Author Topic: New Video of Ronnie Guest Posing in 99 - Best Ever (Read 4392 times)

Steve Namat · « **Reply #1 on:** February 25, 2009, 06:46:09 PM »

Quote from: NeoSeminole on February 25, 2009, 06:32:15 PM

Wow he looked great. That was more than enough mass for his structure...

Camel Jockey · « **Reply #2 on:** February 25, 2009, 06:49:04 PM »

Tell when Dorian ever looked that good

Hulkster · « **Reply #3 on:** February 25, 2009, 06:51:48 PM »

never

Wiggs · « **Reply #4 on:** February 25, 2009, 06:52:25 PM »

nasser could only dream on looking like that.

cue babbu or sharma with grainy nasser pic.

Hulkster · « **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2009, 06:54:27 PM »

that front double bi is crazy at the beginning - better than Nasser OR dorian ever pulled off!

neither one of them had the arms or the structure to beat that.

McFarland · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2009, 06:57:03 PM »

Wow those were the days.

muscularny · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2009, 07:10:34 PM »

amazing

Palpatine Q · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2009, 07:14:16 PM »

He was the best, plain and simple.

There isn't a video of another BBer on earth that matches that

These fucking retards can argue into infinty and it won't change the fact

bigbobs · « **Reply #9 on:** February 25, 2009, 07:16:57 PM »

Quote from: Camel Jockey on February 25, 2009, 06:49:04 PM

Tell when Dorian ever looked that good

Epic bait to get Hulkster and ND going at it again

Hulkster · « **Reply #10 on:** February 25, 2009, 07:23:04 PM »

here he is in contest shape that year:
http://www.truveo.com/Ronnie-Coleman-1999-Mr-Olympia-Part-Two/id/1160132027

this is the video that the dorian nuthuggers claim is 'faked' ...

you know Ronnie was the best when you have people claiming the footage is doctored..he was that damn good.

of course, anyone with a copy of the 99 olympia VHS or DVD knows better..

The_Hammer · « **Reply #11 on:** February 25, 2009, 07:25:37 PM »

Why couldn't he have been satisfied with that physique?

just_a_pilgrim · « **Reply #12 on:** February 25, 2009, 07:41:03 PM »

Quote from: The_Hammer on February 25, 2009, 07:25:37 PM

Why couldn't he have been satisfied with that physique?

The body doesn't stay the same. Things change and some things might get better, some might get worse.

Wiggs · « **Reply #13 on:** February 25, 2009, 07:50:46 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 25, 2009, 07:23:04 PM

here he is in contest shape that year:
http://www.truveo.com/Ronnie-Coleman-1999-Mr-Olympia-Part-Two/id/1160132027

this is the video that the dorian nuthuggers claim is 'faked' ...

you know Ronnie was the best when you have people claiming the footage is doctored..he was that damn good.

of course, anyone with a copy of the 99 olympia VHS or DVD knows better..

That's the best 1,2 and 3 in an Olympia EVER

Hulkster · « **Reply #14 on:** February 25, 2009, 08:28:04 PM »

Quote from: Wiggs on February 25, 2009, 07:50:46 PM

That's the best 1,2 and 3 in an Olympia EVER

chris should have beaten Flex, who got to second on name alone that year.

lots of oil..

brent2741 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 25, 2009, 09:46:18 PM »

every posing routine ronnie does the same pose the same way in the same order

kiwiol · « **Reply #16 on:** February 25, 2009, 09:54:32 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 25, 2009, 08:28:04 PM

chris should have beaten Flex, who got to second on name alone that year.

lots of oil..

Hulkster, I've never chimed in on the whole Ronnie 98 vs Ronnie 99 debate that you and ND constantly engage in. So let me tell you this - in 98, Ronnie's condition was better and he was sharper, although he also had gyno, was smaller and had legs that were noticeably smaller than in 99. Ronnie worked with Chad that year (who was also prepping Nasser and Flex) for the first time and they focused on getting him as dry as possible, so his chances of placing in the top 3 or even winning would be high.

In 99, Ronnie wasn't as dry and conditioned and sharp as he was in 98, even though he was dry and conditioned and sharp enough to win the contest by a good margin. On the plus side, he was a lot more massive and fuller (even though he was only 9 lbs heavier), didn't have the gyno, had a much wider lat spread and most notably, had increased his quad sweep and leg mass by a huge amount.

So the 98 Ronnie was better in terms of conditioning and sharpness, but the 99 Ronnie did look better overall - the greater mass, sweeps and lack of gyno made for a much improved look. 2001 AC Ronnie had the mass and sweep of 99 while being nearly as conditioned as 98.

bigbobs · « **Reply #17 on:** February 25, 2009, 10:27:53 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 25, 2009, 08:28:04 PM

chris should have beaten Flex, who got to second on name alone that year.

lots of oil..

Just months before the 99 Olympia Nasser beat Chris (and Levrone) with this condition at the Arnold Classic. Unfortunately he came in to the Olympia over 20 lbs lighter that year.

vic86 · « **Reply #18 on:** February 25, 2009, 11:08:39 PM »

damn!!! will anyone ever look like this???!!! KING at his peak!!!

Meso_z · « **Reply #19 on:** February 26, 2009, 12:58:21 AM »

U N B E L I E V A B L E

just_a_pilgrim · « **Reply #20 on:** February 26, 2009, 01:05:05 AM »

Quote from: bigbobs on February 25, 2009, 10:27:53 PM

Just months before the 99 Olympia Nasser beat Chris (and Levrone) with this condition at the Arnold Classic. Unfortunately he came in to the Olympia over 20 lbs lighter that year.

He won because he complained a lot the previous two years. That show was won on name (kind of Ironic considering his complaining) Levrone was better IMO. That was Nasser's first bad showing (not in the final placing). 98 O was his peak.

Wonder if Will Brink still posts here, i remember his column in MM and he had Cormier 1st, Levrone 2nd and Nasser 3rd.

bigbobs · « **Reply #21 on:** February 26, 2009, 01:23:41 AM »

Quote from: just_a_pilgrim on February 26, 2009, 01:05:05 AM

He won because he complained a lot the previous two years. That show was won on name (kind of Ironic considering his complaining) Levrone was better IMO. That was Nasser's first bad showing (not in the final placing). 98 O was his peak.

Wonder if Will Brink still posts here, i remember his column in MM and he had Cormier 1st, Levrone 2nd and Nasser 3rd.

You really think that MM pose posted above is a "bad showing?"

And since when does complaining help you win a show - if anything the result would be opposite since complainers get on the nerves of judges and officials.

Also, you say the show was won on "name," so what is it about Nasser that gave him a bigger "name" than Levrone or Cormier?

just_a_pilgrim · « **Reply #22 on:** February 26, 2009, 01:40:59 AM »

Quote from: bigbobs on February 26, 2009, 01:23:41 AM

You really think that MM pose posted above is a "bad showing?"

And since when does complaining help you win a show - if anything the result would be opposite since complainers get on the nerves of judges and officials.

Also, you say the show was won on "name," so what is it about Nasser that gave him a bigger "name" than Levrone or Cormier?

Compared to his condition the previous 4 years it wasn't as good. Nasser was incredible those years i feel he dropped on this contest.

He was a bigger name than the other two at the time definately. 2nd in 1997, 3rd in 1998 behind two of the best ever, 2nd in 2 previous Arnolds.

I'm not knocking him, he was the biggest and if you want to reward that it's his show, but i think the other two were better overall there. Nasser was off from his best.

Hulkster · « **Reply #23 on:** February 26, 2009, 01:37:23 PM »

Quote

In 99, Ronnie wasn't as dry and conditioned and sharp as he was in 98, even though he was dry and conditioned and sharp enough to win the contest by a good margin

two big problems:

1. the visuals do not show this

and

2. there are eyewitness contest reviewers (eg Musclemag's Johnny Fitness) that have stated that Ronnie was in better condition in 99 than the previous year. the quote is somewhere in the truce thread.

ND loves to show the McGough quote down our throats and ignore all others, but he is no more qualified than Musclemag's Johnny Fitness. they were both there live and in person.

problem is, only one of their statements (Johnny's) is supported by the pics and videos..

eg. note the deeper quad cuts ronnie had in 99 that were not nearly as prominent in 98. Ironman magazine took specific notice of this too.

Danimal77 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 27, 2009, 04:40:59 PM »

Quote from: NeoSeminole on February 25, 2009, 06:32:15 PM

Aside from his alien abs and African tribeswoman nipples, he was a MONSTER.