Author Topic: Top Ten Arms (Read 24248 times)

Hulkster · « **Reply #75 on:** May 06, 2006, 06:37:52 PM »

watch a video of the 99 Olympia - Ronnie's biceps at that show are the best I have ever seen.

huge, cut and detailed.

If the photo does not capture his arms at full contraction, his arms tend to look weird.

But when they do, they look something like this:

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #76 on:** May 06, 2006, 06:42:48 PM »

Gunter has some insanely huge biceps

LuciusFox · « **Reply #77 on:** May 06, 2006, 06:45:22 PM »

Quote from: Hulkster on May 06, 2006, 06:37:52 PM

watch a video of the 99 Olympia - Ronnie's biceps at that show are the best I have ever seen.

huge, cut and detailed.

If the photo does not capture his arms at full contraction, his arms tend to look weird.

But when they do, they look something like this:

Freaky bis!

gibberj2 · « **Reply #78 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:16:09 PM »

see i dont know what it is but look at gunter and look at ronnie. they may have the same size arms but it looks like the bicep definition from the inside starts lower.

LuciusFox · « **Reply #79 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:23:22 PM »

Quote from: gibberj2 on May 06, 2006, 07:16:09 PM

see i dont know what it is but look at gunter and look at ronnie. they may have the same size arms but it looks like the bicep definition from the inside starts lower.

Unless Gunter has insane thickness, his arms are smaller than Ronnie's. Did you see the picture of them posing next to each other?

pumpster · « **Reply #80 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:38:02 PM »

Arnold will always have some of the best arms. Outrageous peak, probably the best ever; even better than Robinson or Beckles though it's close. Arms overall were huge; tris were not a weakness even if not as dominant. Not as balanced as Scott, relatively not quite Sergio volume though close, but more outrageous then either, with greater refinement.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #81 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:40:45 PM »

Arnolds's triceps wern't bad at all !!

LuciusFox · « **Reply #82 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:43:42 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on May 06, 2006, 07:38:02 PM

Arnold will always have a pair of the best arms; peaks was outrageous, probably the best ever, even better than Robinson or Beckles. Arms overall were huge; tris were not a weakness even if not as dominant. Not as balanced as Scott, not quite as huge as Sergio, but more outrageous then either, and with greater refinement.

They were definitely a weak point in the front double bi $:-\$

pumpster · « **Reply #83 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:46:57 PM »

Weak points..nothing.

NarcissisticDeity · « **Reply #84 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:49:11 PM »

Quote from: LuciusFox on May 06, 2006, 07:43:42 PM

They were definitely a weak point in the front double bi $:-\$

Weak? wtf

LuciusFox · « **Reply #85 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:49:21 PM »

Quote from: pumpster on May 06, 2006, 07:46:57 PM

Weak points..nothing.

His triceps look tiny there $:-\$ They look sick as a dog $:-\$

pumpster · « **Reply #86 on:** May 06, 2006, 07:50:36 PM »

Maybe in comparison, but there was size there.

LuciusFox · « **Reply #87 on:** May 06, 2006, 08:05:26 PM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on May 06, 2006, 07:49:11 PM

Weak? wtf

When his biceps were at their biggest, the tris looked weak

. Even there, they look undersized.

Thin Lizzy · « **Reply #88 on:** May 06, 2006, 10:47:26 PM »

This is as good as it gets

gh15 · « **Reply #89 on:** May 07, 2006, 12:17:54 AM »

Quote from: LuciusFox on May 06, 2006, 04:51:57 PM

""" arnold is BY FAR the best arms in bodybuilding EVER"""....I'm sorry to say this, but you just lost a lot of credibility with this post $:-\$

let me explain it again for the slow among us

i will make it as clear as i can even though if you read what i wrote in the other posts it is quite clear.

ARNOLD SCHWARZI WOULD WIN STILL WIN O NOW DAYS IF HE WAS A COMPETETIVE BODYBUILDER IN HIS 30S.

THERE IS NO OTHER BODYBUILDER THAT HAD HIS RESPONSE TO NATURAL TRAINING AND HIS RESPONSE TO HORMONES.

ARNOLD SCHWARTZI IF TRAINED DURING THE 90S WOULD BE TARING APART ANY ONE. ANY ONE!

HE WORKED THE HARDEST! HE RESPONDED TO TRAINING THE BEST! HE WOULD RESPOND 10 TIMES BETTER THAN RON COLMAN AND 20 TIMES BETER THAN DORIAN YATES TO HORMONES AT THE DOSES THOSE 2 TOOK/TAKE.

ARNOLD IS A TALL GUY HE IS CLOSE TO 6'2 AND NEXT TO RON COLMAN HE, AS I SAID BEFORE, WOULD LOOK AT HIS COMPETETIVE DAYS LIKE A 210LB GUY WHILE RON WOULD BE COMING ON STAGE 280LB AND THEIR ARMS WOULD STILL MESURE 21.5-22-22.5 INCHES WHICH IS VERY CLOSE!

OFCOURSE RON WOULD WIN SINCE HE HAS MORE LEAN MUSCLE MASS OVER ALL,,BUT IF THE 2 COMPETED NOW DAYS ARNOLD WOULD HAVE THE SAME DOSES OF HORMONES AND THE SAME KNOLWEDGE LEARNED DURING THE YEARS TO GET HIS ARMS TO BE 23-24 INCHES ON STAGE!

THUS IF ARNOLD WAS A COMPETETIVE BODYBUILDER NOW DAYS HE WOULD MOST LIKLEY BE AGAIN NUMBER 1.

IF HE ONLY KNEW HALF THE SECRETS WE USE TODAY....

*lucious darling my credibility is only important to me when i talk to the bank it dont matter to me who believs me and who dont

Gord · « **Reply #90 on:** May 07, 2006, 02:59:18 AM »

Double bis not bad at all, tris look ok too.

Mars · « **Reply #91 on:** May 07, 2006, 03:11:49 AM »

can't believe you bitches did not mention Dennis James.

Scimowser · « **Reply #92 on:** May 07, 2006, 03:57:10 AM »

the thing with Gunter is that his bicep muscle is bigger then Ronnies, but his triceps have always been overpowered in the same was as Arnolds were. Gunter is said to have 23" arms so there is nothing at all wrong with them for size. They just arent proportionate in regards to the bicep/tricep combination

pumpster · « **Reply #93 on:** May 07, 2006, 04:22:44 AM »

Gunter's got nowhere near the same size as Ron-his arms should be bigger, not smaller in this pic considered his height advantage.

In the second pic, one arm is photoshopped.

LuciusFox · « **Reply #94 on:** May 07, 2006, 05:34:17 AM »

Quote from: gh15 on May 07, 2006, 12:17:54 AM

let me explain it again for the slow among us i will make it as clear as i can even though if you read what i wrote in the other posts it is quite clear.

ARNOLD SCHWARZI WOULD WIN STILL WIN O NOW DAYS IF HE WAS A COMPETETIVE BODYBUILDER IN HIS 30S.

THERE IS NO OTHER BODYBUILDER THAT HAD HIS RESPONSE TO NATURAL TRAINING AND HIS RESPONSE TO HORMONES.

ARNOLD SCHWARTZI IF TRAINED DURING THE 90S WOULD BE TARING APART ANY ONE. ANY ONE!

HE WORKED THE HARDEST! HE RESPONDED TO TRAINING THE BEST! HE WOULD RESPOND 10 TIMES BETTER THAN RON COLMAN AND 20 TIMES BETER THAN DORIAN YATES TO HORMONES AT THE DOSES THOSE 2 TOOK/TAKE.

ARNOLD IS A TALL GUY HE IS CLOSE TO 6'2 AND NEXT TO RON COLMAN HE, AS I SAID BEFORE, WOULD LOOK AT HIS COMPETETIVE DAYS LIKE A 210LB GUY WHILE RON WOULD BE COMING ON STAGE 280LB AND THEIR ARMS WOULD STILL MESURE 21.5-22-22.5 INCHES WHICH IS VERY CLOSE!

OFCOURSE RON WOULD WIN SINCE HE HAS MORE LEAN MUSCLE MASS OVER ALL,,BUT IF THE 2 COMPETED NOW DAYS ARNOLD WOULD HAVE THE SAME DOSES OF HORMONES AND THE SAME KNOLWEDGE LEARNED DURING THE YEARS TO GET HIS ARMS TO BE 23-24 INCHES ON STAGE!

THUS IF ARNOLD WAS A COMPETETIVE BODYBUILDER NOW DAYS HE WOULD MOST LIKLEY BE AGAIN NUMBER 1.

IF HE ONLY KNEW HALF THE SECRETS WE USE TODAY....

*lucious darling my credibility is only important to me when i talk to the bank it dont matter to me who believs me and who dont

Ironage nonsense from a guy who has been drinking the Kool-Aid. The more you insist, the more credibility you lose. Please stop $:-\$

Parker · « **Reply #95 on:** May 07, 2006, 05:41:53 AM »

Quote from: gibberj2 on May 06, 2006, 06:28:06 PM

well one thing i can say is that they're bigger than yours. anyway i'm just saying that coleman doesn't belong with lee priest or arnold.

At one time that was all Ronnie was known for, his biceps...then all of a sudden he grew a physique to go with them.

Parker · « **Reply #96 on:** May 07, 2006, 05:50:24 AM »

Quote from: gh15 on May 07, 2006, 12:17:54 AM

l
ARNOLD SCHWARTZI IF TRAINED DURING THE 90S WOULD BE TARING APART ANY ONE. ANY ONE!

HE WORKED THE HARDEST! HE RESPONDED TO TRAINING THE BEST! HE WOULD RESPOND 10 TIMES BETTER THAN RON COLMAN AND 20 TIMES BETER THAN DORIAN YATES TO HORMONES AT THE DOSES THOSE 2 TOOK/TAKE.

ARNOLD IS A TALL GUY HE IS CLOSE TO 6'2 AND NEXT TO RON COLMAN HE, AS I SAID BEFORE, WOULD LOOK AT HIS COMPETETIVE DAYS LIKE A 210LB GUY WHILE RON WOULD BE COMING ON STAGE 280LB AND THEIR ARMS WOULD STILL MESURE 21.5-22-22.5 INCHES WHICH IS VERY CLOSE!

Sorry, he wouldn't, Arnold had a wide waist, said so himself, and before you post some twisting shot of him, look at a pic of him straight on... his waist is wide. There was a pic of Arnold at the beach next to a blonde woman in yellow bikini, it ran in Playboy. His waist was wide as hell, not in the 20's, but like a 36" The only one close to Arnold's physique is Gunter.

So, if he trained like today's pros, he more than likely would look like Gunter, who is the same height, and has a wide waist...it didn't matter if Gunter was 230, 290, or 310...

And we all know how Gunter has faired so far.

bmacsys · « **Reply #97 on:** May 07, 2006, 06:08:40 AM »

Quote from: NarcissisticDeity on May 06, 2006, 05:52:28 PM

Arnold had good triceps , not great but good !!

That pose is rare for Arnold.

pumpster · « **Reply #98 on:** May 07, 2006, 06:10:48 AM »

Quote

So, if he trained like today's pros, he more than likely would look like Gunter, who is the same height, and has a wide waist...it didn't matter if Gunter was 230, 290, or 310...

No; Gunter's more like Ferrigno; neither had/have Schwarzenegger's muscle volume relative to height, or the shape, lines or refinement.

bmacsys · « **Reply #99 on:** May 07, 2006, 06:10:55 AM »

Quote from: knny187 on May 06, 2006, 06:09:54 PM

thats why so many people use Larry Scott as an example.

His biceps weren't "peaked" like Arnolds per se....

but the balance between his biceps & triceps were amazing.

Then...his bicep seemed to go tight to the elbow with no gap.

Larry had literally no gap between his elbow joint and the insertions of his bicep and triceps. Amazing.