Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Iceman1981 on February 02, 2007, 07:48:18 PM
-
........Found this pic on another board. I did not photoshop it. Someone else did.
-
You can really see Arnold's superior shape from that.
-
You can really see Arnold's superior shape from that.
Big time!
-
Arnold looks like a tank. The small legs on Ronnie really make his upperbody look bad.
-
Looks very awkward.
-
Good Photoshop job. But what is this meant to prove? ???
-
How come you gave Arnold, Ronnie's trunks, but you let Ronnie keep his own trunks? ;D
-
I didn't do the photoshop. I found the pic on bb.com.
-
that just looks stupid, Ronnie looks funny with smaller legs.
-
hahaha Arnold completely dominates Coleman.
-
shit.....Arnolds arms were massive for his time
-
Ask Ronnie to do a vacuum while holding up a double bi. Wait, no, just ask Ronnie to do a vaccum...
-
arnold was great with his real legs ,his upper body was amazing ,his legs were the best in his best era 1970-1975.ripped,size,charisma ,that's why arnold is arnold
-
Good job on ruining Arnolds Physique.
Huge Legs Never make a physique look good.
-
........
awesome pic.this shows how perfect arnolds upper body was and how shitty ronnies upper body is..awesome comparison
-
Good job on ruining Arnolds Physique.
Huge Legs Never make a physique look good.
(http://bodybuilding_workout.home.insightbb.com/trainingarticles/build_massive_legs/munzer2.jpg)
This comment makes my blood boil!
Legs are incredibly difficult to build...
-
(http://bodybuilding_workout.home.insightbb.com/trainingarticles/build_massive_legs/munzer2.jpg)
This comment makes my blood boil!
Legs are incredibly difficult to build...
thats a shitty pi of munzer..post a better one stupid
-
LMFAO....Ronnie looks like shit compared to Arnold in that pic.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139703;image)
-
LMFAO....Ronnie looks like shit compared to Arnold in that pic.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139703;image)
Ronnie looks fat......oh and the shadow is gay..
-
Ronnie looks fat......oh and the shadow is gay..
ANOTHER SHADOWS NUT SWINGING FANS.. :-*
-
Arnold looks good there.If his legs were just a bit smaller it would be perfect.
-
ANOTHER SHADOWS NUT SWINGING FANS.. :-*
Fan...Nah, I just think your an idiot.
-
Fan...Nah, I just think your an idiot.
that why you keep replying to my posts :-* :-*
-
Fan...Nah, I just think your an idiot.
hahahaha good answer
-
Good job on ruining Arnolds Physique.
Huge Legs Never make a physique look good.
thats why you dont train them
-
thats why you dont train them
Hey Bitchtits, what are you saying don't train legs?
-
Hey Bitchtits, what are you saying don't train legs?
This is the same guy who says forearms don't matter ::)
-
yep - i knew it. looks disgusting, i think its that particular pic. i always thought arnolds legs looked great, they were in proporition to the rest of his body, despite many ppl think theyre ''chicken legs'' certainly, they may be compared to the top competitors. there was a time, when ronnie legs looked good - in 1998
also, i think that is a particular bad photo of coleman, if not the worst...his face, chest, legs, everything just looks horrible and is not pleasing to look at. maybe forearms and lats are good, but thats it for me!
-
This is the same guy who says forearms don't matter ::)
I could just see this guy in the gym, Mr. bench press and curls every day...
-
I could just see this guy in the gym, Mr. bench press and curls every day...
I doubt it... he is on here all the time.Has about 50 accounts.
-
hahaha Arnold completely dominates Coleman.
Even WITH photoshopping. Arnold was/is that much of a bad-ass. 8)
-
Very interesting comparison and well done whoever did it. It really shows how much better Arnold's upper body was. Because Arnold looks good with both sets of legs yet Ronnie looks totally out of proportion with zero taper with the smaller set of legs.
-
Arnold fucking crushes him in that pic without the shop!
-
thats probably the worst ronnies ever looked. why dont you post a good pic of ronnie for a fair comparison.
-
Wait until Hulkster sees these pictures.
-
Arnold fucking crushes him in that pic without the shop!
agreed. ronnie never ever looked worse than he did at that show.
however, put arnold and ronnie onstage at their bests, and Ahhnold would be crushed.
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m1.jpg)
-
here is a neat comparison - almost the same pose:
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/a2b.jpg)
-
here is a neat comparison - almost the same pose:
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/a2b.jpg)
ronnie looks like a midget next to arnold..arnold is 6.2 and your boy is 5.11..go fig
-
........Found this pic on another board. I did not photoshop it. Someone else did.
LOL that's a great photo. Ronnie loks so funny. It really points out two things:
1. Arnold's legs in 1975 were WAAAY below par (see 1974 for Arnold with good legs). But his tiny waist helped mask that.
2. Ronnie's waist is horribly wide. Arnold has much, much better shape.
-
Hulkster always finds the best picture of Ronnie, and the worst of whomever he compares him to!
-
Hulkster always finds the best picture of Ronnie, and the worst of whomever he compares him to!
you think those are bad pics of Arnold? ::)
-
:)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery3/m192.jpg)
(http://digilander.libero.it/mrolympia2/rc80.jpg)
-
:)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery3/m192.jpg)
(http://digilander.libero.it/mrolympia2/rc80.jpg)
arnold looks better..next question
-
two classic shots:
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)(http://www.ronniecoleman.net/bwcoleman0edecbab.jpg)
-
two classic shots:
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)(http://www.ronniecoleman.net/bwcoleman0edecbab.jpg)
ARNOLD LOOKS BETTER...NEXT QUESTION
-
How come you gave Arnold, Ronnie's trunks, but you let Ronnie keep his own trunks? ;D
Because he is a homo and wanted to see arnold in a thong BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
-
ARNOLD LOOKS BETTER...NEXT QUESTION
but why?
although Arnold had a GREAT back, he of course, would have had a lot of trouble against Ronnie :)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery10/ar93.jpg)
-
LOL that's a great photo. Ronnie loks so funny. It really points out two things:
1. Arnold's legs in 1975 were WAAAY below par (see 1974 for Arnold with good legs). But his tiny waist helped mask that.
2. Ronnie's waist is horribly wide. Arnold has much, much better shape.
arnold never had a tiny waist...actually ronnie has (had) a smaller waist than arnold....but ronnie has a gut...which arnold never did. arnold was a clever poser he would always twist his upper torso when posing thus making his waist look smaller.
im not getting into who was best etc....all i will say is that an arnold competing nowdays would have been a fucking tank.
-
you really can't compare them in all honesty - two different eras.
Ronnie, with modern 'technology' has arms that make the 1975 Arnold's look smooth:
so its not really fair:
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m47.jpg)
-
Case and point. Unfavorable back shot or Arnie, from a bad angle, further away. Clearly not a good picture of Arnold. Against a shot of Ronnie at his best, dead on angle, with modern technology used to snap a very detailed picture.
The pictures you posted above show Arnie looking pretty much just as good if not better then Ronnie 30 years ago.
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)
(http://www.ronniecoleman.net/bwcoleman0edecbab.jpg)
Edit I just saw your most recent post. I agree, There is really no way to compare someone from 30 years ago to those of today. The technology alone was so inferior, it is almost impossible.
-
Arnold fucking crushes him in that pic without the shop!
Exactly.
-
Hulkster...
A lot of the times you're just biased 'cause you LOVE Ronnie, but why don't you give credit where credit is due. Forget Arnold's personality, charm, charisma, blah blah blah... he was just BETTER. Period!
Sleep on this and get back to me in the morning. :)
-
Arnold was ahead of his time, no question.
as I said, its really not fair to arnold to compare them.
I mean, Ronnie quad/glutes/hams are 30 years ahead.
they make Arnolds look like toothpics, with better cuts and shape to boot.
not to mention lat width...
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m20.jpg)
-
Arnold was ahead of his time, no question.
as I said, its really not fair to arnold to compare them.
I mean, Ronnie quad/glutes/hams are 30 years ahead.
they make Arnolds look like toothpics, with better cuts and shape to boot.
not to mention lat width...
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m20.jpg)
Ronnie has better shaped quads, if you like Turnips
I think his quad shape looks like ass.
Cuts are pretty even in those pics.
Ronnie just has size.
-
The whole thing is about "appeal" and "pleasing to the eye". And Arnold delivered. Ronnie on the other hand is... well... hell, what can one say about Ronnie? :-\
-
ARNOLD WAS THE FIRST BODYBUILDER TO BE KNOWN AS NUMERO UNO..RONNIE WASN'T..HOPE THIS HELPS
-
Arnold was ahead of his time, no question.
as I said, its really not fair to arnold to compare them.
I mean, Ronnie quad/glutes/hams are 30 years ahead.
they make Arnolds look like toothpics, with better cuts and shape to boot.
not to mention lat width...
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m20.jpg)
What's so appealing about that? Never in my life have I ever thought about even training the glutes. This must be a daily routine for you.
-
ARNOLD WAS THE FIRST BODYBUILDER TO BE KNOWN AS NUMERO UNO..RONNIE WASN'T..HOPE THIS HELPS
Yeah, 30 years ago. Arnold is great. Numero Uno for sure. But he needed to hit the squat rack a lil more to catch up with the automobiles known as Big Rons left and right quad.
-
he needed to hit the squat rack a lil more to catch up with the automobiles known as Big Rons left and right quad.
I'd rather drive a Ferrari than a mack truck.
-
Yeah, 30 years ago. Arnold is great. Numero Uno for sure. But he needed to hit the squat rack a lil more to catch up with the automobiles known as Big Rons left and right quad.
arnold was waaay ahead of his time.nobody ever had or has a chest like arnold.arnolds physiue is beyond perfect.best physiue ever.arnold is god and ronnie is his worshipper.arnold rulz
-
Yeah, 30 years ago. Arnold is great. Numero Uno for sure. But he needed to hit the squat rack a lil more to catch up with the automobiles known as Big Rons left and right quad.
and by the way arnold was a powerlifter.he squatted alot in his time
-
IN THE WORDS OF TOM PLATZ..'' I DON'T CONSIDER ARNOLD JUST A BODYBUILDER..HE IS BODYBUILDING''..SO NUFF SAID I GUESS
-
arnold was waaay ahead of his time.nobody ever had or has a chest like arnold.arnolds physiue is beyond perfect.best physiue ever.arnold is god and ronnie is his worshipper.arnold rulz
Alright alright geez. I agree Arnold was ahead of his time. I think Ronnies eight Olympias will keep him from worshipping anyone. Dont get me wrong I love Arnold. ONE of the greatest of all time. Got some gifts like Ronnie has (2001).
-
IN THE WRODS OF TOM PLATZ..'' I DON'T CONSIDER ARNOLD IS JUST A BODYBUILDER..HE IS BODYBUILDING''..SO NUFF SAID I GUESS
Take it easy.................... .
-
Alright alright geez. I agree Arnold was ahead of his time. I think Ronnies eight Olympias will keep him from worshipping anyone. Dont get me wrong I love Arnold. ONE of the greatest of all time. Got some gifts like Ronnie has (2001,2002).
FIXED
-
IN THE WORDS OF TOM PLATZ..'' I DON'T CONSIDER ARNOLD JUST A BODYBUILDER..HE IS BODYBUILDING''..SO NUFF SAID I GUESS
Ohhhhh... well then. If Tom Platz says so then that seals the deal right there. ::)
But he is right though. ;D
-
FIXED
02????????? Levrone forgot his wheels and you cant make me believe that Gunter can even hang onstage with Ronnie. Not happening. Cormier got a gift in 02 placing third. Ronnie wasnt at his best but no one on that stage that year could hang with him at 80 percent.
-
Ronnie has better shaped quads, if you like Turnips
I think his quad shape looks like ass.
Cuts are pretty even in those pics.
Ronnie just has size.
think again:
there is NO comparsion between arnold and ronnie's quads unless you are an ironager...
-
Maybe the question, "who's the greatest bodybuilding champion" needs different criteria. Considering the changes in BBing drugs, equipment and nutrition how can there be a "reasonable" comparison? Maybe someone can morph Ronnie's pic to see how he would have looked in the 60's and 70's? Same thing with ArnoldMAybe that would help.
I think part of being a great champion is how you carry yourself outside the stage and how you support the sport. I think, hands down, that Arnold made more of his opprotunities and I think he really ushered BBing into the mainstream of the 80's and early 90's. A whole industry sprang up and modern sports and coaching took notice about how to improve athletes performance. It wasn't all Arnolds credit, but a great deal was. His will and charisma took BBing to a whole new level and made people feel like going to the gym and giving a sh*t about their health was important and attainable.
Now to be fair to Ron, I think he's also a great champ in that he does what's needed to win at the level he competes. But outside of that, how does he support and represent the sport? To many people, Ronnie is the embodiment all that is WRONG with BBing. The insane amount of drugs...the pursuit of size to such extreme levels that the majority of people turn their noses up. and walk away laughing. Is that good for bbing? Is he representitive of what healthy living and regular exercise can do? Is he on the President's physical fitness team?
Nope.
Arnold was for 2 presidents and 2 govenors. Something to think about.....
Ronnie has an almost comic book physique and I think it does nothing to inspire the fat mass of American people, outside of a small group of BBing-mass-fanatics.
Im not taking away Ronnies hard work ethic. Ive seen his videos, its impressive regardless of whether he has a "look" you like, but is he "good for BBing?"
Does he carry himself as a champion and represent the way Arnold did?
-
think again:
there is NO comparsion between arnold and ronnie's quads unless you are an ironager...
Like I said, if you like turnips.
Why is it so hard for you to understand not everyone likes Ronnie's bodyparts?
Is that inconceivable to you?
His quads look ridiculous compared to his calves to, not to mention the odd turnip shape.
-
Maybe someone can morph Ronnie's pic to see how he would have looked in the 60's and 70's?
he probably would have looked like he did in 92-5:
all upper body, not a super wide back yet, and not so great legs.
-
Like I said, if you like turnips.
Why is it so hard for you to understand not everyone likes Ronnie's bodyparts?
Is that inconceivable to you?
His quads look ridiculous compared to his calves to, not to mention the odd turnip shape.
because these are not turnip shaped quads.
they are fantastic:
-
because these are not turnip shaped quads.
they are fantastic:
Dude, wtf. Do you not conceive that peoples opinions may differ from your own?
To me, they look ugly, shaped like turnips, with good cuts and (too) monstrous size.
-
think again:
there is NO comparsion between arnold and ronnie's quads unless you are an ironager...
Its easy, post a picture of Ron at 225. There is no comparison. 20 years prior Arnold owned him terribly at the same weight. You say There is no comparison, then post pictures of Ronnie 2 inches shorter and 20 lbs heavier. Actually since Ron is shorter post a shot of him at 220 as he is 2 inches shorter then Arnie is. Ronnie at 5 foot 11, 230 lbs would still be more muscular then Arnie at 6'1, 230 lbs.
He would be crushed with the same amount of muscle Arnie carried , the end. When Ronnie was lighter ( 220ish) he looked pretty small, for a pro. Someone post a picture of Ronnie when he was light, as hulk will track down some biased high quality shot, that makes Ronnie look better then he really was.
-
Dude, wtf. Do you not conceive that peoples opinions may differ from your own?
To me, they look ugly, shaped like turnips, with good cuts and (too) monstrous size.
then you must hate most bodybuilder's quads since most good quads are shaped like that.
its called THIGH SWEEP.
-
Coleman=............(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=35771.0;attach=136828;image)
-
then you must hate most bodybuilder's quads since most good quads are shaped like that.
its called THIGH SWEEP.
Haha.
Nice generalization.
His quads have a unique sweep, you dont see on most others.
IMO, they look shitty, like turnips.
What the fuck is your deal?
-
(http://www.bigroncoleman.com/media/1999_03LG.jpg)
its not a unique sweep. Just because other guys (like chris on the left) do not have as good as a sweep as ronnie does does not mean that ronnie's is unique.
it just means the other guys are lacking.
-
Its easy, post a picture of Ron at 225. There is no comparison. 20 years prior Arnold owned him terribly at the same weight. You say There is no comparison, then post pictures of Ronnie 2 inches shorter and 20 lbs heavier. Actually since Ron is shorter post a shot of him at 220 as he is 2 inches shorter then Arnie is. Ronnie at 5 foot 11, 230 lbs would still be more muscular then Arnie at 6'1, 230 lbs.
He would be crushed with the same amount of muscle Arnie carried , the end. When Ronnie was lighter ( 220ish) he looked pretty small, for a pro. Someone post a picture of Ronnie when he was light, as hulk will track down some biased high quality shot, that makes Ronnie look better then he really was.
I want to see a few shots of Ron at 220.
-
I want to see a few shots of Ron at 220.
why? Arnold at his peak condition was 240ish.
-
(http://www.bigroncoleman.com/media/1999_03LG.jpg)
its not a unique sweep. Just because other guys (like chris on the left) do not have as good as a sweep as ronnie does does not mean that ronnie's is unique.
it just means the other guys are lacking.
Lol.
-
why? Arnold at his peak condition was 240ish.
Ok, I will give you Arnie at 240 lbs. Again, Ronnie is 2 inches shorter then Arnold. Ronnie also competes at a lower bf percentage then Arnold ever did.
Again, post a pic of Ron at 220 from early in his career. At the same muscle density with height and bf taken into account, Ronnie would be crushed by a 20 year prior Arnie. Not to mention Arnold was like 25, Ronnie turned pro at what 30 something?
The only time Ronnie is comparable to Arnie at his best, is when Ronnie was 20 plus pounds heavier, 2 inches shorter, better conditioned (due to better technology), many years older, and at his all time best. All things even, bf, muscle mass, height taken into account, and age, Ronnie is killed.
That not even getting into the advances in drugs.
-
Lol.
well, its true.
lots of guys have cut quads but are lacking in good quad sweep.
-
well, its true.
lots of guys have cut quads but are lacking in good quad sweep.
Keep pushing your opinion as fact man, maybe someday you'll convince someone, considering this is a totally objective sport.
Moron.
-
Ok, I will give you Arnie at 240 lbs. Again, Ronnie is 2 inches shorter then Arnold. Ronnie also competes at a lower bf percentage then Arnold ever did.
Again, post a pic of Ron at 220 from early in his career. At the same muscle density with height and bf taken into account, Ronnie would be crushed by a 20 year prior Arnie. Not to mention Arnold was like 25, Ronnie turned pro at what 30 something?
The only time Ronnie is comparable to Arnie at his best, is when Ronnie was 20 plus pounds heavier, 2 inches shorter, better conditioned (due to better technology), many years older, and at his all time best. All things even, bf, muscle mass, height taken into account, and age, Ronnie is killed.
Thats not even getting into the advances in drugs.
?
-
Most people sadly see Arnolds physique as the perfect physique with no flaws b/c he made bb a worldwide deal. He does as does Ronnie as well. BB is an objective sport. Probably some morons out there that think Ken Jones is the pinnacle of BB.
-
Most people sadly see Arnolds physique as the perfect physique with no flaws b/c he made bb a worldwide deal. He does as does Ronnie as well. BB is an objective sport. Probably some morons out there that think Ken Jones is the pinnacle of BB.
Exactly, totally objective.
Thats the beauty, everyone has their own opinion, and no one is wrong (or right).
-
Exactly, totally objective.
Thats the beauty, everyone has their own opinion, and no one is wrong (or right).
Meh, in some cases.
But, if you took Arnold at his peak and then took Ronnie and made all things equal. Compensation for height in mass, drugs, bf percentage, age and condition, Arnold wins every single time. Take a look at Coleman at 220 lbs. That is with all the advances he had and competing at a lower bf, still get pwned by a 25 year old from the 70's! Ronnie is comparable when you post pics of him 20 lbs heavier, 10 years older, 20 years later and better conditioned. Those pics comparing them are of Ronnie in high 240's at 5'11.
My questions still stands
Ok, I will give you Arnie at 240 lbs. Again, Ronnie is 2 inches shorter then Arnold. Ronnie also competes at a lower bf percentage then Arnold ever did.
Again, post a pic of Ron at 220 from early in his career. At the same muscle density with height and bf taken into account, Ronnie would be crushed by a 20 year prior Arnie. Not to mention Arnold was like 25, Ronnie turned pro at what 30 something?
The only time Ronnie is comparable to Arnie at his best, is when Ronnie was 20 plus pounds heavier, 2 inches shorter, better conditioned (due to better technology), many years older, and at his all time best. All things even, bf, muscle mass, height taken into account, and age, Ronnie is killed.
Thats not even getting into the advances in drugs.
-
I totally agree, Arnie was far ahead of his time.
Unfortunatley, there is no fair way to compare the two.
I still think Arnold looks far better than Ronnie, though.
-
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139812;image)
Arnold Owning "your boy"
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m5.jpg)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m86.jpg)
Post a side chest where ronnie can hang with a 20 year old oak....
-
Ronnie still cant do this.................
-
Ok, I will give you Arnie at 240 lbs. Again, Ronnie is 2 inches shorter then Arnold. Ronnie also competes at a lower bf percentage then Arnold ever did.
Again, post a pic of Ron at 220 from early in his career. At the same muscle density with height and bf taken into account, Ronnie would be crushed by a 20 year prior Arnie. Not to mention Arnold was like 25, Ronnie turned pro at what 30 something?
The only time Ronnie is comparable to Arnie at his best, is when Ronnie was 20 plus pounds heavier, 2 inches shorter, better conditioned (due to better technology), many years older, and at his all time best. All things even, bf, muscle mass, height taken into account, and age, Ronnie is killed.
That not even getting into the advances in drugs.
here is a young Ronnie:
(http://digilander.libero.it/mrolympia2/rc59.jpg)
I think Arnold would still have a lot of trouble with this.
sure, Ronnie was not as big and wide and full as he was in 99, but you can still see, that, like Arnold, the potential to dominate the sport was there..and it was eventually realized...
other than his abs and calves, Ronnie's genetics were pretty damn good.
-
here is a young Ronnie:
(http://digilander.libero.it/mrolympia2/rc59.jpg)
I think Arnold would still have a lot of trouble with this.
sure, Ronnie was not as big and wide and full as he was in 99, but you can still see, that, like Arnold, the potential to dominate the sport was there..and it was eventually realized...
other than his abs and calves, Ronnie's genetics were pretty damn good.
One of Ronnies big weakness back in day, was his delts. When he cranked up his bodyweight in 1999, that problem dissapeared.
-
One of Ronnies big weakness back in day, was his delts. When he cranked up his bodyweight in 1999, that problem dissapeared.
no kidding!:
-
Awesome shot.
-
Ronnie still cant do this.................
Kill 100 guerrillas without being shot once?
-
Kill 100 guerrillas without being shot once?
Damn straight..............
-
Damn straight..............
HAHAHA... too funny! :D
-
Something tells me this will be the NEW "Hulkster I'm Calling a Truce" thread.
-
Still an unfair advantage for Ronnie, but whatever. Ronnie is way more ripped then Arnie ever was. I never said Ronnie did not have good genetics. Ronnie has awesome genetics ( that where discovered when he was in the high 240's in 98 - 99) he looked average for a pro when he first started, sub 230 lbs.I merley stated that all things equal, body mass, height taken into account ( which would make Ronnie have to weigh about 220), bf percentage, and age, Ronnie is stomped. The only true comparison of the two are of the pictures you posted in 98 - 99 when Ronnie was 20 lbs heavier at 2 inches shorter. That is 30 years after the pics of Arnold where taken. Arnold still at least "compares" with those shots.
Ronnie turned pro over ten years later then Arnold. That picture is a very good shot of Ronnie at a lighter bodyweight. I have seen pictures where he looked pretty small for a pro when he first started competing. I cannot find them. I am skeptical Ronnie is 220 in that shot.
Not very hard to see with all things equal Arnold would have had the better physique. Bot at 25 with the same years training, same drugs,same techonology, same body mass ( take into account the height) game over. Add in Arnies calves dwarfing those of Ronnie and, imo Arnie is better.
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139884;image)
-
WRONG................... ....&mode=related&search=
-
Awesome shot.
agreed. Ronnie and chris were both on form in 99, and that oily flex should not have been second. Chris should have been.
-
Ronnie around 220/230
-
When are you bitches going to learn that Arnold was the best bodybuilder to ever walk the planet?
-
.. NO SYNTHOL, NO GH, NO T3, NO CLEN, NO IGF, NOT EVEN CREATINE....
-
When are you bitches going to learn that Arnold was the best bodybuilder to ever walk the planet?
EXACTLY! By the way, thanks. I've never seen those shots before.
-
Ronnie's arms are too long for his torso, easier to note on those early pics....
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139881;image)
-
Ronnie's arms are too long for his torso, easier to note on those early pics....
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139881;image)
Arms to long, biceps to short and no forearms.
-
Case and point. Ron still has the edge with better drugs, better condition, better pictures, and a 10 year age advantage. Yet, he is getting owned by a guy who competed 25 year prior, and over ten years younger. When all things are equal Arnie has the better physique.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139884;image)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139885;image)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139882;image)
-
Arnold is the best. Even if a little top heavy...I'd take that physique anyday.
I'd also take some of his money and movie fame, if offered....but I'd start with the physique
-
those calves...my god :o
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139886;image)
-
hahaha Yes!!!! Arnold is god!
-
omg.. arnie > *
but stfu about Ronnie take it to the other fucking threads im sick of seeing pics of his boring physique
-
Good job on ruining Arnolds Physique.
Huge Legs Never make a physique look good.
Hang on. I realise you are tall, like myself, and I also like to think that Arnold's little legs kind of suit his physique (because that way it's okay for taller people to get away with small legs right?) but this statement in reality is simply not true. Ironage guys didn't really focus on their legs like guys do now, but since then people have realised that tooth-pick legs look a bit weird and childish. You can't tell me Paul DeMayo's or Branch Warren's quads don't make their physiques look good?!
(http://www.bbcenter.sk/images/gallery/muzi/paul_demayo/demayo03.jpg)
As long as you have the arms to match!^
-
Hang on. I realise you are tall, like myself, and I also like to think that Arnold's little legs kind of suit his physique (because that way it's okay for taller people to get away with small legs right?) but this statement in reality is simply not true. Ironage guys didn't really focus on their legs like guys do now, but since then people have realised that tooth-pick legs look a bit weird and childish. You can't tell me Paul DeMayo's or Branch Warren's quads don't make their physiques look good?!
(http://www.bbcenter.sk/images/gallery/muzi/paul_demayo/demayo03.jpg)
As long as you have the arms to match!^
Yes, big legs need an equal uppbody to match. That's proportion. Ronnie has that upperbody which is why his legs matched him so well. Funnily enough, I think they suit Arnold well, also.
Small legs are good if you have an impressive enough upperbody.
-
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139881;image)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/foto11.jpg)
No contest.
Arnold is far superior to Coleman.
If he had had access to the same drugs, nutrition, sponsorships and emphasized legs the way they do today, Ronnie would not have one olympia to his name.
Arnold is taller and would be able to pack on way more muscle than he already had.
Arnold always said that he wanted everything to be in balance, to be perfectly symmetrical. "I would not dream of increasing one bodypart by one inch, that would mean I would have to increase my entire body by one inch"
Coleman has no symmetry, he is just a collection of Huge body parts.
Quads overpower calves (which by the way are virtually nonexistant)
Bis overpower Tris
Back overpowers chest
Gut overpowers Hamstrings ;D
Do you honestly believe that if Arnold had access to the same shit that Coleman has he could not increase the size of everyone of his body parts.
He would bring his back way up, already had a lower lat tie in than Coleman
Chest is better 30 years ago already.
Arms, nothing needs to be said here.
Shoulders were always one of the oaks strong points.
Calves. 8)
The only thing Ronnie might beat him on is quads and glutes, but, much like platz, who the hell cares.
-
hahaha Yes!!!! Arnold is god!
So should we all hail???
Hellz yeah!!! 8)
-
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139881;image)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/foto11.jpg)
No contest.
Arnold is far superior to Coleman.
If he had had access to the same drugs, nutrition, sponsorships and emphasized legs the way they do today, Ronnie would not have one olympia to his name.
Arnold is taller and would be able to pack on way more muscle than he already had.
Arnold always said that he wanted everything to be in balance, to be perfectly symmetrical. "I would not dream of increasing one bodypart by one inch, that would mean I would have to increase my entire body by one inch"
Coleman has no symmetry, he is just a collection of Huge body parts.
Quads overpower calves (which by the way are virtually nonexistant)
Bis overpower Tris
Back overpowers chest
Gut overpowers Hamstrings ;D
Do you honestly believe that if Arnold had access to the same shit that Coleman has he could not increase the size of everyone of his body parts.
He would bring his back way up, already had a lower lat tie in than Coleman
Chest is better 30 years ago already.
Arms, nothing needs to be said here.
Shoulders were always one of the oaks strong points.
Calves. 8)
The only thing Ronnie might beat him on is quads and glutes, but, much like platz, who the hell cares.
Im glad Im not the only one that sees those glaring imbalances.
-
Im glad Im not the only one that sees those glaring imbalances.
but those glaring imbalances were virutally non existant before 2003 when his quads, glutes and everything ballooned up in size, leaving his calves in the dust:
those imbalances were certainly not glaring in 99. In fact, they were virtually non existant:
ps how the hell can you agree to crap like "ronnie's back overpowers his chest" and then also think that dorian:
a)does not have the same problem
and
b) has better balance than ronnie
???
you are so biased against ronnie that you don't make any sense - you pick out the faults in ronnie but overlook the same flaws in dorian...
::)
his balance looks fine:
-
but those glaring imbalances were virutally non existant before 2003 when his quads, glutes and everything ballooned up in size, leaving his calves in the dust:
those imbalances were certainly not glaring in 99. In fact, they were virtually non existant:
ps how the hell can you agree to crap like "ronnie's back overpowers his chest" and then also think that dorian:
a)does not have the same problem
and
b) has better balance than ronnie
???
you are so biased against ronnie that you don't make any sense - you pick out the faults in ronnie but overlook the same flaws in dorian...
::)
his balance looks fine:
Dorian wasn't even brought up, jackass.
You're just pissed because other people find the same faults in Ronnie, weather you choose to acknowledge them or not.
-
.. NO SYNTHOL, NO GH, NO T3, NO CLEN, NO IGF, NOT EVEN CREATINE....
NO LEGS! ;)
-
Arnold trained to look like a work of art. He would fine-tune certain body-parts so they all flowed together, in his opinion, and in mine, that is what bodybuilding is all about. Along with that, he worked hard on his poses, and made them work perfectly with his body. That is why he beat guys who might have had an advantage on him physically (although very rare). No offense to coleman, but he and almost all of today’s bodybuilders no longer care about aesthetics, they just want to become massive as they can. None of them can look pleasing to the eye like the godfather of bodybuilding...
**I dare any of today's BB's to try and pull off a pose like the one Arnold's doing in the last pic.
-
NO LEGS! ;)
The very first picture in this thread illustrates why Arnold didn't work on bigger legs, it would totally throw off his lines, and go against everything I just stated in my previous post. For aesthetic balance, his legs were perfect.
-
Case and point. Ron still has the edge with better drugs, better condition, better pictures, and a 10 year age advantage. Yet, he is getting owned by a guy who competed 25 year prior, and over ten years younger. When all things are equal Arnie has the better physique.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139884;image)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139885;image)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139882;image)
Thee pictures are pretty amazing
-
The very first picture in this thread illustrates why Arnold didn't work on bigger legs, it would totally throw off his lines, and go against everything I just stated in my previous post. For aesthetic balance, his legs were perfect.
arnold squatted alot.i heard his max squat was around 600lbs..he was powerlifter before he started bodybuilding.he came second at the german power lifting competition in 1967 or 68
-
arnold squatted alot.i heard his max suqat was around 600lbs..he was poerlifter before he started bodybuilding.he came second at the german power lifting competition in 1967 or 68
Yes, that is true, below are a few pictures to illustrate. My point is, he could of really focused on his quads like he did his calves, but he didn't want them to be any bigger. He felt it would have thrown off his lines.
-
Im glad Im not the only one that sees those glaring imbalances.
Hulkster is owned lol
-
Yes, that is true, below are a few pictures to illustrate. My point is, he could of really focused on his quads like he did his calves, but he didn't want them to be any bigger. He felt it would have thrown off his lines.
awesome pics dude.he was a big squatter
-
Dorian wasn't even brought up, jackass.
You're just pissed because other people find the same faults in Ronnie, weather you choose to acknowledge them or not.
of course dorian wasn't brought up.
I used him to show how delusional and biased your arguments are.
you pick and choose which faults to see and not to see...
-
I suppose thats why other people see his faults too?
I do like your lawyer tactics though, try and discredit peoples opinions based on non-related arguments.
Are you sure you don't work for a Law Firm?
-
All things equal Arnie wins. Even in these "equal" shots, Ronnie enjoys big advantages. Better drugs, over 10 years older, better nutrition, better equipment, better food, better technology ( picture quality) and better skin tone. With all these advnatages Ronnie still gets pwned by a guy who competed 20+ years before!
You really see the quality of Arnies muscle when you consider he is 2 inches taller then Ronnie, and they both have about the same muscle mass in these shots.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139884;image)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139885;image)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139882;image)
[/quote]
-
All things equal Arnie wins. Even in these "equal" shots, Ronnie enjoys big advantages. Better drugs, over 10 years older, better nutrition, better equipment, better food, better technology ( picture quality) and better skin tone. With all these advnatages Ronnie still gets pwned by a guy who competed 20+ years before!
You really see the quality of Arnies mass when you consider he is 3 inches taller then Ronnie and they both have about the same muscle mass in these shots.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139884;image)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139885;image)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139882;image)
Very true.
-
All things equal Arnie wins. Even in these "equal" shots, Ronnie enjoys big advantages. Better drugs, over 10 years older, better nutrition, better equipment, better food, better technology ( picture quality) and better skin tone. With all these advnatages Ronnie still gets pwned by a guy who competed 20+ years before!
You really see the quality of Arnies muscle when you consider he is 2 inches taller then Ronnie, and they both have about the same muscle mass in these shots.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139884;image)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139885;image)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139882;image)
but there is one problem here: Arnold is probably more like 240-245 in those shots, espc. the most muscular (taken in 1973), not 220ish.
if you want to compare Ronnie to Arnold, ronnie's 245 pounds in his 2001 Arnold Classic form is a little closer in terms of weight. And it shows him when he had muscular maturity, something that he certainly did not in that early stage of his career in the 95 shots.
but again, even still, the whole comparison is flawed. We are comparing different eras 30 years apart.
If Arnolds 240 pound best competed against Ronnie's 245-7 pound Arnold Classic form, Arnold would be defeated quite easily.
but if Arnold had access to todays GH, techniques, contest prep programs etc., well, that is a different story. tough to say there..
-
but there is one problem here: Arnold is probably more like 240-245 in those shots, espc. the most muscular (taken in 1973), not 220ish.
if you want to compare Ronnie to Arnold, ronnie's 245 pounds in his 2001 Arnold Classic form is a little closer in terms of weight. And it shows him when he had muscular maturity, something that he certainly did not in that early stage of his career in the 95 shots.
but again, even still, the whole comparison is flawed. We are comparing different eras 30 years apart.
If Arnolds 240 pound best competed against Ronnie's 245-7 pound Arnold Classic form, Arnold would be defeated quite easily.
but if Arnold had access to todays GH, techniques, contest prep programs etc., well, that is a different story. tough to say there..
I admitted Arnold was 240 in those shots. Arnie is also 6'2 , Ronnie is 5'11. Ronnie at 5'11 220, has the same amount of muscle mass as Arnie at 6'2 240. not to mention Ronnie is prob about 3 percent bodyfat, while Arnie admitted never competing lower then 6 percent. No one was 3 percent in Arnies days. Ronnie might even have a higher mass to height ratio then Arnie, but I will say they are equal.
The point is, with Ronnies supposed greatest genetics ever, and a 20 year advantage in drugs, training knowledge, nutrition and technology there should be no comparison at the same muscle mass percentage. The facts are, Ronnie gets stomped when all things are equal. The fact you can compare the two, and Ronnie looks inferior shows how good Arnold really was.I could only imagine Arnold at the age of 35, if he had continued to train seriously.
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139884;image)
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery4/m301.jpg)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139885;image)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139882;image)
-
The point is, with Ronnies supposed greatest genetics ever,
I don't think Ronnie has the greatest genetics ever.
damn good. but not the greatest - his abs are genetically flawed big time. and his calves have always lagged behind.
-
I don't think Ronnie has the greatest genetics ever.
damn good. but not the greatest - his abs are genetically flawed big time. and his calves have always lagged behind.
My mistake, I meant to type greatest ever. Which is highly subective anyway. I think Ronnie possesed one of the greatest physiques of all time in 98.
I believe Arnie is the greatest ever, for the reason I stated above.
-
Ronnie's FIRST contest win...
(http://www.bigroncoleman.com/media/Begin03_LG.jpg)
Arnold's FIRST contest win...
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery7/mg321.jpg)
-
Ronnie's trophy is bigger than Arnold's trophy 8)
-
Ronnie's trophy is bigger than Arnold's trophy 8)
But Arnold's trophy is more reputable. Mr. Universe as opposed to Mr. Texas. 8)
-
But Arnold's trophy is more reputable. Mr. Universe as opposed to Mr. Texas. 8)
owned.
-
But Arnold's trophy is more reputable. Mr. Universe as opposed to Mr. Texas. 8)
yes, but in today's world, Mr. Texas is about equivalent to Mr. Universe 8)
-
yes, but in today's world, Mr. Texas is about equivalent to Mr. Universe 8)
Not to mention Arnold looked better then Ronnie in those pics. What was Arnold 17 there? Ronnie is like 25 in those shots isnt he?
-
What was Arnold 17 there?
No. He was 20 for his 1967 Mr. Universe win.
-
Ronnie started late, so he just used more drugs to catch up, hence the bloated look, film of water under his skin, and severe gyno. How much do you think Ronnie will weigh after he retires? 220 tops.
-
What was Arnold 17 there?
This is Arnold at 17 competing in the Mr. Steirmark where he came in 4th.
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery5/m490.jpg)
-
Hulkster's love for Ronnie is actually endearing. No, seriously. If husbands and wives loved each other as much as Hulkster loves Ronnie, divorce and all the social problems caused by it would disappear.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Hulkster's love for Ronnie is actually endearing. No, seriously. If husbands and wives loved each other as much as Hulkster loves Ronnie, divorce and all the social problems caused by it would disappear.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Here's your award...
*Stupid Post of the Day*
-
Hulkster's love for Ronnie is actually endearing. No, seriously. If husbands and wives loved each other as much as Hulkster loves Ronnie, divorce and all the social problems caused by it would disappear.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
its not love.
I just know a killer physique (in his 98/99 or 01 AC form) when I see one.. 8)
-
if this is arnold at 17....
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m32.jpg)
and this is arnold at 19
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m60.jpg)
that's a hell of a change in 2 years...gear?
-
synthol 8)
-
if this is arnold at 17....
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m32.jpg)
and this is arnold at 19
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery1/m60.jpg)
that's a hell of a change in 2 years...gear?
Actually, the top picture is of Arnold at 18 when he competed in the Jr. Mr. Europe held by Peter Gottlob and Albert Busek.
The bottom picture is of Arnold when he was 21 -- already in America.
-
Actually, the top picture is of Arnold at 18 when he competed in the Jr. Mr. Europe held by Peter Gottlob and Albert Busek.
The bottom picture is of Arnold when he was 21 -- already in America.
in arnold's encyclopedia, he has that exact picture with a caption saying "me at nineteen with over 20" arms"
-
in arnold's encyclopedia, he has that exact picture with a caption saying "me at nineteen with over 20" arms"
And in his book, The Education of a Bodybuilder , Arnold states that this is him "Winning my first competition, Mr. Europe Junior, 1965."
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery7/mg166.jpg)
And again, it's not. It's from his Best Built Athlete of Europe win in 1966. Report of the contest can be seen in the Health and Strength issue (Mar. 30, 1967). So trust me. ;)
-
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=124084.0;attach=139885;image)
Good delts.
Arnold was great, like seriously great. Most guys would probably choose his physique over the guys from today, but he would get destroyed on a stage today. End of story. Look at his shoulders. Ronnie had notoriously poor delts back then and he's still winning. And Arnold's legs WERE small even by the standards of his day.
Whatever, I'd rather look like Arnie but I can also admit his legs needed to be bigger and he had small delts. He was all chest a biceps, which was cool back then, and still is for most beach-goers etc, just not IFBB judges post 1992.
-
Poor shoulders? What about triceps, was he missing those too?
-
He wasn't missing shoulders. In some poses it looked like he had weak rear delts, but that's it.
-
That is an amazing shot of his triceps.
Most haterz complain he had small triceps.... ::)
His delts are great....perfect proportion with the rest of his body.
No reason to believe he couldn't get them (and every other part) bigger if he wanted.
Arnold was not 100% devoted to BBing towards the end (Pumping Iron, Hercules in New York era) he would take long stretches off bodybuilding and get smaller to pursue acting, then come back and train for like a few months for a show.
If he was 100% bodybuilding (like Pros of today who spend their whole day shooting up, stuffing their faces, training and napping) he would be ginormously bigger.