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

[carvedoutofwood]

I find that the people who are usually obsessed with calves have horribly fat and sloppy physiques growing up… so their calves develop in order to continuously lift their heavy ass’s… their only save face is to wear shorts in the winter to show that theyre not a complete mess…  this is not to say that the average BB fan doesn’t appreciate good calves, but nobody outside ND and a few others would rank them above virtually any other body part

[pumpster]

I find that the people who are usually obsessed with calves have horribly fat and sloppy physiques growing up…

And/or they're:


D-E-S-P-E-R-A-T-E

[suckmymuscle]

Those comparisons are like "before" & "after" pics, and they know it. Comedic, like comparing John Grimek to Sergio Oliva.
Thus the desperate recyclement of calves, forearms and "density" arguments.

  Yeah, that's all I've been saying in my last hundred posts or so. I mean, I wrote over one thousand paragraphs explaining why Dorian would defeat Coleman and yet you keep on insisting that my arguments somehow only envolve calves, forearms and density. The fact is that you can't give a single logical rebuttal to the points I make. So what do you do? You pretend that my whole arguments revolve around that. Pumpster, your stupidity is only surpassed by your dishonesty.

Translated: we've hit bottom of the barrel after comparing these shots. [/b]

  Actually, before the posedown video of the 1993 Olympia, I thought Dorian was only among the top five or so bodybuilders in history. After seeing that, I now consider him the greatest of all times. As for the Ronnie videos, I had already seen it years before this thread even started, so I owned you.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[pumpster]

Actually, before the posedown video of the 1993 Olympia, I thought Dorian was only among the top five or so bodybuilders in history. After seeing that, I now consider him the greatest of all times.

When in 2005 did you begin following BB?

[BEAST 8692]

as good as dorian was condition wise, etc, you just can't bypass those arms.

then there are ronnie's calves.

so it comes down to arms versus calves.

ok, i haven't assisted in concluding this debate whatsoever.

[NarcissisticDeity]

You simple, simple man.

Only upper seperation and sweep.

How about better natural shape?

Deeper cuts?

Muscles in the lower quad? (anyone ever noticed dorian actually apears to be missing muscles down there).

If ronnies quads are only better than dorians in those regards you listed, then how are dorians quads better than ronnies?

Sartorious development? Hardly a trait sufficient to justify dorian havin better quads.

Bottom line: Ronnies quads piss all over dorians.

When will you get this?

People's patience on this board/thread is beginning to run out. 

Whats funny is you're stating something I never said , I never said Dorian's quads were better , you can go on and on about how poor Yates quads are and its laughable , because at his best his quads were just fine , in no way shape or form are Dorian's quads as bad as Ronnie calves , Dorian's quads ONLY lack great upper seperation & sweep , they're massive , cut , balanced and dense and they match his calves

lets run with Ronnie's quads are so much better , his legs aren't , a collection of impressive parts that don't create a balanced whole , again great quads spotlight pathetic calves and I'm glad people's patience is running out , it means I'm doing my job of educating the ignorant.

[NarcissisticDeity]

So the only advantage Ronnie enjoys is more sweep with better seperation. cool.

Your calf argument can be reversed easily to say Yates' calves don't mean shit when his poor quads are taken in to account, WHICH THE JUDGES LOOK FOR IN EVERY MANDATORY POSE.

Yates= Good Y frame, poor X frame. This isn't the 70s old man.

No the calf argument can't be reversed because Dorian's quads ARE NOT as pathetic as Ronnie's calves , Ronnie's calves lack , shape , size , proportion , baance , detail & seperation , Dorian's quads lack sweep & great upper seperation BIG difference

and how can it be an x-frame when the lower half of the X is missing? and calves my friend can be seen in every pose NOT quadriceps , an calves are asked for by the judges in every single pose.

[pumpster]

Whats funny is you're stating something I never said , I never said Dorian's quads were better , you can go on and on about how poor Yates quads are and its laughable , because at his best his quads were just fine , in no way shape or form are Dorian's quads as bad as Ronnie calves , Dorian's quads ONLY lack great upper seperation & sweep , they're massive , cut , balanced and dense and they match his calves

lets run with Ronnie's quads are so much better , his legs aren't , a collection of impressive parts that don't create a balanced whole , again great quads spotlight pathetic calves and I'm glad people's patience is running out , it means I'm doing my job of educating the ignorant.

blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

Conclusion: Yates > Columbu

[NarcissisticDeity]

as good as dorian was condition wise, etc, you just can't bypass those arms.

then there are ronnie's calves.

so it comes down to arms versus calves.

ok, i haven't assisted in concluding this debate whatsoever.

Dorian has arms and at their best are huge , balanced and seperated , Ronnie's calves are MIA

[natural al]

dorian 94 vs. Ronnie 99

sort of puts things into persective just how bad dorian was in 1994:

no, not at all.  First those shots of Dorian aren't even from the Olympia.  second you take the worst year of a guys career and put them up againts what you consider Ron's best?  At least try to play fair.  how does everyone else from that 94 show look compared to Ronnie.  How much do you think the lighting comes into play?  The lighing is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa y better in the ronnie shots, they're closer, on a better angle and the pics are higher quality.   I'm not saying Ron doesn't look awsome cause I think he does, I'm not saying Dorian looks awsome cause I don't think he does there but I'm saying try to be a little mroe consistant when.........what the hell am I saying?  This thread is 500+ pages long and I expect anybody in here to listen to reason?  What the hell am i thinking?

[BEAST 8692]

dorian has arms like ron has calves.

they just don't flow with the rest of them.

[carvedoutofwood]

This is where you are showing your bias.  Dorian's arms are at least as weak as Ronnie's calves.  They are probably more flawed, but at the LEAST, it is a push.

i would agree that both ronnies calves and dorians arms may be equally flawed... but thats not to say that arms wouldnt still out value calves in any and every bodybuilding contest... by a lot

[pumpster]

Here are better pictures of those tiny arms.

To novices like ND: they call em "show" muscles ND - now finally you understand that arms are show muscles, because they matter more, except to internet BB nerds desperate to prolong an inevitable conquest of "twigs" Yates. Yates doesn't have much to show when it comes to show muscles! Calves have never ever been in that category..

Prediction: ND will immediately & desperately post side-tri shots that have nothing to do with his deficiencies.

[carvedoutofwood]

dorian has his wrists torqued so hard in that pic.... his hands facing twelve and two or some nonsense just to creat the allusion that they are at all symmetrical

[NeoSeminole]

[pumpster]

Is this the "good" or the "bad" arm? Who can tell?

[NarcissisticDeity]

This is where you are showing your bias.  Dorian's arms are at least as weak as Ronnie's calves.  They are probably more flawed, but at the LEAST, it is a push.

This is where your lack of knowlege shines through , simply put your statement is nonsense , period.

Dorian's arms mind you arms are no where near as weak as Ronnie's calves

Dorian's biceps at his best were huge , developed , while not as good as Ronnies still no where near as weak as the delusional claim

Dorian's triceps are outstanding , huge , seperated , great shape , not lacking in development

Dorian's forearms are world class outstanding shape & size and his arms at his best are balanced throughout at groups

Ronnie's calves suck , they are probably the worse of ANY Mr Olympia , they lack size , diamond shape , development  , seperation or the gastrocnimeus inner & outer heads , they're HIGH and lack balance & proportion in relation to his quads

Matt you're way off base on this one.

[raskil]

Yates' physique had a hardness in the way it looked that Coleman has never had. He was granite.

[pumpster]

Yates' physique had a hardness in the way it looked that Coleman has never had. He was granite.

I thought so to, until seeing these shots. Even with great hardness, Yates looks soft in comparison:

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=69359.12200

[pobrecito]

Pumpster owned for the 105th time

[pumpster]

More filler from the loser.

[pumpster]

Dorian's triceps are outstanding , huge , seperated , great shape , not lacking in development

He doesn't have great size, as has been proven repeatedly. ND makes claims then looks like an idiot when he can't prove it. Followed by side-tri shots that show only great cuts.

No great tri size to be found anywhere other than side tri cuts..

[NarcissisticDeity]

1993 Mr Olympia Dorian was so far ahead of anyone , so many light years above and beyond of everyone he wasn't even called out in the muscularity rounds !! thats unprecedented !!

[pobrecito]

Dorian's arm huge here....Coleman's calves twigs are far far worse

[NarcissisticDeity]

Yates' physique had a hardness in the way it looked that Coleman has never had. He was granite.

You got that right !!