Author Topic: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??  (Read 30146 times)

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #150 on: July 20, 2010, 09:54:32 AM »

Blah Blah Blah...apples and oranges, taking shit out of context, IGNORING other things......it's like talking to a ten year old girl.

Seriously....my daughter states her case better than you do

To much of a man to admit you're flat-out wrong? you said I'm hypocritical for claiming Dorian didn't receive any gifts when I said he shouldn't have won in 97 , you're wrong and now are looking for an easy way out

just like when you claimed I said being striated didn't matter another tit-bit you overlooked when I corrected you and called you on it , you're like a child , can't admit when you're wrong and proven wrong.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #151 on: July 20, 2010, 09:56:44 AM »
Ronnie never looked like this , he would have to be re-born with better genetics to touch this.  ;)

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #152 on: July 20, 2010, 09:58:46 AM »
go and learn about the difference between seperation and striations.

ronnie's quads were more striated in the mid 90's. but not nearly as seperated.

the cuts between the four quad muscles were as deep as a sword slash in 99..not so in 96:



epic backfire , Ronnie's quads are JUST as separated in that pic and has striations to boot.


another Hulkster backfire  ;) thanks for proving my point for me dumbass

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #153 on: July 20, 2010, 09:59:58 AM »


ND claiming someone can't admit when they're wrong, yet he will say dorian beats this

or that we don't know how to judge

or that this pic is a bad representation of reality

or that in real life dorian was better

or that the best bodybuilder always wins

or that we just don't like dorian

or that we are trolls and nuthuggers

next he will probably say "I'm done arguing, you've made up your mind, dorian is better" but he will have no proof, just claims as usual

Palpatine Q

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24132
  • Disdain/repugnance....Version 3: glare variation B
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #154 on: July 20, 2010, 10:00:18 AM »
To much of a man to admit you're flat-out wrong? you said I'm hypocritical for claiming Dorian didn't receive any gifts when I said he shouldn't have won in 97 , you're wrong and now are looking for an easy way out

just like when you claimed I said being striated didn't matter another tit-bit you overlooked when I corrected you and called you on it , you're like a child , can't admit when you're wrong and proven wrong.

again....taking things out of context and missing the point entirely.

I never claimed you said anything you weirdo, I posted my opinion.

You are a strange dude, you will say ANYTHING just to make yourself look "right"

I just come onto this thread occasionally to stir it up a little.....It's not life or death for me like it is you


Palpatine Q

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 24132
  • Disdain/repugnance....Version 3: glare variation B
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #155 on: July 20, 2010, 10:02:06 AM »
Ronnie never looked like this , he would have to be re-born with better genetics to touch this.  ;)

That's true...Ronnie was never blocky and pasty looking, and his arms were better than that when he was 15 years old  :)

StuartR

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 351
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #156 on: July 20, 2010, 10:08:31 AM »
This is a tough call. It seems to me that hulkster is an order of magnitude gayer for ronnie than ND & co. are for dorian, but then again, hulkster is patently right. Dorian beats ronnie in calves, and back is fairly close, but you'd have to be blind to think that ronnie doesnt absolutely destroy dorian on every other bodypart, as well as overall impression. "Stage weight" and "graininess" arent the issue here, im sure paco had a higher stage weight and graininess factor at the tampa pro than ronnie did in 1999 too, it doesnt make him anywhere near a comparable bodybuilder  (sorry kyomu).

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #157 on: July 20, 2010, 10:13:29 AM »


dorian wasn't too fond of squats














































































and when compared to ronnie or nasser it showed

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #158 on: July 20, 2010, 10:22:41 AM »
again....taking things out of context and missing the point entirely.

I never claimed you said anything you weirdo, I posted my opinion.

You are a strange dude, you will say ANYTHING just to make yourself look "right"

I just come onto this thread occasionally to stir it up a little.....It's not life or death for me like it is you



everything is ' out of context ' with you  ::) I can only go by what you type don't make excuses now because you're wrong.

hahahahaha I will say anything to make myself look right? how does one accomplish that?

and once again you interpretations leave a LOT to be desired , elaborate on how posting on a message board is ' life or death ' for me , you make a lot of odd statements and don't back any of them up.

I'm here posting like you my opinion , mixing it up like you yet this is somehow life or death for me hahahahaha give me a break , stop projecting your views onto me

this isn't life or death it's me correcting ignorant people on how the game is played.  ;)


NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #159 on: July 20, 2010, 10:24:51 AM »
That's true...Ronnie was never blocky and pasty looking, and his arms were better than that when he was 15 years old  :)

Ronnie was never as balanced or complete or dense & as dry either , Ronnie still sporting those 15 year old calves too  ;)


NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #160 on: July 20, 2010, 10:28:01 AM »


ND claiming someone can't admit when they're wrong, yet he will say dorian beats this

or that we don't know how to judge

or that this pic is a bad representation of reality

or that in real life dorian was better

or that the best bodybuilder always wins

or that we just don't like dorian

or that we are trolls and nuthuggers

next he will probably say "I'm done arguing, you've made up your mind, dorian is better" but he will have no proof, just claims as usual

There is NO argument , just me correcting you people on how the game is played.


NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #161 on: July 20, 2010, 10:31:43 AM »


dorian wasn't too fond of squats














































































and when compared to ronnie or nasser it showed

Ronnie wasn't fond of standing calf raises and when compared to everyone it showed  ;)

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #162 on: July 20, 2010, 10:55:30 AM »
Ronnie wasn't fond of standing calf raises and when compared to everyone it showed  ;)
calves are almost all genetic, some people will always have them some will never have them, this is common knowledge in bodybuilding

the rest of ronnie's physique makes up for his calves

dorians calves don't make up for the rest of his physique

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #163 on: July 20, 2010, 11:01:23 AM »
There is NO argument , just me correcting you people on how the game is played.


uhh yeah there is an argument, that ronnie is > than dorian

"correcting you on how the game is played" trying to act like we don't know what we're talking about, I predicted this kind of statement in a previous post, You are the most predictable poster here, often wrong but never in doubt.

what's next? "I'm done arguing, you guys don't accept that dorian won a long time ago,"

"you just don't like dorian and only see what you wanna see" or "FACT dorian beat ronnie years ago"

or how bout "I saw it and the judges saw it, dorian is better"


NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #164 on: July 20, 2010, 11:02:18 AM »
calves are almost all genetic, some people will always have them some will never have them, this is common knowledge in bodybuilding

the rest of ronnie's physique makes up for his calves

dorians calves don't make up for the rest of his physique

ALL muscle cell allocation is genetic ,  the rest of Ronnie's physique makes up for his calves compared to who he was beating and he wasn't beating Dorian

and if that were the case about Yates it should have been very , very easy to beat him seeing all he was , was just a back & calves  ;)

Dorian's overall package makes up for any flaw he may have

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #165 on: July 20, 2010, 11:06:55 AM »
uhh yeah there is an argument, that ronnie is > than dorian

"correcting you on how the game is played" trying to act like we don't know what we're talking about, I predicted this kind of statement in a previous post, You are the most predictable poster here, often wrong but never in doubt.

what's next? "I'm done arguing, you guys don't accept that dorian won a long time ago,"

"you just don't like dorian and only see what you wanna see" or "FACT dorian beat ronnie years ago"

or how bout "I saw it and the judges saw it, dorian is better"

You don't know what you're talking about that's been established with your posts on the subject. and I'm predictable? NO consistent and you've apparently been hanging on my words for a long time gimmick

In order to establish a logical and intelligent opinion on the subject you must know how contests are judged and you don't and NONE of you do just based on the freshman conclusions you come to.

Dorian was always better than Ronnie , this isn't an opinion this is a FACT proven by the number of times they directly competed with each other. The speculation is did Ronnie improve enough to beat Dorian , you have your opinion I have mine , but the facts haven't changed.  ;)

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #166 on: July 20, 2010, 11:12:52 AM »
ALL muscle cell allocation is genetic ,  the rest of Ronnie's physique makes up for his calves compared to who he was beating and he wasn't beating Dorian

and if that were the case about Yates it should have been very , very easy to beat him seeing all he was , was just a back & calves  ;)

Dorian's overall package makes up for any flaw he may have
like his small "smith machine squat" legs that lack seperation and striation, or his missing bicep that throws off so many poses

his chest that was no where near as big or defined as ronnies or his back which was just as good in width but lacked the upper back detail and thickness or maybe his sheer lack of size next to ronnie,

oh but wait "this is not how you judge a show"   "striation, size, conditioning, balance, and symmetry don't matter" . as for your last post it was just senseless and didn't really make or prove a point, oh but wait "if you knew anything about bodybuilding you would know what it means"

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #167 on: July 20, 2010, 11:14:31 AM »
You don't know what you're talking about that's been established with your posts on the subject. and I'm predictable? NO consistent and you've apparently been hanging on my words for a long time gimmick

In order to establish a logical and intelligent opinion on the subject you must know how contests are judged and you don't and NONE of you do just based on the freshman conclusions you come to.

Dorian was always better than Ronnie , this isn't an opinion this is a FACT proven by the number of times they directly competed with each other. The speculation is did Ronnie improve enough to beat Dorian , you have your opinion I have mine , but the facts haven't changed.  ;)
you doing exactly what we make fun of you for doing

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #168 on: July 20, 2010, 11:16:48 AM »
you doing exactly what we make fun of you for doing

And you're contradicting facts & reality. a typical trend of yours

keep making fun of me you're the guy who thinks Dorian has smaller joints , waist , hips and calves than Ronnie  ;D this fan-boy comparisons are accurate

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #169 on: July 20, 2010, 11:20:07 AM »
you can't say dorian is more balanced because he is not

you can't say he is more conditioned because he is not (we proved it with the flabby back shots)

you can't say he is bigger because he is not (we proved it with multiple and different photos)

what's your excuse now? "this is not how you judge a show, you don't know what your talking about"

well in what catagories does dorian beat ronnie? having a good set of calves isn't enough if it was matarazzo would have been mr o.


NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #170 on: July 20, 2010, 11:23:46 AM »
you can't say dorian is more balanced because he is not

you can't say he is more conditioned because he is not (we proved it with the flabby back shots)

you can't say he is bigger because he is not (we proved it with multiple and different photos)

what's your excuse now? "this is not how you judge a show, you don't know what your talking about"

well in what catagories does dorian beat ronnie? having a good set of calves isn't enough if it was matarazzo would have been mr o.


Thanks for backing up your numerous blanket statements up with proof  ;)

the old Hulkster post a picture and say ' see ' that's not proof kid


PROOF where is it?

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #171 on: July 20, 2010, 11:24:46 AM »
And you're contradicting facts & reality. a typical trend of yours

keep making fun of me you're the guy who thinks Dorian has smaller joints , waist , hips and calves than Ronnie  ;D this fan-boy comparisons are accurate
becuase a peak dorian beat a young ronnie, thats a desperate attempt to say why dorian is better.

it's like comparing a modern day arnold to gregg valentino and saying gregg was better, if you want contest results as reality which are not always the truth, ronnie has 8 mr O's and deserved all, dorian has 5, 3 of which are debated

Nirvana

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5121
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #172 on: July 20, 2010, 11:27:41 AM »
Thanks for backing up your numerous blanket statements up with proof  ;)

the old Hulkster post a picture and say ' see ' that's not proof kid


PROOF where is it?
well then what is proof? "he was better in real life"

you just deny all the photos because they prove me right























PS small joints and waist is a good thing to have, you should review some of your previous posts

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #173 on: July 20, 2010, 11:34:11 AM »
becuase a peak dorian beat a young ronnie, thats a desperate attempt to say why dorian is better.

it's like comparing a modern day arnold to gregg valentino and saying gregg was better, if you want contest results as reality which are not always the truth, ronnie has 8 mr O's and deserved all, dorian has 5, 3 of which are debated

Oh boy where should I begin? a young Ronnie?  ::) NO Dorian beat Ronnie period , it's not Dorian's fault Ronnie wasn't good enough. again where did Ronnie improve the most from 1996/197 to 1998 ? conditioning , Sorry Dorian wrote the book on conditioning this isn not enough of an advantage to beat Dorian , especially when you consider the FACT ( I know you hate that word ) that at what Ronnie himself considers his best Olympia showing ever ( 1998 ) he just barely beat Flex Wheeler in one of the closest Mr Olympia contests in HISTORY ! , Flex BTW wasn't nearly as good as he was in 98 as he was in 93 and he drove Ronnie to the limit , Dorian absolutely crushed Flex 1993 , Dorian 1993 would have easily beaten Ronnie 1998 just based on that

I really laughed out loud when you typed Ronnie deserved all 8  ;D and Dorian has SIX not 5 ( you're proving your ignorance again ) and 3 are ' debated ' if you mean ' debated ' as in people say he shouldn't have won allow me to school you on what others have said about Ronnies win

Shawn Ray said Ronnie 98 wasn't better than him or Flex , Flex said in 1999 he beat Ronnie , 2000 Kevin Levrone said he beat Ronnie , 2001 Even Ronnie thought he was second , 2002 Kevin again said he beat Ronnie , you still wanna talk about ' debate '

and your analogy about Arnold and Greg is retarded , Ronnie & Dorian competed in the same era , Ronnie just wasn't good enough


NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83517
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Is Colemans back still special by todays standards??
« Reply #174 on: July 20, 2010, 11:38:22 AM »
well then what is proof? "he was better in real life"

you just deny all the photos because they prove me right























PS small joints and waist is a good thing to have, you should review some of your previous posts

I've posted scores and scores of quotes all saying Dorian looks eons better live and in person than pics or video I could posted them and make you look stupid if you'd like?

and yes small joints and waist are good things but that's NOT the subject , the subject is Dorian's aren't smaller than Ronnies but yet in your fanciful ' comparisons ' they are which means that it is NOT an accurate representation of reality even if you think so

Flex always had a smaller waist & hips and joints than Dorian , how well did that do for him?  ???  ;) need more than just symmetry , you need the total package that's how the game is played.

Ronnie does meet part(s) of the judging criteria better than Dorian but not all.