Author Topic: hahaha Mesomorph78 thinks these arms are "underdeveloped" (Read 12722 times)

The Wizard of Truth · « **Reply #100 on:** March 04, 2009, 08:52:11 AM »

Nasser is a muscleman

coltrane · « **Reply #101 on:** March 04, 2009, 08:54:24 AM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 08:51:40 AM

If you really care, click on the quotes and read the thread he posted them in, which gives more background.

Not the brightest crayon in the box are you? $:-\$

Just show me where MESO used the word "underdeveloped". I'd like to read THAT quote.

Is it possible you're misquoting him? Or are you just summing up where you think he means?

bigbobs · « **Reply #102 on:** March 04, 2009, 09:00:43 AM »

Quote from: coltrane on March 04, 2009, 08:54:24 AM

Just show me where MESO used the word "underdeveloped". I'd like to read THAT quote.

Is it possible you're misquoting him? Or are you just summing up where you think he means?

Holy crap, who cares what the exact word he used was? Maybe he did use it, maybe he used something else that meant the same thing - check the original thread if it's that important to you.

bigbobs · « **Reply #103 on:** March 04, 2009, 09:02:49 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 03, 2009, 05:17:30 PM

Thickness compared to Dorian Yates absolutely

coltrane · « **Reply #104 on:** March 04, 2009, 09:03:23 AM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 09:00:43 AM

Holy crap, who cares what the exact word he used was? Maybe he did use it, maybe he used something else that meant the same thing - check the original thread if it's that important to you.

Stop putting words in people's mouths. This place will be better that way.

That is all.

mesmorph78 · « **Reply #105 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:07:47 PM »

Quote from: coltrane on March 04, 2009, 08:54:24 AM

Just show me where MESO used the word "underdeveloped". I'd like to read THAT quote.

Is it possible you're misquoting him? Or are you just summing up where you think he means?

exactly...
plus a lot of people said a lot of stuff about nasser why take my name and start a thread...

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #106 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:36:31 PM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 09:02:49 AM

Thanks for playing though

QuakerOats · « **Reply #107 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:37:43 PM »

Dorian has a short ass torso and some long legs, weird structure.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #108 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:39:35 PM »

Quote from: QuakerOats on March 04, 2009, 12:37:43 PM

Dorian has a short ass torso and some long legs, weird structure.

Actually he doesn't it's Nasser who has a long torso and short legs , Ronnie has a true short torso and long legs , Dorian's balance is near perfect check out the pic with Ronnie and notice the torso lengths

bigbobs · « **Reply #109 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:41:37 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 04, 2009, 12:36:31 PM

Thanks for playing though

So Dorian's back is slightly wider than Nasser's and he's spreading his arms out further too - how does that show that Dorian was "thicker" as you claim? Hence, the

emoticon remains

QuakerOats · « **Reply #110 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:43:58 PM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 12:41:37 PM

So Dorian's back is slightly wider than Nasser's and he's spreading his arms out further too - how does that show that Dorian was "thicker" as you claim? Hence, the emoticon remains

exactly, the back THICKNESS looks exactly even to me and as you said Yates' back is wider but he's holding his arms differently, but a wider back doesn't compare to all the other places where Nasser kills Dorian.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #111 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:48:00 PM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 12:41:37 PM

So Dorian's back is slightly wider than Nasser's and he's spreading his arms out further too - how does that show that Dorian was "thicker" as you claim? Hence, the emoticon remains

Take a look at the following muscles ALL are thicker than Nasser , traps , lats , teres , infraspinatus and spinal erectors , his back is wider , thicker and is more developed and detailed , Nasser's back is HUGE and soft i.e. he's carrying more intramuscular fat which is NOT the same as dense muscle that's a fact

bigbobs · « **Reply #112 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:48:17 PM »

Quote from: QuakerOats on March 04, 2009, 12:43:58 PM

exactly, the back THICKNESS looks exactly even to me and as you said Yates' back is wider but he's holding his arms differently, but a wider back doesn't compare to all the other places where Nasser kills Dorian.

ND can not produce a single picture showing that Dorian was "thicker" than Nasser because it's simply not true. It's just one of those excuses ND likes to use that can't be proven, similar to "Dorian had a graininess that you could only see in person and not in pictures."

And yes, Nasser beat Dorian in every bodypart from the front.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #113 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:49:03 PM »

Quote from: QuakerOats on March 04, 2009, 12:43:58 PM

exactly, the back THICKNESS looks exactly even to me and as you said Yates' back is wider but he's holding his arms differently, but a wider back doesn't compare to all the other places where Nasser kills Dorian.

don't mistake volume for density , having a big smooth back isn't the same as having a dense dry back MAJOR difference

bigbobs · « **Reply #114 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:49:20 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 04, 2009, 12:48:00 PM

Take a look at the following muscles ALL are thicker than Nasser , traps , lats , teres , infraspinatus and spinal erectors , his back is wider , thicker and is more developed and detailed , Nasser's back is HUGE and soft i.e. he's carrying more intramuscular fat which is NOT the same as dense muscle that's a fact

You can't tell thickness from a one dimensional picture, sorry. You're a dumbass if you think otherwise.

dr.chimps · « **Reply #115 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:53:02 PM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 09:00:43 AM

Holy crap, who cares what the exact word he used was? Maybe he did use it, maybe he used something else that meant the same thing - check the original thread if it's that important to you.

LOL. You do, bobs. You using quotation marks around the word 'underdeveloped' in the thread title was my first clue.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #116 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:53:06 PM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 12:48:17 PM

ND can not produce a single picture showing that Dorian was "thicker" than Nasser because it's simply not true. It's just one of those excuses ND likes to use that can't be proven, similar to "Dorian had a graininess that you could only see in person and not in pictures."

And yes, Nasser beat Dorian in every bodypart from the front.

Now you're just being silly , I just posted a pic of Dorian with a clearly thicker back and YOU mention width

DENSITY trumps Volume , Nasser has a lot of volume in his back it's not dense , he's carrying more intramuscular fat than Dorian clearly evident in the lack of any depth , separation and detail

NO excuses needed Dorian's back is eons better than Nasser's it's not open for discussion Nasser said this himself , and Dorian's graininess can be seen on film , it shows up much better on black & white photos . so again wrong again

This is thickness personified

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #117 on:** March 04, 2009, 12:56:29 PM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 12:49:20 PM

You can't tell thickness from a one dimensional picture, sorry. You're a dumbass if you think otherwise.

ouch ' dumbass ' now you're getting personal lol someone is getting frustrated , actually YOU can tell thickness via a one dimensional photo it's just harder to do which is why I also supplemented it with a reference from Nasser acknowledging his back pales in comparison

one of these backs is thicker than the other I'll let YOU decide if you can spot which one via a one dimensional photo

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #118 on:** March 04, 2009, 01:01:18 PM »

One of these guys has a really thick back compared to the other , I wonder which one it is?

I can't seem to tell via a one dimensional photo LMFAO

bigbobs · « **Reply #119 on:** March 04, 2009, 01:02:22 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 04, 2009, 12:56:29 PM

ouch ' dumbass ' now you're getting personal lol someone is getting frustrated , actually YOU can tell thickness via a one dimensional photo it's just harder to do which is why I also supplemented it with a reference from Nasser acknowledging his back pales in comparison

one of these backs is thicker than the other I'll let YOU decide if you can spot which one via a one dimensional photo

One back is more detailed than the other, but not thicker.

The only way you can compare thickness is with a picture of them both standing at a side angle.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #120 on:** March 04, 2009, 01:15:09 PM »

Quote from: bigbobs on March 04, 2009, 01:02:22 PM

One back is more detailed than the other, but not thicker.

The only way you can compare thickness is with a picture of them both standing at a side angle.

ha ha more than detail separates those backs and why the need for comments like ' dumbass ' ? I never showed you any disrespect like that

you can tell thickness due to depth as well , and we all know Nasser's back has NONE you're arguing Nasser's back is just as thick as Dorians it's not worthy of a response it's laughable

Dorian wrote the book on back thickness

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #121 on:** March 04, 2009, 01:16:40 PM »

Quote from: dr.chimps on March 04, 2009, 12:53:02 PM

LOL. You do, bobs. You using quotation marks around the word 'underdeveloped' in the thread title was my first clue.

Ouch that's gonna leave a mark

QuakerOats · « **Reply #122 on:** March 04, 2009, 01:23:32 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 04, 2009, 01:15:09 PM

ha ha more than detail separates those backs and why the need for comments like ' dumbass ' ? I never showed you any disrespect like that

you can tell thickness due to depth as well , and we all know Nasser's back has NONE you're arguing Nasser's back is just as thick as Dorians it's not worthy of a response it's laughable

Dorian wrote the book on small arms, big stomach and torn bodyparts.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #123 on:** March 04, 2009, 01:24:52 PM »

Quote from: QuakerOats on March 04, 2009, 01:23:32 PM

I forgot your arms were bigger than his , thanks for reminding me

bigbobs · « **Reply #124 on:** March 04, 2009, 01:27:51 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 04, 2009, 01:15:09 PM

ha ha more than detail separates those backs and why the need for comments like ' dumbass ' ? I never showed you any disrespect like that

Gee, a little sensitive are we?

Sorry if that bothered you.

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 04, 2009, 01:15:09 PM

you can tell thickness due to depth as well , and we all know Nasser's back has NONE you're arguing Nasser's back is just as thick as Dorians it's not worthy of a response it's laughable

Dorian wrote the book on back thickness

Like I said, finding a picture of them from the sides is the only way you can compare thickness. Just because a certain bodypart has deeper cuts does not automatically make it "thicker." You have access to tons of pictures, I'm sure you can find one from the side that shows Dorian looking "thicker" Here's one where they were both at 270 (Nasser smaller than usual and Dorian bigger than usual) and Nasser still looks thicker (except Dorian's got him beaten on waist thickness)