Author Topic: ruhl vs. nasser (Read 6478 times)

dragonheart · « **Reply #25 on:** October 15, 2007, 10:12:38 AM »

nasser in the mid 90s was godlike. he went to shit pretty fast though

BayGBM · « **Reply #26 on:** October 15, 2007, 10:15:03 AM »

Tamer Razor · « **Reply #27 on:** October 15, 2007, 10:23:05 AM »

Nasser was one of the best in the 90's. With historic epic battles with Flex,Dorian....
Ruhl never achieved that condition necessary to battle with the best. Even if he did ...Nasser was better structurally.

affeman · « **Reply #28 on:** October 15, 2007, 10:47:05 AM »

Ruhl was awesome in the late 90s and early 2000s. Probably the best chest ever! And his NOC 2002 shape would kill Nasser any day of the week! Altough Nasser was better and more constant over a longer time, but best Ruhl vs. best Nasser, I'd say Ruhl.

Top 3 Olympia-Material:

fakeblood · « **Reply #29 on:** October 15, 2007, 12:22:08 PM »

NEITHER, BOTH HAVE 2 BIGGA GROWTH GUTS

CC973 · « **Reply #30 on:** October 15, 2007, 12:29:59 PM »

nasser at his best would be better than ruhl.

he was always a bit soft from the back but still great for a few years.

Petrucci · « **Reply #31 on:** October 15, 2007, 12:34:34 PM »

Quote from: dragonheart on October 15, 2007, 10:12:38 AM

nasser in the mid 90s was godlike. he went to shit pretty fast though

it was more all the 90´s when he competed and some part of the 200´s (he won the 2001 AC if im not mistaken, and he was completely OWNING the competiton)

just the last years of his carrer went downrill...but at least he saw this very quick and stoped

Matt C · « **Reply #32 on:** October 15, 2007, 01:16:34 PM »

Quote from: dragonheart on October 15, 2007, 10:12:38 AM

nasser in the mid 90s was godlike. he went to shit pretty fast though

I would actually say Nasser going to shit was a slow progression.

monstercalves · « **Reply #33 on:** October 15, 2007, 02:22:57 PM »

Quote from: Petrucci on October 15, 2007, 12:34:34 PM

it was more all the 90´s when he competed and some part of the 200´s (he won the 2001 AC if im not mistaken, and he was completely OWNING the competiton)

just the last years of his carrer went downrill...but at least he saw this very quick and stoped

you are mistaken....big ron won it!

BayGBM · « **Reply #34 on:** October 15, 2007, 02:50:39 PM »

Nasser had muscle to spare... Ruhl not so much.

allpumpedup · « **Reply #35 on:** October 15, 2007, 02:56:43 PM »

edit: why doesnt the top 3 olympians look that good anymore?? The first pic is the definition of a pro bodybuilding competition IMO.

jason5581 · « **Reply #36 on:** October 15, 2007, 02:58:13 PM »

Nasser pre oil ruhl had a weak back and no triceps(why no great pictures from the back), nasser better overall package.

j3di3 · « **Reply #37 on:** October 15, 2007, 03:01:37 PM »

cgcgraded · « **Reply #38 on:** October 15, 2007, 03:02:33 PM »

i would love to see them compared at each one's best

Dballn247 · « **Reply #39 on:** October 15, 2007, 03:32:50 PM »

Nasser, no question. His symetry and aesthetics were far better. Don't get me wrong, they are both Freaks, Rhul and Fux in their primes would have been a better comparison.

BayGBM · « **Reply #40 on:** October 15, 2007, 03:36:39 PM »

Quote from: Dballn247 on October 15, 2007, 03:32:50 PM

Nasser, no question. His symetry and aesthetics were far better. Don't get me wrong, they are both Freaks, Rhul and Fux in their primes would have been a better comparison.

Agreed.

Gotta love this pic though; I'd love to peel Nasser's shirt off!

just_a_pilgrim · « **Reply #41 on:** October 15, 2007, 03:42:56 PM »

Quote from: affeman on October 15, 2007, 10:47:05 AM

ok i've always wondered this.

Look at these two pics. It looks like two completely different people?

The first pic he has spikey hair and his face looks very different, i would say much older.

However in the second pic (a few years later) he looks younger and his hair is very different. Anyone see this?

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #42 on:** October 15, 2007, 03:57:02 PM »

Nasser looked so much better at 250 pounds I mean seriously !

theworm · « **Reply #43 on:** October 15, 2007, 04:21:06 PM »

i wonder what GH15 would say in this?

Marcus vs nasser?

The Squadfather · « **Reply #44 on:** October 15, 2007, 04:22:56 PM »

Quote from: theworm on October 15, 2007, 04:21:06 PM

i wonder what GH15 would say in this?

Marcus vs nasser?

i'm sure he'd say he was better than either one of them which he may have been.

FreedomFighter · « **Reply #45 on:** October 15, 2007, 04:26:00 PM »

overall NASSER.

slaveboy1980 · « **Reply #46 on:** October 15, 2007, 04:26:24 PM »

Quote from: The Squadfather on October 15, 2007, 04:22:56 PM

i'm sure he'd say he was better than either one of them which he may have been.

he would say nasser

Jizzacked · « **Reply #47 on:** October 15, 2007, 04:27:40 PM »

I would say nasser...

that infamous spread with him and fux in flex I think it was back in the day was around when I first started lifting weights seriously... I hadn't seen anything like that before, lats were like holiday hams held under the arm, shit was insane.

bmuscle90 · « **Reply #48 on:** October 15, 2007, 04:49:29 PM »

I would pick Markus. He was very big overall in the 90's and still packs on size. Nice person.. not afraid to be himself around his fans or on his dvds. He was around 140-150lbs at age 18.. so to say he was already big when he started lifting is wrong. Hes come a long way. A true bodybuilder.

20inch calves · « **Reply #49 on:** October 15, 2007, 05:27:10 PM »

would be very close at there absolute bests

nasser 96 olympia?

ruhl 02 Noc?

those were there best showings in my opinion. i think nasser looked great at the 98 arnold also

Author Topic: ruhl vs. nasser (Read 6478 times)

Jizzacked