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

[Hulkster]

maybe his first year.

but in 95 whe won the canada show, beating flex.

after that he got top 5 in EVERY show (accept the olympia).

he was a contender for every show he entered.

wrong as always.

again.

top 5 in every show is nothing compared to his performance when he peaked you moron. From early 98 on he won everything he entered..

you just can't compare ronnie pre 98 to ronnie post 98.

no one else is stupid enough to say that they were close.

why do you?

 

[NarcissisticDeity]

Ronnie admits he couldn't beat Yates ( or Haney or Arnold ) lol


5. Q. This is my last question for you Ronnie, and it's quite "hypothetical" but I believe it is a good one. Let's say that it would be possible to have a bodybuilding contest where the only competitors would be you, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lee Haney, and Dorian Yates, and all of you in their prime condition. Who do you believe would win?

R.C. Come on now, this is the age of Ronnie Coleman who else would win... but I couldn't have beat them in their hey days.

[NarcissisticDeity]

top 5 in every show is nothing compared to his performance when he peaked you moron. From early 98 on he won everything he entered..

you just can't compare ronnie pre 98 to ronnie post 98.

no one else is stupid enough to say that they were close.

why do you?

 

You absolutely can compare them because they're basically the same with the exception of GYNO and being completely dry .  he was 255 pounds in 1997 smaller in 1998 albeit much harder & drier .

[Hulkster]

like I said, you can't compare..

Ronnie always had a good upper body, but it wasn't until around 98 that both his quads/hams/glutes and his BACK caught up with his front top half:

[Hulkster]

note the incredible difference in thickness and width.

Ronnie's back and lower body was what really stopped him from doing better pre 98.

once that caught up, he dominated everything.

You guys are alway quick to point out his arms and chest as some sort of delusional proof that he looked fantastic pre 98, but you alway leave out the back, quads and the famous glutes/hams.

the fact that you overlook this does not surprise me because it takes a shread of intelligence to realize these things.

actually, no it doesn't - it just takes common sense...

[pumpster]

the first of many this week

HILARIOUS

THIS CLOWN THOUGHT HE WAS SO COOL AND KNEW EVERYTHING.

NOW THE ENTIRE BOARD IS ON TO HIM.

GET YOUR FUCKING ASS OF THIS BOARD

IN TWO WEEKS, THERE HAVE OFFICIALLY BEEN 5 THREADS BASHING DUMPSTER:

THE LATEST. 

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=164602.0


hulkster, people like this are voting in your polls.


lmao.lmao.lmao.lmao.lmao .lmao.lmao.

LOL here's what counts..

[IceCold]

LOL here's what counts..

coleman never beat yates

hope this helps.

more diversions.

[IceCold]

top 5 in every show is nothing compared to his performance when he peaked you moron. From early 98 on he won everything he entered..

you just can't compare ronnie pre 98 to ronnie post 98.

no one else is stupid enough to say that they were close.

why do you?

 

no one is saying that the olympia winning coleman and a pre 98 ronnie are the same.

 

but ronnie was still a top pro and stop making excuses for him loosing to dorian 25 + times.

[IceCold]

Ronnie admits he couldn't beat Yates ( or Haney or Arnold ) lol


5. Q. This is my last question for you Ronnie, and it's quite "hypothetical" but I believe it is a good one. Let's say that it would be possible to have a bodybuilding contest where the only competitors would be you, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lee Haney, and Dorian Yates, and all of you in their prime condition. Who do you believe would win?

R.C. Come on now, this is the age of Ronnie Coleman who else would win... but I couldn't have beat them in their hey days.

hulkster will tell us what ronnie is thinking.

lmao.

[NarcissisticDeity]

1997 Ronnie 255 pounds with an outstanding back , just not that dry

[NarcissisticDeity]

hulkster will tell us what ronnie is thinking.

lmao.

and that was in 2001 after Ronnie's 1999 Mr Olympia lol which Hulkster thinks is the greatest despite the fact that McGough states Ronnie was as hard or dry in 99 as he was in 98

[RocketSwitch625]

That sure looks like striations not loose folds of skin in his lower back there. The truth finally revealed.

[Hulkster]

looks like some folds to me.

like I said, you CANNOT compare 96 or 97 ronnie to a 98 or a 99 Ronnie.

no loose skin here: you can even see the striations of muscle.

[Hulkster]

1997 Ronnie 255 pounds with an outstanding back , just not that dry

its not outstanding if it is not that dry.

like I said, you CANT compare:

[NarcissisticDeity]

looks like some folds to me.

like I said, you CANNOT compare 96 or 97 ronnie to a 98 or a 99 Ronnie.

no loose skin here: you can even see the striations of muscle.

The only thing Ronnie was lacking 96/97 to 1998 was conditioning , he had the size the width he just need to be bone dry

[NarcissisticDeity]

its not outstanding if it is not that dry.

like I said, you CANT compare:

Sure it is because he was close to being Ronnie 1998 , real close his problem 1997 was he competed a LOT the spring shows cost him sharpness , dimensionally he was the same 97/97 the only difference was he was a tad lighter ( 5 pounds ) and alot sharper

[Hulkster]

The only thing Ronnie was lacking 96/97 to 1998 was conditioning , he had the size the width he just need to be bone dry

but this 'only thing' is probably the most important part of displaying a physique.

it is not a minor thing.

it is damn near everything.

[NarcissisticDeity]

but this 'only thing' is probably the most important part of displaying a physique.

it is not a minor thing.

it is damn near everything.

No its not everything , everything is size , density , balance & proportion and condition , hey wait thats Dorian  again dimensionally Ronnie was basically the same but bone dry ! stop acting like he was eons away from the right combo he wasn't 1996/1997 he was a top tier pro

[IceCold]

but this 'only thing' is probably the most important part of displaying a physique.

it is not a minor thing.

it is damn near everything.

more hypocrisy.

who is the most bone dry of any bber?

yates.

we've been saying since day 1, yates has the edge in condition.

you said it didnt matter, now it does when comparing a 97 and 98 coleman.

[NarcissisticDeity]

more hypocrisy.

who is the most bone dry of any bber?

yates.

we've been saying since day 1, yates has the edge in condition.

you said it didnt matter, now it does when comparing a 97 and 98 coleman.

recall he argued that Ronnie 99 has better conditioning than Yates despite the fact that Yates said he has better conditioning and despite the fact that McGough states Ronnie 99 was not as dry or hard as he was in 98 , he's clueless and quotes when it serves his fancy

[Hulkster]

LOL you guys are so fucking stupid its unbelievable.

you don't seem to understand the english language..

Is it your first language?

Somehow I doubt it..

If you understood english you would understand that I was pointing out how stupid it is that ND brushes off the difference in Ronnie's physique from 96 to 99 as "only conditioning" when in fact that was the KEY to his rise to the top of the throne.

the conditioning is what brought out the incredible detail that he is (was) famous for.

There is more to bodybuilding than simply conditioning: see, Andreas Munzer, who never really came close to winning a pro show (other than the NOC) and was better condititioned than anyone, dorian and ronnie included.

Muscles look impressive due to shape, size, detail, vascularity, conditioning..

not simply conditioning alone.

Ronnie had the size, he had the shape, but he was missing the conditioning, in addition to the back thickness (and lower body detail too) that he was known for.

And I still find it funny that you guys go on about how greatly conditioned dorian was, simply because he had so little detail to display, at least in the arms, delts and quads. In other words, a huge percentage of the body, and the main reason that his most muscular and its variations is so poor.

its so ironic that someone so well conditioned had such poor detail in major extremities..esp. from the front

its a shame he didn't have the detail of a ronnie or a flex, he would have been amazing.

but he wasn't:

[Hulkster]

recall he argued that Ronnie 99 has better conditioning than Yates despite the fact that Yates said he has better conditioning and despite the fact that McGough states Ronnie 99 was not as dry or hard as he was in 98 , he's clueless and quotes when it serves his fancy

can you guys PM me when you come up with an argument that is based upon concrete visual proof please?

this is bodybuilding, not braille reading.

its really pathetic.

you don't even post pics or comparisons anymore because they contradict every single thing you are typing..

[NarcissisticDeity]

LOL you guys are so fucking stupid its unbelievable.

you don't seem to understand the english language..

Is it your first language?

Somehow I doubt it..

If you understood english you would understand that I was pointing out how stupid it is that ND brushes off the difference in Ronnie's physique from 96 to 99 as "only conditioning" when in fact that was the KEY to his rise to the top of the throne.

the conditioning is what brought out the incredible detail that he is (was) famous for.

There is more to bodybuilding than simply conditioning: see, Andreas Munzer, who never really came close to winning a pro show (other than the NOC) and was better condititioned than anyone, dorian and ronnie included.

Muscles look impressive due to shape, size, detail, vascularity, conditioning..

not simply conditioning alone.

Ronnie had the size, he had the shape, but he was missing the conditioning, in addition to the back thickness (and lower body detail too) that he was known for.

And I still find it funny that you guys go on about how greatly conditioned dorian was, simply because he had so little detail to display, at least in the arms, delts and quads. In other words, a huge percentage of the body, and the main reason that his most muscular and its variations is so poor.

its so ironic that someone so well conditioned had such poor detail in major extremities..esp. from the front

its a shame he didn't have the detail of a ronnie or a flex, he would have been amazing.

but he wasn't:

No its not everything , everything is size , density , balance & proportion and condition , hey wait thats Dorian  Wink again dimensionally Ronnie was basically the same but bone dry ! stop acting like he was eons away from the right combo he wasn't 1996/1997 he was a top tier pro

What part of the above quote did you miss? LMFAO I've argued since day one Dorian  would win because he's more complete , he meets ALL of the criteria better than Ronnie

And once again Dorian doesn't need Ronnie or Flex's detail to beat them , he doesn't need their taper to beat them , he doesn't need vascularity to beat them , he doesn't need to be Ronnie or Flex to beat them 

[NarcissisticDeity]

can you guys PM me when you come up with an argument that is based upon concrete visual proof please?

this is bodybuilding, not braille reading.

its really pathetic.

you don't even post pics or comparisons anymore because they contradict every single thing you are typing..

Lets see a crystal clear screencap of Ronnie V a crummy one from YouTube of Dorian from 1996 NOT even his best year lol yes you're really concerned about concrete visual proof lol Hulkster I've included EVERYTHING to back up my argument quotes ( which if you recall I was the first to start posting much to your dismay ) photos , critiques , my analysis , the Official IFBB Mens Professional Judging Criteria , videos , eye witness accounts I have covered my bases , all of them .

you can touch my argument hence why you talk in circles 

[Hulkster]

ND, here is a good of a shot of dorian 93 as you are ever going to get and ronnie still owns him: