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

[Hulkster]

Does the Greek Ideal say that your calves have to be bigger than your biceps and your arms/delts have no shape or detail from the front:




 

if you think this is "superior muscular balance and proportion"

as compared to this:



than you truly do not comprehend how modern (not greek) bodybuilding is judged.

[suckmymuscle]

1/ So you've decided out of the blue that size isn't one of the key criteria in BB? Who the F--- are you? Size is one of the key criteria in case you've conveniently forgotten or don't want to accept it.

2/ The "short" head you keep babbling about-when is it going to occur to you that no one else sees this? Which means you're deluded!

3/ Sorry to clue you in finally-he's right there with your hero on cuts but with more size and better aesthetics! 

  HA HA HA HA! Look at Poopster, obsessing over overhead triceps shots, which don't mean shit in bodybuilding judging criteria!

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[NarcissisticDeity]

The fact that you didn't mention biceps leads me to believe that the only Dorian you can have in this fight is the 93 version. Let's take the 98 Ronnie vs 93 Dorian. Size is close enough not to be the deciding factor. I'll give Dorian the slight edge in conditioning. That puts Ronnie slightly behind. Now lets move on to shape, detail, and aesthetics. Dorian himself has said that the 93 version of himself lacked polish and finish. You can hear his words himself http://www.muscleradio.com/past/index.html   So that means that the unpolished 93 version of Dorian faces the 98 Ronnie, a Ronnie you just yourself said looked awesome. The 98 Ronnie also didn't have the huge leg and glute imbalance you mention. So that means we have a battle of two men with roughly the same size, one with a little better condition and one with better shape, detail, and finish.  I just think that the small advantage Dorian has in condition is beaten by the superior shape, detail, and finish of Ronnie. To most people's eyes Ronnie simply looks better than Dorian. I know that is an opinion but that is what this is about. And more people have the opinion that Ronnie just has the better body. You say Dorian has an obvious adavantage in muscle balance and proportion but most people don't see this the way you do and even those that do don't see it as enough of an advantage to beat Ronnie. You're simply looking at this with to much "exactness". Look at both head to toe and Ronnie just looks better. Opinion sure, but one shared by most. And if you want to take this one step farther, we can talk about 03 Ronnie vs. 93 Dorian. I know you don't think 03 Ronnie is better than 98 Ronnie, but the comparison here, in my opinion, makes Ronnie's win even easier. He's just too big, with enough condition, to beat anything Dorian could ever come up with.

Size is close enough ? Ronnie was 249lbs in 98 and Dorian was 257lbs thats an eight pound weight advantage with being one inch shorter thats not that close , I could see if it was 3 or 4 pounds eight pounds of solid muscle is a lot but if it were a close contest little things like this do make a difference .

and we could use Dorian 1995 even with the torn bicep his overall package is unstopable and you say " well his bicep is torn " according to Roger Schwab one of the heads of the I.F.B.B. judging chair commented on the tear in 1994 and said " it made absolutely no difference to his overall package " and you can now say " well that was in relation to the guys he faced back then "  and you'd have a point , however this pose would only hurt him in one shot and thats the front double biceps pose and with his overall strenghts in the mandatories he can afford to lose this shot .

Now you insist that Ronnie has better shape & detail , I conceded that in some muscles he does and others he does not.  I don't think overall that his shape & detail are that dominating or overwhelming , he doesn't have better shaped or detailed , gastrocnemius outer & inner head , soleus or tibialis , abdominals , intercostals , serratus , obliques , forearms , lats , eractor spinae  , so lets say Ronnie has a better shaped chest his gyno in 98/99 renders that advantage moot . his quads are better shaped and detailed , lets say the triceps are a push what does that leave Ronnie with ? biceps , chest , and quads , thats not an overwhelming advantage in terms of detail & shape I wouldn't even call it a slight edge. if you were comparing Dorian to Cormeir in terms of shape I would concede but not Ronnie .

And Dorian said he was slightly more finished in 95 in relation to 93 but thats in his high standards both years were extremly dominating not anyone was even close , lets put 1993 into prospective durring the prejudging the judges actually didn't even need to call him out in the muscularity round because he was so far ahead of everyone else !! that is unheard of and I don't think thats been before or since !! Wayne Demila only called him out to be compared to Ray & Wheeler to please the crowd . now put Ronnie's win from 1998 Mr Olympia into prospective , he just barely beat Flex Wheeler by 3 points , this has to be the closest Mr Olympia ever !! now the version of Flex Ronnie beat in 1998 wasn't as sharp or detailed as the version Dorian beat in 1993 and Dorian beat him by leaps & bounds , to say 1998 Ronnie would beat Dorian at his best when he could barely beat Flex a man who Yates beat at ease is just fantasy .

Now you made the claim that Ronnie has an edge on aesthetics compared to Dorian and I always laugh when people when people associate Ronnie as being aesthetic , he may be more aesthetic than Yates but he's not going to be mistaken for Bob Paris anytime soon , a few points to remember  Dorian consistantly beat aesthetic bodybuilders and he doesn't have to conform to to someone elses ' strengts ' in order to beat them , he did just fine by being Dorian .

Now you say most people don't see Dorian's better balance & proportion and a deciding factor in the comparisions of the two but like I've said before most people overlook this and thats not wise , especially when in the I.F.B.B. judging criteria they preface their assesments with this statement
 
The judge should then survey the
whole physique, starting from the head, and looking at every part
of the physique in a downward sequence, beginning with general
impressions, and looking for muscular bulk, balanced
development, muscular density and definition.

So while most people overlook it the judges don't. another outright clear advantage Dorian has at simlar weights is muscle density , muscular bulk in 99 is moot and 1998 Dorian has 8 extra pounds I think thats another advantage however slight , and we can argue about definition , Dorian midsection , lats , etc vs Ronnies advantages which equate to my opinion to a push  and Dorian has the outright advantage in terms of balanced devlopment , factor in Dorian being the better poser of the two , not that Yates will be mistaken for Mohammed Makawwy anytime soon , but compared to Ronnie he has the better ability to properly execute the mandatory poses and show his physique to its maximum , add those all up to owning more of the mandatory poses and its very safe to assume Dorian would beat Ronnie in 98 convincingly and it may be a lot closer vs 1999 .

2003 vs anything Dorian could come up with? lol the black & white Horton pics from 1993 where Yates was 269lbs could give Ronnie at 287lbs a run for his money but the judges may go with Ronnie just based on his weight advantage but then again Ronnie's hardness at that weight especially in the back isn't great but that comparision is a whole other thread lol

[NarcissisticDeity]

Does the Greek Ideal say that your calves have to be bigger than your biceps and your arms/delts have no shape or detail from the front:


 

if you think this is "superior muscular balance and proportion"

as compared to this:


than you truly do not comprehend how modern (not greek) bodybuilding is judged.

One for you to say his biceps are smaller than his calves gives us all another peek at your desperation , you post a pic where it appears so but in reality its not so  same contest , same shot now does his biceps look smaller than his calves? yeah I thought so .

And while Dorian wont be mistaken for Steve Reeves in terms of the Greel Ideal  , he's a hell of a lot closer to it than Ronnie whos calves & forearms are the same size is that the Canadian-Ideal? 

[Hulkster]

the canadian ideal is to have a cock that is the same size as your arm. 

I love being canadian

[Hulkster]

dorian's calves were huge.

His biceps were not. In fact, they were far too small for the rest of his body.
His calves look bigger than his biceps in every pic:







so much for Dorian's "superior muscle balance and proportion"

ND you truly have no clue.

[pobrecito]

Corinth, you are absolutely right!

Front Double Biceps



Ronnie >>> Dorian

Front Lat Spread



Tie

Side Triceps



Dorian >>> Ronnie

Side Chest



Ronnie >>> Dorian

Rear Double Biceps



Ronnie >>> Dorian

Rear Lat Spread



Ronnie >>> Dorian

Abs and Thighs



Dorian >>> Ronnie

Most Muscular



Ronnie >>> Dorian

Dorian: 2
Ronnie: 5

If both men competed head-to-head at their respective best, Ronnie would win.

Let's look at this based on the pictures you posted.

Front double biceps - that picture ronnie looks to be from 99, both men at 257 lbs, Ronnie wins.

Front lat spread - again, both men at 257lbs, Dorian considerably thicker in the lats (he's gotta be thicker somewhere, both at the same weight Dorian will be more dense and muscular). Ronnie has the smaller waist and better arms. Will agree with the tie on this one.

Side tricep - Dorian has better shaped triceps plus the calves, Dorian wins.

Side chest - Ronnie has more detailed side hams, more detail in the arms, and also hits this pose better than Dorian does. What you fail to recognize here is Dorian's size advantage, how will that affect the judging? Regardless, IMO, Coleman takes this shot.

Rear dbl bi - Both striated glutes, Ronnie's hams are far more separated, Dorian far superior calves, Dorian better lower back...but again, 262lbs vs. 245lbs. That cannot be denied. Both at the same weight Coleman wins becuase of the arms IMO.

Rear lat spread - I have to go with Dorian on this. Ronnie can only match Dorian's thickness and width when he is above 265lbs. But, at this weight and above Ronnie loses detail and conditioning in his back compared to his all-time best '99 257lbs.

Ab/Thigh - This one depends on how it is judged. If Dorian can get away with his ab/calf, he will win this pose. If he is forced to flex the thigh this will expose he weak thigh separation and will spotlight coleman's in return. Regardless, Dorian's midsection is superior not only being genetically superior but also more detailed. Too close to call. Tie

Most musclular - maybe I am the only one to see it this way, but these two pictures are extremely close, a lot of the separation you are able to see in Ronnie's shoulders is being wiped out in Dorian's picture by the lighting. Due to Dorian's superior mass (257 vs. 248 in these pictures), Dorian wins. Take a 99 Ronnie and his shape and vascularity may be enough to beat Dorian on this pose but it would be close becuase remember Dorian would still be more muscular. Tie again.

From my standpoint the tally is:

Coleman - 3
Yates - 2
with 3 ties/judges calls

so as you can see, I believe it would be extremely close and would depend not only on the two competitors but also the judges expectations and demands. I don't think it would be a blowout like many of you are suggesting.

[Hulkster]

Dorian does not stand a snowballs chance in hell of ever beating Ronnie in a most muscular






as you can see, it doesn't matter whether you choose 250 pound Ronnie or 297 pound Ronnie - its not even close.



no chance.

[NeoSeminole]

Here are two more most muscular comparisons





I admit the scaling is a little off, but you get the idea.

[corinth]

Size is close enough ? Ronnie was 249lbs in 98 and Dorian was 257lbs thats an eight pound weight advantage with being one inch shorter thats not that close , I could see if it was 3 or 4 pounds eight pounds of solid muscle is a lot but if it were a close contest little things like this do make a difference .

and we could use Dorian 1995 even with the torn bicep his overall package is unstopable and you say " well his bicep is torn " according to Roger Schwab one of the heads of the I.F.B.B. judging chair commented on the tear in 1994 and said " it made absolutely no difference to his overall package " and you can now say " well that was in relation to the guys he faced back then "  and you'd have a point , however this pose would only hurt him in one shot and thats the front double biceps pose and with his overall strenghts in the mandatories he can afford to lose this shot .

Now you insist that Ronnie has better shape & detail , I conceded that in some muscles he does and others he does not.  I don't think overall that his shape & detail are that dominating or overwhelming , he doesn't have better shaped or detailed , gastrocnemius outer & inner head , soleus or tibialis , abdominals , intercostals , serratus , obliques , forearms , lats , eractor spinae  , so lets say Ronnie has a better shaped chest his gyno in 98/99 renders that advantage moot . his quads are better shaped and detailed , lets say the triceps are a push what does that leave Ronnie with ? biceps , chest , and quads , thats not an overwhelming advantage in terms of detail & shape I wouldn't even call it a slight edge. if you were comparing Dorian to Cormeir in terms of shape I would concede but not Ronnie .

And Dorian said he was slightly more finished in 95 in relation to 93 but thats in his high standards both years were extremly dominating not anyone was even close , lets put 1993 into prospective durring the prejudging the judges actually didn't even need to call him out in the muscularity round because he was so far ahead of everyone else !! that is unheard of and I don't think thats been before or since !! Wayne Demila only called him out to be compared to Ray & Wheeler to please the crowd . now put Ronnie's win from 1998 Mr Olympia into prospective , he just barely beat Flex Wheeler by 3 points , this has to be the closest Mr Olympia ever !! now the version of Flex Ronnie beat in 1998 wasn't as sharp or detailed as the version Dorian beat in 1993 and Dorian beat him by leaps & bounds , to say 1998 Ronnie would beat Dorian at his best when he could barely beat Flex a man who Yates beat at ease is just fantasy .

Now you made the claim that Ronnie has an edge on aesthetics compared to Dorian and I always laugh when people when people associate Ronnie as being aesthetic , he may be more aesthetic than Yates but he's not going to be mistaken for Bob Paris anytime soon , a few points to remember  Dorian consistently beat aesthetic bodybuilders and he doesn't have to conform to to someone elses ' strengts ' in order to beat them , he did just fine by being Dorian .

Now you say most people don't see Dorian's better balance & proportion and a deciding factor in the comparisions of the two but like I've said before most people overlook this and thats not wise , especially when in the I.F.B.B. judging criteria they preface their assesments with this statement
 
The judge should then survey the
whole physique, starting from the head, and looking at every part
of the physique in a downward sequence, beginning with general
impressions, and looking for muscular bulk, balanced
development, muscular density and definition.

So while most people overlook it the judges don't. another outright clear advantage Dorian has at similar weights is muscle density , muscular bulk in 99 is moot and 1998 Dorian has 8 extra pounds I think thats another advantage however slight , and we can argue about definition , Dorian midsection , lats , etc vs Ronnie's advantages which equate to my opinion to a push  and Dorian has the outright advantage in terms of balanced development , factor in Dorian being the better poser of the two , not that Yates will be mistaken for Mohamed McKay anytime soon , but compared to Ronnie he has the better ability to properly execute the mandatory poses and show his physique to its maximum , add those all up to owning more of the mandatory poses and its very safe to assume Dorian would beat Ronnie in 98 convincingly and it may be a lot closer vs 1999 .

2003 vs anything Dorian could come up with? lol the black & white Horton pics from 1993 where Yates was 269lbs could give Ronnie at 287lbs a run for his money but the judges may go with Ronnie just based on his weight advantage but then again Ronnie's hardness at that weight especially in the back isn't great but that comparision is a whole other thread lol

ND, I'll say this, I hope Dorian appreciates what you do for him here, man you've got your position down that's for sure.

Now, let me try to take this point by point.

Size, yes 98 Ronnie vs 93 Yates size wise is a draw. Dorian may have been 8 pounds heavier but the pictures simply don't give the size advantage to either man. I've stood right next to Ronnie at the Arnold expo and if he's 5-11 as the stats say then I'm 6 ft. tall. I"m 5-10 and he's at least an inch shorter than me. So basically they are the same height.  You say that 8 pounds may come in to play in a tight contest but my argument has been that Ronnie doesn't just win because of size but because of his advantages in shape, detail, separation, and finish, in addition to his size. I believe Phil Heath is an example of a bodybuilder who's shape helps him to make up an disadvantage he has in size. Didn't he just win two shows at a bodyweight of 215? He won on shape.

Now to 95 Dorian, I'm simply never going to agree with you that any version of Dorian with the torn biceps is going to beat Ronnie. No way. If the places were reversed ND, I know there's no way in hell you'd ever give Ronnie the nod over Dorian with an arm that looks like that. That arm is just too much of a flaw to beat someone like Ronnie with. I think you're not giving Ronnie his due here when you think like that. Ronnie has won 8 Olympias and in many opinions has set new standards for bodybuilding. So we're never going to agree on this one.

Shape. Here you've probably done your homework best, but here is also where you make your biggest mistake. You simply can't pick apart every single head and insertion point of every muscle and tally up a score sheet to determine who wins. That's not bodybuilding, that's accounting. You have to look at these men from head to toe, complete bodies. I simply think you're wrong when you say that Ronnie doesn't have the edge here. His body simply looks better. Why do you and I like Flex so much. He simply looks "good". Right? Now I'm never going to say that Ronnie looks anything like Flex, but compared to Dorian, Ronnie is definitely a different shape. He's also much more detailed, separated, and finished. He just is. It's so obvious, especially in the chest, shoulders, and arms. If you don't see this, then we'll just have to agree to disagree.  The advantage I believe Ronnie has in shape isn't overwhelming, but in my opinion it is more than enough to make up for Dorian's edge in condition.

In 93 Dorian was a monster. I'll admit it. He had no competition. And that was mostly because he was at least 20 pound heavier than Flex. No amount of shape going to make up that gap. Ronnie doesn't have that size gap with Dorian so that closes the gap right there. And if Ronnie was able to beat Flex, who wasn't at his best but still good, doesn't that tell you right there that in the judges eyes Ronnie must have some shape?

Aesthetics. I'm going to keep this one short. I'll agree Ronnie's aesthetics leave quite a bit to be desired, but next to Dorian....well, I'm going to be nice here, but an image of a truck next to a sports car does come to mind.  Edge, Ronnie. And Dorian beat more aesthetic bodybuilders by simply overpowering them. Shape can make up for size to a point, but not when we're talking 25-30 pounds.

Balance and proportion. You're simply not going to convince anyone with this argument. To most people's eyes Ronnie isn't nearly as unbalanced as you like to make him out to be. You're just not going to win any points with this argument. I'm sorry.

Density. Again, this is one of your weaker points. Dorian does indeed posses dense hard as nails muscles. Grainy crazy muscles no doubt. But so does Ronnie. Ronnie's muscles don't have that grainy look to them, but they do possess crazy detail, separation and finish. And Ronnie simply has striations in places Dorian never did. The advantage you believe Dorian gains here just isn't as big as you like to think. They possess two different kinds of muscle, neither one really better than the others in the judges eyes.

Posing, give the posing round to Dorian, Ronnie isn't going to need it.


98 Ronnie vs 93 Yates would be a war. But Ronnie simply has the detail, separation, and finish that Dorian doesn't have. Ronnie in a close fight.

Now, 03 Ronnie could beat Yates, any Yates you throw at him. The 269 pound Yates you mentioned is awesome, but those picks are a perfect example of the lack of detail I keep mentioning. He has the crazy hard grainy muscle he's known for but that's just not enough to beat a more polished Ronnie. And 18 pounds is an awful lot to overcome.

[FREAKgeek]

Somebody go back to page 1 of this thread, and read every word till you get to this post, and tell me how long it took you to do it.

[Hulkster]

the most muscular tends to showcase the shape and detail of the arms, delts and chest.

These are three areas that Dorian does not even come close to Ronnie on.

Its not a suprise that he gets anhialated.


amazing

[Hulkster]

Density. Again, this is one of your weaker points. Dorian does indeed posses dense hard as nails muscles. Grainy crazy muscles no doubt. But so does Ronnie. Ronnie's muscles don't have that grainy look to them, but they do possess crazy detail, separation and finish. And Ronnie simply has striations in places Dorian never did. The advantage you believe Dorian gains here just isn't as big as you like to think.

we have been telling this to ND for centuries now.

he really has no clue.

[NarcissisticDeity]

dorian's calves were huge.

His biceps were not. In fact, they were far too small for the rest of his body.
His calves look bigger than his biceps in every pic:



so much for Dorian's "superior muscle balance and proportion"

ND you truly have no clue.

LMFAO at no clue   anyway the offseason pics you can throw those away , hello McFly is that Dorian at his best? no I didn't think so. and how do you counter these pics? by post offseason pics lol what a tool . at his best his biceps/triceps appear to be the same size and because you didn't know thats disireable   and lets entertain your stupidity for a moment and live in Hulkster fantasy world where pink elephants fly , how is okay for Ronnie to have severly disproportionate balance in his calves and biceps/triceps but Dorian can't? uh-oh someone is a hypocrite . a common theme with your posts lol when you look at other shots its plain to see that Dorian's biceps/triceps are about the same size as his calves for you to claim other wise is wishfull thinking .

[Hulkster]

hello? McFly? you can't even see dorian's calves in this pic!

[pobrecito]

This picture just truly blows me away - the completeness head to toe, the dryness, the density. It would have been awesome to see Yates and Coleman go toe to toe at their best..

[pumpster]

obsessing over overhead triceps shots, which don't mean shit in bodybuilding judging criteria!           

SUCKMYMUSCLE

You mean they don't consider this pose, moron? The analysis would include tris blockhead, which are crucial to arm size.

[pumpster]

This picture just truly blows me away - the completeness head to toe, the dryness, the density. It would have been awesome to see Yates and Coleman go toe to toe at their best..

In that case, you're indifferent to the fact the arms aren't special & don't balance with the rest of the physique. They're clearly too small for the torso, and the shape can best be described as "forgettable" AKA banal. I expect more from a supposed "great" considering some of the other past and present multiple Olympians.

That's aside from the overly-muscular obliques & wide waist, that obviously detract from taper.

[pobrecito]

In that case, you're indifferent to the fact the arms aren't special-I expect more from a supposed "great".

Ronnie has the greatest arms in history. But Yates arms here are in perfect concert with his physique and they are big. 20" forearms anyone? How you all can deny his '93 form blows me away

[pumpster]

But Yates arms here are in perfect concert with his physique and they are big.

It's well-documented here and understood by many that his arms are too small for his torso. They are simply too small, aside from the mediocre shape and lack of cuts, refinement or aesthetics.

That you don't agree doesn't make it so; many more understand this fundamental problem with his physique.

[pobrecito]

It's well-documented here and understood by many that his arms are too small for his torso. They are simply too small, aside from the mediocre shape and lack of cuts, refinement or aesthetics.

That you don't agree doesn't make it so; many more understand this fundamental problem with his physique.

When I speak of Yates, I speak of 1993. Everything else is inferior to 1993. Same with Ronnie. Everything is inferior to 1999. You cannot look at the picture above and tell me Yates arms are small in his 257lb physique. Hell, look at the B/W pictures, his arms are as big or bigger than his head...

[delta9mda]

hello? McFly? you can't even see dorian's calves in this pic!

you couldnt see ronnies if they were in the pic

[Hulkster]

Hell, look at the B/W pictures, his arms are as big or bigger than his head...

but they had no shape, or aesthetics to speak of:



in comparison to an off-season Ronnie:



The problem with Yates arms is not only the size but the shape.

To me, the shape (or lack thereof) of his arms/delts is the biggest problem.

[pumpster]

When I speak of Yates, I speak of 1993. Everything else is inferior to 1993. Same with Ronnie. Everything is inferior to 1999. You cannot look at the picture above and tell me Yates arms are small in his 257lb physique. Hell, look at the B/W pictures, his arms are as big or bigger than his head...

His conditioning was far better in '93, but the imbalance has always been there. The only time I've seen the imbalance improved with more arm size is in those off-season B/W shots when he was bigger, but at the expense of most of his definition-he's never been able to maintain the greater size while retaining definition the way Coleman can. At that higher weight the arms were closer to being in balance but were still not quite there, and were extremely smooth as well.

That's aside from an utter lack of refinment and aesthetics as well as an almost complete lack of vascularity.

[pumpster]

His conditioning is phenomenal here, but the arms both bis & tris are still far too small for huge lats. Nothing to do with outer triceps cuts I'm referring to overall size-they're about the same size as the bis of that flexed arm.