Dorian Yates - overrated!

[NeoSeminole]

Where did he say it would be close?

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.

see the part in bold

[JP_RC]

then it's redundant you typing it then don't you think?

Let's clarify Peter did NOT say 1999 was Ronnie's best in fact he said 2001 was his best which coincides with a vast majority of people , and the reference to the 99 Olympia was NOT even about his best Olympia it was in reference to a memorable moment at the Olympia where the guy set the bar on that day , he referenced Dorian and the 1993 Mr Olympia and he does NOT consider that his best Olympia showing . That's Hulkster drawing his own conclusions

2001 is considered his best because he had the perfect blend of size , density , dryness and balance for his physique it's pretty much the best of all worlds for his physique

no there is a difference as many have point out which McGough touched on in who is the best Mr Olympia ever , it's impossible to choose , way way to many variables , lighting , technology , contexts , knowledge ,  etc many people feel many different people are the greatest ever way to subjective a topic

1995 or 1993 and his proportions even with the one bicep shorter than the other is still better than Ronnies , Ronnie will always have two very underdeveloped sub-par calves that aren't in proportion with his quads and entertaining all things were equal ( and they're not ) two is worse than one

subjective/non-subjective popular opinion doesn't make it a correct opinion , the minority judge contests not the majority , I don't look for popular opinion on a subjective topic as a means of proof

no it does not because Ronnie's conditioning was never on par with Yates and entertaining it was Dorian was still larger and had equal conditioning

Greatly improved where? by Ronnie being harder & drier? with bitch tits in 98? NO WAY in hell Ronnie 98 would beat Dorian he barely beat Flex and 99 he was bigger and fuller albeit with less density & dryness this would be very evident next to a insanely conditioned Yates

Flex wasn't as great at the Olympia as he was in the Arnold , but he was close enough and either you're being contrary or just plain ignorant , Flex at the 99/98 Olympia wasn't on par with 93 Olympia not even close if he was he would have been Mr Olympia

Ronnie's forearm bicep/triceps discrepancy has always been there , the heavier he gets the worse it became old news , still NOT on par with Yates it's just not , you can't claim Dorian's arms/back-torso proportion wasn't great all you'd like it doesn't change the fact you're grasping at straws , Ronnie's arms in fact are to LONG for his short torso now couple that with long legs and the short torso and the calf & forearm imbalance out of the two Dorian's balance & proportion is better

The scale isn't perfect this I know , ironic you bring up that tidbit because 99.9% of the comparisons they post are way off , where Ronnie at 247 pounds has the same size calves as Dorian and he has the same size waist , but I digress , even with the scale off it's clearly shows who has a short torso , who has long legs & arms in relation to the torso , who has disproportionate calves and forearms and it's Ronnie , he may have a smaller waist & hips and joints however he doesn't compare overall

you see it and you shouldn't fucking see it , and you said I was nitpicking and I'm not merely showing you how the judges would look at it , Ronnie may have gotten away with it with the competition he faced but he never faced a prime Dorian , wait he did and we all know how that turned out 

Dorian's proportion flaws are not nearly as much as a liability compared to Ronnie



[ Q ] What were some of your better physical qualities as a bodybuilder, do you think?


Obviously I carried a lot of muscle mass and my trademark was to come into a show in super hard condition. I think my muscles had a certain quality and density from all the years of heavy training that a lot of guys didn't have.



One thing that I think people underrated me on - it was never really mentioned because of my sheer physical size and condition - was my balance and proportion. Not only from muscle group to muscle group, but from upper body to lower body. My skeletal structure and everything else was there and in good balance.


here is Dorian commenting on his outstanding balance & proportion , you know what's ironic is I raved about it for years before I ever found this quote and it was very nice to be validated after the fact by an IFBB judge like Yates 

Bev Francis : Bodybuilder's phsyique you most admire ?

The man Dorian Yates , his combonation of size and shape makes for an awesome physique , unlike a lot of big guys he's not a load of massive parts just thrown together , His symmetry is almost perfect , Everything is in proportion , no weak bodyparts .


another IFBB judge commenting on Yates outstanding balance and at his best he was absolutely near perfect in this aspect , reminds me of the Flex magazine coverage of the 93 when they assess the competitors strengths & weaknesses , concerning Dorian they remarked weaknesses and their response was " none ...really "


Shawn Perine Ironage  May 9 2009

Although I prefer the Reeves-Zane-Paris physique, I still contend that there was never a more complete, muscular human being to walk the earth than Dorian on the day Kevin Horton shot him pre-93 O. I was never so shocked by a set of bodybuilding photos as when I went through that article. Even Ronnie at his best, lacked Dorian's hardness and certainly his calves.

see a pattern here? Dorian was more complete , had better balance & proportion , unrivaled conditioning and he was a better poser , believe me Ronnie would have a ton of trouble beating Dorian

then it's redundant you typing it then don't you think?

Probably

Let's clarify Peter did NOT say 1999 was Ronnie's best in fact he said 2001 was his best which coincides with a vast majority of people , and the reference to the 99 Olympia was NOT even about his best Olympia it was in reference to a memorable moment at the Olympia where the guy set the bar on that day , he referenced Dorian and the 1993 Mr Olympia and he does NOT consider that his best Olympia showing . That's Hulkster drawing his own conclusions

I was trying to show McGough feels that 99 is better than 98, not that its his best ever. Why didn't he mention 98 if he thinks its his best Olympia appearance? Isn't it because he thinks 99 is better?

1995 or 1993 and his proportions even with the one bicep shorter than the other is still better than Ronnies , Ronnie will always have two very underdeveloped sub-par calves that aren't in proportion with his quads and entertaining all things were equal ( and they're not ) two is worse than one

I guess we will never agree on who had the better balance & proportion. You think it was Dorian, I think it was Ronnie.

no it does not because Ronnie's conditioning was never on par with Yates and entertaining it was Dorian was still larger and had equal conditioning

How can you be so sure that Ronnie's conditioning was never on par with Dorian's conditioning other than posting a quote from McGough?
Was he larger just because he was heavier? We've seen that a bodybuilder can appear to be bigger than another in certain poses despite being lighter.

Greatly improved where? by Ronnie being harder & drier? with bitch tits in 98? NO WAY in hell Ronnie 98 would beat Dorian he barely beat Flex and 99 he was bigger and fuller albeit with less density & dryness this would be very evident next to a insanely conditioned Yates

Ronnie was greatly improved in 98-99 compared to his previous showings because he was MUCH better conditioned, a bit bigger and the quality of his physique improved considerably.

Ronnie's forearm bicep/triceps discrepancy has always been there , the heavier he gets the worse it became old news , still NOT on par with Yates it's just not , you can't claim Dorian's arms/back-torso proportion wasn't great all you'd like it doesn't change the fact you're grasping at straws , Ronnie's arms in fact are to LONG for his short torso now couple that with long legs and the short torso and the calf & forearm imbalance out of the two Dorian's balance & proportion is better

Do you honestly think Dorian's arms were in good proportion to his back/torso in 1995 compared to Ronnie?
I can't understand what you're seeing here..............

The scale isn't perfect this I know , ironic you bring up that tidbit because 99.9% of the comparisons they post are way off , where Ronnie at 247 pounds has the same size calves as Dorian and he has the same size waist , but I digress , even with the scale off it's clearly shows who has a short torso , who has long legs & arms in relation to the torso , who has disproportionate calves and forearms and it's Ronnie , he may have a smaller waist & hips and joints however he doesn't compare overall

Its true it shows a lot of those things you listed, however it doesn't show other things like Dorian's arms being too small/underdeveloped for his torso compared to Ronnie and it doesn't show the level of both guy's quad development in which case Dorian's appear narrow once again compared to Ronnie.

you see it and you shouldn't fucking see it , and you said I was nitpicking and I'm not merely showing you how the judges would look at it , Ronnie may have gotten away with it with the competition he faced but he never faced a prime Dorian , wait he did and we all know how that turned out 

Dorian's proportion flaws are not nearly as much as a liability compared to Ronnie



[ Q ] What were some of your better physical qualities as a bodybuilder, do you think?


Obviously I carried a lot of muscle mass and my trademark was to come into a show in super hard condition. I think my muscles had a certain quality and density from all the years of heavy training that a lot of guys didn't have.



One thing that I think people underrated me on - it was never really mentioned because of my sheer physical size and condition - was my balance and proportion. Not only from muscle group to muscle group, but from upper body to lower body. My skeletal structure and everything else was there and in good balance.


here is Dorian commenting on his outstanding balance & proportion , you know what's ironic is I raved about it for years before I ever found this quote and it was very nice to be validated after the fact by an IFBB judge like Yates 

Bev Francis : Bodybuilder's phsyique you most admire ?

The man Dorian Yates , his combonation of size and shape makes for an awesome physique , unlike a lot of big guys he's not a load of massive parts just thrown together , His symmetry is almost perfect , Everything is in proportion , no weak bodyparts .


another IFBB judge commenting on Yates outstanding balance and at his best he was absolutely near perfect in this aspect , reminds me of the Flex magazine coverage of the 93 when they assess the competitors strengths & weaknesses , concerning Dorian they remarked weaknesses and their response was " none ...really "


Shawn Perine Ironage  May 9 2009

Although I prefer the Reeves-Zane-Paris physique, I still contend that there was never a more complete, muscular human being to walk the earth than Dorian on the day Kevin Horton shot him pre-93 O. I was never so shocked by a set of bodybuilding photos as when I went through that article. Even Ronnie at his best, lacked Dorian's hardness and certainly his calves.

see a pattern here? Dorian was more complete , had better balance & proportion , unrivaled conditioning and he was a better poser , believe me Ronnie would have a ton of trouble beating Dorian

Again, I guess we'll never agree on the proportion criteria on both Dorian and Ronnie.




 

[JP_RC]

sure you do , you like Ronnie better

you're contradicting the experts by claiming he was better in 99.

1) Ronnie's conditioning in 98 was great FOR RONNIE not on par with Yates , 99 definitely NOT close to 99 nevermind Dorian

2) who has been harping on the fact that ALL rounds are physique rounds? who has been saying Dorian has better balance & proportion? posing & presentation? and muscular bulk? I have , I said while Ronnie meets part(s) of the criteria better than Yates , Dorian meets ALL of the criteria better than Ronnie and better than any of his contemporaries , it's old news my stance hasn't budged one iota in years

I know it's not all about conditioning HOWEVER entertaining for the sake of argument all things were being equal ( which they're not ) the guy with the best conditioning wins

has nothing to do with my point

NO he does not , you see what you want to see , Ronnie has advantages sure but stop with the blatant overstatements , McGough also said Ronnie never touched Dorian in conditioning I'm sure you agree with that?

And no one said Dorian was an anatomy chart? how about these?

Quote from Julian Schmidt, "FLEX" magazine, on the November issue, 1998:

  "Now that Dorian Yates, the thickest, densest and most annealed bodybuider in history has retired, Ronnie has taken the opportunity to become the new stndard-bearer. Something unlikely to have happened, if Dorian still competed

thickest , densest and most annealed !

Quote from Greg Zulak, "MuscleMag", early 1997:

  "The most amazing characteristic, of Dorian, is not his size per se, but his muscularity: not only is his muscle-per-square-inch ratio the greatest ever, but his muscles seem like they were etched in stone, such is their hardness."

etched in stone

Quote from Steve Blechman, 1995:

  "Even though he doesen't represent my bodybuilding ideal, I think Dorian's overall development is mind-blogging. And when you consider that his frame carrries his size so comfortably, and that he presents his mass with such incredible conditioning...I don't think that Dorian can be defeated by current professional judging standards. He'll be Mr.Olympia for as long as he wants to

incredible conditioning

At 2 p.m. on 11 September 1993 he walked out onstage at the Civic Auditorium in Atlanta, Georgia. He weighed 257 lb. His skin looked as if it had been painted directly on to his muscle. He was stone hard and grainy. Every detail of every body part punched out into the first ten rows. No man had ever looked quite like Dorian Yates looked that day: he looked big. He looked bad He looked sick. There was  no Mr. Olympia contest. The judges saw no need to call him out for comparisons during the muscularity round.

' I knew then, ' he would say, ten years later, ' that I was either first or last. And I wasn't fucking last. '


his skin looked like it had been painted directly onto his muscle , ( dry anyone? ) stone hard ( dense anyone? )

[ Q ] What were some of your better physical qualities as a bodybuilder, do you think?


Obviously I carried a lot of muscle mass and my trademark was to come into a show in super hard condition. I think my muscles had a certain quality and density from all the years of heavy training that a lot of guys didn't have.



One thing that I think people underrated me on - it was never really mentioned because of my sheer physical size and condition - was my balance and proportion. Not only from muscle group to muscle group, but from upper body to lower body. My skeletal structure and everything else was there and in good balance.


super hard condition

Ronnie:  Dorian would have won again.


Jim: You think so?


Ronnie:  I know so.  Dorian has a big physique - hard- and he's been the man to beat, and its hard to knock the champion off the block.  He's a big guy and has a lot going for him.  He overcame so many adversities, like his torn biceps, I couldnt see too much else stopping him.


big physique , hard , density ? see a pattern here?

As Weider photographer Bill Dobbins so succinctly put it as Yates strutted his stuff : " I have never seen such muscle development on a human being. The other guys sit around backstage talking about whether to get big or cut , what they need to do is get like Dorian. "

they need to get like Dorian , big and cut


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.

I mean this sums it all up

Has the quality of physique seen on the pro stage these days changed much compared to when you were competing as a professional?

I don't think the physiques have changed radically. I think a lot of people are trying to go the size route. My sole goal when getting ready for a contest was not building a lot of size, although when I was coming up pure muscle size was still very important. I was always really concerned about coming in very sharp conditioning wise.

I think that is lacking a little bit now, and it has occurred over the past few years. You go to a pro show now and you see a couple of guys who are in really good shape and the rest of the lineup is so-so, or not so good. Back when I was competing in the Olympia I think you saw a lot of guys who were in really good shape.

There was a greater emphasis on conditioning, but now you see guys going for size at the expense of conditioning. It seems strange me saying that, as I was known for my muscle size, but it was not my priority in getting ready for a contest. Obviously I carried a lot of muscle but my main thing was to come in super-ripped


Dorian talking about how the current crop of guys ( Ronnie was included ) just couldn't touch the 90s or his conditioning


First of all, Dorian would bring to the stage a package so massive and freakily conditioned that throughout his career as Mr. Olympia no one would come close to defeating him on size and hardness. His level of development set a new standard in bodybuilding excellence, one that is being favorably looked upon, and replicated by many in the sport, today.


freaky conditioned . size and hardness ? see a pattern here?

Peter Mcgough

  "These words should not be taken lightly, because no bodybuilder has ever been as hard and dry as the man who won six Sandows."



yet again

Flex Magazine October 2004 - Peter McGough’s commentary on the "voodoo" that has now reached ridiculous complexity when it comes to trying to "dry out" bodybuilders so they’re more ripped than any anatomy chart illustration on contest day. He quotes former Mr. Olympia Dorian Yates, who notes that despite the chemistry experiments with insulin and diuretics, "I don’t see the guys getting any harder."


Dorian again commenting on how guys sucked compared to his conditioning

ripped completely ripped

Flex Magazine June 1996

Quote Milos Sarcev on Dorian Yates

" Dorian is.........The current Mr Olympia. I admire him a great deal. He's impressive , ripped and huge with a total package that can't be beat. he doesn't have the type of physique I'd want to emulate. "



  ripped and huge and complete

Lee Priest

HOW DO YOU FEEL DORIAN WOULD FAIR AGAINST RONNIE COLEMAN NOW?

I think Dorian at his best (1993) would easily beat Ronnie. Dorian might not be as symmetrical as Ronnie, but all over he was more complete and in better condition at his best.

better condition

hardest by far


Quote Mike Mattarazo on Dorian Yates

" Does he even have skin? "


dry anyone?

Flex magazine Dec 1995

Dorian Yates : Skin like tissue paper.

tissue paper


Peter McGough on Dorian at the 1996 Mr Olympia

Dorian Yates : The man was in situ was rock hard

rock hard

super-hard condition , see the pattern

Dorian's conditioning is legendary and for all intents and purposes UNMATCHED

contests aren't based on what's good for you , Dorian's conditioning and balance are both better than Ronnies

sure you do , you like Ronnie better

Yes, but I don't have anything against Dorian. I don't just try to go against him because I supposedly dislike him, I don't dislike him. I just think Ronnie was better.

you're contradicting the experts by claiming he was better in 99.

Most, but not all.

1) Ronnie's conditioning in 98 was great FOR RONNIE not on par with Yates , 99 definitely NOT close to 99 nevermind Dorian

2) who has been harping on the fact that ALL rounds are physique rounds? who has been saying Dorian has better balance & proportion? posing & presentation? and muscular bulk? I have , I said while Ronnie meets part(s) of the criteria better than Yates , Dorian meets ALL of the criteria better than Ronnie and better than any of his contemporaries , it's old news my stance hasn't budged one iota in years

I know it's not all about conditioning HOWEVER entertaining for the sake of argument all things were being equal ( which they're not ) the guy with the best conditioning wins

How can you be so sure Ronnie's conditioning in 1998 is not on par with Dorian's conditioning? I see him just as dry and hard.
Again, I don't think Dorian is better than Ronnie in symmetry, balance & proportion and not even posing. Going by the criteria and that all rounds are physique rounds: Ronnie beats Dorian, I see him meeting all of the criteria better.

By muscular bulk I'm sure you mean muscularity or size right? In this case how can you be so sure Dorian meets it better just because he is heavier? Don't you think Ronnie could give the impression of being more muscular than a heavier Dorian?

NO he does not , you see what you want to see , Ronnie has advantages sure but stop with the blatant overstatements , McGough also said Ronnie never touched Dorian in conditioning I'm sure you agree with that?

I don't think I agree with it going with Ronnie in 1998.

And no one said Dorian was an anatomy chart? how about these?

Quote from Julian Schmidt, "FLEX" magazine, on the November issue, 1998:

  "Now that Dorian Yates, the thickest, densest and most annealed bodybuider in history has retired, Ronnie has taken the opportunity to become the new stndard-bearer. Something unlikely to have happened, if Dorian still competed

thickest , densest and most annealed !

Quote from Greg Zulak, "MuscleMag", early 1997:

  "The most amazing characteristic, of Dorian, is not his size per se, but his muscularity: not only is his muscle-per-square-inch ratio the greatest ever, but his muscles seem like they were etched in stone, such is their hardness."

etched in stone

Quote from Steve Blechman, 1995:

  "Even though he doesen't represent my bodybuilding ideal, I think Dorian's overall development is mind-blogging. And when you consider that his frame carrries his size so comfortably, and that he presents his mass with such incredible conditioning...I don't think that Dorian can be defeated by current professional judging standards. He'll be Mr.Olympia for as long as he wants to

incredible conditioning

At 2 p.m. on 11 September 1993 he walked out onstage at the Civic Auditorium in Atlanta, Georgia. He weighed 257 lb. His skin looked as if it had been painted directly on to his muscle. He was stone hard and grainy. Every detail of every body part punched out into the first ten rows. No man had ever looked quite like Dorian Yates looked that day: he looked big. He looked bad He looked sick. There was  no Mr. Olympia contest. The judges saw no need to call him out for comparisons during the muscularity round.

' I knew then, ' he would say, ten years later, ' that I was either first or last. And I wasn't fucking last. '


his skin looked like it had been painted directly onto his muscle , ( dry anyone? ) stone hard ( dense anyone? )

[ Q ] What were some of your better physical qualities as a bodybuilder, do you think?


Obviously I carried a lot of muscle mass and my trademark was to come into a show in super hard condition. I think my muscles had a certain quality and density from all the years of heavy training that a lot of guys didn't have.



One thing that I think people underrated me on - it was never really mentioned because of my sheer physical size and condition - was my balance and proportion. Not only from muscle group to muscle group, but from upper body to lower body. My skeletal structure and everything else was there and in good balance.


super hard condition

Ronnie:  Dorian would have won again.


Jim: You think so?


Ronnie:  I know so.  Dorian has a big physique - hard- and he's been the man to beat, and its hard to knock the champion off the block.  He's a big guy and has a lot going for him.  He overcame so many adversities, like his torn biceps, I couldnt see too much else stopping him.


big physique , hard , density ? see a pattern here?

As Weider photographer Bill Dobbins so succinctly put it as Yates strutted his stuff : " I have never seen such muscle development on a human being. The other guys sit around backstage talking about whether to get big or cut , what they need to do is get like Dorian. "

they need to get like Dorian , big and cut


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.

I mean this sums it all up

Has the quality of physique seen on the pro stage these days changed much compared to when you were competing as a professional?

I don't think the physiques have changed radically. I think a lot of people are trying to go the size route. My sole goal when getting ready for a contest was not building a lot of size, although when I was coming up pure muscle size was still very important. I was always really concerned about coming in very sharp conditioning wise.

I think that is lacking a little bit now, and it has occurred over the past few years. You go to a pro show now and you see a couple of guys who are in really good shape and the rest of the lineup is so-so, or not so good. Back when I was competing in the Olympia I think you saw a lot of guys who were in really good shape.

There was a greater emphasis on conditioning, but now you see guys going for size at the expense of conditioning. It seems strange me saying that, as I was known for my muscle size, but it was not my priority in getting ready for a contest. Obviously I carried a lot of muscle but my main thing was to come in super-ripped


Dorian talking about how the current crop of guys ( Ronnie was included ) just couldn't touch the 90s or his conditioning


First of all, Dorian would bring to the stage a package so massive and freakily conditioned that throughout his career as Mr. Olympia no one would come close to defeating him on size and hardness. His level of development set a new standard in bodybuilding excellence, one that is being favorably looked upon, and replicated by many in the sport, today.


freaky conditioned . size and hardness ? see a pattern here?

Peter Mcgough

  "These words should not be taken lightly, because no bodybuilder has ever been as hard and dry as the man who won six Sandows."



yet again

Flex Magazine October 2004 - Peter McGough’s commentary on the "voodoo" that has now reached ridiculous complexity when it comes to trying to "dry out" bodybuilders so they’re more ripped than any anatomy chart illustration on contest day. He quotes former Mr. Olympia Dorian Yates, who notes that despite the chemistry experiments with insulin and diuretics, "I don’t see the guys getting any harder."


Dorian again commenting on how guys sucked compared to his conditioning

ripped completely ripped

Flex Magazine June 1996

Quote Milos Sarcev on Dorian Yates

" Dorian is.........The current Mr Olympia. I admire him a great deal. He's impressive , ripped and huge with a total package that can't be beat. he doesn't have the type of physique I'd want to emulate. "



  ripped and huge and complete

Lee Priest

HOW DO YOU FEEL DORIAN WOULD FAIR AGAINST RONNIE COLEMAN NOW?

I think Dorian at his best (1993) would easily beat Ronnie. Dorian might not be as symmetrical as Ronnie, but all over he was more complete and in better condition at his best.

better condition

hardest by far


Quote Mike Mattarazo on Dorian Yates

" Does he even have skin? "


dry anyone?

Flex magazine Dec 1995

Dorian Yates : Skin like tissue paper.

tissue paper


Peter McGough on Dorian at the 1996 Mr Olympia

Dorian Yates : The man was in situ was rock hard

rock hard

super-hard condition , see the pattern

Dorian's conditioning is legendary and for all intents and purposes UNMATCHED

contests aren't based on what's good for you , Dorian's conditioning and balance are both better than Ronnies

Your quotes here just prove what I was trying to say before: Not one of them mentions Dorian resembling a walking anatomy chart, but they all mention his amazing dryness, density and hardness. When McGough said Ronnie resembled a walking anatomy chart, he based it off Ronnie's amazing muscle separations, striations and detail. A bodybuilder can be incredibly hard & dry, but still don't display deep muscle separations and detail.
Which is why I said Ronnie has an advantage over Dorian as far as separations, striations and detail in the first place.

[JP_RC]

1998 would not beat Dorian , he barely beat Flex in one of the closest Mr Olympia contests in the history of it ! 3 points , let's say for the sake of argument Flex was just as good in 98 as he was in 93 it wouldn't matter Dorian 93 was so far and ahead of Flex it wasn't even funny , plus the bitch-tits NO contest throw 98 out the window

99 not as dry and not as hard , please note density is a step beyond being dry and Ronnie 99 wasn't as hard AND as dry as 98 and NOT in Yates league anyway , the size advantage against Dorian would be close then 98 would be but it would be clearly evident who had the superior conditioning , and balance & posing and guess who would win?

1998 would not beat Dorian , he barely beat Flex in one of the closest Mr Olympia contests in the history of it ! 3 points , let's say for the sake of argument Flex was just as good in 98 as he was in 93 it wouldn't matter Dorian 93 was so far and ahead of Flex it wasn't even funny , plus the bitch-tits NO contest throw 98 out the window

I can understand your point of using Flex as a comparison factor here, but I just don't see it as very accurate. I mean, was Flex really that close to Ronnie in 98?

Was he as greatly conditioned? No
Was he as dry and hard? No
Was he as big and muscular? No
Did he have better symmetry? Probably
Did he have better balance & proportion? No

I honestly see Ronnie beating Flex by a lot in 98 despite the judging score, just as Dorian beat him in 93.
 

99 not as dry and not as hard , please note density is a step beyond being dry and Ronnie 99 wasn't as hard AND as dry as 98 and NOT in Yates league anyway , the size advantage against Dorian would be close then 98 would be but it would be clearly evident who had the superior conditioning , and balance & posing and guess who would win?

I agree that Ronnie in 1999 was not as dry and hard as Dorian. But he wasn't too far behind as his conditioning was still pretty great.
Stil it comes down to who has the most complete physique. Could Ronnie beat Dorian in muscularity despite being lighter? Yes.
Who would have an advantage in balance, proportion and symmetry overall? I see Ronnie. Posing? Could be equal.

I admit it would be a very close call, but I just don't see why you're so sure Dorian would win. I mean, its not like Ronnie is Nasser, Shawn or Levrone.

[Hulkster]

I honestly see Ronnie beating Flex by a lot in 98 despite the judging score

so does everyone else. except for idiot ND of course..

this has been brought up before to ND who doesn't look to whats onstage and only looks at the scorecards as 100% accurate..

Place Name Country 1 2 3 4 Pnts  
1 Ronnie Coleman USA 17 5 5 5 32  
2 Flex Wheeler USA 5 10 10 10 35  

 fact is, ronnie was overlooked slightly in the opening round, and his scoring reflects that.

[Hulkster]

I was trying to show McGough feels that 99 is better than 98, not that its his best ever. Why didn't he mention 98 if he thinks its his best Olympia appearance? Isn't it because he thinks 99 is better?

yes he does and ND knows he was caught.

so he tries to ignore this and point out that Mcgough feels 2001 was better than either, when it really doesn't matter becuase the fact is that ND has been arguing forever that 98 was better than 99, and his own hero, the cornerstone of his entire pro dorian argument, disagrees.

and it drives him crazy.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Probably

I was trying to show McGough feels that 99 is better than 98, not that its his best ever. Why didn't he mention 98 if he thinks its his best Olympia appearance? Isn't it because he thinks 99 is better?

I guess we will never agree on who had the better balance & proportion. You think it was Dorian, I think it was Ronnie.

How can you be so sure that Ronnie's conditioning was never on par with Dorian's conditioning other than posting a quote from McGough?
Was he larger just because he was heavier? We've seen that a bodybuilder can appear to be bigger than another in certain poses despite being lighter.

Ronnie was greatly improved in 98-99 compared to his previous showings because he was MUCH better conditioned, a bit bigger and the quality of his physique improved considerably.

Do you honestly think Dorian's arms were in good proportion to his back/torso in 1995 compared to Ronnie?
I can't understand what you're seeing here..............

Its true it shows a lot of those things you listed, however it doesn't show other things like Dorian's arms being too small/underdeveloped for his torso compared to Ronnie and it doesn't show the level of both guy's quad development in which case Dorian's appear narrow once again compared to Ronnie.

Again, I guess we'll never agree on the proportion criteria on both Dorian and Ronnie.




 

I was trying to show McGough feels that 99 is better than 98, not that its his best ever. Why didn't he mention 98 if he thinks its his best Olympia appearance? Isn't it because he thinks 99 is better?

he most certainly doesn't think he's better in terms of conditioning. maybe because Ronnie had bitch-tits in 98 who knows but almost anyone with any credibility says 2001 is his best

I guess we will never agree on who had the better balance & proportion. You think it was Dorian, I think it was Ronnie.

my point if proven , yours isn't

How can you be so sure that Ronnie's conditioning was never on par with Dorian's conditioning other than posting a quote from McGough?
Was he larger just because he was heavier? We've seen that a bodybuilder can appear to be bigger than another in certain poses despite being lighter.

I can because McGough and Dorian himself have said so , do you have anything directly comparing the two in this area to the contrary? feel free to post it and I've always said for arguments sake that perhaps he did at his lightest. and was he larger because he carried more muscle more evenly distributed over his physique and we've seen it however have we ever seen Ronnie appear bigger than Dorian despite being lighter? NO they've competed against each other and Ronnie didn't appear bigger than Dorian and in if you're going by pics and videos DON'T they don't accurately portray reality , Dorian touches on in this article

Dorian Yates interview bodybuilding.com 2008
Everyone who sees my physique in person always comments on how much better I look in person than in pictures. That's because my physique is thick and developed from all angles. From the front, from the back, from the side, standing on my head: it doesn't matter. Everywhere is fully developed from every angle. And this might not show in one-dimensional photos. When you turn somebody to the side and they are twice as thick as everyone else, then that shows up.

Ronnie was greatly improved in 98-99 compared to his previous showings because he was MUCH better conditioned, a bit bigger and the quality of his physique improved considerably.

Ronnie was greatly improved in terms of conditioning and in 98 he wasn't a bit bigger than 97 in fact he was lighter , albeit much harder & drier which gave the illusion of being bigger , 99 he did add a bit more size and fullness at the expense of prime conditioning though

Do you honestly think Dorian's arms were in good proportion to his back/torso in 1995 compared to Ronnie?
I can't understand what you're seeing here..............

absolutely if you're claiming they're not because of the shorter bicep you're mistaken and grasping at straws

Its true it shows a lot of those things you listed, however it doesn't show other things like Dorian's arms being too small/underdeveloped for his torso compared to Ronnie and it doesn't show the level of both guy's quad development in which case Dorian's appear narrow once again compared to Ronnie.

at his best his arms were neither small of ' underdeveloped ' and what is that supposed to mean? elaborate on this one? and please type what you mean I can't go by anything other than what you type. And you don't know how Dorian's quads appear compared to Ronnie at their separate primes you're speculating and nothing more

Again, I guess we'll never agree on the proportion criteria on both Dorian and Ronnie.

and you don't agree with the experts that his balance & proportion were that great to begin , but it changes nothing as far as this issue is concerned I think I've showed and admitted neither are perfect but Dorian has less flaws AT HIS BEST in this department

[JP_RC]

so does everyone else. except for idiot ND of course..

this has been brought up before to ND who doesn't look to whats onstage and only looks at the scorecards as 100% accurate..

Place Name Country 1 2 3 4 Pnts 
1 Ronnie Coleman USA 17 5 5 5 32 
2 Flex Wheeler USA 5 10 10 10 35 

 fact is, ronnie was overlooked slightly in the opening round, and his scoring reflects that.

Its probably because of this that ND feels 98 was so close......

[Hulkster]

I was trying to show McGough feels that 99 is better than 98

you don't need to show this to ND

he knows McGough's article makes it explicitly clear.

99 is on the list
98 is not.

case closed.

2001 has nothing to do with this fact.

despite ND's crying..

[Hulkster]

Its probably because of this that ND feels 98 was so close......

he has never looked the the pics, videos or onstage at all for most of his arguments.

its always just the random opinion of someone or exactly what the scorecard said.

visuals mean nothing to ND.

thats why his view is so fucked up - no other bb fan thinks this way.

we know the judging can be fucked up, we know opinions can be wrong.

and we show this by the pics and vids.

ND denies all of this just to save his hero and slam ronnie..

[NarcissisticDeity]

Yes, but I don't have anything against Dorian. I don't just try to go against him because I supposedly dislike him, I don't dislike him. I just think Ronnie was better.

Most, but not all.

How can you be so sure Ronnie's conditioning in 1998 is not on par with Dorian's conditioning? I see him just as dry and hard.
Again, I don't think Dorian is better than Ronnie in symmetry, balance & proportion and not even posing. Going by the criteria and that all rounds are physique rounds: Ronnie beats Dorian, I see him meeting all of the criteria better.

By muscular bulk I'm sure you mean muscularity or size right? In this case how can you be so sure Dorian meets it better just because he is heavier? Don't you think Ronnie could give the impression of being more muscular than a heavier Dorian?

I don't think I agree with it going with Ronnie in 1998.



Your quotes here just prove what I was trying to say before: Not one of them mentions Dorian resembling a walking anatomy chart, but they all mention his amazing dryness, density and hardness. When McGough said Ronnie resembled a walking anatomy chart, he based it off Ronnie's amazing muscle separations, striations and detail. A bodybuilder can be incredibly hard & dry, but still don't display deep muscle separations and detail.
Which is why I said Ronnie has an advantage over Dorian as far as separations, striations and detail in the first place.

Yes, but I don't have anything against Dorian. I don't just try to go against him because I supposedly dislike him, I don't dislike him. I just think Ronnie was better.

  I don't believe I claimed you had anything against him 

Most, but not all.

I've yet to see any that say 1999 was his best , am I missing something? 

How can you be so sure Ronnie's conditioning in 1998 is not on par with Dorian's conditioning? I see him just as dry and hard.
Again, I don't think Dorian is better than Ronnie in symmetry, balance & proportion and not even posing. Going by the criteria and that all rounds are physique rounds: Ronnie beats Dorian, I see him meeting all of the criteria better.

Well to be 100% honest with you seeing I never seen Dorian or Ronnie over the course of their entire careers , at their best and worse showing I couldn't in all honestly ascertain who was better conditioned than the other just based on pictures & videos because neither are as accurate as being there live & in person , so I prefer to rely on some experts who were and so far the consensus is Dorian's conditioning was better , if you can do better than that feel free

Okay we've established that you feel Ronnie meets all of the criteria you didn't even know better than Dorian , it's redundant to keep typing that because you've done a horrible job at presenting a case for your opinion

By muscular bulk I'm sure you mean muscularity or size right? In this case how can you be so sure Dorian meets it better just because he is heavier? Don't you think Ronnie could give the impression of being more muscular than a heavier Dorian?

muscular bulk is NOT muscularity please learn the difference , it's amazing how you're so confident in your opinion yet it's not based on knowledge

I don't think I agree with it going with Ronnie in 1998.

you don't agree with a lot of established facts

Your quotes here just prove what I was trying to say before: Not one of them mentions Dorian resembling a walking anatomy chart, but they all mention his amazing dryness, density and hardness. When McGough said Ronnie resembled a walking anatomy chart, he based it off Ronnie's amazing muscle separations, striations and detail. A bodybuilder can be incredibly hard & dry, but still don't display deep muscle separations and detail.
Which is why I said Ronnie has an advantage over Dorian as far as separations, striations and detail in the first place.

wow they don't say he's a walking anatomy chart? that means what? all of those quotes establish two things , Dorian's conditioning is better than Ronnie's and the gold standard for bodybuilder that to this day they can't seem to match

we could brake it down part-by-part , does Ronnie have advantages in Dorian in separations? sure detail? sure , striations? maybe , Dorian's NO slouch like I've said before , Dorian's back is probably better in terms of separation , details and striations compared to Ronnie , he has striated triceps , glutes , traps , pecs , obliques , intercostals , delts , you're trying to argue Ronnie has more so he's better? laughable if so , Hulkster tried this and failed long ago

the old story is Ronnie does have some advantage(s) compared to Dorian , but at his best you factor in muscular bulk , density & dryness , balance & proportion , posing & presentation and completeness Dorian meets ALL of this criteria better than Ronnie at his best

[NarcissisticDeity]

I can understand your point of using Flex as a comparison factor here, but I just don't see it as very accurate. I mean, was Flex really that close to Ronnie in 98?

Was he as greatly conditioned? No
Was he as dry and hard? No
Was he as big and muscular? No
Did he have better symmetry? Probably
Did he have better balance & proportion? No

I honestly see Ronnie beating Flex by a lot in 98 despite the judging score, just as Dorian beat him in 93.
 
I agree that Ronnie in 1999 was not as dry and hard as Dorian. But he wasn't too far behind as his conditioning was still pretty great.
Stil it comes down to who has the most complete physique. Could Ronnie beat Dorian in muscularity despite being lighter? Yes.
Who would have an advantage in balance, proportion and symmetry overall? I see Ronnie. Posing? Could be equal.

I admit it would be a very close call, but I just don't see why you're so sure Dorian would win. I mean, its not like Ronnie is Nasser, Shawn or Levrone.

I can understand your point of using Flex as a comparison factor here, but I just don't see it as very accurate. I mean, was Flex really that close to Ronnie in 98?

Was he as greatly conditioned? No
Was he as dry and hard? No
Was he as big and muscular? No
Did he have better symmetry? Probably
Did he have better balance & proportion? No

I honestly see Ronnie beating Flex by a lot in 98 despite the judging score, just as Dorian beat him in 93.
 

yes Flex was VERY close to Ronnie in 98 much closer to Ronnie than he ever was to Dorian

you're claims are moving past the point of being honestly entertained when you make comments like 98 was as close as 93 , in all honesty there is you responding to such contradictory and off-the-wall remarks , this ranks up there with Hulkster's claim of Ronnie having more detailed calves than Dorian

I agree that Ronnie in 1999 was not as dry and hard as Dorian. But he wasn't too far behind as his conditioning was still pretty great.
Stil it comes down to who has the most complete physique. Could Ronnie beat Dorian in muscularity despite being lighter? Yes.
Who would have an advantage in balance, proportion and symmetry overall? I see Ronnie. Posing? Could be equal.

he was noticeably behind Ronnie 98 in 99 and that wasn't close to Yates , see above your points are either blatantly contrary or you honestly believe the nonsense you're typing either way you're just reiterating the same things YOU believe and again contests aren't judge on what you believe which clearly contradicts bodybuilding history

I admit it would be a very close call, but I just don't see why you're so sure Dorian would win. I mean, its not like Ronnie is Nasser, Shawn or Levrone.

98/99 wouldn't be a close call and even if it were the bitch-tits in 98 would swing it Dorian's way and that's entertaining it's close and the lack of conditioning in 99 would

[NarcissisticDeity]

so does everyone else. except for idiot ND of course..

this has been brought up before to ND who doesn't look to whats onstage and only looks at the scorecards as 100% accurate..

Place Name Country 1 2 3 4 Pnts  
1 Ronnie Coleman USA 17 5 5 5 32  
2 Flex Wheeler USA 5 10 10 10 35  

 fact is, ronnie was overlooked slightly in the opening round, and his scoring reflects that.

Oh no the OLD 98 wasn't close plea HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA always count on Hulkster to cry , make excuses and bitch '

3 fucking points separated the winner from the loser that's close in fact one of the closest Mr Olympia contest to this DAY !

look at the pics , look at the videos it confirms 98 was fucking close as it comes and FYI I have BOTH contests and watched them both many times 

[NarcissisticDeity]

yes he does and ND knows he was caught.

so he tries to ignore this and point out that Mcgough feels 2001 was better than either, when it really doesn't matter becuase the fact is that ND has been arguing forever that 98 was better than 99, and his own hero, the cornerstone of his entire pro dorian argument, disagrees.

and it drives him crazy.

I've been arguing that 98's conditioning was better and that's an established FACT

and another very weak attempt at diversion , this is about Hulkster looking like a retard by agreeing with McGough , then disagreeing and disagreeing and disagreeing with him lol

you're fucked as usual NO ONE agrees 99 was his best NO ONE this whole 98/99 thing is a diversionary tactic to try and escape the fact that McGough says two things outright 98 he was harder & drier and 2001 is his best , so you my retarded little friend are wrong as usual and proven wrong by me 

[NarcissisticDeity]

he has never looked the the pics, videos or onstage at all for most of his arguments.

its always just the random opinion of someone or exactly what the scorecard said.

visuals mean nothing to ND.

thats why his view is so fucked up - no other bb fan thinks this way.

we know the judging can be fucked up, we know opinions can be wrong.

and we show this by the pics and vids.

ND denies all of this just to save his hero and slam ronnie..

Lie #355 from Hulkster , I have both videos and watched them many times 


I watched the videos and came to the conclusions many of the experts did , 1998 was a CLOSE contest and Ronnie was a deserving winner , and it was clearly evident to those of us who know what we're looking for that Ronnie's conditioning in 98 was noticeably better , some of us look at pics and videos and come to contradictory conclusions like Dorian lost the 93 Mr Olympia to Flex and Ronnie had more detailed calves than Dorian did , and Dorian didn't dominate in 1995 like he did in 1993 lol

[NarcissisticDeity]

you don't need to show this to ND

he knows McGough's article makes it explicitly clear.

99 is on the list
98 is not.

case closed.

2001 has nothing to do with this fact.

despite ND's crying..

bullshit 2001 is ON THAT LIST and in fact he says 2001 is better than 1999 , so WRONG once again retard 2001 has everything to do with that ' fact '

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.  Grin


where is 1999 fanboy? NO WHERE 

[Hulkster]

3 fucking points separated the winner from the loser that's close in fact one of the closest Mr Olympia contest to this DAY !

but what you are not understanding is that it was close on paper only because of the overlooking of ronnie in round 1.

onstage it was a massacre:

this is not a 3 point difference ND and you know it.

this is pure domination by a wide margin:

understand now what the rest of the world knows and has been saying for years?

it was close on paper only. it was not close onstage.

why are you the only bb fan on the planet stupid enough to hang on the judges every number despite the huge contrast between what the scores say and what actually transpired onstage?

 

[Hulkster]

by the night show, the judges realized their mistake early on and were so unconcerned with Flex that they put him and ronnie far apart onstage.

thats how dominant ronnie was in the judges eyes by then. Flex was a non contender by then.

in really close contest (actual close ones, not fake close ones beause of fucked up scoring early on) the judges always put the two top guys side by side in the lineup.

[Hulkster]

ND agrees that these two guys were only 3 points apart LOL

 

this is what we are dealing with lol

[ShipSekki]

 Maybe if you all post 10,000 more pics the argument will finally get resolved?

[Royal Lion]

by the night show, the judges realized their mistake early on and were so unconcerned with Flex that they put him and ronnie far apart onstage.

thats how dominant ronnie was in the judges eyes by then. Flex was a non contender by then.

in really close contest (actual close ones, not fake close ones beause of fucked up scoring early on) the judges always put the two top guys side by side in the lineup.

This illustrates your lack of bodybuilding knowledge. In close contests, the judges typically compare the top 3 or 4 competitors in various orders.  Usually the first callout is between the top 2 or 3, but a 4th is usually shuffled in and the competitors switch places for additional comparisons. Maybe if you actually attended a pro show you would know this.  But then again, all of your knowledge is based on "visual proof" in the sole form of pics  

[NarcissisticDeity]

but what you are not understanding is that it was close on paper only because of the overlooking of ronnie in round 1.

onstage it was a massacre:

this is not a 3 point difference ND and you know it.

this is pure domination by a wide margin:

understand now what the rest of the world knows and has been saying for years?

it was close on paper only. it was not close onstage.

why are you the only bb fan on the planet stupid enough to hang on the judges every number despite the huge contrast between what the scores say and what actually transpired onstage?

 

typical Hulkster make a gross overstatement that contradicts facts and experts back up your claim with an ignorant plea and the good old ' everybody ' knows routine

fact is 98 wasn't close on paper , wasn't close in reality pictures , videos and the experts ALL converge on this fact

98 was a dominating win so was 2001 and Dorian lost in 1993 Ronnie has more detailed calves , right in line with the rest of your fantasy

[NarcissisticDeity]

This illustrates your lack of bodybuilding knowledge. In close contests, the judges typically compare the top 3 or 4 competitors in various orders.  Usually the first callout is between the top 2 or 3, but a 4th is usually shuffled in and the competitors switch places for additional comparisons. Maybe if you actually attended a pro show you would know this.  But then again, all of your knowledge is based on "visual proof" in the sole form of pics  

exactly , he doesn't know anything which why his ' opinion ' is so often contradictory with history and facts. He attempts to speak for ' everyone ' and offers these imaginary people up as some sort of proof when even most Ronnie fans don't agree with him

Hulkster like to attempt to re-write history , he's like a Christian apologetics writer who is constantly re-write history to suit his warped point of view when the facts clearly don't work in his favor

[Shockwave]

by the night show, the judges realized their mistake early on and were so unconcerned with Flex that they put him and ronnie far apart onstage.

thats how dominant ronnie was in the judges eyes by then. Flex was a non contender by then.

in really close contest (actual close ones, not fake close ones beause of fucked up scoring early on) the judges always put the two top guys side by side in the lineup.

i dont know what youre trying to prove with this pic. All this shows is flex damn close to Ronnie. Ronnie still has him on conditioning tho.

[NeoSeminole]

ND, your posts are kind of ambiguous so I'm not sure I understand you. Who do you think would win between Dorian and Ronnie?