Author Topic: Dorian Yates kicks Ronnie's ass Hulkster is a punk Bitch and fuck any truce (Read 3502572 times)

haider · « **Reply #14125 on:** November 23, 2006, 03:47:27 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on November 23, 2006, 03:00:03 PM

Dorian's back clearly wider and superior. Not to mention genetically wider clavicles. What's even crazier is that Coleman is 265 here to Yates' 255

whats crazier is that they're not standing next to each other in your "comparison" pic

Hulkster · « **Reply #14126 on:** November 23, 2006, 03:56:20 PM »

this most muscular blows away yates with the smooth arms and quads:

it was so good it got its own thread.

Shockwave · « **Reply #14127 on:** November 23, 2006, 03:58:36 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on November 23, 2006, 03:56:20 PM

this most muscular blows away yates with the smooth arms and quads:

it was so good it got its own thread.

Uh, you started that thread.

Hulkster · « **Reply #14128 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:01:01 PM »

this is the dumbest comparison shot of entire thread.

Ronnie 99 was just as wide with a much smaller waist.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #14129 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:02:01 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on November 23, 2006, 03:56:20 PM

this most muscular blows away yates with the smooth arms and quads:

it was so good it got its own thread.

Like Ronnie's smooth bloated midsection and smooth calves?

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #14130 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:04:13 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on November 23, 2006, 04:01:01 PM

this is the dumbest comparison shot of entire thread.

Ronnie 99 was just as wide with a much smaller waist.

And who cares who was wider? it means nothing , you don't have to be wider than Ronnie to beat Ronnie.

RocketSwitch625 · « **Reply #14131 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:05:12 PM »

Most grainy pictures don't do bodybuilders justice but these favourite 3 pics of Hulkster's are grainy and pixelated to the point where they make Coleman look a lot better than he really is. Post some real pics instead of pixelated video captures.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #14132 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:05:24 PM »

You don't have to have striations to beat Ronnie or a wider back with better taper.

pobrecito · « **Reply #14133 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:05:29 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on November 23, 2006, 04:01:01 PM

this is the dumbest comparison shot of entire thread.

Ronnie 99 was just as wide with a much smaller waist.

oh really? That shot of Ronnie is from 2001 where he was 265 lbs. Do you really think he was wider in 99 weighing 8lbs less

Just fact it, Dorian was wider and had a better back.

Ronnie is the 2nd most overrated bodybuilder due to all his lucky ass O "wins".

Hulkster · « **Reply #14134 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:05:42 PM »

Quote from: Shockwave on November 23, 2006, 03:58:36 PM

Uh, you started that thread.

no I didn't.

it is testiment to the general opinion of the other getbiggers about how much better Ronnie 99 was than dorian at his best.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #14135 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:07:16 PM »

You don't need a better taper to beat Ronnie.

pobrecito · « **Reply #14136 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:08:14 PM »

Dorian's back clearly wider and superior. Not to mention genetically wider clavicles. What's even crazier is that Coleman is 265 here to Yates' 255

Hulkster · « **Reply #14137 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:08:29 PM »

Quote from: RocketSwitch625 on November 23, 2006, 04:05:12 PM

Most grainy pics don't do bodybuilders justice but these favourite 3 pics of Hulkster's are grainy and pixelated to the point where they make Coleman look a lot better than he really is. Post some real pics instead of pixelated video captures.

I have numerous times you moron:

next time, pay attention.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #14138 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:08:55 PM »

You don't need biggers arms and striated triceps to beat Ronnie

Hulkster · « **Reply #14139 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:09:57 PM »

ronnie's 99 taper was 100x better than that horrible 2001 pic thanks to much smaller obliques..

it is something that everyone seems to forget.

pobrecito · « **Reply #14140 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:10:18 PM »

Gustavo is just killing Coleman there

Yates would embarrass coleman

Hulkster · « **Reply #14141 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:10:44 PM »

ND why are you posting pics of Ronnie in 2005 when he was over 40 years old?

99 blows him away.

RocketSwitch625 · « **Reply #14142 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:11:28 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on November 23, 2006, 04:07:16 PM

You don't need a better taper to beat Ronnie.

And look at Coleman's evil eyes there. He looks like a witch doctor.

pobrecito · « **Reply #14143 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:11:36 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on November 23, 2006, 04:09:57 PM

ronnie's 99 taper was 100x better than that horrible 2001 pic thanks to much smaller obliques..

it is something that everyone seems to forget.

I am not referring to taper.

I simply use that picture to illustrate absolute width where Dorian is clearly superior. Nobody has ever claimed Dorian had a better relaxed taper than Ronnie, as he didn't. But he DID have a superior taper in the ab/thigh due to his wider lats, despite his wider waist.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #14144 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:12:15 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on November 23, 2006, 04:09:57 PM

ronnie's 99 taper was 100x better than that horrible 2001 pic thanks to much smaller obliques..

it is something that everyone seems to forget.

It doesn't matter all your imaginary advantages for supposedly beating Yates his moot , you don't need them to beat Ronnie.

pobrecito · « **Reply #14145 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:12:52 PM »

Again.

Hulkster · « **Reply #14146 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:13:45 PM »

LOL:

ND and Pubic are like two (dumb) peas in a pod.

pobrecito · « **Reply #14147 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:15:15 PM »

Again, advantage Yates

Hulkster · « **Reply #14148 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:15:59 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on November 23, 2006, 04:12:15 PM

It doesn't matter all your imaginary advantages for supposedly beating Yates his moot , you don't need them to beat Ronnie.

so you are saying that because Jay beat a 2006 43 year old Ronnie that you don't need these advantages? Or a 2001 worst ever shape Ronnie that almost lost?

tell me ND, how many people beat Ronnie in 1999?

God, I am glad you were never on a debate team..

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #14149 on:** November 23, 2006, 04:16:46 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on November 23, 2006, 04:13:45 PM

LOL:

ND and Pubic are like two (dumb) peas in a pod.

What does that have to do with Gustavo beating Ronnie despite ot having bigger arms , despite not being as big overall in the side triceps? nothing . your imaginary strengths are easily beatable by men who aren't as great as Yates.