deeply hurt and upset that they were not picked. For
those who were picked for the top 5, many were apologetic
for their placings because they too didn't think that
they were deserving of their placings over their
competitors who were obviously better qualified.
The audience was stunned in silence. Many audience
members were grumbling words like "fixed", "staged", or
"the only purpose is to promote Subic like in 2002".
Even many of the relatives of the top 5 were visibly
angry, not because their candidate finished high, but
because they were picked with a group of undeserving male
and female candidates. One man in particular felt
insulted that his girlfriend or wife (I'm not sure) was
included with "two anorexics and a fat girl" as he put
it. He also said that others who didn't place in the top
5 should have been there so his lady would have been
proud of her finish. It also appeared that one or two
candidates walked out before the show was finished.
Why didn't they put the two best candidates from both the male and female division in the Top 5? They did so because they didn't want to make the best male candidate and the best female candidate stand next to their chosen winners in a comparison round, i.e. the top 5. If these two candidates would have stood next to their predetermined winners, the winners would look inadequate and it would expose the sham to even the average untrained observer. But to the trained observer, Slimmers shot themselves in the foot to an even greater degree. When you don't put the best candidates in the top, it's obvious you are hiding something. It's just like most bodybuilding, bikini, figure, or other fitness competitions that have been staged in the past or decided by politics. Shame on you Slimmers World. It's only too obvious due that exclusion that you are trying to hide the best candidates to make your "winners" look better, and that's both unfair and wrong.
My conclusions and observations:
Slimmers World Bikini Bodies 2005 was an absolute
failure. To me, they lost integrity as an organization
and credibility as a leader in fitness by how they picked
the candidates initially as well as how the show
concluded. For the both the men and women, it was clear
to most who witnessed the spectacle that the purpose was
only to promote Slimmers World Subic at the expense of
their other clients. Many candidates and their
supporters felt used like puppets in a promotion game and
swore that they would abandon their memberships and join
other more credible gyms. People who joined even just
for fun became angry, citing that if such underserving
people can place high, then why couldn't they do the
same?
Furthermore Slimmers World did not promote a healthy
lifestyle. This was especially true in the case of the
female category where it appeared that bodies that are
the result of eating disorders and diet pills are what is
considered "desirable". I'm sorry, but when you are very
skinny but have a high bodyfat %, that's a very clear
indicator of an eating disorder. Slimmers World could
make the argument that "this is not a bodybuilding
contest". That's correct, but in the case of the
females, the most muscular girl (who still had a large
waist and no abs) finished higher than the two other
girls who were muscular but much smaller, pound for pound
and had abs.
All Slimmers World accomplished with their Bikini Bodies
2005 was create a corporate feel of animosity and
bitterness amoungst its competitors and members. This
review serves as a warning to others who are interesting
in joining Slimmers world Bikini Bodes in 2006. To
expand on this warning, I'll say the following:
If you are entering with the purpose of winning 100% and
having fun as a side-effect, don't bother unless:
A) You're a member of a branch they are trying to
promote.
B) You're tall, frighteningly thin, and with white
features in the case of the women. Morena filipinas need
not apply.
If you enter only to have fun and really don't care how
you finish or why, even if you are the best contestant on
the stage, by all means join the competition.
I will take down this review and criticism of Slimmers
World ONLY if they make the following changes:
1) DO NOT include celebrity judges or especially judges
from the fasion industry on your panel of judges. You
only discredit your competition and alienate the contests
who are not, nor they wish to be, part of show business.
2) Make a pledge to follow your actual written scoring
criteria.
3) Make scores available to all audience members and
candidates upon request following the competitions.
Allow for formal protesting of the judging scores.
4) Post these changes in both your clubs on your bulletin
boards as well as the Slimmers World website.
In my opinion, Slimmers World is losing ground in the
booming fitness industry. Their gyms are often
overcrowded due to their oversold nature. Competitions
such as Bikini Bodies 2005 do not build loyal to their
brand. Instead, they are only breeding contempt.
Posted by slimmersreview
at 12:01 AM EDT
Updated: Sunday, 8 May 2005 11:48 AM EDT
