Author Topic: mass and conditioning still unmatched (Read 6978 times)

Am I the only one who thinks Yates' weakest part was his legs? That's the part that always really stands out to me in the Ronnie Comparisons -- no comparison in mass.

LittleJ · « **Reply #40 on:** April 15, 2011, 03:00:27 PM »

Quote from: Shockwave on April 15, 2011, 12:22:34 PM

Dont feed the trolls

Calm down bro

ARNIE1947 · « **Reply #41 on:** April 15, 2011, 03:23:12 PM »

disco_stu · « **Reply #42 on:** April 15, 2011, 03:26:14 PM »

yates will still be regarded as the best weve seen not because he looked better than ronnie- but because he was far more complete.

having huge calves tips the scale to yates..despite being behind elsewhere...

if ronnie had calves, then id go with him...but he didnt..

Nails · « **Reply #43 on:** April 15, 2011, 03:28:20 PM »

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #44 on:** April 15, 2011, 03:28:42 PM »

Quote from: disco_stu on April 15, 2011, 03:26:14 PM

yates will still be regarded as the best weve seen not because he looked better than ronnie- but because he was far more complete.

having huge calves tips the scale to yates..despite being behind elsewhere...

if ronnie had calves, then id go with him...but he didnt..

He certainly looks better than Ronnie in a lot of poses

ARNIE1947 · « **Reply #45 on:** April 15, 2011, 03:38:10 PM »

Shockwave · « **Reply #46 on:** April 15, 2011, 03:41:30 PM »

Quote from: ARNIE1947 on April 15, 2011, 03:38:10 PM

I personally thought Flex looked better in 99.
Ronnie won in 98, no question.
But 99... I really think Flex pushed Ronnie. Ronnie wasnt as sharp or dry as 98, and Flex looked pretty fckn good.

Shockwave · « **Reply #47 on:** April 15, 2011, 03:46:35 PM »

heathen · « **Reply #48 on:** April 15, 2011, 04:17:02 PM »

Please stop

ARNIE1947 · « **Reply #49 on:** April 15, 2011, 04:29:52 PM »