Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: donrhummy on March 08, 2007, 10:09:43 PM
-
(http://www.schwarzenegger.it/gallery/musclegallery11/ar499.jpg)
-
personally Ron Coleman looks more impressive there
-
Impressive? Ronnie by a country mile. Better? Arnold from the waist up.
-
Arnold's successor 8)
-
Arnold by a landslide!!
-
awwwwwwnold.......
-
Arnold
-
Those brains of people saying arnold is totaly fvcked up.
We are not talkin about who is great. We are talking about whose physic is impressive.
Gimme a break.
-
Ronnie because he doesn't look human.
-
Seriously, what exactly is IMPRESSIVE about Coleman? He looks like a bloated toadstool.
-
Ronnie's legs are more impressive due to size and cuts, but Arnold, to be in the same condition as Ronnie, 30 years prior, is more impressive.
-
Split about 50-50 so far...
Personally I think Arnold is more impressive. Ronnie's bigger, more muscular, but not as impressive. I see Arnold and I'm blown away by how aesthetically lined his physique is while still being incredibly muscular. Ronnie, on the other hand, doesn't have pleasing shape there and looks a little like a massive mess. Still, it's all just opinion. :)
-
Whats up with Arnold arnold arnold arnold....!!!
Damn Arnold was not known for his aethtic physic!! He was a mass monster at that age!
Arnold was great but he cant even beat Haney priod!
Look at arnolds hams and glutes!Soft as hell comparing with BBers of now a day.
-
That deliberately misleading comparison reeks of Iron Age quality, with Coleman at a heavier weight. Try comparing them in top shape..
-
I think Arnold would look 1000 xs different if he was competing today. I think he looks best back then. If he competed today he would have a gut and look GH-ed up, kinda like Lou at the 1996 Masters..
-
That deliberately misleading comparison reeks of Iron Age quality, with Coleman at a heavier weight. Try comparing them in top shape..
Actually, I chose Ronnie from 2003 because a lot of people on here said he was amazing/untouchable that year.
-
I would like to see Arnold with some wheels of todays competitors! That would intersting to see in a more balanced physique (by todays standards).
-
ronnies is more impressive based on the shock value of his physique, whereas arnolds is more covetable based on aesthetics
-
ronnies is more impressive based on the shock value of his physique, whereas arnolds is more covetable based on aesthetics
nice gramar!!!
-
nice gramar!!!
are you being facetious or are you insinuating that i've made a gaffe?
-
nice gramar!!!
nice spelling. ::) LOL
-
are you being facetious or are you insinuating that i've made a gaffe?
naw, it was a compliment of which i rarely give out. ;)
-
nice spelling. ::) LOL
take it easy bro, the xanax isn't quite out of my system from last night... ;D
-
Arnold
Of course! ;D
-
I don't know if Lou was all Gh'ed up. He was 320 pounds and bloated from that high weight and btw, he wasn't in the 1996 Masters. The man retired officially in 1994, after his 1992 comeback. Correct me if I'm wrong.
-
your right,,,1994 masters.
-
sorry Arnold.
-
if ron kept his gut in at all times,,he would look more impressive,,problem is when you carry so much muscle on you its easy to forget things and get sluggish,,common problem now days
-
Arnold's successor 8)
The fucker was in a TV show yesterday and he looked HUUUUUGGGEEEEEEEE
he almost didn't fit in the Taxi cab
he looked like he was about 280
-
Sorry Ronnie ;)
-
if ron kept his gut in at all times,,he would look more impressive,,problem is when you carry so much muscle on you its easy to forget things and get sluggish,,common problem now days
Did you keep your gut in better than Ronnie when you competed?
-
I would much rather look like Arnold.
His look is about as far as most ladies will go.
Meanwhile, Ron pulls some questionable science-enhanced freak.
-
men aren't supposed to be pregnant.
Hell i'd take steve urkel over ronnie coleman.
-
Ahnold.
-
This, I think, is at the base of the whole discussion of what BB should be about. Unfortunately, it seems close to evenly split. :P
-
men aren't supposed to be pregnant.
Hell i'd take steve urkel over ronnie coleman.
Men aren't supposed to have developed glutes, either! And who represents the epitome of gluteal developement? That's right: Coleman. How could he win the men's top physique contest in the World several times by having an ass which dominates his physique from the back is beyond me. :-X
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
Men aren't supposed to have developed glutes, either! And who represents the epitome of gluteal developement? That's right: Coleman. How could he win the men's top physique contest in the World several times by having an ass which dominates his physique from the back is beyond me. :-X
SUCKMYMUSCLE
Yes, and men were not supposed to have fully-developed serratus, trapezius, two-headed biceps, two heads of the tricep, etc, etc...what's your point? Bad argument.
-
Men aren't supposed to have developed glutes
According to you, maybe. It's a muscle, so it can be developed. Having a stomach that sticks out so far you look like Junior is another thing. Coleman has both.
-
the really stupid thing is Sucky's insistance, along with the other guy ND, that coleman's glutes "dominate his physique from the back"... ::)
-
Ain't nothing wrong with having a big ass.
Can't pound a spike with a tack-hammer ;)
-
the really stupid thing is Sucky's insistance, along with the other guy ND, that coleman's glutes "dominate his physique from the back"... ::)
I think the real point should be: who the hell CARES if they have ripped glutes or not. It shouldn't be a factor either way.
-
The fucker was in a TV show yesterday and he looked HUUUUUGGGEEEEEEEE
he almost didn't fit in the Taxi cab
he looked like he was about 280
Spoke to him last week... he just broke the 290 barrier couple of weeks ago 8)
-
GH gut, nuff said! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Ronnie in 1998 would beat Arnold's best IMO.