Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure

Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Mussolini on November 26, 2006, 04:34:23 PM

Title: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Mussolini on November 26, 2006, 04:34:23 PM
  What's up with all of these Dorian vs Ronnie wars here? There isn't a single week that a thread on this topic isn't started at this board. Hell, last month or so, there were not one, not two, not even three, but four threads on this topic going on simulataneously. What the f**k is this non-stop obsession with this? Also, there isn't a single thread where Dorian or Ronnie are mentioned without the other being brought up for comparison. Wtf?! What's up with all of these assholes arguing this shit ad infinitum? I side with Dorian, and it has nothing do do with the fact that Suckmymuscle and NarcissisticDeity are clearly more intelligent than the Coleman side, but simply because I prefer Dorian's grain and tight appearance. At the end of the day, it's just an opinion. Who cares? At their respective bests, neither Dorian nor Ronnie had any serious height, weight, or muscularity advantage over the other, so the outcome of this hypothetical contest would be a matter of preference, with the judges giving their nod based on their prefered structure, type of muscularity and how they look at the end of the day. Let it go. Geez!
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: pobrecito on November 26, 2006, 04:36:41 PM
Dorian is clearly superior.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: TheAnimal on November 26, 2006, 04:41:04 PM
Dorian > Ronnie
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: TrapsMcLats on November 26, 2006, 04:41:31 PM
you've only got 601 pages to go!!!
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: The Squadfather on November 26, 2006, 04:42:42 PM
Dorian is clearly superior.
i agree.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: MisterMagoo on November 26, 2006, 04:42:50 PM
  What's up with all of these Dorian vs Ronnie wars here? There isn't a single week that a thread on this topic isn't started at this board.

way to contribute to the problem, genius.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: delta9mda on November 26, 2006, 04:45:25 PM
yeah you just started another one. keep it in the truce thread!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Tigerman on November 26, 2006, 04:50:24 PM
way to contribute to the problem, genius.

What can you expect from a guy who praises fascism?
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: tweeter on November 26, 2006, 05:14:48 PM
The problem is you can't just compare Dorian vs. Ronnie. You have to be more specific...say Ronnie 01 ASC vs. Dorian 93 O. Its hard to compare two bodybuilders throughout their career because their physiques change so much from contest to contest.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: GoneAway on November 26, 2006, 05:20:39 PM
The problem is you can't just compare Dorian vs. Ronnie. You have to be more specific...say Ronnie 01 ASC vs. Dorian 93 O. Its hard to compare two bodybuilders throughout their career because their physiques change so much from contest to contest.

Exactly. It's a never ending battle. There's just too much to compare.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: figgs on November 26, 2006, 05:25:45 PM
Find a Dorian pic to match these.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Sergio Rules 77 on November 26, 2006, 05:47:15 PM
Find a Dorian pic to match these.

These are none too shabby ;D. I think he measures up quite well.

(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/yates/dy156.jpg)

(http://digilander.libero.it/gruppociak/dy78.jpg)

(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/yates/dy158.jpg)

(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/yates/dy213.jpg)

(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/yates/dy126.jpg)


SERGIO!!!!!
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Cavalier22 on November 26, 2006, 05:49:52 PM
how many times can people repost the same pictures. people have their own opinions and aren't gonna change after viewing the same picture for the 33rd time
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Sergio Rules 77 on November 26, 2006, 05:53:44 PM
how many times can people repost the same pictures. people have their own opinions and aren't gonna change after viewing the same picture for the 33rd time

I agree, but maybe the 34th time will be the charm.

SERGIO!!!!
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on November 26, 2006, 07:09:22 PM
  What's up with all of these Dorian vs Ronnie wars here? There isn't a single week that a thread on this topic isn't started at this board. Hell, last month or so, there were not one, not two, not even three, but four threads on this topic going on simulataneously. What the f**k is this non-stop obsession with this? Also, there isn't a single thread where Dorian or Ronnie are mentioned without the other being brought up for comparison. Wtf?! What's up with all of these assholes arguing this shit ad infinitum? I side with Dorian, and it has nothing do do with the fact that Suckmymuscle and NarcissisticDeity are clearly more intelligent than the Coleman side, but simply because I prefer Dorian's grain and tight appearance. At the end of the day, it's just an opinion. Who cares? At their respective bests, neither Dorian nor Ronnie had any serious height, weight, or muscularity advantage over the other, so the outcome of this hypothetical contest would be a matter of preference, with the judges giving their nod based on their prefered structure, type of muscularity and how they look at the end of the day. Let it go. Geez!

  Great point. It all comes down to people believing that, because Dorian lacked narrow hips and round  muscles, that this somehow makes him an inferior bodybuilder. The criticisms of the Coleman side all coems down to structure, really: they just don't like Dorian's shape. However, what they ignore is that there isn't any particular shape that judges demand. Bodybuilders with structures as differfent as Nasser's and Wheeler's have gotten the nod from the judges, so who knows. The bottom line is that Dorian was muscular&symmetrical enough from most angles while contracting different muscles to be Mr.Olympia. What the Ronnie fans don't understand is that, for his structure, Dorian was superb. The epitome. :)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Sean-DeMarco on November 26, 2006, 07:11:33 PM
The problem is you can't just compare Dorian vs. Ronnie. You have to be more specific...say Ronnie 01 ASC vs. Dorian 93 O. Its hard to compare two bodybuilders throughout their career because their physiques change so much from contest to contest.

...the most intelligent post on this thread thus far. Props.~ 8)
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on November 26, 2006, 09:12:07 PM
Find a Dorian pic to match these.

  Please...these pics have been posted one gazillion times before. Ronnie looks flat and bloated there. :-\

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: pumpster on November 26, 2006, 09:31:55 PM
Quote
Quote from: tweeter on November 26, 2006, 08:14:48 PM
The problem is you can't just compare Dorian vs. Ronnie. You have to be more specific...say Ronnie 01 ASC vs. Dorian 93 O. Its hard to compare two bodybuilders throughout their career because their physiques change so much from contest to contest.

...the most intelligent post on this thread thus far. Props.~


Well..maybe not. It was agreed a long time ago to compare them at their best, and a concensus formed as to which year to use.


Quote
These are none too shabby . I think he measures up quite well.
That first Yates back shot is morphed.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Theoak* on November 26, 2006, 09:35:49 PM
Ronnie owns dorain 6 way from sunday.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: SLYY on November 26, 2006, 09:38:54 PM
I'll add to the many pages this thread will generate...

Dorian
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Sergio Rules 77 on November 26, 2006, 09:58:27 PM

That first Yates back shot is morphed.

Don't, your destroying my perfect vision of Dorian :'(. I prefer to live deluded and say it hasn't been touched ;D.


(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=109067.0;attach=122721)

Damn, that is very impressive. Almost as impresive as Dorian's morphed.......I mean, Dorian's incredible unaltered back shot.

SERGIO!!!!!

Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: The_Hammer on November 26, 2006, 10:50:27 PM
LIGHTS OUTS

(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=97886.0;attach=106516;image)
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: JasonH on November 26, 2006, 11:32:51 PM
I would say that Ronnie's best condition ever (2004) probably beats Dorian's best condition ever (1993). However, Dorain was far more consistent than Ronnie as Ronnie has been known to come in out of shape and still win. Dorian was never really out of shape - even in '94 with the torn bicep he was still better than everyone onstage, but Shawn came close to beating him. It's a tough call but I think Dorian shades the decision.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 08, 2006, 12:39:40 PM
I would say that Ronnie's best condition ever (2004) probably beats Dorian's best condition ever (1993). However, Dorain was far more consistent than Ronnie as Ronnie has been known to come in out of shape and still win. Dorian was never really out of shape - even in '94 with the torn bicep he was still better than everyone onstage, but Shawn came close to beating him. It's a tough call but I think Dorian shades the decision.

  Ronnie's "best" condition ever was 2004?! :o ::) Dude, his gut was the wors of any bodybuilder ever, his quads had barely a cut on them and overpowered his upper body, his glutes looked like those of a woman and he looked like a water-buffalo, being so soft and retaining so much water under his skin. 2004 was his worst performance ever. It was even worse than 2003, because at least that year Ronnie still had some separations despite tho monster gut. :-\

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: IceCold on December 08, 2006, 01:00:05 PM
  What's up with all of these Dorian vs Ronnie wars here? There isn't a single week that a thread on this topic isn't started at this board. Hell, last month or so, there were not one, not two, not even three, but four threads on this topic going on simulataneously. What the f**k is this non-stop obsession with this? Also, there isn't a single thread where Dorian or Ronnie are mentioned without the other being brought up for comparison. Wtf?! What's up with all of these assholes arguing this shit ad infinitum? I side with Dorian, and it has nothing do do with the fact that Suckmymuscle and NarcissisticDeity are clearly more intelligent than the Coleman side, but simply because I prefer Dorian's grain and tight appearance. At the end of the day, it's just an opinion. Who cares? At their respective bests, neither Dorian nor Ronnie had any serious height, weight, or muscularity advantage over the other, so the outcome of this hypothetical contest would be a matter of preference, with the judges giving their nod based on their prefered structure, type of muscularity and how they look at the end of the day. Let it go. Geez!


excellent post and great summary.

my involvment in the thread is more of what hulkster and pumpster said about yates being overrated and a 'tier b olympian'.

its one thing to say that ronnie would win, but another to blatantly talk shit about dorian while ignoring facts. 
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: affeman on December 08, 2006, 01:02:50 PM
Dorian has no chance!!! He has the better calves, and that's it. Ronnie got him on any other muscle group. >:(

Dorian is one of the most overrated BBs of all time. Except the back there is nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING special about his physique. ::)
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: IceCold on December 08, 2006, 01:22:07 PM
Dorian has no chance!!! He has the better calves, and that's it. Ronnie got him on any other muscle group. >:(

Dorian is one of the most overrated BBs of all time. Except the back there is nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING special about his physique. ::)


looks like someone who's been into bbing since 2003. 
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 08, 2006, 07:49:04 PM
Dorian has no chance!!! He has the better calves, and that's it. Ronnie got him on any other muscle group. >:(

Dorian is one of the most overrated BBs of all time. Except the back there is nothing, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING special about his physique. ::)

  A guy doesen't need to have several great bodyparts to be Mr.Olympia; all he needs are one or two "unfuckingbelievable" bodyparts, merely "outstanding" bodyparts everywhere else and no more than one or two liabilities. This is the case with Dorian. His back and calves were outstanding. Conversely, his pecs, delts, quads hams, traps and forearms were merely outstnading. His liability were biceps, and that's it.

  No bodybuilder has more than one or two "unfuckingbelievable" bodyparts. Arnold, for instance, had pecs and biceps; at everything else, he was merely outstanding. Ronnie has one "unfuckingbelievable" bodyparts, back, and his other muscles were merely excellent. His liabilites were calves.

  What makes a bodybuilder become a standard-bearer are a structure as close to perfect as possible with no muscular liabilites and a few major strenghs. When a bodybuilder is complete - which is more or less the case for every Mr.Olympia -, all he needs are a few truly fantastic bodyparts to win. Case closed. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: slaveboy1980 on December 08, 2006, 08:00:04 PM
maybe its the same tension that existed between the facist leaders...i.e mussolini (peed on his dead body the did yes sir) and hitler (called hister by the fake nostradamus). maybe the tension migrated to posses other bodies.

oops forgot franco
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: fonz on December 09, 2006, 08:03:06 AM
man, we miss DORIAN onstage :(
its hard to see in the near future a bb like him.........
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 09, 2006, 08:25:38 AM
Quote
Conversely, his pecs, delts, quads hams, traps and forearms were merely outstnading. His liability were biceps, and that's it.

sucky if his delts quads and pecs were really outstanding his most muscular would not blow as badly as it does ::)

everyone knows the mm is dorian's worst pose by far.

and its no suprise as to why: his upper body and quads were not all that great, esp. compared to Ronnie
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: pumpster on December 09, 2006, 08:27:05 AM
Flea owning Yates:
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: NarcissisticDeity on December 09, 2006, 08:52:19 AM
sucky if his delts quads and pecs were really outstanding his most muscular would not blow as badly as it does ::)

everyone knows the mm is dorian's worst pose by far.

and its no suprise as to why: his upper body and quads were not all that great, esp. compared to Ronnie

just an eight pound weight advantage for Yates lol
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 09, 2006, 08:55:07 AM
why don't you try a good shot from the AC: ::)

(http://www.mass-shop.hu/belso_kepek/arnold/galeria/coleman_mostmuscular.jpg)
ronnie's mm owns yates as always.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Saxon on December 09, 2006, 08:58:51 AM
Someone post a picture of Ronnie with gyno  :D
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: pobrecito on December 09, 2006, 09:11:12 AM
why don't you try a good shot from the AC: ::)

(http://www.mass-shop.hu/belso_kepek/arnold/galeria/coleman_mostmuscular.jpg)
ronnie's mm owns yates as always.

What a surprise, yet another excuse from Hulkster ::)

It never fails, anytime Yates beats Coleman in a comparison, Hulkster bitches and whines. Popular excuses include: "he's not flexing yet", "that's a bad picture", etc.

It's like arguing with a child who throws a temper tantrum anytime they don't get what they want.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: NarcissisticDeity on December 09, 2006, 09:52:32 AM
What a surprise, yet another excuse from Hulkster ::)

It never fails, anytime Yates beats Coleman in a comparison, Hulkster bitches and whines. Popular excuses include: "he's not flexing yet", "that's a bad picture", etc.

It's like arguing with a child who throws a temper tantrum anytime they don't get what they want.

I used the pic of them at both the same angle and you're right he can never admit defeat .
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: NarcissisticDeity on December 09, 2006, 09:53:55 AM
Someone post a picture of Ronnie with gyno  :D

Here you go , according to Camp-Coleman this wouldn't be frowned upon compared to Yates lol
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: affeman on December 09, 2006, 10:20:08 AM
That's ridicolous, kiddy. ::)

Coleman owned Yates so badly already in 1996, and that was even long before Coleman peaked.

(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=111054.0;attach=125138;image)
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 09, 2006, 10:39:41 AM
sucky if his delts quads and pecs were really outstanding his most muscular would not blow as badly as it does ::)

  The problem here is that it is you who are saying that his crab shot blows. I think it's outstanding, although definitely not his best pose. Secondly, who said that this is such a great pose to asses the excellency of these bodyparts? The anterior delts are mostly concealed in this pose, as well as most of the pec thickess. Look at Dorian from the sides in the relaxed round or whle executing the side chest and side triceps, and you'll see how outstanding his pecs and delts were. ;)

Quote
everyone knows the mm is dorian's worst pose by far.

  No, that's the front double biceps. Anyway, it doesen't really matter if it's his worse pose, because it's still fantastic.

Quote
and its no suprise as to why: his upper body and quads were not all that great, esp. compared to Ronnie

  Said the "leader of the Colemaniacs". ::) ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Iceman1981 on December 09, 2006, 11:12:48 AM
Coleman, NUFF SAID.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: pumpster on December 09, 2006, 11:28:28 AM
Quote
everyone knows the mm is dorian's worst pose by far.

  No, that's the front double biceps

hahahaha Even SUCKY can't decide which of many Yates poses is the worst. :-X
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 09, 2006, 11:30:35 AM
hahahaha Even SUCKY can't decide which of many Yates poses is the worst. :-X

  Yeah, Ronnie's better at one pose while flexing the arms from one angle. Big fucking deal... ::)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: realkarateblackbelt on December 09, 2006, 07:02:09 PM
Ronnie Coleman always looks like he's holding a thick layer of water under his skin imo. I think Dorian has a slight edge on him.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 09, 2006, 07:06:22 PM
Ronnie Coleman always looks like he's holding a thick layer of water under his skin imo. I think Dorian has a slight edge on him.

no water here:

Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: realkarateblackbelt on December 09, 2006, 08:16:02 PM
He still looks like he's holding water when you stand him next to Dorian. Dorian is so grainy.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Mr Gethin on December 09, 2006, 08:35:19 PM
 :P
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 10, 2006, 06:46:26 AM
He still looks like he's holding water when you stand him next to Dorian. Dorian is so grainy.

only if grainy = doughy

 :-\
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: NarcissisticDeity on December 10, 2006, 06:50:04 AM
only if grainy = doughy

 :-\

doughy like Coleman's midsection in 1999 ?
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 10, 2006, 05:14:12 PM
  All Hulkster does is post the 1999 Olympia shots where Ronnie is showing great striations and separations and then say that, in his opinion, Ronnie is drier. Well, guess what, Hulky? You're wrong. As I've already explained to you, there's no logical correlation between separations and dryness. This is evident in that some bodybuilders show better separations than others even when they have edema.

  You then post pics of Dorian where he dopesen't have a smany separations on his arms and qads as Ronnie and say that is proof that he wasn't as dry. Again, wrong. The "stony" appearance of Dorian's arm and quad muscles are a much better indication of his greater dryness in relation to Coleman than Ronnie's separations is an indication of the opposite hypothesis. Hulkster, this is being dry.;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: logical? on December 10, 2006, 05:15:51 PM
  All Hulkster does is post the 1999 Olympia shots where Ronnie is showing great striations and separations and then say that, in his opinion, Ronnie is drier. Well, guess what, Hulky? You're wrong. As I've already explained to you, there's no logical correlation between separations and dryness. This is evident in that some bodybuilders show better separations than others even when they have edema.

  You then post pics of Dorian where he dopesen't have a smany separations on his arms and qads as Ronnie and say that is proof that he wasn't as dry. Again, wrong. The "stony" appearance of Dorian's arm and quad muscles are a much better indication of his greater dryness in relation to Coleman than Ronnie's separations is an indication of the opposite hypothesis. Hulkster, this is being dry.;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE


Does not a level of dryness need to be obtained to show separations?
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 10, 2006, 05:30:36 PM

Does not a level of dryness need to be obtained to show separations?

  Yes, but it correlates more strongly with bodyfat loss. The correlation is not linear. If it were, all bodybuilders with edema would have less separations than dehydrated bodybuilders. This is why it;'s my contention that a dry appearance to the muscles is a better correlation to dryness than separations. Why? Because you can obtain great separations whuile still retaining water, but no bodybuiulder gets the "stony" look to his muscles while having edema. Never. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 10, 2006, 05:46:53 PM
Dorian's LATS look better in the front lat spread.  So does his chest due to better posing skills than Ronnie.  As for comparing anything else of Dorian's to Ronnie in that pose...  :-X

  Wrong. Ronnie's stomach protrudes from the front, and he has terrible abdominal separations. Dorian also has better taper in this pose, because here taper is a funtion of the lats and not the delts. Dorian destroys your boy flat out, you spooge sucker. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: logical? on December 10, 2006, 05:49:55 PM
Dorian's LATS look better in the front lat spread.  So does his chest due to better posing skills than Ronnie.  As for comparing anything else of Dorian's to Ronnie in that pose...  :-X


I'm in complete agreement, Matt. Ronnie is a poor poser- of course it's relative- compared to the likes of Dorian, K-Lo, Ray and so on.

Dorian and ROnnie both hit each pose differently. Dorians lats look incredible in the front lat spread- but I agree, this is down to the way they hit the pose. Dorian tends to bring his elbows up further, accentuating the lats. Ronnie keeps his elbows down- for some unknown reason. Time and time again, ytou see Ronnie get ready to hit a front lat spread, and you hope that this time, he flares the lats properly. It's always underwhelming, though.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 11, 2006, 02:49:59 PM
  Yes, but it correlates more strongly with bodyfat loss. The correlation is not linear. If it were, all bodybuilders with edema would have less separations than dehydrated bodybuilders. This is why it;'s my contention that a dry appearance to the muscles is a better correlation to dryness than separations. Why? Because you can obtain great separations whuile still retaining water, but no bodybuiulder gets the "stony" look to his muscles while having edema. Never. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

 your contention is wrong.

Hope this helps.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 11, 2006, 07:58:41 PM
your contention is wrong.

Hope this helps.

  Why? Prove that separations correlate more strongly with dryness than the stomy loook that Dorian had to his muscles. You can't. This is especially true because there are bodybuilders who display better separations than others even when their conditioning is off. An example? Wheeler had more separations than Nasser even when the former's conditioning  was off and the latter was on. Sorry to say, but when a bodybuilder's muscles looks harder than another's, it's because it usually is. Muscle separations have nothing to do with it.

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 11, 2006, 10:16:08 PM
  Why? Prove that separations correlate more strongly with dryness than the stomy loook that Dorian had to his muscles. You can't. This is especially true because there are bodybuilders who display better separations than others even when their conditioning is off. An example? Wheeler had more separations than Nasser even when the former's conditioning  was off and the latter was on. Sorry to say, but when a bodybuilder's muscles looks harder than another's, it's because it usually is. Muscle separations have nothing to do with it.

SUCKMYMUSCLE



Ronnie and flex were both striated but Ronnie had a much dryer look to him:

so my point is still valid, esp. if you are comparing ronnie to dorian, or even flex to Ronnie.

ronnie looks dryer than all of them:

(http://www.bbcenter.sk/images/gallery/arnolds_classic/flex_wheeler/wheeler14.jpg)
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 11, 2006, 10:21:08 PM
its the EXTREME detail over much of the body that sets Ronnie apart.

dorian had this extreme detail in the lower back and abs but thats it.

Ronnie had it almost everywhere.

i mean just LOOK at those glutes and hams :o

and those ARMS :o

and the CHEST :o
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=76821;image)
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 11, 2006, 10:22:18 PM
and the DELTS :o

 8)
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 11, 2006, 10:22:53 PM
and the TRICEPS :o
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 11, 2006, 10:27:05 PM
and those QUADS :o 8)

cut so deep look like Ronnie will bleed to death
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 11, 2006, 10:28:36 PM
in short, no one has ever had ronnie's combo of shape, size and detail as displayed in 99.

dorian had the size, but lacked the shape and some detail.

Flex had the shape, had good detail, but lacked the size.

ronnie had it all.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 12, 2006, 07:15:36 PM
  Hulkster, nothing of this discredits my contention. We're not debating Flex vs Ronnie, but Dorian vs Ronnie. Both Ronnie and Flex have a natural genetic tendency towards separations, so this is not an indication of dryness. Look at the 1993 Olympia, when Wheeler's conditioning was off and Dorian's was on, and yet Wheeler had far moe separations than Dorian. Separations and striations have a lot to do with genetics, Hulkster. There are bodybuilders who display fantastic separations and striations even when their conditioning is off, while there are others who still lack separation even when their bodyfat is at 3% and they're dehydrated. Conversely, the film of water that lies under the skin blurrs the quality of the muscle, it's hard appearance, making it look turvy.

  You see, Hulkster, the nproblem I have with you is that your posts ae based on conjectures, generalizations and your subjective preference for muscular qualities which ae not univesally judged to be valuable by all judges. As I explined elsewhere, there are judges who reward vascularity, while there ae others who consider it a liability. You can't say that Ronnie would defeat Dorian based on these things because it is muscularity&symmetry that is the ne plus ultra of a bodybuilding judging, and Dorian would most likely defeat Ronnie at it. Some judges might like Ronnie's superior separations and striations over Dorian's superior hadness&dryness; others might not. All things considered, Dorian would most likely win. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Shockwave on December 12, 2006, 07:53:49 PM
in short, no one has ever had ronnie's combo of shape, size and detail as displayed in 99.

dorian had the size, but lacked the shape and some detail.

Flex had the shape, had good detail, but lacked the size.

ronnie had it all.

Your opinion.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Hulkster on December 12, 2006, 11:00:11 PM
Your opinion.

which is clearly correct. 8)
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on December 13, 2006, 07:35:12 PM
Your opinion.

  It is poitnless to debate Hulkster. He just spills out his opinion, post the same 1999 pics and then say "you are wrong" when you disagree with him. He simply ignores my posts, where I explain point by point why he's wrong, and it's fine because I know that he secretly agrees with me. ;D ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on January 30, 2007, 04:15:57 PM
Your opinion.

  It's always his opinions. Hulkster has never made even a single post where he explains why Ronnie has objective superiorities over Dorian that the judges would inequivocally consider as such. All he does is post pics from the 1999 Olympia, and then say something like: "See, these details and striations combined with a superior shape make Ronnie better than Dorian." Of course, striations and separations cannot overcome Dorian's conditioning, and shape is subjective: what really counts is muscularity&symmetry from different angles while contracting different muscles, and the bottom line is that Dorian has this over the 1999 Ronnie.

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on March 01, 2007, 06:54:00 PM
  Hulkster got owned in yet this other thread. In total, that's three thousand pages of Dorian Yates toring Ronald Coleman a new asshole. ;) 8)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: swoody on March 01, 2007, 06:56:01 PM
With all these dorian vs ronnie wars, I've come to the point.... who gives a shit???
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: delta9mda on March 01, 2007, 07:13:08 PM
only if grainy = doughy

 :-\
get your eyes checked and stop eating shit
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Necrosis on March 01, 2007, 07:32:03 PM
  Why? Prove that separations correlate more strongly with dryness than the stomy loook that Dorian had to his muscles. You can't. This is especially true because there are bodybuilders who display better separations than others even when their conditioning is off. An example? Wheeler had more separations than Nasser even when the former's conditioning  was off and the latter was on. Sorry to say, but when a bodybuilder's muscles looks harder than another's, it's because it usually is. Muscle separations have nothing to do with it.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

you prove the opposite please. your assumption is not right. dorian does not look "stony" in the above pics, ronnie screencaps look much harder. the pic were dorian is showing more striations, and cuts is the pic were he looks the hardest.

you keep posting about correlations, etc. and that hardness is better exemplified with stoniness, or graniness, but what are you talking about. the pics dont show any of these properties. his arms and delts look smooth and soft compared to ronnies.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Necrosis on March 01, 2007, 07:38:28 PM
  It is poitnless to debate Hulkster. He just spills out his opinion, post the same 1999 pics and then say "you are wrong" when you disagree with him. He simply ignores my posts, where I explain point by point why he's wrong, and it's fine because I know that he secretly agrees with me. ;D ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE



dude everything about dorian is also your opinion.


so striations and sep are genetic to an extent- i would agree.

but lets keep logic going further

shape-genetic

size-genetic

cuts-genetic

proportion-genetic to an extent

hardness-genetic

so if your saying sep and striations are genetic, what are you implying? that they are not a positive? if so you are wrong. how can you say they arent advantages based on genetics when ever other criteria is also? genetics is what seperates the boys from the men.


hardness is not universal, your choosing to ignore this though for some reason, some people can get super dry, others cant its genetics.

based on your argument, the bodybuilder with better asthetics is not superior based on that attribute because of his genetic predisposition towards better asthetics then the next man. this is incorrect.

if you dont have the genetics, too bad, you cant keep up.
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on March 01, 2007, 08:36:24 PM
you prove the opposite please. your assumption is not right. dorian does not look "stony" in the above pics, ronnie screencaps look much harder. the pic were dorian is showing more striations, and cuts is the pic were he looks the hardest.

you keep posting about correlations, etc. and that hardness is better exemplified with stoniness, or graniness, but what are you talking about. the pics dont show any of these properties. his arms and delts look smooth and soft compared to ronnies.

  You want proof? Here it is. Dorian is showing a clearly inferior level of separations than Ronnie, yet he still looks harder. Don't equate looking hard with having more separations because you can have more than the other and vice-versa. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: suckmymuscle on March 01, 2007, 08:40:46 PM
  Usmoke, how the fuck can you say that the most separated bodybuilder must necessarily be harder ater looking at this pic? Of all the hunreds of Dorian pics, this is my absolute favorite, because it exemplifies Dorian's hardness to the utmost. Here Coleman is as separated as Dorian, yet Dorian looks much, much harder. Bodybuilding 101 to you:

  This is the hardest bodybuilder of all times ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE
Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: Necrosis on March 03, 2007, 02:29:54 PM
i dont ever simply equate. all are important. that is each of the criteria.

plus ronnie is not showing ronnie like seperation in that pic. here is one showing more sep, ronnie looks harder to me. if not tell me how to see hardness please. i mean there must be some obsevable external feature right?


Title: Re: The Dorian vs Ronnie wars
Post by: kimo on July 19, 2012, 12:54:26 PM
as  dorian is more impressive than haney so ronnie is better than yates . . yates is better on the calves . the rest.. true he had a gut sometimes . but he is a big man and strong . ronnie vs dorian is also . HIT  against classical training .