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

[Hulkster]

I mean, come on:

[Hulkster]

 

whats next? that larry scott had the better biceps than Ronnie?

[suckmymuscle]

ha ha ha, wtf are you talking about?

wow, you really are dumb as shit. You asked me if 2 guys with the same body fat % will demonstrate the same level of separations. I responded "yes, if they are both the same height and carry the same lean mass." So why are you going off on a tangent about one guy weighing 200 lbs while another weighs 300 lbs?

  Ok, this is the last time that I'm explaining this to you. If you don't understand this time, I'll just let it go.

  Bodyfat and water are distributed under the surface of the body. The size of the body's surface area is proportional to it's total mass, which makes lean body mass as well as height irrelevant. And the same % of two different masses are proportionally equqivalent. Ergo, the thickness of the subcutaneous fat layer will be the same between two guys with the same bodyfat % regardless of differences in height or lean body mass. Get it? So you bringing the topics of height qaand lean muscle mass is completely idiotic. And by the way, two guys with the same bodyfat % and water won't be as equally separated, because separations are partially genetic.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

if you let 10 unbiased people read our dialogue, I guarantee you that all of them would disagree you owned me. The 2 individuals you speak of seemed overly eager in their attempts to spite me. I take what they say with a grain of salt.

 
  It doesen't matter, because 2 is better than 0. At least a few people think I hav3e owned you, hereas no one thinks you've owned me.

no, that's not what you said. I'll let you go back and re-read your post to let it sink in.

  That's exactly what I've said, that Dorian has several supposedly inferior muscles to Ronnie, yet he defeats Coleman whgere it counts - in the symmetry round and mandatories.

wrong. Ronnie wins the front double biceps, front lat spread, side chest, and most muscular due to superior muscularity and definition from head to toe. The back double biceps and back lat spread are a tie. This leaves only the side triceps and ab-and-thigh for Dorian.

  Elaborate on this, sport. Why exactly does Ronnie win these mandatories?

yeah right, your physique looks even worse than mine. ha ha ha ha ha.

  This fag has the muscles of a 12 year old girl and he still feels like bragging...

what's your point? Here is what I said.

"Sergio is my fav. bodybuilder of all-time, you dumb c*nt. Ronnie is like 3rd or 4th on my list. How can I be a Ronnie "spooge-sucker" when I like Sergio more? Unlike you, I know the difference between what I like and what actually wins contests."

  The fact that you believe that the horrible Coleman from 2003 with his distended gut and bloated look would defeat Sergio Oliva goes to show what a biased guy you are. I would never in a million years say that an all-time best Dorian Yates would defeat Oliva. So there you have it! Who's the guy now?

since when am I obligated to pick my fav. bodybuilder to win a hypothetical contest? I like Samir Bannout more than Ronnie, but I'm not delusional to say he would beat him.

  In a propoerly judged contest, Ronnie would never have won the 2003 Olympia. If the judges followed the I.F.B.B booklet, Ronn ie would be disqualified just by virtue of his monster gut, irresp[ective of how huge his muscles are.

no, this is the only quote that counts.

  Nope, this is the only quote that counts. Mike Matarazzo:

  Describe Dorian Yates:

  "He may go down in history as the greatest bodybuilder who ever lived."

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[pobrecito]

Sucky, glad to have you back. Did you repair your keyboard? It's a shame that piece of shit busted as you were furiously making replies to this thread 

[suckmymuscle]

I never changed the subject. I'm telling you straight up that Dorian wasn't as shredded and dry as you think. The only reason why you believe he was the most conditioned bodybuilder ever is b/c you've been brainwashed to think so by journalists. That's right, journalists - NOT medical doctors or exercise physiologists - but people with a degree in English (if that) who never even measured his lean body mass. They just guessed by looking at Dorian.

  Bullshit. Ronnie in 1998 was far more defined than Dorian ever was. He was more defined in his back, quads, etc. However, there is no evidence whatsoever that Ronnie was holding less subcutaneous fat and water than Dorian. This tells me what? That separations are partially genetic. Your theory is crap! Yates was as low as a Human can be in bodyfat and water, so it can't possibly be explained by that. Even if they were about the same in bodyfat and water, it would still not explain the vastly superior separations that Ronnie had. So you talked bullshizle again  and got schooled.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

here's proof that Suckmymuscle is a hypocrite.

  I never said that separations are not an attribute that an in shape bodybuilder must have. My point, however, is that Coleman in his 2003 version had far less separations overral than Dorian. Ronnie made a mistake going from having more separations than Dorian(1998 Olympia), to having far less. So you need to underatnd that as "Waht's the point of having bigger muscles if you lack the separations to display it?" Get it? My point is that Ronnie didn't gain 40 lbs of muscle from 1998 to 2003, since a lot of it was subcutaneous bodyfat and came at the cost of less quality.

here's proof that Suckmymuscle doesn't know his poses.

  That was a typo. Do you really think I don't know what the two biceps mandatories are, considering that I have been schooling you since the very beggining?

here's proof that Suckmymuscle is a liar.

  Yes, I did say that Dorian's arms were 52 cm. So what's your point?

here's proof that Suckmymuscle is delusional (notice his grammar also sucks).

  Again, a typo. It shows how pathetic you are that the only things you can correct me is when I commit an occasional spelling mistake. And by the way, I'm willing to match my I.Q against yours any day of the week. Wanna bet?

here's proof that Suckmymuscle is gay.

  This coming from the guy who said that Ronnie has "flawless skin". Gayer than the day is long!

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

Sucky, glad to have you back. Did you repair your keyboard? It's a shame that piece of shit busted as you were furiously making replies to this thread 

  Thanks. No, I just purchased another one. This is my 3rd or 4rth keyboard that got destroyed...

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[phyxsius]

  Thanks. No, I just purchased another one. This is my 3rd or 4rth keyboard that got destroyed...

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Hey mate.. You are indeed an internet warrior!!


You're a beast!!

[pumpster]

  Ok, this is the last time that I'm explaining this to you. If you don't understand this time, I'll just let it go.

  Bodyfat and water are distributed under the surface of the body. The size of the body's surface area is proportional to it's total mass, which makes lean body mass as well as height irrelevant. And the same % of two different masses are proportionally equqivalent. Ergo, the thickness of the subcutaneous fat layer will be the same between two guys with the same bodyfat % regardless of differences in height or lean body mass. Get it? So you bringing the topics of height qaand lean muscle mass is completely idiotic. And by the way, two guys with the same bodyfat % and water won't be as equally separated, because separations are partially genetic.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

This is the last time i'm explaining this: you have too much bodyfat & water between the ears.


Hope this helps

[Deadpool]

.

[sgt. d]

Is suckmymuscle the same guy who claim to be 280 lbs ripped


SGT. D

[NeoSeminole]

Ok, this is the last time that I'm explaining this to you. If you don't understand this time, I'll just let it go.

Bodyfat and water are distributed under the surface of the body. The size of the body's surface area is proportional to it's total mass, which makes lean body mass as well as height irrelevant. And the same % of two different masses are proportionally equqivalent. Ergo, the thickness of the subcutaneous fat layer will be the same between two guys with the same bodyfat % regardless of differences in height or lean body mass. Get it? So you bringing the topics of height qaand lean muscle mass is completely idiotic. And by the way, two guys with the same bodyfat % and water won't be as equally separated, because separations are partially genetic.

yawn, this is the last time I'm going to explain this to you. If you still don't understand after this, then I'll just let it go. If you take 2 individuals - let's say one of them is 5'7" and the other is 7' - who both weigh 200 lbs and have 3% bf and 0 water levels, the person who is shorter will display more overall definition. The reason for this is simple. A taller person carries more weight in his skin, bones, organs and connective tissue, and body fat is expressed as a percentage of total weight. Therefore, even at the same body fat % the individual who is 7' carries more body fat. Since both weigh the same amount yet the taller person has more fat, it logically follows that he has less muscle mass. Even a middle school student can grasp this simple concept. The guy who is 7' will display less overall definition b/c he is carrying more fat and less muscle even though they are both 3% body fat. I standardized the height and lean body mass to compensate for this.

[Hulkster]

does anyone know how dorian was awarded perfect scores in the symmetry round with his post tear double bi being the most unsymmetrical in the history of bodybuilding?

oh wait!

but Icecold claims there is no proof of bias!

the proof is everywhere from 1994 on...

[haider]

  Thanks. No, I just purchased another one. This is my 3rd or 4rth keyboard that got destroyed...

SUCKMYMUSCLE

hahahaha, meltdown DEFINED! 

[Iceman1981]

does anyone know how dorian was awarded perfect scores in the symmetry round with his post tear double bi being the most unsymmetrical in the history of bodybuilding?

oh wait!

but Icecold claims there is no proof of bias!

the proof is everywhere from 1994 on...

Hey Hulkster. All these nuthuggers have to do is read this post I made:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=69359.msg2118709#msg2118709

Everything I said is spot on and clear to everyone. Every word in my post makes perfect sense and is TRUE. They can't argue about anything in that post I made, because they know it's true. If they try to argue, they will look stupid because they have no argument or have a "made" up argument. Hey nuthuggers, Face the facts and get a LIFE.

RONNIE RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Hulkster]

exactly!

ever notice how even though dorian's 93 form is respected, it is NEVER mentioned on a 'who brought the greatest physique ever to a show" type questions?

there is good reason for that :

[IceCold]

Hey Hulkster. All these nuthuggers have to do is read this post I made:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=69359.msg2118709#msg2118709

Everything I said is spot on and clear to everyone. Every word in my post makes perfect sense and is TRUE. They can't argue about anything in that post I made, because they know it's true. If they try to argue, they will look stupid because they have no argument or have a "made" up argument. Hey nuthuggers, Face the facts and get a LIFE.

RONNIE RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

your post is valid, but it also comes down to personal preference.

with the exception of back (only he and yates), i would not rate ronnie top of any list for bodyparts.

i'll give a few examples.  again personal preference, but most will agree with me, that ronnie is not the person when you think of:

thighs:  platz, demayo, warren, dillet, munzer

chest:  arnold, haney, ruhl, louie, bertil  (ronnie's gyno)

delts:  ruhl, levrone, dillet, nasser - all have bigger and rounder delts than ronnie, although his may have been more seperated.  but it seems most will agree that bigger, rounder delts are more impressive.

biceps:  arnold, priest, bertil, beckles, boyer coe, if anything, coleman is more at the top at this list than the others.


again, ronnie would on the list of 'best ever', but would not be the #1 guy people look at.

[IceCold]

exactly!

ever notice how even though dorian's 93 form is respected, it is NEVER mentioned on a 'who brought the greatest physique ever to a show" type questions?

there is good reason for that :

actually, its the exact opposite. 

everyone knows how dominant yates was in 93.

those quotes neo posted were all post 2003, when ronnie showed up in at 285+.

nothing was really mentioned in 99 or even at the 01 AC.

ronnie was the deserving winner, but those years came and went.  nothing special.

if you dont believe me, than i ask you to post any relevant information regarding how great ronnie was in 99 or 2001 in reference to the best ever.

you wont find much.

the only think i can think of is peter's comments of 2001 AC ronnie.  but, i think they were made in reference to ronnie in 2003. 

for example, i dont recall reading anything from 99 or 01 that ronnie's package is 'the best ever'.

prove me wrong. 

 

[pobrecito]

Ronnie looks fucking putrid here 

Nice convex gut with a huge gap in between his nasty 4 pack 

[IceCold]

245 lbs. for ronnie vs. 257 lbs. for yates.

[pobrecito]

More Yates ownage LOL

[Hulkster]

dorian could not stand next to this and look good.

remember: dorian's waist always looked narrow standing next to no one.

[IceCold]

dorian could not stand next to this and look good.

remember: dorian's waist always looked narrow standing next to no one.

monster avoidance


you still havent posted anything relevnat from a credible source touting the 99 ronnie or 01 AC as the best ever.


even now, people point to ronnie in 2003, not 99 or 01.

[IceCold]

dorian could not stand next to this and look good.

remember: dorian's waist always looked narrow standing next to no one.

see above picture comparison.

same contest.