Author Topic: Dorian Yates kicks Ronnie's ass Hulkster is a punk Bitch and fuck any truce (Read 3527392 times)

IceCold · « **Reply #25350 on:** February 26, 2007, 10:54:15 AM »

Quote from: pumpster on February 26, 2007, 10:46:56 AM

More useless posts LOL

not nearly as useless as giving training advice while refusing to go to a gym and instead wasting time on a bowflex in the basement.

IceCold · « **Reply #25351 on:** February 26, 2007, 10:55:35 AM »

pumpster,

stop deleting my posts in the training forum just becuase i call you and out in inform everyone who they are getting their advice from.

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #25352 on:** February 26, 2007, 01:31:54 PM »

Quote from: IceCold on February 26, 2007, 09:00:53 AM

ronnie didnt think so.

do i have to post the quote from the november 99 issue of flex.

I don't care what quote you post. Have you turned into ND now? yates would have got crushed in 98. Why do you think he retired? Just look at the pics.

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #25353 on:** February 26, 2007, 01:32:59 PM »

Quote from: IceCold on February 26, 2007, 09:01:44 AM

my point was that i dont think yates flexes his low back in the lat spread.

his xmas tree is clearyly visibile, if not the most visible of all time, in the bdb and other poses.

Well, that's yates problem. Still has loose skin hanging on the lower back.

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #25354 on:** February 26, 2007, 01:34:26 PM »

Quote from: usmokepole on February 26, 2007, 09:03:22 AM

hahahah, way to post a morphed pic to prove your point. yates is getting crushed if you posted the real fuggin pic. ronnie is not.

ronnie has the thickest back of all time.

Here is the real pic

IceCold · « **Reply #25355 on:** February 26, 2007, 01:37:58 PM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on February 26, 2007, 01:31:54 PM

I don't care what quote you post. Have you turned into ND now? yates would have got crushed in 98. Why do you think he retired? Just look at the pics.

actually, yates planned on retiring in 96, but decided to come back in 97.

yes, i've seen the pics and the video as well.

yates would have won. just like ronnie said.

RocketSwitch625 · « **Reply #25356 on:** February 26, 2007, 01:39:29 PM »

Quote from: delta9mda on February 26, 2007, 07:03:17 AM

be glad yates retired cuz he'd have 7 or 8 mr o's. here is off season yates pre-tear.

You could be forgiven for thinking this shot is pre-tear Yates but read the dates.

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #25357 on:** February 26, 2007, 01:56:11 PM »

Quote from: IceCold on February 26, 2007, 09:44:49 AM

i know the pic is morphed.

stubbs is crushing ronnie in any back pic you can post.

yates wrote the book on back thickenss.

even ronnie admitted to it.

are you a more valid source as to who has the thickest back than ronnie coleman?

didnt think so.

Joel doesn't beat Coleman in all back poses, maybe in the rear latspread when he is in shape, but not the back double bi. Joel's back double is just average. His rear latspread is impressive. See what I mean? The same can be said about Joel over yates in the rear latspread, but not the back double bi.

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #25358 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:00:17 PM »

Quote from: IceCold on February 26, 2007, 01:37:58 PM

actually, yates planned on retiring in 96, but decided to come back in 97.

yes, i've seen the pics and the video as well.

yates would have won. just like ronnie said.

You actually believe a 97 yates would of won the 98 Olympia? LOL, what's next? Come on, be real to yourself and the rest of us. 97 yates shouldn't even have won that year. I mean come on, look for yourself.

IceCold · « **Reply #25359 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:04:03 PM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on February 26, 2007, 02:00:17 PM

You actually believe a 97 yates would of won the 98 Olympia? LOL, what's next? Come on, be real to yourself and the rest of us. 97 yates shouldn't even have won that year. I mean come on, look for yourself.

yes, i do believe yates should and did won.

just like mcgough stated as well as nasser.

its very clear when viewing the video that yates was the clear winner?

have you ever seen the actual video?

the 97 olympia aired on espn was one of the 1st bbing things i'd had seen.

even then no knowing anything, i still thought yates was the winner.

that hasnt changed in 9 years.

IceCold · « **Reply #25360 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:04:45 PM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on February 26, 2007, 01:56:11 PM

Joel doesn't beat Coleman in all back poses, maybe in the rear latspread when he is in shape, but not the back double bi. Joel's back double is just average. His rear latspread is impressive. See what I mean? The same can be said about Joel over yates in the rear latspread, but not the back double bi.

agreed. except the part about yates.

Hulkster · « **Reply #25361 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:09:00 PM »

Quote from: IceCold on February 26, 2007, 02:04:03 PM

yes, i do believe yates should and did won.

just like mcgough stated as well as nasser.

its very clear when viewing the video that yates was the clear winner?

have you ever seen the actual video?

the 97 olympia aired on espn was one of the 1st bbing things i'd had seen.

even then no knowing anything, i still thought yates was the winner.

that hasnt changed in 9 years.

hahaha how stupid:

dorian looking like he did at the end of his career would have got destroyed by 98 or 99 lineup.

look at this: it would not be close.

Hulkster · « **Reply #25362 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:12:49 PM »

Hulkster · « **Reply #25363 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:19:00 PM »

Dorian would have probably not even made the top 3 had he showed up in 1999 in his 1997 shape.

with Ronnie and Chris peaking, and Flex looking okay, dorian with his wide back but nothing else would have got killed (watch the youtube clip - dorian had nothing but a back in 97, and his arms were at their all time worst).

it would not have been close:

IceCold · « **Reply #25364 on:** February 26, 2007, 02:51:02 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on February 26, 2007, 02:19:00 PM

Dorian would have probably not even made the top 3 had he showed up in 1999 in his 1997 shape.

with Ronnie and Chris peaking, and Flex looking okay, dorian with his wide back but nothing else would have got killed (watch the youtube clip - dorian had nothing but a back in 97, and his arms were at their all time worst).

it would not have been close:

cormier couldnt even beat flex wheeler who was off.

yates beat flex every time and in 98 and 99, flex wasnt even close to his 93 or 94 form.

pobrecito · « **Reply #25365 on:** February 26, 2007, 03:30:37 PM »

Hulkster spewing more garbage I see hahahahahahahha

Hulkster · « **Reply #25366 on:** February 26, 2007, 03:52:30 PM »

Quote

cormier couldnt even beat flex wheeler who was off.

and you actually AGREE with this decision?

puffy, watery flex was second place on name value alone.

nothing more.

it should have been ronnie and then chris and then flex.

Hulkster · « **Reply #25367 on:** February 26, 2007, 04:02:44 PM »

Quote

flex wasnt even close to his 93 or 94 form.

and I suppose you think that 97 dorian was somehow even remotely close to his 93 form?

pobrecito · « **Reply #25368 on:** February 26, 2007, 04:21:08 PM »

Dorian is beating Ronnie there in delts, traps, forearms, midsection, and chest.

274lbs vs. 257.

No contest

Hulkster · « **Reply #25369 on:** February 26, 2007, 04:45:29 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on February 26, 2007, 04:21:08 PM

Dorian is beating Ronnie there in delts, traps, forearms, midsection, and chest.

274lbs vs. 257.

No contest

biggest load of bullshit I have ever read...

besides, bodybuilding is not always about weight. it is about quality:

Necrosis · « **Reply #25370 on:** February 26, 2007, 05:01:41 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on February 26, 2007, 04:21:08 PM

Dorian is beating Ronnie there in delts, traps, forearms, midsection, and chest.

274lbs vs. 257.

No contest

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH AAHAH/ DORIAN LOOKS SMALL. those arms have to be about 18 inches there. ahahahahhahahahhaahhaha, not a cut in site and forarms look the same size as his upper arms.

Hulkster · « **Reply #25371 on:** February 26, 2007, 05:04:03 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on February 26, 2007, 04:21:08 PM

Dorian is beating Ronnie there in delts, traps, forearms, midsection, and chest.

274lbs vs. 257.

No contest

are you for real?

no contest my ass...

Hulkster · « **Reply #25372 on:** February 26, 2007, 05:05:35 PM »

$:-\$

no contest my ass part 2....

Hulkster · « **Reply #25373 on:** February 26, 2007, 05:06:27 PM »

Dorian 97 vs Kovacs 04 would have been quite a battle... $:-\$

pobrecito · « **Reply #25374 on:** February 26, 2007, 05:37:17 PM »

Dorian was a super dense, rock hard, separated and diced 274lbs at the 1997 Mr. Olympia, how else could he have won? A small Coleman wouldn't stand a chance.