Author Topic: Dorian Yates kicks Ronnie's ass Hulkster is a punk Bitch and fuck any truce  (Read 3567706 times)

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16000 on: December 06, 2006, 08:27:52 PM »
 You contradict yourself because you first said that Ronnie was as wide as Dorian, and then you changed that and said that they look as wide. These are not the same thing. The bottom line is that you were unable to prove your assertion

Easily proved-pause it at :45 and measure the screen, dumbass..Coleman wider, even at a lower bodyweight than he was later, and with the narrower waist, better taper.




Stop debating this SUCKY, you look like more of a moron.
 
Game, set & match. 8)

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16001 on: December 06, 2006, 08:36:13 PM »
Cause and effect determines only that two properties interact in a pre-determined way; it does not determine why the pattern is as such.

your definition of causality is different than the definition given to me by usmokepole. My contention is that a law which says everything that happens must have been caused by something, contradicts itself and therefore cannot be regarded as a "law." I deleted the rest of what you typed b/c it had absolutely nothing to do with my comments.

delta9mda

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7365
  • Team Pussy Claad/ ya know I'm sayin?
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16002 on: December 06, 2006, 08:40:23 PM »
  You contradict yourself because you first said that Ronnie was as wide as Dorian, and then you changed that and said that they look as wide. These are not the same thing. The bottom line is that you were unable to prove your assertion, so you changed that to an opinion. Sorry, but an opinion is not a statement of fact. I couldn't care less what you think on this issue; either Ronnie is as wide as Dorian or he is not. My assertion is that odds are that Dorian is wider. I can't prove it, but I have reasonable evidence. You, conversely, flat out said that Ronnie was as wide as Dorian, and gave absofuckinglutely not proof besides irrelvant visual evidence, which doesen't prove shit.

  Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha...just because you say so? Again, I don't care what you think about the issue based on visual evidence, since the issue is not visual: you either prove that Ronnie was as wide or you don't. So far, you have failed.

  Irrelevant.

  I sure know what the brachialis muslce is, dumbshit, and I stand by what I said: Ronnie's biceps and triceps dwarfed his brachialis and forearms. The arrogance you have in saying that I don't what it is, since I'm way smarter than you.

  "Arms" do not exist as a bodybuilding category. Get that, "dipshit"? The arms are a complex bodypart which showcases different parts from different angles and positions of contraction. Ronnie's arms were sure bigger overrall than Dorian's in his 2003 form, but Dorian still held his own very well in many ways. Dillet had 23" arms before Ronnie, and he never did that well in poses that showcase the arms beside the front double biceps, and he certainly didn't do very well in as a pro.

  :'(

SUCKMYMUSCLE
owned again

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16003 on: December 06, 2006, 08:41:54 PM »
owned again
Come back in another 100 pages with something else equally inane.

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16004 on: December 06, 2006, 09:38:11 PM »
From the comments it's clear that SUCKY's brachialis is extremely well developed between the ears.

A SUCKY classic hahahahaahahahahaahahaha hahahahahahahahahahaha

  Again, you have yet to debate me on any topic whatsoever. It's amazing that you have no shame. I think that everyone here, even in the Colmeman side, can agree that I owned you hundreds of times at this thread. Besides, you shame is compounded by this. But then, you're shameless. :-\

SUCKMYMUSCLE

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16005 on: December 06, 2006, 09:43:16 PM »
  I think that everyone here, even in the Colmeman side, can agree that I owned you hundreds of times at this thread.

No one's been more soundly humiliated than "Mr. resistence" the self-proclaimed "grad student of physiology." Embarassing.

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16006 on: December 06, 2006, 10:00:24 PM »
again, where did I contradict myself? I don't see how saying that Ronnie and Dorian were the same width, and saying they look equally as wide is a contradiction.

  It is a contradiction, "dipshit" ;D. because looking the same width and being the same width are two very different things. If you took a picture of a building from 500 ft away and then one of Mount Everest taken from 30 miles away, it would look just as big as a the building. Visual comparisons are far from accurate, sport, and the bottom line is that you didn't prove your assertion. Game over.

Quote
the issue here is entirely visual you dumbass.

  No, it is not, dumbshit. I don't how wide their lats look like, since what matters is the mathematical meaure of their lats. You claimed that Ronnie's lats were just as wide; prove it, you son of a bitch!

Quote
For you to claim it's not is a pathetic attempt to make your lame guessing argument look stronger despite a lack of evidence on your behalf. Since nobody measured both their lat widths, all we have is pics and videos to compare.

  Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Thanks for agreeing with me! You have just proved my point! Since their respective lats were never measured, then we have no way of knowing who was wider. The difference between me and you, c.u.n.t, is that I never said that I'm sure Dorian was wider; I said that all things indicated that. You, conversely, have asseted that Ronnie was just as wide. Oh, and by the way, there's far more evidence in my side than yours, dumbshit, since at least my argument is logically reasonable, while all you do is post some comparisons when they're facing the camera from a different angle, have different waists, etc. You suck dick and so those your bullshit comparisons. ;)

Quote
I find it amusing you try to dismiss photo comparisons made by Pubes and me. What a coincidence that 2 people working independently both arrived at the same results, not once, but multiple times. Furthermore, there is direct video evidence that shows Ronnie and Dorian were the same width.

  Million sof people working independetly have come to millions of wrong conclusions. What's your point, dumbshit? "Direct video evidence". Wtf? Unless the video showed, in bold letters, that they had the exact same lat width measurement by saying the number of the measurement, I just don't care foer the video.

Quote
of course you would call a video of Ronnie and Dorian onstage together under the same circumstances irrelevant when it doesn't agree with you. ::)

  Ok, what if I said that, based on the video, Dorian is wider. You wouldn't agree with it, but would you be able to prove me wrong based on the visual evidence? No, you wouldn't. Of course, I wouldn't be able to prove that Dorian was wider either. The bottom line is that your methods were proved to be ineffective to prove your hypothesis. You have failed, "dipshit". ;D ;)

Quote
face it, you are wrong kid.

  Face it: you're as lost on this argument as Ronnie was when he competed with Dorian. ;D

Quote
I still don't think you know what the brachialis muscle is, otherwise you wouldn't say Ronnie's were poor. If anything, they might have been too big for his biceps. I dare you to circle his brachialis on the pic I posted of Ronnie hitting a most muscular. Prove to me you know which muscle it is.

  Oh, I'm gonna circle the muscle.., ::) when all I had to do, in case I didn't know where the muscle is located, would be to do a simple google search for an anatomy chart and find it. NeoSperminole: you're a retard. :P

Quote
You are out of your f*cking mind if you think Dorian's arms held their own against 03 Ronnie's. It's not even close.

  They held their own pretty fucking well, tou dumb c.u.n.t. Do you think he would defeat Dorian in the side triceps shot with an inferior triceps, a distended gut and no calves? The arm's msucle mass is only visible entirely in the front double biceps, so Ronnie's size advantage wouldn't work that great for him. I'll match these arms against that of the 2003 Ronnie any day. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE








suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16007 on: December 06, 2006, 10:08:47 PM »
your definition of causality is different than the definition given to me by usmokepole. My contention is that a law which says everything that happens must have been caused by something, contradicts itself and therefore cannot be regarded as a "law." I deleted the rest of what you typed b/c it had absolutely nothing to do with my comments.


  Yes it has, and you have been proven wrong. Just because there is an original cause in this reality does not mean that it was, itself, caused by something. If you define a pattern of interaction between given properties, you create a language to descibe it. This description is arbitrary because all deductions made from a set of axioms pressupose that the axioms cannot be questioned.  So, trying to explain cause and effect with logic is like trying to explain the existence of numbers with mathematics. It can't be done, because the non-arbitrarity of logic is local, and it is iself globally arbitrary. See the works of Betrand Russel, Wittgenstein, Max Tegmark and Richard Feynman. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16008 on: December 06, 2006, 10:12:10 PM »
Easily proved-pause it at :45 and measure the screen, dumbass..Coleman wider, even at a lower bodyweight than he was later, and with the narrower waist, better taper.




Stop debating this SUCKY, you look like more of a moron.
 
Game, set & match. 8)

  Ugh...the video doesen't prove anything, moron. There''s no such thing as reliability of measures that are visually infered. You'd fall flat on your face to realize how different the measures of bodybuilders who appear to be of the same size are. The more this thread moves on, the more sophomoric your arguments become. ;)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16009 on: December 06, 2006, 10:13:07 PM »
No one's been more soundly humiliated than "Mr. resistence" the self-proclaimed "grad student of physiology." Embarassing.

  Ok. ::)

SUCKMYMUSCLE

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16010 on: December 06, 2006, 10:57:20 PM »
It is a contradiction, "dipshit" because looking the same width and being the same width are two very different things. If you took a picture of a building from 500 ft away and then one of Mount Everest taken from 30 miles away, it would look just as big as a the building. Visual comparisons are far from accurate, sport, and the bottom line is that you didn't prove your assertion. Game over.

again, how did I contradict myself? I didn't say Dorian was wider and then later say Ronnie was. Your analogy is horrible b/c I'm not talking about comparing a mountian and a building. I'm comparing 2 bodybuilders who are almost the same height and weight. Here's a video of Ronnie and Dorian onstage together under the same conditions (lighting, camera angle, distance, etc) that proves they were the same width. You're going to have to do better than that kiddo. ;)



Quote
No, it is not, dumbshit. I don't how wide their lats look like, since what matters is the mathematical meaure of their lats. You claimed that Ronnie's lats were just as wide; prove it, you son of a bitch!

yes, it is purely visual you dumbass since nobody measured their lats. We are only left with pics and videos. How the hell else are we supposed to compare who was wider? I already proved Ronnie was just as wide as Dorian.

Quote
thanks for agreeing with me! You have just proved my point! Since their respective lats were never measured, then we have no way of knowing who was wider. The difference between me and you, c.u.n.t, is that I never said that I'm sure Dorian was wider; I said that all things indicated that. You, conversely, have asseted that Ronnie was just as wide. Oh, and by the way, there's far more evidence in my side than yours, dumbshit, since at least my argument is logically reasonable, while all you do is post some comparisons when they're facing the camera from a different angle, have different waists, etc.

what a sad, pathetic little creature you are. You have been reduced to hiding behind semantics b/c I have defeated all your other arguments. Whether you said Dorian looks wider, or claimed he was, is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. You act like by saying Dorian looked wider instead of straight out affirming that he was grants you some kind of immunity from providing evidence, yet you zealously defend your argument that he was wider than Ronnie. ::)

Quote
Million sof people working independetly have come to millions of wrong conclusions. What's your point, dumbshit? "Direct video evidence". Wtf? Unless the video showed, in bold letters, that they had the exact same lat width measurement by saying the number of the measurement, I just don't care foer the video.

anecdotal evidence hardly disproves what I said. Face it, you are wrong.

Quote
Ok, what if I said that, based on the video, Dorian is wider. You wouldn't agree with it, but would you be able to prove me wrong based on the visual evidence? No, you wouldn't. Of course, I wouldn't be able to prove that Dorian was wider either. The bottom line is that your methods were proved to be ineffective to prove your hypothesis. You have failed, "dipshit".

but Dorian is not wider in the video. Go check for yourself.

Quote
Oh, I'm gonna circle the muscle.., when all I had to do, in case I didn't know where the muscle is located, would be to do a simple google search for an anatomy chart and find it. NeoSperminole: you're a retard.

ha ha ha, you're too afraid to circle it now b/c you know it will just make you look retarded. Please enlighten us all and circle Ronnie's "poor brachialis" so that we all may see. This will be good. ;D







Quote
They held their own pretty fucking well, tou dumb c.u.n.t. Do you think he would defeat Dorian in the side triceps shot with an inferior triceps, a distended gut and no calves? The arm's msucle mass is only visible entirely in the front double biceps, so Ronnie's size advantage wouldn't work that great for him. I'll match these arms against that of the 2003 Ronnie any day.

not even close kiddo! Posting a pic of 1 muscle head of one muscle of the arm is hardly proof that Dorian's arms held their own against Ronnie's.

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16011 on: December 06, 2006, 11:04:36 PM »
Yes it has, and you have been proven wrong. Just because there is an original cause in this reality does not mean that it was, itself, caused by something. If you define a pattern of interaction between given properties, you create a language to descibe it. This description is arbitrary because all deductions made from a set of axioms pressupose that the axioms cannot be questioned.  So, trying to explain cause and effect with logic is like trying to explain the existence of numbers with mathematics. It can't be done, because the non-arbitrarity of logic is local, and it is iself globally arbitrary. See the works of Betrand Russel, Wittgenstein, Max Tegmark and Richard Feynman.

I never tried to explain causality with logic. The law of cause and effect, as given to me by usmokepole, cannot be assumed b/c it contradicts itself. I already explained why using 1 empirical and 2 logical objections.

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16012 on: December 06, 2006, 11:08:55 PM »
No one's been more soundly humiliated than "Mr. resistence" the self-proclaimed "grad student of physiology." Embarassing.

don't forget these priceless gems from Suckmyasshole ;D

Of the two main biceps poses, Dorian actully wins one, the side tris.

what's the point of big musles if you lack the separations to display them?

Secondly even though Ronnie surpasses Dorian for lat thickness, Dorian still has thicker rhombois than Ronnie.

And the British Muscle&Fitness magazine repoted that Dorian's right arm flexed tapered at 52 centimeters in circumference for the 1995 Olympia.

Ok, first of all, I never said that Dorian's arms were 52 cm. I said they were 52 or 53 centimeters.

I find it hard to believe that so many people would waist their times writing me PMs just to blow smoke up my ass.

Besides, you're seriously deluded if I'm going to waist my time with a worthless internet fanboy moron who doesen't even know how to evaluate a bodybuilding physique, and actually has the galls to believe that he knows anything about what he's talking about.

No one at this board is more intelligent that me. No one.

NeoSeminole

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5589
  • Ronnie > Dorian
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16013 on: December 06, 2006, 11:10:31 PM »
ask him how his sobriety is coming along. He still hasn't given an answer.

Suckmymuscle,how are ya doing with the whole sobriety thing?Good I hope.

I heard his liver is suing him for damages.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83581
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16014 on: December 07, 2006, 01:42:33 AM »
I don't get how anyone could say any version of Dorian beats Ronnie of 2003.  He would have Dorian beat by upwards of 30 pounds of muscle.  How can you ignore that much sheer muscle size?  Even at 287 Ronnie wasn't exactly a slouch in terms of shape and symmetry either.  His waist was wider than it was at lower body weights but that is expected and he hid it well in most poses (both lat spreads for instance).  Ronnie would beat Dorian in that form simply by virtue of how much better he looks in the rear lat spread - the only place Dorian wouldn't be dwarfed there would be the calves.

You act like Dorian never faced anyone bigger than him . Nasser El Sonbaty was 5'11" and weighed 285 pounds and a 205 pound Shawn Ray beat him , Dorian beat Nasser despite being lighter , he beat a 318 pound Lou Ferrigno , 280 pound Fux , 280 pound Ian Harrison a 260 pound Mike Francios who was shorter at 5'8"

Dorian at his best is clearly better conditoned than Ronnie 2003 and while Ronnie had a walk in the park with Cutler & Dexter in 03 Yates is a whole other story.

IceCold

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4878
  • Getbig!
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16015 on: December 07, 2006, 07:02:50 AM »
I don't get how anyone could say any version of Dorian beats Ronnie of 2003.  He would have Dorian beat by upwards of 30 pounds of muscle.  How can you ignore that much sheer muscle size?  Even at 287 Ronnie wasn't exactly a slouch in terms of shape and symmetry either.  His waist was wider than it was at lower body weights but that is expected and he hid it well in most poses (both lat spreads for instance).  Ronnie would beat Dorian in that form simply by virtue of how much better he looks in the rear lat spread - the only place Dorian wouldn't be dwarfed there would be the calves.

ronnie was huge in 03 and still had decent shape and symmetry, but if he stood next to yates with his conditioning, it would appear that ronnie was in guest posing mode. 
R.I.P. DIMEBAG DARRELL ABBOTT (1966-2004)

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16016 on: December 07, 2006, 07:05:22 AM »
ronnie was huge in 03 and still had decent shape and symmetry, but if he stood next to yates with his conditioning, it would appear that ronnie was in guest posing mode. 

Conditioning isn't the only factor dude, how many times more must it be said that you're obsessed with it and with Yates? This isn't a balanced perspective & only reminds of your warped position.

I'm not gonna bother responding to your inevitable defensive reaction post, which will include more desperate personal stuff and insults (because you're all class haahahahaah).

MikeThaMachine

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5994
  • WTF Happened, BBing Is Dead. I Didn't Miss A Thing
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16017 on: December 07, 2006, 07:07:33 AM »

I'm not gonna bother responding to your inevitable defensive reaction post, which will include more desperate personal stuff and insults (because you're all class haahahahaah).

But that's exactly what you do ::)
I

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16018 on: December 07, 2006, 07:08:18 AM »
But that's exactly what you do ::)

Mike the 21-year old novice contributing absolutely nothing. hahahaahahahah

IceCold

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4878
  • Getbig!
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16019 on: December 07, 2006, 07:20:55 AM »
Conditioning isn't the only factor dude, how many times more must it be said that you're obsessed with it and with Yates? This isn't a balanced perspective & only reminds of your warped position.

I'm not gonna bother responding to your inevitable defensive reaction post, which will include more desperate personal stuff and insults (because you're all class haahahahaah).

its not only conditioning, just like its not only bicpes.

conditioning and size are the 2 most important factors in a contest (assuming the symmetry and balance is decent).

you can be the biggest but with no conditioning, you'll be placed low.

if you are the most conditioned guy and the smallest or one of the smallest, you also wont place that high.

the person who has the best combo wins.

no one has matched dorian's combo of size and conditioning.

ronnie in 99 was close but had more striations and details than dorian, but wasnt as hard or as dry. 

which is better?

i dont know, but i have my preference. 
R.I.P. DIMEBAG DARRELL ABBOTT (1966-2004)

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16020 on: December 07, 2006, 10:09:35 AM »
  Ugh...the video doesen't prove anything, moron. There''s no such thing as reliability of measures that are visually infered. You'd fall flat on your face to realize how different the measures of bodybuilders who appear to be of the same size are. SUCKMYMUSCLE

WEAK EXCUSE:

If you're cognitively challenged, measure the screen:

Coleman's considerably WIDER + SMALLER WAIST = FAR SUPERIOR TAPER. And this was Coleman at a lower bodyweight.
Yates is obliterated, overpowered by sheer muscle and superior tapers. It's such a mismatch that even density & hardness don't help much. ;D Same mismatch on X-taper. hahaahahahahah



Game, set & match.. Pumpster nails it (again).."like shooting fish in a barrel"..;D

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83581
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16021 on: December 07, 2006, 10:47:14 AM »
WEAK EXCUSE:

If you're cognitively challenged, measure the screen:

Coleman's considerably WIDER + SMALLER WAIST = FAR SUPERIOR TAPER. And this was Coleman at a lower bodyweight.
Yates is obliterated, overpowered by sheer muscle and superior tapers. It's such a mismatch that even density & hardness don't help much. ;D Same mismatch on X-taper. hahaahahahahah




One his NOT considerably wider in fact he's NOT wider at all the picture you posted his Ronnie throwing his lats forward and his arms way out to the sides , Dorian is standing straight up like you're supposed to standing in the ' standing relaxed ' pose Ronnie can't even do this pose correctly

And you're patting yourself on the back for what? he fucking lost lol 6th place he was lucky to get a call out with Yates , Dorian finished with straight firsts , what good did his x-frame , superior taper , smaller waist do? nothing he couldn't even beat a 205 pound Shawn Ray .

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16022 on: December 07, 2006, 10:49:14 AM »
One his NOT considerably wider in fact he's NOT wider at all the picture you posted his Ronnie throwing his lats forward and his arms way out to the sides , Dorian is standing straight up like you're supposed to standing in the ' standing relaxed ' pose Ronnie can't even do this pose correctly

And you're patting yourself on the back for what? he fucking lost lol 6th place he was lucky to get a call out with Yates , Dorian finished with straight firsts , what good did his x-frame , superior taper , smaller waist do? nothing he couldn't even beat a 205 pound Shawn Ray .


Empty excuses from a loser, as always..hahahahahahahaha


Coleman overwhelming Yates even in '96, on size, lat width, waist size and taper. Not even close; Yates looks like a "before" pic. ;D

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83581
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16023 on: December 07, 2006, 10:51:11 AM »

Empty excuses from a loser..hahahahahahahaha

who lost?  ;) Dorian won with a perfect score

What good did a 250 pound Ronnie Coleman's x-frame do , and his superior taper and his smaller waist and his better quadsweep ? you have nothing to work with pumpster.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 83581
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: Hulkster I'm calling for a Truce
« Reply #16024 on: December 07, 2006, 10:54:33 AM »
 ;)