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

[NarcissisticDeity]

Nothing emptier than some clown furiously churning out rhetoric from a basement, proving precisely nothing.

Part of an avalanche of proof..

avalanche of ' proof ' ? you mean slanted picture comparisons of Dorian obviously NOT as his best , stop trolling . you've proved nothing other than your bias oh and nice hack job trying to turn the screencap black & white try and compete with the Dorian shots lol

[bizzy]

I actually had some time off today because of a
massive ice storm and got a chance to check different
reviews and quotes. It was actually quite fun and relaxing.
I do not agree with everything said in these quotes because
bodybuilding is subjective. Never the less, I think everyone
will find these quite interesting.

Will start with Peter McGough and a quote he made and notice
he mentions 1999 and not 1998.

BY PETER McGOUGH
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
1ST RONNIE COLEMAN
5'11", 287 POUNDS
At 245 pounds last year and coming too close for comfort to losing the title, the posTHortem then was that Coleman was too light. So in a variation of the adage "be careful what you wish for," he came in at more than a full, and I do mean full, 40 pounds heavier than his harum-scarum win of 2002.
His thighs were enormous, hanging over his knees like two bantamweights clinging on for dear life. His back went on forever and given Jay Curler's flatness, a sixth Sandow was never in doubt. Having said that, although his back had oodles of separation, it lacked the depth and dry crispness of his '99 Olympia and '01 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic Showings--the latter being, in my opinion, his best-ever presentation.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_11_21/ai_111506216/pg_9

[bizzy]

John Hansen - Natural Mr. Universe and Natural Mr. Olympia
1st Place - Ronnie Coleman. Ronnie is one of my favorite bodybuilders competing today. He believes in training heavy and hard using barbells and dumbbells with the basic exercises and his physique shows it! When Ronnie won his first Mr. Olympia contest in 1998, it was one of the most exciting victories in the sport's history. His biceps, back and chest are absolutely incredible and nearly everyone agrees that he owns the Rear Double Biceps pose in this sport. Many people in the sport have also talked about the fact that Ronnie Coleman may be the best Mr. Olympia ever!
Last year, Ronnie was about ten pounds heavier and he was just as ripped as when he won the contest the first time in 1998.

[bizzy]

From the greatest bodybuilder of all-time, Ronnie Coleman, to gregarious owner Brian Dobson to the kid who joined yesterday, everyone is trying to push themselves further than ever before, and it’s the energy of this shared commitment that makes Metroflex great.
Greg Merritt
Senior Writer
FLEX Magazine

[NarcissisticDeity]

I actually had some time off today because of a
massive ice storm and got a chance to check different
reviews and quotes. It was actually quite fun and relaxing.
I do not agree with everything said in these quotes because
bodybuilding is subjective. Never the less, I think everyone
will find these quite interesting.

Will start with Peter McGough and a quote he made and notice
he mentions 1999 and not 1998.

BY PETER McGOUGH
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
1ST RONNIE COLEMAN
5'11", 287 POUNDS
At 245 pounds last year and coming too close for comfort to losing the title, the posTHortem then was that Coleman was too light. So in a variation of the adage "be careful what you wish for," he came in at more than a full, and I do mean full, 40 pounds heavier than his harum-scarum win of 2002.
His thighs were enormous, hanging over his knees like two bantamweights clinging on for dear life. His back went on forever and given Jay Curler's flatness, a sixth Sandow was never in doubt. Having said that, although his back had oodles of separation, it lacked the depth and dry crispness of his '99 Olympia and '01 Arnold Schwarzenegger Classic Showings--the latter being, in my opinion, his best-ever presentation.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_11_21/ai_111506216/pg_9

I hate to break this to you sport he mentions 1998 in his review of 1999 and 2000 let me show you how it's done 

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

Oh and let couple that with the quote from Ronnie Coleman himself who said on Pro Bodybuilding Weekly on the recap of his professional career and when asked the question what was his best Olympia his response

Mr First one ...because my conditioning was spot-on now mind you this was perhaps 2 months ago couple that with the TWO ( not one ) quotes specifically mentioning his conditioning was not as sharp in 99 as 98

again this is Ronnie-fucking-Coleman saying this lol

and lets entertain he was just as conditioned as he was in 99 as he was in 98 or even better , lets entertain this fantasy for a brief moment , he's still was he was never drier or harder than Dorian.

While I’m on record as saying that the best physique I ever saw was Ronnie’s at the 2001 Arnold, he was never drier or harder than Dorian. In fact now that – 14 years after it happened – I recently for the first time saw the video of Dorian posing before the 1993 Olympia I have cause to rethink. I’m now not sure that Ronnie at 245 pounds would beat Dorian at 269 pounds. At a bigger bodyweight I think Ronnie would look soft next to an in-shape rock-hard Dorian.

On the subject of conditioning, no-one did it better than Dorian. He achieved a hardness and dryness (without losing fullness) that nobody has ever matched. In the flesh he looked even harder than he did in photos. It was like a statue made of granite was standing in front of you.

your post means NOTHING even if it were true .

[NarcissisticDeity]

From the greatest bodybuilder of all-time, Ronnie Coleman, to gregarious owner Brian Dobson to the kid who joined yesterday, everyone is trying to push themselves further than ever before, and it’s the energy of this shared commitment that makes Metroflex great.
Greg Merritt
Senior Writer
FLEX Magazine

Greatest bodybuilder of all time? sure he has the most pro wins , he has eight straight Olympia titles he earned the title if they are solely basing it on that I have no problem with that that doesn't mean Dorian couldn't beat him

[NarcissisticDeity]

Has the quality of physique seen on the pro stage these days changed much compared to when you were competing as a professional?

I don't think the physiques have changed radically. I think a lot of people are trying to go the size route. My sole goal when getting ready for a contest was not building a lot of size, although when I was coming up pure muscle size was still very important. I was always really concerned about coming in very sharp conditioning wise.

I think that is lacking a little bit now, and it has occurred over the past few years. You go to a pro show now and you see a couple of guys who are in really good shape and the rest of the lineup is so-so, or not so good. Back when I was competing in the Olympia I think you saw a lot of guys who were in really good shape.

There was a greater emphasis on conditioning, but now you see guys going for size at the expense of conditioning. It seems strange me saying that, as I was known for my muscle size, but it was not my priority in getting ready for a contest. Obviously I carried a lot of muscle but my main thing was to come in super-ripped

First of all, Dorian would bring to the stage a package so massive and freakily conditioned that throughout his career as Mr. Olympia no one would come close to defeating him on size and hardness His level of development set a new standard in bodybuilding excellence, one that is being favorably looked upon, and replicated by many in the sport, today.

freakily conditioned

Dorian's conditioning is legendary and unequaled

[Necrosis]

I hate to break this to you sport he mentions 1998 in his review of 1999 and 2000 let me show you how it's done 

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

Oh and let couple that with the quote from Ronnie Coleman himself who said on Pro Bodybuilding Weekly on the recap of his professional career and when asked the question what was his best Olympia his response

Mr First one ...because my conditioning was spot-on now mind you this was perhaps 2 months ago couple that with the TWO ( not one ) quotes specifically mentioning his conditioning was not as sharp in 99 as 98

again this is Ronnie-fucking-Coleman saying this lol

and lets entertain he was just as conditioned as he was in 99 as he was in 98 or even better , lets entertain this fantasy for a brief moment , he's still was he was never drier or harder than Dorian.

While I’m on record as saying that the best physique I ever saw was Ronnie’s at the 2001 Arnold, he was never drier or harder than Dorian. In fact now that – 14 years after it happened – I recently for the first time saw the video of Dorian posing before the 1993 Olympia I have cause to rethink. I’m now not sure that Ronnie at 245 pounds would beat Dorian at 269 pounds. At a bigger bodyweight I think Ronnie would look soft next to an in-shape rock-hard Dorian.

On the subject of conditioning, no-one did it better than Dorian. He achieved a hardness and dryness (without losing fullness) that nobody has ever matched. In the flesh he looked even harder than he did in photos. It was like a statue made of granite was standing in front of you.

your post means NOTHING even if it were true .

those shots of dorian are blah compared to gym shots of ronnie and bfto shots, and stage shots. dorians back was diced, his quads arms, delts etc where not conditioned so much. thats obvious. his arms look soft and quads softer. i cant get over how you think a guy with little seperation in his quads, little sweep or pleasing shape has good quads.

[Hulkster]

i cant get over how you think a guy with little seperation in his quads, little sweep or pleasing shape has good quads.

its because he has no clue how to evalute a physique properly.

thats why he has become the laughing stock of this thread.

even non regular posters are coming in here and making fun of his bullshit.

lol

like his latest gem about how 1500 pages of dominating visual evidence "mean nothing'.

lol

sure they don't.

if Ronnie was dominated as bad as dorian was, you would be saying the exact opposite..

[Hulkster]

ND, how do you explain this quote from Peter talking about how much better Ronnie was in 1999 than 1998?
we all want to know:

 

In his first defense of the Mr. O title, Coleman exhibited size, condition and sinew-splitting fullness he lacked a year earlier. At 257 pounds, he was so separated that he looked like a walking anatomy chart.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_7_23/ai_n15346614

this quote directly contradicts your Peter quote about 99 being softer than 98 that you keep posting.

and, what is interesting, is that the visual evidence VALIDATES THIS quote not the one you keep posting.

please explain.

lol

you are fucked now.

[pumpster]

those shots of dorian are blah compared to gym shots of ronnie and bfto shots, and stage shots. dorians back was diced, his quads arms, delts etc where not conditioned so much. thats obvious. his arms look soft and quads softer. i cant get over how you think a guy with little seperation in his quads, little sweep or pleasing shape has good quads.

Were you expecting lucidity?

[Iceman1981]

Why the hell is this pic of yates being used? You can't even see a single striation or seperation at all. On the other hand, Ronnie's pic you can clearly see them even though the quality of both pics are garbage.? It must be the photo electric bullshyt.

[pumpster]

Why the hell is this pic of yates being used? You can't even see a single striation or seperation at all. On the other hand, Ronnie's pic you can clearly see them even though the quality of both pics are garbage.? It must be the photo electric bullshyt.

Were you expecting coherent arguments? He's clearly on the ropes, babbling..no one's explained to him that it has to make sense LOL

[PANDAEMONIUM]

Were you expecting coherent arguments? He's clearly on the ropes, babbling..no one's explained to him that it has to make sense LOL

good to see the great pumpster destroying bitches as usual

[bizzy]

ND, how do you explain this quote from Peter talking about how much better Ronnie was in 1999 than 1998?
we all want to know:

 



http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_7_23/ai_n15346614

this quote directly contradicts your Peter quote about 99 being softer than 98 that you keep posting.

and, what is interesting, is that the visual evidence VALIDATES THIS quote not the one you keep posting.

please explain.

lol

you are fucked now.

Holy Cow!! Very nice find Hulkster!!
In the 2001 AC Ron had started to develop a gut and was 10 pounds lighter than
1999. I just don't get why people think that was his best when he was a walking
anatomy chart and fuller in 99. Maybe you just had to be there...

[pumpster]

good to see the great pumpster destroying bitches as usual

They swim around the barrel, i take aim.

[Necrosis]

again another blanket statement with no explanation or supplemented quotes . you type empty words .

why do i need supplemental quotes, perhaps certain aspects where not talked about on certain bodybuilders, or certain questions where not asked. quotes are good to support a case but pictures do a much better job, surely you would agree, they are free of bias, and mis-interpretation. for instance we have peter making quotes all over the place about ronnie and dorian and none of them are internally consistent or even valid based on the back and forth nature of his quotes. dorian was best, no ronnie, now looking back dorian, actually ronnie. memory, moment etc.. all contribute to inflated quotes and memories, thats why memory is thrown out in court.

the good old days are always better, when they rarely are. HOWEVER, pictures always show the reality of the situation, and ronnie is way more cut, way more striated, and seperated all over his body. i dont need a quote to support my assertion that ronnies arms are more seperated and conditioned then dorians. his biceps are splite, his tris in the front double bi are deeply seperated from his bis, from the front the long head is visible in the mm etc etc.... quotes wouldnt help me more the pictures, i can post lots of them if you want.

dorians lower back is more conditioned then ronnies, i can see that from pictures, if a quote disagreed the quote is wrong. obviously there is some favoritism etc going on because dorians lower back is diced. stop being so ignorant and use some logic in your arguments.

[Necrosis]

Why the hell is this pic of yates being used? You can't even see a single striation or seperation at all. On the other hand, Ronnie's pic you can clearly see them even though the quality of both pics are garbage.? It must be the photo electric bullshyt.
[/quote

HOLY FUCK, look at ronnies legs, his quads are amazing, even his calves look good. as usual the upper body is insane, in all fairness ive never seen his abs deep like that before, shyte.

he is bigger then dorian in that pic and way more conditioned. its laughable to argue the two pics. fuck nd is a stupid guy, he is holding on to the past, yates was great, ronnie is clearly better, things evolve.

[NeoSeminole]

HOLY FUCK, look at ronnies legs, his quads are amazing, even his calves look good. as usual the upper body is insane, in all fairness ive never seen his abs deep like that before, shyte.

Ronnie looked unbelievable in the 02 BFTO.

[NeoSeminole]

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND, how do you explain this quote from Peter talking about how much better Ronnie was in 1999 than 1998?
we all want to know:

 



http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0KFY/is_7_23/ai_n15346614

this quote directly contradicts your Peter quote about 99 being softer than 98 that you keep posting.

and, what is interesting, is that the visual evidence VALIDATES THIS quote not the one you keep posting.

please explain.

lol

you are fucked now.

This quote is old , this is nothing new this has been posted before you're acting like you struck gold lol and it doesn't contradict his others quotes it states the difference between the years , pay attention

In his first defense of the Mr. O title, Coleman exhibited size, condition and sinew-splitting fullness he lacked a year earlier.

he exhibited size , condition and sinew-splitting FULLNESS he lacked a year earlier . no where does it say he was more dry than 1998 and more hard than 1998 . and here's the kicker lol just when you thought you moved forward you get knocked back ten spaces lol he references 2001 Arnold Classic again as his best and why is that? because his conditioning was at it's best , it wasn't because he was bigger .

and again when asked specifically what his best Olympia was on Pro Bodybuilding Weekly Ronnie Coleman himself said 1998 because his conditioning was ' spot-on ' so you're fucked kid I hope this helps 

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

[NarcissisticDeity]

Why the hell is this pic of yates being used? You can't even see a single striation or seperation at all. On the other hand, Ronnie's pic you can clearly see them even though the quality of both pics are garbage.? It must be the photo electric bullshyt.

I'll tell you why its been used lol because Hulkster thought he accompliahed something by doing so but again what does it show bias 

[England_1]

This quote is old , this is nothing new this has been posted before you're acting like you struck gold lol and it doesn't contradict his others quotes it states the difference between the years , pay attention

In his first defense of the Mr. O title, Coleman exhibited size, condition and sinew-splitting fullness he lacked a year earlier.

he exhibited size , condition and sinew-splitting FULLNESS he lacked a year earlier . no where does it say he was more dry than 1998 and more hard than 1998 . and here's the kicker lol just when you thought you moved forward you get knocked back ten spaces lol he references 2001 Arnold Classic again as his best and why is that? because his conditioning was at it's best , it wasn't because he was bigger .

and again when asked specifically what his best Olympia was on Pro Bodybuilding Weekly Ronnie Coleman himself said 1998 because his conditioning was ' spot-on ' so you're fucked kid I hope this helps 

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

LOL this is classic....ND going 1 on 5, yet owning everyone in sight hahaahahahaa

[NarcissisticDeity]

Holy Cow!! Very nice find Hulkster!!
In the 2001 AC Ron had started to develop a gut and was 10 pounds lighter than
1999. I just don't get why people think that was his best when he was a walking
anatomy chart and fuller in 99. Maybe you just had to be there...

he had a gut in 99 and 2001 is hailed as his best because , you guessed he had better fucking conditioning than 1999 , thanks for proving my point if 1999 he was just as hard and just as dry as 2001 his 1999 Mr Olympia appearance would be heralded as his best ever because he would be lacking nothing he would have had been 257 pounds instead of 245 pounds while being bone dry & rock hard , the difference is he wasn't bone dry & rock hard in 1999 hence why it's not his best showing , Ronnie himself said he was better conditioned in 1998 but I'm sure you guys know more than him lol sitting at home on your PCs lmfao

[NarcissisticDeity]

LOL this is classic....ND going 1 on 5, yet owning everyone in sight hahaahahahaa

lol thats because they don't know what the fuck they're talking about lol its easy.