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

[Iceman1981]

holy crap!

look at that rear lat spread and arms clasped mm

where are those from?

yet again, they destroy anything yates ever presented:

My friend sent me these pics. They are from the backstage photoshoot at the 99' Mr. Olympia.

[England_1]

BFTO '99

[Hulkster]

what is really funny and stupid at the same time is that no doubt ND will STILL claim he was better in 98..

[England_1]

what is really funny and stupid at the same time is that no doubt ND will STILL claim he was better in 98..

Ronnie's best condition was 1998. This is straight from Coleman himself. You can't sit here and go based off some pictures that he was more conditioned in 99 because there are too many variables. To claim you know Ronnie's condition better than Ronnie himself is absurd.

[bizzy]

Nice pics Iceman!
Just further proof that Ronnie was just as sharp
as at the 2001 AC but 10-12 pounds heavier
with a smaller waist and gut.

[bizzy]

...

[pumpster]

Quite a comparison. The construction worker hit by a wrecking ball.

[PANDAEMONIUM]

just popping in to up my post count

[bizzy]

what is really funny and stupid at the same time is that no doubt ND will STILL claim he was better in 98..

Natural Mr. Olympia - John Hansen

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.

Musclemag International 1999 Mr. Olympia Review By Johnny Fitness

Ronnie was gargantuan, herculean, and every adjective in between.
He was ripped, sharper than last year, and filled with a champions confidence.

Peter McGough mentioned 1999 and not 1998 in the next advancement of the sport.
I wonder why he chose 1999 when he could have easily put down 1998. HHHmmm.

[England_1]

You can post all the quotes you want, Coleman's word himself trumps all 

[Camel Jockey]

You can post all the quotes you want, Coleman's word himself trumps all 

It's called modesty, jackass.

[England_1]

It's called modesty, jackass.

Think before you post. Why would modesty have anything to do with Coleman determining which year he had the best condition? When he was interviewed he was defiant about 98 being his best condition. They even asked him if he said 98 due to it being his first win and he vehemently denied that.

Like I said, you cannot compare 98 and 99 simply by pictures as the lighting was drastically different. Coleman knows best.

[Hulkster]

Coleman knows best.

lol sure he does..

 

ps Coleman is quoted in the 99 contest coverage in M and F as stating he was in the best shape of his life, better than last year (98)

so, which coleman quote is true?

answer:

the one in which all the visuals validate, ie 1999.

not 1998.

[England_1]

lol sure he does..

 

ps Coleman is quoted in the 99 contest coverage in M and F as stating he was in the best shape of his life, better than last year (98)

so, which coleman quote is true?

answer:

the one in which all the visuals validate, ie 1999.

not 1998.

You obviously have a very poor education.

two things are not comparable unless they are share identical extrinsic factors. Therefore you cannot compare 98 and 99 and empirically say which was better. That leaves us with the next best thing, Coleman's word. Which do we go with? The most recent obviously as he had time to look back and reflect. Coleman also states on the 99 BFTO tape that it wasn't worth it to try and get in the condition he achieved in 98 over losing $100,000. If you want proof of this look at 2002 when he tried to do it and got booed off stage and was gifted a win over a more deserving Levrone.

[Hulkster]

two things are not comparable unless they are share identical extrinsic factors. Therefore you cannot compare 98 and 99 and empirically say which was better. That leaves us with the next best thing, Coleman's word.

total bullshit .

the next best thing is not 'coleman's word' - 10 years after the fact -  it is the video tape.


how stupid .

[Hulkster]

The most recent obviously as he had time to look back and reflect

had time to forget is more like it..

[England_1]

total bullshit .

You are obviously clueless and have never read a scientific journal or the likes.

The 98 and 99 video tapes are not comparable because of the differences in factors such as lighting, recording quality, etc. This is exactly why you cannot base anything off your so called "visuals" and why many people who saw both live said Yates was better 

Coleman's word as of 2007 is FINAL. 1998 was his alltime best condition, he was very serious when he said this and NOBODY forgets their 1st olympia win or anything about it.

[Hulkster]

You are obviously clueless and have never read a scientific journal or the likes.

yeah, I never read any academic journals in earning my honours biology degree..

 


lol

[Hulkster]

You are obviously clueless and have never read a scientific journal or the likes.

The 98 and 99 video tapes are not comparable because of the differences in factors such as lighting, recording quality, etc. This is exactly why you cannot base anything off your so called "visuals" and why many people who saw both live said Yates was better 

Coleman's word as of 2007 is FINAL. 1998 was his alltime best condition, he was very serious when he said this and NOBODY forgets their 1st olympia win or anything about it.

the excuses continue to mount.

 

lol coleman's word as of 2007 is the final definitive peice of evidence on the matter? screw the videos, other eyewitnesses lol

Ronnie coleman's foggy memory 10 years later is all that matters..

how stupid.

[England_1]

the excuses continue to mount.

 

lol coleman's word as of 2007 is the final definitive peice of evidence on the matter? screw the videos, other eyewitnesses lol

Ronnie coleman's foggy memory 10 years later is all that matters..

how stupid.

Ronnie's memory foggy? Is that the new excuse? First it's was that Coleman was flat out stupid, now he is forgetful 

Just in case you didn't know Ronnie said he felt like he was going to die backstage at the 98O from being so depleted, you think you forget something like that? 

[Hulkster]

Ronnie's best condition was 1998. This is straight from Coleman himself. You can't sit here and go based off some pictures that he was more conditioned in 99 because there are too many variables. To claim you know Ronnie's condition better than Ronnie himself is absurd.

lol based on a few pictures?

lol

try LOTS of pictures AND the VIDEO TAPE.

you don't get any more conclusive than that.

 

talk is cheap. the videos and pics (mountains of them) don't lie, or forget, like humans do.

sorry.

[Hulkster]

Nice pics Iceman!
Just further proof that Ronnie was just as sharp
as at the 2001 AC but 10-12 pounds heavier
with a smaller waist and gut.

exactly.

are you seeing this Pubes?

 

[England_1]

yeah, I never read any academic journals in earning my honours biology degree..

 


lol

Then you may have read them, but they obviously didn't register in your pea brain 

And don't try and impress me with an undergrad biology degree, honors or not. It's about as common as the sun coming up every morning.

[Hulkster]

Then you may have read them, but they obviously didn't register in your pea brain 

And don't try and impress me with an undergrad biology degree, honors or not. It's about as common as the sun coming up every morning.

these days, maybe so.

but its not common from a really good school .

[E N A N T H A T O R]

  to all 400000000000 posts here