Whats That? Ronnie Way Bigger Than Dorian???

[NarcissisticDeity]

are you an idiot?

the point of that post was to disprove your claim that ronnie in 2004 was out of shape despite having striations and vascularity.

He WAS NOT in good shape that year.

and his relative lack of deep striations proves it.

LMAFO relative lack of deep striations how about the excess fat and water? oh thats right you're to busy looking at the ' fine lines ' lol you have much to learn young one.
 

[NarcissisticDeity]

1996 Mr Olympia

[Hulkster]

Dorian's lower lats and erector spinae were covered in striation in a like Coleman's never , Dorian's interclostals and obliques same thing , his chest was covered in striations

wrong, wrong and wrong:

[Hulkster]

1996 Mr Olympia

everytime I see shots of Ronnie in 96 I think there is NO WAY he could possibly be 255 or whatever his weight was supposedly listed in Ironman or whatever the mag was when his quads looked half the size that they were at 257 in 1999:

[NarcissisticDeity]

wrong, wrong and wrong:

not even close slick 

[suckmymuscle]

but of what relevance is the actual number when its the illusion that counts?

eg. take two guys with equal "mathematical" lat widths.

one has a wide, monster oblique waist, lets call this guy "dorian" just for the sake of argument.

the other has a tiny, trim waist. Let call this guy um.."Ronnie" just for the hell of it.

Now onstage, who is going to look wider?

the guy we called Ronnie will...

  My point is that who's lat appears wider is not an indication of width. Of course the illusion is part of bodybuilding. Wheeler appeared to be bigger than he was due to his small joints and round muscle bellies. However, it is exactly because Ronnie has rounder lats that they appear to b e wider than they really are. This is relevant in the judging, but it does not change the fact that Dorian most likely carried the most back muscle mass when compared to the 1999 Coleman. I'm not arguing who appeared to be wider, but who actually was wider;) Get it? An while Ronnie's rounder muscles gives him an impression of being biiger than he actually is, Dorian stony muscle does the same. Recall that Dorian looked as big as Nasser despit ethe latter weighing 30 lbs more, because Diesel's muscles were so hard. So, it evens out in the illusion department for both Dorian and Ronnie.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[NarcissisticDeity]

everytime I see shots of Ronnie in 96 I think there is NO WAY he could possibly be 255 or whatever his weight was supposedly listed in Ironman or whatever the mag was when his quads looked half the size that they were at 257 in 1999:

he was 250 pounds at the 1996 Mr Olympia , he was 255 pounds at the 1997 Mr Olympia and he's fuller in 1999 because he finally learned how to carb-up and at the 1996 Canadian pro he was 262 pounds !

[Hulkster]

Recall that Dorian looked as big as Nasser despit ethe latter weighing 30 lbs more

recall what I said about your premises being wrong?:

Nasser looked a lot bigger than dorian every time they stood next to each other onstage:

[pumpster]

Not only is Nasser overwhelming Yates, Yates arms don't even look like those of a pro in comparison with either of the other guys.

Listening to Yates in recent interviews, it's remarkable how unaware he is of his good fortune in some of the contests. He appears to share ND's delusions that it was all "earned the hard way". 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Not only is Nasser overwhelming Yates, Yates arms don't even look like those of a pro in comparison with either of the other guys.

Thank you , you proved my point that you don't need the biggest arms to beat guys with bigger arms 

[pumpster]

Thank you , you proved my point that you don't need the biggest arms to beat guys with bigger arms 

Those arms and other attributes prove the point about suspect judging.

[Hulkster]

Thank you , you proved my point that you don't need the biggest arms to beat guys with bigger arms 

no, you just need partial judges...

dorian did not deserve a perfect score in 96 looking like he did:

shawn was incredible that night. And nasser was better than Yates from the front too.

And Yates gets a perfect score

[slaveboy1980]

ronnie isnt way bigger than dorian...both had offseason weights of around 315lbs...dorian was upto 318lbs at one point and i think coleman was up at 322lbs or something. Im sure dorian could have competed at 282 or so if he really wanted. coleman in the late 90s was better than dorian ever was. Ronnie should retire now tho.

[pumpster]

ronnie isnt way bigger than dorian...both had offseason weights of around 315lbs...

Next you'll be telling us that Nasser's the same size as Yates.  Here's a hint: bodyweight's not the entire basis for determining size, that's a weak basis in fact.

[Hulkster]

coleman in the late 90s was better than dorian ever was.

take note ND: most people think you are nuts for arguing that dorian was ever better than Ronnie 98 or 99.

[slaveboy1980]

Next you'll be telling us that Nasser's the same size as Yates.  Here's a hint: bodyweight's not the entire basis for determining size, that's a weak basis in fact.

pumpster: i think if 2 men have similar bodyweights..their bodies will not be radically different sizewise (with fat percentages of 4-5), no?

[NarcissisticDeity]

take note ND: most people think you are nuts for arguing that dorian was ever better than Ronnie 98 or 99.

Wow then I must be wrong  if I were dead wrong the truce thread would NEVER be 650 pages 

[Hulkster]

pumpster: i think if 2 men have similar bodyweights..their bodies will not be radically different sizewise (with fat percentages of 4-5), no?

yes but their proprotions can be different:

for example, Ronnie has bigger arms but smaller calves.  Quads were about the same size.

[pumpster]

pumpster: i think if 2 men have similar bodyweights..their bodies will not be radically different sizewise (with fat percentages of 4-5), no?

Bones can be considerably thicker (Yates) as well as the bone structure (Yates), which effects the actual volume of muscle and the difference in waist to shoulder & upper arm to wrist ratios, to name a couple.

Plus the muscle size can vary widely in placement: Platz compared with Padilla for example.

[slaveboy1980]

yes ND Is wrong..dorian was never as good as ronnie was..in late 90s..including 97.
but to say that ronnie was way bigger than dorian is bs.

[slaveboy1980]

Bones can be considerably thicker (Yates) as well as the bone structure (Yates), which effects the actual volume of muscle and the difference in waist to shoulder & upper arm to wrist ratios, to name a couple.

lol..for sure but not so much that one guy is way bigger than the other. i want a cookie

[NarcissisticDeity]

no, you just need partial judges...

dorian did not deserve a perfect score in 96 looking like he did:

shawn was incredible that night. And nasser was better than Yates from the front too.

And Yates gets a perfect score

Again you're basing your argument on never seeing Yates live and in person on a few scans lol typical newbie move oh don't forget to keep this in mind 


Flex magazine Jan 1992 on Dorian Yates

" Dorian has the type of physique that looks much better and more powerfull in person than photos. I personally saw him onstage , and Yates if definitely light years ahead of the way he looks in photos.


MuscleMag International Feb 1994 on Dorian Yates at the 1993 Mr Olympia


" He's huge , absolutely HUGE ...he's ripped completely RIPPED. And while he's not in possession of the prettiest physique body by a long shot , he's equipped with all the bodyparts you need to win .

Combine this with the fact that he's 10 TIMES more impressive when you see him onstage at the Olympia than he is in pictures or on videos and you got yourself a winner.

[pumpster]

but to say that ronnie was way bigger than dorian is bs.

Well the pic shows a considerable size advantage across the board, and that was only '96. Nasser was also clearly bigger.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Well the pic shows a considerable size advantage across the board, and that was only '96. Nasser was also clearly bigger.

He may have been heavier however he wasn't as dry as Yates and he failed the diuretics test to boot.

[slaveboy1980]

Well the pic shows a considerable size advantage across the board, and that was only '96. Nasser was also clearly bigger.

no it doesnt..not when they stand equally close to the camera..in the pic where dorian looks smaller than nasser he stands further away then nasser does. besides i never argues that yates was bigger than nasser...nasser competed at 282-285 several times in the late 90s. Also nasser was  better than yates in 96 and 97 i believe, atleast one of those years. and nassers back wasnt the best of all time but to say say it was that bad as some people claim is bullshit, once again atleast 96-97.