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

[NarcissisticDeity]

did you forget that ronnie himself has said that dorian has the best back of all time?

And so did Samir Bannout , Two Mr Olympias can't be wrong !

[IceCold]

hulkster


why do you continually ignore quotes from other top pro bodybuilders that comment on yates' greatness and dominance?

in 93, flex labels dorian as "untouchable"

paul dillet has said that the 95 version of yates was the best that the sport has seen.  

ronnie has said that dorian has the best back, best side chest and openly admits that dorian would have beat him in 98.

clearly, these are opinions, but from very credible sources.  the next best source other than a judge, yet you and pumpster ignore these quotes bc they dont fit your argument.

explain why you do that?


ps. pumpster - we all know your silly quote from hardly speaking english sergio oliva.  you probably misunderstood him like everyone else ever did.  yes, he was right about yates gut and arm size, but that still doenst detract from his mass, conditioning, and dominance.  

[Hulkster]

hulkster


why do you continually ignore quotes from other top pro bodybuilders that comment on yates' greatness and dominance?

in 93, flex labels dorian as "untouchable"

paul dillet has said that the 95 version of yates was the best that the sport has seen.  

ronnie has said that dorian has the best back, best side chest and openly admits that dorian would have beat him in 98.

clearly, these are opinions, but from very credible sources.  the next best source other than a judge, yet you and pumpster ignore these quotes bc they dont fit your argument.

explain why you do that?


ps. pumpster - we all know your silly quote from hardly speaking english sergio oliva.  you probably misunderstood him like everyone else ever did.  yes, he was right about yates gut and arm size, but that still doenst detract from his mass, conditioning, and dominance.  

and why do you ignore quotes from Dexter, Paul Dillett, Flex Wheeler, Shawn Ray (in his commentaries in the past), Sergio Oliva, and pretty much all the current pros about how unbeatable Ronnie was when he is on?

explain THAT

haha you quote Flex back in 1993 about dorian, yet you ignore his comments in 2003 about Ronnie!

Are you an ironager?

[pumpster]

Who cares when Yates himself agrees with the getbig poll: Coleman >> Yates hahahaahahahahah

What about his twig forearms? Great arm balance.

Rocketdweeb down to the calves n' forearms argument to go with "poor lighting" and "special/unique veins".

[Hulkster]

in 93, flex labels dorian as "untouchable"

paul dillet has said that the 95 version of yates was the best that the sport has seen. 

I still find it amusing that IceCold is so fond of these comments from Paul and Flex, totally unaware of their comments following the 2003 Mr Olympia

[pumpster]

Quote
in 93, flex labels dorian as "untouchable"

paul dillet has said that the 95 version of yates was the best that the sport has seen. 

I still find it amusing that IceCold is so fond of these comments from Paul and Flex, totally unaware of their comments following the 2003 Mr Olympia

Icecold, did you hear about 9/11?

[pobrecito]

hahah, pumpster you clown, you post a picture of Yates after he won the title. bwahahah.

THIS is the only picture from 97 that matters.

[pumpster]

hahah, pumpster you clown, you post a picture of Yates after he won the title. bwahahah.

You idiot most of these are after undeserved titles-you haven't noticed this until now? hahahahahaahahahah

Speaking of which, these two shots really belong together..

[pobrecito]

You idiot most of these are after undeserved titles! You haven't noticed this yet? hahahahahaahahahah

your opinion means nothing.

The judges determine if they are deserved or not.

[whateva]

 

[pumpster]

your opinion means nothing.

The judges determine if they are deserved or not.

Pathetic backpeddle-if all that matters is suspect judging that gave him "perfect scores" for this, why are you here? 

[pobrecito]

Pathetic backpeddle-if all that matters is suspect judging that gave him "perfect scores" for this, why are you here? 

WHY are YOU here...you do nothing but post the same pathetic pictures over and over again.

[pobrecito]

[LyricTenor]

That shot of dorian is just mind blowing.

[suckmymuscle]

Sure

  What's the point of this post of yours? Do any of these pics show Ronnie having thicker and wider latissimus, teres major and teres major muscles than Dorian? No, they don't. Why are you even trying to argue this? You're the greates of all hypocrites: you show pics of Ronnie at the 2003 Ollympia to show him with greater muscularity than Dorian, and then pics of the 1998 or 1999 Olympias to show better separations and taper. Are you retarded? Like I said, I can use pics from different years because Dorian was relatively similar in muscularity, but you cannot use pics from 1999 and 2003 because of the differenced of 30 lbs of bodyweight. Sorry, but that's like comparing oranges and apples.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

this is what would REALLY happen if Dorian stood next to prime Ronnie.

  Actually, this comparison is deceiving for several reasons. Fists of all, there's very little difference in latissimus width between the two. What happens is that Ronnie's hams and glutes are disproportionally big. In the case of the hams, that can be seen as a strengh - and although it makes his calves look even more pathetic in comparison -, but the glutes, like the abdomianl muscles, should not be hypertrophied. That's a liability. So, what happens in this comparison is that Coleman is bigger overrall due to the difference in glute and ham size. If you picked up a tape measurer and measured the distance between Coleman's left and right lats when compared to Dorian, you'd see that the difference is very small. Coleman's back was much better in 1998/9, when nhe had separations there. He never had any huge size advantage over Dorian in the back department, but at least in 1998/9 he had some striations there that Dorian lacked.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

exactly. this is the point your retard friend ND did not understand.

  He  understands it perfectly: it is you who hasn't grasped the semantics of it, so I'll help you.

He was trying to claim that I had said that dorian some new development as far as back is concerned.

  "Development" refers to size; it is muscularity. Dorian did show a previously unseen level of development in the back department: his muscles were the biggest anyone had ever seen for someone that height before. My criticism was directed at you. You claimed that Ronnie took it to a whole new level in 1999 because we could see there muscles which we couldn't in any bodybuilder before. So, I explained to you that all muscles that can be seen are exactly the same in any Human Being. Ronnie did not show any muscles there that we hadn't seen before one gazillion times. If you look at pictures of Auschwitz prisioners, you'll see the exact same muscles due to their extremely low bodyfat - although far less developed

  I showed him that there is no such thing.

  You made a poin that is absurd and I corrected you...

everyone's back is the same. Its just whether or not you can see the muscles.
but the LEVEL of development is different.

  Whether of not you can see the muscles is a function of conditioning, not development. If you get a guy anbd put him in an extreme diet for months, you'll see in his back all the muscles that Coleman had in contest shape, only much smaller. Dorian took it to a new level, in 1993, because the development of his muscles was simply absurd for the time - and is still pro-level today.

  Coleman in 1999 didn not take iot to a new level because his muscular size was common-place by then and he was not extraordinary when it came to proportions either. You might prefer his round muscles and his good taper, but Dorian had even greater muscle size than Ronnie in 1993, and while his taper was slightly worse, he had a flat stomach and etched serratus at almost 260 lbs. Ronald was no incredible physique in 1999, except that his muscle shape appeals to you more.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

Sheer size, width, taper & aesthetics Yates groupies can only fantasize about:

  Dorian has him beat on size for that version. As for taper, Ronnie's advantage was not that great in 1999, and at least Dorian had a flat stomach and etched serratus separations that Coleman can only dream of. As for aesthetics, there are as many bodybuilding fans who prefer the massive, powerful look that Dorian has rather than the round muscularity of Ronald Coleman. It is a preference, and as many bodybuilders with the former look wins contests as those who posses the latter look. Oh, and Dorian was never penalized for it, since he trounced everybody else at muscularity, hardness and he was the only guy over 250 lbs who had great proiportions from head to toe.

Notice also that Coleman's triceps don't look like toothpicks alongside that back, unlike someone else..

  Too bad Coleman's advantage in inner triceps head only served him in the front double biceps, when he's flexing his arms from the front, and that's a pose he wins anyway. Conversely, Dorian's side triceps gives an entire mandatory. Not to mention that it serves him well in the back double biceps and in the relaxed round as well.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[NeoSeminole]

What's the point of this post of yours? Do any of these pics show Ronnie having thicker and wider latissimus, teres major and teres major muscles than Dorian? No, they don't. Why are you even trying to argue this?

I posted the pics to show Ronnie in 99 was just as wide as Dorian. I do agree, however, that Dorian's teres major/minor are thicker than 99 Ronnie's.

You're the greates of all hypocrites: you show pics of Ronnie at the 2003 Ollympia to show him with greater muscularity than Dorian, and then pics of the 1998 or 1999 Olympias to show better separations and taper. Are you retarded? Like I said, I can use pics from different years because Dorian was relatively similar in muscularity, but you cannot use pics from 1999 and 2003 because of the differenced of 30 lbs of bodyweight. Sorry, but that's like comparing oranges and apples.

my god, you are a dumb f*cking idiot. ha ha. This is the second time you claimed I switch between 99 and 03 Ronnie. I was merely responding to your comment that Dorian was wider than 99 Ronnie. What did you expect me to do? Post pics of Ronnie in 03? Then you would insult my reading comprehension. Sorry, but either you are mentally retarded or you have amnesia b/c you forget what you say. Here is your post I responded to.

on the back double biceps, Dorian's teres major and minor were thicker than Ronnie's in 1999, and on the lat spread, his latissimus spread wider. Sure, Dorian's waist is thicker, but since his lats are wider, the taper advantage of Ronnie is neglegible.

[carvedoutofwood]

  Actually, this comparison is deceiving for several reasons. Fists of all, there's very little difference in latissimus width between the two. What happens is that Ronnie's hams and glutes are disproportionally big. In the case of the hams, that can be seen as a strengh - and although it makes his calves look even more pathetic in comparison -, but the glutes, like the abdomianl muscles, should not be hypertrophied. That's a liability. So, what happens in this comparison is that Coleman is bigger overrall due to the difference in glute and ham size. If you picked up a tape measurer and measured the distance between Coleman's left and right lats when compared to Dorian, you'd see that the difference is very small. Coleman's back was much better in 1998/9, when nhe had separations there. He never had any huge size advantage over Dorian in the back department, but at least in 1998/9 he had some striations there that Dorian lacked.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

ronnnies obviously slightly turned to his right here... so a measurement would clearly lie... but come on, anyone can see his width in this picture completely blows dorian away... regardless, you can't dismiss dorian saying, just this past year... that ronnie is better

[nicorulez]

ND, the background pic you show of Dorian is deceiving.  His hands are turned inward as if were doing a hammer curl.  In this position, the bicep is always lengthened.  Check yourself and compare your biceps when your hands are open palmed (face up) like a curl compared to inward like a hammer curl.  The bicep is longer in the hammer curl position.  Thus, although I have never dissed Dorian's arms as much as Pumpster's, that pic does very little to show Dorian's dominance.  You can take any bodybuilder with 20+ inch arms and his arm would look similar.  What is obvious is that when he flexed, the tear was noticeable.  Nothing less and nothing more.  However, Dorian always had cut and thick lats.  Ronnie's have been on a downward spiral the last few years and hit their nadir this Olympia. 

[pumpster]

So, what happens in this comparison is that Coleman is bigger overrall due to the difference in glute and ham size. If you picked up a tape measurer and measured the distance between Coleman's left and right lats when compared to Dorian, you'd see that the difference is very small.

No amount of bizarre & desperate SUCKY logic changes the reality that Coleman's noticably bigger, more cut with better tapers and shape all-round. Yates beats him in calves, is otherwise dominated in the same way SUCKY is.

[pumpster]

So, what happens in this comparison is that Coleman is bigger overrall due to the difference in glute and ham size. If you picked up a tape measurer and measured the distance between Coleman's left and right lats when compared to Dorian, you'd see that the difference is very small.

Entirely incorrect hypothesis. Here's one without the lower body to use as an excuse:

[delta9mda]

hulkster


why do you continually ignore quotes from other top pro bodybuilders that comment on yates' greatness and dominance?

in 93, flex labels dorian as "untouchable"

paul dillet has said that the 95 version of yates was the best that the sport has seen. 

ronnie has said that dorian has the best back, best side chest and openly admits that dorian would have beat him in 98.

clearly, these are opinions, but from very credible sources.  the next best source other than a judge, yet you and pumpster ignore these quotes bc they dont fit your argument.

explain why you do that?


ps. pumpster - we all know your silly quote from hardly speaking english sergio oliva.  you probably misunderstood him like everyone else ever did.  yes, he was right about yates gut and arm size, but that still doenst detract from his mass, conditioning, and dominance. 

flex mag- mike franscios was asked what is the most amazing thing youve seen in bb'ing? "dorian yates at the 95 mr o"

[pumpster]

Yates, recent interview: "I guess Coleman wins".