no shit it's my opinion since bodybuilding is a subjective sport. I laugh whenever you guys say that as if it's supposed to mean something. It's understood that we are arguing over a difference of opinion, otherwise there wouldn't be a discussion in the first place. You're of the opinion that Dorian was more balanced and conditioned.
You're wrong about Ronnie's calves ruining the effect of his rear double biceps and rear lat spread. Although they're not huge by any means, they certainly don't undermine the visual impact of his world-class arms, delts, back, glutes and hamstrings. Furthermore, you're fond of repeating your blanket statement that Dorian has more definition in his gastrocnemius than Ronnie. This is simply not true.
muscular bulk refers to the size of the muscle. Ronnie has larger arms, delts, pecs, glutes and quads than Dorian. Their backs and hamstrings are comparable, which means Ronnie has greater overall muscular bulk.
bullshit, you're looking for any excuse to weasel your way out of this situation. I used a pic of Dorian from 93 b/c that's his best year. Now you're claiming that I did so intentionally b/c I fear a comparison between 95 Dorian and Ronnie. Give me a break! Ronnie owns that pose.
yes, I think you are jealous of my comparisons. I've seen all yours and they look like baboon shit even though you use professional software. I just use Microsoft Office Picture Manager and Paint. Moreover, I already demonstrated that Titus and Dennis James didn't make Ronnie look small. I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove with the pics you posted from the 01 ASC. Titus and Dennis James still look smaller than Ronnie.
no shit it's my opinion since bodybuilding is a subjective sport. I laugh whenever you guys say that as if it's supposed to mean something. It's understood that we are arguing over a difference of opinion, otherwise there wouldn't be a discussion in the first place. You're of the opinion that Dorian was more balanced and conditioned.
Ah the difference is I know the criteria YOU obviously don't and I can back up my claim that Dorian was more balanced than Ronnie by Yates and Priest NONE of you can back up your claim that Ronnie has better balance than Dorian , hell you can't even verify he had great balance & proportion alone nevermind better than Yates , I've also posted numerous quotes and one from in IFBB no less that Dorian at his best had outstanding symmetry , balance & proportion so I think I've established my case about Dorian having better balance & proportion than Ronnie better than you guys have to the contrary
and about the topic of conditioning it depends on the year I think Ronnie had Dorian-esq conditioning in 1998 and 2001 after that you're out of luck I can admit his conditioning may have been equal to Dorian on those two occasions but as far as balance & proportion NO contest
You're wrong about Ronnie's calves ruining the effect of his rear double biceps and rear lat spread. Although they're not huge by any means, they certainly don't undermine the visual impact of his world-class arms, delts, back, glutes and hamstrings. Furthermore, you're fond of repeating your blanket statement that Dorian has more definition in his gastrocnemius than Ronnie. This is simply not true.
No you mean Arnold Schwarzenegger was wrong about the lack of calves ruining the whole effect and we know YOU know more than him lol and Arnold said and I quote " Check out Kevin Levrone , Dorian Yates , Shawn Ray and Chris Cormier in the 1995 Mr Olympia. As great as their backs , shoulders , traps and arms are , if nothing happened when they flexed their calves ,
the entire effect would be ruined "
And Dorian has everything Ronnie has and some , the effect would be ruined compared with Dorian ! and why do you type such ridiculous statements? WHY? lol you're comparing Ronnie's calves who are among the worse of ANY Mr Olympia to Dorian's who had among the best of ANY Mr Olympia the pictures you showed are part of the reason they say Dorian looks much better in person , you can't see them great in those pics , mostly likely based on your history you choose them specifically for that reason but none the less its retarded to say Ronnie has better ANYTHING than Yates in the calf department , I mean among your dumbest posts , Dorian has a clear split between the gastrocnemoius inner and outter heads , he also shows better separation of the gastrocnemoius from the soleus , Ronnie's calves suck period , do yourself a favor
never mention them in the same sentence with Dorian again under any circumstances lol
muscular bulk refers to the size of the muscle. Ronnie has larger arms, delts, pecs, glutes and quads than Dorian. Their backs and hamstrings are comparable, which means Ronnie has greater overall muscular bulk
You're getting as bad as Hulkster there is NO way Ronnie carries more muscular bulk than Dorian by being 3 pounds lighter and 1 inch taller and seeing Ronnie according to Peter McGough was not as ' hard or dry ' as 1998 that means he was softer and holding more water , so more of Dorian's 260 pounds was quality muscle than Ronnie , I don't care what appears bigger what may be bigger , Ronnie doesn't carry more bulk by being softer and holding water , once inch taller and 3 pounds lighter NONSENSE , defies logic
bullshit, you're looking for any excuse to weasel your way out of this situation. I used a pic of Dorian from 93 b/c that's his best year. Now you're claiming that I did so intentionally b/c I fear a comparison between 95 Dorian and Ronnie. Give me a break! Ronnie owns that pose.
No its YOU who intentionally posted a BAD PIC from his best year , and another blanket statement Ronnie owns that pose
he doesn't own it in DENSITY he doesn't own it in BALANCE he doesn't own it in BULK and in 2001 he may tied on conditioning and we can apply the same logic to every single pose what happens when he hits the most muscular and flexed his calves and nothing happen? " the whole effect is ruined " you people see big arms and a great delt-pec tie-in and think thats all there is to a most muscular lol how about a chest that doesn't look sunken in? or a set of calves? or being 260 pounds compared to 247?
yes, I think you are jealous of my comparisons. I've seen all yours and they look like baboon shit even though you use professional software. I just use Microsoft Office Picture Manager and Paint. Moreover, I already demonstrated that Titus and Dennis James didn't make Ronnie look small. I'm not really sure what you're trying to prove with the pics you posted from the 01 ASC. Titus and Dennis James still look smaller than Ronnie.
You're absolutely terrible at picture comparisons the one from Yates 1993 and Ronnie 2003 is the biggest joke you ever posted lol I'm surprised you had the balls to post it , and I did make some bad comparisons the difference is I can admit it lol you slant things in Ronnie's favor because thats how YOU think the reality of the situation would be , and you look at the pics of Titus , Chris and Dennis Ronnie isn't making them look small and he sure as hell wouldn't make look a 260 pound Dorian look small , especially not at 247 pounds max lol
You're ignorant to what judges look for in a competitive bodybuilding contest , you've proven this time and time again , you thought ( until I corrected you
) that balance & proportion were the same thing , you think back poses come down to ' personal preference ' you think a 247 pound Ronnie has a thicker back than a 260 pound Dorian , you think their balance is comparable , that his calves are comparable in terms of separation
( WTF ?
) you think at his best Dorian's balance & proportion suck , you are very ignorant to what the criteria is , what the judges look for , whats who has what and who doesn't , my opinion crushes YOURS ( and Hulksters and pumpster and etc ) I've always maintained that Dorian would beat Ronnie because he has better balance & proportion , better conditioning ( depending on the year ) better density , better bulk ( depending on the year ) he would accumulate more mandatory poses , he has better posing & presentation and is more complete and that hasn't changed and I've yet to be proven wrong ! and there is nothing wrong with being ignorant about how contests are judged and physique evaluation just don't state things matter-of-factly because I will correct you
