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. 
This might be the dumbest sentence to ever come from you. Bodybuilding is
not objective in the manner of measuring muscularity or symmetry. The difference between a 257lbs Yates and a 215lb Wheeler may be black and white, but not so between a 257lbs Yates and 257lbs Coleman. And it doesn't matter if Ronnie did not have as great of symmetry as Flex, he still had an advantage over Dorian in that area. Point for Coleman.
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.
Once again, sucky making claims with no proof. Coleman had a better taper than Flex
from all angles. This is irrefutable.
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.
Yet again, a false statement from the master of long-winded bullshit, suckmymuscle
See the above pictures. This disproves you flat out. Any utterance from you claiming Flex had a better taper from the front and you will be deemed the biggest imbecile on GetBig.
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.
My argument was not concerning who would win the pose. I was only concerned with proving your assinine claim that Flex had a better taper in all situations except from the rear.
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.
Ronnie had inferior muscle roundness to Flex, but a superior taper
from all angles. This is irrefutable as proven by the visual evidence. None of your long-winded babbling can change that. So quit wasting our time.
The bottom line is that despite the fact that Flex may have not been on Flex's level in terms of aesthetics or symmetry, he still has a considerable advantage of Yates in this critereon. 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.
Oh really? Then why did Ronnie defeat Flex in 1999 with straight first in all rounds?
Owned. 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.
Not only do you have zero proof for this retarded statement, but I doubt anyone here would agree with you. Ronnie's condition in 98 and 99 was second only to Yates in 95.
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.
I've already proven this to be wrong. Quit wasting our time with this garbage.
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.
Again, faulty logic from SMM. Wheeler's condition has
matched Coleman's at his best. This voids your entire argument.
Oh, and, did you mean "moot"
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.
Laughable. Completely laughable.
It is completely inexplicable how Yates received straight firsts in symmetry when he was clearly more unsymmetrical in the front double biceps compared to his closest rivals.
Yates is no more symmetrical than Nasser or Ray here, and certainly not more symmetrical enough to merit straight firsts WITH a torn bicep!
I'm shacking on my boots. From what I've read from you so far, you seem like a down-graded version of Hulkster.
Your level of education is comical. I'd love to hear what you do for a living. I need a good laugh today. Oh, and learn to fucking spell. I'm sick of reading posts with the spelling of a 5 year old.
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.
And you are an imbecile. Comprende?
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.
Quit comparing Flex and Ronnie. It doesn't help your faulty argument anyways. As I have already stated, Flex may have had an advantage in symmetry over Ronnie, but Ronnie still carries an advantage over Dorian here. Combine that with the fact that visually Yates and Coleman are indistinguishable in muscularity, and it's easy to see how the judges could pick Coleman as the winner. In fact, this scenario is more likely than Yates defeating Coleman, albeit possible.
Now I will patiently wait for more garbage from suckmymuscle with 0 proof. To put suckmymuscle's posts in perspective, imagine a scientific journal with invalid or no empirical data and it not being peer reviewed. It would be considered useless and garbage. The same can be said of anything SMM posts.
Peace. 
