backstage at the 99 MR. O, ronnie was in insane shape, even better than in 98:
10 pounds more muscle and rock hard:
know, we know HypocriticDiety will no doubt post an opinion my McGough claiming otherwise, but that quote is thoroughly disproven by other eyewitness, contest reviewers, ronnie himself, and mountains of visual evidence:
Hulkster = owned
1998 harder & drier than 1999 hence why 1999 is NOT considered his best overall showing
hence Ronnie said himself , and why Peter McGough stated , and why Shawn Perine stated and Joe Weider stated Ronnie's best Olympia showing was you guessed it 1998
Shawn Perine Ironage Dec 11, 2004
As much as I love Haney and my IA champs,
I think Ronnie circa '98 or at the 2001 Arnold is pretty much untouchable. Except by Dorian Yates 6 weeks out from the '93 O as photographed by our own KMH. Both men, on those specific occasions carried so much dry muscle mass in good proportion and with good lines that it's almost unfair to compare them to others.
Shawn Perine stating Ronnie's best Olympia was 1998 because he carried so much ' dry muscle ' there is a reason 1999 isn't listed
owned Flex Magazine August 2003
Jim Schmatltz on Ronnie chances of winning six Olympias in a row
if he repeats his
2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic form, he'll experience the joy of six.
his 2001 Arnold Classic form NOT his 1999 Mr Olympia form and why? pssst I'll let you in on a little secret Ronnie wasn't as hard or as dry as these two showings
owned review of mr. olympia 1999, january 2000, page 90:
257 pounds, a good seven pounds heavier than last year and the clear winner,
ALTHOUGH NOT AS BONE DRY OR AS ROCK HARD IN 98. In comparison to 98, his thighs are enourmous with a greater sweep and his front delts have improved; plus the pec anomaly (gyno) is no longer present.
ALTHOUGH NOT AS BONE DRY OR AS ROCK HARD IN 98. that sums it up
owned Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001
RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds.
Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .
so true the heavier he became the more his conditioning suffered for it , right in line with his assessment from 1998 & 1999
owned Peter McGough Flex Magazine August 2005
Personally, the best physique I ever saw onstage (there was a contender for best-ever that I saw offstage: those crazy photos of sock-footed Dorian Yates taken seven weeks before the 1993 Mr. Olympia) was Ronnie's at the
2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic. He was cut, full, trim in the waist and a monster (proving that when you're supersharp, you look superbig) at 244 pounds. Ronnie sporting that look would, in my opinion, be unbeatable and would make any criticisms as redundant as a chocolate squat rack.
it wasn't the 1999 Mr Olympia and why? lets see if Hulkster was right in his claim his conditioning was virtually identical and he was 13 pounds heavier 1999 would be considered his best showing and its NOT for a very good reason and why? because his conditioning was OFF
owned Ronnie what was your best Olympia?
Ronnie: I would have to say my first because
my conditioning was spot-on.
Which means his conditioning was NOT spot-on in 1999 which is why NO ONE considers 1999 his best Olympia appearance which coincides with ALL the above mentioned professionals who didn't come to their conclusions using PHOTOSHOPPED screencaps and compressed video
owned next....................
........................
......
