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

[NarcissisticDeity]

A rear lat spread WITHOUT EQUAL:

I agree this shot is just outstanding it lacks nothing

The comparisons of the compulsory poses cannot be overemphasized
as these comparisons will help the judge to decide
which competitor has the superior physique from the standpoint of
muscular bulk, balanced development, muscular density and
definition.


Back Lat Spread (see Figure 5)
Standing with his back to the judges, the competitor will
place his hands on his waist with his elbows kept wide,
one foot back and resting on the toes. He will then
contract the latissimus dorsi as wide as possible and
display a calf contraction by pressing downward on the
rear toes. The competitor should make an effort to
display the opposite calf to that which was displayed
during the back double biceps pose so the the judge may
assess both calf muscle equally. It shall be strictly
forbidden for the competitor to pull up on the posing
trunks so as to show the gluteus maximus muscles.
The judge will look for a good spread of the latissimus
dorsi, but also for good muscle density and will again
conclude with the head-to-foot survey.

Notice it says the word ' calf ' not once but twice , Ronnie doesn't have any , Dorian's rear latspread like his front is without equal .

[NarcissisticDeity]

these are better.

Not according to the criteria , notice the word calf which they asked to see twice ? and Dorian's balance & proportion is better , his conditioning is better , he's complete and he's doing the pose correctly standing straight up and not leaning forward like Ronnie

[bizzy]

How does one sound ' angry and defensive ' on a message board? and again who are you to tell Ronnie when his best year was? and those pictures didn't prove anything you see what you want to see , McGough and Ronnie himself both reference he was better conditioned in 1998 and we've already established pictures aren't an accurate means to ascertain such things , you think you're going to tell two people on is the man in question if he's better conditioned one year or the next , despite never once seeing either of the contests in question? this makes sense to you? you're comfortable in typing this? LOL

my point stands 1999 is never quoted as his best showing , for a reason . some say 1998/2001/2003 never 1999 and the reason it's not is because his conditioning is lacking that extreme dryness & rock hardness he had in 1998 and 2001 . he was fuller in 1999 with very good conditioning just not as great as the other years he actually looks better fuller but make no mistake that fullness came at a cost.

This is only my subjective opinion and certainly doesn't make it right.
I think 1999 is the year he possessed the size qualities that made him
unreal in 2003 and the shape and definition that made him great in 1998, 2001.
Kinda the best of both worlds but shape wise much more similar to 98, 2001.
I'm not saying he was as big in 99 as 2003 so don't mistake what I'm saying here.
I've got onstage footage from 2001, backstage footage and photoshoot footage
after the 2001 AC. None of this footage, (3 different sources from the same contest
as well as different lighting in all three) still don't look as good as the 1999 footage of Ronnie.
Even McGough said he was a walking anatomy chart...You can't get much more defined
than that...plus twelve pounds heavier!
     

[NarcissisticDeity]

This is only my subjective opinion and certainly doesn't make it right.
I think 1999 is the year he possessed the size qualities that made him
unreal in 2003 and the shape and definition that made him great in 1998, 2001.
Kinda the best of both worlds but shape wise much more similar to 98, 2001.
I'm not saying he was as big in 99 as 2003 so don't mistake what I'm saying here.
I've got onstage footage from 2001, backstage footage and photoshoot footage
after the 2001 AC. None of this footage, (3 different sources from the same contest
as well as different lighting in all three) still don't look as good as the 1999 footage of Ronnie.
Even McGough said he was a walking anatomy chart...You can't get much more defined
than that...plus twelve pounds heavier!
     

Oh it's okay you think his best year is 1999 but make no mistake his conditioning was lacking compared to 1998/2001 hence why those are considered his best , density is part of the judging criteria and in the case of 1999 his fullness came at the expense of his density , does he look better fuller? I think so , but that doesn;t change the fact his conditioning at its  best is referenced in 98/01

[bizzy]

Oh it's okay you think his best year is 1999 but make no mistake his conditioning was lacking compared to 1998/2001 hence why those are considered his best , density is part of the judging criteria and in the case of 1999 his fullness came at the expense of his density , does he look better fuller? I think so , but that doesn;t change the fact his conditioning at its  best is referenced in 98/01

Fair enough...but we have to also apply the same criteria to Dorian
if we are going to apply it to Ronnie.
I think Yates best is the black and white photos from Kevin Horton
where he is fuller but not as dry as 1993 or 1995 and if we use the same
standard as you are using for Ronnie, also less dense.
I think most people would agree that the 269 shots of Yates are his best
although not his best condition; therefore my same reasoning with Ron in 1999.

[NarcissisticDeity]

Fair enough...but we have to also apply the same criteria to Dorian
if we are going to apply it to Ronnie.
I think Yates best is the black and white photos from Kevin Horton
where he is fuller but not as dry as 1993 or 1995 and if we use the same
standard as you are using for Ronnie, also less dense.
I think most people would agree that the 269 shots of Yates are his best
although not his best condition; therefore my same reasoning with Ron in 1999.

No thats the clear difference between Ronnie & Dorian , Dorian could go as high as 270 pounds and maintain his density & dryness proof?

While I’m on record as saying that the best physique I ever saw was Ronnie’s at the 2001 Arnold, he was never drier or harder than Dorian. In fact now that – 14 years after it happened – I recently for the first time saw the video of Dorian posing before the 1993 Olympia I have cause to rethink. I’m now not sure that Ronnie at 245 pounds would beat Dorian at 269 pounds. At a bigger bodyweight I think Ronnie would look soft next to an in-shape rock-hard Dorian.

On the subject of conditioning, no-one did it better than Dorian. He achieved a hardness and dryness (without losing fullness) that nobody has ever matched. In the flesh he looked even harder than he did in photos. It was like a statue made of granite was standing in front of you.

He achieved a hardness and dryness (without losing fullness) that nobody has ever matche

without losing fullness , echo that with Kevon Horton's quote

Kevin Horoton GetBig Dec 30th

The photo is technically terrible, fortunately the physique is awesome.
I'd agree with Kris about Dorian showing up on stage how he looked a few weeks out. There are some shots of him at around 280 - 285 shredded. That conditioning has not been surpassed.

and McGough's on Ronnie's weight and conditioning as it progressed

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 .

which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

Again if you notice Ronnie's conditioning was only spectacular when he was lighter and as he got progressively heavier  his conditioning always suffered for it , his two best showing conditioning wise were not ironically his lightest 249 pounds in 1998 and 247 pounds in 2001

[pumpster]

I agree this shot is just outstanding it lacks nothing

Wrong again; for those who comprehend anatomy, it's clear the arms are on the small side relative to the back & delts. Unlike the deficiency seen with the double bi shot, the problem here is lack of triceps size in relation to the rest of the package.

ND doesn't see it because he doesn't comprehend WTF i'm talking about LOL. Just look at guys in the same pose without this deficiency and take the time to look carefully at the differences vis-a-vis triceps size.

[bizzy]

No thats the clear difference between Ronnie & Dorian , Dorian could go as high as 270 pounds and maintain his density & dryness proof?

While I’m on record as saying that the best physique I ever saw was Ronnie’s at the 2001 Arnold, he was never drier or harder than Dorian. In fact now that – 14 years after it happened – I recently for the first time saw the video of Dorian posing before the 1993 Olympia I have cause to rethink. I’m now not sure that Ronnie at 245 pounds would beat Dorian at 269 pounds. At a bigger bodyweight I think Ronnie would look soft next to an in-shape rock-hard Dorian.

On the subject of conditioning, no-one did it better than Dorian. He achieved a hardness and dryness (without losing fullness) that nobody has ever matched. In the flesh he looked even harder than he did in photos. It was like a statue made of granite was standing in front of you.

He achieved a hardness and dryness (without losing fullness) that nobody has ever matche

without losing fullness , echo that with Kevon Horton's quote

Kevin Horoton GetBig Dec 30th

The photo is technically terrible, fortunately the physique is awesome.
I'd agree with Kris about Dorian showing up on stage how he looked a few weeks out. There are some shots of him at around 280 - 285 shredded. That conditioning has not been surpassed.

and McGough's on Ronnie's weight and conditioning as it progressed

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 .

which would seem to say that Ronnie is better at a lighter weight .

Again if you notice Ronnie's conditioning was only spectacular when he was lighter and as he got progressively heavier  his conditioning always suffered for it , his two best showing conditioning wise were not ironically his lightest 249 pounds in 1998 and 247 pounds in 2001

You can't have it both ways...I do agree that Yates was just as dense @ 269
as he was @ 257 if not more, but I also believe Ronnie was as or more dense
@ 257 than 245.
You can't say one bodybuilder is more dense because he is drier (Ronnie in 2001)
and then say that criteria doesn't apply to another bodybuilder.
As far as the 1993 video goes I don't think it is as impressive as the BandW pics.
I think it also shows that Dorian, although big, was not contest ready, whether that be
fat, water, ect.   

[delta9mda]

damn it man

[RocketSwitch625]

Wrong again; for those who comprehend anatomy, it's clear the arms are on the small side relative to the back & delts. Unlike the deficiency seen with the double bi shot, the problem here is lack of triceps size in relation to the rest of the package.

ND doesn't see it because he doesn't comprehend WTF i'm talking about LOL. Just look at guys in the same pose without this deficiency and take the time to look carefully at the differences vis-a-vis triceps size.

That comparison means nothing because when they were on stage for real Yates clearly dwarfed Coleman in the back department. There have been so many other comparisons in this thread proving this one to be inaccurate.

[pumpster]

damn it man

Touche. Yates cannot top this.

[pumpster]

That comparison means nothing because when they were on stage for real Yates clearly dwarfed Coleman in the back department. There have been so many other comparisons in this thread proving this one to be inaccurate.

Once again inneffectual in overturning hard evidence, given the usual absence of proof LOL

If talking out of yer ass with absolutely nothing to back it up is what counted, the 3-person Yates bandwagon would be in the lead.

[pumpster]

You can't have it both ways...I do agree that Yates was just as dense @ 269
as he was @ 257 if not more, but I also believe Ronnie was as or more dense
@ 257 than 245.
You can't say one bodybuilder is more dense because he is drier (Ronnie in 2001)
and then say that criteria doesn't apply to another bodybuilder.
As far as the 1993 video goes I don't think it is as impressive as the BandW pics.
I think it also shows that Dorian, although big, was not contest ready, whether that be
fat, water, ect.   

Are you kidding me? He will try desperately to have it both ways.

[Hulkster]

Check the ripped, trim waist, and the incredible smoothness and lack of size (far undersized in fact) of the twigs..er..arms:

fixed for accuracy.

[Hulkster]

ND, why do you keep saying Ronnie 99 was not as well conditioned than Ronnie 98 when we not only have the visual evidence to support this, but a Peter quote as well?

you have one peter quote and no  visual evidece.

we have both showing/stating that he was in better condition in 99.

answer please.

its getting stupid with you relying on ONE quote when we have ANOTHER quote stating the EXACT OPPOSITE PLUS VISUAL EVIDENCE.


please explain.

[Hulkster]

A rear lat spread WITHOUT EQUAL:

you mean the wrinkled loose skin on the lower back are without equal.. and the cutless glutes and smooth hams..oh wait Jay Cutler equals them lol

 

[Hulkster]

damn it man

those are some serious twigs on a barrel shots there.

arms like threads hanging off the massive back.

what contest are those from?

terrible proportions..

[Hulkster]

99 Ronnie wiping the floor with 95 dorian and 95 Ronnie too!

[Necrosis]

Not according to the criteria , notice the word calf which they asked to see twice ? and Dorian's balance & proportion is better , his conditioning is better , he's complete and he's doing the pose correctly standing straight up and not leaning forward like Ronnie

totally incorrect, ronnie looks bigger, hes whole lower body has better definition, and seperation. his traps are bigger. the screenshot from 99 is textbook, his conditioning is so far ahead of dorians its laughable. pumpster posted the pick, please show me how dorians shot is better, every bodypart save calves is better on ronnies and more conditioned.

[bizzy]

Here's a pic I dug up from this thread that was posted
along time ago. I have no idea the actual weights but
I have a feeling the Yates shot could be pre-contest
at a pretty heavy weight. I'm guessing the Ron shot
is 1999-2000.

[Iceman1981]

Huge, ripped, seperated from head to toe.

[IceCold]

the shot of yates is from 97 Olympia.

its from muscle and fitness.

they had an olympia report and a yates back training feature.

this is the cover - jan 98 -

i give the edge to yates - broader back, better lower lats, rear delts, and calves.

[IceCold]

Here's a pic I dug up from this thread that was posted
along time ago. I have no idea the actual weights but
I have a feeling the Yates shot could be pre-contest
at a pretty heavy weight. I'm guessing the Ron shot
is 1999-2000.

thanks for admitting what he already know to be true - yates would be too big for ronnie if ronnie matched or came close to his condition.

its a contest pic of 97 and you think its a pre contest pic of yates where he is heavier.


classic.

[bizzy]

thanks for admitting what he already know to be true - yates would be too big for ronnie if ronnie matched or came close to his condition.

its a contest pic of 97 and you think its a pre contest pic of yates where he is heavier.


classic.

The reason I said pre-contest is not because of the size but because of the lower back
definition. He doesn't look like he's in contest shape and Ronnie does.

[Hulkster]

totally incorrect, ronnie looks bigger, hes whole lower body has better definition, and seperation. his traps are bigger. the screenshot from 99 is textbook, his conditioning is so far ahead of dorians its laughable. pumpster posted the pick, please show me how dorians shot is better, every bodypart save calves is better on ronnies and more conditioned.

exactly.

cue ND to totally ignore the visuals and post the same peter quote that has already been contradicted by Peter himself.lol