Author Topic: Dorian Yates kicks Ronnie's ass Hulkster is a punk Bitch and fuck any truce (Read 3491794 times)

kyomu · « **Reply #30675 on:** June 28, 2007, 11:14:21 AM »

I am just surprised at you guys still keeping on going this traditional matter.
I want you guys to reach 2000pages.

Hulkster · « **Reply #30676 on:** June 28, 2007, 02:28:41 PM »

Quote from: phyxsius on June 28, 2007, 12:56:55 AM

His arm will grow definitely if he didn't not had that tear.

it might have grown but it never would have looked good.

dorian's arms were like ronnie's calves: lacked the shape and detail to ever look good

RocketSwitch625 · « **Reply #30677 on:** June 28, 2007, 02:44:03 PM »

Let's get something straight. These nuthuggers think that Coleman is the best bodybuilder ever and Yates looks like a construction worker.

Well, think again. LOL

IceCold · « **Reply #30678 on:** June 28, 2007, 02:56:39 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on June 28, 2007, 09:58:25 AM

Completely empty comeback; shooting blanks again.

yes, thought i did not post that remark.

didnt finish.

IceCold · « **Reply #30679 on:** June 28, 2007, 02:58:34 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 28, 2007, 03:45:40 AM

he was the biggest who had a back.

nasser and dillett owned dorian from the front but had no back.

Ronnie had a back, as well as owned dorian from the front at his best..

so, whats YOUR excuse?

no excuse needed.

yates was the biggest guy in the best condition.

that's it.

samething with ronnie.

there may have been a few others who beat yates in certain poses, but no one owned dorian from the front.

winning the front double biceps or most musuclar is not the only criteria for winning the olympia.

IceCold · « **Reply #30680 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:01:12 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 28, 2007, 02:28:41 PM

it might have grown but it never would have looked good.

dorian's arms were like ronnie's calves: lacked the shape and detail to ever look good

wrong as usual.

dorian's arms looks awesome in more than half the poses.

ronnie's calves look pathetic in EVERY pose.

why is that so hard to understand?

Hulkster · « **Reply #30681 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:15:20 PM »

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #30682 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:36:55 PM »

Quote from: RocketSwitch625 on June 28, 2007, 02:44:03 PM

Let's get something straight. These nuthuggers think that Coleman is the best bodybuilder ever and Yates looks like a construction worker.

Well, think again. LOL

Well hundreds of other people sure do agree with us

Who is better 99/03 Ronnie or 93/95 Yates?

http://www.musclemecca.com/showthread.php?t=9710

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=3109401

Who has the best back so far in bodybuilding history?

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=2974091

Stop waisting your time with your stupid comments.

Iceman1981 · « **Reply #30683 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:38:26 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on June 28, 2007, 11:10:49 AM

Dorian is owning Ronnie in that comparison, bigger and more conditioned. Shape and cuts are overrated.

Do you ever shut up? Maybe this will shut that trap you call for a mouth.

Who is better 99/03 Ronnie or 93/95 Yates?

http://www.musclemecca.com/showthread.php?t=9710

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=3109401

Who has the best back so far in bodybuilding history?

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=2974091

pobrecito · « **Reply #30684 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:42:09 PM »

Quote from: Iceman1981 on June 28, 2007, 03:38:26 PM

Do you ever shut up? Maybe this will shut that trap you call for a mouth.

Who is better 99/03 Ronnie or 93/95 Yates?

http://www.musclemecca.com/showthread.php?t=9710

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=3109401

Who has the best back so far in bodybuilding history?

http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=2974091

You are nothing but a biased guy so stupid you cannot even form an argument for yourself LOL.....so you must resort to bb.com (read: 14 year olds) to confirm in your pea brain that Coleman is better hahahahah

Reality Check:

Hulkster · « **Reply #30685 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:43:36 PM »

LOL 99 Ronnie has more than 5 times 93 dorian's votes in one of those polls hahahahhaa

Countdown to Excuses....5....4...3... 2...1...

The Squadfather · « **Reply #30686 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:43:51 PM »

Dorian's back is ridiculous there, looks like a life sized granite jigsaw puzzle.

Hulkster · « **Reply #30687 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:44:21 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on June 28, 2007, 03:42:09 PM

You are nothing but a biased guy so stupid you cannot even form an argument for yourself LOL.....so you must resort to bb.com (read: 14 year olds) to confirm in your pea brain that Coleman is better hahahahah

Reality Check:

lol how is a shot using a 1996 ronnie a 'reality check'..

Hulkster · « **Reply #30688 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:46:38 PM »

I can't believe how bad dorian's arms are in that shot though.

seriously. looks like someone photoshopped them out its that bad.. $:-\$

ruins the whole look of the upper back for me...

pumpster · « **Reply #30689 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:47:31 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on June 28, 2007, 03:42:09 PM

Reality Check:

Reality check: Yates is dead-on the camera, Coleman isn't.

pobrecito · « **Reply #30690 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:49:41 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on June 28, 2007, 03:47:31 PM

Reality check: Yates is dead-on the camera, Coleman isn't.

Quit your crying little bitch.

Dorian smacked up your boy and all your other lazy ass bodybuilders like rag dolls.

The Squadfather · « **Reply #30691 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:53:17 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on June 28, 2007, 03:46:38 PM

I can't believe how bad dorian's arms are in that shot though.

seriously. looks like someone photoshopped them out its that bad.. $:-\$

ruins the whole look of the upper back for me...

honestly Hulk their arms are about even there when you consider that Dorian's triceps are better than Ronnie's there but Ronnie's biceps are definitley rounder and bigger.

pobrecito · « **Reply #30692 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:56:53 PM »

Quote from: The Squadfather on June 28, 2007, 03:53:17 PM

honestly Hulk their arms are about even there when you consider that Dorian's triceps are better than Ronnie's there but Ronnie's biceps are definitley rounder and bigger.

Dorian's biceps were never in Ronnie's league, but they weren't nearly as bad as Ronnie's calves.

pumpster · « **Reply #30693 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:57:28 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on June 28, 2007, 03:49:41 PM

Quit your crying little bitch.

Dorian smacked up your boy and all your other lazy ass bodybuilders like rag dolls.

Pubes aka unmemorable ethnic name with 17 letters that no one with common sense would've used here LOL

pumpster · « **Reply #30694 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:58:28 PM »

Quote from: pobrecito on June 28, 2007, 03:56:53 PM

Dorian's biceps were never in Ronnie's league, but they weren't nearly as bad as Ronnie's calves.

It's really not hard to imagine the next step: "Yates' arms were actually some of the best ever" LOL

pumpster · « **Reply #30695 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:59:29 PM »

Quote from: The Squadfather on June 28, 2007, 03:53:17 PM

honestly Hulk their arms are about even there when you consider that Dorian's triceps are better than Ronnie's there but Ronnie's biceps are definitley rounder and bigger.

Yates had better cuts but not the same triceps size as Coleman, or biceps.

The Squadfather · « **Reply #30696 on:** June 28, 2007, 03:59:57 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on June 28, 2007, 03:58:28 PM

It's really not too far off to imagine "Yates' arms were actually some of the best ever" LOL

hahahaha, who said that?, Dorians arms were not small but they were definitly the weak point on his body for sure, Haney's arms were a weakness as well.

pumpster · « **Reply #30697 on:** June 28, 2007, 04:00:55 PM »

Quote from: The Squadfather on June 28, 2007, 03:59:57 PM

hahahaha, who said that?, Dorians arms were not small but they were definitly the weak point on his body for sure, Haney's arms were a weakness as well.

They were both seriously flawed and the best of the tier-B Olympians because of those flaws-both of them were all torso.

IceCold · « **Reply #30698 on:** June 28, 2007, 04:01:26 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on June 28, 2007, 03:59:29 PM

Yates had better cuts but not the same triceps size as Coleman, or biceps.

or paul, kevin, or nasser.

but it didnt and doesnt matter.

what did their tricep size do for them?

nothing.

and all of the above have better tri's than ronnie.

pobrecito · « **Reply #30699 on:** June 28, 2007, 04:01:48 PM »

Shit, even in his neonate form, Yates with a better front double biceps than Ronnie could ever dream of - no weaknesses.