-
Right here :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsNVgdWDch4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsNVgdWDch4)
-
nothing good can come of this thread.
-
I think you meant to word it the other way around. Nobody that I know said 96 Ronnie was bigger than Dorian.
-
It is the angle. Why bother tho right?
-
I think you meant to word it the other way around. Nobody that I know said 96 Ronnie was bigger than Dorian.
If the grass is greener on the other side, then the guy with the greener grass doesn't think your grass is greener now does he, asshole? The message that this proverb is trying to stumble through is that everything always looks more attractive when you don't have it. I'm sure there are millionaires crying themselves to sleep every night because they don't live in a trailer park. Just face it: sometimes nobody envies you. There has to be a bottom and that bottom is probably you.
-
Ronnie's head has grown to three times its size since this show...
-
Ronnie's head has grown to three times its size since this show...
Based on zero proof LOL
He really overpowers Yates there, even at a lower bodyweight.
-
If the grass is greener on the other side, then the guy with the greener grass doesn't think your grass is greener now does he, asshole? The message that this proverb is trying to stumble through is that everything always looks more attractive when you don't have it. I'm sure there are millionaires crying themselves to sleep every night because they don't live in a trailer park. Just face it: sometimes nobody envies you. There has to be a bottom and that bottom is probably you.
your first sentence didn't make any sense. I'm not even sure why you called me an asshole b/c nothing I said insulted you. The rest of your post sounds like the rambling of an idiot who thinks he's amusing. ::)
-
Based on zero proof LOL
He really overpowers Yates there, even at a lower bodyweight.
c'mon pumpster you honestly don't think ronnie's head is any bigger today than it was 10 years ago?
-
c'mon pumpster you honestly don't think ronnie's head is any bigger today than it was 10 years ago?
Without proof there's nothing. And why wouldn't Yates' head have grown too? It's all kinda silly.
-
Without proof there's nothing.
c'mon...that's terrible.
-
c'mon...that's terrible.
Nothing worse than unfounded claims as regularly made by "camp Yates".
Without proof, it's just slander.
That pic confirms Coleman's size advantage, despite all the crap put out to the contrary by Yates nuthuggers. Coleman clearly with a wider back, smaller waist and superior taper, after all the misleading speculation. And that was Coleman at a lower bodyweight. ;)
-
who is the little kid that snuck up on stage that's between them?
-
who is the little kid that snuck up on stage that's between them?
The same kid that loves oatmeal cookies & milk! ;D
-
Yates is just 7 pounds heavier than Coleman right there.
-
So what...he's bigger...who's in better condition??? Dorian...that's why he won.
-
Nothing worse than unfounded claims as regularly made by "camp Yates".
Without proof, it's just slander.
That pic confirms Coleman's size advantage, despite all the crap put out to the contrary by Yates nuthuggers. Coleman clearly with a wider back, smaller waist and superior taper, after all the misleading speculation. And that was Coleman at a lower bodyweight. ;)
Are you fucking high? size advantage? he's 7 pounds lighter and one inch taller . his back isn't wider it appears wider because of his smaller waist , needless to say Coleman was 6th so much for his great arms and superior taper and better quad sweep , he couldn't even beat a 205 pound Shawn Ray
-
Are you fucking high? size advantage? he's 7 pounds lighter and one inch taller . his back isn't wider it appears wider because of his smaller waist , needless to say Coleman was 6th so much for his great arms and superior taper and better quad sweep , he couldn't even beat a 205 pound Shawn Ray
More filler from a losing position. The proof is right there; measure the screen.hahahahaahahahaha hah
-
oh, for the love of God keep it in the truce thread, you're bickering is pointless in any other thread.
I still say ronnies head is weighing at least 35lbs more these days than in the pics above.
-
More filler from a losing position. The proof is right there; measure the screen.hahahahaahahahaha hah
This is the losing position lol you're the Bow Flex warrior lol
-
Yates is just 7 pounds heavier than Coleman right there.
And yet Ronnie looks far bigger.
There you have it. the two of them side by side on video and Ronnie owns the shit out of him.
Bigger back
Bigger shoulders
Bigger quads
Bigger chest
Bigger arms
better shape and taper.
Yes, I know Dorian "won" but that is really irrelevant in the IFBB.
-
And yet Ronnie looks far bigger.
There you have it. the two of them side by side on video and Ronnie owns the shit out of him.
Bigger back
Bigger shoulders
Bigger quads
Bigger chest
Bigger arms
better shape and taper.
Yes, I know Dorian "won" but that is really irrelevant in the IFBB.
LMFAO you must have went to the pumpster school of judging he didn't win obviously he wasn't second , third , fourth or fifth he was sixth lol
-
Yates is just 7 pounds heavier than Coleman right there.
Yeah, Yates has an advantage of 7+ solid pounds... all in his midsection.
Unfortunately also Ronnie will catch up in the following years.
-
LMFAO you must have went to the pumpster school of judging he didn't win obviously he wasn't second , third , fourth or fifth he was sixth lol
Like I said where they placed in the "contest" is irrelevant, it's all bullshit anyways. I judge who is the better man with my eyes, and Ronnie is clearly superior.
Your'e delusional ND, look at that fckin video, Ronnie's pec are literally twice the size of yates, it's comical how much more muscular he is.
-
just go by the video, ronnie is owning dorian, his back is much much better, and his taper absolutely destroys dorians. there is no way around it the proof is in the pudding, name recognition goes a long way.
-
And yet Ronnie looks far bigger.
There you have it. the two of them side by side on video and Ronnie owns the shit out of him.
Bigger back
Bigger shoulders
Bigger quads
Bigger chest
Bigger arms
better shape and taper.
Yes, I know Dorian "won" but that is really irrelevant in the IFBB.
Exactly as stated for dozens of pages on the truce thread, all conveniently rationalized away as "bad lighting", etc. until this pic. ;D
-
Yeah, Yates has an advantage of 7+ solid pounds... all in his midsection.
Unfortunately also Ronnie will catch up in the following years.
Priceless. hahaahahahahahahaahahah
-
Like I said where they placed in the "contest" is irrelevant, it's all bullshit anyways. I judge who is the better man with my eyes, and Ronnie is clearly superior.
Your'e delusional ND, look at that fckin video, Ronnie's pec are literally twice the size of yates, it's comical how much more muscular he is.
ND's such a tool that he believes this crap about no politics, and Yates being "as wide or wider" as stated over and over again?
In other words, is he just delusional with an inveterate predeliction for "handsome white BBs", or entirely clueless? ???
-
Like I said where they placed in the "contest" is irrelevant, it's all bullshit anyways. I judge who is the better man with my eyes, and Ronnie is clearly superior.
Your'e delusional ND, look at that fckin video, Ronnie's pec are literally twice the size of yates, it's comical how much more muscular he is.
Yeah, what he said.
-
just go by the video, ronnie is owning dorian, his back is much much better, and his taper absolutely destroys dorians. there is no way around it the proof is in the pudding, name recognition goes a long way.
Again. What he said.
-
Same contest Dorian's not even at his best and walked all over Coleman !
-
Same contest Dorian's not even at his best and walked all over Coleman !
Nice try.
Ronnie's not even hitting the pose fully yet so it's really not accurate.
One thing that does strike me is the way Ronnie's arms utterly destroy Dorian's.
Like Iv'e said earlier, it's comical that you even argue the point.
-
One thing that does strike me is the way Ronnie's arms utterly destroy Dorian's.
Like Iv'e said earlier, it's comical that you even argue the point.
hahahaahahahahaaha ND and his pea-shooter.
-
.
-
Nice try.
Ronnie's not even hitting the pose fully yet so it's really not accurate.
One thing that does strike me is the way Ronnie's arms utterly destroy Dorian's.
Like Iv'e said earlier, it's comical that you even argue the point.
Again nice try what? who won? Oh Yates did with a perfect score thats right and where was Ronnie? a distant sixth ;)
-
Again nice try what? who won? Oh Yates did with a perfect score thats right and where was Ronnie? a distant sixth ;)
Yeah because we all know how fair and accurate contest placings are ::)
C'mon ND....you know better.
-
Yeah because we all know how fair and accurate contest placings are ::)
C'mon ND....you know better.
Let me get this straight you're claiming Ronnie should have won the 1996 Mr Olympia?
-
Let me get this straight you're claiming Ronnie should have won the 1996 Mr Olympia?
YUP
EDIT: maybe not, but 6th!??!....no way
Dorian shouldn't have won with basically one arm, that's a MAJOR flaw that is basically ignored
-
YUP
It always seems Coleman fans are the dumbest people ! that statement is so ridiculous its not even worthy of a response .
-
It always seems Coleman fans are the dumbest people ! that statement is so ridiculous its not even worthy of a response .
And yet you did reply, so how dumb are you?
-
It always seems Coleman fans are the dumbest people ! that statement is so ridiculous its not even worthy of a response .
Mentally ill, ND resorts to personal attacks at the drop of a hat in efforts to distract from the grim pictorial & vidoe reality. BTW even Yates "good" arm was blah.
-
If the grass is greener on the other side, then the guy with the greener grass doesn't think your grass is greener now does he, asshole? The message that this proverb is trying to stumble through is that everything always looks more attractive when you don't have it. I'm sure there are millionaires crying themselves to sleep every night because they don't live in a trailer park. Just face it: sometimes nobody envies you. There has to be a bottom and that bottom is probably you.
Hey KTMckay, you stole that part from Maddox, i knew i've read that bit before:
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=boiling_blood
Monster theft!
Peace
D
-
And yet you did reply, so how dumb are you?
No I didn't reply an indepth response why he shouldn't have won or why he wasn't even in the running , that would be a waste of effort because you're standing on the ledge of absurdity with that statement and rather talk you down I'll let you jump the world has enough stupid people you wont be missed. ;)
-
Mentally ill, ND resorts to personal attacks at the drop of a hat in efforts to distract from the grim pictorial & vidoe reality. BTW even Yates "good" arm was blah.
Even Yates good bicep was blah thats old news you're stating the obvious you idiot with every one of your posts you confirm mt thesis that most ( not all ) Coleman fans are idiots.
-
Even Yates good bicep was blah thats old news you're stating the obvious you idiot with every one of your posts you confirm mt thesis that most ( not all ) Coleman fans are idiots.
To ND's endless BLATHER & EXCUSES, i say:
DEAL WITH IT.. ;D
-
Yates' tris are also lacking in size relative to Coleman:
-
Even Yates good bicep was blah thats old news you're stating the obvious you idiot with every one of your posts you confirm mt thesis that most ( not all ) Coleman fans are idiots.
Just because it's old news doesn't mean it isn't a valid point that gets conveniently ignored by Dorian nuthuggers
-
pumpster's brain is also lacking in size compared to a rat haahahahahahahaha ahahahahahhahahahahah
(http://www.terrywhittaker.com/galleries/12mammals/MBLR006-Black-rat.jpg)
-
Yates' tris are also lacking in size relative to Coleman:
Thank you again for conforming my theory
Pumpster says " Look Yates triceps are also lacking size relative to Coleman "
and proceeds to post a picture of Dorian with a ton fucking tricep lol you loser no wonder why your stuck at home using a Bow Flex.
-
Just because it's old news doesn't mean it isn't a valid point that gets conveniently ignored by Dorian nuthuggers
You now live beyond the grace of God with your statement Ronnie should have won the 1996 Mr Olympia .
-
Pubes desperate. LOL
Back on track, kid..that pic confirms the veracity of these; verifies the mismatch in lat, tri and trap size. Yates completely out-muscled: ;D ;D ;D
-
News Flash ! this just in pumpster discovers Dorian Yates' triceps are smaller than Ronnie Coleman ! details at 11 ::)
-
You now live beyond the grace of God with your statement Ronnie should have won the 1996 Mr Olympia .
You didn't read my edit did you
-
hahahaha Until 2 pages ago, ND's been arguing that they're the same size, with SUCKY claiming Yates' arms are "within an inch" of Coleman's.
Same thing with lat width.
Quick ND, now that you're backpeddling and changing the story, go back and edit all those posts ya little weasel. hahahaahah
-
You didn't read my edit did you
Why? Coleman won with no calves for eight years straight .
-
hahahaha Until 2 pages ago, ND's been arguing that they're the same size, with SUCKY claiming Yates' arms are "within an inch" of Coleman's.
Same thing with lat width.
Quick ND, now that you're backpeddling and changing the story, go back and edit all those posts ya little weasel. hahahaahah
Show me where I said they were the same size , I dare you.
-
Yeah because we all know how fair and accurate contest placings are ::)
C'mon ND....you know better.
no he doesn't. thats what is so sad.
He thinks every point the judges ever scored in the IFBB is fair, just and accurate ::)
-
ronnie was overlooked in 96.
Hell, he was overlooked in 98 and he fuckin' won!
The judges gave him a 17 in round one, then realized Holy Shit this guy is amazing maybe we should give him a closer look and then gave him perfect 5's for the rest of the contest.
had the judges not given in to the Wheeler hype in round one and gave Ronnie a closer look early on in 98, it is likely he would have won every round with 5's instead of the final 3 rounds.
ps. Ronnie's back is better than dorians, but then again, we already knew that...
-
Yates is just 7 pounds heavier than Coleman right there.
And we can see where they are: Im his big fat gut.
-
And we can see where they are: Im his big fat gut.
hahaahahahaha yet more fans of the bricklayer.
-
Are you fucking high? size advantage? he's 7 pounds lighter and one inch taller . his back isn't wider it appears wider because of his smaller waist , needless to say Coleman was 6th so much for his great arms and superior taper and better quad sweep , he couldn't even beat a 205 pound Shawn Ray
96 and 99 are two different years. Do you understand?
-
96 and 99 are two different years. Do you understand?
600+ pages of this warped reasoning provides a clear answer. ;)
-
BRUTAL SMACK DOWN OWNAGE BY R/C!
-
just go by the video, ronnie is owning dorian, his back is much much better, and his taper absolutely destroys dorians. there is no way around it the proof is in the pudding, name recognition goes a long way.
name recognition does go a long way.
ronnie's taper has always been better than dorian's.
but how about contest results?
check them for 96 and you'll get your answer.
-
Nothing worse than unfounded claims as regularly made by "camp Yates".
Without proof, it's just slander.
That pic confirms Coleman's size advantage, despite all the crap put out to the contrary by Yates nuthuggers. Coleman clearly with a wider back, smaller waist and superior taper, after all the misleading speculation. And that was Coleman at a lower bodyweight. ;)
i'm in nobody's camp...i can see..that's all i need to know that ronnie's head is like a watermelon as compared to a grapefruit ten years ago...
-
all i need to know that ronnie's head is like a watermelon as compared to a grapefruit ten years ago...
Interesting obsession; it's called bodybuilding, why would this be important to you? Without any proof it's about as baseless as claiming that Yates' skull's grown. ;D
Where are the pics that prove this (so far) baseless claim?
but how about contest results?
Contest results are pointless given the fact that they didn't compete against one another at their peaks-hard to believe this has to be explained. Besides which, it's already been pointed out here that the results are (1) suspect, and (2) already known; nothing to do with these threads, actually.
-
no he doesn't. thats what is so sad.
He thinks every point the judges ever scored in the IFBB is fair, just and accurate ::)
No just the contests Ronnie won ::)
-
Mentally ill, ND resorts to personal attacks at the drop of a hat in efforts to distract from the grim pictorial & vidoe reality. BTW even Yates "good" arm was blah.
Man, mind my language. I don't care how good you are. No one should win with a F**ked up left arm like that? And ND claims that the IFBB judges are better judges than the "real" people that follow bodybuilding? Give me a friggin break.
-
And ND claims that the IFBB judges are better judges than the "real" people that follow bodybuilding? Give me a friggin break.
I'm fairly certain that ND's uncommon allegiance to the IFBB and Weider has to do with his reverence of Iron Age, which is connected to both of them. Some kind of relationship with one or more of those would explain the illogical faith in the judging as well as the numbers obsession in lieu of pictorial proof.
-
More filler from a losing position. The proof is right there; measure the screen.hahahahaahahahaha hah
Moron. Measuring the screen wouldn't mean shit. Why? Because they're at different distances from the camera and from different angles. While this is not as bad as comparing them from pics taken at different contests, it still sucks because it doesen't establish any proof that he was even as wide as Dorian, let alone wider.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Contest results are pointless given the fact that they didn't compete against one another at their peaks-hard to believe this has to be explained. Besides which, it's already been pointed out here that the results are (1) suspect, and (2) already known; nothing to do with these threads, actually.
true, but someone made the comment specifically regarding ronnie and dorian when they COMPETED AGAINST EACH OTHER at the 96 olympia.
-
Moron. Measuring the screen wouldn't mean shit. Why? Because they're at different distances from the camera and from different angles.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Prove it, otherwise the comparison stands as valid. SUCKY's tacitly admitting the ownage by coming up with the predicted excuses.
They are in fact standing as accepted for judging purposes, you fool. Not one other post here felt this was important enough to mention because there was no agenda to spin more of this delusional backpeddling to save Yates' ass.
Further ownage of Yates:
-
HERE WE FUCKIN GO AGAIN !!!!
-
Nah, that particular pic shows such obvious dominance that all that's left is assorted lameass excuses as just seen. Laughable.
-
Lol.
-
So if he was so much bette than Yates.... why did he not beat him?
-
Nah, that particular pic shows such obvious dominance that all that's left is assorted lameass excuses as just seen. Laughable.
This is what makes me laugh about you in no way shape or form is Ronnie Coleman dominating Dorian Yates in that picture not in the least , Dorian won with a perfect score Coleman was fighting for 6th lol if thats your idea or ' dominance ' hey look he finished 6th look at his dominate the first place winner lol
-
So if he was so much bette than Yates.... why did he not beat him?
" politics " the MAN held Ronnie down until 1998 lol
-
Actually Sucky, on the bodybuilding stage the competitors are lined up fairly uniformly. If they were not, it would make the judges job that much more difficult considering perspective, etc. However, the camera is tilted toward Coleman. Regardless, it does appear that he is thicker in the back, especially the traps. However, Dorian is in better conditioning. The absurdity is that Dorian won with perfect scores; he was off this show. He appears flat and his conditioning did not even begin to approach his 1993 or even 1995 conditioning. Thus, I don't know why ND places so much merit on judging as there have been a plethora of IFBB shows that were poorly judged. Hell, did Gutler really dominate Vic and Dex that much this year...NO. Dorian was gifted a few of his Olympia wins, as was Ronnie. Regardless, in this show it is obvious that Ronnie has the size and taper advantage (duh....Ronnie in later years if over thirty pounds larger...he is a true Meso), while Dorian had conditioning. Thus, as was reverberated over and over again in the 600+ page thread before; pick your poison. In no way is Dorian appearing more dominant in those pics and vid. Ronnie is obviously the genetically superior bodybuilding, but Dorian has him on conditioning. I agree with everyone that Ronnie got hosed that year; he should have been top three. If Nasser had a back; he would have smoked Dorian.
-
" politics " the MAN held Ronnie down until 1998 lol
ND, this is where some of your foolish comments get annoying. You have even admitted that Dorian was anything but dominant in his last few years. He did not in any way hold Ronnie down; he won on name recognition and size his last few years. In 1998; Ronnie would have smoked Yates. End of story; it would have not been close in a legitimately judged show. Now I agree that Yates in his early years was a complete bad ass. However, he looked like shit his last few years. In 1996 he was flat. In 1997 he looked atrocious; a gift to Britain that was. Obviously, Ronnie looked like a turd this year and appropriately lost his title. This should have happened to Yates in 1996 or 1997. Oh well.
-
The absurdity is that Dorian won with perfect scores; he was off this show. He appears flat and his conditioning did not even begin to approach his 1993 or even 1995 conditioning. Thus, I don't know why ND places so much merit on judging as there have been a plethora of IFBB shows that were poorly judged.
ND really has no clue what he is talking about. each day that becomes more clear to everyone on here. He insists that dorian was so perfectly deserving of all these amazing scores when we can all see that he wasn't.
::)
-
In 1998; Ronnie would have smoked Yates. End of story;
very true.
but only if Dorian showed up looking like he did in 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96 or 97.
-
ND really has no clue what he is talking about. each day that becomes more clear to everyone on here. He insists that dorian was so perfectly deserving of all these amazing scores when we can all see that he wasn't.
::)
Ha ha ha ha ha ha !! bodybuilding history kid get over it ;) Yates dominates in a way Coleman never did.
-
ND, this is where some of your foolish comments get annoying. You have even admitted that Dorian was anything but dominant in his last few years. He did not in any way hold Ronnie down; he won on name recognition and size his last few years. In 1998; Ronnie would have smoked Yates. End of story; it would have not been close in a legitimately judged show. Now I agree that Yates in his early years was a complete bad ass. However, he looked like shit his last few years. In 1996 he was flat. In 1997 he looked atrocious; a gift to Britain that was. Obviously, Ronnie looked like a turd this year and appropriately lost his title. This should have happened to Yates in 1996 or 1997. Oh well.
1997 was a gift 1996 he was the clear cut winner no if ands or buts about it.
-
Yates dominates in a way Coleman never did.
Coleman: 8 Olympias
Yates: 6 Olympias
History baby hahahaahahah...Coleman
DOMINATES...
-
Coleman: 8 Olympias
Yates: 6 Olympias
History baby hahahaahahah...Coleman
DOMINATES...
Dorian beat Ronnie Coleman 9 times NINE times thats bodybuilding history kid.
Ronnie beat Dorian ? zero times lol
Dorian's win/loss ratio - 88%
Ronnie's - 40 %
-
What I cannot understand is why is ND and Co. are the ONLY people to not realize that 95/96 Ronnie LOOKED LIKE SHIT compared to his 98/99 forms?
they keep acting like Ronnie 95/6 was somehow even on the same level as Ronnie of later years and they try and use this flawed argument to make it seem like Dorian would win over Ronnie in 99 just as easily ::)
95 vs. 99:
-
the clear difference in size between 95 and 99 Ronnie is astounding, esp. when you considered that he also got way more detailed..
-
ND, this is where some of your foolish comments get annoying.
He does seem to excel at nonsensical blather doesn't he?
-
What I cannot understand is why is ND and Co. are the ONLY people to not realize that 95/96 Ronnie LOOKED LIKE SHIT compared to his 98/99 forms?
It's part of the required delusion. I think the handfull of believers in Yates on getbig have to keep reinforcing one another's dogmas. Part of the "circle the wagon" syndrome.
-
the clear difference in size between 95 and 99 Ronnie is astounding, esp. when you considered that he also got way more detailed..
Yates clearly had a growth spurt sometime in the early 90s which is readily acknowledged, yet the change in Coleman's physique is conveniently ignored. I wonder why? ;D
-
Actually Sucky, on the bodybuilding stage the competitors are lined up fairly uniformly. If they were not, it would make the judges job that much more difficult considering perspective, etc. However, the camera is tilted toward Coleman. Regardless, it does appear that he is thicker in the back, especially the traps. However, Dorian is in better conditioning. The absurdity is that Dorian won with perfect scores; he was off this show. He appears flat and his conditioning did not even begin to approach his 1993 or even 1995 conditioning. Thus, I don't know why ND places so much merit on judging as there have been a plethora of IFBB shows that were poorly judged. Hell, did Gutler really dominate Vic and Dex that much this year...NO. Dorian was gifted a few of his Olympia wins, as was Ronnie. Regardless, in this show it is obvious that Ronnie has the size and taper advantage (duh....Ronnie in later years if over thirty pounds larger...he is a true Meso), while Dorian had conditioning. Thus, as was reverberated over and over again in the 600+ page thread before; pick your poison. In no way is Dorian appearing more dominant in those pics and vid. Ronnie is obviously the genetically superior bodybuilding, but Dorian has him on conditioning. I agree with everyone that Ronnie got hosed that year; he should have been top three. If Nasser had a back; he would have smoked Dorian.
Non-sensical to the ultimate. He said that Ronnie was wider than Dorian: Where's the evidence? The point here is that visual comparisons suck to asses something as lat width, because the confounding variables are too many. You say that they are aligned in the same plane, yet they're not facing the camera to the same angle. You say they're aligned, yet there's no question that even standing a few inches behind or forward dramatically changes the perceprion of size, thus making visual assesments unreliable.
I have made my contention that Dorian was most likely wider, and I presented a hypothesis of why that is the case for the 1999 Ronnie. When it comes to the 1996 Ronnie, the comparison is even more obvious in Dorian's favor because Ronnie was smaller. My rationale is that Dorian's lats were thicker and wider because they weighed the same and yet Ronnie's quads were bigger and Dorian drier, so the equated size could only result from Dorian's bigger lats. This is even more obvious when it comes to 1996. I never said that Dorian's lats were wider, only that odds are. Yet, NeoSperminole said that they were just as wide, and Poopster, the troll, said that Ronnie was wider. Again, this is all bullshit because only the tape measurer could tell the truth. Visual assesments are not accurate!
Now, you're seriously insane if you think Ronnie deserved to place high in 1996. If he had conme in like he was at the 1996 CPC, then that would be a different story, but the fact is that he was flat, soft and his liabilities were stronger than ever. G=He even had some gut distension. I think you just can't see past your preferences when it comes to Coleman, so you'll look at a video and even say that something that can't even be assesed visually was in Ronnie's favor. Ronnie was lucky to place sizth in 1996; I would have plced him in tenth. These pics are from 1996
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
If he had conme in like he was at the 1996 CPC, then that would be a different story, but the fact is that he was flat, soft and his liabilities were stronger than ever
really?
-
Visual assesments are not accurate!
yes but that is what this ENTIRE SPORT is BASED ON! ::)
-
holy shit dorian had a massive gut in 96
-
yes but that is what this ENTIRE SPORT is BASED ON! ::)
Not when the issue at hand is establishing actual width, which is accurate and mathematical, and not visual. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Not when the issue at hand is establishing actual width, which is accurate and mathematical, and not visual. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
With clear pictorial EVIDENCE, those are the words of a bonehead.
-
What I cannot understand is why is ND and Co. are the ONLY people to not realize that 95/96 Ronnie LOOKED LIKE SHIT compared to his 98/99 forms?
they keep acting like Ronnie 95/6 was somehow even on the same level as Ronnie of later years and they try and use this flawed argument to make it seem like Dorian would win over Ronnie in 99 just as easily ::)
95 vs. 99:
Who said Ronnie 1995? no one another straw man for you to knock down , no one else claiming Ronnie was anything in 1995. 1996 was another story ;)
-
Not when the issue at hand is establishing actual width, which is accurate and mathematical, and not visual. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
but of what relevance is the actual number when its the illusion that counts?
eg. take two guys with equal "mathematical" lat widths.
one has a wide, monster oblique waist, lets call this guy "dorian" just for the sake of argument.
the other has a tiny, trim waist. Let call this guy um.."Ronnie" just for the hell of it.
Now onstage, who is going to look wider?
the guy we called Ronnie will...
-
but of what relevance is the actual number when its the illusion that counts?
eg. take two guys with equal "mathematical" lat widths.
one has a wide, monster oblique waist, lets call this guy "dorian" just for the sake of argument.
the other has a tiny, trim waist. Let call this guy um.."Ronnie" just for the hell of it.
Now onstage, who is going to look wider?
the guy we called Ronnie will...
lets put to bed this myth that the guy with the widest back and best V-taper is going to win because its a myth and nothing more , see Shawn Ray , see Flex Wheeler .
-
lets put to bed this myth that the guy with the widest back and best V-taper is going to win because its a myth and nothing more , see Shawn Ray , see Flex Wheeler .
They had *no* width relative to Coleman. Insane, stupid point.
-
lets put to bed this myth that the guy with the widest back and best V-taper is going to win because its a myth and nothing more , see Shawn Ray , see Flex Wheeler .
lets put to bed the myth that ND has any idea of how bodybuilding is judged in practise.
for the 200th time, these are advantages that when combined WITH OTHERS help to win contests. they never won contests solely based on these isolated attribues ::)]
just ask Munzer if his striations won him anything. He will say no.
But ask Ronnie the same question, and its a different story because his striations (or lat width or whatever the attribute may be) is accompanied by many OTHER attributes that add up to create impressiveness.
You such a novice, superficial understanding of the judging system.
Hint: that judging document you keep posting is only one SMALL part of the story.
-
lets put to bed the myth that ND has any idea of how bodybuilding is judged in practise.
for the 200th time, these are advantages that when combined WITH OTHERS help to win contests. they never won contests solely based on these isolated attribues ::)]
just ask Munzer if his striations won him anything. He will say no.
But ask Ronnie the same question, and its a different story because his striations (or lat width or whatever the attribute may be) is accompanied by many OTHER attributes that add up to create impressiveness.
You such a novice, superficial understanding of the judging system.
Hint: that judging document you keep posting is only one SMALL part of the story.
Hint you don't know how bodybuilding contests are judged , you never knew the criteria until I posted them and you still continue to misquote them wrong I might add
And what the fuck do you know about judging? you think the guy with the best X-frame will be the winner and the guy with more ' lumpiness ' in his back lol you claim I'm a novice if thats the case you're a high functioning retard ;)
I've maintained all along Yates meets ALL of the bodybuilding requirements better than Ronnie NOT just some of them , and I never mentioned ' x-frame ' and ' lumpiness ' in the process or the absurd that Ronnie has better balance than Dorian lol or this gem Ronnie has more detail in his calves than Dorian lol
You know what? right I thought so. ;)
-
They had *no* width relative to Coleman. Insane, stupid point.
They had NO witdh relative to Coleman and still managed to beat him , Flex beat him eight times and he was never wider , never heavier , and never had a better taper . ;)
-
you think the guy with the best X-frame will be the winner and the guy with more ' lumpiness ' in his back lol
when have I EVER said that the guy with the best X frame will win or that the guy with more lumpiness in his back will automatically win?
just because you don't like the fact that Ronnie's back makes dorian look flat in the rear double bi or that Ronnie has a better taper does not make them any less advantagous onstage.
-
They had NO witdh relative to Coleman and still managed to beat him , Flex beat him eight times and he was never wider , never heavier , and never had a better taper . ;)
But the width was a big plus, dumbass, stop trying to confuse the issue with winning.
The deliberate efforts to distort from this ND is incredible. So much for credibility.
-
Ronnie making dorian look flat:
yes, it is an advantage:
-
Not at his best, just as they couldn't beat Yates at his best, something you've conveniently left out surprise surprise.
The misinformation from this ND is incredible.
it wasn't even that he wasn't at his best, it was that he wasn't even filled out yet.
Ronnie in his mid 90's form looks SCRAWNY compared to his filled out 257 pound physique:
of course Flex beat him. Ronnie was in his infant stage:
-
when have I EVER said that the guy with the best X frame will win or that the guy with more lumpiness in his back will automatically win?
just because you don't like the fact that Ronnie's back makes dorian look flat in the rear double bi or that Ronnie has a better taper does not make them any less advantagous onstage.
You tried for pages to say these are advantages that Dorian doesn't have and given all of these ' advantages ' Ronnie would beat Dorian lol
-
Ronnie making dorian look flat:
yes, it is an advantage:
says who? who says One Yates looks flat? and two this is an advantage? and your pathetic attempt at a comparison only proves your bias , is that Dorian at his best? let me try
" Oh look Dorian making Ronnie look flat and overdeveloped and weak " ::)
you fear Dorian at his best for a good reason , so did everyone else because they knew the contest was for second place.
-
Hint you don't know how bodybuilding contests are judged , you never knew the criteria until I posted them and you still continue to misquote them wrong I might add
And what the f**k do you know about judging? you think the guy with the best X-frame will be the winner and the guy with more ' lumpiness ' in his back lol you claim I'm a novice if thats the case you're a high functioning retard ;)
I've maintained all along Yates meets ALL of the bodybuilding requirements better than Ronnie NOT just some of them , and I never mentioned ' x-frame ' and ' lumpiness ' in the process or the absurd that Ronnie has better balance than Dorian lol or this gem Ronnie has more detail in his calves than Dorian lol
You know what? right I thought so. ;)
ND, when was the IFBB judging criteria written?
-
ND, when was the IFBB judging criteria written?
I'm not sure originally but its revised every year I think if need be with amendments such as the ' no gut ' edict that they never really implemented but I guess it was a tool to use at their discretion and to let people know don't flaunt your gut because if need be we can use it against you.
-
I'm not sure originally but its revised every year I think if need be with amendments such as the ' no gut ' edict that they never really implemented but I guess it was a tool to use at their discretion and to let people know don't flaunt your gut because if need be we can use it against you.
I see- so since the development of detailed striations and deep vascularity, we can assume that the judging criteria has progressed such that it hasn't overlooked them?
-
says who? who says One Yates looks flat? and two this is an advantage? and your pathetic attempt at a comparison only proves your bias , is that Dorian at his best? let me try
" Oh look Dorian making Ronnie look flat and overdeveloped and weak " ::)
you fear Dorian at his best for a good reason , so did everyone else because they knew the contest was for second place.
ND now desperately comparing peak Yates to 2006 Ronnie. Sadly they're not far apart. ;D
-
I see- so since the development of detailed striations and deep vascularity, we can assume that the judging criteria has progressed such that it hasn't overlooked them?
No they're covered under the umbrella of definition/conditioning but again striations and deep vasculairty aren't not an indication of overall conditioning see Ronnie 2004.
-
No they're covered under the umbrella of definition/conditioning but again striations and deep vasculairty aren't not an indication of overall conditioning see Ronnie 2004.
Yeah, what I mean is that we can assume that the criteria wasn't written before such things had happened- eg, 1940s, lol. So, they knew about it when they chose to exclude it, rather than excluding it because they didn't know about it.
-
Yeah, what I mean is that we can assume that the criteria wasn't written before such things had happened- eg, 1940s, lol. So, they knew about it when they chose to exclude it, rather than excluding it because they didn't know about it.
well the criteria is an accumulation and amendments are added as need be , the most muscular was added as a mandatory pose relatively recently .
-
well the criteria is an accumulation and amendments are added as need be , the most muscular was added as a mandatory pose relatively recently .
Cool. So why do you think they left out explicit mention of striations and vascularity?
-
Cool. So why do you think they left out explicit mention of striations and vascularity?
ND will probably just give you some lame excuse. What's funny is that when Gaspari displayed striated glutes for the first time, everyone hailed it as a benchmark of great conditioning. However, the Dorian nuthuggers compeletely ignore Ronnie's dominance in striations and separations from head to toe. ::)
-
again striations and deep vasculairty aren't not an indication of overall conditioning see Ronnie 2004
I would disagree, and so would most people.
other than dorian, who did not display many striations, striations and deep vascularity ARE a good indicator of overall conditioning.
eg.
Compare ronnie 99 to his 2004 shape where he was holding much water:
-
I would disagree, and so would most people.
other than dorian, who did not display many striations, striations and deep vascularity ARE a good indicator of overall conditioning.
eg.
Compare ronnie 99 to his 2004 shape where he was holding much water:
You would disagree and like most people you're not well versed on competitive bodybuilding , where is he holding water? in his midsection , his quads , his back , his delts the fact you think Ronnie in 99 and 2004 are similarly conditioned proves my point of how little you know.
NO fat and SQ water are great indications of conditioning , Dorian's lower lats and erector spinae were covered in striation in a like Coleman's never , Dorian's interclostals and obliques same thing , his chest was covered in striations , again if you're haggling over more its just a complete joke seriously .
One thing Dorian NEVER had a problem with was conditioning he had the size of a superheavyweight and the conditioning of a lightweight its an extremely hard thing to do thats why you don't see it even to this day.
-
says who? who says One Yates looks flat? and two this is an advantage? and your pathetic attempt at a comparison only proves your bias , is that Dorian at his best? let me try
" Oh look Dorian making Ronnie look flat and overdeveloped and weak " ::)
you fear Dorian at his best for a good reason , so did everyone else because they knew the contest was for second place.
again, your babbling leaves out all sense of reality.
not dorian at his best?
no it wasn't.
but here is the catch:
Dorian at his best STILL had a flat looking back double bi. Better conditioned than 94 yes, but still just as flat.
It doesn't matter whether it was 1993, 1994 or 1997 it will still be flat:
-
notice: despite ND's claims to the contrary, Dorian's back at his "best" is just as flat as it was at his 'worst' ::)
-
you think Ronnie in 99 and 2004 are similarly conditioned proves my point of how little you know.
are you an idiot?
the point of that post was to disprove your claim that ronnie in 2004 was out of shape despite having striations and vascularity.
He WAS NOT in good shape that year.
and his relative lack of deep striations proves it.
-
again, your babbling leaves out all sense of reality.
not dorian at his best?
no it wasn't.
but here is the catch:
Dorian at his best STILL had a flat looking back double bi. Better conditioned than 94 yes, but still just as flat.
It doesn't matter whether it was 1993, 1994 or 1997 it will still be flat:
Again who cares ? this is like you guys babbling over who is slightly wider it all means NOTHING he looks flat lol the greatest back ever and he looks flat lol Dorian crushes everyone from head to toe , forget taper , forget a smaller waist , forget higher peaked biceps its all filler , Dorian dominated because he was the biggest and best conditioned , the best balanced and the most complete.
-
are you an idiot?
the point of that post was to disprove your claim that ronnie in 2004 was out of shape despite having striations and vascularity.
He WAS NOT in good shape that year.
and his relative lack of deep striations proves it.
LMAFO relative lack of deep striations how about the excess fat and water? oh thats right you're to busy looking at the ' fine lines ' lol you have much to learn young one.
;)
-
1996 Mr Olympia
-
Dorian's lower lats and erector spinae were covered in striation in a like Coleman's never , Dorian's interclostals and obliques same thing , his chest was covered in striations
wrong, wrong and wrong:
(http://digilander.libero.it/gruppociak/rc142.jpg)
-
1996 Mr Olympia
everytime I see shots of Ronnie in 96 I think there is NO WAY he could possibly be 255 or whatever his weight was supposedly listed in Ironman or whatever the mag was when his quads looked half the size that they were at 257 in 1999:
(http://www.mostmuscular.com/newmuscle.cx/olympia/coleman7.jpg)
-
wrong, wrong and wrong:
(http://digilander.libero.it/gruppociak/rc142.jpg)
not even close slick ;)
-
but of what relevance is the actual number when its the illusion that counts?
eg. take two guys with equal "mathematical" lat widths.
one has a wide, monster oblique waist, lets call this guy "dorian" just for the sake of argument.
the other has a tiny, trim waist. Let call this guy um.."Ronnie" just for the hell of it.
Now onstage, who is going to look wider?
the guy we called Ronnie will...
My point is that who's lat appears wider is not an indication of width. Of course the illusion is part of bodybuilding. Wheeler appeared to be bigger than he was due to his small joints and round muscle bellies. However, it is exactly because Ronnie has rounder lats that they appear to b e wider than they really are. This is relevant in the judging, but it does not change the fact that Dorian most likely carried the most back muscle mass when compared to the 1999 Coleman. I'm not arguing who appeared to be wider, but who actually was wider;) Get it? An while Ronnie's rounder muscles gives him an impression of being biiger than he actually is, Dorian stony muscle does the same. Recall that Dorian looked as big as Nasser despit ethe latter weighing 30 lbs more, because Diesel's muscles were so hard. So, it evens out in the illusion department for both Dorian and Ronnie. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
everytime I see shots of Ronnie in 96 I think there is NO WAY he could possibly be 255 or whatever his weight was supposedly listed in Ironman or whatever the mag was when his quads looked half the size that they were at 257 in 1999:
(http://www.mostmuscular.com/newmuscle.cx/olympia/coleman7.jpg)
he was 250 pounds at the 1996 Mr Olympia , he was 255 pounds at the 1997 Mr Olympia and he's fuller in 1999 because he finally learned how to carb-up and at the 1996 Canadian pro he was 262 pounds !
-
Recall that Dorian looked as big as Nasser despit ethe latter weighing 30 lbs more
recall what I said about your premises being wrong?:
Nasser looked a lot bigger than dorian every time they stood next to each other onstage:
-
Not only is Nasser overwhelming Yates, Yates arms don't even look like those of a pro in comparison with either of the other guys.
Listening to Yates in recent interviews, it's remarkable how unaware he is of his good fortune in some of the contests. He appears to share ND's delusions that it was all "earned the hard way". ::)
-
Not only is Nasser overwhelming Yates, Yates arms don't even look like those of a pro in comparison with either of the other guys.
Thank you , you proved my point that you don't need the biggest arms to beat guys with bigger arms ;)
-
Thank you , you proved my point that you don't need the biggest arms to beat guys with bigger arms ;)
Those arms and other attributes prove the point about suspect judging. ;D
-
Thank you , you proved my point that you don't need the biggest arms to beat guys with bigger arms ;)
no, you just need partial judges... :-\
dorian did not deserve a perfect score in 96 looking like he did:
shawn was incredible that night. And nasser was better than Yates from the front too.
And Yates gets a perfect score ::)
-
ronnie isnt way bigger than dorian...both had offseason weights of around 315lbs...dorian was upto 318lbs at one point and i think coleman was up at 322lbs or something. Im sure dorian could have competed at 282 or so if he really wanted. coleman in the late 90s was better than dorian ever was. Ronnie should retire now tho.
-
ronnie isnt way bigger than dorian...both had offseason weights of around 315lbs...
Next you'll be telling us that Nasser's the same size as Yates. ::) Here's a hint: bodyweight's not the entire basis for determining size, that's a weak basis in fact.
-
coleman in the late 90s was better than dorian ever was.
take note ND: most people think you are nuts for arguing that dorian was ever better than Ronnie 98 or 99.
-
Next you'll be telling us that Nasser's the same size as Yates. ::) Here's a hint: bodyweight's not the entire basis for determining size, that's a weak basis in fact.
pumpster: i think if 2 men have similar bodyweights..their bodies will not be radically different sizewise (with fat percentages of 4-5), no?
-
take note ND: most people think you are nuts for arguing that dorian was ever better than Ronnie 98 or 99.
Wow then I must be wrong ::) if I were dead wrong the truce thread would NEVER be 650 pages ;)
-
pumpster: i think if 2 men have similar bodyweights..their bodies will not be radically different sizewise (with fat percentages of 4-5), no?
yes but their proprotions can be different:
for example, Ronnie has bigger arms but smaller calves. Quads were about the same size.
-
pumpster: i think if 2 men have similar bodyweights..their bodies will not be radically different sizewise (with fat percentages of 4-5), no?
Bones can be considerably thicker (Yates) as well as the bone structure (Yates), which effects the actual volume of muscle and the difference in waist to shoulder & upper arm to wrist ratios, to name a couple.
Plus the muscle size can vary widely in placement: Platz compared with Padilla for example.
-
yes ND Is wrong..dorian was never as good as ronnie was..in late 90s..including 97.
but to say that ronnie was way bigger than dorian is bs.
-
Bones can be considerably thicker (Yates) as well as the bone structure (Yates), which effects the actual volume of muscle and the difference in waist to shoulder & upper arm to wrist ratios, to name a couple.
lol..for sure but not so much that one guy is way bigger than the other. i want a cookie
-
no, you just need partial judges... :-\
dorian did not deserve a perfect score in 96 looking like he did:
shawn was incredible that night. And nasser was better than Yates from the front too.
And Yates gets a perfect score ::)
Again you're basing your argument on never seeing Yates live and in person on a few scans lol typical newbie move oh don't forget to keep this in mind ;)
Flex magazine Jan 1992 on Dorian Yates
" Dorian has the type of physique that looks much better and more powerfull in person than photos. I personally saw him onstage , and Yates if definitely light years ahead of the way he looks in photos.
MuscleMag International Feb 1994 on Dorian Yates at the 1993 Mr Olympia
" He's huge , absolutely HUGE ...he's ripped completely RIPPED. And while he's not in possession of the prettiest physique body by a long shot , he's equipped with all the bodyparts you need to win .
Combine this with the fact that he's 10 TIMES more impressive when you see him onstage at the Olympia than he is in pictures or on videos and you got yourself a winner.
-
but to say that ronnie was way bigger than dorian is bs.
Well the pic shows a considerable size advantage across the board, and that was only '96. Nasser was also clearly bigger.
-
Well the pic shows a considerable size advantage across the board, and that was only '96. Nasser was also clearly bigger.
He may have been heavier however he wasn't as dry as Yates and he failed the diuretics test to boot.
-
Well the pic shows a considerable size advantage across the board, and that was only '96. Nasser was also clearly bigger.
no it doesnt..not when they stand equally close to the camera..in the pic where dorian looks smaller than nasser he stands further away then nasser does. besides i never argues that yates was bigger than nasser...nasser competed at 282-285 several times in the late 90s. Also nasser was better than yates in 96 and 97 i believe, atleast one of those years. and nassers back wasnt the best of all time but to say say it was that bad as some people claim is bullshit, once again atleast 96-97.
-
This is the losing position lol you're the Bow Flex warrior lol
END YOURSELF!!
-
END YOURSELF!!
hahahahaahah well said. Understand that he has no life & is stuck within a self-imposed ghetto of delusion. ;)
-
END YOURSELF!!
dont you know that the wheel of opinions is eternal?
-
hahahahaahah well said. Try to understand that he has no life. ;)
pumpy what happened to your link to your post about the great white hope? ;)
-
Bones can be considerably thicker (Yates) as well as the bone structure (Yates), which effects the actual volume of muscle and the difference in waist to shoulder & upper arm to wrist ratios, to name a couple.
Plus the muscle size can vary widely in placement: Platz compared with Padilla for example.
This is an idiotic argument because there are several other variables at work here. Dorian's bones may be thicker, but they're also lighter - because Black Men have a greater bone mineral density. Dorian also has less sub-cutaneous water. So, at the same weight, odds are that Dorian carries more muscle. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
This is an idiotic argument because there are several other variables at work here. Dorian's bones may be thicker, but they're also lighter - because Black Men have a greater bone mineral density. Dorian also has less sub-cutaneous water. So, at the same weight, odds are that Dorian carries more muscle. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Absolutely correct if one is much dryer and they're the same weight who is carrying more muscle?
-
This is an idiotic argument because there are several other variables at work here. Dorian's bones may be thicker, but they're also lighter - because Black Men have a greater bone mineral density. Dorian also has less sub-cutaneous water. So, at the same weight, odds are that Dorian carries more muscle. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
They were just examples, you idiot, but valid ones about Yates. He does have thicker bones and smaller muscle bellies. Thiis "grad student of physiology" completely baffled (again), trying to rationalize Yates' 18" arms:
-
They were just examples, you idiot. hahaahahahahahah This "grad student of physiology" completely baffled (again) and trying to rationalize Yates' 18" arms:
pumpster what happened to your post? about the great white hope? lol
-
pumpster what happened to your post? about the great white hope? lol
Seems it was deleted or changed. That was good though, he was correct about the getbig skinheads and their support of white BBs at all cost. ;)
-
Absolutely correct if one is much dryer and they're the same weight who is carrying more muscle?
assuming the same bone density, bone size etc etc and all the other variables, the one who is drier.
problem is, was dorian 93 really drier than ronnie 99?
highly doubtful based on how Ronnie looked at the 1999 show:
they were probably about equal in terms of dryness:
-
Seems it was deleted or changed. That was good though, he was correct about the getbig skinheads and their support of white BBs at all cost. ;)
LMFAO what a loser you are . classic pumpster quote when you have nothing play the race card.
pumpster
Who cares what Lee Priest says, he's not exactly stable on his 3rd marriage.
Lots of racism still around in redneck Australia as well.
Classic bricklayer shot..
-
again, just because Ronnie was famously puffy later in his career does not mean he was not bone dry (exept for maybe the midsection) earlier in his career.
For example look at the incredible dryness of Ronnie's arms compared to Dorian's watery limbs:
-
assuming the same bone density, bone size etc etc and all the other variables, the one who is drier.
problem is, was dorian 93 really drier than ronnie 99?
highly doubtful based on how Ronnie looked at the 1999 show:
they were probably about equal in terms of dryness:
Oh now they're ' probably ' equal in terms of dryness huh? lol
-
They were just examples, you idiot, but valid ones about Yates. He does have thicker bones and smaller muscle bellies. Thiis "grad student of physiology" completely baffled (again), trying to rationalize Yates' 18" arms:
Dorian's arms were 21" at his best. Now, Dorian has short muscle bellies? First of all, this isn't true. Secondly, even if it is, it's still irrelevant because there are other variables at work. It's possible that Dorian has a greater muscle fiber density, and this makes a muscle heavier. ;) As for the skeltal structure argument, dumbass, I have already explained that it's possible that Ronnie's frame actually weighed more, since Ronnie has more Calcium deposited in hius muscles. poopster, you're a moron and also my bitch. ;) I have owned you too many times to count, and will continue to do so as long as you continue to insist arguing with me, someone who is far above your level. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
again, just because Ronnie was famously puffy later in his career does not mean he was not bone dry (exept for maybe the midsection) earlier in his career.
For example look at the incredible dryness of Ronnie's arms compared to Dorian's watery limbs:
See this is where you go terribly wrong you're saying Yates is carrying water in 1993 that statement is foolish , and just outright wrong . you have to learn Yates in 1993 had no fat or water.
-
LMFAO what a loser you are . classic pumpster quote when you have nothing play the race card.
[/b]
It's true though, look at most of fanboy's favorite poster-boyz :-*
-Yates
-Priest
-Paris
-Schwarzenegger
-Zane
-
So great it's worth saying twice, hahahaahahahhah
Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on December 07, 2006, 01:52:29 PM
This is the losing position lol you're the Bow Flex warrior lol
END YOURSELF!!
-
It's true though, look at most of fanboy's favorite poster-boyz :-*
-Yates
-Priest
-Paris
-Schwarzenegger
-Zane
Flex Wheeler , Lee Haney , Samir Bannout , Sergio Oliva , Lee Lebrada , you're the one who has a problem with race not me ;)
-
Flex Wheeler , Lee Haney , Samir Bannout , Sergio Oliva , Lee Lebrada , you're the one who has a problem with race not me ;)
Utter liar, attacking Oliva like the bitch he is just a week ago during another Schwarzenegger ball-worship thread he got off on. haahahahahahahahahhaha
-
Utter liar, attacking Oliva like the bitch he is just a week ago during another Schwarzenegger ball-worship thread he got off on. haahahahahahahahahhaha
Attacking him ? how so? by stating the obvious he was lacking compared to Arnold.
-
assuming the same bone density, bone size etc etc and all the other variables, the one who is drier.
problem is, was dorian 93 really drier than ronnie 99?
highly doubtful based on how Ronnie looked at the 1999 show:
they were probably about equal in terms of dryness:
Well, I think that the skeletal frame argument is a stretch, but my opinion has been enhanced further by evidence. Let's see:
- Dorian's frame is thicker, but Ronnie's bones weight more. They even out. Check.
- Dorian's muscle bellies are as long as Ronnie's, only not as round. Check.
- Roundness of muscles have no bearing in muscle weight. Check.
- Dorian arguably had greater muscle fiber density than Ronnie. Check.
- Increased muscle fiber density makes a muscle heavier. Check.
- They weighted the same. Check.
- Dorian arguably had less sub-cutaneuous water. Check.
So, in conclusion, deductive logic tells us that Dorian carried more lean muscle tissue than Ronnie. Case closed. ;) 8)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
See this is where you go terribly wrong you're saying Yates is carrying water in 1993 that statement is foolish , and just outright wrong . you have to learn Yates in 1993 had no fat or water.
why is it a given that yates had no fat or water when ronnie's arms, delts, chest, quads glutes and hams all looked dryer?
don't assuming things if their is no corroberating evidence to back up the claim.
Ronnie would not look watery next to Dorian:
-
why is it a given that yates had no fat or water when ronnie's arms, delts, chest, quads glutes and hams all looked dryer?
don't assuming things if their is no corroberating evidence to back up the claim.
Ronnie would not look watery next to Dorian:
Flex magazine Jan 1992 on Dorian Yates
" Dorian has the type of physique that looks much better and more powerfull in person than photos. I personally saw him onstage , and Yates if definitely light years ahead of the way he looks in photos.
MuscleMag International Feb 1994 on Dorian Yates at the 1993 Mr Olympia
" He's huge , absolutely HUGE ...he's ripped completely RIPPED. And while he's not in possession of the prettiest physique body by a long shot , he's equipped with all the bodyparts you need to win .
Combine this with the fact that he's 10 TIMES more impressive when you see him onstage at the Olympia than he is in pictures or on videos and you got yourself a winner.
-
Attacking him ? how so? by stating the obvious he was lacking compared to Arnold.
Funny, Serge Nubret agrees with me both on it being a coin-toss and the fact that Oliva didn't have the advantage of having politics on his side.
-
Combine this with the fact that he's 10 TIMES more impressive when you see him onstage at the Olympia than he is in pictures or on videos and you got yourself a winner.
and the same holds true for ronnie... ::)
-
Funny, Serge Nubret agrees with me both on it being a coin-toss and the fact that Oliva didn't have the advantage of having politics on his side. ND once again trying to justify his racism.
If I were a ' racist ' I'd be the first to admit it but your claim is baseless and simply not true , I have a black man in my avatar ;) I'm a huge fan of both Flex Wheeler and Lee Haney you have nothing to work with pumpy ;) you're getting very desperate now .
-
and the same holds true for ronnie... ::)
Sorry I've never once seen that quote applied to Ronnie not once.
-
Combine this with the fact that he's 10 TIMES more impressive when you see him onstage at the Olympia than he is in pictures or on videos and you got yourself a winner.
Someone was on here a while ago who saw Yates in person, said he wasn't impressed. :-\
-
Someone was on here a while ago who saw Yates in person, said he wasn't impressed. :-\
Someone on here said a while ago he saw the 1997 Mr Olympia and it was no contest Yates destroyed everyone.
-
If I were a ' racist ' I'd be the first to admit it but your claim is baseless and simply not true , I have a black man in my avatar ;) I'm a huge fan of both Flex Wheeler and Lee Haney you have nothing to work with pumpy ;) you're getting very desperate now .
OWNED on yet ANOTHER obvious bias regarding a black BB competing against a white BB. A clear trend incidentally. ;D
-
Well, I think that the skeletal frame argument is a stretch, but my opinion has been enhanced further by evidence. Let's see:
- Dorian's frame is thicker, but Ronnie's bones weight more. They even out. Check.
- Dorian's muscle bellies are as long as Ronnie's, only not as round. Check.
- Roundness of muscles have no bearing in muscle weight. Check.
- Dorian arguably had greater muscle fiber density than Ronnie. Check.
- Increased muscle fiber density makes a muscle heavier. Check.
- They weighted the same. Check.
- Dorian arguably had less sub-cutaneuous water. Check.
So, in conclusion, deductive logic tells us that Dorian carried more lean muscle tissue than Ronnie. Case closed. ;) 8)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
When you say that if someone's lats appear wider than another's, this is not an indication of width- what do you mean by this? If I look to have lats 1 M wide, and you look like having lats 10 M wide- is this not an indication of width?
Further, my question has gone unanswered. If the IFBB judging criteria is continually updated, why has there been no explicit mention of striations and vascularity which has only been more recently achieved (~lsat 20 years)?
-
Someone on here said a while ago he saw the 1997 Mr Olympia and it was no contest Yates destroyed everyone.
Excuse me, that character came on after the first one who said Yates looked weak, but had no credibility or details whatsoever about the contest, let alone believability, the way the first guy did. ;D
-
If I were a ' racist ' I'd be the first to admit it but your claim is baseless and simply not true , I have a black man in my avatar ;) I'm a huge fan of both Flex Wheeler and Lee Haney you have nothing to work with pumpy ;) you're getting very desperate now .
Yeah, racism is a big call, Hulkster. You could equally be accused of being anti-white for your lack of concessions to camp yates. ???
-
Yeah, racism is a big call, Hulkster. You could equally be accused of being anti-white for your lack of concessions to camp yates. ???
Earlier in the truce thread several of the pro-Coleman guys were accused of being "non-whites" with racial agendas, which was farcical since it's verifiably untrue. The accusations were entirely serious and repeated more than once by one of ND's skinheads.
-
OWNED on yet ANOTHER obvious bias regarding a black BB competing against a white BB. A clear trend incidentally. ;D
This is your pathetic attempt to stir up the pot and you have nothing to work with , you're the one obsessed with race ( the white race apparently ) you have some issues .
-
Yeah, racism is a big call, Hulkster. You could equally be accused of being anti-white for your lack of concessions to camp yates. ???
that would be difficult considering I am white myself.
And I have made concessions to camp yates.
its just that most of what is claimed about Dorian's post tear physique is NOT backed up by the visuals (ie all those perfect scores despite the myriad of yates-getting-owned- pics)
doesn't matter whether dorian was white, black, pink or purple.
If the visuals do not corroborate with the incredible scores, that person is overrated. period.
-
Based on ample posts, ND has attacked Oliva & Coleman equally, like a rabid dog, in regards to fantasy-figures Schwarzengger, Yates & Priest. Not a coincidence. Has openly admitted to a preference for "handsome white BBs" including confirmed fruitcake Bob Paris. :-*
-
Earlier in the truce thread several of the pro-Coleman guys were accused of being "non-whites" with racial agendas, which was farcical since it's verifiably untrue. The accusations were entirely serious and repeated more than once by one of ND's skinheads.
Whats ironic is on the truce thread you and Hulkster BOTH referred to Dorian as " The Blocky White Guy " this is your comment NOT mine ;), I never once got involved with people making fun of the way Ronnie speaks or articulates himself I keep my remarks to his physique
I posted this quote
Lee Priest
HOW DO YOU FEEL DORIAN WOULD FAIR AGAINST RONNIE COLEMAN NOW?
I think Dorian at his best (1993) would easily beat Ronnie. Dorian might not be as symmetrical as Ronnie, but all over he was more complete and in better condition at his best.
And your response was
pumpster
Who cares what Lee Priest says, he's not exactly stable on his 3rd marriage.
Lots of racism still around in redneck Australia as well.
Classic bricklayer shot..
implying Priest was racist by virtue of being born in Australia , this is your comment NOT mine lol you're the one who is obsessed with race and continue to play yourself .
-
that would be difficult considering I am white myself.
And I have made concessions to camp yates.
its just that most of what is claimed about Dorian's post tear physique is NOT backed up by the visuals (ie all those perfect scores despite the myriad of yates-getting-owned- pics)
doesn't matter whether dorian was white, black, pink or purple.
If the visuals do not corroborate with the incredible scores, that person is overrated. period.
Oh so you're back to saying he's overrated? lol is he still the most overrated bodybuilder of all time? or have you come to your senses?
-
Oh so you're back to saying he's overrated? lol is he still the most overrated bodybuilder of all time? or have you come to your senses?
you cannot tell me that post tear dorian was not overrated.
come on ND.
Gone was the left biceps, totally ruining his front double bi due to horrible symmetry.
gone was the great midsection, replaced by massive obliques from 94 on (not as bad in 92/3).
Arms noticabally smaller in 96/7 as were his quads.
Dorian never looked the same post tear.
never:
Many a bodybuilder owned him in countless poses,
and yet he still recieved perfect scores ::)
-
Based on ample posts, ND has attacked Oliva & Coleman equally, like a rabid dog, in regards to fantasy-figures Schwarzengger, Yates & Priest. Not a coincidence. Has openly admitted to a preference for "handsome white BBs" including confirmed fruitcake Bob Paris. :-*
Attacked Oliva and Coleman? lol one need not look any further than the truce thread to see your bias and pathetic attempts to label people , you're the one who claimed Dorian was handpicked because he was white for marketing reasons , you're the one who called Yates a ' Blocky White Guy " you're obsessed the moment one person thinks another is better than your ' heros '
I didn't have a problem with Sergio beating Arnold in 1969 , I didn't have a problem with Haney beating Yates in 1991 , I didn't have a problem with Yates losing to the Algerian Momo , I don't have a problem with race you do thats your hang-up and thats a shame
And I am a huge fan of Bob Paris NOT because he's handsome because he was a great bodybuilder and on top of being obsessed with race you're also homophobic? lol Paris is a ' fruitcake ' ? man you're in a dark place dude.
-
you cannot tell me that post tear dorian was not overrated.
come on ND.
Gone was the left biceps, totally ruining his front double bi due to horrible symmetry.
gone was the great midsection, replaced by massive obliques from 94 on (not as bad in 92/3).
Arms noticabally smaller in 96/7 as were his quads.
Dorian never looked the same post tear.
never:
Many a bodybuilder owned him in countless poses,
and yet he still recieved perfect scores ::)
1995 he was just as good as 1993 if not better !! sans the shorter bicep he was outstanding in 1995 and in 1996 he was the clear cut winner , and you know how I feel about 1997 and you keep posting that picture to highlight Yates thick obliques and its stating the obvious NO kidding his oblqiues are thick its old news lol
-
Well, I think that the skeletal frame argument is a stretch, but my opinion has been enhanced further by evidence. Let's see:
- Dorian's frame is thicker, but Ronnie's bones weight more. They even out. Check.
- Dorian's muscle bellies are as long as Ronnie's, only not as round. Check.
- Roundness of muscles have no bearing in muscle weight. Check.
- Dorian arguably had greater muscle fiber density than Ronnie. Check.
- Increased muscle fiber density makes a muscle heavier. Check.
- They weighted the same. Check.
- Dorian arguably had less sub-cutaneuous water. Check.
So, in conclusion, deductive logic tells us that Dorian carried more lean muscle tissue than Ronnie. Case closed. ;) 8)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Hulkster, to prove that you're an idiot, here's yet another one of my posts that you failed to address. 8)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Hulkster, to prove that you're an idiot, here's yet another one of my posts that you failed to address. 8)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
oh, I will address, don't you worry...
-
Well, I think that the skeletal frame argument is a stretch, but my opinion has been enhanced further by evidence. Let's see:
- Dorian's frame is thicker, but Ronnie's bones weight more. They even out. Check.
- Dorian's muscle bellies are as long as Ronnie's, only not as round. Check.
- Roundness of muscles have no bearing in muscle weight. Check.
- Dorian arguably had greater muscle fiber density than Ronnie. Check.
- Increased muscle fiber density makes a muscle heavier. Check.
- They weighted the same. Check.
- Dorian arguably had less sub-cutaneuous water. Check.
So, in conclusion, deductive logic tells us that Dorian carried more lean muscle tissue than Ronnie. Case closed. ;) 8)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
your speculation does NOT hold up to the test of REALITY, since we can clearly see here that the argument that dorian probably has more musce fibre density and less subcutaneous fat is incorrect:
his arms and chest would NOT appear so watery in comparison to ronnie if he did:
the same holds true for the quads, glutes and hams.
The ONLY part of Dorian that appeared to hold less subcutaneous fat than Ronnie 99 is the lower back and abs. THATS IT.
that does not make up for the other 90% of the body.
OWNED
-
sucky's conclusions do not appear to hold up to the yardstick of real life:
-
Dorian was better conditioned and drier than Ronnie ever was.
Look at Dorian's chest in this comparison. It completely blows away Ronnie's in thickness and striations, despite being 20lbs smaller.
-
LOL what a dumb post.
Dorian's chest blow's Ronnie's 42 year old chest away?
why not try a pic from a time when ronnie was closer to his prime next time ::):
-
Even in this screencap from 99 (which is more flattering than the actual pictures of that contest), Ronnie's chest is no thicker and no more striated than that shot from 95 for Dorian. I would claim that Dorian's chest was actually thicker.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=111054.0;attach=125644;image)
-
that would be difficult considering I am white myself.
And I have made concessions to camp yates.
its just that most of what is claimed about Dorian's post tear physique is NOT backed up by the visuals (ie all those perfect scores despite the myriad of yates-getting-owned- pics)
doesn't matter whether dorian was white, black, pink or purple.
If the visuals do not corroborate with the incredible scores, that person is overrated. period.
Reverse-discrimination + insecurity about deep-seated racial awareness ;D ;D
-
Even in this screencap from 99 (which is more flattering than the actual pictures of that contest), Ronnie's chest is no thicker and no more striated than that shot from 95 for Dorian. I would claim that Dorian's chest was actually thicker.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=111054.0;attach=125644;image)
Dorian's chest is off the hook there, but it looks like Ronnie's covering up his lower chest with his arms- so we can't accurately guage his lower chest thickness compared to Dorian's.
-
Dorian was better conditioned and drier than Ronnie ever was.
yeah, and this showed in 10% of the muscle groups on the body... ::)
Dorian had less subcutaneous fat over his abs and lower back.
no where else:
arms - ronnie's biceps were actually striated and split. dorian;s were smooth. Triceps- Ronnie's striated, Dorian's smooth (although with great shape).
Chest - again, ronnie's is far more detailed at his peak.
Quads/glutes/hams - no contest - Ronnie's displayed far less sub epidermal fat.
Back - lower back is dorian's, upper back is even.
Delts - another easy one for Ronnie, who displayed incredible dryness and details.
So no, the bullshit about Yates being dryer and better conditioned does NOT apply to 1999 Ronnie.
May to 2001 ronnie, or 2003 Ronnie or 2006 Ronnie,
but NOT to 1999 Ronnie.
-
Dorian's chest is off the hook there, but it looks like Ronnie's covering up his lower chest with his arms- so we can't accurately guage his lower chest thickness compared to Dorian's.
maybe this will help:
-
Dorian's chest is off the hook there, but it looks like Ronnie's covering up his lower chest with his arms- so we can't accurately guage his lower chest thickness compared to Dorian's.
logical - the thing that is so upsetting about Hulkster's stance to many people is his fanatical preaching of self-proclaimed dogma that Ronnie would absolutely blow Dorian off the stage. This is simply not the case. You can post all the 99 screencaps you want, Ronnie blew away his peers - but so did Dorian in 95. And given the fact that both carried roughly the same amount of muscle with Dorian being slighly denser, it would not be a cakewalk for either.
-
maybe this will help:
Probably not the best pic to post to illustrate your claim lol.
-
or this:
(http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/1999britishgrandprix/46.jpg)
-
logical - the thing that is so upsetting about Hulkster's stance to many people is his fanatical preaching of self-proclaimed dogma that Ronnie would absolutely blow Dorian off the stage. This is simply not the case. You can post all the 99 screencaps you want, Ronnie blew away his peers - but so did Dorian in 95. And given the fact that both carried roughly the same amount of muscle with Dorian being slighly denser, it would not be a cakewalk for either.
What's also upsetting is that you posted a mm of Ronnie in 2005 to make a comparison- one of his lesser years! ???
-
or this:
(http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/1999britishgrandprix/46.jpg)
Yes, that pic is nuts. It has to be one of the freakiest sights ever in bodybuilding.
-
What's also upsetting is that you posted a mm of Ronnie in 2005 to make a comparison- one of his lesser years! ???
how many times did we have to go over this.
I can only make a comparison if I find a picture of the same pose and relatively the same angle.
I found a picture of Ronnie's 1999 MM from the IFBB website but it's too small to use for the comparison. If you have a 99 most-muscular of ronnie in the same angle as Dorian I would be glad to make a comparison. Like I said, I believe Dorian's chest fares extremely well against Ronnie at his best.
-
Yes, that pic is nuts. It has to be one of the freakiest sights ever in bodybuilding.
agreed.
-
how many times did we have to go over this.
I can only make a comparison if I find a picture of the same pose and relatively the same angle.
I found a picture of Ronnie's 1999 MM from the IFBB website but it's too small to use for the comparison. If you have a 99 most-muscular of ronnie in the same angle as Dorian I would be glad to make a comparison. Like I said, I believe Dorian's chest fares extremely well against Ronnie at his best.
Hulkster, I'm sure you can dig out a MM from 2003 of Ronnie to help pobrecito out ;D
-
how many times did we have to go over this.
I can only make a comparison if I find a picture of the same pose and relatively the same angle.
I found a picture of Ronnie's 1999 MM from the IFBB website but it's too small to use for the comparison. If you have a 99 most-muscular of ronnie in the same angle as Dorian I would be glad to make a comparison. Like I said, I believe Dorian's chest fares extremely well against Ronnie at his best.
(http://www.mass-shop.hu/belso_kepek/arnold/galeria/coleman_mostmuscular.jpg)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/yates/dy153.jpg)
-
Post a set of pictures of a pro from a single contest that can match these from Dorian. Simply put, you cannot do this unless you use Ronnie. For as much shit as you all talk about Dorian, he and Ronnie were still well above their peers.
-
.
-
Post a set of pictures of a pro from a single contest that can match these from Dorian. Simply put, you cannot do this unless you use Ronnie. For as much shit as you all talk about Dorian, he and Ronnie were still well above their peers.
What do you think of Kevin Levrone's most muscular in his prime, pobrecito?
-
some side angle shots to help pubic out:
(http://digilander.libero.it/gruppociak/rc148.jpg)
(http://digilander.libero.it/gruppociak/rc137.jpg)
-
Hmm....if I could use one word to describe Levrone's MM it would be "inflated."
Kevin was known to use a lot of esiclene and I think it really showed - he looked huge in the most muscular, but not really dense at all - especially considering he was the same weight as Dorian in 1995.
That being said, Kevin's lower body, really never was on par with his upper body, let alone his calves.
-
Hmm....if I could use one word to describe Levrone's MM it would be "inflated."
Kevin was known to use a lot of esiclene and I think it really showed - he looked huge in the most muscular, but not really dense at all - especially considering he was the same weight as Dorian in 1995.
That being said, Kevin's lower body, really never was on par with his upper body, let alone his calves.
I know the feeling you're talking about- that does hold for certain years. There are a few pics around from his best showings (eg 99 English GP) that show him with density. true, though, the one thing that does jump out at you with Dorian- probably moreso than his size- is just how much like a shaped piece of granite he resembles.
And Kevin's lower body was only sub-par post-2000 or so. He was really known for amazing wheels in the mid-90s.
-
Post a set of pictures of a pro from a single contest that can match these from Dorian. Simply put, you cannot do this unless you use Ronnie. For as much shit as you all talk about Dorian, he and Ronnie were still well above their peers.
for the rear lat spread, no, we do have to use ronnie.
but for the other shots, there are some crazy shots of both Flex and Shawn out there..
-
.
-
8)
-
dorian just cannot compete with Ronnie in the mm.
his arms, delts and chest are just not detailed and vascular enough.
-
its amazing how much more detailed Ronnie's delts are..
-
Yeah, but I'm starting to come to the conclusion that perhaps Ronnie is too separated when compared to Dorian.
Whoa, I haven't gone crazy, but what I mean is that it might harm his hardness- Dorian's trump card. Something about Dorian that he just looks grainy, hard- like a block of stone; maybe Ronnie is too separated to look like said piece of stone?
-
there is no such thing as too much seperation in bodybuilding provided that you have the shape and size to go with it.
-
your speculation does NOT hold up to the test of REALITY, since we can clearly see here that the argument that dorian probably has more musce fibre density and less subcutaneous fat is incorrect:
his arms and chest would NOT appear so watery in comparison to ronnie if he did:
the same holds true for the quads, glutes and hams.
The ONLY part of Dorian that appeared to hold less subcutaneous fat than Ronnie 99 is the lower back and abs. THATS IT.
that does not make up for the other 90% of the body.
OWNED
"Owned" ::) Well, you're wrong for several reasons. First of all, you give your opinion of where Ronnie is drier and pass it as fact. Well, in my opinion, Dorian is drier in all muscles. Secondly, I said that odds are that Dorian is carries more muscle. You conversely, just said they had the same amount and didn't give any evidence. Secondly, even if Doria had the same muscle fiber density as Ronnie, this still would mean that odds are that Dorian carried the most mass, because they even out in skeletal frame and yet Dorian is drier. Now, you said that Dorian is not drier. Well, I think that it is pretty evident that he is. Besides, Dorian could have less intra-muscular water as well. You can't get over this fact, dude. Dorian's greater hardness suggestes, overwhelmingly, that he either had more muscle fibers or less water. One of the two, or both of them. Owned. ;) 8)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
there is no such thing as too much seperation in bodybuilding provided that you have the shape and size to go with it.
No, my point is that maybe it detracts from the illusion of granite-ness which Dorian unquestionably had.
-
First of all, you give your opinion of where Ronnie is drier and pass it as fact. Well, in my opinion, Dorian is drier in all muscles
the pics support my opinion.
they do not support yours except for the two areas that I mentioned, which isn't much..
-
Whoa, I haven't gone crazy, but what I mean is that it might harm his hardness- Dorian's trump card. Something about Dorian that he just looks grainy, hard- like a block of stone; maybe Ronnie is too separated to look like said piece of stone?
Ronnie looks smooth b/c he has perfect skin while Dorian's had little bumps. It's not hard to look grainy when your skin has the texture of sandpaper.
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin3.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin8.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin4.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin7.jpg)
-
in other words, being an ugly motherfucker can help you win Mr. Olympia's!
;D
-
Ronnie looks smooth b/c he has perfect skin while Dorian's had little bumps. It's not hard to look grainy when your skin has the texture of sandpaper.
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin3.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin8.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin4.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin7.jpg)
this is very true.
compare complexion:
(http://www.bigroncoleman.com/media/Arnold.05_LG.jpg)
-
compare skin: no bacne on Ronnie 8)
(http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/ronnie-coleman-2001-arnold-classic/32.jpg)
-
That's interesting- you don't think it's the quality of the muscle pushing through the skin? Those black and white shots, for instance. He had the granite appearance on the front- on his legs, too if I'm not mistaken. Yet I'm sure he didn't have acne there.
-
That's interesting- you don't think it's the quality of the muscle pushing through the skin? Those black and white shots, for instance. He had the granite appearance on the front- on his legs, too if I'm not mistaken. Yet I'm sure he didn't have acne there.
no, its not the quality of the muscle pushing through the skin.
the ugly acne is there, in full force, you just have to look close:
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/yates/dy161.jpg)
-
the now famous acne:
-
Yeah, post the front lat spread from that series. I'd upload it but I don't know how.
-
(http://digilander.libero.it/mikementzer/Yates19.jpg)
-
(http://digilander.libero.it/mikementzer/Yates19.jpg)
Thanks. How can that be acne?
-
Thanks. How can that be acne?
well, since I am not a dermatologist (I am a gynecologist by training), acne may not be the right term.
but it is bumps and blemishes on the skin.
-
Thanks. How can that be acne?
you can still see the little bumps if you look closely but nevertheless, I'm not sure what you're refering to in the pic. He appears to be smooth and puffy. Just look at his left arm. It seems like you could push it in if you wanted.
-
Yeah, how do I upload pics from my machine?
-
you can still see the little bumps if you look closely but nevertheless, I'm not sure what you're refering to in the pic. He appears to be smooth and puffy. Just look at his left arm. It seems like you could push it in if you wanted.
dorian's arms, quads and delts often looked smooth and puffy:
(http://)
its something that the nuthuggers ingnore in their attempt to justify how hard and dry dorian was ::)
In reality, Ronnie 99 was harder overall - arms quads, chest glutes hams, you name it.
-
That's interesting- you don't think it's the quality of the muscle pushing through the skin? Those black and white shots, for instance. He had the granite appearance on the front- on his legs, too if I'm not mistaken. Yet I'm sure he didn't have acne there.
The black & white shots are recycled endlessly, because they exaggerate the remaining definition had after blowing up on that drug cocktail. There are no similar color shots of him like that, for good reason-he didn't look as good with color that revealed the loss of definition.
-
The black & white shots are recycled endlessly, because they exaggerate the remaining definition had after blowing up on that drug cocktail. There are no similar color shots of him like that, for good reason-he didn't look as good with color that revealed the loss of definition.
-
Great post. !
-
Great post. !
hardly. that mm is horrible. other than the bit of detail in his right pec, he is smooth everywhere else:
-
hardly. that mm is horrible. other than the bit of detail in his right pec, he is smooth everywhere else:
arguing with you is pointless.
Dorian stands up very well to Ronnie in any pose.
-
yeah if Ronnie is 42 ::)
-
That bottom comparison has Ronnie from 99 or 2000 and Yates is still holding even, or even defeating Coleman. You are nothing but a bag of excuses.
-
That bottom comparison has Ronnie from 99 or 2000 and Yates is still holding even, or even defeating Coleman. You are nothing but a bag of excuses.
yeah right. put that same ronnie shot in great lighting like dorian's shot and its game over.
notice if you look closely you can see every detail in that shot as you can in the 99 contest shots.
its all there.
-
yeah right. put that same ronnie shot in great lighting like dorian's shot and its game over.
notice if you look closely you can see every detail in that shot as you can in the 99 contest shots.
its all there.
It's no surprise, you come up with yet another excuse.
-
It's no surprise, you come up with yet another excuse.
its not an excuse you retard. its an observation.
that shot of Ronnie is from a guest posing exhibition with lighting so bad you can barely see anything. and yet if you look close you can still see vascularity and lots of detail in his pecs delts and arms.
put this contest shot against dorian's side contest shot and see how well he does ::)
-
'93 Yates & '06 Coleman's close. ;D
-
its not an excuse you retard. its an observation.
that shot of Ronnie is from a guest posing exhibition with lighting so bad you can barely see anything. and yet if you look close you can still see vascularity and lots of detail in his pecs delts and arms.
put this contest shot against dorian's side contest shot and see how well he does ::)
No need to get hostile hulkster. If I recall correctly, you were the one who posted that picture for me to put in the comparison, and now you scold me for it ??? ::)
-
its not an excuse you retard. its an observation.
that shot of Ronnie is from a guest posing exhibition with lighting so bad you can barely see anything. and yet if you look close you can still see vascularity and lots of detail in his pecs delts and arms.
put this contest shot against dorian's side contest shot and see how well he does ::)
Hulkster you are the last and I mean absolute last person who ever has a right to complain about comparing bad pictures seriously , you perfected this ' tool ' well before the truce thread ever started , you posted a picture of a 228 pound Dorian and a 260 pound Ronnie doing pull ups and the proceeded to claim that Ronnie owns him in the back ::) seriously man you complaining about that is off-limits.
-
the pics support my opinion.
they do not support yours except for the two areas that I mentioned, which isn't much..
You made the assertion that Ronnie 1999 carried as much mass as Dorian, and the bottom line is that you failed utterly to substantiate that. My contention is that odds are that Dorian carried more mass. Even if their frames were of equal weights, Dorian woulds still carry the most mass.
Now, you argued that Dorian wasn't drier than Ronnie. Since you said that as prima fasce evidence that Ronnie carried as much mass as Dorian, and since your entire argument is based on this assumption, I expect you to prove it. Based on visual evidence, it is clear that Dorian was drier overrall. Youa rgue that he's only drier in the lower back and abs. Ok: prove it. Odds are that Dorian was drier overrall, and this would prove that my contention is correct.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Youa rgue that he's only drier in the lower back and abs. Ok: prove it.
gladly:
lets start at the top:
who has drier arms?
Ronnie easily. everyone can see that:
-
gladly:
lets start at the top:
who has drier arms?
Ronnie easily. everyone can see that:
lmfao drier arms? ::) oh jesus
-
forgot the tris:
Ronnie's are striated. Dorian's are not.
check out the dryess of Ronnie's arm from the front too
-
forgot the tris:
Ronnie's are striated. Dorian's are not.
check out the dryess of Ronnie's arm from the front too
check out the film of water covering his tricep look at a bone dry tricep ;)
-
moving on to chest:
again, Ronnie easily
-
check out the film of water covering his tricep look at a bone dry tricep ;)
LOL its as smooth as a baby's ass!
-
LOL its as smooth as a baby's ass!
man you're beyond my help , you have much to learn. :-\
-
time for the quads:
again, easy win for ronnie.
Dorian is not holding up well to 99 Ronnie's detail and dryness.
(http://www.musclememory.com/magCovers/fl/fl1311.jpg)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/mro/yates/dy183.jpg)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=79967;image)
(http://forum.bodybuildingpro.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=1647&stc=1)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?PHPSESSID=0276dea3dd5703b7ca1d3b09c1aa07f8&action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=77821;image)
(http://www.bodybuildingpro.com/1999britishgrandprix/52.jpg)
-
forgot to post this Ronnie 99 chest shot.
I know the dorian fans don't like to have their myth debunked, but Ronnie 99 was drier than Dorian.
just look at that grainyness and detail :P :):
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=76821;image)
-
back time.
now, of course dorian has less water in the lower back than anyone.
but the upper back Ronnie can match.surpass him:
-
sorry yates fans, but more Ronnie dominating in the chest dryness department:
-
time for hams and glutes:
another easy win for Coleman:
-
might as well look at deltoid dryness while we are at it:
again, easy win for ronnie in this area:
dorian's chest doesn't look bad in this shot, but its not up to Ronnie's level quite yet.
-
Lee Priest
HOW DO YOU FEEL DORIAN WOULD FAIR AGAINST RONNIE COLEMAN NOW?
I think Dorian at his best (1993) would easily beat Ronnie. Dorian might not be as symmetrical as Ronnie, but all over he was more complete and in better condition at his best.
more complete and in better condition . ;)
-
there you go sucky.
you wanted proof?
you got it.
-
and all ND can do is resort back to his quotes... ::)
-
and all ND can do is resort back to his quotes... ::)
From someone who was there lol from someone who competed with them both at their bests , now who should we believe? Hmmmmmmmmmm this is a hard one ..........Hulkster who claimed Dorian's conditioning was a myth in 1993 or Lee Priest who was actually there lol no contest.
-
From someone who was there lol from someone who competed with them both at their bests , now who should we believe? Hmmmmmmmmmm this is a hard one ..........Hulkster who claimed Dorian's conditioning was a myth in 1993 or Lee Priest who was actually there lol no contest.
oh its not a myth. dorian WAS greatly conditioned in 93.
But this was 1999 we are talking about. The sport progressed and Ronnie was dryer overall.
its all right there for the world to see.
If dorian was really drier than Ronnie why is it that I could post all that I just did>
answer: because Dorian was NOT as dry.
-
oh its not a myth. dorian WAS greatly conditioned in 93.
But this was 1999 we are talking about. The sport progressed and Ronnie was dryer overall.
its all right there for the world to see.
If dorian was really drier than Ronnie why is it that I could post all that I just did>
answer: because Dorian was NOT as dry.
lol
Dorian has the type of physique that looks much better and more powerfull in person than photos. I personally saw him onstage , and Yates if definitely light years ahead of the way he looks in photos.
He's huge , absolutely HUGE ...he's ripped completely RIPPED. And while he's not in possession of the prettiest physique body by a long shot , he's equipped with all the bodyparts you need to win .
Combine this with the fact that he's 10 TIMES more impressive when you see him onstage at the Olympia than he is in pictures or on videos and you got yourself a winner.
Lee Priest
HOW DO YOU FEEL DORIAN WOULD FAIR AGAINST RONNIE COLEMAN NOW?
I think Dorian at his best (1993) would easily beat Ronnie. Dorian might not be as symmetrical as Ronnie, but all over he was more complete and in better condition at his best.
You make it so easy. ;)
-
LOL
this is ND's strategy.
when faced with a barrage of shots showing that Ronnie 99 was in fact dryer over most of the body than Dorian Yates,
his only strategy to refute this is to run back to a quote from Lee Preist... ::)
Admit it ND: ronnie was dryer in all areas with the exception of the lower back and abs.
All the quotes from Lee Preist are not going to change reality.
It wont erase the proof.
-
I believe 99 Ronnie and 93 Dorian had the same conditioning. Dorian may have been just a tad bit dryer, but not by much. Ronnie appears to hold more water in his midsection and lower back, while Dorian holds more water in his arms and quads. Thus, both physiques looked different but achieved the same conditioning.
-
I believe 99 Ronnie and 93 Dorian had the same conditioning. Dorian may have been just a tad bit dryer, but not by much. Ronnie appears to hold more water in his midsection and lower back, while Dorian holds more water in his arms and quads. Thus, both physiques looked different but achieved the same conditioning.
Dorian's NOT hold water anywhere period. Ronnie is.
-
Dorian's NOT hold water anywhere period. Ronnie is.
that's what you think. I find it hard to believe a man who is regarded by many to have the best conditioning could have such playdoey-looking arms.
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin1.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYatesFaDorianYatesFatBelly2.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/1995Mr-12.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates77a.jpg)
-
that's what you think. I find it hard to believe a man who is regarded by many to have the best conditioning could have such playdoey-looking arms.
It can't be coincidence all Coleman fans are ignorant it just can't. Yates never held water .
-
Holding water shouldn't be mistaken for the application of possibly too much oil and shining in the glare of the stage lights, like that last Dorian pic.
But just quoting Lee Priest like he's the holder of the truth is kinda weird ND ;D
-
Holding water shouldn't be mistaken for the application of possibly too much oil and shining in the glare of the stage lights, like that last Dorian pic.
I tried to explain this concept to the Dorian nuthuggers. If Ronnie had less posing oil and the stage lights weren't so bright, he would look just like Dorian in this comparison. However, the Dorian nuthuggers claim that he looks waterlogged in the pic.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=125236;image)
-
who cares who's bigger ? colemans 98 size, shape and condition is unmatched by any olympia
-
will you guys please combine this thread with the million page thread so as not to pollute this board even more with this stupid fucking debate?
-
Holding water shouldn't be mistaken for the application of possibly too much oil and shining in the glare of the stage lights, like that last Dorian pic.
But just quoting Lee Priest like he's the holder of the truth is kinda weird ND ;D
Well Priest had a prospective which I didn't and he competed against both of them so when push comes to shove I'll take his word over someone who claims Dorian is the most overrated bodybuilder of all time.
-
Well Priest had a prospective which I didn't and he competed against both of them so when push comes to shove I'll take his word over someone who claims Dorian is the most overrated bodybuilder of all time.
well what about Flex Wheeler and paul dillett?
they boith competed against both of them and both of them say Ronnie is the greatest ever.
what do you think of that?
-
that's what you think. I find it hard to believe a man who is regarded by many to have the best conditioning could have such playdoey-looking arms.
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates-BadSkin1.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYatesFaDorianYatesFatBelly2.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/1995Mr-12.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/DorianYates77a.jpg)
bingo.
the claim that dorian was dryer than ronnie 99 is not valid...um...no matter what Lee Preist might say...uhh... :-\
Notice ND does not try and dispute the proof because the proof is right there and clear to everyone., he just goes to the lord and savoir for advice, Lee. A. Preist... :-\
-
It can't be coincidence all Coleman fans are ignorant it just can't. Yates never held water .
LOL Yates never held water?
its amazing how closeminded you have become to reality.
-
After years and endless threads about this debate one thing I notice,
Ronnie supporters post pics of both guys at thier respective peaks of Coleman wasting Yates and laugh at how comical this whole thing is
Dorian supporters then defend him with mismatched pics of Dorian at his best and Bad shots of Ron.
If you take the absolute BEST pics and put them side by side Ronnie is the clear winner
-
well what about Flex Wheeler and paul dillett?
they boith competed against both of them and both of them say Ronnie is the greatest ever.
what do you think of that?
Well, yeah- what do you say to this ND?
-
After years and endless threads about this debate one thing I notice,
Ronnie supporters post pics of both guys at thier respective peaks of Coleman wasting Yates and laugh at how comical this whole thing is
Dorian supporters then defend him with mismatched pics of Dorian at his best and Bad shots of Ron.
If you take the absolute BEST pics and put them side by side Ronnie is the clear winner
excellent observation.
-
will you guys please combine this thread with the million page thread so as not to pollute this board even more with this stupid fucking debate?
Willie with standards..hahahahahhaha haha
-
well what about Flex Wheeler and paul dillett?
they boith competed against both of them and both of them say Ronnie is the greatest ever.
what do you think of that?
Ya but they're not white. ;D
-
After years and endless threads about this debate one thing I notice,
Ronnie supporters post pics of both guys at thier respective peaks of Coleman wasting Yates and laugh at how comical this whole thing is
Dorian supporters then defend him with mismatched pics of Dorian at his best and Bad shots of Ron.
If you take the absolute BEST pics and put them side by side Ronnie is the clear winner
That was already done around page 489. That page effectively ended the thread.:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=69359.12200
Didn't stop the maniacs; they fumbled around for a while, then resumed as if nothing had happened:
-
well what about Flex Wheeler and paul dillett?
they boith competed against both of them and both of them say Ronnie is the greatest ever.
what do you think of that?
Flex said if he never retired he would own more than ONE of Ronnie's Sandows what do you think of that? ;)
-
After years and endless threads about this debate one thing I notice,
Ronnie supporters post pics of both guys at thier respective peaks of Coleman wasting Yates and laugh at how comical this whole thing is
Dorian supporters then defend him with mismatched pics of Dorian at his best and Bad shots of Ron.
If you take the absolute BEST pics and put them side by side Ronnie is the clear winner
Man you couldn't be any more wrong lol look no further than pumptser almost every single one of his comparisons are slanted heavily , Hulkster , Neo etc all are guilty of this and I've followed suit to show how ridiculous it is , for you to claim the contrary shows you really haven't paid any attention to the whole thread.
-
Flex said if he never retired he would own more than ONE of Ronnie's Sandows what do you think of that? ;)
I think nothing of it.
The only thing that counts with me is comparable pics and videos when both guys are hitting (Fully!) the same pose.
When you do that it is hilarious how bad Ronnie owns Dorian. Not that I think Dorian Sucks. i actually think he's a great BBer, but Ronnie is just better. Sorry :P
-
I think nothing of it.
The only thing that counts with me is comparable pics and videos when both guys are hitting (Fully!) the same pose.
When you do that it is hilarious how bad Ronnie owns Dorian. Not that I think Dorian Sucks. i actually think he's a great BBer, but Ronnie is just better. Sorry :P
I have no problem with your opinion at least you admit Yates was great ! and I disagree with your opinion obviously. :)
-
the only thing that counts for ND is what Lee Preist says... :-\
-
the only thing that counts for ND is what Lee Preist says... :-\
Not just what he says lol Peter McGoughs , Samir Bannouts , Ronnie Coleman , Lee Haney , Flex Wheeler , Paul Dillett , Milos Sarcev , Mike Christian , Mike Quinn , Mike Mattarazo , Kevin Horton , IFBB judge Roger Schwab , Jim Rockell , Jim Manion , need I continue? couple that with videos , statistics , facts , figures , firsthand accounts , magazine reviews , hundreds of pictures and you have an all around argument . ;)
-
there you go sucky.
you wanted proof?
you got it.
Hulkster, try to understand this: Ronnie does not look drier on any of the pics you posted. None. Even if he were drier de facto - extremely unlikely -, the fact is that he doesen't look the part. You are confusing striations with dryness; they are two completely different things. When the amount of sub-cutaneous water is small, the bodybuilder's muscles acquire a hard, stony look to them...like Dorian. In these pics, you must admit Dorian is much drier than Ronnie ever was, even if yout think that Ronnie is better. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Hulkster, try to understand this: Ronnie does not look drier on any of the pics you posted. None. Even if he were drier de facto - extremely unlikely -, the fact is that he doesen't look the part. You are confusing striations with dryness; they are two completely different things. When the amount of sub-cutaneous water is small, the bodybuilder's muscles acquire a hard, stony look to them...like Dorian. In these pics, you must admit Dorian is much drier than Ronnie ever was, even if yout think that Ronnie is better. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
sucky he doesn't know what he;s talking about , this is the same guy who said Ronnie has better balance and proportion than Dorian , every once in a while he goes off the deep end and makes outrageous claims , Dorian's conditioning is legendary I honestly can't think of another bodybuilder who has matched his size and dryness I really can't.
-
Man you couldn't be any more wrong lol look no further than pumptser almost every single one of his comparisons are slanted heavily , Hulkster , Neo etc all are guilty of this
Major BS again - here are the best pics, posted pg. 489:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=69359.12200
-
Major BS again - here are the best pics, posted pg. 498:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=69359.12200
Be honest for a change 99% of your comparisons are garbage its Yates 94/97 like Hulkster you fear great shots of Dorian for a reason , I mean be honest , seriously.
-
sucky he doesn't know what he;s talking about , this is the same guy who said Ronnie has better balance and proportion than Dorian , every once in a while he goes off the deep end and makes outrageous claims , Dorian's conditioning is legendary I honestly can't think of another bodybuilder who has matched his size and dryness I really can't.
You know what? I have estimated that, altogether, I've debated this topic with them for almost two thousand pages and have written roughly five thousand paragraphs on the subject. For what? They continue to spill out their insanity. :-\ But I will continue to debate them en absurdum because I won't allow the name of a great champion to be thrown in the mud like that.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Be honest for a change 99% of your comparisons are garbage its Yates 94/97 like Hulkster you fear great shots of Dorian for a reason , I mean be honest , seriously.
Just anothe meaningless backpeddle. Can't handle the truth hahaahahahahahahah
-
sucky he doesn't know what he;s talking about , this is the same guy who said Ronnie has better balance and proportion than Dorian , every once in a while he goes off the deep end and makes outrageous claims , Dorian's conditioning is legendary I honestly can't think of another bodybuilder who has matched his size and dryness I really can't.
ND talking to SUCKY of all people about common sense = DESPERATE.. ;D
-
ND talking to SUCKY of all people about common sense = DESPERATE.. ;D
Almost as desperate as claiming a 410 powerrod bench press for 15 consecutive reps huh? lol ;)
-
ND talking to SUCKY of all people about common sense = DESPERATE.. ;D
Like the common sense you display while formulating your conspiracy the theories? You know, the ones about how a foreign White guy was given the Sandow even though most fans are Americans, and also despite the fact that giving the Sandow to a White guy is not as politically correct as giving it to a Black one? ::):P
Poopster, why do you keep trying? You know I own you everytime we argue, so why do you insist on it ??? Maybe you have mascochistic tendencies? Maybe you enjoy being another man's woman? :-X
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Like the common sense you display while formulating your conspiracy the theories? You know, the ones about how a foreign White guy was given the Sandow even though most fans are Americans, and also despite the fact that giving the Sandow to a White guy is not as politically correct as giving it to a Black one? ::):P
Poopster, why do you keep trying? You know I own you everytime we argue, so why do you insist on it ??? Maybe you have mascochistic tendencies? Maybe you enjoy being another man's woman? :-X
SUCKMYMUSCLE
He gets owned by everyone lol I don't feel bad for him anymore because he's asks for it ! he absolutely hates that I outed him as a devote of the Bow Flex
-
Hey pumpy no kidding around did you know that there was a recall on the Bow Flex in 2004 ? we wouldn't want it to break on you , then again maybe we do lol
-
Dorian's conditioning is legendary I honestly can't think of another bodybuilder who has matched his size and dryness I really can't.
then you are stupid 8)
-
You are confusing striations with dryness; they are two completely different things.
yes but you cannot have the level of detail/striations that Ronnie displayed in 99 and be holding water.
it just doesn't work that way.
Ronnie was so detailed he looks like an anatomy chart:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=76821;image)
other than the lower back and abs, you really can't say Dorian has that same look.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=79967;image)
hence, ronnie appears like he has no skin.
dorian appears like he has skin but that he looks more statue like.
Most would say that supreme detail conveys dryness better than the statue type look.
-
yes but you cannot have the level of detail/striations that Ronnie displayed in 99 and be holding water.
it just doesn't work that way.
Ronnie was so detailed he looks like an anatomy chart:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=76821;image)
other than the lower back and abs, you really can't say Dorian has that same look.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=69359.0;attach=79967;image)
hence, ronnie appears like he has no skin.
dorian appears like he has skin but that he looks more statue like.
Most would say that supreme detail conveys dryness better than the statue type look.
This is another one of your terrible comparisons that was a picture I scanned and it was very small in the magazine and when you resize it the quality suffers and it was in color and I changed it to B & W , Hulkster you simply don't know what you're talking about , one can have striations and still be carrying water , you really don't have a clue. ;)
-
yes but you cannot have the level of detail/striations that Ronnie displayed in 99 and be holding water.
it just doesn't work that way.
the Dorian nuthuggers don't seem to comprehend this.
-
Flex said if he never retired he would own more than ONE of Ronnie's Sandows what do you think of that? ;)
ND you know that doesn't mean anything. He could have won 2000-2002, 2004, 2005- 5 of them- but it still wouldn't change the fact that he thought peak Ronnie (what's being debated) was the best ever.
-
the Dorian nuthuggers don't seem to comprehend this.
No you're mistaken Flex had striations & detail in 1993 yet he was still holding some water.
-
ND you know that doesn't mean anything. He could have won 2000-2002, 2004, 2005- 5 of them- but it still wouldn't change the fact that he thought peak Ronnie (what's being debated) was the best ever.
He could have won in 1998/99/01/03/06 under the right set of circumstances , Flex at his best is capable of beating anyone in my opinion.
-
No you're mistaken Flex had striations & detail in 1993 yet he was still holding some water.
no shit, but do you agree that Flex would have even more detail if he was better conditioned? You don't achieve the level of striations and separations Ronnie displayed without insane conditioning.
-
He could have won in 1998/99/01/03/06 under the right set of circumstances , Flex at his best is capable of beating anyone in my opinion.
ND, you keep posting red herrings lol. The matter in contention is not whether he could have beaten Ronnie or not (anyway, Flex has more than his fair share of flaws); it's simply what you make of his and Dillet's comments about Ronnie.
-
no shit, but do you agree that Flex would have more detail if he was better conditioned? You don't achieve the level of striations and separations Ronnie displayed without insane conditioning.
I'm not saying Ronnie's conditioning wasn't great in 1999 its fantastic especially compared to 2003 but as far as being better than Dorian's 1993 no way.
-
ND, you keep posting red herrings lol. The matter in contention is not whether he could have beaten Ronnie or not (anyway, Flex has more than his fair share of flaws); it's simply what you make of his and Dillet's comments about Ronnie.
its an opinion like mine like everyone elses it carries more weight than mine for obvious reasons but I have posted conflicting quotes in the end its just an opinion.
-
its an opinion like mine like everyone elses it carries more weight than mine for obvious reasons but I have posted conflicting quotes in the end its just an opinion.
Would you give theirs more or less weight than Lee Priest?
-
Would you give theirs more or less weight than Lee Priest?
well less because Priests' supports my claim lol
-
well less because Priests' supports my claim lol
LOL monster honesty ;D
-
yes but you cannot have the level of detail/striations that Ronnie displayed in 99 and be holding water.
it just doesn't work that way.
This is incorrect. Separations are mostly enhanced by losing fat, not subcutaneous water, and the capacity to show separations varies in different bodybuilders. What this means is that Ronnie could have incredible separations while still holding a significant amount of subcutaneous water.
Conversely, it is impossible to have a stony look an still be retaining water. When you have edema your muscles look bloated. My contention is that the stony look is a better indication of the amount of sub-cutaneous water because there are bodybuilders who display better separations than other bodybuilders even when their conditioning is off. Conversely, when a muscle looks dry, it usually is. ;)
Ronnie was so detailed he looks like an anatomy chart:
But Dorian looked like an anatomy chart etched in stone! Again, Ronnie might have more separations overrall, but this is immaterial to evaluating the amount of subcutaneous water.
other than the lower back and abs, you really can't say Dorian has that same look.
Again with the lower back and abs shit. Says who? You. ::)
hence, ronnie appears like he has no skin.
Hmmm...but granite statues don't have skin either! ;)
dorian appears like he has skin but that he looks more statue like.
Most would say that supreme detail conveys dryness better than the statue type look.
No, it doesen't. There are bodybuilders who never display incredible separations even whn dehydrated to an inch of their lives. Hence, your argument is stupid. Separations are only enhanced up to a point by dehydration, and some bodybuilders with more subcutaneous water display more separations than others with less. ;)
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
This is another one of your terrible comparisons that was a picture I scanned and it was very small in the magazine and when you resize it the quality suffers and it was in color and I changed it to B & W , Hulkster you simply don't know what you're talking about , one can have striations and still be carrying water , you really don't have a clue. ;)
ND when are you going to be smart enough to know than dorian's most musclar NEVER had anywhwere near Ronnie's level of shape and detail in the arms, chest and quads.
it doesn't matter which pic you choose, they are ALL THE SAME:
::)
-
ND when are you going to be smart enough to know than dorian's most musclar NEVER had anywhwere near Ronnie's level of shape and detail in the arms, chest and quads.
it doesn't matter which pic you choose, they are ALL THE SAME:
::)
Hulkster when are you going to be smart enough to know that Ronnie's most muscular NEVER had anywhere neat Dorian's level of balance & proportion , density and thickness ?
Dorian's chest is just as shapely and detailed as Ronnies and thicker , his arms are detailed , how can you have a complete pose with NO calves see how much calves add to this pose? Oh no you wouldn't because Ronnie has none , keep picking what you think looks like a better pose and omit other criteria , it shows your ignorance of the criteria.
-
Hulkster when are you going to be smart enough to know that Ronnie's most muscular NEVER had anywhere neat Dorian's level of balance & proportion , density and thickness ?
Dorian's chest is just as shapely and detailed as Ronnies and thicker , his arms are detailed , how can you have a complete pose with NO calves see how much calves add to this pose? Oh no you wouldn't because Ronnie has none , keep picking what you think looks like a better pose and omit other criteria , it shows your ignorance of the criteria.
if any of what you said was true you would not be the laughing stock of getbig.
everyone on this board except you and two others knows that ronnie 99 was on whole other plane of existance.
-
if any of what you said was true you would not be the laughing stock of getbig.
everyone on this board except you and two others knows that ronnie 99 was on whole other plane of existance.
LOL still pushing the " more people agree with me " argument , it doesn't matter and you pick the criteria that fits Ronnie the best dismiss the criteria that fits Dorian then best and declare victory , you're looking at Ronnie with a fans eyes NOT the judges eyes , Ronnie meets some of the criteria Dorian meets others , for all your babbling you can't escape this.
-
LOL still pushing the " more people agree with me " argument , it doesn't matter and you pick the criteria that fits Ronnie the best dismiss the criteria that fits Dorian then best and declare victory , you're looking at Ronnie with a fans eyes NOT the judges eyes , Ronnie meets some of the criteria Dorian meets others , for all your babbling you can't escape this.
Maybe more of the judges agree with him than you ???
-
Maybe more of the judges agree with him than you ???
probably true.
only a drunk and high judge would ever award 93 dorian over 99 ronnie.