Dorian Yates - overrated!

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND stopped looking at Ronnie's pics years ago.

not true that's how I noticed Hulkster was posting photoshopped ones 

[JP_RC]

I know you don't ....and you have lots of ideas that conflict with reality

the parts are judged in accordance with who meets the criteria as a WHOLE , still learning huh? the judging is NOT subjective and you're hyperfocusing on one minute part of the whole package

again either one guy is hold water or he's not , either one guy has high calves or he doesn't , either one guy is short or he's not , either one guy doesn't carry a lot of muscular bulk or he does don't, these things are NOT subjective

NOPE sorry wrong again , Ronnie's calves are much more of a liability than Dorian's biceps and you being the ignorant biased person you are can't look past your own preference , Dorian's biceps ( AT HIS BEST )  were never spectacular but in NO WAY as bad as Coleman's calves , ontop of being high and lacking proportionate size and any development the shape sucks as well , at his best Dorian's biceps lacked a peak but that's about it , and calves my ignorant friend CAN NOT be hidden the judges know this , they are clearly visible in every single pose from every single angel in a hypothetical pose-down in terms of liability Ronnie's calves is a major and glaring flaw even if you're willing to overlook it

NOPE still lost huh? with all things being equal in this area with assess ALL of the criteria as a whole , get this through your head ALL ROUNDS ARE PHYSIQUE ROUNDS all of the criteria is assessed as a whole in every single pose

So lets say Shawn Ray has the exact same conditioning as Dorian , how do we pick whose better? lets add the rest of the criteria , does Shawn carry more muscular bulk than Dorian? NO does Shawn have better balance & proportion than Dorian? NO his Shawn harder than Dorian? NO is Shawn a better poser than Dorian? you could say yes however in ANY pose ALL of the criteria is assessed so NO Dorian wins because he simply meets ALL of the criteria better

symmetry is most certainly NOT subjective if I make the claim that Flex Wheeler has smaller joints , hips and waist than Dorian , this is NOT open for discussion it's a fact , you constantly prove with each post how little you know about how contests are judged and what they look for , you're attempting to bend everything to meet Ronnie's style physique and it's NOT how it's done

and who has the best physique does come down to opinion , opinions of people who know what to look for , how to apply it and who meets it better and your opinion is lacking severely

NOPE sorry wrong again , Ronnie's calves are much more of a liability than Dorian's biceps and you being the ignorant biased person you are can't look past your own preference , Dorian's biceps ( AT HIS BEST )  were never spectacular but in NO WAY as bad as Coleman's calves , ontop of being high and lacking proportionate size and any development the shape sucks as well , at his best Dorian's biceps lacked a peak but that's about it , and calves my ignorant friend CAN NOT be hidden the judges know this , they are clearly visible in every single pose from every single angel in a hypothetical pose-down in terms of liability Ronnie's calves is a major and glaring flaw even if you're willing to overlook it

Did those terrible calves prevented Ronnie from winning? No.
Was it that the rest of his physique was so good that it didn't matter so much? Probably.
Do you want to talk about "lacking proportionate size"? How about Dorian's arms lacking proportionate size to match his massive back/torso?
They may be proportionate to you, but not to others: subjective opinion.
Do you want to talk about shape? How about Dorian's quads and biceps?
And you tell me I'm biased? You are overlooking Dorian's flaws all the time.

NOPE still lost huh? with all things being equal in this area with assess ALL of the criteria as a whole , get this through your head ALL ROUNDS ARE PHYSIQUE ROUNDS all of the criteria is assessed as a whole in every single pose

Get this through your head: I know all rounds are physique rounds. Repeating it won't make you sound smarter.........
You were the one picking up on Ronnie's calves and abs before.

does Shawn carry more muscular bulk than Dorian? NO

Try comparing Dorian to Ronnie its a lot closer........

does Shawn have better balance & proportion than Dorian? NO

Its not a fact. Plenty of people out there, myself included, think Shawn had better balance & proportion. There is even some people that say Dorian's proportion was terrible.

is Shawn harder than Dorian? NO

Try with Ronnie......a much closer comparison.

is Shawn a better poser than Dorian?

Funny that you were saying that its not a fact that Shawn was a better poser than Dorian........Again, another aspect of the criteria that is subjective.

however in ANY pose ALL of the criteria is assessed so NO Dorian wins because he simply meets ALL of the criteria better

In Shawn's case yes, since the difference between the two is more noticeable.
Try with Ronnie, would you say Dorian beats him because he meets the criteria better?

symmetry is most certainly NOT subjective if I make the claim that Flex Wheeler has smaller joints , hips and waist than Dorian , this is NOT open for discussion it's a fact , you constantly prove with each post how little you know about how contests are judged and what they look for , you're attempting to bend everything to meet Ronnie's style physique and it's NOT how it's done

Really? A few pages back you were telling how symmetry can change depending on the context and different people's opinions, meaning its subjective. Now you are saying its not subjective.
You even used quotes from Lee Priest and Bev Francis to show how symmetry can be subjective.
Did you know that proportion can also be shown to be subjective going by your logic?

[JP_RC]

when you speak on topics and try and sound knowledgeable I will always throw that quote back in your face because in 2 seconds I can show how little you know. 

Do it as you wish, it won't matter at all.........

[JP_RC]

Wayne Demilla " I've said to Ronnie , " What you've got to realize is that in 98-99 you were probably in the best proportion you could be for your frame . Those muscles have gotten bigger. Just cos you're bigger , doesn't make you better . "

this quote is from 2003 and I've said many times before I found this quote that the heavier Ronnie became the more his balance & proportion suffered for it which is exactly why the vast majority agree 2001/1998 are his best showings . so whenever anyone post these pics of Ronnie from pre-contest 2002/2003 they can't seem to grasp how much worse his physique is in this aspect an along with his density & dryness which McGough touches on and anyone with two fucking eyes can see , the heavier Ronnie becomes the worse his conditioning becomes

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 .

According to you all of these quotes should be "popular opinion". You sure when to use them to your convinience.

Anyway let's go by quotes:

Flex, Sept, 2005 by Peter McGough
Ronnie Coleman | 1999
In his first defense of the Mr. O title, Coleman exhibited size, condition and sinew-splitting fullness he lacked a year earlier. At 257 pounds, he was so separated that he looked like a walking anatomy chart. That being said, I still think he achieved his best-ever physique for the 2001 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic.

[JP_RC]

He is basically saying that even though he was drier in 1998, his best Olympia appearance was 1999.

[JP_RC]

Wayne Demilla " I've said to Ronnie , " What you've got to realize is that in 98-99 you were probably in the best proportion you could be for your frame . Those muscles have gotten bigger. Just cos you're bigger , doesn't make you better . "

this quote is from 2003 and I've said many times before I found this quote that the heavier Ronnie became the more his balance & proportion suffered for it which is exactly why the vast majority agree 2001/1998 are his best showings . so whenever anyone post these pics of Ronnie from pre-contest 2002/2003 they can't seem to grasp how much worse his physique is in this aspect an along with his density & dryness which McGough touches on and anyone with two fucking eyes can see , the heavier Ronnie becomes the worse his conditioning becomes

Are you saying Dorian's balance & proportions didn't suffer? How about the 1995, 1996 and 1997 Olympias?
Just look at him at the 1997 Olympia and you just can't say he was proportionate. He still won.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Did those terrible calves prevented Ronnie from winning? No.
Was it that the rest of his physique was so good that it didn't matter so much? Probably.
Do you want to talk about "lacking proportionate size"? How about Dorian's arms lacking proportionate size to match his massive back/torso?
They may be proportionate to you, but not to others: subjective opinion.
Do you want to talk about shape? How about Dorian's quads and biceps?
And you tell me I'm biased? You are overlooking Dorian's flaws all the time.

Get this through your head: I know all rounds are physique rounds. Repeating it won't make you sound smarter.........
You were the one picking up on Ronnie's calves and abs before.

Try comparing Dorian to Ronnie its a lot closer........

Its not a fact. Plenty of people out there, myself included, think Shawn had better balance & proportion. There is even some people that say Dorian's proportion was terrible.

Try with Ronnie......a much closer comparison.

Funny that you were saying that its not a fact that Shawn was a better poser than Dorian........Again, another aspect of the criteria that is subjective.

In Shawn's case yes, since the difference between the two is more noticeable.
Try with Ronnie, would you say Dorian beats him because he meets the criteria better?

Really? A few pages back you were telling how symmetry can change depending on the context and different people's opinions, meaning its subjective. Now you are saying its not subjective.
You even used quotes from Lee Priest and Bev Francis to show how symmetry can be subjective.
Did you know that proportion can also be shown to be subjective going by your logic?

Did those terrible calves prevented Ronnie from winning? No.
Was it that the rest of his physique was so good that it didn't matter so much? Probably.
Do you want to talk about "lacking proportionate size"? How about Dorian's arms lacking proportionate size to match his massive back/torso?
They may be proportionate to you, but not to others: subjective opinion.
Do you want to talk about shape? How about Dorian's quads and biceps?
And you tell me I'm biased? You are overlooking Dorian's flaws all the time.

Did those terrible calves prevented Ronnie from winning? No.
Was it that the rest of his physique was so good that it didn't matter so much? Probably.
Do you want to talk about "lacking proportionate size"? How about Dorian's arms lacking proportionate size to match his massive back/torso?

That's all relative to who he's competing with isn't it? if everyone has weak calves than it's NOT a flaw is it? and overall compared to he was competing with he was better than them , then again his competition wasn't fantastic anyway , past his prime , Flex , Kevin , Shawn and Dillet men who were much better and sharper when they competed with Yates , you think Flex 98 would push Yates to the limit? HAHAHAHA or Kevin in 02? are you kidding me? Dorian's ARMS at his best are in proportion with his torso , arms include biceps/triceps and forearms so be careful about making blanket statements

They may be proportionate to you, but not to others: subjective opinion.
Do you want to talk about shape? How about Dorian's quads and biceps?
And you tell me I'm biased? You are overlooking Dorian's flaws all the time

I'm not overlooking Dorian's flaws just assessing which ones are more of a liability and as a whole Dorian has less flaws , when you factor in ALL of the criteria which you can't seem to grasp , lets say balance & proportion were a push , Dorian still wins in muscular bulk , density , dryness and posing so when you factor in ALL of the criteria which is how it's done , Dorian still edges Ronnie out and that's being kind

Get this through your head: I know all rounds are physique rounds. Repeating it won't make you sound smarter.........
You were the one picking up on Ronnie's calves and abs before.

the purpose wasn't to make myself sound smarter it was to beat into your ignorant head   I'm not doing it for my benefit but yours , I may not be smart ( although Hulkster thinks so ) but I at least know what I'm talking about

Try comparing Dorian to Ronnie its a lot closer........

or is it? there is a difference between 257lbs dense & dry and 257 lbs lacking in this area , soft size will never beat dense , dry size

Funny that you were saying that its not a fact that Shawn was a better poser than Dorian........Again, another aspect of the criteria that is subjective.

Shawn probably was a better ' poser ' but this means what? how many times did Shawn beat Dorian in ANY posing rounds? NEVER and why? ALL ROUNDS ARE PHYSIQUE ROUNDS so in the posing rounds the judges are looking for who has the most muscular bulk , who has better balanced development , density & dryness , among other things so go back to the drawing board

Its not a fact. Plenty of people out there, myself included, think Shawn had better balance & proportion. There is even some people that say Dorian's proportion was terrible.

LMFAO your proof is popular opinion? you're flat-out wrong if you think Shawn had better balance & proportion compared to Dorian , wow people say things so they must be true this is what you're offering up? popular opinion and ignorant people? people think Ronnie was aesthetic too so I guess that means it's true   get a clue

In Shawn's case yes, since the difference between the two is more noticeable.
Try with Ronnie, would you say Dorian beats him because he meets the criteria better?

Yup , the criteria favor's Yates physique

Really? A few pages back you were telling how symmetry can change depending on the context and different people's opinions, meaning its subjective. Now you are saying its not subjective.
You even used quotes from Lee Priest and Bev Francis to show how symmetry can be subjective.
Did you know that proportion can also be shown to be subjective going by your logic?

It's NOT subjective just misunderstood by the layperson , and it depends on the context and what PART of it they mean , does Ronnie have better ' symmetry ' than Dorian ? smaller hips , waist , joints , etc YES , Flex was known as The Sultan of Symmetry despite the fact his balance & proportion weren't anything special

balance & proportion are part & parcel of symmetry which is why Bev Francis said Dorian's was almost perfect , the judges know the difference and what to look for and who meets it better . does Ronnie have better ' symmetry ' than Dorian? yes . does Dorian have better ' symmetry ' than Ronnie? yes it all depends on the context you're using. but make NO mistake it's not subjective , Ronnie's hips & waist & joints are smaller than Dorian's and so was Shawn's & Flex that's not open for discussion

[NarcissisticDeity]

He is basically saying that even though he was drier in 1998, his best Olympia appearance was 1999.

and HARDER he may have liked 1999 better due to the fact he didn't have ANY bitch-tits which would explain why he thinks 2001 is better than 1999 he was harder & drier and didn't have any bitch-tits 
 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Are you saying Dorian's balance & proportions didn't suffer? How about the 1995, 1996 and 1997 Olympias?
Just look at him at the 1997 Olympia and you just can't say he was proportionate. He still won.

NO not at his best NO they didn't in fact Dorian looks better heavier and at his best the 93 pics it's near perfect

in 95 his balance & proportion was great even with the one bicep shorter than the other , especially in relation to with whom he was competing. 96 not so much and 97 NO he won that on pure size , density & dryness

[JP_RC]

and HARDER he may have liked 1999 better due to the fact he didn't have ANY bitch-tits which would explain why he thinks 2001 is better than 1999 he was harder & drier and didn't have any bitch-tits 
 

So you're agreeing that 1999 was possibly better then 1998?

[NarcissisticDeity]

So you're agreeing that 1999 was possibly better then 1998?

NO as far as a whole , muscular bulk , balance & proportion , density & dryness , Ronnie looked better in 98

if Ronnie 99 had the same density & dryness he did in 98/01 I would say yes because more muscle and equal conditioning as long as balance doesn't suffer is the ideal

[JP_RC]

That's all relative to who he's competing with isn't it? if everyone has weak calves than it's NOT a flaw is it? and overall compared to he was competing with he was better than them , then again his competition wasn't fantastic anyway , past his prime , Flex , Kevin , Shawn and Dillet men who were much better and sharper when they competed with Yates , you think Flex 98 would push Yates to the limit? HAHAHAHA or Kevin in 02? are you kidding me? Dorian's ARMS at his best are in proportion with his torso , arms include biceps/triceps and forearms so be careful about making blanket statements

I'm not overlooking Dorian's flaws just assessing which ones are more of a liability and as a whole Dorian has less flaws , when you factor in ALL of the criteria which you can't seem to grasp , lets say balance & proportion were a push , Dorian still wins in muscular bulk , density , dryness and posing so when you factor in ALL of the criteria which is how it's done , Dorian still edges Ronnie out and that's being kind

the purpose wasn't to make myself sound smarter it was to beat into your ignorant head  I'm not doing it for my benefit but yours , I may not be smart ( although Hulkster thinks so ) but I at least know what I'm talking about

or is it? there is a difference between 257lbs dense & dry and 257 lbs lacking in this area , soft size will never beat dense , dry size

Shawn probably was a better ' poser ' but this means what? how many times did Shawn beat Dorian in ANY posing rounds? NEVER and why? ALL ROUNDS ARE PHYSIQUE ROUNDS so in the posing rounds the judges are looking for who has the most muscular bulk , who has better balanced development , density & dryness , among other things so go back to the drawing board

LMFAO your proof is popular opinion? you're flat-out wrong if you think Shawn had better balance & proportion compared to Dorian , wow people say things so they must be true this is what you're offering up? popular opinion and ignorant people? people think Ronnie was aesthetic too so I guess that means it's true  get a clue

Yup , the criteria favor's Yates physique


It's NOT subjective just misunderstood by the layperson , and it depends on the context and what PART of it they mean , does Ronnie have better ' symmetry ' than Dorian ? smaller hips , waist , joints , etc YES , Flex was known as The Sultan of Symmetry despite the fact his balance & proportion weren't anything special

balance & proportion are part & parcel of symmetry which is why Bev Francis said Dorian's was almost perfect , the judges know the difference and what to look for and who meets it better . does Ronnie have better ' symmetry ' than Dorian? yes . does Dorian have better ' symmetry ' than Ronnie? yes it all depends on the context you're using. but make NO mistake it's not subjective , Ronnie's hips & waist & joints are smaller than Dorian's and so was Shawn's & Flex that's not open for discussion

That's all relative to who he's competing with isn't it? if everyone has weak calves than it's NOT a flaw is it? and overall compared to he was competing with he was better than them , then again his competition wasn't fantastic anyway , past his prime , Flex , Kevin , Shawn and Dillet men who were much better and sharper when they competed with Yates , you think Flex 98 would push Yates to the limit? HAHAHAHA or Kevin in 02? are you kidding me? Dorian's ARMS at his best are in proportion with his torso , arms include biceps/triceps and forearms so be careful about making blanket statements

Sure it all depends on who they are competing with. Wouldn't Dorian's arms, quads, lack of deep separations, etc. be a flaw considering he would be going on against Ronnie who was outstanding at these?

Funny thing you mention past their primes, when one of your "friends" here thinks Shawn's best was 1999.
What was Kevin's best according to you? Was he past his prime in 2002? Of course, but not in 1998-1999.
Flex 1999 is considered to be one of his best appearances ever after his 1993 AC of course.

As far as Dorian's arms: what is Dorian's best according to you?

I'm not overlooking Dorian's flaws just assessing which ones are more of a liability and as a whole Dorian has less flaws , when you factor in ALL of the criteria which you can't seem to grasp , lets say balance & proportion were a push , Dorian still wins in muscular bulk , density , dryness and posing so when you factor in ALL of the criteria which is how it's done , Dorian still edges Ronnie out and that's being kind

How do you know this is a fact? How can you be so sure that Dorian meets all of the criteria better?
Wait.....you said you think its not a fact Dorian would beat Ronnie, but now you're saying he would. 

or is it? there is a difference between 257lbs dense & dry and 257 lbs lacking in this area , soft size will never beat dense , dry size

So Ronnie 98-99 is soft to you? 

Shawn probably was a better ' poser ' but this means what? how many times did Shawn beat Dorian in ANY posing rounds? NEVER and why? ALL ROUNDS ARE PHYSIQUE ROUNDS so in the posing rounds the judges are looking for who has the most muscular bulk , who has better balanced development , density & dryness , among other things so go back to the drawing board

You're repeating this too much...........I was not trying to say Shawn should've beaten Dorian in the posing rounds and I know all rounds are physique rounds. All I was trying to do is show you how ONE aspect of the criteria, in this case posing, is subjective.

LMFAO your proof is popular opinion? you're flat-out wrong if you think Shawn had better balance & proportion compared to Dorian , wow people say things so they must be true this is what you're offering up? popular opinion and ignorant people? people think Ronnie was aesthetic too so I guess that means it's true  get a clue

Sergio Oliva said that Dorian had terrible proportion and symmetry. You have quoted a lot of pro bodybuilders in the past, so don't try to say their opinions don't matter.

It's NOT subjective just misunderstood by the layperson , and it depends on the context and what PART of it they mean , does Ronnie have better ' symmetry ' than Dorian ? smaller hips , waist , joints , etc YES , Flex was known as The Sultan of Symmetry despite the fact his balance & proportion weren't anything special

You say that balance & proportion are a part of symmetry, then how can someone say that Flex was the Sultan of Symmetry? perhaps because to the person who said it symmetry is just about small waist, small joints, left & right balance, etc.
If its changing due to the context or the opinion of a person then it has to be subjective.

balance & proportion are part & parcel of symmetry which is why Bev Francis said Dorian's was almost perfect , the judges know the difference and what to look for and who meets it better . does Ronnie have better ' symmetry ' than Dorian? yes . does Dorian have better ' symmetry ' than Ronnie? yes it all depends on the context you're using. but make NO mistake it's not subjective , Ronnie's hips & waist & joints are smaller than Dorian's and so was Shawn's & Flex that's not open for discussion

So using both sets of context, who has better symmetry to you Ronnie or Dorian?

[JP_RC]

NO not at his best NO they didn't in fact Dorian looks better heavier and at his best the 93 pics it's near perfect

in 95 his balance & proportion was great even with the one bicep shorter than the other , especially in relation to with whom he was competing. 96 not so much and 97 NO he won that on pure size , density & dryness

So you're saying someone can win on pure size and conditioning, yet a heavier Ronnie loses to Dorian because of his imbalances and proportional flaws?

[JP_RC]

NO as far as a whole , muscular bulk , balance & proportion , density & dryness , Ronnie looked better in 98

if Ronnie 99 had the same density & dryness he did in 98/01 I would say yes because more muscle and equal conditioning as long as balance doesn't suffer is the ideal

Do you consider Peter McGough to be an "expert"? You must since you quote him so much.

Now your opinion on Ronnie's best Olympia is different than that of McGough. Who's is right?
It can't be determined in an exact way because its subjective.

If its subjective to determine Ronnie's best year, then it would be equally subjective to determine who would win between him and Dorian.
In this case then, who meets the judging criteria better is also subjective. Which can make who meets part of the criteria better a subjective matter.

[Hulkster]

its funny and sad that ND is now claiming that he thinks that 98 is better than 99 when in the past he has specifically stated that he feels 99 was better than 98 (because of the extra size and fullness). look in the truce thread or old ronnie vs dorian threads. the statements are there.

now, he changes his mind..for no reason.

hell, his own hero Mcgough even says 99 was better than 98, but now he disagrees with him.

but he agrees with him on ridiculous stuff like dorian was harder precontest than ronnie ever was onstage..

the guy must be on crack.

[Hulkster]

Do you consider Peter McGough to be an "expert"? You must since you quote him so much.

yes, Mcgough quotes are about the only thing that ND presents as proof for his arguments.

because the visuals always show him to be wrong.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Sure it all depends on who they are competing with. Wouldn't Dorian's arms, quads, lack of deep separations, etc. be a flaw considering he would be going on against Ronnie who was outstanding at these?

Funny thing you mention past their primes, when one of your "friends" here thinks Shawn's best was 1999.
What was Kevin's best according to you? Was he past his prime in 2002? Of course, but not in 1998-1999.
Flex 1999 is considered to be one of his best appearances ever after his 1993 AC of course.

As far as Dorian's arms: what is Dorian's best according to you?

How do you know this is a fact? How can you be so sure that Dorian meets all of the criteria better?
Wait.....you said you think its not a fact Dorian would beat Ronnie, but now you're saying he would. 

So Ronnie 98-99 is soft to you? 

You're repeating this too much...........I was not trying to say Shawn should've beaten Dorian in the posing rounds and I know all rounds are physique rounds. All I was trying to do is show you how ONE aspect of the criteria, in this case posing, is subjective.

Sergio Oliva said that Dorian had terrible proportion and symmetry. You have quoted a lot of pro bodybuilders in the past, so don't try to say their opinions don't matter.

You say that balance & proportion are a part of symmetry, then how can someone say that Flex was the Sultan of Symmetry? perhaps because to the person who said it symmetry is just about small waist, small joints, left & right balance, etc.
If its changing due to the context or the opinion of a person then it has to be subjective.

So using both sets of context, who has better symmetry to you Ronnie or Dorian?

Sure it all depends on who they are competing with. Wouldn't Dorian's arms, quads, lack of deep separations, etc. be a flaw considering he would be going on against Ronnie who was outstanding at these?

Dorian's arms at his best are fine as are his quads , does Ronnie have advantages in biceps? absolutely? quads? sure . but I can mention Ronnie's flaws we could go tit-for-tat but as a whole at his best Dorian has less flaws

Funny thing you mention past their primes, when one of your "friends" here thinks Shawn's best was 1999.
What was Kevin's best according to you? Was he past his prime in 2002? Of course, but not in 1998-1999.
Flex 1999 is considered to be one of his best appearances ever after his 1993 AC of course.

who said it was my friend? he thinks what he likes I think what I like . Shawn's best was either 1994 or 1996 , Kevin was 1992 or 1995 . the best Flex ever looked was 1993 and after the accident he never looked the same again , he resorted to injecting everywhere and looked foolish that and his hams/glutes most likely prevented him from beating Ronnie in 98

Dorian's arms at his best is probably the 93 precontest pics his arms are massive everywhere NO tears

How do you know this is a fact? How can you be so sure that Dorian meets all of the criteria better?
Wait.....you said you think its not a fact Dorian would beat Ronnie, but now you're saying he would.  

well you can tell by looking at pics & videos ( which aren't always accurate BTW ) eyewitnesses which verify these statements , Dorian who is an IFBB judge mind you said on the topic of Ronnie , that he had better balance & proportion and conditioning and I honestly don't think the conditioning aspect is in question by anyone other than internet-fans I think it's generally accepted by people in the know that Dorian's conditioning is legendary and Ronnie's well isn't , but for the sake of argument I'm always willing to entertain Ronnie may have matched Dorian in this area albeit at his lightest

and people have said Dorian at his best would beat Ronnie this does NOT make it a fact , but I think it's  a fact that Dorian meets the criteria better

So Ronnie 98-99 is soft to you?  

NO 99 softer than 98 yes but still pretty damn conditioning , but not on par with 01 or Dorian but I'm willing to entertain he may have been even though I don't have to

You're repeating this too much...........I was not trying to say Shawn should've beaten Dorian in the posing rounds and I know all rounds are physique rounds. All I was trying to do is show you how ONE aspect of the criteria, in this case posing, is subjective.

because you're still not grasping the concept , and elaborate on how it's subjective

Sergio Oliva said that Dorian had terrible proportion and symmetry. You have quoted a lot of pro bodybuilders in the past, so don't try to say their opinions don't matter.

Okay now we have to know in what context was he talking about? 1997? I wouldn't disagree so much at his best? I mean it's a pretty vague quote and Sergio also bitched & moaned about his placement in 1984/85 does it mean he should have placed higher?

You say that balance & proportion are a part of symmetry, then how can someone say that Flex was the Sultan of Symmetry? perhaps because to the person who said it symmetry is just about small waist, small joints, left & right balance, etc.
If its changing due to the context or the opinion of a person then it has to be subjective.

no because 99% of people always refer to symmetry as small hips , waist & joints , it's the context . Dorian NEVER lost a symmetry round does that mean he always had the best ' symmetry ' again when properly applied it's not subjective because in the end Ronnie's waist is narrower and Dorian's calves are in better proportion with his quads and this isn't debatable or subjective

So using both sets of context, who has better symmetry to you Ronnie or Dorian?

Ronnie has better ' symmetry ' in the classic sense of the word and Dorian has better balance & proportion , see this is where all rounds are physique rounds comes into play because Ronnie's physique favors part(s) of the criteria better than Dorians and same with Yates in that area , but then we factor in the rest of the criteria even with better ' symmetry ' it doesn't mean a better pose perfect example ab-thigh

A pose on paper Ronnie should win hands down , smaller waist & hips , smaller joints great taper. But Ronnie's never had a better ab-thigh one because he can never seem to effectively do the pose but overall from head to toe Dorian's greater balance & proportion , bulk , abdominals density & drynes , he wins , it's a classic case of Dorian meeting the criteria better overall although Ronnie has some advantages

[NarcissisticDeity]

So you're saying someone can win on pure size and conditioning, yet a heavier Ronnie loses to Dorian because of his imbalances and proportional flaws?

I said Dorian won in 97 on size & density & dryness and Ronnie doesn't have better conditioning than Yates and again it's all relative to who you're competing with

[Hulkster]

but not on par with 01 or Dorian but I'm willing to entertain he may have been even though I don't have to

yes you do.

the visuals dictate that you do:

 

[JP_RC]

I said Dorian won in 97 on size & density & dryness and Ronnie doesn't have better conditioning than Yates and again it's all relative to who you're competing with

I have to disagree on the statement that Ronnie never had equal conditioning to Dorian.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Do you consider Peter McGough to be an "expert"? You must since you quote him so much.

Now your opinion on Ronnie's best Olympia is different than that of McGough. Who's is right?
It can't be determined in an exact way because its subjective.

If its subjective to determine Ronnie's best year, then it would be equally subjective to determine who would win between him and Dorian.
In this case then, who meets the judging criteria better is also subjective. Which can make who meets part of the criteria better a subjective matter.

Do you consider Peter McGough to be an "expert"? You must since you quote him so much.

Now your opinion on Ronnie's best Olympia is different than that of McGough. Who's is right?
It can't be determined in an exact way because its subjective.

well Gee everything is ' subjective ' then how can anyone decide whose better in a contest 

and McGough never said 99 was his best Olympia

Instead of choosing a best-ever Mr. Olympia, maybe all one can do is reflect on 40 years of Olympia history and highlight those instances where the winner advanced the sport on that particular day. With that in mind, I would nominate the following.

he used Ronnie 99 as an instance but he doesn't say he's better in 99 and in fact has been pretty consistent that 01 is his best

If its subjective to determine Ronnie's best year, then it would be equally subjective to determine who would win between him and Dorian.
In this case then, who meets the judging criteria better is also subjective. Which can make who meets part of the criteria better a subjective matter.

see above everything is subjective then how do judges come to conclusions? popular opinion? or the criteria ? again stop trying to claim proportion is subjective it's NOT are you claiming Ronnie's calves are in more proportion with his quads than Dorians? is this even open for discussion? is this subjective?

[NarcissisticDeity]

its funny and sad that ND is now claiming that he thinks that 98 is better than 99 when in the past he has specifically stated that he feels 99 was better than 98 (because of the extra size and fullness). look in the truce thread or old ronnie vs dorian threads. the statements are there.

now, he changes his mind..for no reason.

hell, his own hero Mcgough even says 99 was better than 98, but now he disagrees with him.

but he agrees with him on ridiculous stuff like dorian was harder precontest than ronnie ever was onstage..

the guy must be on crack.

he NEVER once says 99 was better that's a lie , in fact he's been pretty consistent that 01 is his best

[NarcissisticDeity]

yes, Mcgough quotes are about the only thing that ND presents as proof for his arguments.

because the visuals always show him to be wrong.

the only thing? owned run along dumbass

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.

[NarcissisticDeity]

yes you do.

the visuals dictate that you do:

 

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.

Ummm NO I don't  add this to the Yates quotes about him having better conditioning 

[NarcissisticDeity]

I have to disagree on the statement that Ronnie never had equal conditioning to Dorian.

Maybe he did and that's for argument's sake but he only did at his lightest weights , Dorian equals bigger ' equal ' conditioning , better balance & proportion and posing & presentation , so Dorian still wins


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.

size + fullness + hardness + dryness + balance + posing = Yates win