Author Topic: Dorian Yates kicks Ronnie's ass Hulkster is a punk Bitch and fuck any truce (Read 3527236 times)

Hulkster · « **Reply #22725 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:31:02 PM »

more:

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #22726 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:31:31 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 01, 2007, 04:29:48 PM

1998 vs. 1999 screencap comparisons:

thanks to Iceman for the great shots!

Obvious difference in quality

98 V 99 pic , clear difference

Hulkster · « **Reply #22727 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:32:35 PM »

again:

Hulkster · « **Reply #22728 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:33:36 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on February 01, 2007, 04:31:31 PM

Obvious difference in quality

98 V 99 pic , clear difference

your 'clear difference' is apparently not as clear as you think it is...

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #22729 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:34:53 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 01, 2007, 04:33:36 PM

your 'clear difference' is apparently not as clear as you think it is...

To idiots who's argument is contingent on Ronnie 99 being just as dry? lol sure sure kid

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #22730 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:36:14 PM »

Don't forget these 98 shots

Hulkster · « **Reply #22731 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:38:16 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on February 01, 2007, 04:34:53 PM

To idiots who's argument is contingent on Ronnie 99 being just as dry? lol sure sure kid

typical "I'll ignore everything and just laugh" ND response...

bottom line is this:

he looked great at both shows.

you can nitpick hardness all you want, but the bottom line is this:

he looked better overall in 1999 - the added fullness made him look like he would explode. he was that full and dense:

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #22732 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:40:24 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 01, 2007, 04:38:16 PM

typical "I'll ignore everything and just laugh" ND response...

bottom line is this:

he looked great at both shows.

you can nitpick hardness all you want, but the bottom line is this:

he looked better overall in 1999 - the added fullness made him look like he would explode. he was that full and dense:

No one ever denied he looked great at both shows , hardness isn't knitipicking its part of conditioning , I agree he does look better fuller but he's noticeably softer than 98 and 01 , and Ronnie 99 would look like playdough next to a bigger harder & drier Dorian Yates this is a fact !

pobrecito · « **Reply #22733 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:41:37 PM »

Ronnie does not look "dense" at all....just soft and puffy.

This is dense

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #22734 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:43:36 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on February 01, 2007, 04:41:37 PM

Ronnie does not look "dense" at all....just soft and puffy.

This is dense

Thank you ! Density is a result of short insanely intense work outs , that type of thickness & density shows you busted your ass like Viator , Mentzer , Fancios its the byproduct of training and its part of the criteria

Hulkster · « **Reply #22735 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:44:08 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on February 01, 2007, 04:41:37 PM

Ronnie does not look "dense" at all....just soft and puffy.

This is dense

and smooth (arms and quads)

benchthis · « **Reply #22736 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:45:42 PM »

do you losers sleep at night

Hulkster · « **Reply #22737 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:46:54 PM »

yes, ronnie looked soft and puffy in 99:

Pubic, does the wind whistle through your ears when you walk?

pobrecito · « **Reply #22738 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:53:16 PM »

Somebody is in love with the most-muscular hahahahahah.....Hulkster you are dumber than horse shit. The Most-muscular is meaningless. Fuck, it wasn't even a mandatory pose in Yates' day. Chalk up another point for Yates hahahahahaah

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #22739 on:** February 01, 2007, 04:59:00 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on February 01, 2007, 04:53:16 PM

Somebody is in love with the most-muscular hahahahahah.....Hulkster you are dumber than horse shit. The Most-muscular is meaningless. f**k, it wasn't even a mandatory pose in Yates' day. Chalk up another point for Yates hahahahahaah

Here is an IFBB judge on who had the best most muscular at the 1994 Mr Olympia and chest and LEGS and back

" Best Most Muscular - Yates. When he poses , everything explodes. "

" Best Chest - Yates and Levrone-torn pec and all. "

" Best Legs - Yates from top to bottom "

" Best Back - Yates. He has too much back to be compared. "

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #22740 on:** February 01, 2007, 05:38:27 PM »

Check out the INSANE conditioning of Yates

RocketSwitch625 · « **Reply #22741 on:** February 01, 2007, 05:39:08 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on February 01, 2007, 04:36:14 PM

Don't forget these 98 shots

LOL PWNED

pobrecito · « **Reply #22742 on:** February 01, 2007, 05:41:16 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on February 01, 2007, 05:38:27 PM

Check out the INSANE conditioning of Yates

holy mother of god

NOBODY has ever been that fucking dry...nobody

RocketSwitch625 · « **Reply #22743 on:** February 01, 2007, 05:49:59 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 01, 2007, 03:53:03 PM

no, since his arms and quads are just as crappy by comparison in the clear shot of the same pic:

$:-\$

You can think whatever the fuck you want asshole. I see Yates destrying Coleman in that comparison.

RocketSwitch625 · « **Reply #22744 on:** February 01, 2007, 05:58:11 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on February 01, 2007, 04:18:30 PM

This is total desperation...clearly the Coleman shot is blurred. Pathetic...hahahaahahah

And I suppose this comparison is totally acceptable?

realkarateblackbelt · « **Reply #22745 on:** February 01, 2007, 06:33:32 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on February 01, 2007, 08:44:00 AM

Coleman owning Yates here standing together, several years before Coleman's peak..you have no credibility. $:-\$

Huckster himself claims Coleman reached his peak in 98.
After that he went on to invent the pyramid taper.

The camera is closer to Coleman,
and in any case he's still sporting a wider waste than Yates. Developed obliques does not equate to poor symmetry, symmetry is defined by the shoulder to waste ratio - and the judges agree. That is precisely why Cutler is Mr. Olympia now.

I'm sorry, but an outrageously large protruding stomach - a stomach sticking out past the chest creating a flat look, is of far more detriment than highly developed obliques.

Coleman is never dry, and always retaining a film of water under his skin, he was too small in 98 and showing too many side-effects from mega-dosing in 04.

Sorry Dumpster, score another on for Deisel in the symmetry/proportion round. The water buffalo doesn't have what it takes.

Shockwave · « **Reply #22746 on:** February 01, 2007, 06:36:12 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on February 01, 2007, 05:38:27 PM

Check out the INSANE conditioning of Yates

Um... wow.
I think that is what everyone is talking about when they mention Yates' conditioning.
That is insane.

NeoSeminole · « **Reply #22747 on:** February 01, 2007, 06:54:23 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on February 01, 2007, 04:24:35 PM

Oh I don't think , I got it from a reliable source

from the same reliable source.

"Ronnie sporting that (01 ASC) look would, in my opinion, be unbeatable."

countdown to excuses... 3.... 2.... 1...

pobrecito · « **Reply #22748 on:** February 01, 2007, 07:02:04 PM »

Proof of Dorian's superior conditioning

(This picture is from 93 BTW)

realkarateblackbelt · « **Reply #22749 on:** February 01, 2007, 07:02:35 PM »

Coleman is just "water-logged mass"