NarcissisticDeity - where would you have Arnold place in pro contests today?

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND also said that fux was a mr. olympia material and that he had a small waist!!..

See I'm not sure if you have an ability to comprehend the English language , I said he had a narrow waist NOT small learn the difference and shall I post the quotes from all the competitors who at the time were saying he had Mr Olympia potential?

There is a vast difference between having the potential to be Mr Olympia and winning it , you being a Nasser fan should know this 

[Sherief Shalaby]

See I'm not sure if you have an ability to comprehend the English language , I said he had a narrow waist NOT small learn the difference and shall I post the quotes from all the competitors who at the time were saying he had Mr Olympia potential?

There is a vast difference between having the potential to be Mr Olympia and winning it , you being a Nasser fan should know this 

sure sure fux was a mr. olympia material, i cant understand why the fukin judges didnt him the title!!.. really big injustice... happy now??.. so gop ahead and post some nasser pics from your old magazines..

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND also said that to win a bb show you MUST have good symmetry and proportion but still he "understood" why the judges gave the mr. olympia title to dorian in 97 .. really contradiction at its worst!..

I said balance & proportion , see now you keep mis-quoting me , I rarely use the word symmetry because it means a lot more than what you think and everyone has different meanings for it

you also need a back to win the big one but torn biceps and triceps are bad but NO back what so ever is acceptable  , hypocrite much?

[WillGrant]

Discuss.

He looks better than any of the sacks of shits competing today

[NarcissisticDeity]

sure sure fux was a mr. olympia material, i cant understand why the fukin judges didnt him the title!!.. really big injustice... happy now??.. so gop ahead and post some nasser pics from your old magazines..

NO injustice I never said he should have won just he had all the right tools to win , you're not paying attention.

[Sherief Shalaby]

I said balance & proportion , see now you keep mis-quoting me , I rarely use the word symmetry because it means a lot more than what you think and everyone has different meanings for it yates was not symmetrical..
 
you also need a back to win the big one but torn biceps and triceps are bad but NO back what so ever is acceptable  , hypocrite much?

fixed

[Sherief Shalaby]

i understand what symmetry means in bb but yates didnt have it especially in 1997 according to both meanings.. his left was not symmetrical with his right (actually his left arm was not there at all) and also his diff. parts were not symmetrical with each other, huge back that dominated his whole physique.. if you excluded his back in 1997 you would see an average chest, very bad waist, smaller shoulders than most of the other guys, small right arm, missing left arm, undefined torn quads, and great calves!!..

where is the symmetry here?..

[Parker]

no man not to that extent, yes he would not be mr. olympia but would look much better than one of the most overrated bbs like gunter!!.. much better arms, chest, calves and over all shape..

No, Arnold would look almost like a carbon copy of Gunter. Arnold had a wide waist, even he said he did, and thias wny he did on the twisting shots. If you look at him straight on, his waist was wide, just like Gundter's is. Both are aproximately the same hieght, so if Arnold was to weigh the same as Gunter, 290-300 pounds, he'd have the same lines...The reason why Arnold good decent, was because he was relatively light.

[MORTALCOIL]

I pretty much have to agree with Parker on this. I think Arnold wouldn't have looked that great with the drug regime of today's pros. At least, not good enough to carry the needed mass to win. Guys like Dorian or Ronnie had the strcture from the get go where they could still get away with bloated guts thanks to width, thickness and monster backs as well as thighs which weren't tiny looking compared to the upper bdy (in Ronnie's case, huge thighs even but with small calves).
Arnold's physique, though much more aesthetic then anything we see today, wouldn't even get him a pro card.

[Sherief Shalaby]

No, Arnold would look almost like a carbon copy of Gunter. Arnold had a wide waist, even he said he did, and thias wny he did on the twisting shots. If you look at him straight on, his waist was wide, just like Gundter's is. Both are aproximately the same hieght, so if Arnold was to weigh the same as Gunter, 290-300 pounds, he'd have the same lines...The reason why Arnold good decent, was because he was relatively light.

i am not saying arnold was a perfect bb or his waist was small but shape wise in nearly all parts he was much better than gunter!!.. gunter had bad shaped quads and no calves and there is no need to talk more about his unbalanced upper body.. arnold's over all shape was superior, his back, quads, calves and of course biceps and chest!..

[Mr Nobody]

He looks better than any of the sacks of shits competing today

X2 Will.

[MORTALCOIL]

i am not saying arnold was a perfect bb or his waist was small but shape wise in nearly all parts he was much better than gunter!!.. gunter had bad shaped quads and no calves and there is no need to talk more about his unbalanced upper body.. arnold's over all shape was superior, his back, quads, calves and of course biceps and chest!..

C'mon, Sherief, Arnold looked great because there was a great flow to his physique but in detail he wasn't a master of proportions either, pretty much like Haney somehow (though I think better than Gunter who was a lot of hype). Arnold was all chest and arms (and even his bis tended to oversahdow his triceps which were very good though). Delts always looked small compared to that chest, his quads were, except in '73, looking ridiculously undevelopped with big calves instead. Actually, he looked more balanced from the back even though the wow factor was clearly the upper front body.

[Sherief Shalaby]

C'mon, Sherief, Arnold looked great because there was a great flow to his physique but in detail he wasn't a master of proportions either, pretty much like Haney somehow (though I think better than Gunter who was a lot of hype). Arnold was all chest and arms (and even his bis tended to oversahdow his triceps which were very good though). Delts always looked small compared to that chest, his quads were, except in '73, looking ridiculously undevelopped with big calves instead. Actually, he looked more balanced from the back even though the wow factor was clearly the upper front body.

i agree with you morta and by the way i was never a fan of arnold physique.. i said clearly he would never be mr. olympia now or even in the 80s or the 90s (with the updated drugs) but i was just replying to paker's comment that he would be just the same as gunter!!.. no way in my opinion!..

[crownshep]

You sure Arnie wouldn`t win a national contest.

[Sherief Shalaby]

You sure Arnie wouldn`t win a national contest.

colombo looks jealous in this pic.

[kevcat]

Both Arnold and Sergio Oliva today would be on top just like then.Sergios genetics would destroy a Ronnie Coleman and Arnolds hard work and attitude would also destroy someone like Jay Cutler No argument needed

[Valane]

I pretty much have to agree with Parker on this. I think Arnold wouldn't have looked that great with the drug regime of today's pros. At least, not good enough to carry the needed mass to win. Guys like Dorian or Ronnie had the strcture from the get go where they could still get away with bloated guts thanks to width, thickness and monster backs as well as thighs which weren't tiny looking compared to the upper bdy (in Ronnie's case, huge thighs even but with small calves).
Arnold's physique, though much more aesthetic then anything we see today, wouldn't even get him a pro card.

Neither Dorian or Ronnie were structurally wide. I am not a huge Arnold fan but he has a larger frame than both, he had structural deficiencies but so did they. He would be a more gifted version of Gunter.

[YoungBlood]

Arnold would have done exactly what he did in the 60's & 70's...he'd probably train the same, and he would have the same dedication.

The one thing that overrides all of what a majority of you are saying; Arnold would do whatever it took/takes to get to the top. If he had to use Slin, GH or monkey feces in order to best Ronnie & Jay...then he would have. Arnold did what he had to to win. And if he were to compete today, he would still win. He would have legs that are bigger, probably even have a few Synthol injections too....because in today's fucked up judging standards, that's what is needed in order to win.

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND's list:

1. Dorian
2. Arnold
3. Samir
4. Frank Zane

Then everyone else. 

What's funny is you asked a question and refused to wait for an answer then just made up your own which goes to show you're not interested in an answer you're just interested in trolling.

[NarcissisticDeity]

How on earth could anyone say that Dorian's best beats Ronnie's best? 

The injuries alone put Dorian out of the running!  As for an uninjured 1993 Yates, Ronnie in 2003 would have outweighed him by 30 pounds with a smaller waist.  Dorian's superior hardness would not have made up for Ronnie's size advantage.  I really don't understand why this is so difficult to grasp.

Yet ND would probably put Arnold ahead of both of them. 

So we're getting to your real point Dorian V Ronnie , and Arnold was just a ploy to get your real topic which proves my point you're just trolling and not interested in any discussion.

for the record Dorian and Ronnie would beat Arnold in a contest but when all things are considered Arnold is a better bodybuilder than both of them

[Matt C]

You sure Arnie wouldn`t win a national contest.

I'm quite confident he could not take the Super-Heavyweight class which he would be in.  I do think he would be able to qualify for the Nationals and compete, but not win.

[Palpatine Q]

Arnold would have done exactly what he did in the 60's & 70's...he'd probably train the same, and he would have the same dedication.

The one thing that overrides all of what a majority of you are saying; Arnold would do whatever it took/takes to get to the top. If he had to use Slin, GH or monkey feces in order to best Ronnie & Jay...then he would have. Arnold did what he had to to win. And if he were to compete today, he would still win. He would have legs that are bigger, probably even have a few Synthol injections too....because in today's fucked up judging standards, that's what is needed in order to win.

Yup....Arnold was a fucking lunatic when it came to training.

If the requirement was to have crazy quads, you know damn well Arnold would kill himself until he had crazy quads, they looked good in 73, so it's not like the muscle wasn't there.

Plus if Arnold were training and competing today, he'd be overall bigger than he was just because of the drugs now. Do you guys think that the human race has somehow evolved over the last 30 years and we are all so much more muscular and bigger?

It's the drugs...period. And he'd be taking the same exact ones.

[Matt C]

I think it's safe to say that Arnold would be about Gunter's size today, at best, maintaining his lines.  That means it's possible that Arnold could have done better than Gunter's all-time best placing of fourth at the 2005 Mr. Olympia - although Dexter did not compete that year.  So to say that Arnold would be top five if he competed today and consumed the products that are out today is an objectively fair statement I believe.  But to say he would still win - that I disagree with.

[Palpatine Q]

I think it's safe to say that Arnold would be about Gunter's size today, at best, maintaining his lines.  That means it's possible that Arnold could have done better than Gunter's all-time best placing of fourth at the 2005 Mr. Olympia - although Dexter did not compete that year.  So to say that Arnold would be top five if he competed today and consumed the products that are out today is an objectively fair statement I believe.  But to say he would still win - that I disagree with.

I can agree with that.....a lot more competitors now than there were in the 70's, much tougher field.

But no one really KNOWS for sure, the guy did have a great build....Far better lines than Gunther

[Matt C]

I can agree with that.....a lot more competitors now than there were in the 70's, much tougher field.

But no one really KNOWS for sure, the guy did have a great build....Far better lines than Gunther

Yes, better lines.  In many ways, they were the same - both were the same height and mass monsters.  Arnold was the better posing which is another reason he looked more aesthetics - not just Arnold's aesthetics, but his ability to present them played a big role.