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

[IceCold]

well, post tear he was pretty bad. Even the most devout dorian sausage swallower like your self has to admit that one.

what's worse:  your hypocrisy or nuthugging?

[Hulkster]

hulkster,

notice how dorian is the same color in every pic, unlike you who posts a different color of ronnie in every pic.

fucking tool.

Excuse #1.

I still find it funny that you are not smart enough to realize that different pics and screencaps of EVERYONE often have different colours.

eg. all pics from the SAME contest retard:

are these 'fake' too?

idiot.

[suckmymuscle]

`

  Hulkster, why is it that you believe that pictures tell the whole story? A proper bodybuilding contest takes roughly six hours to be judged(pre-judging + posing round + posedown), and there is a criteria that the judges use to score the bodybuilders. You cannot post a picture of a crab shot - where Ronnie excels - from the front and then based on this say that Ronnie would win. that's utter nonsense. Then you keep bringing up "shape and detail" as reasons for why Ronnie would win, but you ignore that bodybuilders with shapes as different as Nasser and Wheeler have won bodybuilding contests, and that, while Ronnie has more details, Dorian has greater hardness.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

  Hulkster, reply to this.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Hulkster]

Hulkster, why is it that you believe that pictures tell the whole story? A proper bodybuilding contest takes roughly six hours to be judged(pre-judging + posing round + posedown), and there is a criteria that the judges use to score the bodybuilders. You cannot post a picture of a crab shot - where Ronnie excels - from the front and then based on this say that Ronnie would win. that's utter nonsense. Then you keep bringing up "shape and detail" as reasons for why Ronnie would win, but you ignore that bodybuilders with shapes as different as Nasser and Wheeler have won bodybuilding contests, and that, while Ronnie has more details, Dorian has greater hardness.

Pictures don't tell the whole story. They never have. But we have never seen peak ronnie standing next to peak dorian on the same stage and we never will. So we have to work with what we have available.

However, the problem is that the dorian side (eg. mainly ND) is saying that dorian 'looks way way better in person than he does in these pics" but that Ronnie coleman (or anyone else for that matter) somehow 'does not". As if Dorian has some special property (photoelectric effect? ) that no one else has. Which comes across as a pathetic attempt to discredit good comparisons.


Philosophy lesson for ND (since he needs one badly):

this tactic is known as an 'ad hoc' argument: another premis thrown in just to protect an argument from being falsefied (in this case that dorian is better). Throw in some bullshit about dorian looking better in person but ronnie does not and bingo: you save your argument with a complete fallacy).

Secondly, I have never said Ronnie would win simply based on a crab shot. Its a good indicator of upper and lower body strengths though. Great at showcasing the arms, pecs, traps, delts, sometimes quads.

I have been making the argument that Ronnie would win because he wins all mandatory poses with the exception of the front lat and ab shot.

So I don't know where you came up with that one.

Thirdly, you can't use Nasser or Flex as examples because Nasser had no back at all (hence why Yates won despite being owned from the front by nasser at more than one contest) and Flex never put it together even once on an olympia stage (and was super narrow). So even though they both had better shape and detail than dorian in many areas like Ronnie does, their lack of back strengths hurt them against Dorian. The same would NOT apply to Ronnie 99 clearly. Many say (even ND's friend Peter M. LOL) that Ronnie's back was the greatest of all time. Including dorian's.

you are talking about apples and oranges here.

[The Next BIG Thing!]

  What the fuck is Newtonian mechanics? I think you are refering to quantum mechanics. It was invented by Heisenberg and not by Newton. And it has nothing to do with gravity. It's just that quantum mechanics and general relativity are incompatible. Gravity works both in general relativity as well as quantum mechanics. Yet, general relativity and quantum mechanics don't agree on general principle. For instance, general relativity states that nothing can travel faster than light, but the speed of light has been exceeded by photons under certain circumstances. Likewise, general relativity states that a particle cannot be at two different places simultaneously, but according to quantum mechanics, they can.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

What's that noise? It's either Ron Coleman dropping to one knee again, or it's Newton spinning in his grave...

LOL!


TNBT 

[NarcissisticDeity]

you mean " I can't counter the response so I won't":

 

dorian's arms are blurred from water retention compared to the dry ripped and dense muscle of Ronnie Coleman:

dorian was dry in some areas, but arms and quads were NOT one of them, at least compared to one Ronnie Coleman:

Countdown to the Excuses! (and non responses):

LMFAO look at the magazine scans VS screencaps lol see a difference? I've read every Mr Olympia report from Yates wins and NEVER NOT ONCE ANYWHERE does it day he was holding water ANYWHERE you don't know a God damn thing.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Pictures don't tell the whole story. They never have. But we have never seen peak ronnie standing next to peak dorian on the same stage and we never will. So we have to work with what we have available.

However, the problem is that the dorian side (eg. mainly ND) is saying that dorian 'looks way way better in person than he does in these pics" but that Ronnie coleman (or anyone else for that matter) somehow 'does not". As if Dorian has some special property (photoelectric effect? ) that no one else has. Which comes across as a pathetic attempt to discredit good comparisons.


Philosophy lesson for ND (since he needs one badly):

this tactic is known as an 'ad hoc' argument: another premis thrown in just to protect an argument from being falsefied (in this case that dorian is better). Throw in some bullshit about dorian looking better in person but ronnie does not and bingo: you save your argument with a complete fallacy).

Secondly, I have never said Ronnie would win simply based on a crab shot. Its a good indicator of upper and lower body strengths though. Great at showcasing the arms, pecs, traps, delts, sometimes quads.

I have been making the argument that Ronnie would win because he wins all mandatory poses with the exception of the front lat and ab shot.

So I don't know where you came up with that one.

Thirdly, you can't use Nasser or Flex as examples because Nasser had no back at all (hence why Yates won despite being owned from the front by nasser at more than one contest) and Flex never put it together even once on an olympia stage (and was super narrow). So even though they both had better shape and detail than dorian in many areas like Ronnie does, their lack of back strengths hurt them against Dorian. The same would NOT apply to Ronnie 99 clearly. Many say (even ND's friend Peter M. LOL) that Ronnie's back was the greatest of all time. Including dorian's.

you are talking about apples and oranges here.

Pictures don't tell the whole story. They never have. But we have never seen peak ronnie standing next to peak dorian on the same stage and we never will. So we have to work with what we have available.

However, the problem is that the dorian side (eg. mainly ND) is saying that dorian 'looks way way better in person than he does in these pics" but that Ronnie coleman (or anyone else for that matter) somehow 'does not". As if Dorian has some special property (photoelectric effect? ) that no one else has. Which comes across as a pathetic attempt to discredit good comparisons.

No it isn't mainly ND saying Dorian looks better it is bodybuilding writers , judges , and fellow competitors just because it shuts your ' argument ' down in 10 seconds flat and you can't grasp it doesn't mean its not true , you desperately need to to NOT be true . and please spare me the good comparisons bull shit you've posted 1992/1994/1996/1997 against Ronnie , you've posted magazine scans of Dorian to studio shots or Ronnie , and screencaps you have NO clue what a good comparison is.

Philosophy lesson for ND (since he needs one badly):

this tactic is known as an 'ad hoc' argument: another premis thrown in just to protect an argument from being falsefied (in this case that dorian is better). Throw in some bullshit about dorian looking better in person but ronnie does not and bingo: you save your argument with a complete fallacy).

Secondly, I have never said Ronnie would win simply based on a crab shot. Its a good indicator of upper and lower body strengths though. Great at showcasing the arms, pecs, traps, delts, sometimes quads.

I have been making the argument that Ronnie would win because he wins all mandatory poses with the exception of the front lat and ab shot.

So I don't know where you came up with that one.

lmfao I love when you try and bring philosophy into the mix you're the moron who clings to the argument ad populum and now ad hoc? this is thrown to protect the argument its thrown in to prove that judging contest via pictures is INACCURATE I don't care if you agree or NOT it doesn't change the fact I have 5 eyewitness accounts saying saying Yates looks better in person than pictures you have ZERO claiming this is NOT true these are people who eye-fucking-witnesses you will never trump their opinion sitting at home , the balls you have claiming pictures are just as accurate as reality I have a bodybuilding photographer and a competitive bodybuilder BOTH say pictures mean DICK hence why contests are judged in PERSON and NOT IN Moron , Cananda on your PC

You have NOT been making the argument Ronnie wins all the mandatories except the ab-thigh and front latspread , you recently jumped of the deep end with the claim Dorian loses the side triceps as well lol you're clueless contests are judged by balance & proportion , conditioning & density , muscular bulk and posing and Ronnie doesn't beat Yates in criteria I don't care what you claim you also claim that Ronnie's conditioning was better in 99 than 98 despite two eye witnesses accounts ONE from the man in question

So I don't know where you came up with that one.

Thirdly, you can't use Nasser or Flex as examples because Nasser had no back at all (hence why Yates won despite being owned from the front by nasser at more than one contest) and Flex never put it together even once on an olympia stage (and was super narrow). So even though they both had better shape and detail than dorian in many areas like Ronnie does, their lack of back strengths hurt them against Dorian. The same would NOT apply to Ronnie 99 clearly. Many say (even ND's friend Peter M. LOL) that Ronnie's back was the greatest of all time. Including dorian's.

you are talking about apples and oranges here.

Dorian beat everyone Ronnie included he never placed below second place in a pro contest he is the criteria , stop cherry picking the criteria for what you like follow the criteria you're scared because you know who it favors you know Ronnie's conditioning isn't on par with Dorian thats exactly why you dismiss Ronnie and McGough , you know Ronnie doesn't have better balance & proportion thats why you dismiss the quotes that say so , you can't counter the criteria and you're stuck on stupid period , the criteria favors Yates and you can't stand it hence why you dismiss EVERYONE who says so , but you'll cling when Peter says Dorian has the best back , you're a cherry picking hypocrite who doesn't know a dman thing about competitive bodybuilding and I own you .

[NarcissisticDeity]

you mean " I can't counter the response so I won't":

 

dorian's arms are blurred from water retention compared to the dry ripped and dense muscle of Ronnie Coleman:

dorian was dry in some areas, but arms and quads were NOT one of them, at least compared to one Ronnie Coleman:

Countdown to the Excuses! (and non responses):

LMFAO again I fucking dare you to find me a single quote saying Yates was holding water in his arms and quads YOU CAN NOT DO IT you can't be holding water when you're dense its the absence of fat and water even intramuscularly you can NOT get better conditioned than that , you know nothing about conditioning , keep clinging to striations and detail

[suckmymuscle]

Pictures don't tell the whole story. They never have. But we have never seen peak ronnie standing next to peak dorian on the same stage and we never will. So we have to work with what we have available.

However, the problem is that the dorian side (eg. mainly ND) is saying that dorian 'looks way way better in person than he does in these pics" but that Ronnie coleman (or anyone else for that matter) somehow 'does not". As if Dorian has some special property (photoelectric effect? ) that no one else has. Which comes across as a pathetic attempt to discredit good comparisons.


Philosophy lesson for ND (since he needs one badly):

this tactic is known as an 'ad hoc' argument: another premis thrown in just to protect an argument from being falsefied (in this case that dorian is better). Throw in some bullshit about dorian looking better in person but ronnie does not and bingo: you save your argument with a complete fallacy).

Secondly, I have never said Ronnie would win simply based on a crab shot. Its a good indicator of upper and lower body strengths though. Great at showcasing the arms, pecs, traps, delts, sometimes quads.

I have been making the argument that Ronnie would win because he wins all mandatory poses with the exception of the front lat and ab shot.

So I don't know where you came up with that one.

Thirdly, you can't use Nasser or Flex as examples because Nasser had no back at all (hence why Yates won despite being owned from the front by nasser at more than one contest) and Flex never put it together even once on an olympia stage (and was super narrow). So even though they both had better shape and detail than dorian in many areas like Ronnie does, their lack of back strengths hurt them against Dorian. The same would NOT apply to Ronnie 99 clearly. Many say (even ND's friend Peter M. LOL) that Ronnie's back was the greatest of all time. Including dorian's.

you are talking about apples and oranges here.

  But Hulkster, here are two things for you to keep in mind. First:

 The pictures need to have equal contrast, the bodybuilders need to be standing at the same distance from the camera and the pictures cannot have been tampered with.

  Two:

 The criteria need to be applied.

  These are my criticisms, Hulkster: The pictures you provide for Ronnie do not have the same contrast as the ones for Dorian, they are not standing at the same distance from the camera, and in the case of SemenHole, the pcitures were tampered with.

  Then, you compare these innacurate pics and give your opinion that ronnie would win, because he has better "shape and detail". You don't explain why Ronnie would win according to the I.F.B.B judging guidelines. For instance, the idiotic comparisons of Dorian vs Ronnie 2003, the picture was adjusted for height and for depth, but not for width. This is evident in that Ronnie's arms and forearms are much longer than Dorian's.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Hulkster]

What the fuck is Newtonian mechanics? I think you are refering to quantum mechanics

come on sucky! you have a science degree no?

newtonian mechanics is a common term for classical mechanics in physics.

eg.

http://eml.ou.edu/Physics/module/newton/

[Hulkster]

LMFAO again I fucking dare you to find me a single quote saying Yates was holding water in his arms and quads YOU CAN NOT DO IT you can't be holding water when you're dense its the absence of fat and water even intramuscularly you can NOT get better conditioned than that , you know nothing about conditioning , keep clinging to striations and detail

I don't have to.

just compare his arms and quads to Ronnie's in 99 and you quickly can see who has better conditioning in those areas. and they are big areas. except for dorian's arms hahaha.

93 has come and gone you know..

you find lots of praise of dorian from the early 90's.

that praise was relative to the physiques of the day (ie against narrow opposition like flex and shawn).

Not to the level that the next Mr. O would take it. Had it all, inluding a crazy wide back.

jay is a step backward according to most people.

each Mr. O. in general tended to raise the bar a bit.

but not Jay. He opened the fridge.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Peter Mcgough

  "These words should not be taken lightly, because no bodybuilder has ever been as hard and dry as the man who won six Sandows."

This is an eyewitness who has seen both Ronnie & Dorian compete at their bests , he says NO bodybuilder has ever been as hard & dry as Yates NO ONE , not Ronnie 98 not Ronnie 99 not Ronnie 01

Strike 1

Lee Priest

HOW DO YOU FEEL DORIAN WOULD FAIR AGAINST RONNIE COLEMAN NOW?

I think Dorian at his best (1993) would easily beat Ronnie. Dorian might not be as symmetrical as Ronnie, but all over he was more complete and in better condition at his best.


This is another eyewitness who has seen both Ronnie & Dorian compete at their bests , he has Dorian has better conditioning and this quote is post 1999 , so another eyewitness says Yates is better conditioned than Ronnie 98 and Ronnie 99

Strike 2

Dorian Yates on Pro Bodybuilding Weekly

I have better balance and better conditioning

Strike 3 you're out !

guess what? Dorian has better fucking conditioning than Ronnie , I'm not difficult I think Ronnie perhaps matched Dorian for conditioning in 1998 and 2001 but other than that NO WAY especially 1999 and why? lets see

Quote Peter McGough Flex Magazine Jan 2001

RONNIE COLEMAN : ( 264lbs As big as a house , but holding water. In '98 , he was shredded and bone dry at 250 pounds. Last year ( 1999 ) he was 257 pounds but NOT as sharp as '98. This year ( 2000 ) at 264 pounds , he's not as sharp as 99 , which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

1998 he was bone dry and rock hard 199 he was NOT as sharp period end of sentence , your opinion will NOT ever take the place of someone who was standing live and in person litteraly two feet from Ronnie at both contests

Ronnie on Pro Bodybuilding Weekly

My best Olympia was my first because my conditioning was spot on

Who the fuck are you to tell Ronnie he's wrong? LMFAO now McGough isn't only wrong but the man in question Ronnie Coleman is lol you really played yourself when you said that this ranks up their as your all time stupid statements , your opinion will NEVER take place of two eyewitnesses especially the man in question , never

Interview with David Robson

[ Q ] What were some of your better physical qualities as a bodybuilder, do you think?

      Obviously I carried a lot of muscle mass and my trademark was to come into a show in super hard condition. I think my muscles had a certain quality and density from all the years of heavy training that a lot of guys didn't have.


      One thing that I think people underrated me on - it was never really mentioned because of my sheer physical size and condition - was my balance and proportion. Not only from muscle group to muscle group, but from upper body to lower body. My skeletal structure and everything else was there and in good balance.

Dorian commenting on his super-hard conditioning which was his trademark and once again Hulkster proving the pros wrong at home on his computer  NO Dorian your conditioning was just ok you're holding water in your arms and quads , Hulkster figured this out NOT after seeing you in person but by magazine scans , lmfao you have a long history of dismissing professionals be it writers or competitors and even judges ! your opinion is garbage , you're done the moment you dismiss everyone over an admitted inaccurate means .

[NarcissisticDeity]

  But Hulkster, here are two things for you to keep in mind. First:

  The pictures need to have equal contrast, the bodybuilders need to be standing at the same distance from the camera and the pictures cannot have been tampered with.

  Two:

  The criteria need to be applied.

  These are my criticisms, Hulkster: The pictures you provide for Ronnie do not have the same contrast as the ones for Dorian, they are not standing at the same distance from the camera, and in the case of SemenHole, the pcitures were tampered with.

  Then, you compare these innacurate pics and give your opinion that ronnie would win, because he has better "shape and detail". You don't explain why Ronnie would win according to the I.F.B.B judging guidelines. For instance, the idiotic comparisons of Dorian vs Ronnie 2003, the picture was adjusted for height and for depth, but not for width. This is evident in that Ronnie's arms and forearms are much longer than Dorian's.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Great post !

[Hulkster]

LMFAO look at the magazine scans VS screencaps lol see a difference? I've read every Mr Olympia report from Yates wins and NEVER NOT ONCE ANYWHERE does it day he was holding water ANYWHERE you don't know a God damn thing.

again, you miss the whole point.

dorian's arms may have looked okay back in 93, but put his arms next to 99 Ronnie and you would get a completely DIFFERENT answer, I promise you.

you don't seem to understand the time context of your quotes.

quotes praising dorian mean nothing because those quotes were not made relative to a 99 Ronnie coleman standing next to him, which is what we are talking about here.

[NarcissisticDeity]

I don't have to.

just compare his arms and quads to Ronnie's in 99 and you quickly can see who has better conditioning in those areas. and they are big areas. except for dorian's arms hahaha.

93 has come and gone you know..

you find lots of praise of dorian from the early 90's.

that praise was relative to the physiques of the day (ie against narrow opposition like flex and shawn).

Not to the level that the next Mr. O would take it. Had it all, inluding a crazy wide back.

jay is a step backward according to most people.

each Mr. O. in general tended to raise the bar a bit.

but not Jay. He opened the fridge.

You don't know what conditioning is , stop posting , Dorian is conditioning and your opinion is stupid , period I have thee eyewitnesses saying Dorian's conditioning is better than Ronnies , you have ZERO saying Ronnie's is better than Yates , you're opinion is ignorant and biased and reached by an inaccurate means you have NOTHING .

[NarcissisticDeity]

again, you miss the whole point.

dorian's arms may have looked okay back in 93, but put his arms next to 99 Ronnie and you would get a completely DIFFERENT answer, I promise you.

you don't seem to understand the time context of your quotes.

quotes praising dorian mean nothing because those quotes were not made relative to a 99 Ronnie coleman standing next to him, which is what we are talking about here.

LMFAO you don't know anything I have THREE quotes specifically stating Dorian has better conditioning than Ronnie Coleman , top that you can't , you can't even find ONE quote saying this , your opinion is ignorant three eyewitnesses crush you

[Iceman1981]

LOL, you nuthuggers have gone to a new low. Now the comparisons don't count? Slanted? Give me a damn break you morons. Your hero yates getting crushed. Deal with it, everyone else has. LOL.

[Hulkster]

You don't know what conditioning is , stop posting , Dorian is conditioning and your opinion is stupid

LOL this is a classic response of someone who is losing an argument. Just cover your eyes and ears and say "lalalalala you are stupid"  

great response ND.

news flash: dorian WAS conditioning .... back in 93...

not anymore:

[NarcissisticDeity]

LOL this is a classic response of someone who is losing an argument. Just cover your eyes and ears and say "lalalalala you are stupid"   

great response ND.

news flash: dorian WAS conditioning .... back in 93...

not anymore:

Ha ha ha classic Hulkster resort to straw men comparisons  a studio shot of Ronnie and a blurry scan of Yates , I have three count them THREE people who say Dorian is better conditioned than Ronnie , this crushes your straw men comparisons and ignorant opinion , three eyewitnesses crush you , how you like me now? 

[NarcissisticDeity]

LOL, you nuthuggers have gone to a new low. Now the comparisons don't count? Slanted? Give me a damn break you morons. Your hero yates getting crushed. Deal with it, everyone else has. LOL.

Oh yes those are all accurate and fair  this is the ONLY way Ronnie is going to beat Dorian in fantasy comparisons

[Hulkster]

Ha ha ha classic Hulkster resort to straw men comparisons  a studio shot of Ronnie and a blurry scan of Yates , I have three count them THREE people who say Dorian is better conditioned than Ronnie , this crushes your straw men comparisons and ignorant opinion , three eyewitnesses crush you , how you like me now? 

it doesn't matter how clear the pic is ND, The shadow always had doughy watery arms:

[Hulkster]

LOL, you nuthuggers have gone to a new low. Now the comparisons don't count? Slanted? Give me a damn break you morons. Your hero yates getting crushed. Deal with it, everyone else has. LOL.

like I said, those comparisons are as close to a dream showdown as we will EVER get without a time machine.

great job!

the dorian side will always say they are slanted and inaccurate because they show that they are fighting a losing argument right from the start.

[NarcissisticDeity]

it doesn't matter how clear the pic is ND, The shadow always had doughy watery arms:

I have three eyewitnesses who say Dorian is better conditioned than Ronnie , what do you have? 

[NarcissisticDeity]

like I said, those comparisons are as close to a dream showdown as we will EVER get without a time machine.

great job!

the dorian side will always say they are slanted and inaccurate because they show that they are fighting a losing argument right from the start.

A losing argument ? I have THREE eyewitnesses that say Dorian has better conditioning than Ronnie , I have two saying he has better balance than Ronnie , I'm winning kid you can't counter this.

[Hulkster]

you have three eyewitnesses who's opinions can "easily be proven wrong" as you so eloquently put it..