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

[NarcissisticDeity]

"less than perfect conditioning"?

If ronnie was any better conditioned he would be bleeding:

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

There you have it in black & white , from someone who knows , who was there all years , Ronnie had comprable dryness to Yates in 98 NOT in 99 he was off condition wise in 1999 , this isn't debateable its fact ! to argue to the contrary is useless .

[NarcissisticDeity]

how exactly are my comparisons biased in favor of Ronnie? Please do tell. You haven't really exposed anything as much as just made an empty claim with no evidence to support it.

The evidence is your own pictures , hell you have Ronnie and Dorian at the same size weight with the same size waists NOT ACCURATE the same size calves NOT ACCURATE hell you had in one pic Ronnie slightly taller than Dorian even though his legs were spread apart , no empty claim just your pathetic attempt to justify a pregnant Ronnie beating Yates .

[nicorulez]

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

There you have it in black & white , from someone who knows , who was there all years , Ronnie had comprable dryness to Yates in 98 NOT in 99 he was off condition wise in 1999 , this isn't debateable its fact ! to argue to the contrary is useless .

Peter McGough is a Brit ND and would say such shit.  Besides, is he a physiologist?  This is as stupid a proclamation as Sucky stating that McGough guaranteed Dorian was 274 pounds at 2% BF in 1997.  Where is the friggin proof.  I could care less, but Dorian was most definitely not 2% BF in 1997; not even close.  Again, why don't you and Sucky explain to us neophytes WTF density refers to.  It is such a cryptic term that you two throw around that I figured it was mantra.  However, after careful consideration, it is totally asinine and stupid.  Give me a definition.  You can define hardness and muscularity.  If density is visual as Sucky claims, show me a reference.  I don't want to hear a bunch of cockamany BS pulled out of your butt.  BTW, who is to say that Ronnie is not more dense.  To visually assess that feature is impossible.  Stop trying to state it as fact.  I try to be even, but the BS on both sides is getting steep.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Peter McGough is a Brit ND and would say such shit.  Besides, is he a physiologist?  This is as stupid a proclamation as Sucky stating that McGough guaranteed Dorian was 274 pounds at 2% BF in 1997.  Where is the friggin proof.  I could care less, but Dorian was most definitely not 2% BF in 1997; not even close.  Again, why don't you and Sucky explain to us neophytes WTF density refers to.  It is such a cryptic term that you two throw around that I figured it was mantra.  However, after careful consideration, it is totally asinine and stupid.  Give me a definition.  You can define hardness and muscularity.  If density is visual as Sucky claims, show me a reference.  I don't want to hear a bunch of cockamany BS pulled out of your butt.  BTW, who is to say that Ronnie is not more dense.  To visually assess that feature is impossible.  Stop trying to state it as fact.  I try to be even, but the BS on both sides is getting steep.

What does McGoughs nationality have to do with wintenessing Ronnie's conditioning from year to year? I don't know if Yates was 2% in 97 but I know Ronnie's not a dry in 99 as he was in 98

[nicorulez]

My point is, he was a Yate's fanboy from the beginning.  They lived in the same city.  They were buds.  I doubt even if Ronnie was incredible in 1999 he would give him his total due.  Even you have admitted that Yates was not full par in 1997.  Anybody with objectivity can see he was the most average he ever was.  Thus, for him to define Yates as 274 pounds with 2% BF is utter hyperbole.  That is the problem.  If Ronnie's biggest guy (let us say Hulkster were a journalist) stated the same in 1994; you would call BS.  McGough is not reliable.  Nor he is impartial.  Finally, define density for me ND.  I think the board deserves a good definition since that accolade has been bantered around these boards since page one.  What the hell does density mean if it is not defined as M/V.  Inquiring minds want to know.  If you can't come up with a good definition, then friggin stop describing Dorian as having unparalleled density when you don't even know what the hell that means.  Come on man, this thread has degenerated to pithy platitudes and dismissals of the others strengths.  Both Dorian and Ronnie would be amused by the substantial BS spewed by both sides.

[NeoSeminole]

The evidence is your own pictures , hell you have Ronnie and Dorian at the same size weight with the same size waists NOT ACCURATE the same size calves NOT ACCURATE hell you had in one pic Ronnie slightly taller than Dorian even though his legs were spread apart , no empty claim just your pathetic attempt to justify a pregnant Ronnie beating Yates.

You are such a cry baby loser it's ridiculous. You come up with any accusations you can to discredit my comparisons. Let's take a look at these "inaccuracies" you are talking about.



If you drew a line across the tops of their heads, you would see that Dorian is actually taller in this pic. I took into consideration their stances and Ronnie also seems to be arching his back more.



I made Ronnie 1 inch taller than Dorian in this pic to reflect their true heights. Dorian seems to be bowing his head slightly forward which would make him appear even shorter, but I didn't include this b/c I knew you would cry "bias" if I made Ronnie more than an inch taller.



Both Ronnie and Dorian are the same height in this pic. From head to toe, everything lines up perfectly - the tops of their heads, ears, shoulders, waists, and knees. Honestly, this pic is biased in favor of Dorian b/c in reality he's shorter than Ronnie.

[Hulkster]

His back does look soft.

it does not look soft here because he has completed the pose:

 

Look at how dry the lower back is even in these shots which don't normally show off the lower back:

Please tell me you guys are not naive enough to think that Ronnie's back was soft in 99:

Look at the pics:

[Hulkster]

I heard Dorian had 33% milk fat in this shot:

you could beat him and make whipped cream:

 

[NarcissisticDeity]

My point is, he was a Yate's fanboy from the beginning.  They lived in the same city.  They were buds.  I doubt even if Ronnie was incredible in 1999 he would give him his total due.  Even you have admitted that Yates was not full par in 1997.  Anybody with objectivity can see he was the most average he ever was.  Thus, for him to define Yates as 274 pounds with 2% BF is utter hyperbole.  That is the problem.  If Ronnie's biggest guy (let us say Hulkster were a journalist) stated the same in 1994; you would call BS.  McGough is not reliable.  Nor he is impartial.  Finally, define density for me ND.  I think the board deserves a good definition since that accolade has been bantered around these boards since page one.  What the hell does density mean if it is not defined as M/V.  Inquiring minds want to know.  If you can't come up with a good definition, then friggin stop describing Dorian as having unparalleled density when you don't even know what the hell that means.  Come on man, this thread has degenerated to pithy platitudes and dismissals of the others strengths.  Both Dorian and Ronnie would be amused by the substantial BS spewed by both sides.

See this is where you lose me ! Peter McGough has gone on record as saying Ronnie Coleman 2001 ASC is the best he's personally seen ANYONE in a contest , did you read that? anyone !! now what does that have to do with them being buds? or living in the same city? nothing , Ronnie;s conditioning in 1999 was OFF from 1998 this is clearly evident , so to say Peter is no reliable or unbiased is simply not true

And density is as the name implys how dense the muscle is and very thick dense muscles is a result of superheavy training with low reps , this style of training give the muscles a very dense apperence , casey Viator had it , Mike Mentzer , Mike Francios , compare them to the king of volume someone like Paul Dillett who had a lot of volume but not much in the way of density , a good analogy would be a basketball and a bowlingball both have about the same volume but both don't have the same density , and in my opinion no one has ever coveyed the overall muscule density & thickness that Dorian Yates did , Fancios came close but his conditioning wasn't on par with Yates.

[NarcissisticDeity]

it does not look soft here because he has completed the pose:

 

Look at how dry the lower back is even in these shots which don't normally show off the lower back:

Please tell me you guys are not naive enough to think that Ronnie's back was soft in 99:

Look at the pics:

Soft in a realitive sense , realitive to Dorian , realitive to Yates , yes his back is realitively soft compared to this !!

[pumpster]

You are such a cry baby loser it's ridiculous. You come up with any accusations you can to discredit my comparisons.

Let's review the evidence:

-Recent pics confirm a mismatch. Yates is clearly dominated in virtually every respect. Coleman's conditioning is such that even Yates fortes like density are no longer just his domain.

-ND, SUCKY and assorted hangers-on embark on a backpeddling strategy revolving around meaningless pap ("density", "calves", "forearms" and my personal fave: "because").


Conclusion:


ND & SUCKY ARE CRY-BABY LOSERS.

IT'S OVER KIDZ! 

[Hulkster]

Ronnie;s conditioning in 1999 was OFF from 1998 this is clearly evident ,

bullshit.

totally wrong.

back shots are the same:






go and watch the 98 youtube video and then watch the 99 video posted on this thread.  Ronnie was better conditioned in 99, not 98.

front shots - Ronnie is way more conditioned. more detail everywhere, much dryer in the quads in 99:

[Hulkster]

98 vs 99


again, much better conditioned in 99, not 98 as ND claims.

[pobrecito]

holy F*CK! Now it's evident why Yates is so known for his dryness He is making Coleman look like a water buffalo here!

Camp Coleman needs to get their shit together....Ronnie in 2003 was nothing compared to his 99 form. He may have been bigger, but he definitely wasn't better. And if you want to argue about who wins on a quality level you better use 99 pictures

[Hulkster]

someone should make some comparison pics like that using the 99 Ronnie and 93 dorian pics.

[NeoSeminole]

And density is as the name implys how dense the muscle is and very thick dense muscles is a result of superheavy training with low reps , this style of training give the muscles a very dense apperence , casey Viator had it , Mike Mentzer , Mike Francios , compare them to the king of volume someone like Paul Dillett who had a lot of volume but not much in the way of density , a good analogy would be a basketball and a bowlingball both have about the same volume but both don't have the same density , and in my opinion no one has ever coveyed the overall muscule density & thickness that Dorian Yates did , Fancios came close but his conditioning wasn't on par with Yates.

I tried to explain this concept to Sucky, but he didn't get it. He firmly believes that muscle density is a magical property that only manifest itself in appearance - not physical structure.

[Hulkster]

dorian 93.

one ugly ass physique

[pumpster]

holy F*CK! Now it's evident why Yates is so known for his dryness  He is making Coleman look like a water buffalo here!

MAJOR BULLSHIT

[pobrecito]

Dry as a f*cking desert

[Hulkster]

more 98 vs 99 conditioning. 99 is better.

[pumpster]

The BS no longer holds - Coleman's at least as dry, and dominates everywhere else.

[Hulkster]

more 99 being more dry than 98:

[pumpster]

Poby BS refuted pt. II: No advantage for Yates on dryness.

[NarcissisticDeity]

more 99 being more dry than 98:

DRY OVERALL not just from the front and you don't know more than Peter McGough even though you think so.

[Hulkster]

even more 99 being more dry than 98.

ND, how do you shovel the amount of bullshit you speak?