Author Topic: 2nd place dwarfing the eventual winner (Read 50220 times)

Hulkster · « **Reply #100 on:** January 23, 2006, 07:45:04 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on January 23, 2006, 11:12:20 AM

Shawn Ray didn't have a great structure , he was narrow and he didn't meet the Greek ideal however he is considered an aesthetic bodybuilder , with Flex his muscle roundness and shape is simply very pleasing aesthetically and look at him at the 93 ASC his balance was a lot better when he compted at a lighter weight , but in my opinion he and Shawn were not in the same aesthetic mold as Cormier & Paris but aesthetic none the less .

wow. ND you are grasping at so many straws trying to defend yourself that you are now contradicting yourself in the same paragraph.

This makes no sense: you are saying that paris and cormeir are in an all together different aesthetic class than Shawn and Flex, since Flex and shawn are narrow and "don't meet the greek ideal".

Well, I have some news for ya: Chris and Paris were narrow also and they didn't meet the greek ideal either!

the whole point of me posting that shot of Ronnie, Chris and Flex was to show that:

aesthetics is NOT bound by size.

Just because you are big (Ronnie) does NOT mean that you are not aesthetic.

However, note that, in comparing the shot that I posted to Dorian, you can certainly be big and not be aesthetic.

Note the following: in those shots that I posted, both Dorian and Ronnie BOTH weighed 257 pounds.

And yet look how much better put together Ronnie was than Dorian. Dorian looks like a blob. Ronnie has a wicked taper and cut guads.

here is a 257 pound bodybuilder that is still aesthetic even though he is big.

Here is a 257 pound bodybuilder who is not aesthetic because he is put together like a blob- a jellyfish has a better taper.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #101 on:** January 24, 2006, 01:52:39 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on January 23, 2006, 07:45:04 PM

wow. ND you are grasping at so many straws trying to defend yourself that you are now contradicting yourself in the same paragraph.

This makes no sense: you are saying that paris and cormeir are in an all together different aesthetic class than Shawn and Flex, since Flex and shawn are narrow and "don't meet the greek ideal".

Well, I have some news for ya: Chris and Paris were narrow also and they didn't meet the greek ideal either!

the whole point of me posting that shot of Ronnie, Chris and Flex was to show that:

aesthetics is NOT bound by size.

Just because you are big (Ronnie) does NOT mean that you are not aesthetic.

However, note that, in comparing the shot that I posted to Dorian, you can certainly be big and not be aesthetic.

Note the following: in those shots that I posted, both Dorian and Ronnie BOTH weighed 257 pounds.

And yet look how much better put together Ronnie was than Dorian. Dorian looks like a blob. Ronnie has a wicked taper and cut guads.

here is a 257 pound bodybuilder that is still aesthetic even though he is big.
Here is a 257 pound bodybuilder who is not aesthetic because he is put together like a blob- a jellyfish has a better taper.

Yup Cormier & Paris are both narrow and Shawn Ray has a better back double bicep shot than Yates

yup you know exactly what you're talking about

oh yeah and Ronnie had a small waist and wide lats , plus a flairing quads so that makes him aesthetic

, yup keeping talking .

No kidding aesthetics aren't deterimed by size thats why Paris weighed 230 lbs and Cormier weighes 260lbs and Labrada weighed 190lbs , and what seperates Chris & Paris from Ray & Wheeler is structure , same with Makkawy but all are aesthetic , I challange you to find me one quote from a magazine claiming Coleman is aesthetic , I have the Flex magazine coverage from his first win and no where does it mention Coleman being aesthetic as well as other articles about Ronnie and nowhere does it associate his name & aesthetics .

sculpture · « **Reply #102 on:** January 24, 2006, 04:44:29 AM »

Quote from: Hulkster on January 23, 2006, 07:45:04 PM

wow. ND you are grasping at so many straws trying to defend yourself that you are now contradicting yourself in the same paragraph.

This makes no sense: you are saying that paris and cormeir are in an all together different aesthetic class than Shawn and Flex, since Flex and shawn are narrow and "don't meet the greek ideal".

Well, I have some news for ya: Chris and Paris were narrow also and they didn't meet the greek ideal either!

the whole point of me posting that shot of Ronnie, Chris and Flex was to show that:

aesthetics is NOT bound by size.

Just because you are big (Ronnie) does NOT mean that you are not aesthetic.

However, note that, in comparing the shot that I posted to Dorian, you can certainly be big and not be aesthetic.

Note the following: in those shots that I posted, both Dorian and Ronnie BOTH weighed 257 pounds.

And yet look how much better put together Ronnie was than Dorian. Dorian looks like a blob. Ronnie has a wicked taper and cut guads.

here is a 257 pound bodybuilder that is still aesthetic even though he is big.

Here is a 257 pound bodybuilder who is not aesthetic because he is put together like a blob- a jellyfish has a better taper.

The coup de grace. If we keep goin on like this ND will just end up contradicting himself even further making it all the more easy to run rings around him

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #103 on:** January 24, 2006, 04:53:01 AM »

if you do a lexus-nexus search in EVERY physical philosophy publication you might find this claim and what would ND do if found incorrect ? um nothing. LOL i say let ND live in his little fantasy world where he's the sole arbitrator. i'm not that anal. no wonder he loves ancient roma !

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #104 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:00:34 PM »

Aesthetic & not aesthetic !!

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #105 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:09:40 PM »

great compare ND

now, does benfatto wear a rug ?

and does wearing a wig color aestheticism?

sculpture · « **Reply #106 on:** January 24, 2006, 02:12:12 PM »

ND post a pic of cormier in that pose to prove your ever increasing invalid point

Hulkster · « **Reply #107 on:** January 24, 2006, 04:17:43 PM »

aesthetic and not aesthetic!~:

Round 2:

to me, having a wicked taper and great muscle shape is a big part of being "aesthetic".

lets look at this pic for a minute: to me, ronnie's obliques and hint of a gut damage aesthetics in this shot. Which is fine: ronnie with a gut and obliques to me is not really that aesthetic - a tight midsection is paramount for aesthetics.

BUT: when we are talking about Ronnie at his peak:

he had no gut and no bulging obliques. Again, I don't see how Chris, who is standing right beside Ronnie, is so much more aesthetic.

If anything, Ronnie MORE aesthetically pleasing than Chris because of his superior taper.

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #108 on:** January 24, 2006, 04:20:26 PM »

thanks for turning this into a gross out

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #109 on:** January 24, 2006, 04:37:36 PM »

Hulkster you're such a loser lol you couldn't help turn this into yet another " Ronnie VS Dorian " thread , and who the f**k said Yates was aesthetic? I certainly never did and how ironic you pose the worse pics of Yates to validate your lame opinion lol Yates in 94 totaly relaxed Ronnie posing , if thats your proof you need to work on it , I'm going to pull a Hulkster .

Aesthetic and not aesthetic !!

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #110 on:** January 24, 2006, 04:40:36 PM »

Aesthetic and not aesthetic !!

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #111 on:** January 24, 2006, 05:04:57 PM »

Aesthetic and not aesthetic .

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #112 on:** January 24, 2006, 05:19:30 PM »

An aesthetic masterpeice and an aesthetic abortion .

Hulkster · « **Reply #113 on:** January 24, 2006, 06:26:08 PM »

you guys are so quick to think that I am turning this into yet another Ronnie versus Dorian thread.

that is completely untrue. That would be pointless since Dorian has lost every one of them.

I posted pics of Ronnie and Dorian simply to show that not all big bodybuilders are unaesthetic. Some are in fact aesthetic despite their size.

The "big = unaesthetic" is a bullshit myth that needs to be refuted whenever it rears its ugly head.
And what better way to show this than with Ronnie pics (versus a stereotypical big ugly unaesthetic bodybuilder like dorian).

I could have just as easily used pics of Markus Rhul, but what fun would that be?

ps - Hey ND- try using pics of Ronnie at his peak next time, not bloated gut pics, and you will be quite surprised how aesthetic ronnie used to be:

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #114 on:** January 24, 2006, 06:36:28 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on January 24, 2006, 06:26:08 PM

you guys are so quick to think that I am turning this into yet another Ronnie versus Dorian thread.

that is completely untrue. That would be pointless since Dorian has lost every one of them.

I posted pics of Ronnie and Dorian simply to show that not all big bodybuilders are unaesthetic. Some are in fact aesthetic despite their size.

The "big = unaesthetic" is a bullshit myth that needs to be refuted whenever it rears its ugly head.
And what better way to show this than with Ronnie pics (versus a stereotypical big ugly unaesthetic bodybuilder like dorian).

I could have just as easily used pics of Markus Rhul, but what fun would that be?

ps - Hey ND- try using pics of Ronnie at his peak next time, not bloated gut pics, and you will be quite surprised how aesthetic ronnie used to be:

Hulkster whats ironic is every pic I used was from a contest lol and I've already said you don't have to be small to be aesthetic case ien point , Haney , Paris , Cormier who all own Coleman , and whats also ironic is I said Ronnie used to be a lot more aesthetic than he is now , HOWEVER he still isn't in the leauge of Bob Paris , Chris Cormier , Lee Labrada , Steve Reeves , Francis Benfatto , Frank Zane , I'm sorry sport how matter now small Ronnie's waist is and how wide is back is , he isn't even close to any of the forementioned .

phyxsius · « **Reply #115 on:** January 24, 2006, 06:42:35 PM »

Way a go ND.. Ronnie got owned

bigdumbbell · « **Reply #116 on:** January 24, 2006, 07:01:10 PM »

samir wore a rug too ND

alexxx · « **Reply #117 on:** January 24, 2006, 07:11:31 PM »

Quote from: bigdumbbell on January 24, 2006, 07:01:10 PM

samir wore a rug too ND

Maybe Ronnie should try that

Hulkster · « **Reply #118 on:** January 24, 2006, 07:13:41 PM »

Quote from: phyxsius on January 24, 2006, 06:42:35 PM

Way a go ND.. Ronnie got owned

of course he did. All of those shots were post-gut shots. Try putting a pre-gut Ronnie next to Bob Paris or Samir and you might be surprised at how well the pre-gut Ronnie can hold his own..

big guys can still be aesthetic and pleasing to the eye....

sculpture · « **Reply #119 on:** January 25, 2006, 01:52:04 AM »

This thread has quickly turned to a ronnie bash at the hands of one particularly bitter bber fan who skims around the issues and avoids confronting questions when he knows he's stumped. ND's variable criteria for the aesthetic is probably the biggets dose of hypocrisy i've seen for a while from this board.

I'll never forget the term "aesthetic umbrella" which is a term in which you can extend to encompass bbers you like and exclude the ones you don't like.

Sad.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #120 on:** January 25, 2006, 01:54:13 AM »

Aesthetic and not aesthetic .

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #121 on:** January 25, 2006, 01:58:54 AM »

Quote from: sculpture on January 25, 2006, 01:52:04 AM

This thread has quickly turned to a ronnie bash at the hands of one particularly bitter bber fan who skims around the issues and avoids confronting questions when he knows he's stumped. ND's variable criteria for the aesthetic is probably the biggets dose of hypocrisy i've seen for a while from this board.

I'll never forget the term "aesthetic umbrella" which is a term in which you can extend to encompass bbers you like and exclude the ones you don't like.

Sad.

Oh boo-hoo saying Ronnie isn't aesthetic is " bashing " him , someone is hypersensitive

I gace you a list of people who I consider aesthetic if you disagree with that list okay at least counter with why you don't think they are , and why you think Ronnie is , get in the game and stop crying .

sculpture · « **Reply #122 on:** January 25, 2006, 02:00:14 AM »

Acording to your criteria, arnold would need naturally wide shoulders and a narrow waist to be considered aesthetic which he doesnt. You also mentioned the minimum amount of weakness:
- lack of quad flair and size
- lack of hamstrings
- arm imbalance due to overly large biceps
- low chest that dominates his physique and makes him appear narrow overpowering his delts
- naturally wide waist

dear o dear

DIVISION · « **Reply #123 on:** January 25, 2006, 02:01:39 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on January 25, 2006, 01:58:54 AM

Oh boo-hoo saying Ronnie isn't aesthetic is " bashing " him , someone is hypersensitive

I gace you a list of people who I consider aesthetic if you disagree with that list okay at least counter with why you don't think they are , and why you think Ronnie is , get in the game and stop crying .

^You just love drama, don't you, ND?

You antagonize your opponents as much as they do you.

You claim to be a NAS fan, right? That sounds about right.....

Alot of talk........ain't sayin' nothin'.

When will you learn? Arguing over subjective criteria like "aesthetics" is pointless.

DIV

sculpture · « **Reply #124 on:** January 25, 2006, 02:01:50 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on January 25, 2006, 01:58:54 AM

Oh boo-hoo saying Ronnie isn't aesthetic is " bashing " him , someone is hypersensitive

I gace you a list of people who I consider aesthetic if you disagree with that list okay at least counter with why you don't think they are , and why you think Ronnie is , get in the game and stop crying .

Clutching at straws. Remind me ND as to why your arguing with a bunch of "kids" and losing