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

[suckmymuscle]

Dorian carried a good 10-15 lbs extra in his huge midsection. There are also difference in bone thickness and body fat composition. It's ignorant to say that b/c Dorian weighed 15 lbs more, it must have been strictly all lean muscle. Don't get me wrong. I believe Dorian was larger in some areas like traps (they were longer, not necessarily thicker) and calves. However, Ronnie carried more overall muscular bulk. His arms are definately larger. His pecs are thicker from top to bottom and longer. Dorian's chest sat higher on his torso and most of its mass was concentrated in the lower pecs. Ronnie's delts are bigger than Dorian's. You even commented that his delts overpowered his larger-than-Dorian's chest from the side. Ronnie also had bigger quads and glutes.

  You're parroting my argument here for why Dorian had more lean mass than the 1999 Coleman, sport, but you lack my deductive logical intelligence. So to help you, let's go over this again:

 1. Dorian carries more pounds at a similar bodyfat level = more lean mass.

 2. He has less sub-cutaneous water = more lean mass

 3. His bones are thicker, but they have a lower mineral Calcium density - men of West African ancestry have a much higher mineral bone density than Caucasian males = they even out here.

4. Dorian's hips and waist are wider, but his stomach is flatter than that of the 1999 Coleman = they even out here.

 5. Dorian's muscles look flatter than Ronnie - even in 1995 -, because they have a lower level of intramuscular water = more lean mass per pound.

  In conclusion, odds are that the 1995 Dorian carried slightly more muscle mass than the 1999 Coleman, and much more than the 2001 ASC Ronnie. You have been owned by me for the gazillionth time, so fuck off and delete your account to save face.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Iceman1981]

More wishful thinking

The comparisons of the compulsory poses cannot be overemphasized
as these comparisons will help the judge to decide
which competitor has the superior physique from the standpoint of
muscular bulk, balanced development, muscular density and
definition.


Front Lat Spread (see Figure 2)
Standing face front to the judges, with the legs and feet a
short distance apart, the competitor will place the open
hands, or clenched fists, against, or gripping, the lower
waist or obliques and will expand the latissimus muscles.
At the same time, the competitor should attempt to
contract as many other frontal muscles as possible. It
shall be strictly forbidden for the competitor to pull up on
the posing trunks so as to show the top inside of the
quadriceps.
The judge should first see whether the competitor can
show a good spread of the latissimus muscles, thereby
creating a V-shaped torso. Then the judge should
continue with the head-to-foot survey, noting first the
general aspectsof the physique and then concentrating on
the more detailed aspects of the various muscle groups.


3. Side Chest (see Figure 3)
The competitor may choose either side for this pose, in
order to display the “better” arm. He will stand with his
left or right side towards the judges and will bend the arm
nearest the judges to a right-angle position, with the fist
clenched and, with the other hand, will grasp the wrist.
The leg nearest the judges will be bent at the knee and
will rest on the toes. The competitor will then expand the
chest and by upward pressure of the front bent arm and
contract the biceps as much as possible. He will also
contract the thigh muscles, in particular, the biceps
femoris group, and by downward pressure on his toes,
will display the contracted calf muscles.
The judge will pay particular attention to the pectoral
muscles and the arch of the rib cage, the biceps, the leg
biceps and the calves, and will conclude with the head-tofoot
examination. In this pose the judge will be able to
survey the thigh and calf muscles in profile, which will
help in grading their comparative development more
accurately.

Read the criteria Dorian simply meets it better , density , balance , conditioning , size , Dorian has Ronnie covered.

I'm sorry, but he doesn't compare to this.

[Iceman1981]

Don't worry Matt Yates has you covered 

That's the only front pose that he looks condition in and the side tri. That's it, take a look at the rest.

[Iceman1981]

One Dorian has a thicker back where ? much thicker traps , much thicker lats , and lower back , Dorian has lats that insert near his waist and Ronnie on the otherhand has a shorter torso with slightly higher lats this explains why he doesn't appear flat in this pose he has a shorter torso ! this is a perfect example and spare me the excuses Ronnie isn't flexed yet because this is how he does his back double biceps shot

Notice a his clearly thicker traps , lats , lower back ?

Yeah, go ahead and use a bad shot of Coleman.

[Iceman1981]

where? You must be looking at pics on your computer b/c the pics posted here show Ronnie with a thicker back. That last shot you posted from 97 shows Ronnie with thicker lats than Dorian, and Ronnie's back became even better later on. I don't know how you can say that Dorian's lower back was thicker when you cannot even see it from the side.

Where did Dorian's lower back go?

I posted that first pic before and they run from it when they see it. I have many more shots of yates flat back.  Dorian has a great back, but not as good as Coleman's. I just don't get it. The more I see yates physique, the more things I see wrong with it. Good physique, but it's not like what every yates fan is trying to make sound like.

[Iceman1981]

2 totally different things.

a black and white pic is the original - dorians' shot.

the problem is that those pics of coleman are not real - nothing matches them - even the same shots in the same poses.

his color doesnt match - that's how you can tell.

for example.

the pics posted of 96 Olympia are of awful quality.  however, dorian's, shawn, nasser all have the same color on pics of better quality - and everything else related to the 96 Olympia.

shawn or paul (or any black bber) color will not change bc of the picture quality.  

the only thing that will change is details, not complextions.  

Ok, which Dorian pic is real? This is the samething. In one of yates pic he is darker than the other and different color. This is the same situation.

[Iceman1981]

Look at these pictures , look who has the thicker lats , lower back and traps

I beleive he is speaking about the back double bi shot. This happens everytime. We show a pic of yates back double bi and show you how flat his back looks compared to Coleman's and , all you guys can do is ignore it and post pics of other poses.

[NeoSeminole]

You're parroting my argument here for why Dorian had more lean mass than the 1999 Coleman, sport, but you lack my deductive logical intelligence. So to help you, let's go over this again:

1. Dorian carries more pounds at a similar bodyfat level = more lean mass.

2. He has less sub-cutaneous water = more lean mass

3. His bones are thicker, but they have a lower mineral Calcium density - men of West African ancestry have a much higher mineral bone density than Caucasian males = they even out here.

4. Dorian's hips and waist are wider, but his stomach is flatter than that of the 1999 Coleman = they even out here.

5. Dorian's muscles look flatter than Ronnie - even in 1995 -, because they have a lower level of intramuscular water = more lean mass per pound.

In conclusion, odds are that the 1995 Dorian carried slightly more muscle mass than the 1999 Coleman, and much more than the 2001 ASC Ronnie. You have been owned by me for the gazillionth time, so f**k off and delete your account to save face.

ha ha ha, it's too easy to defeat you. Ronnie in 99 had full round muscle bellies and a small waist, and weighed the same as 95 Dorian. It's not farfetched that Dorian was carrying extra weight in his huge midsection. Just look at the damn thing. I wouldn't be surprised if he was carrying 10-15 lbs more than Ronnie in there.

[suckmymuscle]

ha ha ha, it's too easy to defeat you. Ronnie in 99 had full round muscle bellies and a small waist, and weighed the same as 95 Dorian. It's not farfetched that Dorian was carrying extra weight in his huge midsection. Just look at the damn thing. I wouldn't be surprised if he was carrying 10-15 lbs more than Ronnie in there.

  I was refering especifically to the 2001 ASC Ronnie. But yes, the example is valid when applied to the 1999 Ronnie, too, although to a lesser extent. Here's more or less what I said:

  "So the 1995 Dorian is slightly more muscular than the 1999 Ronnie, but much more than the 2001 ASC Ronnie."

  Why is this example still valid when it comes to the 1999 Ronnie? Simple:

 - Ronnie was heavier in 1999 than at the 2001 ASC, but he had a distended gut, which he lacked at the 2001 ASC. This means not all of the extra weight he had in 1999 was lean mass.

 - Dorian's hips and waist are wider, but his stomach is flat. Ronnie's waist is smaller, but his gut protrudes forward = they are even here.

 - Dorian and Ronnie weighted the same, with similar bodyfat levels = they are even here.

 - Dorian had less subcutaneous water at the same weight = more lean muscle mass.

- Dorian's muscles had less intramuscular water - the reason why his muscles look flatter than Ronnie's = more lean mass per pound.

 - Dorian's bones are thicker, but Ronnie's are denser = they are even here.

  Conclusion: mathematically and logically, odds are that, as I've already elucidated, Dorian was slightly more muscular than the 1999 Ronnie. Owned...yet again.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[NeoSeminole]

Dorian's hips and waist are wider, but his stomach is flat. Ronnie's waist is smaller, but his gut protrudes forward = they are even here.

you make this too easy for me.

[the shadow]

you make this too easy for me.

so whats your next pic is gonna be of dorian??how big or small his dick is as compared to ronnies

[NarcissisticDeity]

the "great" ND is never wrong, and his comparisons are less biased than mine.

Lets assume the scale if off  it has absolutely nothing to do with the thickness of his lats , traps , and lower back you can clearly see a major difference and you never have a right to bitch about anything , ever !! 

[NarcissisticDeity]

yeah honestly i never post here, and truthfully am not interested, but i had to point that out because it's ridiculous.  the whole fuckin thing is ridiculous to me.  i don't follow bodybuilding too much, but it's real obvious that ronnie in his prime has a better physique than dorian in his prime.

i honestly don't understand how people can see that differently, but take that for what it's worth.

No kidding you don't follow bodybuilding too much 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Ronnie 99 full muscle bellies lol

[Bear]

Surely the more pleasing taper owing to superior width (lats flare out noticeably more and with a smaller waist), bigger delts (yes this is clearly the case), much much bigger and better arms, more peeled glutes and hams, and a general appearance of more nooks and crannies in the whole back complex make this a 100% complete ownage for camp Coleman. Even if his calves are unbelievably shit (despite actually being quite huge), his ginormous 3D lats, rhomboids, traps etc are just far too much for Yates, and just infinitely more impressive to look at - even with Yates' patented 'shrink-wrapped' look which hasn't really been matched since.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Surely the more pleasing taper owing to superior width (lats flare out noticeably more and with a smaller waist), bigger delts (yes this is clearly the case), much much bigger and better arms, more peeled glutes and hams, and a general appearance of more nooks and crannies in the whole back complex make this a 100% complete ownage for camp Coleman. Even if his calves are unbelievably shit (despite actually being quite huge), his ginormous 3D lats, rhomboids, traps etc are just far too much for Yates, and just infinitely more impressive to look at - even with Yates' patented 'shrink-wrapped' look which hasn't really been matched since.

Its not even an accurate scale lol no way in hell are Ronnie's calves bigger than Dorians and I've never once see a back shot that can touch this from Ronnie

[NarcissisticDeity]

1998 and 1999 lol

[the shadow]

1998 and 1999 lol

hahhhhaha..what a cow

[NarcissisticDeity]

99/00 I can cover every single year he won the Olympia

[NarcissisticDeity]

2001/2002

[the shadow]

2001/2002

thats one ugly cow

[NarcissisticDeity]

2003/04

[the shadow]

2003/04

hahahahahahah..is ronnie 9 months pregnant in these pics???

[Hulkster]

the Dorian nuthuggers aren't known for their intelligence. I already dealt with the same shit that you're describing. If you criticize Dorian's back for looking flat in the rear double biceps, they post a shot of him relaxed or hitting a rear lat spread. They don't understand this tactic doesn't prove that his back wasn't flat in the rear double biceps - it only shows that his back looked thick in other poses.

exactly.

[Hulkster]

the pics aren't just darker, they are also better quality. Notice how much clearer Ronnie looks in the second pic. It obviously came from a different source. Why can't your dumbass understand that?

exactly. the first shot is blurry for fuck's sake