Author Topic: Kenneth Flex Wheeler versus Ronnie Coleman (Read 30906 times)

OneMoreRep · « **Reply #50 on:** December 12, 2007, 08:14:12 PM »

Quote from: aussiepro on December 12, 2007, 04:05:17 PM

Flex shat in ronnie in 98, Ronnie never should have won his first MR O title, even when there standing relaxed next to each other at the end you can tell that flex iw clearly outclassing ronnie, and there not even flexing then. Ronnie should have won the MR O title in 03 and 04 only

Dude, I was there and Flex was clearly beat by Ronnie. Not to mention that the judges where also coming down hard on Flex from the major talk of Esiclene being employed heavily by him..

TrueGrit · « **Reply #51 on:** December 12, 2007, 08:35:22 PM »

Works for Ronnie but 99% of mortals would gain nothing using his form - the amount of momentum he uses and the tiny partial reps with virtually no negative ...it's shocking

rocket · « **Reply #52 on:** December 12, 2007, 09:53:55 PM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on December 12, 2007, 08:09:59 PM

Ronnie was the most improved bodybuilder and his improvements were more than enough for him to win the show.

Now what the hell is Shawn talking about Ronnie having weak hams?

I think he's probably been to the same School of bodybuilding learning that Jay Cutler went to.

Rule 324:

If a competitor is worlds above you, choose random body parts to criticise. If you are unable to isolate any parts or you are feeling particularly cocky, say they have "structural flaws"

Parker · « **Reply #53 on:** December 12, 2007, 10:06:12 PM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on December 12, 2007, 08:01:04 PM

How is Ronnie "lucky" as you say? Flex was cheating on his diet and not even showing up to the gym to work out some days. That is called being a lazy bastard. It's not Ronnie's fault Flex wasn't at his best, It's Flex's fault, Plus Flex was filled with so much oil he could of given his car an oil change in the parking lot. Ronnie did everything he had to do to win the contest hands down. Flex himself even admits he knew he lost and that Ronnie was better. Give Ronnie some credit and stop showing us how biased you are by saying Ronnie was "Lucky".

That was in 1999. Flex was oil free in 1998. He was smoother than Ronnie, the Flex mag pics show it. But it could have gone either way. If Flex won the O, you would not see the bloated guts of today. The bbers would have tighter waists and the physiques would have more V-taper.

Necrosis · « **Reply #54 on:** December 12, 2007, 10:08:41 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on December 12, 2007, 04:34:51 PM

Well he is correct about Ronnie being incomplete and lacking in the areas but Ronnie won that show .

typical you picking and choosing what parts are correct to fit your needs .lol

Parker · « **Reply #55 on:** December 12, 2007, 10:25:01 PM »

Quote from: michael arvilla on December 12, 2007, 01:45:59 PM

great video!

I wonder how Flex would have turned out, if he trained with Ronnie? I remember when he trained with Kev, he had a spark, and when he trained with Shawn, he won the Arnold Classic in 1997. Especially now, what if the two started trainer together?

Hell, I wonder what would happen if Chris Cormier trained with Ronnie, because both like to go heavy.

LatsMcGee · « **Reply #56 on:** December 13, 2007, 12:40:32 AM »

Nope. While it was anyone's ballgame in the front poses Ronnie was drier than Flex in back and hamstrings. If Flex would have been tighter in those two areas he could have won because he does have a better midsection and he didn't have the trace gyno Ronnie had. Ronnie won that show.

BRUCE · « **Reply #57 on:** December 13, 2007, 01:29:03 AM »

Quote from: Figo on December 12, 2007, 04:39:48 PM

98 was Dillett's year. Pity he froze under pressure...

Bone dry conditioning, his posing is off however.

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #58 on:** December 13, 2007, 01:44:33 AM »

Quote from: aussiepro on December 12, 2007, 03:52:43 PM

biggest load of shit ever, flex should have won in 98 hands down.

I agree.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Meso_z · « **Reply #59 on:** December 13, 2007, 02:37:24 AM »

A screenshot...the quality is not so good but you can see that they are so close...

England_1 · « **Reply #60 on:** December 13, 2007, 02:47:28 AM »

Wheeler had more back detail, but then again, he had more back detail than just about anyone short of Yates.

Coleman kills him on density, width, condition.

It's close because of Flex's supreme symmetry and aesthetics, especially from the front where Coleman is severely lacking. The bitch tit also ruined Coleman's front poses.

Meso_z · « **Reply #61 on:** December 13, 2007, 02:51:47 AM »

I wonder how Flex's back would have looked if he did heavy bb rows, dlifts, t-bar rows.......

England_1 · « **Reply #62 on:** December 13, 2007, 02:53:13 AM »

Quote from: Meso_z on December 13, 2007, 02:51:47 AM

I wonder how Flex's back would have looked if he did heavy bb rows, dlifts, t-bar rows.......

Flex had the genetics to be the greatest BB ever. At 5'10" and 260lbs Flex would have presented a package likely never to be seen again.

phyxsius · « **Reply #63 on:** December 13, 2007, 03:48:15 AM »

Quote from: BRUCE on December 13, 2007, 01:29:03 AM

Bone dry conditioning, his posing is off however.

I didn't know props were used in 98

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #64 on:** December 13, 2007, 04:40:39 AM »

Quote from: England_1 on December 13, 2007, 02:53:13 AM

Flex had the genetics to be the greatest BB ever. At 5'10" and 260lbs Flex would have presented a package likely never to be seen again.

He would never weight that much because his bones are too small.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

England_1 · « **Reply #65 on:** December 13, 2007, 04:42:41 AM »

Quote from: suckmymuscle on December 13, 2007, 04:40:39 AM

He would never weight that much because his bones are too small.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

It's impossible to predict how much weight he could have held. Coleman had a relatively small bone structure and held 285lbs.

MAXX · « **Reply #66 on:** December 13, 2007, 04:59:09 AM »

Levrone should have been 2'nd!

Deicide · « **Reply #67 on:** December 13, 2007, 05:42:19 AM »

Ronnie die have some nasty gyno though; how embarassing... $:-\$

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #68 on:** December 13, 2007, 05:45:32 AM »

Quote from: England_1 on December 13, 2007, 04:42:41 AM

It's impossible to predict how much weight he could have held. Coleman had a relatively small bone structure and held 285lbs.

Coleman's bone structure is much bigger than Wheeler's. It's not even in the same ball park. Look at Ronnie's clavicle width and ankle/wrist thickness then compare it to Wheeler's and you'll see that.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Hulkster · « **Reply #69 on:** December 13, 2007, 06:38:30 AM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on December 12, 2007, 08:01:04 PM

How is Ronnie "lucky" as you say? Flex was cheating on his diet and not even showing up to the gym to work out some days. That is called being a lazy bastard. It's not Ronnie's fault Flex wasn't at his best, It's Flex's fault, Plus Flex was filled with so much oil he could of given his car an oil change in the parking lot. Ronnie did everything he had to do to win the contest hands down. Flex himself even admits he knew he lost and that Ronnie was better. Give Ronnie some credit and stop showing us how biased you are by saying Ronnie was "Lucky".

LOL I see ND being owned on yet ANOTHER thread LOL

Hulkster · « **Reply #70 on:** December 13, 2007, 06:39:21 AM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on December 12, 2007, 08:09:59 PM

Ronnie was the most improved bodybuilder and his improvements were more than enough for him to win the show.

Now what the hell is Shawn talking about Ronnie having weak hams?

he is just bitter that ronnie's hams blow his out of the water.. $:-\$

Parker · « **Reply #71 on:** December 13, 2007, 07:55:20 AM »

Quote from: suckmymuscle on December 13, 2007, 05:45:32 AM

Coleman's bone structure is much bigger than Wheeler's. It's not even in the same ball park. Look at Ronnie's clavicle width and ankle/wrist thickness then compare it to Wheeler's and you'll see that.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Yweah, Wheeler's wrists, knees and ankles were very small. ANd a 260 pound wheeler wouldn't look right. He have a wider waist and a gut. Check him on his Mass construction vid, that was shot after the 1996 O. He's having trouble holding his gut in. 230+ was his max, even if he went heavy on the barbell rows and deadlifted, he'd might have a wider thick back, but it would have thicken his waist as well.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #72 on:** December 13, 2007, 08:14:14 AM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on December 12, 2007, 08:01:04 PM

How is Ronnie "lucky" as you say? Flex was cheating on his diet and not even showing up to the gym to work out some days. That is called being a lazy bastard. It's not Ronnie's fault Flex wasn't at his best, It's Flex's fault, Plus Flex was filled with so much oil he could of given his car an oil change in the parking lot. Ronnie did everything he had to do to win the contest hands down. Flex himself even admits he knew he lost and that Ronnie was better. Give Ronnie some credit and stop showing us how biased you are by saying Ronnie was "Lucky".

I explained how it was lucky , lucky they didn't go with Flex because of his name and because of the fact he was the hair apparent to the throne and lucky Flex was off because a spot-on Flex would beat Ronnie

And MORON did you miss the part where I said Ronnie won ? he got credit you idiot . did you even see what I typed? and you don't think Ronnie has anything in those calves?

between the two in 1998 Ronnie was the better man , but believe me he was lucky , it was still one of the closest Mr Olympias on record Ronnie won by just 3 points , so when all things are considered IDIOT Ronnie was lucky for many reasons .

did that answer your question?

Hulkster · « **Reply #73 on:** December 13, 2007, 08:17:37 AM »

ND, this is why everyone says you are so fucking stupid and unintelligent.

yes, ronnie won. we all know that.

that does not change the fact that you try and downplay his physique by claiming how 'lucky' he was even though there is NO VISUAL EVIDENCE to support him being "lucky" at all..

he crushed flex from every angle and we can all see that.

just because you acknowledge that he won does not mean that your stupid claims about how 'lucky' are not happening.

fucking idiot.

god damn you are so stupid.. $:-\$

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #74 on:** December 13, 2007, 08:24:28 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on December 13, 2007, 08:17:37 AM

ND, this is why everyone says you are so fucking stupid and unintelligent.

yes, ronnie won. we all know that.

that does not change the fact that you try and downplay his physique by claiming how 'lucky' he was even though there is NO VISUAL EVIDENCE to support him being "lucky" at all..

he crushed flex from every angle and we can all see that.

just because you acknowledge that he won does not mean that your stupid claims about how 'lucky' are not happening.

fucking idiot.

god damn you are so stupid.. $:-\$

You're the idiot who was kissing my ass telling me how intelligent I am lol and now you're tired of getting owned and have to revert lol

Moron pay attention , Ronnie was the winner , but he was LUCKY get this through your head he lucky for many reasons , lucky Flex was such a lazy fuck , lucky the judges didn't just go with Ronnie on name and the fact that he was the heir apparent , lucky the judges were fair and stop acting like Ronnie blew Flex out of the water and the contest was no contest because it was very close