Author Topic: The Greatest Arnold Classic Winner ever (Read 38629 times)

Hulkster · « **Reply #300 on:** March 30, 2010, 08:27:34 PM »

too bad real life destroy's ronnie's argument too:

99>98

whos the toolbag now? LOL

even your guy hero Peter McGough says Ronnie 99>98 (as per his article)

deal with it losers.

Hulkster · « **Reply #301 on:** March 30, 2010, 08:32:38 PM »

Quote

Oh, you mean like the 3 times he said 98 was better, all made AFTER he the victory cerimony, thereby AMENDING his previous statement?

your hero Peter McGough agrees with his first statment.

what do you say to THAT loser?

lol fucking owned.

Hulkster · « **Reply #302 on:** March 30, 2010, 08:43:07 PM »

ND I hope you do realize that your very own posts show very compelling proof of how ronnie's 99 form was even better than his AC form.

eg.

way more of a gut at the AC
10 pounds smaller..
not nearly as full as 99

yet not really any more defined either...

so, tell us why his AC form was his best ever? LOL

Hulkster · « **Reply #303 on:** March 30, 2010, 08:44:46 PM »

^

ND frantically trying to figure out a way out of this one.

he is caught between a rock and a hard place..lol

typical owning by someone much smarter and not blindly influenced by incorrect opinions of 'experts' not backed up by reality at all...

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #304 on:** March 30, 2010, 10:24:07 PM »

ND has always been stuck between a rock and a hard place. I'm surprised she hasn't given up yet. Gotta admire her determination

SomeKindofMonster · « **Reply #305 on:** March 30, 2010, 11:27:56 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 30, 2010, 02:31:59 PM

Sorry Neo , Flex magazine 2003 favorite Olympia and Ronnie is behind Dorian it's apparently law now

So no one noticed this poll is revealed in April of 2003. Ronnie has just come off his worst Olympia
since he won the title and also got beat by Gunther at the GNC.
The 2003 Olympia had not happened yet and my guess would be that Coleman would
be No. 2 on that poll had it been taken in April of 2004.
It seems the majority of people like his 2003 physique the best.
I am not one of them by far but I'll show more respect than to call them fanboys
because I strongly disagree with them.
There are a lot of good, serious bodybuilders over at MD who recently polled
2003 as Coleman's best Olympia appearance.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #306 on:** March 31, 2010, 01:17:57 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on March 30, 2010, 08:43:07 PM

ND I hope you do realize that your very own posts show very compelling proof of how ronnie's 99 form was even better than his AC form.

eg.

way more of a gut at the AC
10 pounds smaller..
not nearly as full as 99

yet not really any more defined either...

so, tell us why his AC form was his best ever? LOL

Which is exactly why NO ONE of value agrees with you not even your deluded friend Neo and not even your hero Ronnie who has said three separate occasions 1998 was his best Olympia , compelling case lmfao

http://clips.team-andro.com/watch/6ec386cb64df22dff37b/Superstar-Seminar-Ronnie-Coleman-Phil-Heath-Dexter-Jackson

Heath , Alves and Ronnie all say his best is 1998

Joe Weider - IFBB Co-Founder

"Many experts, including reigning Mr.Olympia, Jay Cutler, believe that at his best Ronnie has the greatest physique of all-time. When looking at pictures of Ronnie from the 1998 Mr.Olympia, I find it hard to argue with that."

Raymond Cassar - Muscletime Editor and Photographer

"There is no one alive that can beat Ronnie Coleman when he is at his best - No One! (and his best for me was when he won the 2001 Arnold Classic)"

Team Flex - http://www.flexonline.com/training/49

"We've said before that the 245 pounds or so physique with which [Ronnie Coleman] won the 2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic is the best ever - unbeatable."

Flex Magazine March 2009

Tales from Columbus

2001 (2): Is Chris Cormier unlucky? Are Bob Cicherillo's threads so loud that he's being sponsored by a megaphone company? At the 2001 Arnold Classic, for the only time in its history, the reigning Mr. Olympia entered the contest. Not only that, but said Mr. Olympia, Ronnie Coleman, was in the best shape of his career, before or since. Now that is bad luck.

Flex Magazine March 2008

2001 Then-reigning Mr. Olympia Ronnie Coleman, in the shape of his life at 245 pounds, took this one, with Cormier gaining the second of his six consecutive runner-up positions.

Q ] There are those who feel you were at your best when you competed lighter, which for you was in the low 270's, and those who say you were best in the 290's. Was there a particular look you presented that you preferred over the others?
dot

Number one. That one was incredible to me. It (Ronnie's first Olympia win in 1998) always will be and nothing will ever take the place of that one. Everything was just spot on for that show. I had to overcome so much to win that one too.

I had guys in front of me who had beaten me for the last ten years or so. Nobody picked me to go in and win that show because I had gotten ninth the year before. I had to come with an incredible package and blow all the judges away and that's what I pretty much did.

Flex Magazine August 2003

Jim Schmatltz on Ronnie chances of winning six Olympias in a row

if he repeats his 2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic form, he'll experience the joy of six.

Shawn Perine Ironage Dec 11, 2004

As much as I love Haney and my IA champs, I think Ronnie circa '98 or at the 2001 Arnold is pretty much untouchable. Except by Dorian Yates 6 weeks out from the '93 O as photographed by our own KMH. Both men, on those specific occasions carried so much dry muscle mass in good proportion and with good lines that it's almost unfair to compare them to others.

While I’m on record as saying that the best physique I ever saw was Ronnie’s at the 2001 Arnold, he was never drier or harder than Dorian. In fact now that – 14 years after it happened – I recently for the first time saw the video of Dorian posing before the 1993 Olympia I have cause to rethink. I’m now not sure that Ronnie at 245 pounds would beat Dorian at 269 pounds. At a bigger bodyweight I think Ronnie would look soft next to an in-shape rock-hard Dorian.

review of mr. olympia 1999, january 2000, page 90:

257 pounds, a good seven pounds heavier than last year and the clear winner, ALTHOUGH NOT AS BONE DRY OR AS ROCK HARD IN 98. In comparison to 98, his thighs are enourmous with a greater sweep and his front delts have improved; plus the pec anomaly (gyno) is no longer present.

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

Peter McGough Flex Magazine August 2005

Personally, the best physique I ever saw onstage (there was a contender for best-ever that I saw offstage: those crazy photos of sock-footed Dorian Yates taken seven weeks before the 1993 Mr. Olympia) was Ronnie's at the 2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic. He was cut, full, trim in the waist and a monster (proving that when you're supersharp, you look superbig) at 244 pounds. Ronnie sporting that look would, in my opinion, be unbeatable and would make any criticisms as redundant as a chocolate squat rack.

As usual you contradict the experts and the real life visual evidence

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #307 on:** March 31, 2010, 01:21:14 AM »

Quote from: NeoSeminole on March 30, 2010, 10:24:07 PM

ND has always been stuck between a rock and a hard place. I'm surprised she hasn't given up yet. Gotta admire her determination

Funny you should mention that because where are you exactly? talking about Dorian Yates and Ronnie Coleman in another thread totally unrelated to the topic at hand in another NarcissisticDeity thread

using all sorts of faulty logic

lost little puppies walking down the path a lead them

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #308 on:** March 31, 2010, 01:23:24 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on March 30, 2010, 08:27:34 PM

too bad real life destroy's ronnie's argument too:

99>98

whos the toolbag now? LOL

even your guy hero Peter McGough says Ronnie 99>98 (as per his article)

deal with it losers.

McGough says 2001 is his best so in the end you still lose moron

deal with that.. the experts all agree Ronnie's best is 1998 or 2001

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #309 on:** March 31, 2010, 01:27:37 AM »

Quote from: Shockwave on March 30, 2010, 07:27:11 PM

Oh, you mean like the 3 times he said 98 was better, all made AFTER he the victory cerimony, thereby AMENDING his previous statement?
Oh thats right, no one EVER says they were better last year after they just won a show.
Hulkster I mean really, you would be smart to never ever mention Ronnie's opinion when you try and argue that 99 was his best, cause quite frankly, Ronnie himself destroys your argument, you fucking toolbag.

HAhahahahhahaha that's the best Ronnie himself owns his fan-boys hence why they keep trying so hard

they came Ronnie would beat Dorian , Ronnie says three times he wouldn't , they claim 1999 is his best Ronnie says three times 1998 is

it's why they try so hard and it's why they're in another one of my threads hi-jacking it crying

Ronnie Coleman owns them and they fucking can't stand it , it's the ultimate kick in the ass

EspenG · « **Reply #310 on:** March 31, 2010, 05:36:53 AM »

Strange what is going on in this thread.

ND posts lots of quotes saying RC is the best ever, and Hulkster post pictures and argues how bad RCs gut is....

beefcakeblake · « **Reply #311 on:** March 31, 2010, 06:34:46 AM »

Quote from: EspenG on March 31, 2010, 05:36:53 AM

Strange what is going on in this thread.

ND posts lots of quotes saying RC is the best ever, and Hulkster post pictures and argues how bad RCs gut is....

lmao haahh irony

beefcakeblake · « **Reply #312 on:** March 31, 2010, 06:49:12 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 31, 2010, 01:21:14 AM

Funny you should mention that because where are you exactly? talking about Dorian Yates and Ronnie Coleman in another thread totally unrelated to the topic at hand in another NarcissisticDeity thread using all sorts of faulty logic

lost little puppies walking down the path a lead them

ronnie fan boys are pretty sad, they can't get how much dorian was over their man crush hero

so they come on here saying dumb things, trying to make their hero look better.

but he still falls short, in the midst of the great one dorian yates

JP_RC · « **Reply #313 on:** March 31, 2010, 07:33:09 AM »

Man, you guys certainly love your quotes.......

Hey ND, have you ever thought about making on your own opinion or do you always fall in line with what Flex magazine has to say regardless of what you might see and think of a particular physique or contest?

You certainly hold your experts up high.

JP_RC · « **Reply #314 on:** March 31, 2010, 07:49:13 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 30, 2010, 01:50:23 PM

No because these things aren't subjective either a guy is in shape or he's not , either he's dry or he's not , either he's holding water or he's not

I'll post quotes from other sources saying Dorian has the best back , does that mean he doesn't? because Flex says so ? and in fact Flex stated in that article that a very strong case could be made for Dorian having the best back , and new article this time around new writer Flex a couple of years ago picked Joel Stubbs over Ronnie and Dorian for having the best back , now comes the point who is right?

Let me answer for you NO ONE is right or wrong because it's a subjective topic learn the difference

Flexonline September 15, 2009

REAR VIEW:
As great as Cutler is from behind, Yates at his best was untouchable from the rear because he had not just the thickest and widest lats but also details like a lumbar Christmas tree. Maybe only two men in history could beat Cutler at his best in both a rear lat spread and a rear double bi, but Yates was one of the two (Coleman being the other).

DESCRIBE DORIAN YATES: A close friend. Dorian is very intelligent, a great Mr. Olympia. He had the best side-chest pose and the thickest freakiest back I have ever seen.

Samir Bannout who had one of the best backs mind you on Cutler 2001

Jay Cutler blows the other bodybuilders away with the crisp detail of his muscularity from top to bottom. He has superior calves, hamstrings and glutes. His back is detailed and big, but it does not match up well against Ronnie, who has the second-best back in the history of bodybuilding behind the great Dorian Yates

Ronnie has the second best back behind the great Dorian Yates

Ellington Darden, Ph.D. " best back - Dorian Yates " http://www.baye.com/interviews/ellington_darden_interview1.html

FROM MARKUS RUHL

October 2000, FLEX page 166 (notice how it is post 1999)

"DORIAN YATES HAD THE BEST BACK IN THE HISTORY OF BODYBUILDING. HIS LAT SPREAD WAS UNBELIEVABLE. HIS SIZE, MASS, AND CONDITIONING WERE PERFECT,"

quotes work two ways many people feel Dorian's back is the best others feel Ronnie it's subjective , please learn the difference

Quote

No because these things aren't subjective either a guy is in shape or he's not , either he's dry or he's not , either he's holding water or he's not

So conditioning is not a little subjective? How about people who think Dorian's dryness and density didn't mean much when he lacked detail, separations and striations compared to his competition hence affecting the overall visual impact of his conditioning?
What about balance and proportion? Or symmetry? Arent' those subjective?
I've read some people say Dorian had good proportion and symmetry while at the same time a whole bunch of other people saying the opposite. And if you think Dorian's proportions or symmetry can't be argued you're a bit biased.

Quote

I'll post quotes from other sources saying Dorian has the best back , does that mean he doesn't? because Flex says so ? and in fact Flex stated in that article that a very strong case could be made for Dorian having the best back , and new article this time around new writer Flex a couple of years ago picked Joel Stubbs over Ronnie and Dorian for having the best back , now comes the point who is right?

Pretty much agree with you here, the case of who had the best bodypart is a subjective matter. Of course within reason, you're not going to say Dorian had better biceps than Ronnie or Ronnie had better calves.

One more thing, you can spare your quotes here, I know those are just subjective opinions of people who happen to know more about bodybuilding than the average person, but that doesn't mean they have the final word.

Mr. Magoo · « **Reply #315 on:** March 31, 2010, 07:51:15 AM »

you two guys again?

JP_RC · « **Reply #316 on:** March 31, 2010, 08:03:52 AM »

Quote from: StuartR on March 30, 2010, 06:47:04 PM

what is the deal with all these paragraphs i mean just look at some pictures its clear these guys are on different levels of musculature

Exactly, but they can't accept the visuals.
And you don't even have to look at pics, just look at videos of both at their respective bests and you'll see.
No matter how much they like to argue and post more pics, quotes, and try to ignore the visuals are there.

JP_RC · « **Reply #317 on:** March 31, 2010, 08:07:59 AM »

Quote from: beefcakeblake on March 31, 2010, 06:49:12 AM

ronnie fan boys are pretty sad, they can't get how much dorian was over their man crush hero so they come on here saying dumb things, trying to make their hero look better.

but he still falls short, in the midst of the great one dorian yates

I know you weren't talking about me here, but I have to say if you don't see that Ronnie at his best would beat Dorian (no matter how great Dorian was), I just don't get what you're seeing.

David M · « **Reply #318 on:** March 31, 2010, 08:17:37 AM »

Everybody keeps forgetting Mike Francois. His level of size and conditioning was 5 years ahead of everyone else at the time!

bigbobs · « **Reply #319 on:** March 31, 2010, 08:21:06 AM »

Quote from: David M on March 31, 2010, 08:17:37 AM

Everybody keeps forgetting Mike Francois. His level of size and conditioning was 5 years ahead of everyone else at the time!

bigbobs · « **Reply #320 on:** March 31, 2010, 08:25:31 AM »

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #321 on:** March 31, 2010, 11:48:16 AM »

Quote from: EspenG on March 31, 2010, 05:36:53 AM

Strange what is going on in this thread.

ND posts lots of quotes saying RC is the best ever, and Hulkster post pictures and argues how bad RCs gut is....

More important is when they say RC is the best an it ain't 1999

I don't fear subjective opinions it's popular opinion Ronnie was the best ever doesn't make it a fact

dr.chimps · « **Reply #322 on:** March 31, 2010, 12:11:17 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 31, 2010, 11:48:16 AM

More important is when they say RC is the best an it ain't 1999 I don't fear subjective opinions it's popular opinion Ronnie was the best ever doesn't make it a fact

'When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.'

Shockwave · « **Reply #323 on:** March 31, 2010, 12:14:42 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on March 30, 2010, 08:32:38 PM

your hero Peter McGough agrees with his first statment.

what do you say to THAT loser?

lol fucking owned.

You're really trying this again?
How about the 5 dozens times you decided Peter Mcough is not a credible source.
Therefore, you are agreeing with someone you said has no credibility.
You really are a fucking idiot. Lol.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #324 on:** March 31, 2010, 12:29:47 PM »

Quote from: Shockwave on March 31, 2010, 12:14:42 PM

You're really trying this again?
How about the 5 dozens times you decided Peter Mcough is not a credible source.
Therefore, you are agreeing with someone you said has no credibility.
You really are a fucking idiot. Lol.

LMFAO it's NO coincidence that these Coleman fans are among the dumbest people on the internet