Chris Cormier Was A Better Bodybuilder Than Nasser

[wes]

[bigbobs]

 

When I first saw this thread started by Hammer I knew it was an attempt to start a lengthy debate and purposely decided to avoid it, but eventually I give in

[NarcissisticDeity]

Exactly!  This is why I keep saying that it's a weak argument to say that 99 Cormier woudl beat any version of Nasser simply because he'd win the back-mandatory poses.  Same for 95 AC Francois.  Yet ND and some others keep using that flawed argument.

You keep clinging to this dumb notion. NO let me explain this to you again , Chris would beat Nasser not just because he's better from the back , because he's better almost everywhere this is how it works , how it's always worked.

Sure Nasser would win some poses , Chris would win more , you keep wrongly assuming Chris would only win from the back so he would win. Again not how it works.

Chris has a better structure , better balance & proportion , almost no weaknesses , is a better poser , has less flaws than Nasser , conditioning might he a slight advantage to Nasser FROM THE FRONT because we all know he's soft from the back , again not much of an advantage

When ALL THINGS are considered Chris would beat Nasser for the above reasons

[BILL ANVIL]

Just biased at him thinking Nasser was something more than what he was  

The Shawn Ray fanboys don't like when I tell them the facts either  

 Shitting in everyones cornflakes eh?  

[bigbobs]

Sure Nasser would win some poses , Chris would win more

Chris would win the two back poses; Nasser would win each other mandatory.

And because YOU think of other bodybuilders always winning more of the mandatories against Nasser than in actuality, you simply refuse to answer my question (which I've posted several times, because you know you can't answer it with the same logic as you do your other posts) to pick one of 96, 97 or 98 Mr. Olympia (where Levrone lost to Nasser) and do your own breakdown of mandatories between them to explain how Nasser beat him?  

Point of the above exercise is to prove that contest results don't coincide with ND's view of who wins more mandatories between Nasser vs. other bodybuilders.  Because ND's inclination is to say something similar that Nasser would beat Levrone only in a few of the front mandatory poses (even in 96 to 98 Olympia) but woudl lose the majority of mandatories. 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Chris would win the two back poses; Nasser would win each other mandatory.

And because YOU think of other bodybuilders always winning more of the mandatories against Nasser than in actuality, you simply refuse to answer my question (which I've posted several times, because you know you can't answer it with the same logic as you do your other posts) to pick one of 96, 97 or 98 Mr. Olympia (where Levrone lost to Nasser) and do your own breakdown of mandatories between them to explain how Nasser beat him?  

Point of the above exercise is to prove that contest results don't coincide with ND's view of who wins more mandatories between Nasser vs. other bodybuilders.  Because ND's inclination is to say something similar that Nasser would beat Levrone only in a few of the front mandatory poses (even in 96 to 98 Olympia) but woudl lose the majority of mandatories. 

Chris would win the two back poses; Nasser would win each other mandatory.

Sure he would  I'm sure you believe that too 

And because YOU think of other bodybuilders always winning more of the mandatories against Nasser than in actuality, you simply refuse to answer my question (which I've posted several times, because you know you can't answer it with the same logic as you do your other posts) to pick one of 96, 97 or 98 Mr. Olympia (where Levrone lost to Nasser) and do your own breakdown of mandatories between them to explain how Nasser beat him?  

The irony of you saying I'm refusing to answer a question ( when in fact I already have ) and you keep ignoring mine. with all things being equal what separates a winner? CONDITIONING

Nasser 96/97/98 compared to Kevin at the Olympia was on ( in condition ) and Kevin was NOT hence why he lost. When Kevin was ON and Nasser was ON 1995 Mr Olympia Kevin beat him because he's a superior bodybuilder.

Point of the above exercise is to prove that contest results don't coincide with ND's view of who wins more mandatories between Nasser vs. other bodybuilders.  Because ND's inclination is to say something similar that Nasser would beat Levrone only in a few of the front mandatory poses (even in 96 to 98 Olympia) but woudl lose the majority of mandatories. 

CONDITIONING , CONDITIONING , CONDITIONING ! Nasser is on , Kevin was on , Kevin would kick his ass , Kevin was inconsistent you usually got two Kevin's big soft , small hard but when he tied them both together he was easily a class above Nasser he was simply a better bodybuilder , as was Flex , Dorian , Chris , Ronnie there are all in another league just a fact.

Why did Kevin crush Nasser way more than he ever beat him? because Kevin was on and when he was on only a handful of people could beat him and Nasser was not one of them.

[bigbobs]

Sure he would   I'm sure you believe that too  

The irony of you saying I'm refusing to answer a question ( when in fact I already have ) and you keep ignoring mine. with all things being equal what separates a winner? CONDITIONING

Nasser 96/97/98 compared to Kevin at the Olympia was on ( in condition ) and Kevin was NOT hence why he lost. When Kevin was ON and Nasser was ON 1995 Mr Olympia Kevin beat him because he's a superior bodybuilder.

CONDITIONING , CONDITIONING , CONDITIONING ! Nasser is on , Kevin was on , Kevin would kick his ass , Kevin was inconsistent you usually got two Kevin's big soft , small hard but when he tied them both together he was easily a class above Nasser he was simply a better bodybuilder , as was Flex , Dorian , Chris , Ronnie there are all in another league just a fact.

Why did Kevin crush Nasser way more than he ever beat him? because Kevin was on and when he was on only a handful of people could beat him and Nasser was not one of them.

Still avoiding the question and just responding with a mumble jumble of words and capitalizations. .  Given Levrone's condition in the 96 to 98 Olympia, can you provide your breakdown of who wins each of the 7 mandatory poses?

[NarcissisticDeity]

Still avoiding the question and just responding with a mumble jumble of words and capitalizations. .  Given Levrone's condition in the 96 to 98 Olympia, can you provide your breakdown of who wins each of the 7 mandatory poses?

You just don't like the answer and if you think you keep asking you'll get what you wanna hear 

And FYI bobs there are 8 mandatory poses , it amazes me you question my opinion on bodybuilding when you don't even know how contests are judged 

Nasser obviously won more mandatories seeing he placed higher than Kevin at these contests , just because he beat Kevin doesn't mean his flaws aren't still flaws when all things are equal , how did Nasser fair against Dorian at this contest? who won more poses? it's all relative to whom you're competing with

[NarcissisticDeity]

Nasser has and could beat guys with better backs and he has every part better than Dorian sans back

Riddle me this Bobs , how come Nasser NEVER beat Dorian? according to your logic it should have been a came walk , Nasser beats Dorian everwhere except two back shots yet never came close

please spare me the politics ploy it wont be entertained.

[bigbobs]

You just don't like the answer and if you think you keep asking you'll get what you wanna hear 

And FYI bobs there are 8 mandatory poses , it amazes me you question my opinion on bodybuilding when you don't even know how contests are judged 

Nasser obviously won more mandatories seeing he placed higher than Kevin at these contests , just because he beat Kevin doesn't mean his flaws aren't still flaws when all things are equal , how did Nasser fair against Dorian at this contest? who won more poses? it's all relative to whom you're competing with

lol how can you say I don't like the answer when you still haven't answered it?

Point is that you can't use your standard argument of picking who you think would win each of the mandatories and then arguing that Nasser would lose overall to a prime Cormier or Francois.  Because even given Kevin's condition in 96 to 98 we both know you would give Kevin more mandatory poses than Nasser.  Right now you dont want to go that route because you know Kevin lost those shows even though your breakdown of mandatories between Kevin vs. Nasser would not change when comparing, say 97 to 95 Olympia (a show Kevin lost vs. a show Kevin won).

No I'm not 100% sure how judging works and neither are you.  What I am 100% sure of though is that your argument of why Nasser would lose to Cormier doesn't hold much weight.

[bigbobs]

Nasser has and could beat guys with better backs and he has every part better than Dorian sans back

Riddle me this Bobs , how come Nasser NEVER beat Dorian? according to your logic it should have been a came walk , Nasser beats Dorian everwhere except two back shots yet never came close

please spare me the politics ploy it wont be entertained.

well there's no point in me answering then because you included my answer and said you won't entertain it, even for 97.  Continue bieng delusional.

[NarcissisticDeity]

lol how can you say I don't like the answer when you still haven't answered it?

Point is that you can't use your standard argument of picking who you think would win each of the mandatories and then arguing that Nasser would lose overall to a prime Cormier or Francois.  Because even given Kevin's condition in 96 to 98 we both know you would give Kevin more mandatory poses than Nasser.  Right now you dont want to go that route because you know Kevin lost those shows even though your breakdown of mandatories between Kevin vs. Nasser would not change when comparing, say 97 to 95 Olympia (a show Kevin lost vs. a show Kevin won).

No I'm not 100% sure how judging works and neither are you.  What I am 100% sure of though is that your argument of why Nasser would lose to Cormier doesn't hold much weight.

ol how can you say I don't like the answer when you still haven't answered it?

nonsense

Point is that you can't use your standard argument of picking who you think would win each of the mandatories and then arguing that Nasser would lose overall to a prime Cormier or Francois.  Because even given Kevin's condition in 96 to 98 we both know you would give Kevin more mandatory poses than Nasser.  Right now you dont want to go that route because you know Kevin lost those shows even though your breakdown of mandatories between Kevin vs. Nasser would not change when comparing, say 97 to 95 Olympia (a show Kevin lost vs. a show Kevin won).

My standard argument? that's how contests are judged. You CAN NOT use a sub-par Kevin as a substitute for a career best Mike or Chris you can't dumb logic. Why did Kevin lose to Nasser in any mandatory pose when he was off? CONDITIONING is why , Kevin kicked Nasser's ass easily even when he was slightly off , when he was on he would crush Nasser

No I'm not 100% sure how judging works and neither are you.  What I am 100% sure of though is that your argument of why Nasser would lose to Cormier doesn't hold much weight.

100%? a 100%? you can't even get the basics  I don't know it all but believe me I know a metic-fuck-ton more than you do. You're also sure of a lot of dumb things your confidence in your ignorance isn't proof of anything.

Chris would beat Nasser because he meets more of the judging criteria than Nasser is more complete. he has better balance & proportion , he's better at posing & presentation , he has enough mass and is has better overall conditioning than Nasser , and that's why he would win.

[wes]

 

When I first saw this thread started by Hammer I knew it was an attempt to start a lengthy debate and purposely decided to avoid it, but eventually I give in

I actually enjoy these threads,but the outcome is always the same............nothing is proven as it is all subjective.

Anyway,carry on!!

[NarcissisticDeity]

well there's no point in me answering then because you included my answer and said you won't entertain it, even for 97.  Continue bieng delusional.

Continue being delusional? irony alert 

Excuses wont be entertained , I deal with facts and I have them on my side come back when you have some.

[NarcissisticDeity]

I actually enjoy these threads,but the outcome is always the same............nothing is proven as it is all subjective.

Anyway,carry on!!

Not really , because that same logic can be applied to any bodybuilding contest they're all  'subjective' but they do pick a winner.

There is criteria it gets applied and there is a clear winner and what we have left is the guys who think they should have won and the cling to their excuses. Nasser was a good bodybuilder but not in the league if a prime Kevin , Chris , Mike , Flex , Dorian or Ronnie.

In the end he's simply not good enough. 

[bigbobs]

Continue being delusional? irony alert 

Excuses wont be entertained , I deal with facts and I have them on my side come back when you have some.

LMAO @ "facts" all you have stated in this thread is your deluded OPINION on who would win in a hypothetical show-down between 99 Olympia Cormier vs. one of Nasser's better forms. 

[wes]

Not really , because that same logic can be applied to any bodybuilding contest they're all  'subjective' but they do pick a winner.

Good point ND............I stand corrected.

[bigbobs]

Not really , because that same logic can be applied to any bodybuilding contest they're all  'subjective' but they do pick a winner.

There is criteria it gets applied and there is a clear winner and what we have left is the guys who think they should have won and the cling to their excuses. Nasser was a good bodybuilder but not in the league if a prime Kevin , Chris , Mike , Flex , Dorian or Ronnie.

In the end he's simply not good enough. 

yes there is black and white criteria but human judges are subjective when they apply it.  It's pretty black and white when comparing someone like Kovacs to Ronnie Coleman obviously, but when bb'ers are close overall there is lots of subjectivity.  Even all judges don't have the same opinion in each show. 

And then definitely there is even more subjectivity when thinking of hypothetical scenerios of "who would win between prime Francois or prime Cormier vs. prime Nasser" - especially when the person answering is not a bb judge himself.

Remove subjectiity we can say black and white that Nasser has much more top placings in his record at the big shows than Francois and Cormier.

[NarcissisticDeity]

LMAO @ "facts" all you have stated in this thread is your deluded OPINION on who would win in a hypothetical show-down between 99 Olympia Cormier vs. one of Nasser's better forms. 

Typical Bobs just gloss over everything I typed. facts? contests placings for Nasser , Kevin , Dorian , etc facts on where Nasser placed in the scheme of things compared to these guys , facts as in how contests are judged like there are 8 mandatory poses and not 7 , facts in how Nasser is lacking in posing & presentation , I can continue pointing out facts and NOT clinging to nonfacts like conspiracy theories and emotional pleas to contest rigging due to racism , I deal in facts not excuses , try following the bouncing ball   

[bigbobs]

Typical Bobs just gloss over everything I typed. facts? contests placings for Nasser , Kevin , Dorian , etc facts on where Nasser placed in the scheme of things compared to these guys , facts as in how contests are judged like there are 8 mandatory poses and not 7 , facts in how Nasser is lacking in posing & presentation , I can continue pointing out facts and NOT clinging to nonfacts like conspiracy theories and emotional pleas to contest rigging due to racism , I deal in facts not excuses , try following the bouncing ball   

Yet nothing in the rant you typed above addresses the topic of the thread of Cormier vs. Nasser or the most recent discussion in the thread of comparisons being subjective lol.  When you can't win an argument you just starting ranting about other stuff off-topic.  Would be a great strategy if it wasn't so obvious.

[NarcissisticDeity]

yes there is black and white criteria but human judges are subjective when they apply it.  It's pretty black and white when comparing someone like Kovacs to Ronnie Coleman obviously, but when bb'ers are close overall there is lots of subjectivity.  Even all judges don't have the same opinion in each show. 

And then definitely there is even more subjectivity when thinking of hypothetical scenerios of "who would win between prime Francois or prime Cormier vs. prime Nasser" - especially when the person answering is not a bb judge himself.

Remove subjectiity we can say black and white that Nasser has much more top placings in his record at the big shows than Francois and Cormier.

yes there is black and white criteria but human judges are subjective when they apply it.  It's pretty black and white when comparing someone like Kovacs to Ronnie Coleman obviously, but when bb'ers are close overall there is lots of subjectivity.  Even all judges don't have the same opinion in each show. 

Showing your ignorance on how contests are judged again. both the high and low scores are toss out to ensure as fair as possible a result. and judges at the Olympia are handpicked for their consistency and lack of bias. Your problem is you think Nasser is as close to the tier 1 ones as you think he is and he's not his record ( facts ) prove this.

 

And then definitely there is even more subjectivity when thinking of hypothetical scenerios of "who would win between prime Francois or prime Cormier vs. prime Nasser" - especially when the person answering is not a bb judge himself.

Or the opposition thinks there are 7 mandatory poses and not 8 and admits he will ignore outright anything the judges say when it doesn't fit his point of view. Again out of the two of us , my opinion is more researched , more well thought out , more unbiased , and more knowledgeable. That my friend isn't up for debate.

Remove subjectiity we can say black and white that Nasser has much more top placings in his record at the big shows than Francois and Cormier.

LMFAO which is absolutely NOTHING to do with what the debate was , and ironically you tried to dismiss this angel when it was applicable to the Kevin/Nasser debate but now you're losing and you're looking for anything to claim a victory

[monstermunch]

...was this how the 'truce' thread started?

[NarcissisticDeity]

Yet nothing in the rant you typed above addresses the topic of the thread of Cormier vs. Nasser or the most recent discussion in the thread of comparisons being subjective lol.  When you can't win an argument you just starting ranting about other stuff off-topic.  Would be a great strategy if it wasn't so obvious.

Now you're being a hypocrite because it was YOU who constantly tried to shift the argument away from Chris and kept trying to bring Kevin into it.

I explained to you ad nausem how and why Chris would beat Nasser and typical Bobs when faced overwhelming evidence you look for a way out. But When you can't win an argument you outright dismiss the whole judging criteria and judges , No one can beat Nasser to you and when they do it was politics , racism , bias , etc you made up your mind already and think that if you keep typing your ignorant biased opinion long enough it will become fact

[bigbobs]

Now you're being a hypocrite because it was YOU who constantly tried to shift the argument away from Chris and kept trying to bring Kevin into it.

And each time I linked it back to the original topic of discussion to explain why I was using that example...I didn't think that would be too complicated for you to follow

I explained to you ad nausem how and why Chris would beat Nasser and typical Bobs when faced overwhelming evidence...

LMFAO that you refer to your individual opinion of a hypothetical matchup as "overwhelming evidence" oh brother 

[NarcissisticDeity]

And each time I linked it back to the original topic of discussion to explain why I was using that example...I didn't think that would be too complicated for you to follow

LMFAO that you refer to your individual opinion of a hypothetical matchup as "overwhelming evidence" oh brother 

And each time I linked it back to the original topic of discussion to explain why I was using that example...I didn't think that would be too complicated for you to follow

Linked back? LMFAO you tried to use Kevin as a proxy to a win over Chris , you shifted away from Chris I didn't.

LMFAO that you refer to your individual opinion of a hypothetical matchup as "overwhelming evidence" oh brother 

Okay where is your evidence to the contrary? where? where is your evidence that Chris isn't more complete ( he has a back Nasser doesn't ) or has better balance & proportion ( Nasser long torso , short legs , etc ) where is your evidence to the contrary that Nasser can pose correctly and effectively? where?

You don't know how contests are judged , you're biased and admit that the judges are flat out wrong when their opinion contradicts your own belief , you've offered up nothing in the least and you don't know what evidence is , again I have and will show you outright how Chris beats Nasser at his best all you can do is deny and offer NO counterpoint , you're not trying then again you would have to know how the game is played and I already proved you don't

Keep pretending Nasser was as good as you think he was , 6 wins in his entire career  facts my friend are not on your side.