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

[toty21]

I started watching bodybuilding about 4 years ago...and by no means am I an expert or even close to it....but just by simply looking at pics and comparing Dorian to Ronnie, in my opinion it is NOT EVEN CLOSE...Ronnie simply has too much muscle (traps, arms, chest) for Dorian...In fact everytime I see pics of Dorian somehow to me he doesn't really resemble a bodybuilder (but please this is just my honest opininon).

[Bear]

exactly.

 12 year old irrelevant quotes from before Ronnie even placed in the top 15 of a contest are not compelling evidence...

Haha, so true. 

[Bear]

Non-arm

[pumpster]

Apparently this is a poster from ND's private collection (hi Daniel!), laminated for repeat use during "private moments".

   

Arms looking small & smooth there BTW.

[RocketSwitch625]

Apparently this is a poster from ND's private collection (hi Daniel!), laminated for repeat use during "private moments".

At least farty knows what a masty is. LOL

[NarcissisticDeity]

when was the last time you saw me post a quote you moron..

No its not you who uses them but you'll agree with them if they suit your fancy , still hypocritical .

[NarcissisticDeity]

see how predicitible and stupid ND is?

I showed him to be a complete idiot when it comes to this technique and it went right over his head, like everything seems to do..

like the philosophers say, when many people agree who know what they are doing and have evidence to prove it, it is very strong evidence.

just because one or two nutcases do not agree does NOT mean that the argument is weak.

ND continues to say it is weak because he is stupid and does not understand.

Did you enroll in the remedial philosophy class yet ND?

Oh wait, they probably didn't let you in - marks not high enough LOL

Hulkster you have nothing your original claims was 98% of people agree Ronnie is better , so there fore he's better , this is a textbook example of an argument ad populum , learn this kid


An argumentum ad populum (Latin: "appeal to the people"), in logic, is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or all people believe it; it alleges that "If many believe so, it is so." In ethics this argument is stated, "If many find it acceptable, it is acceptable."

Examples

This fallacy is sometimes committed while trying to convince a person that a widely popular theory is true.

    * Since 88% of the people polled believed in UFOs, they must exist.
    * Since citizens have to pay taxes and are ruled by governments, the state must be a judicial reasoned and rightful institution.
    * Since most of the world believes in God, He must exist.

It is sometimes committed when trying to convince a person that widely unpopular theories are false.

    * It's silly for you to claim that Hitler would not have attacked the United States if they hadn't entered World War II. Everyone knows that he planned to conquer the world.

The fallacy is commonly found in arguments over ethics:

    * Most Americans hold that the Vietnam War was morally wrong. Therefore, the Vietnam War was morally wrong.
    * Since most people in the world eat meat, so there are no ethical issues involved in meat-eating.

The fallacy is also commonly found in marketing:

    * Brand X vacuum cleaners are the leading brand in America. You should buy Brand X vacuum cleaners.

Other examples:

    * Fifty million Elvis fans can't be wrong.
    * Christianity is believed in by the greatest amount of people in the world, so it must be true.
    * "Every society but ours believed in magic; why should we think otherwise?" "Every society but ours thought the sun revolved about the Earth, rather than the other way round. Would you decide the matter by majority vote?" - Isaac Asimov.
    * In a court of law, the jury vote by majority, therefore they will always make the correct decision.
    * Most analysts consider (at a certain time) Enron Corporation a well-run company with excellent management, so its common stock is a good investment.



98% of people think Ronnie is better than Dorian , there fore Ronnie is better than Dorian

Explanation

The argumentum ad populum is a red herring and genetic fallacy. It appeals on probabilistic terms; given that 75% of a population answer A to a question where the answer is unknown, the argument states that it is reasonable to assume that the answer is indeed A. In cases where the answer can be known but is not known by a questioned entity, the appeal to majority provides a possible answer with a relatively high probability of correctness.

It is logically fallacious because the mere fact that a belief is widely held is not necessarily a guarantee that the belief is correct; if the belief of any individual can be wrong, then the belief held by multiple persons can also be wrong. If for instance, a logical proof that the answer is A attempted to make the argument that 75% of people polled think the answer is A, there is a 25% chance that the answer is not A. However small the percentage of those polled is distributed among any remaining answers, this chance by definition disproves any guarantee of the correctness of the majority. In addition, this would be true even if the answer given by those polled were unanimous, as the sample size may be insufficient, or some fact may be unknown to those polled that, if known, would result in a different distribution of answers.

This fallacy is similar in structure to certain other fallacies that involve a confusion between the justification of a belief and its widespread acceptance by a given group of people. When an argument uses the appeal to the beliefs of a group of supposed experts, it takes on the form of an appeal to authority; if the appeal is to the beliefs of a group of respected elders or the members of one's community over a long period of time, then it takes on the form of an appeal to tradition.

One who commits this fallacy may assume that individuals commonly analyze and edit their beliefs and behaviors. This is often not the case (see conformity).

The argumentum ad populum can be a valid argument in inductive logic; for example, a poll of a sizeable population may find that 90% prefer a certain brand of product over another. A cogent (strong) argument can then be made that the next person will also prefer that brand, and the poll is valid evidence of that claim. However, it is unsuitable as an argument for deductive reasoning as proof, for instance to say that the poll proves that the preferred brand is superior to the competition in its composition.

This is where you get stopped dead in your tracks kid


The argumentum ad populum can be a valid argument in inductive logic; for example, a poll of a sizeable population may find that 90% prefer a certain brand of product over another. A cogent (strong) argument can then be made that the next person will also prefer that brand, and the poll is valid evidence of that claim. However, it is unsuitable as an argument for deductive reasoning as proof, for instance to say that the poll proves that the preferred brand is superior to the competition in its composition.

Your feeling that the argument ad populum is correct in your claim is flat out proven wrong period. argument ad populum is " unsuitable as an argument for deductive reasoning as proof , for instance to say that the poll proves that Ronnie is superior to Dorian

Exceptions

Appeal to belief is only valid when the question is whether the belief exists. Appeal to popularity is therefore only valid when the questions are whether the belief is widespread and to what degree. I.e., ad populum only proves that a belief is popular, not that it is true.

Again your claim is dismissed as an exception and why? because NO ONE is questioning whether the belief exists , so your claim that this warrants an exception in this case is once again proven flat out dead wrong , and in the case of ad populum arguments being true , it proves ONLY that the belief is popular and NOT I repeat NOT that the belief is true

Your argument is wrong , any ad populum argument that states a large number of people as proof is WRONG  , you're an idiot and don't question my intellect kid , because you run the risk of looking very dumb compared to me and thats already been proven many , many times on this thread .

[suckmymuscle]

Suckmyasshole, just give it up. I have proven you wrong on every claim.

I scaled them the exact same height to reduce error even though Ronnie is actually 1" taller

.

  SemenHole, I find you very funny. You claim that you have proven me wrong, when the only thing you have done is to provide a ton of conjecture, speculation and poorly substantitated comparisons to prove your point.

  The pictures in your comparison were taken in different contests, where the bodybuilders in question were standing at different distances from the camera and where Dorian is obviously tilted to one side, which enhances the illusion of Ronnie being wider than he really is. Adding insult to injury, you have the audacity to claim that your comparison is accurate because their heads and waists are aligned. So what? You obviously did not adjust for width and for depth, and that's patently obvious. My guess is that you got the picture of Dorian, adjusted for depth but did not change his width from the original comparison, thus making Dorian artificially narrower than he is. You also photoshopped some bodyparts to make it look bigger, like the forearms.

  As for you other conjectures, they are speculative and specious at best. You claim that the difference in forearm lengh between the two is only 4 milimters, despite the fact that you did not take into consideration that Dorian's wrist is torqued outward, which makes his forerm appear longer than it actually is. If his hand were staind like Ronnie in that comparison, then you'd se that the line you drew would go much upper than where it stops. In reality, the difference in forearm lengh between the two is over 1 centimeter. Now, the scale of the photo is variable according to the video resolution,l but it is obvious that it is a scale of at least 15, and probably as mkuch as 18. The only way for us to know for sure would be to have the original photo negative of the picture, which is impossible. In my screen, I get 11 centimeters, and that is what I base it on. I measured the original picture in the magazine, and got 12.5 centimeters, which is still much less than the 15 you claim.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

I measured Ronnie in the comparision pic and got...10.5 centimeters

  Tell that to SemenHole. According to him, Ronnie is 15 centimeters in that pic.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

that's all fine and dandy if we were comparing 97 Dorian to 03 Ronnie, but we are comparing Dorian at his prime. This means either his 93 or 95 package depending on who you ask. Ronnie has a huge advantage in size, taper, and definition. Remember, Jay weighed the same as Dorian in the 2nd pic and he looks small next to Ronnie.

  Oh, so you can choose Ronnie's biggest package - besides the 2004 Olympia - and then claim that he would defeat Dorian based on a size advantage, but we cannot pick Dorian's largest version? Guess what? Both had guts and symmetry issues, so if you are going to ignore Ronnie's massive gut - much worse than Dorian's - and just focus on the size advantage, then let's narrow the size advantage by picking Dorian's 270+ lbs package from 1997.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[NarcissisticDeity]

Non-arm

Same contest non-arm what?

[NeoSeminole]

Sir NeoSeminole, I find you very funny. You claim that you have proven me wrong, when the only thing you have done is to provide a ton of conjecture, speculation and poorly substantitated comparisons to prove your point.

all I have to do is prove you wrong beyond a reasonable doubt. Yes, I'm not God. So therefore I cannot show with 100% certainty that you're wrong. However, I have provided enough evidence to support my argument that any rational person would say I'm right.

The pictures in your comparison were taken in different contests, where the bodybuilders in question were standing at different distances from the camera and where Dorian is obviously tilted to one side, which enhances the illusion of Ronnie being wider than he really is. Adding insult to injury, you have the audacity to claim that your comparison is accurate because their heads and waists are aligned. So what? You obviously did not adjust for width and for depth, and that's patently obvious. My guess is that you got the picture of Dorian, adjusted for depth but did not change his width from the original comparison, thus making Dorian artificially narrower than he is. You also photoshopped some bodyparts to make it look bigger, like the forearms.

actually, my comparison favors Dorian. Ronnie is slightly turned to the side while Dorian is facing the camera straight on. I also scaled Dorian to be the same height as Ronnie even though he's 1" shorter in person. This is the exact opposite of what you claim.

You also photoshopped some bodyparts to make it look bigger, like the forearms.

As for you other conjectures, they are speculative and specious at best. You claim that the difference in forearm lengh between the two is only 4 milimters, despite the fact that you did not take into consideration that Dorian's wrist is torqued outward, which makes his forerm appear longer than it actually is. If his hand were staind like Ronnie in that comparison, then you'd se that the line you drew would go much upper than where it stops.

that's his wrist, you dipshit. You can even see where his hand makes a 90 degree angle to his forearm.

[NeoSeminole]

  Tell that to Sir NeoSeminole. According to him, Ronnie is 15 centimeters in that pic.

I have proof. You have nothing.











[/quote]

[NarcissisticDeity]

all I have to do is prove you wrong beyond a reasonable doubt. Yes, I'm not God. So therefore I cannot show with 100% certainty that you're wrong. However, I have provided enough evidence to support my argument that any rational person would say I'm right.

actually, my comparison favors Dorian. Ronnie is slightly turned to the side while Dorian is facing the camera straight on. I also scaled Dorian to be the same height as Ronnie even though he's 1" shorter in person. This is the exact opposite of what you claim.



that's his wrist, you dipshit.

lmfao resonable doubt this isn't court and best line ever " actually , my comparison favors Dorian " this my friend is classic !! thanks for the laugh 

[jammer]

LOL

dorian's quads are famous for their LACK of seperation..and blob like appearence...

quads were never a strong point for the shadow.

calves, you bet.

but not quads:

when he flexes them, nothing happens in terms of seperation:

Surely you jest.  Dorian's teardrops beat Ronnies slivers. Colemans quads may have weighed more, but they didn't look as nice.

Wise Men Say:
"GIRL WITH BIGGEST BOOBS, NOT ALWAYS HAVE NICEST BODY"


Long Live Dorian
Narcissistic Diety's arguments have carried the day.

[Shockwave]

Yep.
I see more Johnny-come-lately bodybuilding fans argue for Ronnie. I was the same way. When I really got into studying bodybuilding is when I found out why Dorian was so great.
He just fits the judging criteria better. He is a more complete bodybuilder, rather than a collection of freaky bodyparts.

[Hulkster]

Surely you jest.  Dorian's teardrops beat Ronnies slivers. Colemans quads may have weighed more, but they didn't look as nice.

not back in 99:

maybe in 2006 though.

[Shockwave]

not back in 99:

maybe in 2006 though.

I disagree.
Ronnie's quads look like deformed turnips.
Maybe you should use some of Dorian's Ab and Thigh shots, instead of a most muscular to compare, eh?
Except, then people might side with Dorian... oh nooooeeesss!!

[Hulkster]

I disagree.
Ronnie's quads look like deformed turnips.
Maybe you should use some of Dorian's Ab and Thigh shots, instead of a most muscular to compare, eh?
Except, then people might side with Dorian... oh nooooeeesss!!

I choose the mm because as you can see in the first shot dorian is extending and fully flexing his quad, just as ronnie does in the ab shot.

Problem with dorian's ab shot is he only flexes and shows his inner thigh, hiding his quads from the traditional pose (the front view like ronnie is doing).

dorian was a master poser. He knew his quads were not that great, and took steps to hide them from the judges with tricks like this.

Arnold was good at this too.

[IceCold]

I
dorian was a master poser. He knew his quads were not that great, and took steps to hide them from the judges with tricks like this.

Arnold was good at this too.

keep telling us what others are thinking.


 

[NarcissisticDeity]

keep telling us what others are thinking.


 

The judge at the 1994 Mr Olympia specifically said Yates has the best legs in the whole contest !! Yet Hulkster knows better than him lol

[Shockwave]

I choose the mm because as you can see in the first shot dorian is extending and fully flexing his quad, just as ronnie does in the ab shot.

Problem with dorian's ab shot is he only flexes and shows his inner thigh, hiding his quads from the traditional pose (the front view like ronnie is doing).

dorian was a master poser. He knew his quads were not that great, and took steps to hide them from the judges with tricks like this.

Arnold was good at this too.

This is where your flawed thinking comes in;
Part of the contest is being able to hide flaws.
So, if Dorian hid his flaws better than Ronnie, he wins.
You admitting that Dorian is a master poser gives him just another edge over Ronnie.

[IceCold]

This is where your flawed thinking comes in;
Part of the contest is being able to hide flaws.
So, if Dorian hid his flaws better than Ronnie, he wins.
You admitting that Dorian is a master poser gives him just another edge over Ronnie.

according to hulkster, when others hide their flaws during posing, they are smart. but when dorian does it, he's trying to hide his flaws.

other point this clown tries to make but of course, like every other one, is a contradiction.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Again who has Ronnie faced? who has challenged him ? and the answer is no one really , even though he's had a few close calls and lost a few times , Ronnie has never faced anyone of Dorian Yates' caliber , no one who could meet or exceed him in terms of his greatest strengths his back

Ronnie never faced anyone like Dorian , someone with unrivaled density , legendary freaky conditioning , near perfect balance & proportion , a winning machine , someone who never placed below second in a Pro show , someone who actually beat Lee Haney in the muscularity round in his first Mr Olympia ever despite being 10 pounds lighter , a man who was so far ahead of the competition in 1993 they didn't even need to include him in the muscularity round lmfao someone who dominated some of the highest caliber and quality of competitors in the history of bodybuilding

Ronnie never faced anyone like a prime operating Dorian Yates for anyone who thinks Ronnie no matter what year would enjoy a leisurely walk in the park facing Yates doesn't know bodybuilding , Yates was a winning machine 17 contests 15 win his only two loses were close seconds

[Shockwave]

Those shots are all ridiculous... Dorian literally looks like a machine in that back shot with Kevin. And that most muscular is untouchable as far as density, conditioning and balance are concerned.
Look at those fuckin calves!