Visual evidence should be used in addition to video, primary accounts, and logic. Using these resources, it would be foolish to name Wheeler the best bodybuilder of all-times....especially considering he never even won the Olympia.
I never said Wheeler is the greatest bodybuilder ever, you idiot. I said that if he had the size that Ronnie had in 1999, with the same muscle roundness, completeness and taper that he had at 225 lbs, then he's be the greatest bodybuilder ever. Ronnie is not a larger version of Wheeler by any stretch of the imagination. Learn to read. And visual accounts are not based on preference for shape, but on an objective evalauation of muscularity&symmetry from most angles and while contracting different muscles. As for logic, I win there, as I've demonstrated that Ronnie would not have the same symmetrical advantages over Dorian that Wheeler had, for reasons of taper and muscular completeness. The 1999 Coleman has a great advantage in muscularity over Wheeler with a symmetry that, although not as good, was enough to defeat him. It ad nothing to do with Coleman being more muscular
and assymmetrical and aesthetic as Wheeler.
I do agree Flex has smaller joints and rounder muscle belies; however, Coleman's waist in the 98 and 99 season was not considerably larger than Flex's,
This statement of yours is utterly false. This is especially true considering that Ronnie had a distended gut in 1999, whereas Wheeler had a flat stomach and a wasp waist.
and not nearly to the degree of Yates'. I contend by virtue of his superior clavicle width, and similar waist size, Ronnie has a better taper from all angles.
You contention is wrong. Ronnie might have equivalent taper from the back, but that's it. From the front in the relaxed round, Wheeler's his taper was superior. From the sides, Wheeler had a flat stomach. The only angle where Ronnie had an equivalent taper to Wheeler was from the back, in virtue of his wider lats.
This taper advantage would become even more pronounced in the abs and thigh mandatory pose as the width of the latissimus and not the shoulder girdle becomes the determinant of taper.
You have just parroted one of my lines. Unfortunately for you, this is simply not true, because we all know that Ronnie was always notoriously sub-par in the abs-and-thighs, having relatively wide obliques and terrible abdominal separations. Dorian had better taper than Ronnie in the abs-and-thighs; Wheeler kills him.
Your comparison of Ronnie and Flex are flat out bogus. Coleman surpassed Wheeler in all bodybuilding criteria, and therefore renders any comparison of Wheeler to Yates, and then Yates to Coleman invalid.
I never did. It was Hukster who said that Ronnie had the same attributes as Wheeler, only wit 30 lbs more of mass. He was basically saying tat Ronnie is a larger Wheeler. Now, of course the reason both Dorian and Ronnie defeated Wheeler was due to greater muscularity, but Ronnie would not have the same advantages in taper and muscle roundness at 257 lbs than Wheeler had at 225 lbs.
By the way, your assertion that Ronnie defeats Wheeler in all bodybuilding criteria is wrong. Wheeler would defeat Ronnie flat out in the symmetry round due to his better taper from two of the three angles in the relaxed round, his smaller glutes, superior abs, better calves and overrral superior structure, wit longer legs and a shorter torso.
Now you are bordering upon the absurd. Flex has never been known for dryness, as Yates or a 98 Coleman was. In my opinion, Ronnie's conditioning in the 1998 Olympia was second only to Dorian at the 1995 Olympia, and surpassed Dorian's 93 condition.
I beg to differ: Wheeler's conditioning at the 1993 ASC and even at the 1993 Olympia were light-years ahead of anything that Coleman ever brought to the table. Even in 1998, which I think was Ronnie's best perfromance, his glutes and hams were not a sdry as Wheeler's in 1993.
I have already voiced my sentiment that Ronnie had a better taper from all angles than Flex. Even despite Flex's smaller waist, Ronnie has a supreme advantage in shoulder and latissimus width. Mark one point for Ronnie.
Wheeler has better taper in the relaxed round both from the frotn and the sides. From the back, they're roughy the same. In the mandatories, Wheeler had better taper in the abs-and-thighs, the front lat spread the side chest and the side triceps. Wheeler's classical taper was on his hallmark strenghs. I just relaized how stupid your argument was when you said Ronnie had a better taper than Wheeler in the abs-and-thighs. Ridiculous. This was not the case even in 1998, let alone 1999.
Now, as for separations, the 1999 Ronnie had nearly as many, or as many, as the 1993 Wheeler. However, to achieve this at a weight of 257lbs is what made Coleman superior to his peers, in addition to his excellent conditioning. Moreover, every advantage Flex had over Dorian would be magnified by Ronnie due to his vastly superior muscularity when compared with Wheeler. As it has been pointed out, it is far easier to be separated and conditioned at a low bodyweight (such as Flex's 215lbs in 1993) than it is at nearly 260lbs. This is what separated Coleman and Yates from their peers.
So Ronnie with a distended gut, inferior taper from most angles, bigger joints and an inferior structure is a bigger version of Wheeler? No, he wasn't. And Dorian was never had great separations, so your argument is mute. What separated Dorian from others were his combination of mass with hardness, not separations. And as for conditioning, your argument is even stupider because the 1999 Coleman was not as conditioned as a 1993 Olympia Flex...and Dorian at is best was more condituioned than Wheeler.
Since bodybuilding is fairly subjective, it is hard to argue with your contentions here, especially considering I have not seen any definition of symmetry, from you or the IFBB judges. However, this visual evidence in the front double biceps is clearly showing a symmetrical advantage for Coleman.
Symmetry is a skeletal and muscular quality, and yes, it has been defined by the I.F.B.B. The ideal bodybuilding structure is one characterized by wide clavicles, narrow hips and relatively long legs in relation to the torso. As for muscles, symmetry refers to the proportiona development of the muscles. If a muscle grows 10%, then all the oters must also grow 10% to maintain symmetry. Ronnie is lacking both in skeletal and muscular symmetry, because, like Shawn Ray, he has comparatively a big torso in relation to his thigs. As for muscular symmetry, he has large, unmanly glutes, no calves, and his biceps overpowers both his triceps and forearms. Of course, this is pushing it, because no man wins the Sandow without having a structure that is at least excellent.
Now, as far as balance and proportion is concerned, I say Dorian is superior in that regard to Coleman. However, your claim that Dorian has superior symmetry to Coleman is false, as all the visual evidence points to Coleman having superior symmetry, especially when compared with a 1995 Yates whose left biceps was significantly shorter and smaller than the right biceps. This fault is a severe liability to Yates, and is almost unexplicable how you could receieve straights first from all judges in lieu of such a fault.
No, Dorian's biceps torn biceps is far less of a symmetrical liability than Ronnie's distended gut and disproportional muscular development. Why? Visibility and relevance. The biceps are relatively hidden in most angles and from most poses, so Dorian's torn biceps was not much of a liability. Ronnie's gut is visible during transition, in the relaxed round, during the execution of te side triceps and the side chest and it is even visible from te front. Ronnie's overdeveloped glutes and sub-par calves hurts him in all poses from the back. His calves even compromise the side triceps shot, adding to his inferior lateral triceps head. Dorian had wider hips than Ronnie, and that is a symmetrical liability, but Dorian has a more proprotional frame wen it comes to the lengh of his legs to his torso. Dorian has a better proportionality between his muscle groups than Ronnie. Dorian's torn biceps is only visible in the front double biceps, and that is a pose that Ronnie wins regardless. Aliitle muscle that is hidden most of the time is by no means a graver compromise to Dorian's symmetry than all of Ronnie's faults put together.
Then so it will be.
As I have said before, I didn't have the time as I was preparing for exams. However, now I can devote more time to this thread
.
I'm shacking on my boots. From what I've read from you so far, you seem like a down-graded version of Hulkster.
How old are you? 12? Anything I have said in this thread does not even rival some of the remarks made on this site. As well, you have been known more than once to use foul language in regards to other posters. Grow up and get over it.
You're just a troll. I think that the only thing that I, Nicorulez, Hulkster and Pumpster agree is that you just want to provoke both sides.
Do whatever you please. Just make sure that you don't confuse fact with fiction, as you do fairly often.
The
fact is that Ronnie was never on Wheeler's league wen it comes to symmetry, bot skeletal and muscular. The
fact is that Ronnie's advantage in shape and separations would by no means tip the scales in Ronnie's favor over Dorian, because the latter was still more muscular&symmetrical from most angles and in most poses and had other qualities to his muscularity that Ronnie lacked. The
fact is that the 1999 Ronnie is not a larger version of Wheeler in any way.
OwnedSUCKMYMUSCLE
