gymguy
Getbig III
  
Posts: 759
Getbig!
|
 |
« Reply #100 on: September 17, 2007, 04:01:49 PM » |
|
when did dorian get onstage at 280 lbs and win the olympia?
ronies biggest was 285 at 5'11 , so jay at 5'9" would be the lb for lb biggest guy ever to win the o if he comes in at 280 therefor setting a standard in size!
That's simply not true. Ronnie has weighed over 285lbs at a couple of his victories. Get your stats correct, then they can be called FACTS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
slayer
|
 |
« Reply #101 on: September 17, 2007, 04:05:51 PM » |
|
That's simply not true. Ronnie has weighed over 285lbs at a couple of his victories. Get your stats correct, then they can be called FACTS.
prove it dickhead!
|
|
|
|
|
|
corinth
|
 |
« Reply #102 on: September 17, 2007, 04:07:27 PM » |
|
That's simply not true. Ronnie has weighed over 285lbs at a couple of his victories. Get your stats correct, then they can be called FACTS.
Ronnie weighed 296 when he won the Olympia in 04 and was 300 when he won the Grand Prix shows a week later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #103 on: September 17, 2007, 04:08:05 PM » |
|
prove it dickhead!
doesnt matter, ronnie is far superior to jay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
slayer
|
 |
« Reply #104 on: September 17, 2007, 04:09:06 PM » |
|
doesnt matter, ronnie is far superior to jay.
arnie dorian and lee are far superior to ronnie 
|
|
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #105 on: September 17, 2007, 04:11:38 PM » |
|
arnie dorian and lee are far superior to ronnie  so your saying ronnie is superior to jay  .
|
|
|
|
|
|
affeman
|
 |
« Reply #106 on: September 17, 2007, 04:17:10 PM » |
|
arnie dorian and lee are far superior to ronnie  LOL Yeah, Arnold is far superior to Ronnie hahahahaha..... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #107 on: September 17, 2007, 04:18:58 PM » |
|
LOL Yeah, Arnold is far superior to Ronnie hahahahaha.....  actually in that pic ronnie looks like shit. terrible abs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
slayer
|
 |
« Reply #108 on: September 17, 2007, 04:18:58 PM » |
|
so your saying ronnie is superior to jay  . is that really saying much?
|
|
|
|
|
|
slayer
|
 |
« Reply #109 on: September 17, 2007, 04:20:20 PM » |
|
LOL Yeah, Arnold is far superior to Ronnie hahahahaha.....  arnie actually has bigger calves and a chests thats 2x as thick as ronnies 30 yrs ago on d ball! whats that tell ya?
|
|
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #110 on: September 17, 2007, 04:21:37 PM » |
|
is that really saying much?
not really as jay is together with cockson and scott the worst mr o:s. ronnie was at his best 97 or so..when he did his first movie. better than arnold. ronnie later fucked up his physique..and was still able to beat the fridge time after time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
affeman
|
 |
« Reply #111 on: September 17, 2007, 04:21:56 PM » |
|
arnie actually has bigger calves and a chests thats 2x as thick as ronnies 30 yrs ago on d ball! whats that tell ya?
That Ronnie is 60 pds heavier and three times as sharp, this it tells me.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #112 on: September 17, 2007, 04:25:29 PM » |
|
arnie actually has bigger calves and a chests thats 2x as thick as ronnies 30 yrs ago on d ball! whats that tell ya?
looking at that pic says alot about how incredible arnold was. sure his quads where shit compared to todays pros..and he wasnt as ripped as the guys where in the 90s..but he could walk like a normal person. amazing physique. but to be honest thats a shitty pic of ronnie...should use a pic before the gh made his abs hate each other. a good pic of ronnie from 97 would be even better than that arnie pic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parker
|
 |
« Reply #113 on: September 17, 2007, 04:26:53 PM » |
|
Actually pics don't really do justice and doesn't really show the scale...only if they stood side by side on stage together, or somebody actually took the time to scale Ronnie at 5'11 at his best and Arnold at 6'2 at his best in different poses (without actually pics, this will have to be virtual), taking in account waist differentials, weight and arms.
|
M
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #114 on: September 17, 2007, 04:28:39 PM » |
|
Actually pics don't really do justice and doesn't really show the scale...only if they stood side by side on stage together, or somebody actually took the time to scale Ronnie at 5'11 at his best and Arnold at 6'2 at his best in different poses (without actually pics, this will have to be virtual), taking in account waist differentials, weight and arms.
no shit sherlock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BEAST 8692
|
 |
« Reply #115 on: September 18, 2007, 07:24:01 AM » |
|
arnie actually has bigger calves and a chests thats 2x as thick as ronnies 30 yrs ago on d ball! whats that tell ya?
ronnie has much thicker pecs in that pic (gyno aside). there is no comparison in terms of muscle size and condition. ronnie just has a shit load more muscle and a lot less fat (his abs do look like shit though). i think people might be basing their opinions on who they think looks better, physique wise, but this is purely subjective. in terms of who would win a bbing contest, considering ifbb standards of competition, ronnie annihilates arnold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #116 on: September 18, 2007, 07:30:29 AM » |
|
ronnie has much thicker pecs in that pic (gyno aside).
there is no comparison in terms of muscle size and condition. ronnie just has a shit load more muscle and a lot less fat (his abs do look like shit though).
i think people might be basing their opinions on who they think looks better, physique wise, but this is purely subjective.
in terms of who would win a bbing contest, considering ifbb standards of competition, ronnie annihilates arnold.
of course but when i judge a physique i do so from a personal standpoint and to some extent from a normative point of view. in that pic, arnold looks better than ronnie. even if he isnt as ripped as ronnie. (of course pics dont tell the whole truth) that being said..if you put a pic of ronnie from 97 side by side with arnie pics (one year before he won the mr o) he would defeat arnold. abs are a very imporant part of the physique..they can make or break you as a bodybuilder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tombo
|
 |
« Reply #117 on: September 18, 2007, 07:32:51 AM » |
|
Ronnie looks pretty awesome..
But who prays to posters of Ronnie? cmon?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
BEAST 8692
|
 |
« Reply #118 on: September 18, 2007, 08:03:21 AM » |
|
of course but when i judge a physique i do so from a personal standpoint and to some extent from a normative point of view.
in that pic, arnold looks better than ronnie. even if he isnt as ripped as ronnie. (of course pics dont tell the whole truth)
that being said..if you put a pic of ronnie from 97 side by side with arnie pics (one year before he won the mr o) he would defeat arnold.
abs are a very imporant part of the physique..they can make or break you as a bodybuilder.
1.personal standpoint = subjective. 2. the irony is, if abs were that critical, arnold would never have won a bbing show.
|
|
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #119 on: September 18, 2007, 08:06:17 AM » |
|
1.personal standpoint = subjective.
2. the irony is, if abs were that critical, arnold would never have won a bbing show.
1.exactly, personal standpoint =subjective...thats what im saying, einstein. 2. arnold had a wider waist than many believe. but he was a master of twisting his abs and torso to make it look better
|
|
|
|
|
|
BEAST 8692
|
 |
« Reply #120 on: September 18, 2007, 08:15:18 AM » |
|
1.exactly, personal standpoint =subjective...thats what im saying, einstein.
2. arnold had a wider waist than many believe. but he was a master of twisting his abs and torso to make it look better
settle down bro. what i'm saying is, it's your opinion, and you know how the saying goes on opinions.  hell, there's people around that think goldberg should have been mr o. arnold can twist his waist 'til the cows come home, everyone knows, incuding arnold, that his abs were shit. if abs were important nubret would have kicked his ass at the 75 olympia. come to think of it, nubret would have kicked everyone's ass at every show and that zabo what'shisname would have replaced reeves and grimek.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cap
|
 |
« Reply #121 on: September 18, 2007, 08:19:24 AM » |
|
settle down bro. what i'm saying is, it's your opinion, and you know how the saying goes on opinions.  hell, there's people around that think goldberg should have been mr o. arnold can twist his waist 'til the cows come home, everyone knows, incuding arnold, that his abs were shit. if abs were important nubret would have kicked his ass at the 75 olympia. come to think of it, nubret would have kicked everyone's ass at every show and that zabo what'shisname would have replaced reeves and grimek. Arnold had a 34 inch waist to Ronnie's 44 inch waist; twisting or not Arnold's midsection will always look better than the GH guts of today.
|
Squishy face retard
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #122 on: September 18, 2007, 08:24:20 AM » |
|
settle down bro. what i'm saying is, it's your opinion, and you know how the saying goes on opinions.  hell, there's people around that think goldberg should have been mr o. arnold can twist his waist 'til the cows come home, everyone knows, incuding arnold, that his abs were shit. if abs were important nubret would have kicked his ass at the 75 olympia. come to think of it, nubret would have kicked everyone's ass at every show and that zabo what'shisname would have replaced reeves and grimek. you misunderstood me. waist is not only abs..it includes pregnant tendencies, if the waist is wide, how ripped your are etc. arnold for sure didnt have the best abs or the smallest waist..but he was never pregnant as ronnie. ronnie never had the best shaped abs, but had a small waist (not anymore tho). i would rather look like arnold when he was at his best than a current ronnie. but i would rather look like ronnie 97 than arnie at his best. edit: well in reality, i wouldnt want to look like neither of em. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
BEAST 8692
|
 |
« Reply #123 on: September 18, 2007, 08:41:02 AM » |
|
you misunderstood me. waist is not only abs..it includes pregnant tendencies, if the waist is wide, how ripped your are etc. arnold for sure didnt have the best abs or the smallest waist..but he was never pregnant as ronnie. ronnie never had the best shaped abs, but had a small waist (not anymore tho). i would rather look like arnold when he was at his best than a current ronnie. but i would rather look like ronnie 97 than arnie at his best. edit: well in reality, i wouldnt want to look like neither of em.  i hear you, but when it comes to prejudging and mandatories or free posing, ronnie's gut will be sucked in ie win to ronnie. arnold's waist was bad (in bbing terms). he learnt how to twist it because he had to. it was just too wide, and guys like oliva, nubret and zane made him look wider. personally, if i was a bber, i would much rather have ronnie's 2003 physique than '97 and i'd rather have arnold's physique than anyone competing in his era, but then, that's just another white man's opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
slaveboy1980
|
 |
« Reply #124 on: September 18, 2007, 08:54:41 AM » |
|
i hear you, but when it comes to prejudging and mandatories or free posing, ronnie's gut will be sucked in ie win to ronnie.
arnold's waist was bad (in bbing terms). he learnt how to twist it because he had to. it was just too wide, and guys like oliva, nubret and zane made him look wider.
personally, if i was a bber, i would much rather have ronnie's 2003 physique than '97 and i'd rather have arnold's physique than anyone competing in his era, but then, that's just another white man's opinion.
these things can be argued to death..just look at the ronnie vs yates thread. so im gonna try and stay out of these arguments most of the time from now on. ill say this tho..most of the current pros would look better weighing 225-240. ronnie looked best when 245 or so. edit: some of the guys under 5'7 would look better at 200-210 or so.
|
|
|
|
|
|