That picture is amazing
Dorian Yates!Yes
Dorian Yates!I remember seeing that pic last night and thinking 'that's some good ownage.' Sharma? Any thoughts? Maybe the pic emphasizes Yates' 'criminal burglar hands' at the expense of his back? ;)
I think we can agree on this: Dorian - The most complete white back ever; Stubbs - The most complete black back ever;
End of thread. ;D
::)
by complete, do you mean includes unsightly rolls of loose skin like Jay Cutler? LOL:
LOL just keep telling yourself that the pics are photoshopped ND.
you and two others are the only ones on the planet who maintain that.
the rest of us have seen the vids for ourselves and know better.
nice try though. ::)
Who is the rest of us? you and Bizzy? LMMFAO
Kevin Horton exposed you and your boy for photoshopping screencaps you're busted !! ;) its over kid
Hulkster & Bizzy = con artists
lol how about the rest of the bb community?
::)
the caps are real.
grab the video.
read the reviews of people who were there - your friend Peter even specifically ignored 98 and highlighted 99 in his article of best ever Mr. O's - for a damn good REASON
your denial of real life is unreal.. ::)
whatabout these 2 guys ?
Who else is denying those screencaps are fake? lol NO ONE hell Bizzy isn't even doing it lol HE ADMITTED IT you fucking moron
stick your photoshopped 99 screencaps up your ass and every single time you post them I will expose you ;)
whatabout these 2 guys ?
the caps I keep posting were NOT the ones adjusted you fucking idiot. read the posts again
::)
and ones from others weren't in the first place:
hulkster what video is it from and how far into it ? i can make a cap and we can compare and get it sorted
Lets see BOTH lack width & thickness compared to Yates and Coleman , both had great detail but still incomplete
whats really funny is that in the 'before and after' shots of Ronnie 99 that ND keeps posting, Ronnie has a better back than dorian ever did in both of them!
shopped or unshopped!
hahahahaha
the caps I keep posting were NOT the ones adjusted you fucking idiot. read the posts again
::)
and ones from others weren't in the first place:
This thread is about backs you idiot, why are you posting both of them in a front most muscular?? ::)
because ND claims that all 1999 olympia footage/screencaps of Ronnie Coleman are faked, simply because they are far better than his hero dorian. including the back. hence the relevance to this thread.
hope this helps. :P
but did either ronnie or dorian have the detail of flex ?
Yes but Dorian is white so he wins by default.Skinhead alert.
Yawn another Hulkster hi-jack
This from the queen of hijacks. True what was said earlier, if only Yates had Coleman's traps.
Dorian's back is the best of all-time better than Coleman and Stubbs
maybe back in 97, Dorian had the best back ever but he's since been surpassed by Ronnie. ;)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Ronnie%20Coleman/RonnieColeman4.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Ronnie%20Coleman/98RonnieColeman1.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Ronnie%20Coleman/01%20ASC/2001ASC-Ronnie129.jpg)
Jim Schmaltz – Flex, April 2002
“The 37-year-old Coleman has what many of the sport's analysts feel is the best back ever.”
Peter McGough - Flex, December 2006
"The best back ever lacked its eye-popping detail and fullness."
1998 Mr. Olympia Contest Review by Max Muscle Sports and Fitness
Only Milos Sarcev, in his evaluation of Mr. Olympia contenders in the last issue of Max Muscle, saw Coleman as having a good chance: "At this time, Ron has the best back in the history of the sport," said Mishko, "even better than Bannout and Haney, or Dorian. Ron's thicker, wider, more pleasing.”
http://www.maxmuscle.com/index.cfm?fa=article&doc_id=22&subcat=body_building
Nice try NONE of those quotes invalidate the one from Ronnie himself or , Samir Bannout or , Rhul or Team Flex in 1999 NONE of them Dorian had the best back in 1992 and it still hasn't been matched
Dorian at his best vs the pics you just posted give me a fucking break Yates at 269 crushes Ronnie in thickness , width and detail his lats insert lower and he has striated traps
Another Yates Vs Coleman thread...YAY!
just what Getbig sorely needs
Continue with your feud gentlemen
Pistols at dawn
sorry kiddo, but my quotes trump yours. There's a reason the guys I posted get paid to write articles for the largest bodybuilding magazine in the world. As for the Team Flex poll in 99, that's obsolete now that they came out with a newer poll. ;)
Ronnie's back has the same width, thickness, and detail minus the ugly bacne and skin folds.
No they don't trump anything thats your belief and nothing more just like you believe 2003 was Ronnie's best again it shows you don't know much and you've yet to explain WHY the newer poll is right and the other is wrong ! and lastly Ronnie once again concedes to Dorian's superiority
Neo = stuck on stupid
you're fucking high if you think Ronnie's back is just as wide at 244 pounds compared to Yates at 268 pounds , thickness LMMFAO get the fuck out of here lol again more monumentally stupid assessments from GetBig's moron brigade and detail NO again flat out wrong period end of sentence another dumb assessment Dorian's back crushes Ronnie in all of the above
lol I'm still laughing at Ronnie having a thicker , wider back at 244 pounds compared to Dorian at 269 pounds lol oh boy I can always count on you for a good laugh.
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20Yates/93%20Mr%20Olympia/DorianYates23.jpg)
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Ronnie%20Coleman/01%20ASC/2001ASC-Ronnie129.jpg)
Dorian wins this one.......
cool. Asymmetrical traps, bacne, a poorly defined Christmas tree, and skin folds. Awesome!
(http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c155/coconutsandapples/next/back.jpg)
yes they do, and you stating the opposite of me doesn't make your comment true. Ronnie Coleman, Samir Bannout, and Markus Ruhl are just bodybuilders. They guys I quoted are bodybuilding are journalists whose job is to know the judging criteria and write reviews for the largest bodybuilding magazine in the world. How you arrived at the conclusion that your guys are just as credible as mine is beyond me.
NarcissiticSissy = internet nobody who thinks he knows what he's talking about
Ronnie at 247 lbs is not the same as Dorian at 247 lbs. Also, who's to say that all the extra weight was in Dorian's back? So you cannot use the numbers argument and claim that Dorian was wider b/c he weighed 20 lbs more.
Peter McGough – Flex Magazine, August 2005
"Personally, the best physique I ever saw onstage was Ronnie's at the 2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic. He was cut, full, trim in the waist and a monster (proving that when you're supersharp, you look superbig) at 247 pounds. Ronnie sporting that look would, in my opinion, be unbeatable."
John Hansen, 2x Mr. Natural Universe and Mr. Natural Olympia
"With his incredible thickness and muscle shape, Coleman doesn't need to weigh over 260 pounds on stage to look big. When he won the Arnold Classic last year, Ronnie only weighed 247 pounds but he looked like he weighed 20 pounds heavier."
Dexter Jackson – Getbig Interview 2004
“I am not the gossip type. I let them do all the talking, and I let my physique back my talking up. I know Craig Titus was saying something like he knows that Lee Priest is 200 pounds, I’m 220 pounds, and he is 250 pounds, and all this shit, but what Craig does not realize is that his 250 pounds is not like Ronnie Coleman’s 250 pounds. See what I am saying? I think I have proven to everyone that size doesn't matter. You don't look at Craig and say 'whoa, that’s a big dude’. You might say that about Ronnie or Jay at 250, but not Craig.”
way to support your argument by using pics. ::)
yes they do, and you stating the opposite of me doesn't make your comment true. Ronnie Coleman, Samir Bannout, and Markus Ruhl are just bodybuilders. They guys I quoted are bodybuilding are journalists whose job is to know the judging criteria and write reviews for the largest bodybuilding magazine in the world. How you arrived at the conclusion that your guys are just as credible as mine is beyond me.
NarcissiticSissy = internet nobody who thinks he knows what he's talking about
Ronnie at 247 lbs is not the same as Dorian at 247 lbs. Also, who's to say that all the extra weight was in Dorian's back? So you cannot use the numbers argument and claim that Dorian was wider b/c he weighed 20 lbs more.
Nice try NONE of those quotes invalidate the one from Ronnie himself or , Samir Bannout or , Rhul or Team Flex in 1999 NONE of them Dorian had the best back in 1992 and it still hasn't been matched
Dorian at his best vs the pics you just posted give me a fucking break Yates at 269 crushes Ronnie in thickness , width and detail his lats insert lower and he has striated traps
cool. Asymmetrical traps, bacne, a poorly defined Christmas tree, and skin folds. Awesome!
LOL, even with yates best picture of his back, he is still:
"Ranked as having the SECOND-BEST BACK in bodybuilding history........."
Now I'll wait for your worthless comeback with excuse after excuse. Do you honestly think you know more than the people that made the ranks and the 40+ people that I have quoted? Seriously, answer this question that you have been running away from the past 2 years, LOL.
Don't even try to add in your pathetic "ad populum" argument because that excuse has been demolished over and over. Bodybuilding comes down to Opinions (Eye witnesses/quotes) & Numbers (judging/rounds/points)
lotsa volume...no density
whats really funny is that in the 'before and after' shots of Ronnie 99 that ND keeps posting, Ronnie has a better back than dorian ever did in both of them!
shopped or unshopped!
hahahahaha
every time you've been proven wrong and busted about the fake pics, you totally ignore it and then spout of again how much better ronnie is than dorian.
utterly pathetic.
;D
i think vitor has one of the great backs of all time tho too
joel is up there,
and yes---- even the bicep-less "oblique monster" yates had a great back
No they don't and the irony of you now clinging to the writers YOU dismissed now you're forced to kiss their asses because some agree with you LOL this is great to see you back tracking you're the idiot who dismissed Peter McGough's opinion and asked " What was his major in college English lit " lol my how the tables have turned
And two Mr Olympias with great backs midn you have said the same and again Dorian had the best back ever according to the writers you're now forced to agree with but this doesn't matter either some how lol because we all know Ronnie's back got better in post 99 his back got wider and consistently softer with increased size , Dorian on the other hand maintained the hardness in his back at much higher bodyweights
I always knew you were prone to pathetic arguments and faulty logic and now we've added petty name calling? your frustration level is showing again anyway I may not know it all , I may not know more than most however on the topic of competitive bodybuilding is concerned I have constantly proven I know a FUCK of a lot more than you thats a fact !! remember I thought you that balance & proportion were two separate entities , I thought you how competitive bodybuilding was judged , I proved to you Yates had better density & dryness than Ronnie , oppppppsssss I forgot you dismissed Peter McGough's statement on that but now need it for others , who once said " if you agree with one quote you have to agree with all of them ' ? LMFAO you're so simple kid
First of all Ronnie was 244 pounds in 2001 and Dorian was 269 pounds and I posted a side-by-side comparison of Dorian at 257 pounds compared to Ronnie at 250 pounds and his back was noticeably wider with just 7 pounds now imagine another 25 pounds compared to Ronnie's 244 ! Ronnie's small waist & hips help with the illusion of great width but Dorian doesn't need an illusion his back is wide as fuck even with a wider waist & hips and again I laugh at you thinking Ronnie had a wider back at 244 pounds than Dorian at 269 pounds you're a complete moron for trying that one
again those quote mean dick and why? if a 318 pound Ferrigno couldn't dwarf a 257 pound Dorian NO WAY IN HELL a 244 pound Ronnie make a 269 pound Dorian look small ! that only happens in your imaginary picture comparisons lol
yes they do, and you claiming the opposite of me doesn't make your statement true. ;)
Mike Tyson is considered one of the greatest boxers of all-time. Following your logic, he's just as knowledgable as a boxing historian. ::)
name calling? I was just returning the favor.
"first of all" nothing you dipshit. Ronnie weighed 247 lbs at the 01 ASC. Stop making up 'facts' b/c it makes your argument look even more pathetic that you have to lie.
Peter McGough – Flex Magazine, August 2005
"Personally, the best physique I ever saw onstage was Ronnie's at the 2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic. He was cut, full, trim in the waist and a monster (proving that when you're supersharp, you look superbig) at 247 pounds. Ronnie sporting that look would, in my opinion, be unbeatable."
John Hansen, 2x Mr. Natural Universe and Mr. Natural Olympia
"With his incredible thickness and muscle shape, Coleman doesn't need to weigh over 260 pounds on stage to look big. When he won the Arnold Classic last year, Ronnie only weighed 247 pounds but he looked like he weighed 20 pounds heavier."
::)
yes they do, and you claiming the opposite of me doesn't make your statement true. ;)
Mike Tyson is considered one of the greatest boxers of all-time. Following your logic, he's just as knowledgable as a boxing historian. ::)
name calling? I was just returning the favor.no you weren't you've been reduced to such childish behavior , I'll call you stupid when it applies or I could have come up with some ' witty ' remark about your screenname again I'm above that nonsense obviously you're not
"first of all" nothing you dipshit. Ronnie weighed 247 lbs at the 01 ASC. Stop making up 'facts' b/c it makes your argument look even more pathetic that you have to lie.
too bad dorian looks like shit from the front
E
is the backside of a man what you love the most
Again the irony of YOU posting this shit !
WOW talk about a really bad analogy , Tyson is in fact a boxing historian he was a huge fan of boxing and watched for hours on end old fights of all the past greats , he was truly a student of the game , see fail ( again )
No he didn't I can post and have numerous claims to his weight at 244 pounds , I don't have the desire to repost them because I could careless because 3 pounds means FUCK-ALL in reality because he still isn't as thick , wide and dense as Dorian , feel free to believe that if you want , I'll continue to ridicule your stupidity
lastly the pic of Yates with Lou & Paul mean NOTHING were you at the contest? NO did you see the whole prejudging and night show ? NO the IFBB judge did and his word is LAW those two pics a momentary glimpses into a long event and when an IFBB judge says neither dwarfed Yates thats as good as it gets and certainly a LOT more valid than you and those fanciful ' comparisons ' you made LMFAO
Dorian at 269 pounds kills Ronnie in terms of back thickness , width , density & detail , he has lower lats , wider lats , bigger & thicker traps you can't counter this and any attempt will be laughed at
ha ha ha, you're f*cking stupid. Please explain the irony of my post. Since you don't know wtf you are talking about, I'm expecting some lame response to cover you ass like "I don't need to explain myself." ::)
like I give 2 shits about whether Tyson is a historian or not. The guy is dumb as shit. That was the point of my post. Being a professional athlete does not automatically make you an expert. If those guys you quoted are trusted authorities on the bodybuilding, then why aren't they paid to write contest reviews and articles? ;)
suuuure you can. I posted 3 different sources citing 01 ASC Ronnie's weight as 247 lbs.
yeah, uh huh. If I post a pic of a triangle but you have a quote saying it's a square, which is right? ::)
ha ha ha, I guess you know more than all the guys at Team Flex. ::)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=222481.0;attach=260638;image)
ha ha ha, you're f*cking stupid. Please explain the irony of my post. Since you don't know wtf you are talking about, I'm expecting some lame response to cover you ass like "I don't need to explain myself." ::)
like I give 2 shits about whether Tyson is a historian or not. The guy is dumb as shit. That was the point of my post. Being a professional athlete does not automatically make you an expert. If those guys you quoted are trusted authorities on the bodybuilding, then why aren't they paid to write contest reviews and articles? ;)
suuuure you can. I posted 3 different sources citing 01 ASC Ronnie's weight as 247 lbs.
yeah, uh huh. If I post a pic of a triangle but you have a quote saying it's a square, which is right? ::)
ha ha ha, I guess you know more than all the guys at Team Flex. ::)
ND you really ought to have learned by now. Why do you persist in trying to educate Hulkster? It is long since recognised that the man does not have the intelligence or perhaps more specifically, the knowledge of anatomy to understand what you are trying to say. Put it this way, would you continue to try and make a 5 yr old understand things he has no possible chance of comprehending? It's much the same thing. I notice that once again Pumpster posts pics where Dorian is light years ahead of Ronnie but the irony (look it up Pumpster) is lost on him. Best backs? Dorian, Bannout, Beckles, Arnold, Haney, Lance Dreher then perhaps Coleman - but then again, perhaps I am being generous to Ronnie?
The irony is you're preaching about typing the opposite doesn't make it true thats the irony you think the quotes I post aren't true yet in the same sentence claim the ones you post are thats ironic and weak logic
Of course you couldn't care less about Tyson your analogy backfired in your face and any guy who contradicts your opinion is labeled stupid lol when it comes down to Mike Tyson or Ronnie Coleman their opinions kick the sjit out of yours and again its funny you're claiming being a professional athlete doesn't make you an expert yet have the balls to type quotes from who? professional athletes lol you're fucking stupid , you don't have any debating skills what so ever lol
While I’m on record as saying that the best physique I ever saw was Ronnie’s at the 2001 Arnold, he was never drier or harder than Dorian. In fact now that – 14 years after it happened – I recently for the first time saw the video of Dorian posing before the 1993 Olympia I have cause to rethink. I’m now not sure that Ronnie at 245 pounds would beat Dorian at 269 pounds. At a bigger bodyweight I think Ronnie would look soft next to an in-shape rock-hard Dorian.
wow another great response lol again who's word shall we believe? and IFBB judge or you? we're not talking about a brief moment in a picture we're talking about an entire bodybuilding show and if an IFBB HEAD JUDGE says Lou Ferrigno & Paul Dillett couldn't dwarf Yates despite both outweighing him by a hefty margin A 244-247 pound Ronnie sure as fuck isn't going to , IFBB Judge > Neo
no, I supported why I feel my quotes trump yours. The sources I quoted are trusted bodybuilding experts. The quotes you posted are merely from bodybuilders. You haven't explained why they are just as credible sources as mine. All you have done is disagree with me. There is no irony involved, you dumbass.
again, get it right you idiot. I posted quotes from bodybuilders after you. In case you forgot, I argued against the use of quotes but that didn't stop you from posting them and making stupid comments like "they know more than you." I simply played your game and beat you.
Oh look, a quote from the same guy saying Ronnie was 247 lbs.
Peter McGough – Flex Magazine, August 2005
"Personally, the best physique I ever saw onstage was Ronnie's at the 2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic. He was cut, full, trim in the waist and a monster (proving that when you're supersharp, you look superbig) at 247 pounds. Ronnie sporting that look would, in my opinion, be unbeatable."
so which is it?
::)
no, I supported why I feel my quotes trump yours. The sources I quoted are trusted bodybuilding experts. The quotes you posted are merely from bodybuilders. You haven't explained why they are just as credible sources as mine. All you have done is disagree with me. There is no irony involved, you dumbass.
again, get it right you idiot. I posted quotes from bodybuilders after you. In case you forgot, I argued against the use of quotes but that didn't stop you from posting them and making stupid comments like "they know more than you." I simply played your game and beat you.
Oh look, a quote from the same guy saying Ronnie was 247 lbs.
Peter McGough – Flex Magazine, August 2005
"Personally, the best physique I ever saw onstage was Ronnie's at the 2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic. He was cut, full, trim in the waist and a monster (proving that when you're supersharp, you look superbig) at 247 pounds. Ronnie sporting that look would, in my opinion, be unbeatable."
so which is it?
and again idiot you cling onto for dear life to appeals to numbers you need to I don't , bodybuilding contests FYI are not judged by the popular opinion they're judged by 13 people not the 8000 in attendance ;)
iceman = owned
Man, you're dumb as f*ck.
It doesn't matter if it is judged by 13 people. The 13 people judge by giving points in different rounds and they are eye witnesses that give their opinions that is quoted. In the end this is what bodybuilding comes down to and we have the quotes to back it up, while you have 0.
13 or 8000, it doesn't matter.
Your "ad populum" argument is so weak, you are contradicting yourself everytime you use it in this sport, OPINIONS & NUMBERS. Remember that moron.
Come up with something new. Plus, I'm still waiting on the "so called" quotes, LOL. Good luck finding them.
NOTE: ND furiously scanning through his magazines, LOL ;D
Who cares what you feel you supported , again the irony is you dismissed the experts and now you're clinging to them because you think they verify your point , you're an idiot because you claim these guys only have degrees in English lit and are wrong in other aspects NOW you need them and now they're credible you should run for office and I posted quotes from the cream of the crop IFBB judges that shut your bullshit down so much for your ' writers ' which you dismissed anyway lol this makes you a hypocrite and not a very bright one at that ( old news )
NO you tried to play my game and feel flat on your face as usual , you said if you use one quote you're NOW bound to to every other one they make lol and then you contradict yourself by posting a McGough quote as proof and then dismissing the ones that contradict your ignorance lol you're stuck in a vicious circle of stupidity and you're damn right IFBB judges know more than YOU do I know more than you do and the best part is everything I typed was verified after the fact by judges and professionals and you you're left with flip-flopping lol one minute McGough is right and the next he's wrong and by your own retard logic you have to believe EVERY quote or none , this is your logic lol
It doesn't matter because its 3 pounds at the most its a moot point because NO WAY in HELL Ronnie at 247 pounds max has a thicker & wider back than Dorian at 269 pounds the sad part is you actually believe this nonsense lol it shows how far gone you really are and how little you know , you've been staring at those fanciful comparisons you and iceman made to long where Ronnie has the same size calves as Dorian lol and Yates' waist & hips is just as narrow as Ronnies lol
yawn, none of which has anything to do with the credibility of the guys you posted. I'm still waiting for you to intelligently defend why your quotes carry as much weight as mine. As for posting quotes, I'm merely playing your game. Refer to my last post.
wtf are you talking about? I buried you with quotes from professional bodybuilders, journalists, and industry experts. You posted 2-3 quotes while I posted like 20 of them. As for being bound, I tried to make it fair by eliminating picking which quotes to accept and ignore but you refused to go along with it. I'm not going to stand by and watch your hypocrisy go unchallenged. F*ck that.
I never said Ronnie at 247 lbs had a thicker and wider back than Dorian at 269 lbs, you dipshit.
yawn, none of which has anything to do with the credibility of the guys you posted. I'm still waiting for you to intelligently defend why your quotes carry as much weight as mine. As for posting quotes, I'm merely playing your game. Refer to my last post.
wtf are you talking about? I buried you with quotes from professional bodybuilders, journalists, and industry experts. You posted 2-3 quotes while I posted like 20 of them. As for being bound, I tried to make it fair by eliminating picking which quotes to accept and ignore but you refused to go along with it. I'm not going to stand by and watch your hypocrisy go unchallenged. F*ck that.
I never said Ronnie at 247 lbs had a thicker and wider back than Dorian at 269 lbs, you dipshit.
Are you fucking shitting me? my quotes from IFBB judges CRUSH any quote you can muster from Greg Valentino lol and you have the balls to as me to ' intelligently defend ' my quotes lol I knew you were an idiot but this just keep getting better lol and again Flex Wheeler who like to post frequently as ' proof ' ( while dismissing Ronnie I might add ) had Ronnie in first place after the prejudging in 07 and you think his opinion carries more weight than an IFBB judge? I don't think so dummy
and you tried to play my game and contradicted yourself and feel flat on your face in the process , you're the moron who insisted if you believe one quote you're now bound by ALL of their quotes and then you proceed to post a McGough pro-Ronnie quote and then dismiss every single one that was pro-Yates . don't try and distance yourself from the quote game now because it blew up in your face
ah the old appeal to numbers is back for another failed attempt lol you're so predictable . you posted quotes from professional bodybuilders who claimed just nonsense you're putting stock in quotes from Flex about how Ronnie was the most dominate Mr Olympia ever which is flat-out wrong , and his take leaves a lot to be desired especially considering he actually had Ronnie in first place after the 07 pre-judging lol and the industry exerts include Greg Valentino? who made him an ' industry expert ' ? lol most of the uotes had absolutely NOTHING to do with Dorian Yates , they were in reference to his competition at a particular contest again with your limited abilities you read into what you want
Sure you did maybe back in 97, Dorian had the best back ever but he's since been surpassed by Ronnie. them you proceeded to post pictures of Ronnie 1998/2001 so you absolutely said Ronnie's back was better than Dorians you in fact claimed it was surpassed which is nonsense
sorry kiddo, but my quotes trump yours. There's a reason the guys I posted get paid to write articles for the largest bodybuilding magazine in the world. As for the Team Flex poll in 99, that's obsolete now that they came out with a newer poll. ;)
Ronnie's back has the same width, thickness, and detail minus the ugly bacne and skin folds.
sorry kiddo, but my quotes trump yours. There's a reason the guys I posted get paid to write articles for the largest bodybuilding magazine in the world. As for the Team Flex poll in 99, that's obsolete now that they came out with a newer poll. ;)
Ronnie's back has the same width, thickness, and detail minus the ugly bacne and skin folds.
wow, are you f*cking kidding me? You have a quote from an IFBB judge saying Dorian was big. ZOMG, that trumps all my quotes!!! ::) Also, Iceman posted the quote from Greg Valentino - NOT me. Get your facts right, idiot. And I'm still waiting to hear from you why Ronnie Coleman is just as credible as famed bodybuilding historian Peter McGough. ;)
ha ha ha, where did I contradict myself and fall flat on my face? I've noticed you like to make up shit when you're losing an argument.
I wasn't talking about appeal to numbers. You claimed I played your game and fell on my face when, in reality, I destroyed you with sheer volume of quotes. You've got nothing on me, kiddo. ;)
again, show me where I explicitly said Ronnie at 247 lbs had a wider and thicker back than Dorian at 269 lbs. I'm waiting...
wow, are you f*cking kidding me? You have a quote from an IFBB judge saying Dorian was big. ZOMG, that trumps all my quotes!!! ::) Also, Iceman posted the quote from Greg Valentino - NOT me. Get your facts right, idiot. And I'm still waiting to hear from you why Ronnie Coleman is just as credible as famed bodybuilding historian Peter McGough. ;)
ha ha ha, where did I contradict myself and fall flat on my face? I've noticed you like to make up shit when you're losing an argument.
I wasn't talking about appeal to numbers. You claimed I played your game and fell on my face when, in reality, I destroyed you with sheer volume of quotes. You've got nothing on me, kiddo. ;)
again, show me where I explicitly said Ronnie at 247 lbs had a wider and thicker back than Dorian at 269 lbs. I'm waiting.
I see ND and Dorian are taking a pounding yet again
gee..how rare :-[
Dorian has wider lats m larger lats , lower lats ! and more striated lats , he has a much better christmass tree and larger thicker traps , his and look at the big difference in the infraspinatus & teres and this isn't even Yates at his best lol
Dorian's back > Ronnie's
its also a 1996 Ronnie LOL
dorian doesn't hold up to a post Olympia win Ronnie.
never could.
its also a 1996 Ronnie LOL
dorian doesn't hold up to a post Olympia win Ronnie.
never could.
Ronnie's back in that 01 shot looks exactly the same as 96....high lats, lacking width and hardness compared to Yates. Ron's back does not compare. Sorry.
Ronnie's back in 96 looked very good as the picture shows, yet Dorian clearly destroys him. I don't really see Ronnie improving in 98 - thickness looks less if anything - perhaps a little more lat width but not enough complete development.
Best backs:
1)Yates....2nd
2)Coleman....3rd
3)Haney...4th
4)Bannout...first, best ever
best back of all-time according to Flex magazine. Take your pick.
03 Mr. Olympia
\
Actually Flex magazine also said Dorian had the best back , as well as Joel Stubbs lol
how come dorian has big rolls of fat on his back?
ROFLCOPTER, that was an old issue of Flex magazine.
because his back is not as good as Ronnie's.
It doesn't matter Ronnie's back didn't improve after 99
you still can't counter my argument Dorian has wider thicker lats , they insert lower near his waist. thats like you trying to argue a guy who has high calves being better than a guy with lower ones with less size but equal development lol Dorian's lats are striated in a way Coleman's never were , Dorian has bigger & thicker traps , Dorian also has etter detail & development of the spinal erectors and his infraspinatus & teres are bigger & more detailed
yes it did, you dumbass. The 01 ASC and 03 Mr. Olympia are considered Ronnie's 2 best showings; both contests were after 99 when Flex magazine came out with their first poll for best back.
it's really simple: Ronnie's back was just as good without the ugly bacne and skin folds.
This only means that his physique overral improved, and not necessarily his back. Ronnie was more conditioned and harder overral at the 2001 ASC than in 1999, and at the 2003 Olympia he had more mass than at the 1999 Olympia.
How was Ronnie's back better at the 2001 ASC or 2003 Olympia than Dorian's? In 2001 it was more shredded but smaller, amnd in 2003 it was bigger but much softer and lacking in detail compared to Dorian's.
Dorian didn't have any backne at the 1995 Olympia, which is regarded as his best performance. As for skin folds, Ronnie had them too and there are pictures where Dorian's back skin is as tight as a drum.
exactly
Ronnie's back at the 01 ASC was just as wide and detailed as Dorian's
with better taper and fullness and no disgusting bacne or skin folds.
In 03, Ronnie's back was noticeably wider and thicker than Dorian's.
skin folds :-\
yes it did, you dumbass. The 01 ASC and 03 Mr. Olympia are considered Ronnie's 2 best showings; both contests were after 99 when Flex magazine came out with their first poll for best back.
it's really simple: Ronnie's back was just as good without the ugly bacne and skin folds. ;)
yes it did, you dumbass. The 01 ASC and 03 Mr. Olympia are considered Ronnie's 2 best showings; both contests were after 99 when Flex magazine came out with their first poll for best back.
it's really simple: Ronnie's back was just as good without the ugly bacne and skin folds. ;)
Dorian's and Ronnie's backs are close, but what separates them apart and gives Dorian the nod over Ronnie is the fact that Dorian had the genetically superior back. By this, I mean that Dorian had lats that attached lower than Ronnie's. This doesen't mean much when it comes to lat width and thickness, but it certainly matters as far the lower part of the back is concerned: there is a thick wall of muscle around Dorian's erector spinae, which Ronnie never had. It is an aesthetic advantage that makes Dorian's back overral the better one of the two.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
That picture is amazing
What you've done is selectively allocate more weight to things you personally prefer, especially in bringing up aesthetics that (1) are subjective and (2) which Yates was never known for.
Then you decided that Yates has some advantages in the lower back, something quite debatable, while completely neglecting to mention Coleman's advantages and Yates' drawbacks. Coleman had huge advantages in taper, width, waist and traps. Personally i also think Coleman had better aesthetics given Yates' bad skin and folds not to mention the lesser taper and blocky waist.
In addition, Yates' imbalance in arm size relative to torso and in comparison to Coleman is a negative in the back lat spread, for those who pay attention. :D
:o
sorry dorian: Ronnie owns you.
its not 1996 anymore when Ronnie was winning olympia's.
but your 93 best ever still doesn't cut it:
dorian is barely edging out Kevin's back LOL
Thats 1994 first of all lol
epic fail Hulkster
no it isn't. its 93.
my 12 year old asian nephew doesnt even train back and his lats are fuller and more detailed than dorians... ::)
my 12 year old asian nephew doesnt even train back and his lats are fuller and more detailed than dorians... ::)
:o
sorry dorian: Ronnie owns you.
its not 1996 anymore when Ronnie was winning olympia's.
but your 93 best ever still doesn't cut it:
So you do agree that Ronnie's back was not necessarily better in 2001 and 2003 than in 1999? Nice way to shoot yourself in the foot.
Detailed, yes. As wide, yes.
No, not really. Ronnie's waist was smaller, but since Dorian's lats were wider than Ronnie's at the 2001 ASC, then the taper was about the same.
But it was lacking in quality. And just stop posting pictures where Dorian has skin folds in his back. For starters, I don't even know if judges mark this down, and secondly, there are several pictures of Ronnie with folds as well - as an example, the famous´picture from the 2003 Olympia where he has folds in his neck. And I repeat: Dorian had no acne in his back in 1995, which is the version of him I prefer, so stop bringing this shit up.
We're talking about the best back of all-time here. If 2 guys have equal width, thickness, and detail but one has bacne and skin folds, then the decision should go to the bodybuilder without any skin imperfections.
that shot is from 01 and DJ dwarfed ronnie in that photo shoot.
umm, is this a joke? I can't tell if you're being serious. You said yourself that Ronnie was harder and more detailed at the 01 ASC and wider and thicker in 03. This translates into their backs also having those attributes. I've never heard of a bodybuilder being harder and more detailed while at the same time his back looks softer and less defined. Perhaps you can give an example since you seem to believe this can happen? ;)
all I see is talk and no visual evidence to support your claim. There is no reason to think 01 ASC Ronnie's lats weren't as wide as Dorian's judging from the pics.
We're talking about the best back of all-time here. If 2 guys have equal width, thickness, and detail but one has bacne and skin folds, then the decision should go to the bodybuilder without any skin imperfections.
Dorian 1995 didn'd have acne, and he didn't have skin folds either
so good its worth posting AGAIN:
deal with it dorian nuthuggers:
the real question is what excuses will they come up with THIS TIME? ::)
but thats why dorian was second to Ronnie in the flex poll..
dorian has no problem being second.
after all, being second to a back that good is not too shabby.
excuses for what?
you seem to think that your opinion is a fact.
the only fact is that you've been busted for posting shopped pics.
"overwhelming visual evidence" - hahahaha.
here's someone's opinion that does matter:
from ronnie coleman himself: DESCRIBE DORIAN YATES: A close friend. Dorian is very intelligent, a great Mr. Olympia. He had the best side-chest pose and the thickest freakiest back I have ever seen
tell us again, hulkster, since you can read minds, what ronnie really means.
in the past, you've spouted off trying to tell us what ronnie really meant - like he's need you to do that for him.
owned.
actually the skin folds were in full force - dorian trained them extra hard that year... :-[
dorian 95 pales in comparison to a peak Ronnie Coleman:countdown to the excuses!!!!
::)
My point is that Ronnie's overral package was better at the 2001 ASC, but it does not follow that his back was better. His overral package was better because he was harder, had a smaller waist and his gut was less distended, and while the back gained in cuts and hardness, it lost in terms of mass, so it was not necessarily better than in 1999. The decreased size made his overral physique better despite the loss in size, but the smaller back with more cuts was not better than the one he had in 1999. Just because coming in smaller and sharper made his total package better, it doesen't mean that it made his back better. Two different things.
Again, it is an illusion of size caused by Ronnie's significantly smaller waist. And Ronnie's lower back is clearly less developed than Dorian's, adding to the ilusion of greater lat width even further.
Dorian 1995 didn'd have acne, and he didn't have skin folds either. And prove to me that judges even take such intangible postulates into account in making their decisions.
you make it sound like Ronnie's back lost a lot of size from 99 to the 01 ASC. In reality, his back was probably the same width and thickness. Most of the loss in weight came from his legs. When you consider Ronnie weighed only 10 lbs less with improved condition, his back didn't really suffer any loss in size at all. You admitted that he was harder and more detailed in 01. So his back was, for all intents and purposes, the same width and thickness with improved hardness and definition. Thus his back was better at the 01 ASC. ;)
maybe you are easily fooled by illusions? I'm looking at the same pics as you, and Ronnie's back looks just as wide. As for his lower back being less developed than Dorian's, you are out of your f*cking mind. I admit this comparison I made isn't scaled 100% accurately, but it serves to show the difference in thickness of their erector spinae. Dorian's looks flat as a pancake while Ronnie's has depth.
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Dorian%20vs%20Ronnie/DorianvsRonnie47.jpg)
we're talking about best back here - NOT which physique would win in a contest. I don't have to prove that the judges take bacne and skin folds into consideration.
and his arms are about half the size.. :-\
despite what the delusional nuthuggers say, dorian in 95 displayed all the trademarks that dorian was to become known for:
-undersized, pea shooter arms
-horrible rolls of loose skin
-horrible bacne.
its all there folks: :-\
reality sucks sometimes, doesn't it?
its a shame the nuthuggers are in such denial about these horrible calling cards of the Yatesian physique.. :'(
dorian concedes defeat...
He has a smile on his face. He knows very well that he beat him numerous times and would have been able to beat him at his best, too.
He has a smile on his face. He knows very well that he beat him numerous times and would have been able to beat him at his best, too.
the idiot nuthuggers are quick to point out that Dorian beat ronnie many times.
however, what they convieniently ignore is that Ronnie looked like this, for example, when dorian beat him (in 95):
::) ::) ::)
a far cry from his peak years later on:
8 times he destroyed Ronnie
LOL since when do we EVER see Yates NOT getting owned from the front.
for a supposedly 6 time Mr.O, he sure has the dubious distinction of being owned more times by more bodybuilders from the front than any other Mr. O of the last twenty years..
its damn hard to find shots of him looking good standing facing front next to his competition for fuck's sake.. :-\
says a lot right there..
the idiot nuthuggers are quick to point out that Dorian beat ronnie many times.
however, what they convieniently ignore is that Ronnie looked like this, for example, when dorian beat him (in 95):
::) ::) ::)
a far cry from his peak years later on:
Unf*ckintouchable.....
:o
cool pics Iceman
that 1 pic you can see the depth of the guys back... crazy. to be fair I wonder if there are any pic like that of dorian,,, especially that kinda angle.... crazy pic Ice
lmfao at your comparison Dorian's fucking waist & hips are just as narrow if NOT more so than a 247 pound Ronnie , take a look at the comparison ABOVE because thats a more accurate representation of how a 250 pound Ronnie compares in both terms of width and thickness compared to a 257 pound Dorian so please spare us your fan-boy comparisons they're laughable
ROFLCOPTER at your inability to read, dipshit. I admitted the comparison isn't scaled 100% accurately, but it shows the difference in thickness of their erector spinae. Reducing or enlarging the pic of Dorian won't make his lower back any thicker. LOLOLOL
;D ;D ;D
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Funny%20GIFs/roflbrothel.gif)
Did someone say ROFLCOPTER? ;) ;D 8)
(http://i26.tinypic.com/jakis6.jpg)
ROFLCOPTER at your inability to read, dipshit. I admitted the comparison isn't scaled 100% accurately, but it shows the difference in thickness of their erector spinae. Reducing or enlarging the pic of Dorian won't make his lower back any thicker. LOLOLOL
Unf*ckintouchable.....
LOL ass handed to him? ::)
yates has the worst arms in the history of the back double bi pose in that shot.. ::)
the idiot nuthuggers are quick to point out that Dorian beat ronnie many times.
however, what they convieniently ignore is that Ronnie looked like this, for example, when dorian beat him (in 95):
::) ::) ::)
a far cry from his peak years later on:
This is NOT a far cry from his ' peak ' years in fact he started his peak years in 1996 , these pics from from 96/97 ;)
I understood what you said just fine you admittedly say its NOT scaled yet post it anyway whats the point?
you're still wrong look at the difference in the spinal erectors there is NO contest Dorian's christmass tree > Ronnies period.
no, you didn't understand otherwise you wouldn't have responded with such an idiotic post. What does scaling have to do with lower back thickness? Enlarging the pic of Dorian will make his erector spinae appear longer and wider but won't change its depth.
where is this thickness you're talking about? Dorian's lower back looks flat as a pancake compared to Ronnie's.
Again dummy you could have posted both pictures separately you choose NOT to I'm just pointing out your fan-boy delusions in posting such utter nonsense
and you claimed your knew anatomy my ass go fucking learn what spinal erectors are dummy not the indentation on Ronnie's lower back either
Flat as a pancake the dummy says lol
none of that has to do with lower back thickness. And telling me to post each pic separately makes as much sense as me telling you to imagine them separately. You just choose not to, idiot.
wtf are you talking about? I was referring to the lower back muscle.
what's funny is that Ronnie's lower back looks thicker in that shot, and that's a pre-pubescent Ronnie.
what's funny is that Ronnie's lower back looks thicker in that shot, and that's a pre-pubescent Ronnie.
Again stop posting your fan-boy comparisons of proof of anything all you do is fail each time you do
Dorian's spinal erectors are thicker than Ronnie's and much more detailed , period. don't post an anatomy chart for me dummy I know where they are , obviously you don't if you're claiming Ronnie's are thicker or you need lasik
Pre-pubescent? Dorian is only 2 years older
ha ha ha, suuure. You will say whatever it takes to discredit anything that goes against your opinion. You're a sad, pathetic little man whose life is built upon being 'right' on an internet message board. ::)
you call that proof? All I see are pancakes.
ha ha ha, suuure. You will say whatever it takes to discredit anything that goes against your opinion. You're a sad, pathetic little man whose life is built upon being 'right' on an internet message board. ::)
what's your point? I was comparing pre-Olympian Ronnie to himself after he reached his prime.
(http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h29/NeoSeminole/Ronnie%20Coleman/RonnieColemansBack1996.jpg)
That was in 1996... He never displayed such detail in the (lower) back again.
lmfao discredit anything that goes against my opinion? your comparisons where you undersize Dorian to the point of having the same size calves & waist & hips as Ronnie is discrediting ?
Technically Dorian wasn't at his prime either so boo-hoo
and its NOT even on Dorian's level lol
ha ha ha, I already proved their calves and waists are not the same size in my comparisons. All you can do is talk shit. Like a coward, you slander other people's work but never contribute any of your own. Go home, kiddo.
difference between 95 and 96 Dorian < difference between 96 and 01 ASC/ 03 Ronnie ;)
again, where is this lower back thickness you speak of? His erector spinae looks thin as a sheet of paper.
(http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en-commons/thumb/a/a5/300px-Paper_sheet.jpg)
(http://www.accuratereproductions.com/i/Products/item_cutsheetbondpaper.jpg)
Mohammed Beneziza's has to be considered a top back
you make it sound like Ronnie's back lost a lot of size from 99 to the 01 ASC. In reality, his back was probably the same width and thickness. Most of the loss in weight came from his legs. When you consider Ronnie weighed only 10 lbs less with improved condition, his back didn't really suffer any loss in size at all. You admitted that he was harder and more detailed in 01. So his back was, for all intents and purposes, the same width and thickness with improved hardness and definition. Thus his back was better at the 01 ASC. ;)
maybe you are easily fooled by illusions? I'm looking at the same pics as you, and Ronnie's back looks just as wide. As for his lower back being less developed than Dorian's, you are out of your f*cking mind. I admit this comparison I made isn't scaled 100% accurately, but it serves to show the difference in thickness of their erector spinae. Dorian's looks flat as a pancake while Ronnie's has depth.
we're talking about best back here - NOT which physique would win in a contest. I don't have to prove that the judges take bacne and skin folds into consideration.
Reducing or enlarging the pic of Dorian won't make his lower back any thicker. LOLOLOL
You seem to be unable to comprehend that what improved in Ronnie from the 1999 Olympia to the 2001 ASC was the fact that his waist and gut got smaller,
His entire body was visibly smaller at the 2001 ASC than at the 1999 Olympia. And don't bring up the argument of how Ronnie had as much or more more mass at the 2001 ASC than at the 1999 Olympia, because that has been put to rest by yours truly. Or to quote someone who doesen't like me much, I gave you the "most clear cut ownage" in Getbig.com message board's history regarding this issue.
You seem to be unable to comprehend that what improved in Ronnie from the 1999 Olympia to the 2001 ASC was the fact that his waist and gut got smaller, as well as the fact that he gained a hard look he lacked in 1999. In other words, it was his overral package and not his back that improved. You can improve your overral package while simultaneously having a bodypart remain unchanged or get worse. ;)
The key word is "look". Yes, it looks just as wide because his waist was smaller. It's very simple, really: his lats got smaller, but his waist also got smaller, so his taper and the illusion of width remained unchanged.
You need to prove that the judges would take into consideration acne to decide which back was better. And this is irrelevant anyway, because Dorian in his 1995 version did not have acne in his back.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
man you guys are way out of touch with reality.. ::)
Ronnie's relaxed gut at the AC was WAY WORSE than in 99, not the other way around..
watch some videos and see for yourself.
ronnie had a super gut in 2001 olympia, and had it from then on.
in 99 sure, he had a gut, but it was not protruding as bad as it was at the 2001 AC.
Structurally, Dorian was not in the top six through the nineties in my opinion. But how can you debate his dominance:
You show your ignorance with this statement. Dorian's structure was as close to perfect as any bodybuilder ever has. The proportions between his torso, legs and clavicles are superb. He is not like Ronnie who had a short torso with long legs, or Shawn Ray who had short legs to a long torso. The only, and I must emphasize the only structural flaw that Dorian has is that his hip bones are a little wide. But overral, his structure is far superior to Ronnie's or than any bodybuilder who has ever competed for that matter.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Structurally, Dorian was not in the top six through the nineties in my opinion. But how can you debate his dominance:
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=222481.0;attach=261220;image)
by pointing out the fact that Mr. Levrone isn't hitting the pose yet ;)
oh ronnie wins this thread just like the truce thread
carry on now :)
E
All the guys hero's Dorian DESTROYED all huddle together for comfort lol
Levrone , Nasser , Ray , Coleman NO one won nothing against Yates thats why you guys keep crying .
and who cares if Kevin isn't posing yet like it matters , his back can't touch Yates anyway so whats the sense? ;)
why is it that anybody that goes against your argument is "defending their hero", even though you have more posts defending dorian then i have altogether on this board ::)
yeah dorian had the better back but clearly kev is not hitting the pose yet :)
maybe we should compare their arms ;D
E
You are defending your hero hence why you chimed it , you claim was " he not even flexing " which wasn't even why the picture was posted to begin with it was posted in reference to Dorian's back , and seeing YOU brought the topic up I asked " What difference would it make anyway ? " its not like his back is better and you added the little tag ' ronnie wins ' which is your round about way of trying to get back at Dorian for crushing Levrone for years , and in any debate with Levrone V Ronnie , Kevin wins lol sure ya right
and how about WE compare complete poses ? forget parts because thats how contests are judged and according to the people who judge contests Kevin ALWAYS lost to Dorian no matter what pose ;) but don't feel bad you have plenty of company in the loser department ask Hulkster lol
His entire body was visibly smaller at the 2001 ASC than at the 1999 Olympia. And don't bring up the argument of how Ronnie had as much or more more mass at the 2001 ASC than at the 1999 Olympia, because that has been put to rest by yours truly. Or to quote someone who doesen't like me much, I gave you the "most clear cut ownage" in Getbig.com message board's history regarding this issue.
You seem to be unable to comprehend that what improved in Ronnie from the 1999 Olympia to the 2001 ASC was the fact that his waist and gut got smaller, as well as the fact that he gained a hard look he lacked in 1999. In other words, it was his overral package and not his back that improved. You can improve your overral package while simultaneously having a bodypart remain unchanged or get worse.
The key word is "look". Yes, it looks just as wide because his waist was smaller. It's very simple, really: his lats got smaller, but his waist also got smaller, so his taper and the illusion of width remained unchanged.
You need to prove that the judges would take into consideration acne to decide which back was better. And this is irrelevant anyway, because Dorian in his 1995 version did not have acne in his back.
This is not true at all. When a muscle hypertrophies, it increases in thickness and width. So not scalling the pictures properly makes Ronnie appear to have lower back muscles more developed than they truly were by making them wider.
I still find it amazing that people say Dorian didn't have a great structure
you defend dorian quite a bit, it is kinda odd seeing as how you would NEVER want to look like him and you would rather look like the guys he beat ::)
you still haven't asnwered the question why is everybody else a fanboy when they have a different opinion? you probably have more posts defending dorian than I have on the entire forum
why would I try to "get back" lol at dorian but not ronnie? Mr. Levrone finished runner up to both of them twice
i just think dorian looks like shit, if i used the amount of drugs he used and his body was the end result, I would cry
E
I still find it amazing that people say Dorian didn't have a great structure (Matt C), his bone structure is about as good as there has ever been - his torso to leg length is perfect. This is too often overlooked on this site - not just for Dorian. This is where the majority of you guys fall down and overlook limb to torso length, pelvic structure etc. Many of you miss this with Coleman for example who has a torso that is too short and arms that are too long. Haney is another with just about the perfect bone structure. Look at the level of his lower costal margins to see how his taper is a result of his rib cage and midsection that blend perfectly - not the case with Ronnie. Haney's back is still the best in many respects.
I have more posts EDUCATING ignorant people like you on the inner workings of competitive bodybuilding , the difference between you and I and the rest of them is I can separate what I like personally from what would win , its called being objective.
but why defend a guy so much when you would NEVER want to look like him?
Thats because 99% of these people are ignorant , they think small waist & hips and big biceps is perfect ! these are the same idiots who are screaming Wolf won last year , most people based their opinion on what they prefer and NOT what actually wins contests , I laughed when someone posted Dorian had ' so-so genetics ' lol so-so lol
People all gloss over everything and hyperfocus on what they like , Dorian's symmetry is great and there is more to symmetry than just a narrow waist & hips it also includes torso length , arm length , balance , proportion , leg length in this regards Dorian was in another class but people see what they want to see
but why defend a guy so much when you would NEVER want to look like him? why do you feel the need to "educate" so much?
why does the judging criteria choose the ugliest physique and why do yo support it?
E
he loves the cock. thats why.
missing one arm is great symmetry ::)
E
Because I'm right ;) and I've proven this consistently
and please tell me where it says the prettiest physique should win , please do and even if that was the case Levrone would have lost anyway his aesthetics were better than Dorians but not that spectacular so hypocthetically even if it was a factor he would have been murdered by Wheeler or Labrada so you have no point.
He's NOT missing one arm thats another gross overstatement by you which shows you can't be objective or honest , Levrone was missing a torso he was all delts and biceps/triceps but thats great symmetry? NO his calves lagged behind his quads but thats great symmetry? lol
ONE bicep was shorter than the other he was NOT missing an arm , see the pictures one is pre-tear and the other post-tear NOT much of a difference one BICEP is shorter than the other and overall he still has great symmetry
i never said the prettiest physique should win, only that the ugliest one shouldn't :P
that's why Mr. Levrone was so great, he had the unique combination of power and aesthetics 8)
E
It's very true that Levrone had the aesthetics that many others lacked.
Here a clear comparison of a good arm left, against a mediocre arm of the bricklayer, right.
uh yeah he was missing an arm, only a fanboy would not see that ::)
post the front double bicep pic where his skin is all oily and disgusting
kinda hard to pull off what many felt was the best side chest since arnold if you are missing a torso
dorian's calves were too big for his quads :-*
E
It's very true that Levrone had the aesthetics that many others lacked.
Here a clear comparison of a good arm left, against a mediocre arm with nonexistent biceps, of the bricklayer right.
His skin was all oily and disgusting that was 1994 and his tan sucked ( see fan-boy statements )
and no its easy to have a great side chest with no torso its partially hidden and to also have a great side chest shot you need great calves as well I bet you didn't know that did you? the judges ask for one leg flexed for a reason , again more to a pose than what YOU think wins it , density & dryness count just as much as having great pecs
look at the size and separation :o :o
levrOWNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
E
so dorian's calves give dorian the better side chest ::)
E
but you still would rather look like Mr. Levrone and you NEVER would want to look like yates :P
E
I would rather look like Steve Reeves than anyone so thats redundant ;)
Mr. Levrone fit the judging criteria moreso ;)
E
thats because you are a dumbass.. :P
It is amazing the stupidity of "Earl1972". This is the guy who said that big ugly physiques like Dorian's is the reason why bodybuilding is not popular, and that Levrone being Mr.Olympia would make it more popular because he is more aesthetic. So when I pointed out to this moron that, to the general public, Levrone is equally huge and disgusting and that, going by his retarded logic than Brad Pitt with the physique he had in the film "Troy" should be Mr.Olympia, he came up with some crap argument that Brad Pitt's physique is not "balanced". This despite the fact that he used as a criteria for what Mr.Olympia should be "the physique most people want to have", and not balance. Using his retarded criteria than some underwear model would be Mr.Olympia, because that's the physique most guys would like to have, and not Levrone who is regarded by the general public to be just as disgusting and freaky as Dorian. I have seen non-bodybuilders say that even Ray's 1994 Olympia physique was ugly and too freaky, so there goes this moron's theory down the drain.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
It's very true that Levrone had the aesthetics that many others lacked.
Here a clear comparison of a good arm left, against a mediocre arm with nonexistent biceps, of the bricklayer right.
thanks for comparing arms in the BACK double biceps.
how are the bowflex workouts?
i bet when you roam the ghetto people are like "that dude is huge".
hahahaha
Most people in the ghetto are actually bigger and stronger than suburbian folks :-\