dillett was NEVER as popular as nasser in mid 90s.. so my question is why do you think nasser was the ppl champ and not dillett!!!..
it's funny you are talking to me while showing what bobs said (lack of logic as always)!!.. but yes i agree with all what bobs said and know what he meant.. in 97 when mike came 3rd to nasser's 2nd in 2 contests it was crystal clear that these 2 contests were between nasser and flex (listen to the commentary of the above video).. mike was a clear 3rd after coming in a good shape (his best bigger version ever and it was BEFORE becoming sick).. he beat some of the 2nd tire top pros + off dillett and very off levrone!!.. in the olympia of the same year when dillett and levrone were on they both beat him and nasser beat them all!!..
as for the NOC it was a joke to make mike win and i posted clear comparisons showing all poses and the 2 men were standing next to each other but because you saw nasser much better you tried to say he was closer to the camera.. they were standing beside each other in the same contest, from the same angle, same lighting,.. same everything!!.. even if nasser was one step closer to the camera this doesnt mean you cant judge!!..
and finally sure mike had many chances to show better versions (if he could) before becoming sick but he couldnt.. 4 years were very enough.. and again i am saying it's all guessing.. flex presented his very best in his first year as a pro although he kept competing for more than 10 years after that!!.. and mike did compete at 260 pounds and more but his condition was affected dramatically than what he presented in AC 95.. so in your opinion what a better version mike could present to surpass his 95 best shape/form??.. his condition in 95 AC was clearly the best he could do so to say a better mike it must be a bigger version at the same condition but he tried and failed!!..
and i am not saying it was impossible to improve but it was not a sure thing as you and others try to show..
dillett was NEVER as popular as nasser in mid 90s.. so my question is why do you think nasser was the ppl champ and not dillett!!!..
I never said he was as popular did I? I said he was popular like Nasser , like Gunther after him. Mass monster appeal to the base fan who doesn't know much about the sport but knows what they like and make excuses all the time why their hero was ' robbed '
it's funny you are talking to me while showing what bobs said (lack of logic as always)!!.. but yes i agree with all what bobs said and know what he meant.. in 97 when mike came 3rd to nasser's 2nd in 2 contests it was crystal clear that these 2 contests were between nasser and flex (listen to the commentary of the above video).. mike was a clear 3rd after coming in a good shape (his best bigger version ever and it was BEFORE becoming sick).. he beat some of the 2nd tire top pros + off dillett and very off levrone!!.. in the olympia of the same year when dillett and levrone were on they both beat him and nasser beat them all!!..
Bobs said he never came close to Nasser 95 on which was a lie. It doesn't matter if the contest was between Nasser & Flex what matters is he was still competitive and still placing high and he had room for improvement.
as for the NOC it was a joke to make mike win and i posted clear comparisons showing all poses and the 2 men were standing next to each other but because you saw nasser much better you tried to say he was closer to the camera.. they were standing beside each other in the same contest, from the same angle, same lighting,.. same everything!!.. even if nasser was one step closer to the camera this doesnt mean you cant judge!!..
Of course it's a joke when Nasser loses and the excuses makers start doing their thing , which one would you like you use this time? notice a trend here every time Nasser loses it wasn't simply he got beat by a better man , it was always something else , politics , race , name , it's always something other than the truth which is Nasser was NOT as good as you thought he was , facts and history prove this and this is exactly the reason I remind you guys constantly , Mike was better at this contest and deserved to win keep bitching & moaning it changes nothing.
and finally sure mike had many chances to show better versions (if he could) before becoming sick but he couldnt.. 4 years were very enough.. and again i am saying it's all guessing.. flex presented his very best in his first year as a pro although he kept competing for more than 10 years after that!!.. and mike did compete at 260 pounds and more but his condition was affected dramatically than what he presented in AC 95.. so in your opinion what a better version mike could present to surpass his 95 best shape/form??.. his condition in 95 AC was clearly the best he could do so to say a better mike it must be a bigger version at the same condition but he tried and failed!!..
and i am not saying it was impossible to improve but it was not a sure thing as you and others try to show..
the guy turned pro at 29 and competed until just 32 , he only competed in 9 professional shows , to suggest he couldn't have improved is foolish , and Flex has nothing to do with Mike , Haney turned pro in 1982 and didn't look his absolute best until 10 years later at the 1991 Olympia , he said he just learned how to peak , Ronnie Coleman ring a bell? Jay Cutler? and who cares about if he could so much? I will say right now the physique he brought to the 95 Arnold would beat ANY version of Nasser because of the same reason Nasser usually lost , Mike was more complete , had better overall conditioning ( an entire well defined back , detailed and dense ) and could actually pose correctly , so cling to Mike never beat Nasser after 94 because Nasser never faced Mike 95 ASC and if he did he would lose like he lost to Dorian because Nasser would win a couple of front poses , lose from the side and get obliterated from the back .
the bottom line is Nasser wasn't as good as you guys pretend he was , facts & history confirm this your excuses and denial don't.
