Author Topic: Dorian Yates - New pics, new thread (Read 147539 times)

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #625 on:** June 07, 2009, 04:29:57 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on June 07, 2009, 03:07:15 PM

LMFAO he's can't touch Yates in the conditioning department 6 years LATER in fact NOT a guy competing to this day can match his size AND conditioning

Ronnie 99 couldn't touch his conditioning from the previous year or 2001 , he's NOT in Yates league in this department , couple that with balance & proportion and posing and you have Ronnie losing like he always did

You are right one man...Dorian best ever

Royal Lion · « **Reply #626 on:** June 07, 2009, 04:30:20 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 07, 2009, 11:22:30 AM

no, that is how late career ronnie looked in the offseason.

not how 98/99/2001 AC ronnie looked in the offseason..

which looked this this: absolutely destroying dorian:

Anyone with half of a brain would realize that this "off-season" Ronnie footage is either a few weeks before or after a contest - he is essentially in contest shape, whereas the Dorian video is pure off-season. Typical biased Hulkster comparison. Give it up already dude.

Royal Lion · « **Reply #627 on:** June 07, 2009, 10:29:26 PM »

Here are some great comparison pics of Ronnie versus Dorian. Personally, I think Dorian wins the majority of the poses, although Ronnie looks freaky. I think a 95 Dorian would compare even better given his higher competition weight.

http://www.muscletalk.co.uk/m3303692-print.aspx

(I couldn't scale the pics down to post directly

- if anyone can, please do)

Immortal_Technique · « **Reply #628 on:** June 08, 2009, 06:41:14 AM »

I guess it comes down to poor arms vs poor valves again. i personally think the upper arms is two bodyparts, each as important as the calf. Ronnie has pretty good calves in 99 which suited his overall size, and even bigger ones in 2003, although his quads were so huge by then it was silly. He has done many shows with rubbish calves however, just like Dorian after 94 did many shows with a bunch of tears and stuff in his arms. But Ronnie has had good enough calves for Arnold not to make the comment you mention in 99 or 2003. 93 was Yates best year IMO, I just can't see him standing next to 2003 Ronnie and looking like the champion. I guess it would massively decide what the judges were looking for that year, but if Haney beat him, then I think Ronnie cold beat him. A 9th or 6th place Ronnie is no measuring stick as he then defeated all the people ahead of him in '98. Anyway 99 Ronnie certainly had calves as the front lat spread with Cormier or flex on either side attests to from that year. He was bigger than ever in delts, one of Dorian's strong points, and would not have faded from the back like he did prior to 98. Anyway we'll never know, but it would be close I think.

pumpster · « **Reply #629 on:** June 08, 2009, 10:51:59 AM »

Quote from: Immortal_Technique on June 08, 2009, 06:41:14 AM

I guess it comes down to poor arms vs poor valves again. i personally think the upper arms is two bodyparts, each as important as the calf.

if Haney beat him, then I think Ronnie cold beat him. A 9th or 6th place Ronnie is no measuring stick as he then defeated all the people ahead of him in '98.

QFT but this is common sense overload for bricklayer ball-worshippers.

You're absolutely right: Haney beat him and Coleman wipes the floor with Haney lol

Royal Lion · « **Reply #630 on:** June 08, 2009, 12:06:23 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on June 08, 2009, 10:51:59 AM

QFT but this is common sense overload for bricklayer ball-worshippers.

You're absolutely right: Haney beat him and Coleman wipes the floor with Haney lol

Epic logic....Haney beat him, so Ronnie would

Haney beat Dorian in 91 which was Dorian's Olympia debut wherein he came in second (highest debut ever I might add) - a lot more than we can say for Ronnie's beginnings! Haney retired due in large part to the emergence of Yates.

Dorian beat Ronnie in head to head competition numerous times, so following your Haney logic, Dorian is clearly better than Ronnie.

Face it, Dorian was the best Olympia champion ever.

Royal Lion · « **Reply #631 on:** June 08, 2009, 12:42:30 PM »

Emmortal · « **Reply #632 on:** June 08, 2009, 12:59:37 PM »

There are PLENTY of shots of Yates with his gut hanging out so posting pics of Ronnie with a bad gut doesn't prove anything or help your argument. If you want to have a viable comparison then you should only be showing them in their peaks because that's all that matters.

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #633 on:** June 08, 2009, 01:07:02 PM »

Quote from: Emmortal on June 08, 2009, 12:59:37 PM

There are PLENTY of shots of Yates with his gut hanging out so posting pics of Ronnie with a bad gut doesn't prove anything or help your argument. If you want to have a viable comparison then you should only be showing them in their peaks because that's all that matters.

Where are the pics of Yates?

Royal Lion · « **Reply #634 on:** June 08, 2009, 01:20:07 PM »

Quote from: Emmortal on June 08, 2009, 12:59:37 PM

There are PLENTY of shots of Yates with his gut hanging out so posting pics of Ronnie with a bad gut doesn't prove anything or help your argument. If you want to have a viable comparison then you should only be showing them in their peaks because that's all that matters.

I have never seen a pic with Dorian's gut that distented. And, regardless, I wasn't trying compare those particular shots. Hulkster & Co. do nothing but troll for the worst pics of Dorian and put them up against the best they can find of Ronnie, so I thought I would even it out a bit.

The best comparison shots I have seen are found here: http://www.muscletalk.co.uk/m3303692-print.aspx

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #635 on:** June 08, 2009, 01:24:08 PM »

Quote from: Royal Lion on June 08, 2009, 01:20:07 PM

I have never seen a pic with Dorian's gut that distented. And, regardless, I wasn't trying compare those particular shots. Hulkster & Co. do nothing but troll for the worst pics of Dorian and put them up against the best they can find of Ronnie, so I thought I would even it out a bit.

The best comparison shots I have seen are found here: http://www.muscletalk.co.uk/m3303692-print.aspx

Exactly these idiots like to post the worse pics of Yates then they cry when the favor is returned

Hulkster · « **Reply #636 on:** June 08, 2009, 01:43:19 PM »

Quote from: Royal Lion on June 07, 2009, 10:29:26 PM

Here are some great comparison pics of Ronnie versus Dorian. Personally, I think Dorian wins the majority of the poses, although Ronnie looks freaky. I think a 95 Dorian would compare even better given his higher competition weight.

http://www.muscletalk.co.uk/m3303692-print.aspx

(I couldn't scale the pics down to post directly - if anyone can, please do)

note that the first comment made was that '99 ronnie was better than 2003"

and the nuthuggers laugh at 99..

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #637 on:** June 08, 2009, 02:01:01 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 08, 2009, 01:43:19 PM

note that the first comment made was that '99 ronnie was better than 2003"

and the nuthuggers laugh at 99..

Laugh at 1999 compared to 2001

you know his best showing ever

and his opinion somehow trumps Ronnie Colemans? who said twice that his best Olympia was 1998 specifically because he was better conditioned , when the greatest bodybuilder of all-time says this it carries weight , just like when he said on multiple occasions he couldn't beat Dorian , it carries weight , more weight than some internet-fan-boy

Hulkster · « **Reply #638 on:** June 08, 2009, 02:10:13 PM »

nope ronnie has stated publicly that he was better in 99 than in 98. and the pics and vids back this up.

this is the point you are forgetting.

you can toss around contradictory opinions back and fourth all day.

in the end, one thing and one thing only matters.

how he really looked: and he looked much better (bigger and a bit more cut) in 99:

sorry.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #639 on:** June 08, 2009, 02:22:40 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 08, 2009, 02:10:13 PM

nope ronnie has stated publicly that he was better in 99 than in 98. and the pics and vids back this up.

this is the point you are forgetting.

you can toss around contradictory opinions back and fourth all day.

in the end, one thing and one thing only matters.

how he really looked: and he looked much better (bigger and a bit more cut) in 99:

sorry.

Again Hulkster he may have said that in 1999 everyone says they're better than then previous year , in time after reflecting on his many appearances only then can he say for sure what was his best and twice now at the end of his career he's said publicly 1998 was his best Olympia more specifically because of his conditioning , which coincides with the experts say

It must kill you that Ronnie doesn't agree with you and dismisses 1999 without batting an eyelash lol you have a long trend of being wrong , I think Ronnie looks better in 1999 personally but make no mistake his conditioning is NOT the same which is exactly why 2001 is considered his all-time best and NOT 1999

Royal Lion · « **Reply #640 on:** June 08, 2009, 03:10:06 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 08, 2009, 01:43:19 PM

note that the first comment made was that '99 ronnie was better than 2003"

and the nuthuggers laugh at 99..

I do think Ronnie was better in 99 than 2003, but these were the best comparison pics I could find of Dorian and Ronnie. I am not sure what their respective weights were in 93 vs. 99, but I think Dorian would out-size & out-condition Ronnie. Ronnie has better shape, but Dorian would win. Just my opinion, so spare me the usual round of shitty Dorian pics compared to sharpened Ronnie pics you always post

Although I would like to see comparison shots of 95 Dorian versus a 98/99 Ronnie similar to the link I posted. If 93 Dorian stacks up that well against a 2003 Ronnie (far & away Ronnie's biggest year), a 95 Dorian would compare even better to a smaller Ronnie.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #641 on:** June 08, 2009, 03:14:17 PM »

Quote from: Royal Lion on June 08, 2009, 03:10:06 PM

I do think Ronnie was better in 99 than 2003, but these were the best comparison pics I could find of Dorian and Ronnie. I am not sure what there respective weights were in 93 vs. 99, but I think Dorian would out-size & out-condition Ronnie. Ronnie has better shape, but Dorian would win. Just my opinion, so spare me the usual round of shitty Dorian pics compared to sharpened Ronnie pics you always post

Although I would like to see comparison shots of a 99 Ronnie similar to the link I posted.

Ronnie was 257 pounds in 1999 but not as hard or as dry as Dorian , so big difference even though they both technically weighed the same

Ronnie's best is 2001 Arnold Classic at just 247 pounds , and many consider Dorian's best 1993 pre-contest at 269 pounds which would beat Ronnie easily in my opinion

BuffD · « **Reply #642 on:** June 08, 2009, 03:20:04 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on June 08, 2009, 10:51:59 AM

QFT but this is common sense overload for bricklayer ball-worshippers.

You're absolutely right: Haney beat him and Coleman wipes the floor with Haney lol

\

Actually using that logic then Haney beat Dorian, Dorian beat Coleman numerous times so Haney is the best Mr O ever since he beat the guy that beat Coleman.

Royal Lion · « **Reply #643 on:** June 08, 2009, 03:21:28 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on June 08, 2009, 03:14:17 PM

Ronnie was 257 pounds in 1999 but not as hard or as dry as Dorian , so big difference even though they both technically weighed the same

Ronnie's best is 2001 Arnold Classic at just 247 pounds , and many consider Dorian's best 1993 pre-contest at 269 pounds which would beat Ronnie easily in my opinion

I think a 95 Yates - despite the bicep tear - is the best Mr. O ever. He stated in one of the seminars posted by Arvilla that in 93 he actually over-dieted. In 95 he decided to pull back a bit and coasted in with similar condition but more size.

ND, do you know what Doz weighed in 95?

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #644 on:** June 08, 2009, 03:28:18 PM »

Quote from: Royal Lion on June 08, 2009, 03:21:28 PM

I think a 95 Yates - despite the bicep tear - is the best Mr. O ever. He stated in one of the seminars posted by Arvilla that in 93 he actually over-dieted. In 95 he decided to pull back a bit and coasted in with similar condition but more size.

ND, do you know what Doz weighed in 95?

yeah he's stated on a few occasions 1995 was his best , I've read 255 pounds but when Haney introduces him at the show with Tom Deters he says he's 260 pounds so in that neighborhood

Hulkster · « **Reply #645 on:** June 08, 2009, 03:54:41 PM »

well, if 95 is his 'best' ronnie's 99 form is vastly better - same size, but more detail, more cuts, better shape:

Royal Lion · « **Reply #646 on:** June 08, 2009, 04:04:07 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 08, 2009, 03:54:41 PM

well, if 95 is his 'best' ronnie's 99 form is vastly better - same size, but more detail, more cuts, better shape:

I agree that Ronnie has more detail and cuts in certain shots, but it is an overstatement to say he was "vastly" better. The lighting is so much different in those shots that Flex, Cormier, and Ronnie all have "vastly" better detail and cuts compared to Dorian, Kevin, and Nasser. Also in the front relaxed I am not sure Kevin or Dorian are really posing whereas Ronnie (he looks awesome) is in full pose.

Hulkster · « **Reply #647 on:** June 08, 2009, 04:08:23 PM »

Quote

The lighting is so much different in those shots that Flex, Cormier, and Ronnie all have "vastly" better detail and cuts compared to Dorian, Kevin, and Nasser.

thats because they probably do. its not lighing..

after all Coleman and Cormeir were in incredible shape that year (sliced)

Flex was sliced too in the quads but had that synthol look on his upper body....

Mr Nobody · « **Reply #648 on:** June 08, 2009, 04:10:03 PM »

Quote from: Hurricane Beef ! on May 25, 2009, 08:53:44 AM

New Pic ( to me )

Its no argument Dorian rules!

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #649 on:** June 08, 2009, 04:13:04 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 08, 2009, 04:08:23 PM

thats because they probably do. its not lighing..

after all Coleman and Cormeir were in incredible shape that year (sliced)

Flex was sliced too in the quads but had that synthol look on his upper body....

You still fear a correct shot of Yates for a reason

this pic is posted the same place you got the other one yet you choose the former because you FEAR Dorian even with naturally wider hips & waist his taper is outstanding and it's not an advantage like you used to push

Dorian's front latspread is unequaled