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

[SomeKindofMonster]

I don't get this Ronnie 99 shit.
Clearly 98 he was better conditioned, and drier.
By Ronnie's own admission, and generally agreed by industry experts, 98 was his best. Or 2001 AC.
This 99 bullshit was started here by Hulkster after he beat off to the 99 Grand Prix pics. 

I am also one who has recently changed my opinion on what was Coleman's best year.
A recent poll at MD shows that a growing number of people feel the same way,
placing his 1999 Olympia physique over 1998.
http://forums.musculardevelopment.com/showthread.php?t=55162&highlight=Coleman

The main reasons for this is exposure of that year; The Muscletime Pictures, the heart of Texas video
2 weeks out, the backstage posing from the 99 O, the prejudging footage and the 99 Grand Prix.

He has the mass qualities of 2003 in his arms, shoulders, chest and back but without the severe
gut distention and overgrown thighs.
He has very close to the same conditioning as 1998 and 2001 so you get the best of both worlds so to speak.

A few quotes from writers who were there comparing 1999 to 1998.

Ronnie Coleman (1st place) must have been really psyched and motivated in the past year. He came in looking bigger, harder, denser, and more striated than last year. He was very aware of his condition and showed it off from all 360°. Ronnie is the king when it comes to muscularity. He was given straight 1st place votes by all judges in all rounds.
Lou Messina/East Coast Muscle

Last year, Ronnie was about ten pounds heavier and he was just as ripped as when he won the contest the first time in 1998.
Natural Mr. Olympia - John Hansen

Ronnie was gargantuan, herculean, and every adjective in between.
He was ripped, sharper than last year, and filled with a champions confidence.
Musclemag International/Johnny Fitness

In his first defense of the Mr. O title, Coleman exhibited size, condition and sinew-splitting fullness he lacked a year earlier. At 257 pounds, he was so separated that he looked like a walking anatomy chart.

1999 Olympia DVD description - Ronnie Coleman was again crowned 'king' of the Olympia, this time with a perfect score from all judges in all rounds. Ronnie's second victory saw him 10 pounds heavier than last year, and just as 'cut'. See all the drama as Flex is announced in second place!

Starting at 4:50 he explains why he was better in 1999 than 1998.

2003 O and 1999 GP side chest
 
 
 

[Hulkster]

I am also one who has recently changed my opinion on what was Coleman's best year.
A recent poll at MD shows that a growing number of people feel the same way,
placing his 1999 Olympia physique over 1998.
http://forums.musculardevelopment.com/showthread.php?t=55162&highlight=Coleman

The main reasons for this is exposure of that year; The Muscletime Pictures, the heart of Texas video
2 weeks out, the backstage posing from the 99 O, the prejudging footage and the 99 Grand Prix.

thank you.

are you reading this nuthuggers?

 

[Shockwave]

I am also one who has recently changed my opinion on what was Coleman's best year.
A recent poll at MD shows that a growing number of people feel the same way,
placing his 1999 Olympia physique over 1998.
http://forums.musculardevelopment.com/showthread.php?t=55162&highlight=Coleman

The main reasons for this is exposure of that year; The Muscletime Pictures, the heart of Texas video
2 weeks out, the backstage posing from the 99 O, the prejudging footage and the 99 Grand Prix.

He has the mass qualities of 2003 in his arms, shoulders, chest and back but without the severe
gut distention and overgrown thighs.
He has very close to the same conditioning as 1998 and 2001 so you get the best of both worlds so to speak.

A few quotes from writers who were there comparing 1999 to 1998.

Ronnie Coleman (1st place) must have been really psyched and motivated in the past year. He came in looking bigger, harder, denser, and more striated than last year. He was very aware of his condition and showed it off from all 360°. Ronnie is the king when it comes to muscularity. He was given straight 1st place votes by all judges in all rounds.
Lou Messina/East Coast Muscle

Last year, Ronnie was about ten pounds heavier and he was just as ripped as when he won the contest the first time in 1998.
Natural Mr. Olympia - John Hansen

Ronnie was gargantuan, herculean, and every adjective in between.
He was ripped, sharper than last year, and filled with a champions confidence.
Musclemag International/Johnny Fitness

In his first defense of the Mr. O title, Coleman exhibited size, condition and sinew-splitting fullness he lacked a year earlier. At 257 pounds, he was so separated that he looked like a walking anatomy chart.

1999 Olympia DVD description - Ronnie Coleman was again crowned 'king' of the Olympia, this time with a perfect score from all judges in all rounds. Ronnie's second victory saw him 10 pounds heavier than last year, and just as 'cut'. See all the drama as Flex is announced in second place!

Starting at 4:50 he explains why he was better in 1999 than 1998.

2003 O and 1999 GP side chest
 
 
 

Lol. Heres the problem... all those quotes are from 99. If you look at any quotes after 99, almost everybody is willing to admit that he was off slightly. Everyone thinks they are in the greatest condition of there life right after winning the O, and leading up to the show. Lol.

[JP_RC]

Everyone freaking out? Theres like 2 people that stand with you, and Im pretty sure 1 is a gimmick. Lol.
You're such a tool.
Heres the thing,.. You always say Mcgough opinions arent valid. Ive cornered you on this before. Heres the thing, if his opinions are always invalid like you say, then why do you stand by him? Especially when by Ronnies' own admision 98 was his best.
All you have is your opinion. Thats it. Sorry, you lose.

Are you talking about me? 

I'm not a gimmick.

[Cleanest Natural]

this thread is borderline mentally retarded



this is written by people with huge mental issues

[JP_RC]

Good video of Dorian in the 1996 german grand prix. That has to be the best I've seen Yates back poses look, but his front is not as good. It still wouldn't be enough for Ronnie in 1999.

Let's compare

I have basically compared Ronnie in 1999 to basically every single one of Dorian's best according to his fans here: 1993, 1995 and 1996.
I still see Ronnie beating him.

[JP_RC]

I hope this puts this thread to rest now.

[beefcakeblake]

I hope this puts this thread to rest now.

yeah right   in your opinion ronnie is beating dorian, doesn't mean he is.

[Hulkster]

If you look at any quotes after 99, almost everybody is willing to admit that he was off slightly.

1. thats not what the videos and pics show.

2. even McGough feels 99 was better than 98 (see his article), and he is the guy saviour.

so not only do you have visual proof, you have "expert" testimony of people who were there (McGough)

so you have nothing left go on.

99>>98.


all you can do is cling to the delusion that 98 was better, but that isn't supported by the visuals nor is it agreed with by people like Peter McGough, the guy hero LOL.

[EspenG]

I am a huge Yates fan... and I have to say that the 96 German video shows some of the 'intangible' quality that many have been talking about - that do not show in pics. I also happen to be a fan of Coleman as well.

That being said, I have to agree with Hulkster that he was at his best in 99. Especially his delts and quads were much bigger and fuller. His conditioning was also fantastic that year. So what if it was marginally off from 98. Still it was fantastic, and the advancements in (symmetrically distributed) size far outwighted any conditioning issue. In the 2001 AC I think he was dry, but lacking in fullness and size. Also, an as for bodybuilding, I feel that his 2000 Mr O was great. His size was enourmous, and the conditioning was more then good enough. After 2000 it all went downhill. I can't understand those that celebrate even his 03 showing....

As much as I appreciate ND and collaborators, I have to say that it don't seem right to make Ronnie's 99 condition an issue.

Anyway, who were the best.... discuss. But who would have won? I think it partially depends on whether any of them were the defending champion.

[Hulkster]

That being said, I have to agree with Hulkster that he was at his best in 99. Especially his delts and quads were much bigger and fuller. His conditioning was also fantastic that year.

very smart post.

the nuthuggers have egg on their faces now, don't they?

they are being embarassed by people that know better..

[d0nny2600]

very smart post.

the nuthuggers have egg on their faces now, don't they?

they are being embarassed by people that know better..

My god you take this very seriously

[Hulkster]

Ronnie 99 is a very serious physique.

 

[d0nny2600]

Ronnie 99 is very serious.

 

Your mancrush is quite amazing

[Wiggs]

Ronnie 99 is a very serious physique.

 

that is quite awesome

[Hulkster]

mancrush? uh no.

but I do believe that ronnie was easily better than dorian.

[Fatpanda]

Ronnie 99 is a very serious physique.

 

best there has ever been 

[TrapsMcLats]

99 Ronnie is simply the best.

[beefcakeblake]

I am a huge Yates fan... and I have to say that the 96 German video shows some of the 'intangible' quality that many have been talking about - that do not show in pics. I also happen to be a fan of Coleman as well.

That being said, I have to agree with Hulkster that he was at his best in 99. Especially his delts and quads were much bigger and fuller. His conditioning was also fantastic that year. So what if it was marginally off from 98. Still it was fantastic, and the advancements in (symmetrically distributed) size far outwighted any conditioning issue. In the 2001 AC I think he was dry, but lacking in fullness and size. Also, an as for bodybuilding, I feel that his 2000 Mr O was great. His size was enourmous, and the conditioning was more then good enough. After 2000 it all went downhill. I can't understand those that celebrate even his 03 showing....

As much as I appreciate ND and collaborators, I have to say that it don't seem right to make Ronnie's 99 condition an issue.

Anyway, who were the best.... discuss. But who would have won? I think it partially depends on whether any of them were the defending champion.

I kinda agree as well, I think ronnie was better from the front in 99, but not as good from the back compared to 98 imo.

99: cut up quads, a little fuller, more mass, a bit better posing.
   
98: conditioning, dryness.

[FREAKgeek]

My god you take this very seriously

Hulkster does good work. He is a ronnie apologist that has dedicated his life to preserving, defending, and preaching the legacy. His martyrdom has no limits; he will risk his life over selling out or accepting falsehood from the nuthugging, lower tier fans.

[beefcakeblake]

Hulkster does good work. He is a ronnie apologist that has dedicated his life to preserving, defending, and preaching the legacy. His martyrdom has no limits; he will risk his life over selling out or accepting falsehood from the nuthugging, lower tier fans.

other words biggest fan boy!!   

[NeoSeminole]

other words biggest fan boy!!

show some godamn respect, boy!!!

Lord Hulkster preacheth the holy gospel of bodybuilding so that sinners like you may see the light.

[beefcakeblake]

show some godamn respect, boy!!!

Lord Hulkster preacheth the holy gospel of bodybuilding so that sinners like you may see the light.

lmao ahahah

No he's a guy who only likes one bb and goes on the internet trying to say hes the best
 but gets his ass kicked because he sucks at debating.

So i call him fanboy cause he's so biased for the man he loves.

[FREAKgeek]

Most non symmetrical arms for any O. All the mass in world can't hide such structural flaws. This is one of the big reasons why Ronnie is better.

[Hulkster]

exactly.

but the nuthuggers have never been known to realize simple things about the sport like this..