Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: donrhummy on October 07, 2006, 07:41:04 AM

Title: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: donrhummy on October 07, 2006, 07:41:04 AM
Ronnie looked smaller but ripped a few days out in those pics someone posted before the grand prix, but on stage somehow he'd softened up.

(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0339.jpg)

And his back is no longer blowing people away.
(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0358.jpg)
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: donrhummy on October 07, 2006, 07:43:18 AM
Ronnie looking smaller but not shredded.

(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0410.jpg)
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: body88 on October 07, 2006, 07:45:38 AM
Wll that is because all the pictures posted before these shots where him fully clothed with only his arms showing.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: donrhummy on October 07, 2006, 07:46:23 AM
Forget the PDI, these guys got screwed. They're the real top 3.  :D ;D LOL.

(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0472.jpg)
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: donrhummy on October 07, 2006, 07:47:25 AM
Wll that is because all the pictures posted before these shots where him fully clothed with only his arms showing.
uh, ok, but compare just his arms and they're softer/smoother. So what's your point?
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: donrhummy on October 07, 2006, 07:51:11 AM
Hard to believe, but this is Ronnie COLEMAN's back!  :'(

(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0568.jpg)
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Deadpool on October 07, 2006, 07:52:07 AM
you sound so sad, so cheated...
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: slayer on October 07, 2006, 07:52:56 AM
Forget the PDI, these guys got screwed. They're the real top 3.  :D ;D LOL.

(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0472.jpg)
kinda of tuff for chick to get on the pdi after seeing this!
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Rearden Metal on October 07, 2006, 09:04:16 AM
Hard to believe, but this is Ronnie COLEMAN's back!  :'(

(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0568.jpg)


That really is astonishing. Wouldn't matter how sharp he was, he couldn't hide that.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Ex Coelis on October 07, 2006, 09:04:47 AM
shitty lighting - why can't every show be lit like the 99 British GP? It can't be difficult; just buy a dimmer switch . . .
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Hulkster on October 07, 2006, 09:09:16 AM
(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0339.jpg)
2006

(http://www.flexonline.com/mro/pre_men_bb/images/FDBE0065.jpg)
2003

(http://www.ifbb.com/contestresults/mrolympia/coleman/99coleman9.jpg)
1999

Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: natural al on October 07, 2006, 09:11:56 AM
(http://www.flexonline.com/06contests/06austria/menpre1/images/FDBE0339.jpg)
2006

(http://www.flexonline.com/mro/pre_men_bb/images/FDBE0065.jpg)
2003

(http://www.ifbb.com/contestresults/mrolympia/coleman/99coleman9.jpg)
1999



excactly.  Ron's been going downhill for years, he was fine in 99 but tried to take it to the next level and he's suffereing for it now.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: BEAST 8692 on October 07, 2006, 09:33:04 AM
what's astonishing is that ruhl has better taper, more size, better proportion, freakier than both of them from the front and then he turns around and it's like...where the hell did it go?

just like dillet and nasser. what the hell is it with that?

why the fuk won't these guys get to work and get a fuking back ??? seriously, i don't get it.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: SWOLETRAIN on October 07, 2006, 09:35:38 AM
Maybe he's sick or something. That usually doesn't happen unless you don't eat. Maybe loosing the O made him sink into a depression. Like a little girl, I bet he went home and cried. Then went to Outback to make it all better.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: canadaphiliac on October 07, 2006, 10:01:22 AM
In that comparison, Jay looks worse than he did in 2003 too. Yet, he got the crown over people who actually made imrpovements, like Melvin.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Luv2Hurt on October 07, 2006, 10:08:06 AM
Maybe ron is maxed out, his body said "enough"!  Looks that way to me, burning out.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Royalty on October 07, 2006, 10:11:13 AM
In that comparison, Jay looks worse than he did in 2003 too. Yet, he got the crown over people who actually made imrpovements, like Melvin.

no way

jay was way better in 2006

Something that hulkster still doesnt get: you just cant take random pics from different shows with different angles, different lighting, different backrounds and make comparisons.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: canadaphiliac on October 07, 2006, 10:30:53 AM
Mmm, I'll take your word for it, I'm just sayin' from those pictures in particular, both of them are fading. But would that really be so bad? It might be nice for bodybuilding to not be a freak show. We have carnivals for that.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Hulkster on October 07, 2006, 10:43:13 AM
no way

jay was way better in 2006

Something that hulkster still doesnt get: you just cant take random pics from different shows with different angles, different lighting, different backrounds and make comparisons.

and something royalty doesn't get: if you look like crap in the pictures, chances are you look like crap in person too:

(http://www.graphicmuscle.com/photos/730/Men/comps/Men/IMG_0198.jpg)
Jay in 2006
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=87239;image)
Jay in 2001

as you can see, his abs and legs (check the sweep) were way better in 2001 - these are two of Jay's stongest parts and they suffered greatly in 2006
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: JimmyTheFish on October 07, 2006, 10:45:11 AM
Ruhl owns that stage period......... should've taken it

Ronnie = sympathy placing
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Shockwave on October 07, 2006, 10:47:42 AM
Um... everyone else has said just the opposite... You CANNOT judge a BB comp from pics. You have to be there.

and something royalty doesn't get: if you look like crap in the pictures, chances are you look like crap in person too:

as you can see, his abs and legs (check the sweep) were way better in 2001 - these are two of Jay's stongest parts and they suffered greatly in 2006
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Hulkster on October 07, 2006, 11:00:07 AM
Um... everyone else has said just the opposite... You CANNOT judge a BB comp from pics. You have to be there.


pics are much better than sitting behind a tall guy in the 43d row

pics have their usefullness in comparing physiques.

Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Shockwave on October 07, 2006, 11:01:51 AM
pics are much better than sitting behind a tall guy in the 43d row

pics have their usefullness in comparing physiques.


I won't argue that.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: the shadow on October 07, 2006, 11:03:59 AM
and something royalty doesn't get: if you look like crap in the pictures, chances are you look like crap in person too:

(http://www.graphicmuscle.com/photos/730/Men/comps/Men/IMG_0198.jpg)
Jay in 2006
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=87239;image)
Jay in 2001

as you can see, his abs and legs (check the sweep) were way better in 2001 - these are two of Jay's stongest parts and they suffered greatly in 2006
come on hulkster...jays look way better ronnie in that first pic..just stop licking colemans ass and accept the fact that jay was too good for ronnie
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: canadaphiliac on October 07, 2006, 11:09:08 AM
Jay may look better in the first pic, but Victor looks best, so what you're saying is he really should have won then?
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: UK Gold on October 07, 2006, 11:16:16 AM
Ronnies finished. He was a great champion but now its time to go.

He should retire and spend the rest of his life eating grits and reminiscing about when he was top dog in the IFBB. But, whatever he does, and wherever he goes he will be haunted by two names ... Dorian Yates and Jay Cutler.

 
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Adam Empire on October 07, 2006, 11:32:19 AM
come on hulkster...jays look way better ronnie in that first pic..just stop licking colemans ass and accept the fact that jay was too good for ronnie

Agreed.  And how the hell can you compare the leg size when those pics are from two different angles and distances?
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: kyomu on October 07, 2006, 11:38:35 AM
I really think he is finished. I see very bad sign in his body. I dont see him failed in his condition, but really i see big fatigue of his physic.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Croatch on October 07, 2006, 11:47:39 AM
Quote
excactly.  Ron's been going downhill for years, he was fine in 99 but tried to take it to the next level and he's suffereing for it now.
He didn't suffer for the past 6 titles though.  No doubt, Coleman in 98' was much better.  They should have given the O to Martinez on mid section alone.  Jay's abs are the size of most guys pecs from all that GH, simply disgusting. ;D
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: canadaphiliac on October 07, 2006, 11:53:17 AM
He didn't suffer for the past 6 titles though.  No doubt, Coleman in 98' was much better.  They should have given the O to Martinez on mid section alone.  Jay's abs are the size of most guys pecs from all that GH, simply disgusting. ;D
Are you implying Jay might not have deserved to win!? Blasphemy!
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: TDK on October 07, 2006, 11:54:51 AM
That Jay pic from 2001 shows exactly what I mean about Jays abs.  The were crunched down and deeeep then.  Now he doesnt pose them properly so each individual abs muscle is really large and shallow.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: gmflex on October 07, 2006, 11:58:25 AM
 ::) ::) ::)
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: Hulkster on October 07, 2006, 12:13:26 PM
come on hulkster...jays look way better ronnie in that first pic..just stop licking colemans ass and accept the fact that jay was too good for ronnie

I have. And all these Jay fans should accept the fact that Jay won because Ronnie was 43 and injured.  Jay was dominated by Ronnie when Ronnie was younger

(http://www.flexonline.com/mro/pre_men_bb/images/FDBE0069.jpg)

 Father Time beat Ronnie. Jay didn't.

Had the Ronnie of 98, 99, 01 AC, 2003 hell, even 2004 and 2005 shown up, 2006 Jay would have lost fair and square. Plain and simple.
Title: Re: Weird. Ronnie was softer and smaller
Post by: TDK on October 07, 2006, 12:17:01 PM
I agree  Hulkster.  I have said it before and I will say it again...

A 100% Ronnie > 100% Dorian > 100% Haney.

However a 100% Jay < 100% Ronnie.

Mr O is no longer progressive for the first time in a decades.