Why was Nasser the ONLY pro in the Olympia 96 to get a STANDING OVATION??? Was it because Dorian and Shawn's packages were better?
By the way Yates did not have harder legs than Naser - HE TORE BOTH QUADS, HIS RIGHT HIP (there is a long scar visible but mostly never shown, sometimes you can see it in his side chest pose). And in the 1997 Olympia Yates also had a torn left biceps, so with multiple torn muscles he still looked better AND HARDER?
By the way fresh torn muscles like Yates had when he tore his left triceps less the eight weeks before the 97 Olympia DO HOLD WATER. Yates did not undergo triceps surgery before the 97 Olympia because he would not have made it, but he got signalled that he would win if he would retreat afterwards from further competition.
So with a torn biceps, torn triceps, torn left quad, torn right quad, torn right hip, etc Yates wins still with a perfect score in 1997? All this counts less because of Nasser's "bad" back.
Also there was NEVER EVER any talk about Nasser's weak forearms since recently on getbig.com. Huge Nasser's forearms HAVE NEVER BEEN CRITISIZED BY ANY OF THE JUDGES OF FLEX OR OTHER MAGAZINES.
By the way Yates' forearms looked relatively big because of his relatively smaller, then still untorn arm.
Forearms do not decide a Mr. Olympia outcome, and neither do calves otherwise most black guys except Dillett and Vince Taylor (who have great calves) would never place in the top of any show. Nasser had much greater calves than standard, but you guys think with bigger forearms Nasser could have only then beat the field, but again, the calves do not count because they are less important than forearms?
Nasser, with ONE torn muscle would have never ever seen the top 6 ever again!!!
