Author Topic: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold  (Read 8214 times)

LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #25 on: April 07, 2006, 10:26:55 AM »
lol

 LOL...he is barely shorter than Ronnie.

gibberj2

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2921
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #26 on: April 07, 2006, 10:52:04 AM »
Well if Ruhl wants to qualify for the O he needs to do a contest soon.

Royalty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30630
  • Mentzer is Alive
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #27 on: April 07, 2006, 05:30:40 PM »
Well if Ruhl wants to qualify for the O he needs to do a contest soon.

IFBB Atlantic City Pro show

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #28 on: April 07, 2006, 05:35:30 PM »






  His density and graininess is astounding; but that is not enough to win a pro show. As far as conditioning goes, Ruhl is the closest I've ever seen to Dorian's level. But this does not the fact that his structure has several flaws and that he lacks the crispness of detail in key bodyparts, like legs and middle back, to be a major contender.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

tweeter

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2180
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #29 on: April 07, 2006, 05:51:16 PM »
  His density and graininess is astounding; but that is not enough to win a pro show. As far as conditioning goes, Ruhl is the closest I've ever seen to Dorian's level. But this does not the fact that his structure has several flaws and that he lacks the crispness of detail in key bodyparts, like legs and middle back, to be a major contender.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

No offense, but I don't think Ruhl looks grainy at all...have you seen him from the back?

gibberj2

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2921
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #30 on: April 07, 2006, 06:12:32 PM »
i've never heard of that show Royalty

gibberj2

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2921
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #31 on: April 07, 2006, 08:35:43 PM »
Better legs, bigger chest than almost anyone ever, bigger biceps, MASSIVE deltoids (oil or not)

Royalty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30630
  • Mentzer is Alive
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #32 on: April 08, 2006, 08:04:44 AM »
i've never heard of that show Royalty

Sep 23 Atlantic City Pro
Atlantic City, New Jersey
$30,000 - Top 3
 Stokely Palmer
(732) 261-8713

the shadow

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 10205
  • THE FLAG OF THE ZAPATISTA ARMY OF LIBERATION
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #33 on: April 08, 2006, 09:42:26 AM »
ruhl is one of the only guys wich come closest in matchin with ronnie coleman size wise( and o yes i don't give a shit if ronnie is more defined or not).ruhl does not have a distented stomach tho.although his waist is a bit wide.in terms of width and size ruhl is just a few points shy of beatin ronnie coleman in terms of size.but i still think the guy has alot of potential and i think so in our distant future he will b some day.MARK MY WORDS!!!!!!!some day ruhl is gonna b mr olympia.one of the best ever.he just need to bring his legs a bit and just get that dorian yates type of look in his back.there u have it the most massive mr olympia of all time.the one and only markus ruhl.....
RATM RULZ THE WORLD

tweeter

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2180
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #34 on: April 08, 2006, 02:22:37 PM »
ruhl does not have a distented stomach tho

I don't see how you can say that he doesn't have a distended stomach; have you seen Made in Germany? He even makes fun of his own gut in the video. Nevertheless, he is huge and does from the front atleast hang in there with Jay and Chris.

sculpture

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2544
  • Getbig!
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #35 on: April 08, 2006, 02:28:21 PM »
  His density and graininess is astounding; but that is not enough to win a pro show. As far as conditioning goes, Ruhl is the closest I've ever seen to Dorian's level. But this does not the fact that his structure has several flaws and that he lacks the crispness of detail in key bodyparts, like legs and middle back, to be a major contender.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

What garbage

monster triceps

  • Time Out
  • Getbig III
  • *
  • Posts: 436
  • RIP slobby :(
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #36 on: April 08, 2006, 02:31:05 PM »
Rühl will drop dead within the next 5 years.
young niggah greedy

LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #37 on: April 08, 2006, 02:32:59 PM »
Rühl will drop dead within the next 5 years.

 This shouldn't be funny, but it is ;D

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #38 on: April 08, 2006, 02:47:54 PM »
What garbage

  Wow! What a brilliant comment! Continue making incisive posts such as these, and you'll win your fifth star in no time. :D Just like "sarcasm". And it will be well-deserved too! :)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

sculpture

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2544
  • Getbig!
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #39 on: April 08, 2006, 02:50:38 PM »
  Wow! What a brilliant comment! Continue making incisive posts such as these, and you'll win your fifth star in no time. :D Just like "sarcasm". And it will be well-deserved too! :)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

I can't wait till i get my fifth star.

LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #40 on: April 08, 2006, 02:55:54 PM »
  Wow! What a brilliant comment! Continue making incisive posts such as these, and you'll win your fifth star in no time. :D Just like "sarcasm". And it will be well-deserved too! :)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

 How many posts does it take to get 5 stars? If I keep making worthless posts like this one, I should get there in no time.

sculpture

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2544
  • Getbig!
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #41 on: April 08, 2006, 03:04:12 PM »
How many posts does it take to get 5 stars? If I keep making worthless posts like this one, I should get there in no time.

Did you say worthless posts? Hey, i'll race you to five stars. But you can only get there by worthless posting. Okay?

LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #42 on: April 08, 2006, 03:04:52 PM »
  ;D

sculpture

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2544
  • Getbig!
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #43 on: April 08, 2006, 03:09:16 PM »
  Wow! What a brilliant comment! Continue making incisive posts such as these, and you'll win your fifth star in no time. :D Just like "sarcasm". And it will be well-deserved too! :)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

 ;D

LuciusFox

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8775

MisterMagoo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5591
  • And now, what joy will I have left to live for?
Re: Ruhl should have won the 2003 Arnold
« Reply #45 on: April 08, 2006, 03:40:00 PM »
  His density and graininess is astounding; but that is not enough to win a pro show. As far as conditioning goes, Ruhl is the closest I've ever seen to Dorian's level. But this does not the fact that his structure has several flaws and that he lacks the crispness of detail in key bodyparts, like legs and middle back, to be a major contender.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

ruhl's conditioning was on level with dorian? did you drink windex a lot when you were younger? i like ruhl, he's huge and underrated, but one of his biggest problems has always been that he looks soft as a baby's ass from behind.