Author Topic: ruhl should have placed higher  (Read 4810 times)

Colossus_1986

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 2640
Re: ruhl should have placed higher
« Reply #25 on: October 05, 2006, 07:45:57 AM »
Absolutely not.

PB

did u watch the same show as us? or were you just listening to an audio feed of it and imagined it for yourself?  ::)

Childish///AMG

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1478
Re: ruhl should have placed higher
« Reply #26 on: October 05, 2006, 09:09:06 AM »
Not to take anything away from the others who placed "Higher"
but I do think Ruhl should have placed higher

knny187

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 22005
Re: ruhl should have placed higher
« Reply #27 on: October 05, 2006, 12:05:24 PM »
I saw Made in Germany.....

thy gym looks hardcore

Royalty

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 32993
  • Nasser Endorses Trump 🇺🇸
Re: ruhl should have placed higher
« Reply #28 on: October 05, 2006, 05:39:18 PM »
Not to take anything away from the others who placed "Higher"
but I do think Ruhl should have placed higher


at most olympias, places 6-10 could be mixed around and people wouldnt complain.

IceCold

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4878
  • Getbig!
Re: ruhl should have placed higher
« Reply #29 on: October 05, 2006, 09:11:08 PM »

at most olympias, places 6-10 could be mixed around and people wouldnt complain.


true.
R.I.P. DIMEBAG DARRELL ABBOTT (1966-2004)

Wombat

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2873
  • Your name tattooed to my ass!
Re: ruhl should have placed higher
« Reply #30 on: October 06, 2006, 10:15:51 AM »
if you did not think his back was hard then you should stop posting on this site..dude he had by far the hardest and the thickest back at this show..hell his back looked better than your marshmellow ronnie colemans back...just see him next year and he will be back with a bigger bang..

post a picture of his back double bicep pose from this years olympia and then tell me with a straight face that he had the hardest back up there...