author=Praetor Fenix link=topic=69359.msg1162865#msg1162865 date=1151652280]
Ummm ... no they don't. You are full of shit, as always. Seriously, you are so wrong.
Not even f*cking Zeppelins attached to Coleman's thighs could make that upperbody look small. Nice try though. Keep lying. Not like credibility or integrity mean anything in an anonymous internet forum where you can hide behind a homoerotic screenname like suckmymuscle.
From 2002 to 2003, Ronnie had an enormous size gain, but it was not symmetrical. His gains were mostly the result of abdominal distension, lat thickness and quad size. Check out pictures from when Ronnie was 240+ lbs and then compare to pics of him from the 2003 Olympia, and you'll see that his girth increase, in quad size, was far greater than his increase in pectoralis and deltoid mass. That made him more unbalanced than in previous years. I'm going to go even further than that, and say that, in the 2003 Olympia, Ronnies's quadriceps mass was so overwhelming that, unlike in previous years, when his quads only overpowered his calves, in 2003 they actually overpowered his entire physique from the front.
How would that be the case? Let's take thr front lat spread as an example. His lats increased in thickness considerably from 2002 to 2003, finally surpassing Dorian's, who had much thicker lats than Ronnie when the latter was competing around 250 lbs. Yey, despite his great increase in latissimus thickness, his increase in width did not accompain it. Look at Ronnie's lats in 1998, and you'll see that they were roughly as wide as in 2003 - perhaps a little bit narrower. The major increase in lat mass came courtesy of lat thickness, not width. So, obviously, mathematically, the contrast between his upper and lower bodies wen't downwards. His obliques also became thicker and he lost abdominal separation - which was never too good, to begin with. While Ronnie was never a math for Dorian in the front lat spread, his disparity between quad mass and lat width worsened his symmetry even further; while Dorian won this mandatory by a small margin when compared to the 1998 Ronnie, he wins it flat out when compared to his 2003 version.
In the front double biceps, Ronnie would still probably win, because his biceps are undoubtedly superior to Dorian's. But look at how the margin closed between them when Ronnie ballooned to 280+ lbs: Dorian shows a better taper, narrower obliques - something Ronnie had on him in 1998! -, more defined abs and, although his quads are dwarfed by Ronnie's, he shows better separation there, too - another thing Ronnie had on Dorian at his lighter version! On the abdominal-and-thighs, Ronnie might takes Dorian in out in quads, because, even though Dorian's front quad separations are no worse than Ronnie when the latter is 280+ lbs, Ronnie's quad mass simply dwarves Dorian in size. Ok. But Dorian destroys Ronnie in abdominal separations, taper and has comparable lat width. When you put his superior front quad separations into the picture - which, again, was something that Ronnie has on Dorian when he's lighter -, it is no contest: Dorian takes him out flat out.
The symmetry round. The one Coleman loses flat out when he's over 280 lbs. How would his humoungous quads affect that? Well, from the front, it makes his entire upper body look small. From the sides, Ronnie lacks enough petoral thickness to compensate for the disparity, and his defective calves don't help either, majing his entire physique focused on the part between the navel and calves. Terrible symmetry. From the back, while not technically talking about the quads but the hamstrings, the disparity holds. Ronnie always had tremendous hams, even at 280+ lbs - although far less striated than at 250+ lbs -, but from the back, his humoungous hams and glutes make his calves appear even more pathetic. A glaring weakness. Add to that the fact that his lower body is even wider, in relation to the upper one, from the front, and Dorian flat out wins the symmetry round.
You and ND love to stress calves. I will continue to repeat: they are an extremity. They do not factor into the judging the way large muscle groups do. Coleman's overwhelming advantage in quadriceps alone would be more than enough to compensate for Dorian's better calves. Couple that with Ronnie's immensely better hamstrings/glutes, its no contest whatsoever.
I disagree. Calves are a large part of the lower body, they are also musles onto themselves and are of paramount importance as far as symmetry is concerned. If calves are unimportant, then I could argue the same about biceps, which the Ronnie fans keep reminding us, every three seconds, of how much better they were in relation to Dorian's. The biceps is not as important, overrall, as the triceps - which Dorian takes Ronnie out at -, because most arm mass comes from the triceps. In fact, the calves can be seen as the biceps of the legs. It comes into play in four mandatories: the side chest, the side triceps, the rear lat spread and the back double biceps. In all of these four mandatories, Dorian's calves earns him points over Ronnie. Especially in the back shots, where the disparity between Ronnie's weak calves and his enormous hams is most evident; it costs him points not only in muscularity, but also in symmetry. Dorian's calves, even when he's 30 lbs lighter than Ronnie, is more muscular than Ronnie's, and in appropriate proportion in relation to his hamstrings. It's not so much that Dorian's calves are overwhelmingly massive; no, it's just that Ronnie's calves are so defective for his size, espeially when he's over 280 lbs. This another area where Ronnie loses out big time when he's larger: his clves become even
more of a liability, as far as symmetry goes.
In the relaxed round, Ronnie's calves make him lose points flat out: it is a glaring weakness from
all angles, although not as much from the front. If he turns to the side, Ronnie's great quadriceps sweep make his calves look even more pathetic, because his soleus mass is so small. From the back, he loses in muscularity as well as balance, because his calves are underdeveloped in relation to his hams and create an assymmetry on his lower body. Saying that calves do not matter is like saying that forearms do not: in bodybuilding, the goal is the symmetrical development of all muscles in the body, especially the small, "peripheral" ones, which add refinement and balance to one's physique. All musles matter onto themselves, as far as musularity goes, and also as far as the entire body's symmetry and balance is concerned.
How does quad size detract from lat width? Ronnie has great quad sweep, but its nowhere near as wide as the lats, thats a complete physiological impossibility. Secondly, its called an X-frame, and that is a very good thing by bodybuilding standards.
God you are such a dumbf*ck! Yes ok, his F*CKING QUADS will make his lats look small you f*cking douche, never mind the fact that his entire thigh only tapes 38".
Quad size detracts from lat width in two mandatories: the front lat spread and the front double biceps. It also detracts from the body's entire symmetry from the front. Ronnie did
not increase his lat width dramatically when he went from 250+ lbs to 280+ lbs; most of his lat size increase was in thickness. in the front lat spread, he loses flat out to Dorian for several reasons: for one, the contrast between his waist and lats-shoulders is far less dramatic than in 1998, because his obliques thickened to a much higher degree than his latissimus and deltoids epanded in width. Secondly, his abdominals, which were never in Dorian's league to begin with, became even less defined than at his lighter version. His quadrieps sweep became even more dramatic at the heavier weight, making it epand to the sides; less contrast to the deltoid and latissimus width. Point for The Yates. The same thing goes for the front double biceps, with the exception that Ronnie wins flat out in biceps and loses in everyhting else, from abdominal definition to taper, and Dorian still has comparable pectoralis thickness - even though he's 30 lbs lighter!
suckmymuscle's debate strategy:
- brag about iq and intelligence, exhibit the exact opposite in the actual thread
- make up outrageous lies and pass them as truth
- simply make a statement without a single iota of defense
- compensate for poor content with sheer volume
What lies? That Ronnie's had less separations, on his front quadrieps, at 280+ lbs, than he had at 250+ lbs? No: that's a fact. That Dorian surpasses Ronnie in upper back details when Ronnie is over 280+ lbs? No, that's a fact. That Ronnie has a massive abdominal distension at 280+ lbs, and that ruins his entire physique, in the symmetry round? No. Fact.
You just don't want to face the fact that Ronnie was at his best at 250+ lbs; you just want to believe that Ronnie would overwhelm Dorian with sheer size at his 2003 version, and that this is all that matter in a bodybuilding contest. Guess what? It isn't. Ronnie was humoungous in 2003/4, but the
quality of his mass was clearly inferior to his 1998 version, and he had
serious balance issues you just choose to ignore.
Ronnie's thighs have always been much better, regardless of the weight.
Dorian lacks quad size, separation, vascularity, striations, balance, and symmetry.
Basically, his quads are worthless in relation to Coleman. This can be seen from every/any picture.
I disagree. For several reasons. To start with, Ronnie's quads, in 2003, do dwarve Dorian's. No question about it. But where's the quality. Separations? His was no better than Dorian's when he's over 280+ lbs. Check the pics. Sure, he takes Dorian flat out when it comes to quadriceps muscularity, but that's it. Too bad that his uads, for all their size, lacked the kind of separations that he had in 1998. And too bad, also, that he never had Dorian's hardness at either weight.
You assume that size is always a good thing; no, it's a good thing if it comes with quality
and if they grow proportionally with the rest of the physique, something which was definitely not the case when Ronnie ballooned to over 280 lbs. His quads were vastly superior to Dorian in 1998, for several reasons: they were etremely separated and in
balance with the calves. Which was not the case, in 2003.
You underestimate the importance of size in modern bodybuilding. Look at the 2004 Challenge Round. It was no coincidence that the inner circle was made up of the largest competitors on the stage. Ruhl, Cutler, Schlierkamp, Badell. Jackson was the only exception.
Size is definitely one of bodybuilding's most important judging criterias, but
not if the growth comes at the expense of separations and hardness, and
not if it comes at the expense of compromising the entire symmetry of the physique. A muscle must grow in proportion to all others. This was
not the case with Ronnie at his 2003 version, where his huge quads overpowered his calves and compromised the entire symmetry between his upper and lower body, where his back had little upper bak separations and a distended midsection.
Couple that with Ronnie's outstanding symmetry, good taper, amazing X-frame, astounding muscle maturity, and impressive detail w/ striations, vascularity, and separation, top it all off with muscle maturity, he's far more than just pure size.
You are an idiot.
- Ronnie's quadriceps are larger
- Ronnie's quadriceps are more striated
- Ronnie's quadriceps are more vascular
- Ronnie's quadriceps have better separation
No. Ronnie wins only in quadrieps muscularity. in all other regards, his uads were inferior to Dorian's and certainly inferior to his lighter versions.
- Ronnie's quadriceps have better balance
(Yates vastus lateralis is underdeveloped, rectus femoris is sunken)
- Ronnie's quadriceps have better sweep
Sorry, quadriceps are NOT good quadriceps by sheer virtue of being in balance.
That is the stupidest f*cking argument I have ever heard. Besides, Coleman's quadriceps are in perfect balance with his hamstrings, though not his calves of course. Any perceived imbalance between his hamstrings and quads is imagined.
Once again, you grossly, GROSSLY overestimate calves. Its sickening.
Well, this all your opinion. But I can assure you that Ronnie did
not have better balance lower body balance than Dorian. And "muscle maturity" is not only a subjective rambling, it is not part of any official I.F.B.B judging criteria.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
