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

[NarcissisticDeity]

how is that any different than you clinging to the cropped-to-hide-my-quads ab shot and the lower back shot?

at least the most muscular shows large parts of the body, totally blowing away your theory that ronnie was just a collection of mismatched parts not put together very well...

This most muscular crushes Ronnie's in terms of density , thickness , balance & conditioning , you can't counter this , fear this kid with a reason

[Hulkster]

ONSTAGE, the judges will pick Dorian all day.
Why?
Because he simply meets the criteria better.
Muscularity, proportion, conditioning.
STRAIGHT FROM THE JUDGES MOUTHS.

how can it be straight from the judges mouths when they NEVER judged a peak Ronnie vs. a peak dorian?

 

see, the problem is you guys post words and assume that dorian meets the criteria better.

problem is, most people on this board and most other boards believe that 98/99 Ronnie meets that criteria better than dorian ever did.

why?

shape and aesthetics. (and detail in most bodyparts too)

he had these attributes in spades compared to dorian.

[pobrecito]

how can it be straight from the judges mouths when they NEVER judged a peak Ronnie vs. a peak dorian?

 

see, the problem is you guys post words and assume that dorian meets the criteria better.

problem is, most people on this board and most other boards believe that 98/99 Ronnie meets that criteria better than dorian ever did.

why?

shape and aesthetics. (and detail in most bodyparts too)

he had these attributes in spades compared to dorian.

Here you go kid 

It's truly sad, you are reduced to posting Ronnie's best pictures to Yates' worst just to prove your "point".  What is the reason for this? ...I believe ND has hit it on the head: you fear posting great Yates shots becuase you know just how damned good he was, but refuse to admit it.

[Hulkster]

This most muscular crushes Ronnie's in terms of density , thickness , balance & conditioning , you can't counter this , fear this kid with a reason

why would I fear the worst most muscular ever seen on a mr. olympia since larry scott?

seriously ND.

how can you post bullshit about meeting the criteria better with dorian having arms and that flexed extended quad looking THAT smooth?

you don't make any sense

[pobrecito]

why would I fear the worst most muscular ever seen on a mr. olympia since larry scott?

This just proves how dumb and biased you truly are. Yates' most muscular is outstanding based alone on his superior muscularity and density. You are a bastard Hulkster.

[NarcissisticDeity]

how can it be straight from the judges mouths when they NEVER judged a peak Ronnie vs. a peak dorian?

 

see, the problem is you guys post words and assume that dorian meets the criteria better.

problem is, most people on this board and most other boards believe that 98/99 Ronnie meets that criteria better than dorian ever did.

why?

shape and aesthetics. (and detail in most bodyparts too)

he had these attributes in spades compared to dorian.

Shape? how about the shape of his calves? how about the shape of his abdominals? how about the shape of his triceps? how about the shape of his forearms? how about the shape of his glutes? give me a break shape , you're not talking about Flex Wheeler a man who had 20 times better shape than Dorian and 10 times better shape than Ronnie and Dorian soundly defeated him every single time they met , spare me the shape argument its weak and not accurate and it still carries NO weight even if it were true so either way you're shit out of luck

and what a biases , slanted comparison , every single time you post one you expose yourself as the loser you are , Dorian looked okay in the standing relaxed shot from the front , Ronnie looked better , big deal Dorian crushes him in the 1/4 turns and standing relaxed from the rear

Aesthetics  see shape above same logic applies

DENSITY - Yates
Balance - Yates
Condintiong - Yates
Bulk - Yates over Ronnie at his absoulte best

[Hulkster]

Here you go kid 

It's truly sad, you are reduced to posting Ronnie's best pictures to Yates' worst just to prove your "point".  What is the reason for this? ...I believe ND has hit it on the head: you fear posting great Yates shots becuase you know just how damned good he was, but refuse to admit it.

wow. yates standing alone.

how rare.

put yates next to ANYONE and his TAPER SUCKS:

 

[NarcissisticDeity]

why would I fear the worst most muscular ever seen on a mr. olympia since larry scott?

seriously ND.

how can you post bullshit about meeting the criteria better with dorian having arms and that flexed extended quad looking THAT smooth?

you don't make any sense

You fear Yates at his best in every pose HENCE why you post a most muscular from 1992 lmfao

Now can you post that bullshit when Ronnie isn't as balanced , denser , or as big as Dorian , probably a push in dryness but he's still down 3 and push on 1 you have nothing to work with

The crowd went haywire when Yates hit this shot and you have the ignorance to say the worse most muscular since Larry Scott lol I'm saving this quote for future reffernce LMAO

[pobrecito]

Shit, even a Rookie Yates in his first show had better conditioning than Ronnie ever achieved!

[Hulkster]

Shape? how about the shape of his calves? how about the shape of his abdominals? how about the shape of his triceps? how about the shape of his forearms? how about the shape of his glutes? give me a break shape

see, your problem is that you contradict yourself.

on one hand, you argue that the judges don't focus in on particular bodyparts - they look at the whole.

THEN,

when it comes to shape, you focus in on minor, specific bodyparts and claim Ronnie does not have better shape..

you can't have it both ways:

it terms of shape, we are talking about overall arm/delt shape, quad sweep and body taper.

we are not focusing in on the side head triceps..

[Hulkster]

This just proves how dumb and biased you truly are. Yates' most muscular is outstanding based alone on his superior muscularity and density. You are a bastard Hulkster.

and you are a pathetic troll.

so, what side are you on this week pubes?

 

[NarcissisticDeity]

wow. yates standing alone.

how rare.

put yates next to ANYONE and his TAPER SUCKS:

 

Taper is a straw that you need to grasp at , Dorian's taper was good enough and you always cling to this nonsense Dorian only looks good standing alone , yet he managed to NEVER lose a pre-judging in his Olympia career this stomps that dumb assessment  straight firsts mean he DOMINATED compared to everyone he ever compared with

[pobrecito]

and you are a pathetic troll.

so, what side are you on this week pubes?

 

Is  that the best you  can do, or is this an admission of defeat? 

[NarcissisticDeity]

see, your problem is that you contradict yourself.

on one hand, you argue that the judges don't focus in on particular bodyparts - they look at the whole.

THEN,

when it comes to shape, you focus in on minor, specific bodyparts and claim Ronnie does not have better shape..

you can't have it both ways:

it terms of shape, we are talking about overall arm/delt shape, quad sweep and body taper.

we are not focusing in on the side head triceps..

No you insist that Ronnie has better overall shape and its nonsense , there is more to shape than just parts like proportion & balance of all the parts to make up the best WHOLE you think because Ronnie has better biceps and bigger triceps his arms are better and thats poor logic , same with quads as a whole Ronnie legs suffer despite what you think is better quads , you pick parts and hyperfocus on them and I've always mainatined that the sum of his parts don't make the best whole

this sums it all up nicely

[Hulkster]

thats a sillouette using the 2003 Ronnie..

Ronnie 99/01 AC killed Ronnie 2003 in terms of shape.

[NarcissisticDeity]

thats a sillouette using the 2003 Ronnie..

Ronnie 99/01 AC killed Ronnie 2003 in terms of shape.

Same problems all years , especially compared to Dorian

[Hulkster]

Dorian's taper was good enough

to beat guys that he outweighed by 30 pounds and with crappy-by-comparison backs.

dealing with 99 Ronnie is a whole different ball game kid.

[NarcissisticDeity]

to beat guys that he outweighed by 30 pounds and with crappy-by-comparison backs.

dealing with 99 Ronnie is a whole different ball game kid.

No its NOT its not a whole new game , its a whole new game for Ronnie , Dorian's back is BETTER than Ronnie's , Dorian still has better balance and density not to mention conditioning , Dorian has to many advantages , Ronnie 99  water-logged and soft ever notice that his high watermark is considered the 2001 ASC by most critics? you ever put any thought into that ? obviously not , because he was COMPLETE for Ronnie , excluding his flaws , he had enough size , his balance was decent for Ronnie , his hardness & dryness was spot on ! 1999 isn't his best and you think it is because YOU prefer a ' fuller ' look the judges count conditioning and compared to his 01 ASC shape and Yates he's far behind

[NarcissisticDeity]

to beat guys that he outweighed by 30 pounds and with crappy-by-comparison backs.

dealing with 99 Ronnie is a whole different ball game kid.

He only outweighed this guy by just seven pounds and his back was pretty damn good 

[Hulkster]

ND, why do you say ronnie 99 was far below his 01 AC form in terms of conditioning?

based on the evidence, they are very very close:

pic for pic and screencap for screencap:

[Hulkster]

01 AC vs 99 Olympia

please explain the drastic difference, ND:

[Hulkster]

some direct screencap comparisons:

I have argued that Ronnie 99 was VIRTUALLY in about the same condition as his 98 and 01 AC showings - with added size.

these comparisons certainly back up this opinion:

[NarcissisticDeity]

ND, why do you say ronnie 99 was far below his 01 AC form in terms of conditioning?

based on the evidence, they are very very close:

pic for pic and screencap for screencap:

They were NOT very , very close I will not entertain your nonsense , why would Peter McGough make reference to his conditioning being off from 1998 , in 1999 , 2000 and why is 2001 considered his high watermark? and NOT 1999? please explain that? surely if we believe you his conditioning was very , very close why would they then chose a 244 pound Ronnie A'la 2001 over a 1999 Olympia when he was 257 pounds? you can't because his conditioning was OFF period

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

[NarcissisticDeity]

some direct screencap comparisons:

I have argued that Ronnie 99 was VIRTUALLY in about the same condition as his 98 and 01 AC showings - with added size.

these comparisons certainly back up this opinion:

Oh yes you have argued that point and its contradicted by eye witnesses and your ' proof ' besides the fact you weren't there live & in person is a few ' comparisons ' which by the way aren't accurate , differeing quality screencaps , and take this into consideration

Bob Chick GetBig Jan 15 , 2007

The judges made their decision based on what they saw live and in person. Pictures mean nothing as they can be deceiving...

So I'll take it on authority from a source who was there live & in person who specifically states he was NOT as hard or dry as he was in 1998 and that his high watermark overall condition was 2001 ASC




Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

[Necrosis]

ND your making retarded claims. dorians most muscular sucks, he lacks detail everywere compared to ronnie, you can see all three heads of the delt in ronnies MM. you know definition is an important aspect. you keep chiming in on dryness as part of conditioning, obviously detail would be the main factor in conditioning with dryness taking a epiphenomenal role to detail. his hands clasped most muscular is perhaps the worst of any mr o i have every seen with glaring imbalances and lack of detail in the arms and delts. his delts arent capped and his bicep is missing, how could one win this pose with drastic symmtrical and conditioning flaws, not to mention the poor shape, ronnies split bis, sweeping quads, wide taper, triple headed delts and vascularity that would put yates to shame.

heres yates losing in terms of size, shape, detail and dryness, you can see every striation in his muscle with great symmtry and tons of vascularity. the one armed man couldnt handle this.