Author Topic: Ronnie vs Arnold. Switched legs (Read 18003 times)

getfast81 · « **Reply #100 on:** February 03, 2007, 03:50:21 PM »

WRONG................... ....

&mode=related&search=

Hulkster · « **Reply #101 on:** February 03, 2007, 04:19:47 PM »

Quote from: tommywishbone on February 03, 2007, 03:40:42 PM

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.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #102 on:** February 03, 2007, 04:27:37 PM »

Ronnie around 220/230

Dingleberry · « **Reply #103 on:** February 03, 2007, 04:34:36 PM »

When are you bitches going to learn that Arnold was the best bodybuilder to ever walk the planet?

Dingleberry · « **Reply #104 on:** February 03, 2007, 04:37:15 PM »

.. NO SYNTHOL, NO GH, NO T3, NO CLEN, NO IGF, NOT EVEN CREATINE....

Pollux · « **Reply #105 on:** February 03, 2007, 04:46:49 PM »

Quote from: Dingleberry on February 03, 2007, 04:34:36 PM

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.

hipolito mejia · « **Reply #106 on:** February 03, 2007, 05:06:43 PM »

Ronnie's arms are too long for his torso, easier to note on those early pics....

Voice of Doom · « **Reply #107 on:** February 03, 2007, 07:16:25 PM »

Quote from: hipolito mejia on February 03, 2007, 05:06:43 PM

Ronnie's arms are too long for his torso, easier to note on those early pics....

Arms to long, biceps to short and no forearms.

body88 · « **Reply #108 on:** February 03, 2007, 07:28:11 PM »

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.

Voice of Doom · « **Reply #109 on:** February 03, 2007, 08:23:28 PM »

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

pobrecito · « **Reply #110 on:** February 03, 2007, 08:51:36 PM »

those calves...my god

realkarateblackbelt · « **Reply #111 on:** February 03, 2007, 10:42:11 PM »

hahaha Yes!!!! Arnold is god!

Tombo · « **Reply #112 on:** February 04, 2007, 03:58:54 AM »

omg.. arnie > *

but stfu about Ronnie take it to the other fucking threads im sick of seeing pics of his boring physique

Bear · « **Reply #113 on:** February 04, 2007, 04:09:11 AM »

Quote from: The True Adonis on February 03, 2007, 12:27:58 AM

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?!

As long as you have the arms to match!^

GoneAway · « **Reply #114 on:** February 04, 2007, 04:48:36 AM »

Quote from: Bear on February 04, 2007, 04:09:11 AM

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?!

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.

ether · « **Reply #115 on:** February 04, 2007, 05:22:06 AM »

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

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.

The only thing Ronnie might beat him on is quads and glutes, but, much like platz, who the hell cares.

Pollux · « **Reply #116 on:** February 04, 2007, 05:55:46 AM »

Quote from: realkarateblackbelt on February 03, 2007, 10:42:11 PM

hahaha Yes!!!! Arnold is god!

So should we all hail???

Hellz yeah!!!

Shockwave · « **Reply #117 on:** February 04, 2007, 08:43:32 AM »

Quote from: ether on February 04, 2007, 05:22:06 AM

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

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.
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.

Hulkster · « **Reply #118 on:** February 04, 2007, 09:12:56 AM »

Quote from: Shockwave on February 04, 2007, 08:43:32 AM

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:

Shockwave · « **Reply #119 on:** February 04, 2007, 09:23:45 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 04, 2007, 09:12:56 AM

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.

Knives · « **Reply #120 on:** February 04, 2007, 09:26:24 AM »

Quote from: Dingleberry on February 03, 2007, 04:37:15 PM

.. NO SYNTHOL, NO GH, NO T3, NO CLEN, NO IGF, NOT EVEN CREATINE....

NO LEGS!

Dingleberry · « **Reply #121 on:** February 04, 2007, 09:36:50 AM »

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.

Dingleberry · « **Reply #122 on:** February 04, 2007, 09:40:35 AM »

Quote from: Knives on February 04, 2007, 09:26:24 AM

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.

body88 · « **Reply #123 on:** February 04, 2007, 09:42:53 AM »

Quote from: body88 on February 03, 2007, 07:28:11 PM

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.

Thee pictures are pretty amazing

the shadow · « **Reply #124 on:** February 04, 2007, 09:46:26 AM »

Quote from: Dingleberry on February 04, 2007, 09:40:35 AM

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