stirring the pot......

[dearth]

2003 ronnie = 10 lbs of shit in a 5lb bag

[Hulkster]

Yes, one of the thickest and widest ever, no question, BUT...he lacks the incredible seperation he exhibted when he won the ASC at a slightly lighter body wt.
Howard

to be fair, Ronnie was not nearly done flexing in that 2003 shot.

here is a shot were he was flexing fully, and his separation is much better:


but yes, it was not as good as it was at the Arnold Classic:

[nicorulez]

Hulkster, on retrospect I agree.  Still Coleman in 2003 would have absolutely, resolutely destroyed Dorian in any of his contests.  Dorian never would have been able to touch him from the front except abs/thighs and that is debateable with the one armed man.  Turn them around and Coleman's width and thickness would have crapped on Yates.  Coleman's glutes are frickin striated; Yates never had that.  You can clearly see the cords that comprise his hamstrings; Yates never could show this detail.  Coleman had arms that absolutely crushed Yates.  His shoulders are as big or bigger with better shape.  Thighs....hahahha....ple ase.  ND, you need a new boy to drool over.  Coleman massacres him.  In fact, if Haney would have never retired, Yates may have never won a Sandow.  In 1993, I can see him winning the gold, but every other year was a no go.

[delta9mda]

Ronnie's ass extends halfway down to his knees. Disgusting.

yeah well look how huuuuuuuuuge ronnies calves are. 

[delta9mda]

Dorian's bi's were clearly photoshopped in those pics

the pic is not shopped. dont know why but at the lighter weights, his arms didnt seem so "small", but later on......

[badlad]

It's a shame that Haney is kind of the 'forgotten' Mr O.
Wins 8 Sandows and I'd have to agree could probably have gone on winning more for a while after if he had chosen to.
But I like Haney, Yates and Coleman equally really - they all have some incredible bodyparts and managed to bring everything together when it counted.
If Haney had kept on competing for another few years I would speculate that he would have beaten Yates (notwithstanding the fact that he was of course the incumbent).
But I think that in the next era even if Yates had managed to stay injury free (particularly with respect to the bicep tear) I don't think he (Yates) could have kept Coleman from the Sandow.
For me Haney and Coleman although very very different both have some of the same elements with regard to symmetry and their overall lines. Even with Coleman as massive as he is I think he is still incredibly symmetrical.
Yates on the other hand didn't quite have that quality (have not explained myself well at all) but in his day was very impressive and seemed to usher in a new age of bb monsters.
Anyhoo...

[NarcissisticDeity]

Hulkster, on retrospect I agree.  Still Coleman in 2003 would have absolutely, resolutely destroyed Dorian in any of his contests.  Dorian never would have been able to touch him from the front except abs/thighs and that is debateable with the one armed man.  Turn them around and Coleman's width and thickness would have crapped on Yates.  Coleman's glutes are frickin striated; Yates never had that.  You can clearly see the cords that comprise his hamstrings; Yates never could show this detail.  Coleman had arms that absolutely crushed Yates.  His shoulders are as big or bigger with better shape.  Thighs....hahahha....ple ase.  ND, you need a new boy to drool over.  Coleman massacres him.  In fact, if Haney would have never retired, Yates may have never won a Sandow.  In 1993, I can see him winning the gold, but every other year was a no go.

You're wrong about Yates having stiated glutes , check out the pic , and again you fall flat on your face trying to argue 2003 Coleman could beat a much more ripped Yates by virtue of pure size , Dorian would beat Ronnie in the front latspread , and ab-thigh , from the side Yates would have the side tri and chest , and Yates was no slouch on the hamstrings either .

[dearth]

  In fact, if Haney would have never retired, Yates may have never won a Sandow. 
 

that was by far the dumbest statement of this thread.

Yates beat Haney in the muscularity round in 91, yet haney won because he was a better poser.
haney retired to save embarrasment of being beat after winning 8 sandows.

[LuciusFox]

You're wrong about Yates having stiated glutes , check out the pic , and again you fall flat on your face trying to argue 2003 Coleman could beat a much more ripped Yates by virtue of pure size , Dorian would beat Ronnie in the front latspread , and ab-thigh , from the side Yates would have the side tri and chest , and Yates was no slouch on the hamstrings either .

  Coleman would win all of those poses except for side triceps.

[delta9mda]

everyone needs to stop the bickering(though it is funny as hell to see hulkster and nd going at it).
haney, yates, coleman22 mr. o's between them and they all had "IT". if you have to ask what "it" is, then you dont know.
lance armstrong had/ has "it".
3 eras, 3 of the best ever. and it seems each one stepped up and improved on the man before him.

[Hulkster]

ND - you are missing the point.

sure, Yates had SOME detail in his hams and glutes.

but 2003 Ronnie had this:


so your boy Yates would have been crushed in that department.

And, 2003 Ronnie's side chest destroys any incarnation of a Yates side chest:


check out the quad detail - it would have been no contest.

[NarcissisticDeity]

He also had this lol

[LuciusFox]

ND - you are missing the point.

sure, Yates had SOME detail in his hams and glutes.

but 2003 Ronnie had this:


so your boy Yates would have been crushed in that department.

And, 2003 Ronnie's side chest destroys any incarnation of a Yates side chest:


check out the quad detail - it would have been no contest.

  His legs have innumerable details in that side chest

[nicorulez]

ND, you are funny.  The only pics of Coleman you can criticize are when he is not posing.  Who gives a rat's ass.  That is not judged.  When he flexes his abs and hits his shots, it is game over.  In the other thread, you had the audacity to state that if Dorian wouldn't have gotten injured Coleman wouldn't have won.  What crack have you been smoking.  Only way Dorian beat Ronnie from 1998 on was if the judges were paid off by the mafia.  Yates looked really good one time (1993).  After his tear, I could care less about his conditioning, he was not the ideal bodybuilder.  Moreover, by 2003, Ron was 20 pounds heavier easily and twice as thick.  If you would open your eyes, it was really no contest.  Everything you criticize Ronnie about, I can criticize Dorian double.  Dorian's waist was wider, his arms sucked and his legs were like toothpicks compared to Coleman.  His calves are undoubtedly great, but comparing the two....really....you must like smoking that weed.   Here's a thought, if Haney wouldn't have retired, Yates would have probably never become Mr. Olympia.

[Hulkster]

The only pics of Coleman you can criticize are when he is not posing.

ironage desparation.

ND knows that he is almost the only one left who does not think that Ronnie would destroy Yates.  He has to grasp for what little straws are still available.

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND, you are funny.  The only pics of Coleman you can criticize are when he is not posing.  Who gives a rat's ass.  That is not judged.  When he flexes his abs and hits his shots, it is game over.  In the other thread, you had the audacity to state that if Dorian wouldn't have gotten injured Coleman wouldn't have won.  What crack have you been smoking.  Only way Dorian beat Ronnie from 1998 on was if the judges were paid off by the mafia.  Yates looked really good one time (1993).  After his tear, I could care less about his conditioning, he was not the ideal bodybuilder.  Moreover, by 2003, Ron was 20 pounds heavier easily and twice as thick.  If you would open your eyes, it was really no contest.  Everything you criticize Ronnie about, I can criticize Dorian double.  Dorian's waist was wider, his arms sucked and his legs were like toothpicks compared to Coleman.  His calves are undoubtedly great, but comparing the two....really....you must like smoking that weed.   Here's a thought, if Haney wouldn't have retired, Yates would have probably never become Mr. Olympia.

Again you assume because Coleman is bigger he is better , he isn't , period , if Haney and Yates met again in 92 I think Haney would have beat him , and I think the judges would have went with Yates , and if Yates was healthy & didn't tear any muscles , Ronnie Coleman would have NEVER beat him , thats very safe to assume , Ronnie 98 just narrowly beat a less than stella Flex and he was about 245lbs , Yates would have been at least 10lbs heavier and an 1" shorter , now you can say I'm claiming bigger is better , in this case it applies because in 2003 Ronnie was much bigger but his phsyique couldn't stand the extra weight in terms of conditioning ( especially compared to 1998 ) and his balance & proportion is at its all time worse , Ronnie would have never beat Yates .

[LuciusFox]

Again you assume because Coleman is bigger he is better , he isn't , period , if Haney and Yates met again in 92 I think Haney would have beat him , and I think the judges would have went with Yates , and if Yates was healthy & didn't tear any muscles , Ronnie Coleman would have NEVER beat him , thats very safe to assume , Ronnie 98 just narrowly beat a less than stella Flex and he was about 245lbs , Yates would have been at least 10lbs heavier and an 1" shorter , now you can say I'm claiming bigger is better , in this case it applies because in 2003 Ronnie was much bigger but his phsyique couldn't stand the extra weight in terms of conditioning ( especially compared to 1998 ) and his balance & proportion is at its all time worse , Ronnie would have never beat Yates .

  I think Dorian would have eventually beaten Lee, but I don't think a bloated, desperate Dorian should have beaten 98 Ronnie. His body was a Greek tragedy at that point.

[nicorulez]

Again you assume because Coleman is bigger he is better , he isn't , period , if Haney and Yates met again in 92 I think Haney would have beat him , and I think the judges would have went with Yates , and if Yates was healthy & didn't tear any muscles , Ronnie Coleman would have NEVER beat him , thats very safe to assume , Ronnie 98 just narrowly beat a less than stella Flex and he was about 245lbs , Yates would have been at least 10lbs heavier and an 1" shorter , now you can say I'm claiming bigger is better , in this case it applies because in 2003 Ronnie was much bigger but his phsyique couldn't stand the extra weight in terms of conditioning ( especially compared to 1998 ) and his balance & proportion is at its all time worse , Ronnie would have never beat Yates .

Bullshit, in 1998 if the judging were not fixed, Yates would have gotten his misshapen disaster of a body handed to him.  You cannot even deny it.  As much as you want to, everybody with eyes knows your boy was going downhill fast.  BTW, he did rip his bicep so what if's are a moot point.  Until this year, and we will see how Ronnie's arm is on game day (if screwed up, give it to a very good Jay), Ronnie has been injury free.  Your boy won three Sandow's with one arm.  That is a travesty.  BTW, it is hilarious seeing you bring in the weight card when that is what you have been preaching is wrong with my reasoning that Coleman of now is better.  You contradict yourself constantly.  Ronnie absolutely crushes Yates from the front and back.  Side tri's I agree go to Yates.  Front lat spread, you are on drugs.  You need thighs and arms too.  Yates lats may flare a little more (debateable), but Ronnie has everything except calves over Yates.  Give it up ND.

[dearth]

ironage desparation.

ND knows that he is almost the only one left who does not think that Ronnie would destroy Yates.  He has to grasp for what little straws are still available.

it does not matter if coleman is posing (hiding his obvious flaws) or not.

a mr. olympia with a 40" waist? ...........please

[LuciusFox]

it does not matter if coleman is posing (hiding his obvious flaws) or not.

a mr. olympia with a 40" waist? ...........please

  Ever heard of Dorian in 1997?

[dearth]

  Ever heard of Dorian in 1997?

Ever heard of Coleman in 2000 - 2005 ?

[LuciusFox]

Ever heard of Coleman in 2000 - 2005 ?

  I doubt his waist was 40 inches. He's not Cutler or Gunter.

[Hulkster]

ND, you keeping saying that other people are saying that Coleman would have beat Yates because ronnie was bigger.

If you actually read what we are saying, size is nothing.

You will note that Ronnie at his best was about 10 pounds LESS than Dorian at his best.

Dorian would be bigger.

but that is the problem: bigger is not better.

Coleman (even though he would weigh slightly less than Yates) would have:

-better arms.
-better quads
-better glutes/hams
-better chest
-better back double bi
-better looking lats due to a much better taper
-better vascularity
-more striations
-better muscle shape, esp. thighs, arms, delts...

ronnie was 247 at the AC, Dorian was 257 in 1993.

Dorian would technically be bigger.
Ronnie would be worlds better for the reasons that I mentioned above. 

Size is irrelevant when the difference is only 10 pounds.


its muscle quality, taper and shape that really counts.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Bullshit, in 1998 if the judging were not fixed, Yates would have gotten his misshapen disaster of a body handed to him.  You cannot even deny it.  As much as you want to, everybody with eyes knows your boy was going downhill fast.  BTW, he did rip his bicep so what if's are a moot point.  Until this year, and we will see how Ronnie's arm is on game day (if screwed up, give it to a very good Jay), Ronnie has been injury free.  Your boy won three Sandow's with one arm.  That is a travesty.  BTW, it is hilarious seeing you bring in the weight card when that is what you have been preaching is wrong with my reasoning that Coleman of now is better.  You contradict yourself constantly.  Ronnie absolutely crushes Yates from the front and back.  Side tri's I agree go to Yates.  Front lat spread, you are on drugs.  You need thighs and arms too.  Yates lats may flare a little more (debateable), but Ronnie has everything except calves over Yates.  Give it up ND.

If Yates stood injury free he would have beat Ronnie , again   what changed for Ronnie in 98? he was the same weight in 96 and 97 in 98 he cam n with amazing conditioning , big deal Yates always had amazing conditioning even at his worse , use your head , he just barely beat Flex in 98 by just 3 points , one of the closest Mr Olympia contests ever , Dorian in 93 domianted the feild , no one was even close , and I think Flex was sharper at the 93 Olympia than he was in 98 , So Dorian would have no problem running over Ronnie , it would be just another day at the office , and for all the Ronnie fans who counter with Yates won with one bicep , Ronnie has won 8 Olympia with two missing calves !! and a torn bicep can be hidden , weak calves can't .

[LuciusFox]

If Yates stood injury free he would have beat Ronnie , again   what changed for Ronnie in 98? he was the same weight in 96 and 97 in 98 he cam n with amazing conditioning , big deal Yates always had amazing conditioning even at his worse , use your head , he just barely beat Flex in 98 by just 3 points , one of the closest Mr Olympia contests ever , Dorian in 93 domianted the feild , no one was even close , and I think Flex was sharper at the 93 Olympia than he was in 98 , So Dorian would have no problem running over Ronnie , it would be just another day at the office , and for all the Ronnie fans who counter with Yates won with one bicep , Ronnie has won 8 Olympia with two missing calves !! and a torn bicep can be hidden , weak calves can't .

  His calves aren't missing. They are actually quite large. Dorian was a bloody train wreck at the end of his career. He looked like the bloated and water-logged corpse of popular actor John Goodman.