Author Topic: Dorian Yates kicks Ronnie's ass Hulkster is a punk Bitch and fuck any truce (Read 3492045 times)

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11725 on:** November 04, 2006, 02:59:46 PM »

Quote from: NeoSeminole on November 04, 2006, 02:56:45 PM

oh really? I'd like to know what Arnold thinks about a guy with twig arms.

At his best Dorian Yates' arms wern't twigs by any stretch of the imagination anyone who says the contrary simply isn't being honest with themselves .

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11726 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:01:51 PM »

His arms at his best were damn good !!

pumpster · « **Reply #11727 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:02:38 PM »

Notice that the arms get bigger and bigger as the morphing gets more pronounced. Here's what they actually looks like-about 1/2 the size as what's shown.

ND if i'm wrong produce just one other color shot like that..

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11728 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:05:01 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on November 04, 2006, 03:02:38 PM

Notice that the arms get bigger and bigger as the morphing gets more pronounced. Here's what they actually looks like-about 1/2 the size as what's shown. ND if i'm wrong come up with just one other color shot like that..

When you have nothing to work with , claim rascisim , politics and morphed pictures that sums you up , I don't use morphed pics slick.

pumpster · « **Reply #11729 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:08:43 PM »

Quote

When you have nothing to work with , claim rascisim , politics and morphed pictures that sums you up , I don't use morphed pics slick.

Didn't say you're aware of it-you're naive about that as well, apparently.

Here's the real-deal, size-wise - consistent with the one above. Compare arm size relative to his head against the morphed color shot.

The B&Ws are accurate-he's lost a lot of definition in those in order to gain size; B&W shots exaggerate the definition.

pumpster · « **Reply #11730 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:14:12 PM »

Consistent with the size here-still underwhelming. B&W shots always helped him when bigger to bring out the mostly-missing details:

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #11731 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:14:33 PM »

such amazing arms.

pumpster · « **Reply #11732 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:15:30 PM »

Oblique-overload!!....

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11733 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:18:17 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on November 04, 2006, 03:15:30 PM

Oblique-overload!!....

You're an idiot for stating the obvious , no fucking-kidding his obliques were thick , you think you're breaking new ground on this?

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #11734 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:18:24 PM »

If 95 Dorian's uninjured arm measured 20", then I wouldn't be surprised if his arms were only 19" at the 93 Mr. Olympia. It's 10x more of a liability to have 19" arms than 19" calves.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11735 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:24:55 PM »

Quote from: NeoSeminole on November 04, 2006, 03:18:24 PM

If 95 Dorian's uninjured arm measured 20", then I wouldn't be surprised if his arms were only 19" at the 93 Mr. Olympia. It's 10x more of a liability to have 19" arms than 19" calves.

You're like Hulkster you just don't get it ! Dorian's arms DO NOT lack development , who cares if Ronnie's calves are 22" they still blow in the shape , development and detail department , biggre doesn't mean better , see Colemans calves , hell see 2003 Ronnie vs 250lbs Ronnie.

pumpster · « **Reply #11736 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:27:54 PM »

Quote

You're an idiot for stating the obvious , no fucking-kidding his obliques were thick , you think you're breaking new ground on this?

This is the same guy who claims his arms and waist are just fine.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11737 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:31:44 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on November 04, 2006, 03:27:54 PM

This is the same guy who claims his arms and waist are just fine.

At his best absoultely !!

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11738 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:38:49 PM »

Yates and his INSANE rear latspread !!

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #11739 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:40:13 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on November 04, 2006, 03:24:55 PM

You're like Hulkster you just don't get it ! Dorian's arms DO NOT lack development , who cares if Ronnie's calves are 22" they still blow in the shape , development and detail department , biggre doesn't mean better , see Colemans calves , hell see 2003 Ronnie vs 250lbs Ronnie.

ha ha ha, you f*cking hypocrite. This coming from the same guy who says shape is genetic and detail is not important. Now you say Ronnie's calves suck b/c they blow in shape and lack detail. You pick and choose when it suits you.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11740 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:44:23 PM »

Quote from: NeoSeminole on November 04, 2006, 03:40:13 PM

ha ha ha, you f*cking hypocrite. This coming from the same guy who says shape is genetic and detail is not important. Now you say Ronnie's calves suck b/c they blow in shape and lack detail. You pick and choose when it suits you.

Man you can't pay attention , I've maintained striations ( genius ) are genetic and they're not going to determine a contest and shape is genetic as well and if you want to use that logic it apllies to Yates biceps

hypocrite.

pumpster · « **Reply #11741 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:45:22 PM »

Yates' latz look great-the only area where he's actually on the same page with Coleman.

Too bad the blocky waist ruins some of the taper though. $:-\$

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11742 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:46:27 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on November 04, 2006, 03:45:22 PM

Yates' latz look good-until compared with something better:

Good thing you show Ronnie with pants on lol and remember what Arnold said about the whole pose being ruined because when you flex your calves NOTHING HAPPENS !!

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11743 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:47:39 PM »

Outstanding sidetriceps and what happens to Ronnie's calves when he hits this pose? NOTHING lol

pumpster · « **Reply #11744 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:50:32 PM »

And from the front you can see that Yates doesn't quite have the width, taper or waist to compete:

LIGHTS OUT..

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #11745 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:54:42 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on November 04, 2006, 03:44:23 PM

Man you can't pay attention , I've maintained striations ( genius ) are genetic and they're not going to determine a contest and shape is genetic as well and if you want to use that logic it apllies to Yates biceps.

ha ha, now you're backpeddling. You said Ronnie's calf shape blows and lacks detail. Quit trying to save face.

pumpster · « **Reply #11746 on:** November 04, 2006, 03:55:52 PM »

Good point earlier-Yates' forearms look bigger than Coleman's MAINLY because of the upper arm deficit!!!

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11747 on:** November 04, 2006, 04:00:35 PM »

Quote from: NeoSeminole on November 04, 2006, 03:54:42 PM

ha ha, now you're backpeddling. You said Ronnie's calf shape blows and lacks detail. Quit trying to save face.

Oh it does , the shape of his calves suck , he lacks traditional diamond shape , he lack development of the gastrocmeius inner & outter heads , he lacks balance & proportion , overall his calves suck , pleanty of guy have high/short calves like Cormier , Ray etc and all have better shape & development than Coleman .

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #11748 on:** November 04, 2006, 04:02:57 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on November 04, 2006, 04:00:35 PM

Oh it does , the shape of his calves suck , he lacks traditional diamond shape , he lack development of the gastrocmeius inner & outter heads , he lacks balance & proportion , overall his calves suck , pleanty of guy have high/short calves like Cormier , Ray etc and all have better shape & development than Coleman.

I'm not denying Ronnie's calves suck, but when someone extends the same thinking to Dorian you claim it doesn't matter b/c these attributes are genetic.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #11749 on:** November 04, 2006, 04:03:27 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on November 04, 2006, 03:55:52 PM

Good point earlier-Yates' forearms look bigger than Coleman's MAINLY because of the upper arm deficit!!!

No Yates forearms are bigger because they insert lower at the wrist his forearms are like Casey Viator , Mike Mentzer , Lee Preist . Coleman has bolwing pin shaped forearms and they're not in proportion with his biceps/triceps unlike his calves they don't lack development.