Author Topic: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....  (Read 6511 times)

Danimal77

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7486
  • Yo Adrian
Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« on: May 13, 2009, 08:13:24 PM »
of politics, or was it because of his calf implants???

In 1992 he stepped onstage at 298 pounds (56 pounds heavier than Dorian), yet he placed 12th.

In 1993 he stepped onstage at 320 pounds and outweighed 269 pound Paul Dilett by 50 pounds and Dorian by 60 and YET, Big LOU placed 10th..

Were his placing justifiable? The fact of the matter is, even early on in the competition, he wasn't being called out for any comparisons. Something turned the judges off RIGHT AWAY in prejudging. I thought he looked SICK in 1993. Why 10th place? Even in 1992, were guys like Ron Love, Porter Cottrell and Steve Brisebois really better than Lou?

YoungBlood

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6777
  • Weee!
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #1 on: May 13, 2009, 08:18:53 PM »


He was also one of the first, if not THE first to have an insane GH Gut. Back then, the judges actually marked down things that weren't supposed to happen to the human body.

Stu

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1873
  • Faggotry˛
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #2 on: May 13, 2009, 08:20:34 PM »
He was heavier mainly because he was much taller.

michael arvilla

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21833
  • facebook.com/michael.arvilla
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #3 on: May 13, 2009, 08:27:26 PM »
I thought he looked fucking great! (huge shredded blew me away what he accomplished at his age)
his calves however were a joke
there were no more "what if Arnold Lou etc had access to todays supplementation" how would they look/do?
 Hes like 315 lbs here at 40 yrs old!



Danimal77

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7486
  • Yo Adrian
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #4 on: May 13, 2009, 08:29:31 PM »
Right, but take into account, when he competed in 1974 and 1975, he weighed 264 and 268 pounds respectively. What do you account the extra 30-50 EXTRA pounds from then until the 1990's?

He was 6'4" and even at 6'4", 320 pounds in competition is HUGE. Dilett is like 6'1"-6'2" and the most he ever weighed onstage was 290 pounds? Gunter has gone up to 300 pounds on a 6'0"-6'1" frame Ronnie has gone up to 295 on a 5'10"-5'11" frame. Even Nasser has gone up to around 285 on a 5'11"-6'0" frame. Lou was still heavier than all of them and wasn't THAT much taller then the guys I mentioned..

michael arvilla

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 21833
  • facebook.com/michael.arvilla
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #5 on: May 13, 2009, 08:30:40 PM »
Lou should have won the Masters Olympia (over Robbie Robinson i think)

jesusbod

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1947
  • Bite Me!
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #6 on: May 13, 2009, 08:32:16 PM »
of politics, or was it because of his calf implants???

In 1992 he stepped onstage at 298 pounds (56 pounds heavier than Dorian), yet he placed 12th.

In 1993 he stepped onstage at 320 pounds and outweighed 269 pound Paul Dilett by 50 pounds and Dorian by 60 and YET, Big LOU placed 10th..

Were his placing justifiable? The fact of the matter is, even early on in the competition, he wasn't being called out for any comparisons. Something turned the judges off RIGHT AWAY in prejudging. I thought he looked SICK in 1993. Why 10th place? Even in 1992, were guys like Ron Love, Porter Cottrell and Steve Brisebois really better than Lou?

He placed poorly because he sucked ass and shouldn't have been on stage to begin with. He may have been big, but he looked like shit.

Danimal77

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7486
  • Yo Adrian
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #7 on: May 13, 2009, 08:32:40 PM »
I thought he looked fucking great! (huge shredded blew me away what he accomplished at his age)
his calves however were a joke
there were no more "what if Arnold Lou etc had access to todays supplementation" how would they look/do?
 Hes like 315 lbs here at 40 yrs old!




NO WAY did that 1993 physique deserve 10th place. He was robbed!!

CastIron

  • Time Out
  • Getbig IV
  • *
  • Posts: 1738
  • Superman lives!
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #8 on: May 13, 2009, 08:33:35 PM »



I'll bet you'll never see that posing stage again.

Danimal77

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7486
  • Yo Adrian
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #9 on: May 13, 2009, 08:36:24 PM »


I'll bet you'll never see that posing stage again.

Here are some facts. Dorian was weighing 295 pounds that day and Lou was 320 pounds. Two HUGE Mofo's. I think Vic Richards also posed that day at 370 pounds according to him.

IronMagazine.com

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2758
  • IronMag Bodybuilding Blog Online Since 2001
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #10 on: May 13, 2009, 09:24:56 PM »
bodybuilding is an illusion, I don't care if he weighed 400lbs, he did NOT look that big, he has a huge frame and bone structure.

HTexan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20031
  • Heath must lose!!
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #11 on: May 13, 2009, 09:29:13 PM »
man, his implants look like shit :-\
A

D_1000

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2103
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #12 on: May 13, 2009, 09:44:12 PM »
...he left his legs at home.

Sherief Shalaby

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10629
  • Team Nasser
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #13 on: May 13, 2009, 11:40:47 PM »
of politics, or was it because of his calf implants???

In 1992 he stepped onstage at 298 pounds (56 pounds heavier than Dorian), yet he placed 12th.

In 1993 he stepped onstage at 320 pounds and outweighed 269 pound Paul Dilett by 50 pounds and Dorian by 60 and YET, Big LOU placed 10th..

Were his placing justifiable? The fact of the matter is, even early on in the competition, he wasn't being called out for any comparisons. Something turned the judges off RIGHT AWAY in prejudging. I thought he looked SICK in 1993. Why 10th place? Even in 1992, were guys like Ron Love, Porter Cottrell and Steve Brisebois really better than Lou?

i am not sure if deserved better placings or not but his extra weight was mainly due to his hight.. yes he was much heavier than dorian but dorian was thicker!!..

grab an umbrella

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2039
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #14 on: May 14, 2009, 12:31:52 AM »
Danimal, I have to commend you on some solid posting lately.  Anyways, even though Lou weighed in at a massive 315 pounds, he lacked the density and thickness that a 260 or so pound dorian and dillett brought to the stage that day.

lax

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3768
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2009, 04:15:25 AM »
Lou should have won the Masters Olympia (over Robbie Robinson i think)

No

I was there
Robby smoked him

after, Lou kept yelling in Lobby, I was f---ing robbed
and almost threw down with Steve Weinberger, one of the judges

Van_Bilderass

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14988
  • "Don't Try"
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #16 on: May 14, 2009, 04:33:05 AM »


I don't think Lou broke the 300 barrier on stage.

Figo

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 8101
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2009, 04:37:33 AM »

I don't think Lou broke the 300 barrier on stage.

My thoughts too. These numbers are all blown up.

Royalty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30287
  • Mentzer is Alive
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2009, 04:46:26 AM »
Lou did not exhibit striated glutes. period.   lol just kidding...he was great in 1993. He had awesome arms and arm vascularity.

In that youtube video posted above, toward the end of the video, Dorian and Lou are posing down to a classic early 90's club song.

Lord Humungous

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4673
  • REVOLUTION CALLING!
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #19 on: May 14, 2009, 05:11:55 AM »
maybe he charged a judge $20 for a autograph??
X

the Algebra Wizard

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 257
  • Getbig!
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #20 on: May 14, 2009, 05:35:40 AM »
No

I was there
Robby smoked him

after, Lou kept yelling in Lobby, I was f---ing robbed
and almost threw down with Steve Weinberger, one of the judges

No way,  he got into it with Big Steve ????? ,
C'mon, i was there and do not remember that .

Royalty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30287
  • Mentzer is Alive
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2009, 05:40:19 AM »


I would give Steve the edge over a carb depleted and exhausted Lou.



....But Lou fully rested and eating normal amounts ...damn ...he would rip steves head off....Lou is 6'5 and well over 300

Ursus

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11338
  • Getbig!
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2009, 05:54:58 AM »
whilst he may have weighted 300+ he never looked like it

Royalty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30287
  • Mentzer is Alive
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2009, 05:59:15 AM »
whilst he may have weighted 300+ he never looked like it


he did when he hit that most muscular damn

Royalty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 30287
  • Mentzer is Alive
Re: Did Lou place for poorly in the 90's BECAUSE.....
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2009, 06:06:10 AM »
Here are some facts. Dorian was weighing 295 pounds that day and Lou was 320 pounds. Two HUGE Mofo's. I think Vic Richards also posed that day at 370 pounds according to him.


I think Vic was known to chronically lie. Chronic excuse maker. Always found a reason not to compete.