Dorian At The 1996 Olympia.

[IceCold]

Stop being a cvnt and take the time to actually pay attention to the video evidence..

Coleman close on density but huge advantages on size, tapers, shape, aesthetics, flow, overall cuts, refinement, vascularity, etc.

coleman had those advantages throughout dorian's career.

how did he do against dorian?

[IceCold]

Glad you enjoyed it-now the party's over..

&mode=related&search=

nope.


dorian was dryer and harder.  and that is not even his best year as far as conditioning.

coleman has the edge in shape, taper, etc. but he had that in 92-97.

the only reason ronnie won in 98 was the improvement in his conditioning.  he got a big bigger (more lat and quad sweep) but it was the difference in ronnie's conditioning that enabled him to be a tier b guy in 97 to winner in 98.

however, his conditioning is no where near dorian's level.

but would coleman's size and asethetics with his improved conditioning be enough to beat dorian?

i still think dorian's combo of size WITH conditioning would edge coleman.


that's why this thread is over 400 pages.

[gibberj2]

HELP ME! My youtube gives me an error that I need to download latest flash player or that my java is off. i downloaded it and it gives me same problem. java i dont know how to mess with.

[figgs]

I won that show!

Where's the sandow to prove it?

[ali23]

that was Shawns show.... it really was... Shawn deserves two sandows.. 1996 and 1998.

[IceCold]

that was Shawns show.... it really was... Shawn deserves two sandows.. 1996 and 1998.

98? 

are you serious. 

shawn was off that year and got 5th.

explain why he should have won.

96?

shawn was much, much smaller than dorian and dorian is in better shape.

how would shawn win?

personally, i would have had nasser 2nd.

[pumpster]

coleman had those advantages throughout dorian's career.

how did he do against dorian?

Extremely weak. Zane beat Schwarzenegger-in 1968. For you apparently, time has no meaning. You should compare Grimek with Yates too. 

[Hulkster]

dorian does not look that great in that vid compared to the 1993 clip I have seen.

His arms look really small for his upper body and they are very smooth in the front shots.

His legs even look small for him - and are not seperated at all.

His lower back and upper back look good - but man, his torn bi is screwed in that front double bi.


ps and all that crap about how great dorian's side chest was from ND is bullshit. His side chest was not so hot in that clip.

Dorian almost looked too depleted in that vid - not nearly as full as in 1993.

hell, even his rear lat spread did not look that great because his taper was hurt by his wide waist in the vid.

Pumpster is right:




1999 Ronnie would have beat that particular version of Dorian quite easily.

Peronally, other than his lower and upper back, I don't think that was one of dorian's better performances.

[stomper]

i a;ways liked dorian better than ronnie but no way dorian at his best would beat ronnie at his best

[suckmymuscle]

that clip.
hell, even his rear lat spread did not look that great because his taper was hurt by his wide waist in the vid.

  Actually, he was compared to Coleman for rear lat spread and defeated him with straight-firsts. Wide waist? Dorian's waist was not an inch thicker than in previous years, and he came in with his best conditioning ever. What the fuck are you talking about? Also, he didn't need to have fantastic taper in this pose, because Coleman didn't have either and, at everything else, Dorian takes Coleman out.

Pumpster is right:

  You have just discredited yourself: Pumpster is an intellectual train-wreck and never right

1999 Ronnie would have beat that particular version of Dorian quite easily.

  No, he wouldn't. Dorian was 260 lbs with more and harder muscle. His stomach was flat as a board and he had etched serratus. His taper might not be as good, but at least his gut is not distended. You're seriously deluded if you think that Ronnie would flat out defeat any version of Dorian, especially his 1996 one, when his strenghs were even stronger than usual, and his hardness compensated for his few weaknesses - such as his wide hips.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[IceCold]

Dorian almost looked too depleted in that vid - not nearly as full as in 1993.

well, 93 was his best year....

dorian said in an interview that he did come in flat.

that was the first year of diuretic testing.

i assume he couldnt use his normal diuretics and had to compensate for coming in flat.


he was flat and ronnie at his peak would probably beat that version of dorian, but it still wouldnt be easy - based on dorian's conditioning alone.  he was still 260 lbs.

93 and 95?  different story. 

but like i said earlier,  dorian looks much better on the vhs.  the youtube clip makes dorian (and every other bber) look "thinner" than they do on the tape.  it seems condensed in a wierd way. 

[the shadow]

  Exactly. No one pointed out Dorian's muscularity in 1996, but everyone believed that he had set a standard for dryness that is just preter-human. Personally, I don't believe that 1993 was Dorian's best year; that might be the case for muscularity. But I think that, conditioning-wise, Dorian was much better in 1995 and 1996. As I see it, Dorian took the sport to an unattainable - for the time - level of muscularity, but then didn't really increase his muscular size anymore. 1994 was a flop: he came in as a poorer, heavier but less crisp version of himself. In 1995, though, !BAM!, he hit the stage with a "stony" appearance which, even today, almost a decade after his retirement, still represent the ne plus ultra of bodybuilding conditioning. 1996, as I see it, was an even drier and harder version of 1995, arguably the best shape any bodybuilder has ever stepped onstage, bar none. The problem is that Dorian was depleted and lost a lot of his muscle thickness - except for back.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

i would say the level of conditioning that yates attained at the olympia 1996 was the unreal..he was quite muscular too..his back and his trademark side triceps poses were amazing..considering the fact that yates was in that freaky drier than bone condition he still had his trademark poses stand out the best from the rest of the guys and yes his waist looked flat as a board..that was the most incredible package ever...

[suckmymuscle]

i would say the level of conditioning that yates attained at the olympia 1996 was the unreal..he was quite muscular too..his back and his trademark side triceps poses were amazing..considering the fact that yates was in that freaky drier than bone condition he still had his trademark poses stand out the best from the rest of the guys and yes his waist looked flat as a board..that was the most incredible package ever...

  Agreed. I don't understand why people go on and on about Dorian in his 1993 form. Sure, that year he set a standard for muscularity that hadn't been seen before. But what people forget is that it was in 1995 and 1996 that Dorian set the standard for conditioning, which is what Dorian most became known for. If you look at Dorian's physique past 1993, you'll see that he made no real improvements in muscular size; it seems like Diesel found his competive weight arond 260 lbs - with a variation of a few pounds every year -, and then only improved his quality. If you look at Dorian at the 1995 or 1996 Olympias, you'll see that his muscles were not much bigger than in 1993. However, they had crisper details and his  trademark dnsity was at it's all time best those two years. It was in 1995/6 that Dorian set the standard for the "stony" look, which became the holy grail that all professional bodybuilders aspire to achieve even today, almost a decade after Dorian's retirement. If you look at the magazines reviews from 1993, you'll see that the whole hype that year was about how monstrous Yates'  muscles were in terms of size; there was no raving about his separations, dryness, etc. Yet, when you read the reviews from the 1995 and 1996 Olympias, all the writers were complimenting Dorian's unbelievable hardness&dryness,  not necessarily his muscularity. I agree with you: Dorian's 1995 and 1996 packages were the best of all times when it comes to density and dryness.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[ali23]

98? 

are you serious. 

shawn was off that year and got 5th.

explain why he should have won.

96?

shawn was much, much smaller than dorian and dorian is in better shape.

how would shawn win?

personally, i would have had nasser 2nd.

He placed low yes in 1998... but if you saw his video made by the japanese guy, you would know what i mean.. weeks out he looked amazing, and he looked amazing on stage... he was aesthetic, full, and vascular... he looked amazing and deserved the win..

[Hulkster]

coleman had those advantages throughout dorian's career.

no he didn't.

Ronnie got beat by everyone and his uncle before he peaked.

everyone knows that.

[Rammer]

I just uploaded this clip of Dorian at the '92 Olympia to YouTube:

More fuel for the fire 

[pobrecito]

I just uploaded this clip of Dorian at the '92 Olympia to YouTube:

More fuel for the fire 

Thanks! Awesome clip, rare footage!!

[Hulkster]

cool vid. Thanks for putting it up!

unfortunately, the footage shows us what we already know about dorian from that time period:

poor arms and quads, great abs on top of a wide waist.

I know ND and co. orgasm about how "balanced" dorian was, when in reality, anyone with one good eye can see that his arms were undersized for his upper torso. Its evident in most pics and is clear on most videos, including that one.

the only shots where you can't tell are the superclose up ones.

and of course, whenever the topic of Dorian's arms comes up, thats all that is posted: superclose up shots

[NarcissisticDeity]

cool vid. Thanks for putting it up!

unfortunately, the footage shows us what we already know about dorian from that time period:

poor arms and quads, great abs on top of a wide waist.

I know ND and co. orgasm about how "balanced" dorian was, when in reality, anyone with one good eye can see that his arms were undersized for his upper torso. Its evident in most pics and is clear on most videos, including that one.

the only shots where you can't tell are the superclose up ones.

and of course, whenever the topic of Dorian's arms comes up, thats all that is posted: superclose up shots

You should really pay attention slick , at his best 1993/95 Dorian's balance & proportion are without flaws , 96 not his best showing but still better than any of his contemporaries.

[Hulkster]

misleading pic ND. It doesn't show his main flaw in the back poses: he is not flexing his arms.

if he was, they would disappear:

[NarcissisticDeity]

misleading pic ND. It doesn't show his main flaw in the back poses: he is not flexing his arms.

if he was, they would disappear:

Thats 1997 NOT 1996 and either way he owned Ronnie in both contests lol

[Hulkster]

ND, what you fail to grasp is that it doesn't matter whether it is 1991, 1993, 1992, 1996 or 1997:

Dorian's arms were undersized for his torso and looked bad compared to someone like Ronnie whether it was 1234 or 1997 it doesn't matter.

its like Ronnie's calves: they have always been too small for his quads and have always sucked.


piss poor in 94

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND, what you fail to grasp is that it doesn't matter whether it is 1991, 1993, 1992, 1996 or 1997:

Dorian's arms were undersized for his torso and looked bad compared to someone like Ronnie whether it was 1234 or 1997 it doesn't matter.

its like Ronnie's calves: they have always been too small for his quads and have always sucked.


piss poor in 94

At his best his arms were NOT undersized for his torso , and unlike Ronnie calves , Yates' arms don't lack development 

[Hulkster]

gee, a superclose up shot.

what a surprise


dorian's arms where always undersized, even at higher bodyweights.

[NarcissisticDeity]

gee, a superclose up shot.

what a surprise


dorian's arms where always undersized, even at higher bodyweights.

Second attepmt and second failure lol same contest slick