Author Topic: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.  (Read 97300 times)

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #100 on: December 06, 2008, 06:32:31 PM »
no gut. ;)



yes, we all know you can find an unflattering pic of Ronnie taken from an angle the judges would never see. I can do the same for Dorian if you want to play that game.

I'm not in denial you are NO games needed  ;) and his  front latspread just sucks

England_1

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2132
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #101 on: December 06, 2008, 06:32:58 PM »
SOFT SOFT SOFT like an overcooked potato with loose skin on the abdomen and neck  :-X

Team Yates

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #102 on: December 06, 2008, 06:33:35 PM »
even Freud didn't believe the shit he said. What was that about cigars? ;)

In your case I think he's right on the money , even you have to admit you take it a tad to far  ???

Mr.1derful

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4941
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #103 on: December 06, 2008, 08:06:29 PM »
It seemed as though, as the years progressed, there was too much of a focus on bodyweight.  I would read in MD how Chad wanted to see Ronnie hit this weight, or that.  In 2003, he came in at a reputed 285, with an even higher target set for 2004.  I find this odd, as the primary focus should be visual, not a predetermined target based upon the weigh scale.  If conditioning begins to get sacrificed too much, then the added size will not have as much impact anyway.  Such a tactic wasn't needed.  Ronnie had size to spare compared to his immediate competition.  Ultimately, I believe playing the size game cost Ronnie his 9th title.  Sure, he had obvious injuries, but I truly believe that had he come into the Friday prejudging of 2006, with the tighter look he showed during the Saturday finals, that the judges might have let him take the title again (despite injuries) and break the record.  "They" (Chad/Ronnie) pushed too hard to try have him come in at 300 lbs on the Friday, as some sort of bragging right, and it cost them the title, I believe.

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #104 on: December 08, 2008, 09:32:25 PM »
  Coleman at a large bodyweigt truly is shit. The difference between him and Dorian is that Dorian could be 280+ lbs while still having great symmetry and conditioning, whilst Ronnie couldn't. This picture proves it:

SUCKMYMUSCLE

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #105 on: December 08, 2008, 10:00:21 PM »
Coleman at a large bodyweigt truly is shit. The difference between him and Dorian is that Dorian could be 280+ lbs while still having great symmetry and conditioning, whilst Ronnie couldn't. This picture proves it:

280 lbs? What are you smoking? That shot was taken a few weeks prior to the 95 Mr. Olympia where he competed at 257 lbs. His conditioning looks to be even better which suggests he didn't lose much weight, if any, between that pic and the Mr. Olympia. Are you honestly claiming he lost 20 lbs of muscle right before the contest? ::)

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #106 on: December 09, 2008, 01:16:45 AM »
280 lbs? What are you smoking? That shot was taken a few weeks prior to the 95 Mr. Olympia where he competed at 257 lbs. His conditioning looks to be even better which suggests he didn't lose much weight, if any, between that pic and the Mr. Olympia. Are you honestly claiming he lost 20 lbs of muscle right before the contest? ::)

283 lbs  according to the photographer  ;)

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #107 on: December 09, 2008, 08:17:00 AM »
283 lbs  according to the photographer

oh great! Even worse! So Dorian lost about 25 lbs and his conditioning deteriorated right before the contest? ::)

Mr.1derful

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4941
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #108 on: December 09, 2008, 11:29:56 AM »
oh great! Even worse! So Dorian lost about 25 lbs and his conditioning deteriorated right before the contest? ::)

I would agree that Dorian didn't need to diet down so far, but I would hardly suggest that his conditioning deteriorated.  He was extraordinarily dry at the 1995 contest.  He placed an extreme priority on being in excellent condition, perhaps to the detriment of some size.  That being said, I much prefer this tactic to the current trend of pros coming in soft, just so they can be fuller.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #109 on: December 09, 2008, 12:01:10 PM »
oh great! Even worse! So Dorian lost about 25 lbs and his conditioning deteriorated right before the contest? ::)

Yes he lost about 25 pounds of mostly muscle he said himself many times he reached a point where he was contest ready weeks out it happened in 1992/1993 and his conditioning deteriorated?  ???

283 pounds Ronnie 2003 has NO advantages now Neo  ;)

J Grey

  • Guest
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #110 on: December 09, 2008, 12:05:04 PM »
Yes he lost about 25 pounds of mostly muscle he said himself many times he reached a point where he was contest ready weeks out it happened in 1992/1993 and his conditioning deteriorated?  ???

283 pounds Ronnie 2003 has NO advantages now Neo  ;)

he also said he improved on it, I guess not, 25 pounds of muscle?
he could have ate a little more for a week or two then dieted again

They still couldn't beat him lmao

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #111 on: December 09, 2008, 12:41:53 PM »
Yes he lost about 25 pounds of mostly muscle he said himself many times he reached a point where he was contest ready weeks out it happened in 1992/1993 and his conditioning deteriorated?

yes, Dorian's conditioning deteriorated from the time that pic was taken to the contest. Find me 1 pic from the 95 Mr. Olympia where his quads looked like that. ;)

Quote
283 pounds Ronnie 2003 has NO advantages now Neo

Dorian doesn't look 283 lbs in that pic. He looks smaller than he did in the 93 black and white shots where he weighed 269 lbs. So quoting me numbers that aren't backed up by visuals is meaningless in this discussion.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #112 on: December 09, 2008, 12:53:47 PM »
yes, Dorian's conditioning deteriorated from the time that pic was taken to the contest. Find me 1 pic from the 95 Mr. Olympia where his quads looked like that. ;)

Dorian doesn't look 283 lbs in that pic. He looks smaller than he did in the 93 black and white shots where he weighed 269 lbs. So quoting me numbers that aren't backed up by visuals is meaningless in this discussion.

LMFAO his quads don't look like that so his conditioning deteriorated  ::) great logic he's 283 pounds with better conditioning than 260 yeah sounds right to me

he doesn't look 283 TO YOU he sure as hell looks noticeably bigger to me in this pic than the 1993 shoot , either way he's vastly superior in almost every way to Ronnie , especially Ronnie 2003


NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #113 on: December 09, 2008, 01:06:05 PM »
LMFAO his quads don't look like that so his conditioning deteriorated  great logic he's 283 pounds with better conditioning than 260 yeah sounds right to me

I make a legit point and all you can do is laugh? Find me 1 pic from the 95 Mr. Olympia where his quads looked like that. If my comment is so absurd that it amuses you, then you should easily be able to prove me wrong. ;)







Quote
he doesn't look 283 TO YOU he sure as hell looks noticeably bigger to me in this pic than the 1993 shoot , either way he's vastly superior in almost every way to Ronnie , especially Ronnie 2003

???


Mr.1derful

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4941
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #114 on: December 09, 2008, 05:12:45 PM »
I make a legit point and all you can do is laugh? Find me 1 pic from the 95 Mr. Olympia where his quads looked like that. If my comment is so absurd that it amuses you, then you should easily be able to prove me wrong. ;)







???



Unless you can provide an original that differs from the photo released, so as to prove tampering, you have nothing but supposition.  In light of Kevin Horton having already testified with regard to the photo being a scan of the original negative, your speculations merely come across as sour grapes.  Suck it up princess, Yates was the man and you know it.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #115 on: December 09, 2008, 05:21:55 PM »
Unless you can provide an original that differs from the photo released, so as to prove tampering, you have nothing but supposition.  In light of Kevin Horton having already testified with regard to the photo being a scan of the original negative, your speculations merely come across as sour grapes.  Suck it up princess, Yates was the man and you know it.

Great post! lol

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #116 on: December 09, 2008, 05:42:07 PM »
Are you honestly claiming he lost 20 lbs of muscle right before the contest?

  Of course, since he didn't have 20 lbs of fat to lose, then most of those 20 lbs that he lost were muscle. Why not? Both Kevin Horton and Peter McGough said that Dorian sacrificed a lot of muscle to gain a little in conditioning because he was obsessed with perfect condiotioning. They bh stated Dorian could have stepped onstage like he looked 3 weeks out and still be the hardest man onstage. Dorian would sacrifice 15 lbs of muscle to lose the last stubborn 5 lbs of fat and water even though according to McGough and Horton he would have looked better if he stepped onstage with the added 15 lbs of muscle and 5 lbs of fat.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #117 on: December 09, 2008, 05:46:48 PM »
I make a legit point and all you can do is laugh? Find me 1 pic from the 95 Mr. Olympia where his quads looked like that. If my comment is so absurd that it amuses you, then you should easily be able to prove me wrong. ;)



Your example of Platz legs is a good one to show how side lighting reveals depth, whereas the frontal lighting used at contests doesn't.
It's all about the shadows.


http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=251407.75

Don't mistake a contest pic where the lighting doesn't show off his depth as being less conditioned , his quads were noticeably small that year but to say they are less conditioned is asinine

Hypo

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 878
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #118 on: December 09, 2008, 06:17:20 PM »
Coleman was always shit at a large bodyweight because he could never come close to the conditioning of 98/99. His proportions were out of whack.

When you look at how shit his competition was in those years, you can tell he made a mistake. 01 he should've lost to Cutler. 02 he nearly lost to a half-assed Levrone.

Dorian destroyed his high calibre competition year after year (Ray, Nasser, Levrone, Wheeler, Dillet) and when you compare those physiques to the ones Coleman just defeated, it's hard to consider Coleman, apart from 98/99 to coming even close.

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #119 on: December 09, 2008, 06:53:50 PM »
Unless you can provide an original that differs from the photo released, so as to prove tampering, you have nothing but supposition.  In light of Kevin Horton having already testified with regard to the photo being a scan of the original negative, your speculations merely come across as sour grapes.  Suck it up sir, Ronnie was the man and I know it.

wtf are you talking about? My post challenged ND to find a shot from the 95 Mr. Olympia where Dorian's quads looked as good as they do in the new pic.

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #120 on: December 09, 2008, 06:55:11 PM »
Great post! lol

of course you would congratulate a fellow idiot on a post that has nothing to do with the post he quoted. ::)

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #121 on: December 09, 2008, 06:58:07 PM »
wtf are you talking about? My post challenged ND to find a shot from the 95 Mr. Olympia where Dorian's quads looked as good as they do in the new pic.

NO NO conditioned YOU claimed his quads weren't as conditioned , NO SHIT his quads don't look as good as they did at the Olympia , he's 23 pounds lighter

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #122 on: December 09, 2008, 07:00:04 PM »
of course you would congratulate a fellow idiot on a post that has nothing to do with the post he quoted. ::)


Who's the idiot? you're the jackass claiming the picture is fake and made some half-ass comparison to ' prove it ' I told you this picture would cause many meltdowns and you're included  ;)

283 pounds harder , drier , better balanced and more complete than ANY version of Coleman especially that mess known as 2003

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83547
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #123 on: December 09, 2008, 07:04:46 PM »
yes Dorian's conditioning deteriorated from the time that pic was taken to the contest. Find me 1 pic from the 95 Mr. Olympia where his quads looked like that. ;)


His quads didn't look like that so his conditioning deteriorated  ;)

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Why Coleman At A Large Bodyweight Is Shit.
« Reply #124 on: December 09, 2008, 07:27:10 PM »
His quads didn't look like that so his conditioning deteriorated

::) ::) ::)