Author Topic: Dorian getting pummeled at the 1996 Mr. Olympia.. No arms.. (Read 28076 times)

pumpster · « **Reply #50 on:** November 30, 2007, 06:52:30 PM »

Quote from: Camel Jockey on November 30, 2007, 06:42:30 PM

Way to shift away from the topic at hand. LOL

You mean he has to stick to losing ~~excuses~~ arguments?

Flea Labrada looking like Sergio against Yates.

pumpster · « **Reply #51 on:** November 30, 2007, 06:55:14 PM »

Two of the most mediocre poses ever witnessed in championship BB:

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #52 on:** November 30, 2007, 06:58:41 PM »

Let's throw in this to make the point final.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #53 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:03:29 PM »

Quote from: Camel Jockey on November 30, 2007, 06:58:41 PM

Let's throw in this to make the point final.

Sums it nicely the clear cut winner.

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #54 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:16:18 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on November 30, 2007, 07:03:29 PM

Sums it nicely the clear cut winner.

Sums up his lack of arms, horrible stomach, shitty legs and 85 year old looking face quite well.

Cap · « **Reply #55 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:19:10 PM »

Notice the difference in dryness in his arms and delts and the rest of his body. Night and day. Synthol at its finest and this is what happens when you shoot too much synthol and continue to juice past your prime.

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #56 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:19:57 PM »

Quote from: cap86 on November 30, 2007, 07:19:10 PM

Notice the difference in dryness in his arms and delts and the rest of his body. Night and day. Synthol at its finest and this is what happens when you shoot too much synthol and continue to juice past your prime.

That's when he was out of his prime.

Try 96 and 97 and even 95.

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #57 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:22:54 PM »

Quote from: Camel Jockey on November 30, 2007, 06:01:36 PM

Absolutely no arms.. $:-\$

true

Cap · « **Reply #58 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:23:11 PM »

Quote from: Camel Jockey on November 30, 2007, 07:19:57 PM

That's when he was out of his prime.

Try 96 and 97 and even 95.

He still has synthol delts, lats, calves and biceps in those years.

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #59 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:26:14 PM »

Quote from: bigbobs on November 30, 2007, 06:14:26 PM

That is true actually while Dorian had better back detail in the rear double bi Nasser's delts, biceps and triceps destroyed Dorian's. So overall Nasser's rear double bi was better than Dorian's.

Also from the front, although the pic was taken from the back of the stage.

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #60 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:26:39 PM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on November 30, 2007, 07:22:54 PM

true

hahahaha

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #61 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:27:43 PM »

Quote from: Camel Jockey on November 30, 2007, 06:32:51 PM

HAHAHAH, as though Yates' stomach is any different.

It's worst

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #62 on:** November 30, 2007, 07:43:44 PM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on November 30, 2007, 07:27:43 PM

It's worst

But this clown ND thinks otherwise.

England_1 · « **Reply #63 on:** November 30, 2007, 08:02:40 PM »

Ok, I will give you this, Yates' hair cut was off in 96 but he was DRY AS A BONE. His taper here is outstanding and his good arm looks great. The human body only needs 1 kidney to function, Yates only needs 1 bi to win. Fuck off haters

Big_Tymer · « **Reply #64 on:** November 30, 2007, 08:26:19 PM »

god dorian has been getting owned bad lately, there have been many threads this week about it started by different people, myself included.

its always the same 3 people defending him, while everyone else agrees he is owned.

bigbobs · « **Reply #65 on:** December 01, 2007, 03:05:39 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on November 30, 2007, 06:32:04 PM

Look at Nasser's tight midsection expand like the Universe , trying his hardest to Flex a back he doesn't have .

He wasn't posing knowing that a pic is being taken from the front, plus in a pic like that their stomachs are moving in and out at various points and at one given point one guys' stomach might be sucked in while the other's is not. Regardless its a well known fact that Dorian's waist was WIDER than Nasser's when they competed together...just look at any ab-thigh shot comparison between the two.

bigbobs · « **Reply #66 on:** December 01, 2007, 03:08:34 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on November 30, 2007, 06:36:14 PM

Nice rear latspread HUGE nasser looks about as wide as a 205 pound Shawn Ray lol

There's actually not much difference in their back width. If you don't believe me, take a ruler. The small difference can be attributed to the fact that Dorian is more center-on with the camera whereas Nasser is further and on a slight angle.

pumpster · « **Reply #67 on:** December 01, 2007, 03:35:53 AM »

Quote from: England_1 on November 30, 2007, 08:02:40 PM

Ok, I will give you this, Yates' hair cut was off in 96 but he was DRY AS A BONE. His taper here is outstanding and his good arm looks great. The human body only needs 1 kidney to function, Yates only needs 1 bi to win. Fuck off haters

Oh shut up he looks like shyte there, as usual. The arms are comical, not just the injured one.

pumpster · « **Reply #68 on:** December 01, 2007, 03:39:45 AM »

Quote from: bigbobs on December 01, 2007, 03:08:34 AM

There's actually not much difference in their back width. If you don't believe me, take a ruler. The small difference can be attributed to the fact that Dorian is more center-on with the camera whereas Nasser is further and on a slight angle.

Are you expecting ND to actually confirm the truth of what you're saying, vs more deflections?

Nasser's back clearly at least as wide, and dominating Yates once again.

ND's excuses will include:
-Lighting
-Angles
-Distance from the camera

pumpster · « **Reply #69 on:** December 01, 2007, 03:41:05 AM »

Quote from: Big_Tymer on November 30, 2007, 08:26:19 PM

god dorian has been getting owned bad lately, there have been many threads this week about it started by different people, myself included.

its always the same 3 people defending him, while everyone else agrees he is owned.

LOL the wagons were circled a long time ago, the excuses & deflections flowing freely.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #70 on:** December 01, 2007, 06:56:42 AM »

Quote from: pumpster on December 01, 2007, 03:39:45 AM

Are you expecting ND to actually confirm the truth of what you're saying, vs more deflections?

Nasser's back clearly at least as wide, and dominating Yates once again.

ND's excuses will include:
-Lighting
-Angles
-Distance from the camera

LMFAO this is your defense? his back is at least as wide? what does that have to do with anything? his back may be as wide and it better be he's 275 pounds compared to Dorian's 257 so onto of getting owned on width by a much lighter man , Nasser's back is holding more water than Poland Springs ! he lacks any development and separation of the teres major , infraspinatus , and lats oh and lets not forget the erector spinae , his glutes are soft as a babies ass his hams are even blurry overall Dorian is handing both Shawn and HUGE soft Nasser their asses in this pose despite the small biceps .

Hulkster · « **Reply #71 on:** December 01, 2007, 07:05:13 AM »

its so nice to see that other than the 3 nuthuggers in the truce thread (and I am not including the gimmick account of England 1 by either Pubes or ND, not sure which one) are the ONLY people around who think dorian was not overrated.

everyone else uses their brains and eyes and can see the truth as it is right in front of them:

LOL I love this.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #72 on:** December 01, 2007, 07:13:43 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on December 01, 2007, 07:05:13 AM

its so nice to see that other than the 3 nuthuggers in the truce thread (and I am not including the gimmick account of England 1 by either Pubes or ND, not sure which one) are the ONLY people around who think dorian was not overrated.

everyone else uses their brains and eyes and can see the truth as it is right in front of them:

LOL I love this.

I don't need a gimmick account , nice try though ! I like to use my name when I own you

Hulkster · « **Reply #73 on:** December 01, 2007, 07:21:13 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on December 01, 2007, 07:13:43 AM

I don't need a gimmick account , nice try though ! I like to use my name when I own you

it may not be your gimmick account, but the fact is that some of the wording in England 1's posts are word for word the same as the other nuthuggers (Pubes), and they are arguments that have never been made anywhere else. No on else could be that dumb.

it wouldn't be difficult to find out which one of the nuthuggers it is, simply by comparing posts from posts made 8 months ago by Pubes.

if they are word for word the same, its pretty naive to think that it is NOT pubes.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #74 on:** December 01, 2007, 07:23:39 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on December 01, 2007, 07:21:13 AM

it may not be your gimmick account, but the fact is that some of the wording in England 1's posts are word for word the same as the other nuthuggers (Pubes), and they are arguments that have never been made anywhere else. No on else could be that dumb.

it wouldn't be difficult to find out which one of the nuthuggers it is, simply by comparing posts from posts made 8 months ago by Pubes.

if they are word for word the same, its pretty naive to think that it is NOT pubes.

Again don't make claims I have a gimmick account