Author Topic: Putnum won't be earning his pro card this weekend. (Read 10342 times)

wisconsinBB · « **on:** November 16, 2007, 07:18:39 AM »

From the pics at MD, peter looks good, but Charles Dixon appears to easily have what it takes to beat Putnum.

mass 04 · « **Reply #1 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:20:41 AM »

Peter's back has come up a lot and he made good improvements but Dixon looks good too.

The_Iron_Disciple · « **Reply #2 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:21:00 AM »

Quote from: wisconsinBB on November 16, 2007, 07:18:39 AM

From the pics at MD, peter looks good, but Charles Dixon appears to easily have what it takes to beat Putnum.

I agree 100 % ! As I said earlier in another Thread, Charles looks SPOT ON !!

Brutal_1 · « **Reply #3 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:26:39 AM »

Quote from: wisconsinBB on November 16, 2007, 07:18:39 AM

From the pics at MD, peter looks good, but Charles Dixon appears to easily have what it takes to beat Putnum.

Not if FLEX has anything to say about it

And based on this year's Olympia and Peter's last win at the USA....I really wouldn't be too surprised if they give it to him

But DEEZAM, Dixon looks awesome!

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #4 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:27:34 AM »

guy on right looks better from 2 shots

Overload · « **Reply #5 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:27:48 AM »

Don't forget the political factor...

Brutal_1 · « **Reply #6 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:34:18 AM »

In the back comparison shot.....

Notice from the mid-back down to the waist...this is where using machines for back DIDN'T pay off

Grundle · « **Reply #7 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:40:27 AM »

Both gayer than owning an electric jar opener.

The Squadfather · « **Reply #8 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:42:12 AM »

Putnam looks a lot better than i thought he would, legs look like a mini version of Cutler's.

MAXX · « **Reply #9 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:44:41 AM »

both looks damn good.

i would have to see them side by side to decide who is better.

Colossus_1986 · « **Reply #10 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:47:25 AM »

Quote from: The Squadfather on November 16, 2007, 07:42:12 AM

Putnam looks a lot better than i thought he would, legs look like a mini version of Cutler's.

Dixon is a mini version of Toney Freeman, he's got an amazing flow to that physique, thats what it takes in the pro's.

The Squadfather · « **Reply #11 on:** November 16, 2007, 07:49:17 AM »

Quote from: Colossus_1986 on November 16, 2007, 07:47:25 AM

Dixon is a mini version of Toney Freeman, he's got an amazing flow to that physique, thats what it takes in the pro's.

yeah, he should beat Putnam but like i said Peter looks improved for sure.

Mars · « **Reply #12 on:** November 16, 2007, 08:00:55 AM »

mass 04 · « **Reply #13 on:** November 16, 2007, 08:04:14 AM »

Quote from: Mars on November 16, 2007, 08:00:55 AM

Peter looks great there, huge arms

Mars · « **Reply #14 on:** November 16, 2007, 08:12:10 AM »

thats lee priest.

mass 04 · « **Reply #15 on:** November 16, 2007, 08:14:56 AM »

Quote from: Mars on November 16, 2007, 08:12:10 AM

thats lee priest.

ok mars

gymguy · « **Reply #16 on:** November 16, 2007, 09:12:17 AM »

Quote from: wisconsinBB on November 16, 2007, 07:18:39 AM

From the pics at MD, peter looks good, but Charles Dixon appears to easily have what it takes to beat Putnum.

Doubtful, Dixon is not cut enough. Peter is more ripped and proportional.

wisconsinBB · « **Reply #17 on:** November 16, 2007, 09:13:39 AM »

Quote from: gymguy on November 16, 2007, 09:12:17 AM

Doubtful, Dixon is not cut enough. Peter is more ripped and proportional.

Keep smoking that crack!

The Coach · « **Reply #18 on:** November 16, 2007, 09:15:02 AM »

Quote from: wisconsinBB on November 16, 2007, 07:18:39 AM

From the pics at MD, peter looks good, but Charles Dixon appears to easily have what it takes to beat Putnum.

Samething was thought at the USA's as well.........he'll win wether he deserves it or not.

Andre Nickatina · « **Reply #19 on:** November 16, 2007, 09:19:20 AM »

That's incredible

Special Ed · « **Reply #20 on:** November 16, 2007, 09:26:47 AM »

Dixon will make a good pro. Can't say the same for Putnam. That being said, if they gave the Olympia to Cutler...

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #21 on:** November 16, 2007, 09:58:51 AM »

Quote from: Special Ed on November 16, 2007, 09:26:47 AM

Dixon will make a good pro. Can't say the same for Putnam. That being said, if they gave the Olympia to Cutler...

bump for truth and have The Coach on GETBIG NATION to read us one of his fairy tales lol

no one · « **Reply #22 on:** November 16, 2007, 10:00:28 AM »

Quote from: gymguy on November 16, 2007, 09:12:17 AM

Doubtful, Dixon is not cut enough. Peter is more ripped and proportional.

you have no idea what you are talking about.

stop posting.

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #23 on:** November 16, 2007, 10:02:02 AM »

Someone post a picture of Putman's back double bi..

H-BOMB · « **Reply #24 on:** November 16, 2007, 10:06:27 AM »

Those pics aren’t even side by side comparisons! If you look closely there is a piece of tape on the floor between their legs, and you can tell by the tape on the floor and the table that Peter is further away from the photographer! In actuality Peter is out massing Charles, Pete barley made weight weighing 198 ¼ and he is much tighter than USA’s! Dixon weighed in at 192, Peter is clearly beating Dixon conditioning in the Glutes and Hams.

Why cant you guys wait to see pre-judging pics before you have to say who isn’t going to be getting their pro card! Peter added height and size will make it a hard battle for Charles. Charles looks great but if any of you remember that at the 2006 USA Dixon placed 9th to Peter 2nd.

Peter is not a weider athlete, and you need to quit harping about politics!!!!!

Why don’t you guys hold off judging a show till you see pics from the stage!