Dorian Yates kicks Ronnie's ass Hulkster is a punk Bitch and fuck any truce

[suckmymuscle]

hahahahahhaa

  

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Hulkster]

ND how does dorian look better. are you suggesting he is more cut, bigger, proportioned. what are you suggesting that the camera is not picking up on?

its because of the light waves refecting off of dorian's muscle fibers, travelling into our retinas and fooling us, remember?

[NarcissisticDeity]

its because of the light waves refecting off of dorian's muscle fibers, travelling into our retinas and fooling us, remember?

I never claimed that , I've explained why and if it doesn't make any sense to you guys I could care less it doesn't change the facts that 5 independent sources all came to the same conclusion , so spare yourself the embarassment of claiming he's smooth lol 

[suckmymuscle]

yes but i dont care what horton says nor anyone else, im not a retard and i have watched many shows. i can tell and can see with 20/20 vision thus i can decipher based on photographs who is better. horton has his opinion i have mine. we are directly comparing pics, i think ronnie looks better.

my example of a fat dude on lasik proves my point about conditioning also. he would not be conditioned. thus he would not have seperations, which are genetic to an extent but so is mass, its still judged if you dont have them oh well thats a negative. i can gurantee that hardness is not a criteria unto itself and that cuts, seperations,and striations are the main criteria for definition. a muscle is striated, and each group is seperate.

dryness does exist i have said that, hardness does also, branch is an example of this. but striations, seperations and cuts are just as if not more important. dorian lacks all three of these things to ronnie overall. i dont see how dryness can be quantified by hardness(which is a tactile sensation also) alone, i would venture that the above three are the main factors. for arguments sake say they are even, the other three criteria are obviously won by ronnie.

your argument about genetics is moot, if he doesnt have the genetics it is a flaw, ronnies calves lack genetics, it is a flaw.


ND how does dorian look better. are you suggesting he is more cut, bigger, proportioned. what are you suggesting that the camera is not picking up on?

  A few points:

  - Separations are only one of the qualities that are increased when you decrease bodyfat and water levels. Muscle grain is another one, and Dorian reigns supreme here.

 - Condititioning equates with low bodyfat and water levels. Separation is only one of the many qualities that are increased when you decrease bodyfat and water levels.

 - An obese man on lasix is not conditioned because he has lots of bodyfat.

 - When we say that a bodybuilder is conditioned, we say that he has low bodyfat and water levels, not that he's separated. An off-season Wheeler still had great separations and yet no one would accuse him of being conditioned.

 - The point is that photographs cannot capture all the nuances of a physique, so you can't judge until you see them up-close.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[NarcissisticDeity]

This applies to every pose especially from the back !

[suckmymuscle]

its because of the light waves refecting off of dorian's muscle fibers, travelling into our retinas and fooling us, remember?

  Hulkster, to ptove that you're talking out of your ass about somthing that is over your head - hey, that ryhmed -, I will provide you a simple exercise in logic to demonstrate your folly in arguing with me. Here goes:

  Do photographic cameras reproduce the same nunaces of contrast and texture that light rays coming directly into your retina provide? No. Do Human Beings invariably posses the same physio-chemical propoerties in their sking tonalities and textures, ad so such differential tonalities reflect de facto in pics as well as they do in reality? The answer to both rhetorical questions is a big fat no.

  Usmoke asked me to provide an answer to the conjecture raised by many that Dorian looks different in perosn than he looks on pics; I told him that, as long we know the effect, the cause is not really important as long as the effect is observable and repeeatable. Period. So, I proposed several hypothesis which are not far-fetched to explkain the phenomenon, even though I was honest about the fact that I don't know the answer. You just got owned by yours trly, so try to argue in your league at the risk of being embarassed by me again.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[LuciusFox]

 Is this thread still going on? You people are pathetic

[Iceman1981]

Here is how you're a hypocrite

No said Ronnie was only out of shape in 01/02 and you site his straight firsts as proof that he was in shape in 00 , and then have the balls to claim Dorian was out of shape in 94/96/97 despite having straight first victories , this is the hypocritical part you're using straight firsts as proof he wasn't out of shape and in the same sentence say Dorian WAS out of shape in the years he scored you guessed it straight firsts

this makes you a hypocrite plain & simple

You still  can't read can you? It's the same situation with yates and Coleman. They came in out of shape a few years. So it goes for botth of them even though they both won. That's why I said " What is all of the bytching about". Is that too hard to understand buddy? Take them E.S.L classes.

[Iceman1981]

meltdown  lol whore what the f**k? I average 11 posts a day  ( owned )

and the scans are old actually been posted eons ago , you'd know that if you weren't Johnny-come-lately or should I just say a troll?

It doesn't matter if I came late to this thread or if I was here from day one. Troll? I think you're talking about Pubic, not me. You're the biggest troll around here. You reply with bs to everyones post like your some know it all. Thanks for the scans.

[Iceman1981]

Straight firsts and where was Ronnie? 

Look at that comparison and tell me if he deserved straight firsts. Be honest.

[IceCold]

Look at that comparison and tell me if he deserved straight firsts. Be honest.

i think the 97 clip of yates is on youtube.

he looks much better there than the pics.  i know it sounds like a cop out - but its true.

i said the same thing for ronnie for the 99 pics from FLEX vs. the videos.


i dont know if yates deserved straight firsts.

as i said before, i dont know the criteria as to why the judges award someone a '5' (perfect score) vs. an 7 or 8.

but after seeing the video and pics, yates was the clear winner.

even nasser said so. 

[IceCold]

It was "his" best appearance. That has nothing to do with Coleman. His legs were never as good as Colemans anyway.

i dont think it was levrone's best that year.

earlier in his career he was a monster.

coleman's hams have always been better than kevins, but in the early 90's, levrone's legs were fucking huge.

i much prefer those (circa 94-95) than coleman's. 

ronnie has very long quad muscles (vatus, rectoris femoris, etc.).

[Hulkster]

Look at that comparison and tell me if he deserved straight firsts. Be honest.

hahaha ND honest?

hahahaha

you are expecting someone who has argued for hundreds of pages that dorian's arms are better overall than Ronnie Fucking Coleman's and you are expecting him to be honest?

hahahaha

 

[realkarateblackbelt]

The triceps account for more arm size than the biceps, and most would agree(unless they're just biased) Dorian has superior triceps as far as shape, size, and definition. Huckster wouldn't understand that because he thinks Coleman beats Dorian on biceps alone.

[pobrecito]

Have you noticed every fucking comparison Hulkster poses is the most-muscular?

Someone tell this douche that it doesn't mean squat. Dorian would win regardless.

[realkarateblackbelt]

Huckster thinks biceps alone make the better bodybuilder.

[NarcissisticDeity]

You still  can't read can you? It's the same situation with yates and Coleman. They came in out of shape a few years. So it goes for botth of them even though they both won. That's why I said " What is all of the bytching about". Is that too hard to understand buddy? Take them E.S.L classes.

NO stop backpeddling when it was said Ronnie was out of shape in 2000 you dumbfounded  and admitted he was out of shape in 01/02 and sighted his straight firsts in 2000 as an indication of him being perfect and then you have the balls to say Yates was out of shape despite his straight firsts in the years you listed him as out of shape , thats hypocritical

[NarcissisticDeity]

It doesn't matter if I came late to this thread or if I was here from day one. Troll? I think you're talking about Pubic, not me. You're the biggest troll around here. You reply with bs to everyones post like your some know it all. Thanks for the scans.

You're a troll period  and I may not know everything but I've already proven I know way more than you and the rest of the delusional Coleman fans combined

[NarcissisticDeity]

Have you noticed every fucking comparison Hulkster poses is the most-muscular?

Someone tell this douche that it doesn't mean squat. Dorian would win regardless.

He thinks Ronnie wins this pose

[Iceman1981]

NO stop backpeddling when it was said Ronnie was out of shape in 2000 you dumbfounded  and admitted he was out of shape in 01/02 and sighted his straight firsts in 2000 as an indication of him being perfect and then you have the balls to say Yates was out of shape despite his straight firsts in the years you listed him as out of shape , thats hypocritical

Are you actually reading your posts before you hit the "reply" button? Why argue with a person like you that can't even read on a level of a 5 year old. Go back to school. You seriously need some help. That's why all of your posts are so confusing. If you take the time to read my posts, then you would undersdtand what is being said.

[Iceman1981]

You're a troll period  and I may not know everything but I've already proven I know way more than you and the rest of the delusional Coleman fans combined

lol, you post more than me and say I'm a troll, lol. Good one WHORE.

[NarcissisticDeity]

lol, you post more than me and say I'm a troll, lol. Good one WHORE.

I post more than you? wow great logic  I've registered in 2004 and you 2006 and I have something to say you're just trolling around because you're another Ronnie groupie you're like pumpster and thats the highest insult I can pay you lol

[NarcissisticDeity]

Are you actually reading your posts before you hit the "reply" button? Why argue with a person like you that can't even read on a level of a 5 year old. Go back to school. You seriously need some help. That's why all of your posts are so confusing. If you take the time to read my posts, then you would undersdtand what is being said.

I understood exactly what you said , you said Ronnie was only out of shape in 01/02 and was shocked when someone said 2000 and you sited his straight firsts as proof of him being in shape and then type that Dorian was out of shape in 94/96/97 despite the fact he won with straight firsts , this makes you a hypocrite because if according to your logic Ronnie was in shape in 2000 by virtue of his straight firsts you can't claim Dorian wasn't because he had them as well

And the best part is I posted a quote stating that Ronnie was off especially from 99/98 and my posts are confusing to YOU and Hulkster because you're confused people to begin with lol you think Ronnie has better conditioning & balance no kidding when someone types something logical it confuses in illogical

[RocketSwitch625]

Their arms are pretty much even in terms of size but Yates beats Coleman easily on everything else including condition. Coleman looks like brown play dough.

P.S. Paul Dillett was more vascular than Coleman ever was and what did it ever do for him??? He may have had a shitty back but Coleman has even shittier calves.









Proof that vascularity doesn't = good condition. Dillett terribly out of shape and still as vascular as hell in the arms and delts. LOL

[Iceman1981]

worst god damn symmetry for a mr O:
 

LOL.