Author Topic: Dorian 1995 Would Have Won This Year's Olympia. (Read 6535 times)

Shockwave · « **Reply #50 on:** September 30, 2007, 05:25:44 PM »

Quote from: M75 on September 30, 2007, 05:24:39 PM

I'm a fan of Cutler, but he's not in Dorian's league.

Exactly.
I like Jay 01, early pre-pro Jay, and I think he won in 06.
He just can't compare to Dorian.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #51 on:** September 30, 2007, 05:26:22 PM »

Quote from: EL Mariachi on September 30, 2007, 05:22:18 PM

Wolf would make dorian look like a little kid, even the grainy dorian coudnt stop the WOLF.

Wolf has a great structure and good size , however he's conditioning is less than stella I think a much improved Wolf would give Yates trouble but last nights version no way he's years away from being his best.

IceCold · « **Reply #52 on:** September 30, 2007, 05:30:48 PM »

Quote from: affy on September 30, 2007, 05:16:46 PM

anyone who was top 5 in the 90s would have won last night olympia

ANYONE

and thats fucking sad

each year you realize how much better guys where in the 90's.

superior conditioning.

EL Mariachi · « **Reply #53 on:** September 30, 2007, 05:54:31 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on September 30, 2007, 05:26:22 PM

Wolf has a great structure and good size , however he's conditioning is less than stella I think a much improved Wolf would give Yates trouble but last nights version no way he's years away from being his best.

A tight midsection counts more then a pair of calves in bb. Dorian only has him at conditioning and back detail, on everything else WOLF is clearly superior, enough to be a better bb in my book.

Shockwave · « **Reply #54 on:** September 30, 2007, 05:56:07 PM »

Quote from: EL Mariachi on September 30, 2007, 05:54:31 PM

A tight midsection counts more then a pair of calves in bb. Dorian only has him at conditioning and back detail, on everything else WOLF is clearly superior, enough to be a better bb in my book.

Wolf's lats are too high, no calves, although he is wider and taller.
He definitely has the potential to be mentioned with the greats though.

Shockwave · « **Reply #55 on:** September 30, 2007, 05:56:41 PM »

Quote from: EL Mariachi on September 30, 2007, 05:54:31 PM

A tight midsection counts more then a pair of calves in bb. Dorian only has him at conditioning and back detail, on everything else WOLF is clearly superior, enough to be a better bb in my book.

BTW, Dorians midsection was very tight up to 93 and 95, his two best years.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #56 on:** September 30, 2007, 06:17:28 PM »

Quote from: EL Mariachi on September 30, 2007, 05:54:31 PM

A tight midsection counts more then a pair of calves in bb. Dorian only has him at conditioning and back detail, on everything else WOLF is clearly superior, enough to be a better bb in my book.

See pics for a tight midsection , and weak calves can be seen in every pose in every angle , and Dorian's has him in muscle density & conditioning , and thickness especially in his back Yates' has lower lats better ba;ance & proportion and its okay you think Wolf is better in your book but your book isn't how contests are judged

Wolf has a clear edge in symmetry in the context of naturally wider clavicles and small waist & hips , but on the flip side Yates has the clear edge in balance & proportion

bizzy · « **Reply #57 on:** September 30, 2007, 08:08:27 PM »

If we wanna talk Dorian and conditioning check out the 92
version. I watched the 93 - 15 pounds heavier version and
I'm still not sure the 92 version is not better.
Watch them back to back and decide for yourself.
The added conditioning always makes someone appear larger than they
actually are.

IceCold · « **Reply #58 on:** September 30, 2007, 08:31:55 PM »

any version of yates would have won this year's olympia (except maybe 92).

every year - even his worst of 94, he was still in superior shape to anyone in 07.

Hulkster · « **Reply #59 on:** September 30, 2007, 09:10:41 PM »

I too liked the look of dorian 92 better than 93 except for the arms.

dorian 92 would have decimated the 07 stage.

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #60 on:** September 30, 2007, 09:39:02 PM »

Anyone who doesen't agree that Dorian 1995 would have won this year's Mr.Olympia is a moron. It is not even debatable. Amazing: a physique that won the Olympia a dozen years ago would still be good enough to win it today!

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Hulkster · « **Reply #61 on:** October 01, 2007, 03:49:15 AM »

Quote from: suckmymuscle on September 30, 2007, 09:39:02 PM

Anyone who doesen't agree that Dorian 1995 would have won this year's Mr.Olympia is a moron. It is not even debatable. Amazing: a physique that won the Olympia a dozen years ago would still be good enough to win it today!

SUCKMYMUSCLE

it gets worse that that.

Shawn Ray's 87 nationals presentation would have still likely been good enough to win.

Monster81 · « **Reply #62 on:** October 01, 2007, 04:00:26 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on October 01, 2007, 03:49:15 AM

it gets worse that that.

Shawn Ray's 87 nationals presentation would have still likely been good enough to win.

LOL,

rocket · « **Reply #63 on:** October 01, 2007, 04:01:32 AM »

There are plenty of people who would say that arnold of year X could have won too.

They wouldn't be right either.

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #64 on:** October 01, 2007, 12:56:56 PM »

Quote from: rocket on October 01, 2007, 04:01:32 AM

There are plenty of people who would say that arnold of year X could have won too.

They wouldn't be right either.

Meltdown. Dorian was 260 lbs bone-dry in 1995 at a height of 5'10. Arnold at his biggest was 237 lbs at 6'2. Big difference! Arnold could never have won this year's Olympia because he would be too small for his height. His aeshtetics and symmetry would blow everyone away, yes, but he would be too lacking in the mass department. This is not the case with Dorian 1995.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #65 on:** October 03, 2007, 02:45:44 AM »

Bump for this thread.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Matt C · « **Reply #66 on:** October 03, 2007, 03:04:07 AM »

Quote from: suckmymuscle on September 30, 2007, 04:21:16 PM

He would. Let's compare him to winner, Gay Gutler. Dorian was 260 lbs, only 14 lbs lighter than Gutler. When you take into consideration that Dorian is still harder than Jay at 270 lbs, you realize that they are at least tied in mass, and Dorian might actually have more. Dorian's conditioning is still better than Gay's at 270 lbs, which means that it is infinitely better at 260 lbs. Dorian 1995 has:

- A back as big as Gay's, but with superior separations and it is much harder.

- Quads are tied for size, but Dorian has better calves.

- Superior triceps.

- Superior abdominal/serratus separations

- Smaller waist.

On account of all that, Dorian would win:

- Back double biceps.(backs equivalent in size, but Dorian has better separations and hardness)

- Abs-and-thighs.(Dorian's waist is smaller and his abdominal separations are much better)

- Front lat spread(dorian's lats are as wide as Gutler's, and his taper is superior)

They would tie:

- Rear lat spread - It could go either way. Their backs are about the same in size and neither the two are missing anything in this mandatory.

- Side triceps - I still think Dorian has the best side triceps of a Mr.Olympia ever, but Gay's is very, very good. Both have long triceps bellies, and both are missing nothing in this mandatory.

Gutler would win:

Side chest - They are both missing nothing in this mandatory, but Gay's pecs are thicker, so it would go to him.

Front double biceps - Give it to Gay, because Dorian's arms mass doesen't add up in this pose.

The symmetry round would go to Dorian flat out because he has better taper than Gutler from the three angles.(front, back and sides)

In conclusion: Dorian would be the 2007 Mr.Olympia if he stepped onstage in the exact shape he was circa 1995. It is amazing that an Olympia physique from a dozen years ago would still be good enough to win the Olympia nowadays! The Yates was truly light-years ahead of his time!

SUCKMYMUSCLE

No need to write all this. You seem to think writing so much will make your points more valid. Dorian 1993 was better than Jay at the show. Just as Ronnie overall was better than Dorian overall. No need to write in depth to demonstrate these facts.

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #67 on:** October 03, 2007, 11:04:28 AM »

Quote from: Matt C on October 03, 2007, 03:04:07 AM

No need to write all this. You seem to think writing so much will make your points more valid. Dorian 1993 was better than Jay at the show.

Dorian 1995 was better than Dorian 1993. Yeah, Dorian 1993 would still defeat Gay, but Dorian 1995 defeats both Gay and his 1993 version.

Quote

Just as Ronnie overall was better than Dorian overall.

Ha ha ha ha...and your reasons are? I have already provided enormous evidence for my case at the truce thread, while you have failed to provide any evidence at all, except saying that "Ronnie is better than Dorian". I find the Coleman fans hilarious. They believe that Ronnie is better than Dorian for no other reason than that's their opinion. What a a moron...

Quote

No need to write in depth to demonstrate these facts.

Fuck you.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

P.S: how does it make you feel that your hero was defeated by a fly named Dexter Jackson?

Hulkster · « **Reply #68 on:** October 03, 2007, 02:45:30 PM »

Quote from: Matt C on October 03, 2007, 03:04:07 AM

No need to write all this. You seem to think writing so much will make your points more valid Just as Ronnie overall was better than Dorian overall. No need to write in depth to demonstrate these facts.

great post!

the nuthuggers seem to think that endless paragraphs of babbling will somehow make their invalid points stronger..

it doesn't work that way.

all that matters is how they look onstage..

suckmymuscle · « **Reply #69 on:** October 03, 2007, 04:42:15 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on October 03, 2007, 02:45:30 PM

great post!

One Coleman guy agreeing with another. You proved me wrong!

Quote

all that matters is how they look onstage..

Yes, except that what the judges are looking for is not the same as what you're looking for, Hulky.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #70 on:** October 03, 2007, 04:47:49 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on October 03, 2007, 02:45:30 PM

great post!

the nuthuggers seem to think that endless paragraphs of babbling will somehow make their invalid points stronger..

it doesn't work that way.

all that matters is how they look onstage..

Let me translate this post " I can't articulate my point and when I make a feeble attempt I fall flat on my face and look stupid in the process , so what I prefer to do is post pics are say " see Ronnie is better " and " everyone agrees with me "

Onstage at his best Yates was untouchable .

Hulkster · « **Reply #71 on:** October 03, 2007, 05:59:03 PM »

Quote

Onstage at his best Yates was untouchable but only well before Ronnie hit his peak .

fixed.

Palpatine Q · « **Reply #72 on:** October 03, 2007, 06:01:30 PM »

Don't you two have a six billion page thread for this shit?

PS Ronnie was better at his peak

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #73 on:** October 03, 2007, 06:20:12 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on October 03, 2007, 05:59:03 PM

fixed.

Oh yeah peak Ronnie was lighter , lagged behind in balance & proportion and density & conditioning and just barely beat Flex Wheeler a man Dorian DOMINATED peak Ronnie doesn't offer anything Yates can't handle

Hulkster · « **Reply #74 on:** October 03, 2007, 06:31:32 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on October 03, 2007, 06:20:12 PM

Oh yeah peak Ronnie was lighter , lagged behind in balance & proportion and density & conditioning and just barely beat Flex Wheeler a man Dorian DOMINATED peak Ronnie doesn't offer anything Yates can't handle

according to you and no one else.