review of mr. olympia 1999, january 2000, page 90:257 pounds, a good seven pounds heavier than last year and the clear winner, ALTHOUGH NOT AS BONE DRY OR AS ROCK HARD IN 98. In comparison to 98, his thighs are enourmous with a greater sweep and his front delts have improved; plus the pec anomaly (gyno) is no longer present. Flex Magazine Jan 2001RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .
both quotes by the same person.and that person was wrong both times.
Next
Damn, 98 was way better conditioned! Even the glutes are way more ripped in 98....hmm...goes right along with what Ronnie himself says. hulkster owned.
Even the glutes are way more ripped in 98
98 vs 99his entire lower body was more ripped in 99 than in 98. esp the quads and including his lower back.
shut it you loser.
ND sets up a strawman argument, something he alway accuses others of doing.fact is, ronnie looks like he is not even contracting his back in that muscletime shot, only his arms look tensed.in reality, his back was rock hard:try and deny this ND:http://www.truveo.com/Ronnie-Coleman-1999-Mr-Olympia-Part-Two/id/1160132027compare to the muscletime back shot LOLand note how dense, ripped and hard his back is...
Back on topic -
I think Serge looks leaps & bounds better than Lou in that pose