I think its fucking hilarious that with all the amazing visuals of ronnie 99 posted on this thread, that ND can actually type its not his best "BY A LONG SHOT"
LOL
as if he looked bad relative to 98 or to the 2001 AC when in reality, he had a much smaller gut in 98/99 than at the AC and his quads were way more seperated in 99 than in 98..
there is growing opinion among the bb community that Ronnie 99 WAS his best ever presentation.
I have posted many links to many forum threads verifying this from several different bb boards (all of which ND tried to discredit as usual.. ), and even the article from McGough states that he feels 99 was better than 98 but that he happens to prefer his smaller and more pregnant AC form which might have been a touch harder than either 98 or 99..
I think its fucking hilarious that with all the amazing visuals of ronnie 99 posted on this thread, that ND can actually type its not his best "BY A LONG SHOT"
LOL
yes because I know what I'm looking at you don't
as if he looked bad relative to 98 or to the 2001 AC when in reality, he had a much smaller gut in 98/99 than at the AC and his quads were way more seperated in 99 than in 98..
he really didn't look bad just not as good you're drawing your own conclusions. NO he did not have a smaller gut in 99 that's nonsense. and let's entertain his quads were more separated in 99 AND? his density & dryness weren't on par with either which is exactly why the general consensus among the experts is 1998 is his best Olympia showing and 2001 is his best overall showing , a career defining appearance
I've said many times I think Ronnie looks better fuller , however he's not on par with 01 in 99 it's a fact.
there is growing opinion among the bb community that Ronnie 99 WAS his best ever presentation.
I have posted many links to many forum threads verifying this from several different bb boards (all of which ND tried to discredit as usual.. ), and even the article from McGough states that he feels 99 was better than 98 but that he happens to prefer his smaller and more pregnant AC form which might have been a touch harder than either 98 or 99..
the bb community? you mean internet fanboys who never attended a single show? oh somehow they've become the yardstick in which reality is judged , gotcha and the actual guys who were at every single one of Ronnie's contests live and in person are wrong , right up your alley in insane stupidity
McGough has stated many , many times 2001 is his best , it's a fact NO ONE cares about 1999 except ignorant fan-boys NO ONE , Hulkster you will never escape this no matter how hard you try and the McGough quote you're trying to use as proof states he was better in 2001
He wasn't a ' touch ' harder in 01 he was noticeably harder and drier ( still NOT on par with Yates
) you don't know what you're looking for which is why you come to your stupid conclusions , I'll ask again because every time I post this YOU never have a cognizant reply
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
where is 1999?
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."where is 1999?
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)"where is 1999?
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."where is 1999?
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.
where is 1999?
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.
where is 1999?
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
Ronnie Coleman : 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.
where is 1999?
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.
where is 1999?
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.where is 1999?
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.
On the subject of conditioning, no-one did it better than Dorian. He achieved a hardness and dryness (without losing fullness) that nobody has ever matched. In the flesh he looked even harder than he did in photos. It was like a statue made of granite was standing in front of you.where is 1999?
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.
where is 1999?
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 .
where is 1999?
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.where is 1999? and your response is a few guys on message boards who never went to the 1999 Olympia or in fact ANY of Ronnie's Olympias are wrong and you are right.
Hulkster run along you can't counter this.
