Author Topic: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great  (Read 27254 times)

rufjunk

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 121
  • Getbig!
Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« on: January 28, 2006, 11:16:13 AM »
Thoughts.. opinions..?

I'll go first..

This is the look thats ruined with modern bodybuilding. When you start putting on size just for the sake of size, it literally ruins everything. It looks like Ronnie pumped himself full of oil and shredded out, he looks like a shredded version of the Michilin tire man.

Look how smooth he is in the bottom picture, granted its in black and white, compare his stomach and his muscle shape. All of that went to shit when he went for more size and I'm afraid this is what will ruin bodybuilders such as Dexter, Richard Jones, Gustavo (he's already starting), Mark Dugdale. The bottom Ronnie would win each olympia without question, the top will leave everything up to controversy.

Disgusted

  • Expert
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 13610
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #1 on: January 28, 2006, 11:29:01 AM »
Well brainiac, in the first pic Ronnie is expanding his rib cage and in the second he is flexing his abs. Two different poses. Plus his shorts make his obliques look smaller. Soooooo, if your going to make a comparison then do it right.  ::)

Bluto

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 33175
  • Well?
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #2 on: January 28, 2006, 11:30:51 AM »
Another bash ronnie thread, how exciting!
Z

tommywishbone

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 20507
  • Biscuit
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #3 on: January 28, 2006, 11:32:25 AM »
Where was that top/color pic taken?
a

sculpture

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2542
  • Getbig!
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #4 on: January 28, 2006, 11:55:31 AM »
I read the same opinion over at ironage using teh exact same two photos. Coincidence? This smacks of the ironage consensus

body88

  • Guest
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2006, 12:21:12 PM »
I read the same opinion over at ironage using the exact same two photos. Coincidence? This smacks of the ironage consensus


It is true, anyone who thinks Ronnie has improved his body since those black and whites is obv a cock rider or blind. Coleman looks crazy in those black and whites


Hell even hulk admits this openly :o

Slick Vic

  • Guest
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2006, 12:23:37 PM »
Hulkster, you listening?

jazon7x

  • Getbig I
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2006, 12:46:55 PM »
Thoughts.. opinions..?

I'll go first..

This is the look thats ruined with modern bodybuilding. When you start putting on size just for the sake of size, it literally ruins everything. It looks like Ronnie pumped himself full of oil and shredded out, he looks like a shredded version of the Michilin tire man.

Look how smooth he is in the bottom picture, granted its in black and white, compare his stomach and his muscle shape. All of that went to shit when he went for more size and I'm afraid this is what will ruin bodybuilders such as Dexter, Richard Jones, Gustavo (he's already starting), Mark Dugdale. The bottom Ronnie would win each olympia without question, the top will leave everything up to controversy.

the black and whites are from 2000.....the other from 04

8 INCH not biceps

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2805
  • On the road to weighing 300 pounds
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2006, 01:26:23 PM »
Thoughts.. opinions..?

I'll go first..

This is the look thats ruined with modern bodybuilding. When you start putting on size just for the sake of size, it literally ruins everything. It looks like Ronnie pumped himself full of oil and shredded out, he looks like a shredded version of the Michilin tire man.

Look how smooth he is in the bottom picture, granted its in black and white, compare his stomach and his muscle shape. All of that went to shit when he went for more size and I'm afraid this is what will ruin bodybuilders such as Dexter, Richard Jones, Gustavo (he's already starting),
Mark Dugdale. The bottom Ronnie would win each olympia without question, the top will leave everything up to controversy.






At least Ronnie was great and he still his but you have always being dogshit and guess what? you are still dogshit!

rufjunk

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 121
  • Getbig!
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to dogshit
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2006, 01:38:16 PM »
The dogshit mark was an exaggeration of course.. I'm just attempting to stir up controversy.... anyone think the previous look is better?

yes/no/maybe

beats flames..

rufjunk

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 121
  • Getbig!
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2006, 02:12:21 PM »
Also I apologize, the two pictures are obviously different and don't do Ronnie justice..

It's the best I could find...

But does anyone else feel the same way I do.. you can notice he's sorta bulging out his stomach in the first one.. flexing his abs in the second.. Even with him flexing his abs it still looks a lot better than his current form. I know there is someone out there that believes Insulin and GH use does alter muscle size and shape and causes distended stomachs, all for the sake of size.



Jr. Yates

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4646
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #11 on: January 28, 2006, 03:46:43 PM »
2nd pic looks good.
bodybuildersreality.com

GMCtrk

  • Guest
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #12 on: January 28, 2006, 10:50:27 PM »
That second picture is from 97....

controldenied33

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 91
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #13 on: January 28, 2006, 11:31:19 PM »
That 2nd picture is amazing.  Slight gyno behind the left nipple but an otherwise amazing physique.

DIVISION

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16278
  • Bless me please, father.....
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #14 on: January 29, 2006, 12:17:46 AM »
I know there is someone out there that believes Insulin and GH use does alter muscle size and shape and causes distended stomachs, all for the sake of size.

It's a strong belief, the only thing we don't have confirming this is a clinical study, but you could make a strong correlation between GH/Insulin/IGF-1 use with distended stomachs in pro bodybuilders.

Things were never this out of control before the introduction of these drugs.

I'm not one to say Ronnie shouldn't have used them, it's his life, and I don't care about bodybuilding or its future.  I just think it's a very high price to pay for a trophy, fleeting fame and a Hummer......




DIV
I'm a ghost in these killing fields...

suckmymuscle

  • Guest
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #15 on: January 29, 2006, 03:26:29 AM »
Thoughts.. opinions..?

I'll go first..

This is the look thats ruined with modern bodybuilding. When you start putting on size just for the sake of size, it literally ruins everything. It looks like Ronnie pumped himself full of oil and shredded out, he looks like a shredded version of the Michilin tire man.

Look how smooth he is in the bottom picture, granted its in black and white, compare his stomach and his muscle shape. All of that went to shit when he went for more size and I'm afraid this is what will ruin bodybuilders such as Dexter, Richard Jones, Gustavo (he's already starting), Mark Dugdale. The bottom Ronnie would win each olympia without question, the top will leave everything up to controversy.

  I have said it before and I'll say it again:Ronnie looks like shit, when he gets over 260 lbs. His best form ever was at the 99 O, when he was just as dry and with as much detail as in 98, only 10 lbs heavier. Ronnie looks his best at 250 lbs.

  At the 2004, Ronnie was grotesque. At 296 lbs, he looked like a black Sigourney Weaver, pregnant with an Alien Queen. Furthermore, his skin showed the resilience of a dam; it seemed like he had drank the Mississippi River. Ugly. Gross. Repugnant. At the 2003 O and weighting 287 lbs, he was shredded and dry, but his shoulder-traps complex clearly overpowered his chest and his waist, the shoulders. His thighs and back were humongous, but with far less detail than in 98 or 99. Also, his thighs overpowered his calves.

  While both Roonie and Dorian look bad over 260 lbs, I think that Dorian looked better at that weight. At the 97 O, when Dorian was 270+ lbs, he also had a big waist, but at least he maintained his trademark density and dryness. Also, at that weight, he showed more detail than Ronnie, on his back and thighs. That's my opinion.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

Bluto

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 33175
  • Well?
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #16 on: January 29, 2006, 04:12:01 AM »
Quote
Also, his thighs overpowered his calves.

really. i cant imagine that happening!
Z

DIVISION

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 16278
  • Bless me please, father.....
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #17 on: January 29, 2006, 05:43:39 AM »
At the 97 O, when Dorian was 270+ lbs, he also had a big waist, but at least he maintained his trademark density and dryness.

When did Dorian NOT maintain density and dryness?

That's the real question.

It's the one thing that made him stand out above everyone else.




DIV
I'm a ghost in these killing fields...

gibberj2

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2921
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #18 on: January 29, 2006, 06:06:53 AM »
Levrone won in 92. and dorian's chest was always kinda small for the rest of him. i thought i had seen shawn look better and flex look better in some olympias. maybe he should have 4 sandows.

pumpster

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 18890
  • If you're reading this you have too much free time
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #19 on: January 29, 2006, 02:36:23 PM »
THIS BLOATED LOOK STARTED WITH YATES.
NO ONE Ron included, looks as good heavier than their ideal weight.

Jr. Yates

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4646
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #20 on: January 29, 2006, 03:39:32 PM »
true
bodybuildersreality.com

bigdumbbell

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 17468
  • Bon Voyage !
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #21 on: January 29, 2006, 03:47:39 PM »
i hate all his pictures

phyxsius

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6264
  • Mini Getbigger
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #22 on: January 29, 2006, 04:02:54 PM »
Ronnie is old. Am young, am hungry, I wanted to win and am 100% natural.
I am a mini beast

Lion666

  • Competitors II
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 1080
  • You gotta bring it to get it!
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #23 on: January 29, 2006, 05:23:22 PM »
2nd pic looks good.

8 INCH not biceps

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2805
  • On the road to weighing 300 pounds
Re: Ronnie Coleman - from great to not-as-great
« Reply #24 on: January 29, 2006, 05:29:59 PM »
  I have said it before and I'll say it again:Ronnie looks like shit, when he gets over 260 lbs. His best form ever was at the 99 O, when he was just as dry and with as much detail as in 98, only 10 lbs heavier. Ronnie looks his best at 250 lbs.
  At the 2004, Ronnie was grotesque. At 296 lbs, he looked like a black Sigourney Weaver, pregnant with an Alien Queen. Furthermore, his skin showed the resilience of a dam; it seemed like he had drank the Mississippi River. Ugly. Gross. Repugnant. At the 2003 O and weighting 287 lbs, he was shredded and dry, but his shoulder-traps complex clearly overpowered his chest and his waist, the shoulders. His thighs and back were humongous, but with far less detail than in 98 or 99. Also, his thighs overpowered his calves.
  While both Roonie and Dorian look bad over 260 lbs, I think that Dorian looked better at that weight. At the 97 O, when Dorian was 270+ lbs, he also had a big waist, but at least he maintained his trademark density and dryness. Also, at that weight, he showed more detail than Ronnie, on his back and thighs. That's my opinion.
SUCKMYMUSCLE

Your opinion sucks because in 97 dorian gut looked horrible and his waist was wide, no one will argue that ronnie's gut was getting out of control but he turned around and got it under control.
 I still cannot understand how you guys expect a bodybuilder to be 296 lbs on stage at 5ft 11  with a small waist and a flat stomach that is a little unrealistic.