Mike Francois Was A Better Bodybuilder Than Nasser

[Ronnie Rep]

At his peak Mike was a better bodybuilder than Nasser at his peak.

Agreed!

[WillGrant]

something a lot of you are ignoring is that mike as his best shape was 240 pounds.. beside an on nasser he always looked small and nasser had him beat in all poses except the 2 rear..

to say that "if" he reached his limit is like saying "if" nasser had a better back so it's pointless..

No its not - Mike retired before he reached his full potential , Nasser had no back after reaching his full potential.

[MB]

Mike was a complete bodybuilder.  Nasser was half a bodybuilder. 

[Sherief Shalaby]

No its not - Mike retired before he reached his full potential , Nasser had no back after reaching his full potential.

it's all guessing.. why are you so sure what he already presented was not his full potential??.. because it was so early in his career??.. so what?.. a lot of top pros. presented their very best very early,.. flex wheeler, levrone, dillet and many more..

[bigbobs]

lol one of the most retarded threads created.

95 Mr. Olympia was where Nasser and Francois were both at their closest to being their best and on the same stage at the same time, and Nasser smoked him.  

94 NOC judges barely awarded Francois over Nasser (Nasser got 2nd, which was a horrible judging decision), but regardless that was BEFORE Nasser's mutation from 94 to 95 which started getting him into the top 3 at the Mr. O.  Once Nasser improved to 95, Francois was in a separate lower league.

A more fair comparison therefore, is who was better between Mike Francois at his best and Nasser BEFORE his best

[Sherief Shalaby]

lol one of the most retarded threads created.

95 Mr. Olympia was where Nasser and Francois were both at their closest to being their best and on the same stage at the same time, and Nasser smoked him.  

94 NOC judges barely awarded Francois over Nasser (Nasser got 2nd, which was a horrible judging decision), but regardless that was BEFORE Nasser's mutation from 94 to 95 which started getting him into the top 3 at the Mr. O.  Once Nasser improved to 95, Francois was in a separate lower league.

A more fair comparison therefore, is who was better between Mike Francois at his best and Nasser BEFORE his best

X2

 

[Sherief Shalaby]

 

[bigbobs]

X2

 

Thanks for sharing Sherief!  Funny thing is the Francois nuthuggers will say "yeah but Francois has no weak points, his back is not weak" failing to acknowledge that the rest of Nasser is so far ahead of Francois that that it more more than compensates the back "weakness"

Using their logic as an example one can argue that an NPC competitor at an open show may be a better bodybuilder than a pro if that NPC competitor has "no weak bodyparts" while the pro might have lagging calves and delts for example, failing to acknowledge that the rest of the pro's physique far more than overcompensates over the NPC competitor's.

[Sherief Shalaby]

Thanks for sharing Sherief!  Funny thing is the Francois nuthuggers will say "yeah but Francois has no weak points, his back is not weak" failing to acknowledge that the rest of Nasser is so far ahead of Francois that that it more more than compensates the back "weakness"

Using their logic as an example one can argue that an NPC competitor at an open show may be a better bodybuilder than a pro if that NPC competitor has "no weak bodyparts" while the pro might have lagging calves and delts for example, failing to acknowledge that the rest of the pro's physique far more than overcompensates over the NPC competitor's.

actually i dont think there are francois "nuthuggers".. he was a great bb and all but didnt achieve much to have nuthuggers/big fan base.. calling them nasser's haters is more proper here i think!!..

[tendonitis]

Francois always reminded me of Dorian. He trained hard and heavy, was complete from head to toe, lived in Columbus away from all the nonsense and bullshit and just put the work in and got it done.

He was better than Nasser physiquewise and a million times better characterwise.

[Royalty]

[hench]

very different structures, Nasser looks superior standing relaxed and in the fdb his abs and serratus look sharper with better separation between bi's and tri's too. Fls about equal
Francois shows how the side chest is done and his back shots, especially the bdb destroy Nasser.

[WillGrant]

I think Bob and Sherif need to take there rose coloured glasses of nasser off here and look at the bigger picture - you guys are blinded with your admiration of Nasser that you can not give fair Critiques.

[bigbobs]

very different structures, Nasser looks superior standing relaxed and in the fdb his abs and serratus look sharper with better separation between bi's and tri's too. Fls about equal
Francois shows how the side chest is done and his back shots, especially the bdb destroy Nasser.

You seriously believe Francois has a better side chest here?  Again, keep in mind this is also BEFORE Nasser's mutation and movement from second to first tier rankings from 94 to 95.



Yes, Francois has a better back but Nasser more than overcompensates by destroying Francois in all other bodyparts and angles.  Even in the back shots Nasser's arms and legs are beating Francois'. 

[bigbobs]

I think Bob and Sherif need to take there rose coloured glasses of nasser off here and look at the bigger picture - you guys are blinded with your admiration of Nasser that you can not give fair Critiques.

Okay explain your "bigger picture" view here?

You have photos of the Nasser and Francois together when Nasser is not even close to his best (94).  Then you also lots of shows from 95 and onward (Nasser's best) where Francois competed in also but did not even place close to Nasser.  What's left to discuss "big picture?" 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Okay explain your "bigger picture" view here?

You have photos of the Nasser and Francois together when Nasser is not even close to his best (94).  Then you also lots of shows from 95 and onward (Nasser's best) where Francois competed in also but did not even place close to Nasser.  What's left to discuss "big picture?" 

Do you do any research before you type? or do you just make stupid statements?

[bigbobs]

Do you do any research before you type? or do you just make stupid statements?

OK let's hear the "bigger picture" from you then?

[NarcissisticDeity]

OK let's hear the "bigger picture" from you then?

Who said anything about the bigger picture? and do you always answer a question with a question?

[bigbobs]

Who said anything about the bigger picture? and do you always answer a question with a question?

You posted that my comment was "stupid" and apparently can not back your accusation up

My post was in response to Willgrant suggesting that Francois is better "in the bigger picture" whatever that means lol, and your reply critiqued mine, so naturally I asked you what this "bigger picture" means - but perhaps Willgrant would be better at trying to address it since those are his words.

[njflex]

You seriously believe Francois has a better side chest here?  Again, keep in mind this is also BEFORE Nasser's mutation and movement from second to first tier rankings from 94 to 95.



Yes, Francois has a better back but Nasser more than overcompensates by destroying Francois in all other bodyparts and angles.  Even in the back shots Nasser's arms and legs are beating Francois'. 

your right some of theses shots nasser looks good and better i some than mike,,imo he should have stayed here in terms of his build,his midsection was tight .

[NarcissisticDeity]

You posted that my comment was "stupid" and apparently can not back your accusation up

My post was in response to Willgrant suggesting that Francois is better "in the bigger picture" whatever that means lol, and your reply critiqued mine, so naturally I asked you what this "bigger picture" means - but perhaps Willgrant would be better at trying to address it since those are his words.

You posted that my comment was "stupid" and apparently can not back your accusation up

95 and onward (Nasser's best) where Francois competed in also but did not even place close to Nasser

Stupid statement which was typed without any research and ironically not anything to '' back " it up

in 1997 he placed third behind Nasser twice , once at the Arnold and again San Jose pro , so to claim he ' did not even place close to Nasser ' is not only ignorant but stupid because you could have easily checked instead of me correcting you as usual.

Another stupid statement NOT backed up with anything either , yet you demand others back up their claim

94 NOC judges barely awarded Francois over Nasser (Nasser got 2nd, which was a horrible judging decision)

How do you know? what was the score card? where is the link?

Another dumb statement

95 Mr. Olympia was where Nasser and Francois were both at their closest to being their best and on the same stage at the same time, and Nasser smoked him.  

Mike was NOT close to his best at the 1995 Mr Olympia because Mike did the spring shows ( where he won BTW ) and couldn't peak again and who knows how it would have turned out , because Mike beat Flex at the 1995 Arnold and Flex routinely beat Nasser

seriously bro do your research or run the risk of looking stupid and having me point it out.

[bigbobs]

95 and onward (Nasser's best) where Francois competed in also but did not even place close to Nasser

Stupid statement which was typed without any research and ironically not anything to '' back " it up

in 1997 he placed third behind Nasser twice , once at the Arnold and again San Jose pro , so to claim he ' did not even place close to Nasser ' is not only ignorant but stupid because you could have easily checked instead of me correcting you as usual.

Another stupid statement NOT backed up with anything either , yet you demand others back up their claim

94 NOC judges barely awarded Francois over Nasser (Nasser got 2nd, which was a horrible judging decision)

How do you know? what was the score card? where is the link?

Another dumb statement

95 Mr. Olympia was where Nasser and Francois were both at their closest to being their best and on the same stage at the same time, and Nasser smoked him.  

Mike was NOT close to his best at the 1995 Mr Olympia because Mike did the spring shows ( where he won BTW ) and couldn't peak again and who knows how it would have turned out , because Mike beat Flex at the 1995 Arnold and Flex routinely beat Nasser

seriously bro do your research or run the risk of looking stupid and having me point it out.

Wow you totally show your biases in posts such as this.  So Francois was far from his best at the 95 Olympia because he did a spring show, even though Nasser did the Houston and NOC shows the same year? lol.  If Francois couldn't peak again it just adds to the list of reasons why he was an inferior bodybuilder to Nasser.  And you're pointing out that he beat Flex at the 95 AC even though its previously been argued to death that Flex was still recovering in 95 (btw Nasser beat Flex decisively at the 95 Olympia as well), again, irrelevent to the discussion here.

And lol at the fact that you've challenged me to find a link to scorecards to say that Nasser and Francois were close at the 94 NOC even though you did not provide any link to the scores of Francois' two placings behind Nasser at the 97 Arnold and San Jose pro shows.  Why the double standard?

But again that's all irrelevent, fact is Francois never beat Nasser at his best.  Any further arguments to Francois' favour are always filled with if's - if his career didn't end early, if he kept continuing to improve, if he could have peakd twice in 95, etc. 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Wow you totally show your biases in posts such as this.  So Francois was far from his best at the 95 Olympia because he did a spring show, even though Nasser did the Houston and NOC shows the same year? lol.  If Francois couldn't peak again it just adds to the list of reasons why he was an inferior bodybuilder to Nasser.  And you're pointing out that he beat Flex at the 95 AC even though its previously been argued to death that Flex was still recovering in 95 (btw Nasser beat Flex decisively at the 95 Olympia as well), again, irrelevent to the discussion here.

And lol at the fact that you've challenged me to find a link to scorecards to say that Nasser and Francois were close at the 94 NOC even though you did not provide any link to the scores of Francois' two placings behind Nasser at the 97 Arnold and San Jose pro shows.  Why the double standard?

But again that's all irrelevent, fact is Francois never beat Nasser at his best.  Any further arguments to Francois' favour are always filled with if's - if his career didn't end early, if he kept continuing to improve, if he could have peakd twice in 95, etc. 

Wow you totally show your biases in posts such as this.  So Francois was far from his best at the 95 Olympia because he did a spring show, even though Nasser did the Houston and NOC shows the same year? lol.  If Francois couldn't peak again it just adds to the list of reasons why he was an inferior bodybuilder to Nasser.  And you're pointing out that he beat Flex at the 95 AC even though its previously been argued to death that Flex was still recovering in 95 (btw Nasser beat Flex decisively at the 95 Olympia as well), again, irrelevent to the discussion here.

What bias? where did I say Mike was better? where? furthermore none of this has anything to do with your ignorant statement but I will address it

You claimed ignorantly that they were their best at the 1995 Olympia which is a lie , it doesn't matter is Nasser competed in the spring shows and still maintained a good shape at the Olympia , that has NOTHING to do with them both being their best at the same show.

And lol at the fact that you've challenged me to find a link to scorecards to say that Nasser and Francois were close at the 94 NOC even though you did not provide any link to the scores of Francois' two placings behind Nasser at the 97 Arnold and San Jose pro shows.  Why the double standard?

The difference between you and I is , I can back up my claims and you don't ever , you just make shit up , examples are present in Kevin vs Nasser debates

http://musclememory.com/show.php?c=Arnold+Classic+-+IFBB&y=1997

http://musclememory.com/show.php?c=San+Jose+Pro+Invitational+-+IFBB&y=1997

consider it back-up and your bullshit about Mike never coming close to Nasser after 95 corrected   now I will NOT be waiting for your other bullshit claim to be backed up ,  about the judges just giving Mike a close 1st over Nasser at the 95 NOC because you made that shit up and we both know it and please don't tell me Nasser told you it was a close contest because he's a horrible source for information and anything he ' confirms ' will be dismissed

But again that's all irrelevent, fact is Francois never beat Nasser at his best.  Any further arguments to Francois' favour are always filled with if's - if his career didn't end early, if he kept continuing to improve, if he could have peakd twice in 95, etc.

Nasser never beat Mike at his best , and I don't think we ever really saw Mike at his best , but 1995 Arnold Classic was pretty damn impressive and he wasn't missing much compared to Nasser

[QuakerOats]

What bias? where did I say Mike was better? where? furthermore none of this has anything to do with your ignorant statement but I will address it

You claimed ignorantly that they were their best at the 1995 Olympia which is a lie , it doesn't matter is Nasser competed in the spring shows and still maintained a good shape at the Olympia , that has NOTHING to do with them both being their best at the same show.


The difference between you and I is , I can back up my claims and you don't ever , you just make shit up , examples are present in Kevin vs Nasser debates

http://musclememory.com/show.php?c=Arnold+Classic+-+IFBB&y=1997

http://musclememory.com/show.php?c=San+Jose+Pro+Invitational+-+IFBB&y=1997

consider it back-up and your bullshit about Mike never coming close to Nasser after 95 corrected   now I will NOT be waiting for your other bullshit claim to be backed up ,  about the judges just giving Mike a close 1st over Nasser at the 95 NOC because you made that shit up and we both know it and please don't tell me Nasser told you it was a close contest because he's a horrible source for information and anything he ' confirms ' will be dismissed

Nasser never beat Mike at his best , and I don't think we ever really saw Mike at his best , but 1995 Arnold Classic was pretty damn impressive and he wasn't missing much compared to Nasser

i agree, at their bests Mike and Nasser were very close, both very, very good 250 pound plus bodybuilders, two of the best ever.

[bigbobs]

What bias? where did I say Mike was better? where? furthermore none of this has anything to do with your ignorant statement but I will address it

You claimed ignorantly that they were their best at the 1995 Olympia which is a lie , it doesn't matter is Nasser competed in the spring shows and still maintained a good shape at the Olympia , that has NOTHING to do with them both being their best at the same show.


The difference between you and I is , I can back up my claims and you don't ever , you just make shit up , examples are present in Kevin vs Nasser debates

http://musclememory.com/show.php?c=Arnold+Classic+-+IFBB&y=1997

http://musclememory.com/show.php?c=San+Jose+Pro+Invitational+-+IFBB&y=1997

consider it back-up and your bullshit about Mike never coming close to Nasser after 95 corrected   now I will NOT be waiting for your other bullshit claim to be backed up ,  about the judges just giving Mike a close 1st over Nasser at the 95 NOC because you made that shit up and we both know it and please don't tell me Nasser told you it was a close contest because he's a horrible source for information and anything he ' confirms ' will be dismissed

Nasser never beat Mike at his best , and I don't think we ever really saw Mike at his best , but 1995 Arnold Classic was pretty damn impressive and he wasn't missing much compared to Nasser

haha you are such a liar find the quote where I said 95 Olympia was both Francois' and Nasser's best?  

And you did NOT provide a score-card for either show showing the placings of the 97 San Jose and AC were close, unless you're just asking me to similarly show a scorecard of the NOC that Nasser and Francois were one placing apart without the actual scores?  

And again you're using the "if" argument when you say "I don't think we ever really saw Mike at his best."

Anyway at least you aren't trying to claim that Francois was better than Nasser at his best, so perhaps this is just a debate of symantics.