Author Topic: Nasser vs. Mike (NOC 94). (Read 4012 times)

Sherief Shalaby · « **on:** October 16, 2008, 04:49:16 AM »

Does any one feel that Mike really deserved to beat Nasser on that day??..

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #1 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:50:01 AM »

More..

MuscleMcMannus · « **Reply #2 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:50:38 AM »

NO he looked like a bloated carcus.

m8 · « **Reply #3 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:51:35 AM »

Nasser 94-95= great bodybuilder. Very aesthetic physique before the synthol abuse.

RZA · « **Reply #4 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:53:22 AM »

From the front, no. But from the back, Nasser gets owned massively and the side poses are not really in his faviour either.

m8 · « **Reply #5 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:55:17 AM »

Quote from: RZA on October 16, 2008, 04:53:22 AM

From the front, no. But from the back, Nasser gets owned massively and the side poses are not really in his faviour either.

Mike's wasn't at its best either.

I would have given it to Nasser and I'm far from a Nasserite.

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #6 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:55:25 AM »

Quote from: RZA on October 16, 2008, 04:53:22 AM

From the front, no. But from the back, Nasser gets owned massively and the side poses are not really in his faviour either.

Sure Mike's back was better than Nasser's but Nasser's front was MUCH better than Mike's..

io856 · « **Reply #7 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:57:03 AM »

Nasser wins every pose except rear double bicep and lat spread.

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #8 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:57:22 AM »

Quote from: m8 on October 16, 2008, 04:51:35 AM

Nasser 94-95= great bodybuilder. Very aesthetic physique before the synthol abuse.

R u sure he used synthol in 1996???.. I believe he didn't..

io856 · « **Reply #9 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:58:47 AM »

Mike's muscles close to spine are so god damn thick!

m8 · « **Reply #10 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:58:56 AM »

Quote from: Sherief Shalaby on October 16, 2008, 04:57:22 AM

R u sure he used synthol in 1996???.. I believe he didn't..

No idea... but I believe he reached his peak in 1994-1995.

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #11 on:** October 16, 2008, 04:59:16 AM »

Quote from: m8 on October 16, 2008, 04:55:17 AM

Mike's wasn't at its best either.

I would have given it to Nasser and I'm far from a Nasserite.

I believe Mike's best was at the AC 95 when he beat a "come back" Flex Wheeler..

RZA · « **Reply #12 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:03:17 AM »

Nasser was probably at his best in '96 rom what I recall. Pretty impressive in '95 also.

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #13 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:04:24 AM »

Quote from: m8 on October 16, 2008, 04:58:56 AM

No idea... but I believe he reached his peak in 1994-1995.

I believe when using synthol it hides the veins of the injected muscle and in 96 he was all veins and he looked slightly better than 95.. He also looked gr8 at the AC 97 and 98..

io856 · « **Reply #14 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:05:08 AM »

Nasser looks absolutely incredible at this show unbelievable aesthetics, great taper and to top it off mass

RZA · « **Reply #15 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:06:06 AM »

Quote from: io856 on October 16, 2008, 04:57:03 AM

Nasser wins every pose except rear double bicep and lat spread.

The side poses are debatable. Nasser's chest looks a bit flat and his arms are not at his best. He's far superior from the front, true, upper and lower body.

Tombo · « **Reply #16 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:06:58 AM »

who was that other arab poster that nuthugged nasser? the other troll... someone help me out

slaveboy1980 · « **Reply #17 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:13:56 AM »

nassers golden years where 94-97...specially 96-97

in the ancient books of bodybuilding history it shall be noted that NASSER THE CALIPH OF MUSCLE REIGNED DURING THESE GOLDEN YEARS OF BODYBUILDING

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #18 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:25:18 AM »

Quote from: RZA on October 16, 2008, 05:06:06 AM

The side poses are debatable. Nasser's chest looks a bit flat and his arms are not at his best. He's far superior from the front, true, upper and lower body.

I always feel that one of Nasser's weakness was his inability to hit all poses in the right way.. You can see how his shoulder, arm, and chest looked better and bigger that Mike's but because he didn't hit the side chest pose right he looked flat in some ppl' eyes.. I myself don't see him flat but I believe he had to improve his posing..

slaveboy1980 · « **Reply #19 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:29:50 AM »

Quote from: Sherief Shalaby on October 16, 2008, 05:25:18 AM

I always feel that one of Nasser's weakness was his inability to hit all poses in the right way.. You can see how his shoulder, arm, and chest looked better and bigger that Mike's but because he didn't hit the side chest pose right he looked flat in some ppl' eyes.. I myself don't see him flat but I believe he had to improve his posing..

early in his career he had problems with the side chest pose (as in the case of the pic posted earlier in this thread)...he didnt push the chest out and up + he didnt contract the bicep enough (by bringing the forearm up....its too low as you can see in the pic.....although in the pic maybe he just hadnt finished the pose)

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #20 on:** October 16, 2008, 05:56:00 AM »

Quote from: slaveboy1980 on October 16, 2008, 05:29:50 AM

early in his career he had problems with the side chest pose (as in the case of the pic posted earlier in this thread)...he didnt push the chest out and up + he didnt contract the bicep enough (by bringing the forearm up....its too low as you can see in the pic.....although in the pic maybe he just hadnt finished the pose)

100% right

affeman · « **Reply #21 on:** October 16, 2008, 07:02:04 AM »

Quote from: Sherief Shalaby on October 16, 2008, 04:49:16 AM

Does any one feel that Mike really deserved to beat Nasser on that day??..

Nobody ever deserved to beat Nasser on any day!

RC Money · « **Reply #22 on:** October 16, 2008, 07:13:18 AM »

Dam Mike looks a little small next to Nasser, he looks thick but small next to Nasser...wierd.

bigbobs · « **Reply #23 on:** October 16, 2008, 07:14:46 AM »

Quote from: RZA on October 16, 2008, 04:53:22 AM

From the front, no. But from the back, Nasser gets owned massively and the side poses are not really in his faviour either.

Quote from: affeman on October 16, 2008, 07:02:04 AM

Nobody ever deserved to beat Nasser on any day!

Quote from: RC Money on October 16, 2008, 07:13:18 AM

Dam Mike looks a little small next to Nasser, he looks thick but small next to Nasser...wierd.

Why do you find that weird? Mike was never a first tier bodybuilder. Wasn't his highest Mr. O placing 7th?

nukkaready · « **Reply #24 on:** October 16, 2008, 07:26:07 AM »

This contest was another travesty where the all american poster boy at the time Mike Francois beat the unknown pro Nasser from Europe. This show should have been clearly gone to Mr. El Sonbaty.