Author Topic: Haney vs. Yates : Helsinki 1992 (Read 16207 times)

Ex Coelis · « **on:** March 19, 2006, 07:03:38 PM »

If Lee Haney had competed in the 1992 Mr. Olympia in Helsinki, Finland, who would have won? The TotaLee Awesome One or the Shadow?

Assume that Haney's size and conditioning were at least the same as in 1991.

I say Lee Haney would have won. He was the reigning Mr. Olympia (always counts for something), his back was still better than Dorian's, plus he was taller and had better aesthetics.

The Big Diesal was good, but wouldnt have been good enough to overtake Lee until '93 when he truly dominated.

VS

alexxx · « **Reply #1 on:** March 19, 2006, 07:06:01 PM »

I think if Lee chose to continue to compete than Yates wouldn't of been mr. Olympia for all of those years!

nicorulez · « **Reply #2 on:** March 19, 2006, 07:06:47 PM »

Haney would have ripped him.

However, in 1993 it seems Dorian got a really good stash of GH, insulin, clenbuterol and horse steroids that he would have won thereafter. However, if Haney would have taken the same amount of crap...who knows. What would be more interesting is if Sergio Oliva or Arnold took the amount of stuff the guys today take, that would have been interesting. I have a feeling the Governator may have been the original Diesel and Oliva would have been like Ronnie...with a smaller waist.

benchthis · « **Reply #3 on:** March 19, 2006, 07:10:02 PM »

no he wouldnt arnold would of had a bigger waist than ronnie if he were to take all that shit his waist was wide to begin with ronnie at one point did have a small waist

alexxx · « **Reply #4 on:** March 19, 2006, 07:18:28 PM »

Part of the reason why Ronnies waist got so out of control is because of all the stress put on his body from the exessive weights he uses. Why would you need to lift 800 pound squats. I meant look at Ronnie now. I'd say about 60 punds he hides just in his stomac and ass alone. So this is the reason why Arnold was so much bigger than Coleman.

GMCtrk · « **Reply #5 on:** March 19, 2006, 07:21:06 PM »

Yates' back was better than Haney's in 91 let alone 92. His legs were better too.

nicorulez · « **Reply #6 on:** March 19, 2006, 07:35:42 PM »

GMC, not even close. Haney had a 32 inch waist and huge shoulders. His chest absolutely anihilated Dorian and from the front it was not even close. Dorian had bigger legs, but not necessarily better. Haney had a much better back double bi at that time. By 1993/1994, Doz was bigger but he never had Haney's genetics or aesthetics.

bigkid · « **Reply #7 on:** March 19, 2006, 07:37:27 PM »

Haney

GMCtrk · « **Reply #8 on:** March 19, 2006, 08:18:09 PM »

Quote from: nicorulez on March 19, 2006, 07:35:42 PM

GMC, not even close. Haney had a 32 inch waist and huge shoulders. His chest absolutely anihilated Dorian and from the front it was not even close. Dorian had bigger legs, but not necessarily better. Haney had a much better back double bi at that time. By 1993/1994, Doz was bigger but he never had Haney's genetics or aesthetics.

aesthetics dont mean jack shit. if they did Flex would have won several sandows.

Haney's chest destroyed Yates? news to me. Yates was tighter, drier, better back, and better legs. But he wasn't pretty, and according to you that's why he lost.

bigkid · « **Reply #9 on:** March 19, 2006, 08:24:59 PM »

better back my ass http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=60549.0

GMCtrk · « **Reply #10 on:** March 19, 2006, 08:46:11 PM »

Yates even had a tighter waist

Naked4Jesus · « **Reply #11 on:** March 19, 2006, 10:00:14 PM »

Haney all the way! The next year might have been different but there was no next year, Haney retired.

240 is Back · « **Reply #12 on:** March 19, 2006, 10:04:02 PM »

haney would have won a very very controversial show.

haney knew when to bounce. in 91 he lost the muscularity round to doz. the end was near.

LuciusFox · « **Reply #13 on:** March 19, 2006, 10:18:20 PM »

Dorian's quads look terrible

MCWAY · « **Reply #14 on:** March 20, 2006, 12:26:06 AM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on March 19, 2006, 10:04:02 PM

haney would have won a very very controversial show.

haney knew when to bounce. in 91 he lost the muscularity round to doz. the end was near.

What end? Haney won 8 straight Olympias. Having broken Arnold's record, Haney had nothing left to accomplish.

WorldGym2006 · « **Reply #15 on:** March 20, 2006, 12:39:57 AM »

Quote from: GMCtrk on March 19, 2006, 08:18:09 PM

Haney's chest destroyed Yates? news to me.

Haney had the best chest in the Pro's (and the best since Arnold-hands down). No way Dorians chest could even come close to Haney's, and I have seen them both in person.

JasonH · « **Reply #16 on:** March 20, 2006, 02:08:39 PM »

Yates would have been the better bodybuilder by 1992 by you know what bodybuilding politics are like - Haney would have won it only just on the basis that he was current Mr Olympia. Controversial I know but with the exception of Samir Bannout in '84 that's what happens at the O, the champ always wins.

Hulkster · « **Reply #17 on:** March 20, 2006, 03:49:08 PM »

Quote from: LuciusFox on March 19, 2006, 10:18:20 PM

Dorian's quads look terrible

exactly. Dorian's quads were bigger, but puffy and watery. His calves and hams were much better though.

and yes, I agree that Haney's chest destroyed Yates', hell Haney's chest practically destroys anyones.

nicorulez · « **Reply #18 on:** March 20, 2006, 04:31:43 PM »

GMC, you are deluded if you think that Yates upper body compared favorably to Haney. Haney had better chest, shoulders, and back. His waist was like 3 inches smaller. When they turned to the side, you could really tell. Yates had bigger legs, but they were hardly shredded. It really was not a close show except the muscularity round which Dorian won 8-7. After that, it was not even close. Why don't you go to a show and see some of these guys and not always go by pics. Hell, I don't know how you get your opinion's about Dorian's superiority as his body is always washed out from the lights...

. Is that why his in contest shape never came close to the B&W pics. I would love it if Hulkster took some shots from Coleman circa 2003 at the Mr. Olympia in shape and made them Black and White. That would be so funny, as you would really appreciate how much better he is. Haney, in mine and a lot of people's opinion, is better than both of them. Dorian's symmetry is horrible except for the 1993 show.

knny187 · « **Reply #19 on:** March 20, 2006, 04:33:31 PM »

Haney with #9

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #20 on:** March 20, 2006, 05:06:49 PM »

Quote from: nicorulez on March 20, 2006, 04:31:43 PM

GMC, you are deluded if you think that Yates upper body compared favorably to Haney. Haney had better chest, shoulders, and back. His waist was like 3 inches smaller. When they turned to the side, you could really tell. Yates had bigger legs, but they were hardly shredded. It really was not a close show except the muscularity round which Dorian won 8-7. After that, it was not even close. Why don't you go to a show and see some of these guys and not always go by pics. Hell, I don't know how you get your opinion's about Dorian's superiority as his body is always washed out from the lights... . Is that why his in contest shape never came close to the B&W pics. I would love it if Hulkster took some shots from Coleman circa 2003 at the Mr. Olympia in shape and made them Black and White. That would be so funny, as you would really appreciate how much better he is. Haney, in mine and a lot of people's opinion, is better than both of them. Dorian's symmetry is horrible except for the 1993 show.

Here you go 2003 Mr Olympia shots in B&W and it doesn't make him look one bit better .

natural al · « **Reply #21 on:** March 20, 2006, 05:10:34 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 20, 2006, 05:06:49 PM

Here you go 2003 Mr Olympia shots in B&W and it doesn't make him look one bit better .

oh, no not another one of these threads...I can see it now...Ronnie sucks, Dorian sucks.....

but I will agree with ND, that shot is terrible, used to be the best in the biz now it looks like a lump of shit...

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #22 on:** March 20, 2006, 05:16:32 PM »

Quote from: natural al on March 20, 2006, 05:10:34 PM

oh, no not another one of these threads...I can see it now...Ronnie sucks, Dorian sucks.....

but I will agree with ND, that shot is terrible, used to be the best in the biz now it looks like a lump of shit...

I posted this back shot and that one from 2003 and he is just leaps & bounds better in 98

Hulkster · « **Reply #23 on:** March 20, 2006, 05:17:16 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on March 20, 2006, 05:06:49 PM

Here you go 2003 Mr Olympia shots in B&W and it doesn't make him look one bit better .

that is not a great shot of Ronnie's back, but you are wrong about the black and white not making it look better: it would look even less detailed in colour:

eg. compare:

black and white always makes the body look better. If the famous dorian shots were in colour, they would not be nearly as famous as they are now

natural al · « **Reply #24 on:** March 20, 2006, 05:17:53 PM »

kinda looks like ronnie is sporting a little...gasp....polumbo ism.....