Author Topic: Cormier or Martinez? (Read 8794 times)

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #50 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:03:39 PM »

Chris Cormier

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #51 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:04:41 PM »

Relentless · « **Reply #52 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:31:32 PM »

Quote from: Parker on January 29, 2009, 11:44:39 AM

Cormier had the type of physique where you could visually keep adding muscle to him. He could have easily carried 270 pounds on him and look like a beast. Whereas Vic, has maxed out. He's already got the gut.

Vic does appear to be maxed out. Vic was also 5'9', whereas Chris is 5'11". Chris also trained much heavier than Vic. I haven't seen any footage of Vic using the crazy weights Chris used. 8 plates on hacks a week out from the Olympia? Who does that besides Chris?

Parker · « **Reply #53 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:37:41 PM »

Quote from: Relentless on January 29, 2009, 12:31:32 PM

Vic does appear to be maxed out. Vic was also 5'9', whereas Chris is 5'11". Chris also trained much heavier than Vic. I haven't seen any footage of Vic using the crazy weights Chris used. 8 plates on hacks a week out from the Olympia? Who does that besides Chris?

Chris needed back thickness, but I believe that due to his injury he could n't train that way.
And another thing that Chirs will go down in history for. being a 6 time runner up in the Arnold Classic

pumpster · « **Reply #54 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:42:26 PM »

Quote from: Parker on January 29, 2009, 11:44:39 AM

Cormier had the type of physique where you could visually keep adding muscle to him. He could have easily carried 270 pounds on him and look like a beast. Whereas Vic, has maxed out. He's already got the gut.

All speculation, wishful thinking.

Parker · « **Reply #55 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:46:07 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on January 29, 2009, 12:42:26 PM

All speculation, wishful thinking.

It would never happen. But look at his physique, you said yourself, it looks nothing special. that's because nothing jumps out at you. You can keep adding weight to him (Like the guys in Weird Science with the breast thing) like slap some more on his arms, his legs, back, chest. And your looking at prolly 275 @ about 5'11.

pumpster · « **Reply #56 on:** January 29, 2009, 12:48:51 PM »

Quote from: Parker on January 29, 2009, 12:46:07 PM

You can keep adding weight to him (Like the guys in Weird Science with the breast thing) like slap some more on his arms, his legs, back, chest. And your looking at prolly 275 @ about 5'11.

What's the point of the exercise, given that you're speculating and could do the same with alot of guys?

Some of those pics here looked morphed-he never had great size, nor great shape-Vic has him on aesthetics, muscle tie-ins and flow. He had average tris and so-so arms (unbalanced upper arms, minimal forearms), small calves and so-so lats, which isn't supposed to happen to someone known for overall balance. Most of the time including that video i don't see great muscle refinement either.

As far as "unrealized potential", that would apply to several guys who i think had better genetics and were also known as underwhelming in the gym, like Dillet and Wheeler.

Immortal_Technique · « **Reply #57 on:** January 29, 2009, 03:59:12 PM »

Quote from: Relentless on January 28, 2009, 11:16:21 AM

These two have faced off a few times, with Chris placing better at the 2004 Olympia shown below.

IMO Martinez wins that shot cos he's a lot sharper. Also he has a ripped ass like Cormier's never had so I don't understand people saying Chris had better conditioning.

Martinez wins the suspect biceps and calves award though, so I consider Cormier a greater BB at this point. His waist is never anything but flat either. Martinez looks bigger now maybe, but I can't believe those bis are real, and the calves def aren't. Plus Cormier's old hams were awesome!

Relentless · « **Reply #58 on:** January 29, 2009, 04:55:35 PM »

Are these biceps full of oil? Hmmm..........

Relentless · « **Reply #59 on:** January 29, 2009, 04:58:53 PM »

Oil in the bis?

Relentless · « **Reply #60 on:** January 30, 2009, 11:18:42 AM »

Honestly, Vic's biceps actually throw off the rest of his physique with the OIL.

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #61 on:** January 30, 2009, 11:40:15 AM »

HeyNow · « **Reply #62 on:** January 30, 2009, 12:02:29 PM »

Quote from: Relentless on January 28, 2009, 08:58:45 AM

Most muscular.

CC all the way he's probably one of the top 20 bodybuilders of all time.

Relentless · « **Reply #63 on:** January 30, 2009, 02:20:32 PM »

Quote from: HeyNow on January 30, 2009, 12:02:29 PM

CC all the way he's probably one of the top 20 bodybuilders of all time.

He is easily in the top 20, maybe in the top 10.

flexingtonsteele · « **Reply #64 on:** January 30, 2009, 02:31:21 PM »

Quote from: Relentless on January 30, 2009, 11:18:42 AM

Honestly, Vic's biceps actually throw off the rest of his physique with the OIL.

the oil in his calves look bad too.

Relentless · « **Reply #65 on:** January 30, 2009, 05:16:14 PM »

Quote from: flexingtonsteele on January 30, 2009, 02:31:21 PM

the oil in his calves look bad too.

Here's Vic without the oil. I don't know why guys go the oil route...it never makes a physique look better.

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #66 on:** January 30, 2009, 08:53:25 PM »

Quote from: Relentless on January 28, 2009, 08:33:52 AM

Chris was probably at his all time best at the 1999 Olympia, while Victor's best was the 2007 Olympia. Who takes this shot?

chris.. his back ws drier and more detailed..

Big Worm · « **Reply #67 on:** January 30, 2009, 09:20:17 PM »

Quote from: Sherief Shalaby on January 30, 2009, 08:53:25 PM

chris.. his back ws drier and more detailed..

In some shots...Not all...

pumpster · « **Reply #68 on:** January 30, 2009, 09:32:20 PM »

Quote from: Relentless on January 30, 2009, 02:20:32 PM

He is easily in the top 20, maybe in the top 10.

Everyone talks about "unrealized potential", clearly implying that something was lacking, while at the same time trying to bump him up to one of the best all-time lol.

Cormier comes in at a solid 37th place all-time. He is absolutely bereft of greatness using any criteria, is not even the most aesthetic of his era. The ultimate jack of all trades, master of none.

The comments about oil are in most cases backhanded complements. Vic has the greater potential, lacks less if he gets it together. Don't know if he will though.

Sherief Shalaby · « **Reply #69 on:** January 30, 2009, 09:49:03 PM »

Quote from: Big Worm on January 30, 2009, 09:20:17 PM

In some shots...Not all...

ys i am talking abt back shots only here and when bth of them were at their best..

still as a whole thing i see chris as a better bb coz of his thickness..

willie mosconi · « **Reply #70 on:** January 31, 2009, 11:54:23 AM »

How old is Cormier now? 42 or so. I wonder if he got really serious for one solid year whether he could still return to near top form.

Big Worm · « **Reply #71 on:** January 31, 2009, 09:50:27 PM »

Quote from: Sherief Shalaby on January 30, 2009, 09:49:03 PM

ys i am talking abt back shots only here and when bth of them were at their best..

still as a whole thing i see chris as a better bb coz of his thickness..

If both were in their prime? Cormier all the way...I don't know ? But as of lately ..Victors physique is looking a little rough to me .?

gymguy · « **Reply #72 on:** February 01, 2009, 04:53:29 AM »

Vic. Cormier only looked that great ONCE! More often than not, he was not in stellar shape.

Armstrong · « **Reply #73 on:** February 01, 2009, 05:33:49 AM »

Quote from: Relentless on January 28, 2009, 08:21:53 AM

Which one is better?

VICTOR (at his best) smashes Cormier. But Cormier gets respect because he was almost always on his game. Victor has bad days more often than Chris did. Victor will win the O and Chris never could.

Figo · « **Reply #74 on:** February 01, 2009, 05:35:50 AM »