Arnold vs Ronnie

**AnaBolic_hOsS** · 06-07-2005, 06:00 PM

http://www.xtrememass.com/gallery/sh...cat/503/page/1

reference: xtrememass.com

**bignatt** · 06-07-2005, 06:23 PM

link doesnt work you need to be a member

**4U2NV** · 06-07-2005, 07:10 PM

Members only bro!

**Nicky B** · 06-07-2005, 09:53 PM

Anyway I say if arnold competed today and used todays drugs then he would beat ronnie. His stats would like 6'1 310lbs and 24inch bi's now thats big. But if arnie competed at his weight from the 70's then ronnie would win the 10000th Olympia trophy.

**collar** · 06-08-2005, 02:58 AM

link not work

**S.P.G** · 06-08-2005, 07:46 AM

linky no worky for me..

**Jsik98** · 07-04-2005, 11:13 PM

Originally Posted by Nicky B

Anyway I say if arnold competed today and used todays drugs then he would beat ronnie. His stats would like 6'1 310lbs and 24inch bi's now thats big. But if arnie competed at his weight from the 70's then ronnie would win the 10000th Olympia trophy.

Arnold was 6'2'' closer to 6'3''.

**scriptfactory** · 07-05-2005, 02:15 AM

Originally Posted by Jsik98

Arnold was 6'2'' closer to 6'3''.

I've met him, he's 6'1" tops. I've met him and I am 6'1".

**S.P.G** · 07-05-2005, 07:32 AM

can we decide with this...its arnold for me.

**Kenny007** · 07-05-2005, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by S.P.G

can we decide with this...its arnold for me.

Wow, Arnold was the man back then! that comparison photo of Ronnie and Arnold.......... Coleman is obviously more muscular, but Arnold's is more visually elegant.

**NoDude!** · 07-18-2005, 01:41 PM

More muscular my ass... Ronnie looks like a pigeon next to Arny (if the height/size ratios are correct on this photo). He is and for a long time will be number one... numero uno... nomer edno... tonomero ena!!!

**decadbal** · 07-18-2005, 01:53 PM

no comparison, even arnold has said ronnie is the greatest ever...

**scriptfactory** · 07-18-2005, 02:16 PM

Originally Posted by NoDude!

More muscular my ass... Ronnie looks like a pigeon next to Arny (if the height/size ratios are correct on this photo). He is and for a long time will be number one... numero uno... nomer edno... tonomero ena!!!

Ronnie is 5'11". Arnold is 6'1". The height/size ratios in that photo are far from correct...

***Giantz11*** · 07-18-2005, 02:56 PM

Arnold hands down....Those Biceps are amazing

**scriptfactory** · 07-18-2005, 05:26 PM

All of you who said Arnold are insane! LOL!

**Nicky B** · 07-18-2005, 05:41 PM

What arnie really needed was bigger legs. He could have been 265 easy with some bigger legs and thicker back. Then it would be easier to compare Ronnie and Arnold. All without a gh gut.

**scriptfactory** · 07-18-2005, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by Nicky B

What arnie really needed was bigger legs. He could have been 265 easy with some bigger legs and thicker back. Then it would be easier to compare Ronnie and Arnold. All without a gh gut.

Very true. However you have to realize that legs are half of your body! That combined with a severely lacking back makes an incomplete build. Arnold had great pecs and great biceps. His forearms needed work, his triceps could have used a little more size, his back lacked thickness and width, his quads lacked sweep and size and all of these areas are critical. Think about this, Arnold has biceps as large as Ronnie and yet his arms are 3"-4" smaller.

Arnold is a very interesting and charismatic man, and I think this leads people to believe he is a better bodybuilder than Ronnie Coleman. Judging strictly from a strictly bodybuilding standpoint, however, I believe Ronnie blows Arnold clear out of the water.

***Giantz11*** · 07-18-2005, 08:00 PM

Ronnie bloated freakish GH gut and massive head is nothing compared to Arnold. Who yes did his share of drugs but looked human at the same time. Ronnie no doubt is the biggest human that has ever lived but I fail to see why people only love to see plain old disgusting massiveness, rather than a visually pleasing Bodybuilder which Arnold most certainly was.

**Baba** · 07-18-2005, 09:22 PM

offcourse ronnie is huge as hell, but I think the only thats bad about him is that he has the worse midsection in bodybuilding history and that hurts him quite a bit. Now look at arnold, he is a great poser chest and biceps are out of this world but he doesn't have legs or back. IMO people talk about how ronnie was handed a couple of sandows but shit how the hell did arnold win 7 olympias without great legs or back? Franco was more muscluar than arnold was, I believe feiregno should have bitten him. To be honest arnold didn't have near the competition ronnie has nowadays. Any given olympia ronnie slips up especially this since he might tie lee haney anywhere from jay, dexter, gunter, ruhl or even comier can take it. He definately has to come top notch to win all those guys are very good.

**Kreatine_Kid** · 07-19-2005, 02:53 AM

I think what we are forgetting that in Arnold's day there were more things to take in to consideration. Not only did the bodybuilder have to have an amazing physique BUT they also had to be excellent posers as well. Also symmetry and asthetics played a major part as well as preportions.

Today its all about the biggest lump of meat on stage in a pair of trunks. IMO the total package of Arnold far exceeds the total package of Ronnie.

**QuickSilver** · 07-19-2005, 03:53 AM

Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold Arnold

**Darkness** · 07-19-2005, 04:18 AM

Originally Posted by Giantz11

Ronnie bloated freakish GH gut and massive head is nothing compared to Arnold. Who yes did his share of drugs but looked human at the same time. Ronnie no doubt is the biggest human that has ever lived but I fail to see why people only love to see plain old disgusting massiveness, rather than a visually pleasing Bodybuilder which Arnold most certainly was.

Couldn't have said it better my self. Plus in Arnold's days they didnt have all the supplements we have now, yes roids were available but so are now and with a lot more variety.

**Squatman51** · 07-19-2005, 09:30 AM

my question is what drugs do they have now to get soo huge that they didnt have or take back when arnold was around??? Back then no BB had a gut, but nowadays there is hard to find one who doesnt have a gut. I know GH gives you a gut, but what else is available now that wasnt in the past?????

**captain chet** · 07-19-2005, 09:43 AM

Bodybuilding id say has to go to ronnie, he has the biggest built body, but arnold has the best built body i think.

all in all, id rather look like, or look, at arnold on stage as opposed to ronnie. hes a big dude but arnold has a much better body to look at.

***Giantz11*** · 07-19-2005, 09:47 AM

IGF-1, Synthol, pgf2a, not sure about this but I doubt Isulin was abused either. T3, Clen I mean the list goes on. The Pro's today are on so many drugs its getting crazy. I mean back then they had Weed, Dbol and some good ole Test. Didn't need anything else. Nowa days dudes are just plain freaks that do not look good and most certainly are not visually pleasing.

**Nicky B** · 07-19-2005, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Giantz11

IGF-1, Synthol, pgf2a, not sure about this but I doubt Isulin was abused either. T3, Clen I mean the list goes on. The Pro's today are on so many drugs its getting crazy. I mean back then they had Weed, Dbol and some good ole Test. Didn't need anything else. Nowa days dudes are just plain freaks that do not look good and most certainly are not visually pleasing.

Yeah and back in the 70's if they took test they would take very low doses. Because I don't think they had anti-e's back then.

**dr.shred** · 07-19-2005, 08:45 PM

u really cant even compare the two, it is two completely different looks. Arnold's bi's are def just as good as anyone today though.

-SHRED

**Kreatine_Kid** · 07-20-2005, 03:07 AM

Its summed up by one of the inmate at the prison in pumping iron when he says

"that mans got a beautiful body!"

***Narkissos*** · 07-20-2005, 10:25 PM

Ronnie

Ronnie

Ronnie

Ronnie

Ronnie

Ronnie

Ronnie

Ronnie

Ronnie

**Baba** · 07-21-2005, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by Kreatine_Kid

Its summed up by one of the inmate at the prison in pumping iron when he says

"that mans got a beautiful body!"

That was just a gay guy talking LOL!

**bigcity** · 07-21-2005, 07:23 AM

I saw the pic and was like WTF, You cant compare 2 diff people from diff eras, thats like comparing joe namath VS Tom brady, things are so differnet now, Science controlls are sport

**scriptfactory** · 07-21-2005, 07:23 AM

Originally Posted by Baba

That was just a gay guy talking LOL!

Which is the reason that Kreatine Boy decided to use that quote.

**TryingHard** · 07-28-2005, 05:04 AM

Arnold would NEVER beat Ronnie. Bodybuilding is about who can build the most mass. If you want to look at a "Nice Body", check out some chicks, not guys. The problem with most people is they want a "White" Mr O. That is all it boils down to. If you dont like the massive beasts we have on stage, then go watch the woman.

**NoDude!** · 07-28-2005, 07:20 AM

Bodybuilding was never just for the mass... It was aestetics, it was harmony. It was avision of beauty represented by the perfect male body.

Now it's turned into something I would call grotesque. It's turned into a competition of neither strenght nor looks, but of mass. Which wasn't it's general intent and for me it never will be.

And speaking of female bodybuilders, they're no better than the men right now. There's nothing hotter than a lean muscular chick working out, but nowadays the women who are into this want to look vascular and big.

For Christ's sake, my little sister wants big arms! Where the **** is this world going to if the only thing everybody's looking at is mass regardless of the gender!

**Kreatine_Kid** · 07-28-2005, 07:23 AM

The problem with most people is they want a "White" Mr O. That is all it boils down to.

That my friend is absolute bollocks! This has nothing to do with race or colour! This is about the most visually appe****g and well defined physique! Its about a human being who has taken his body to its limits of perfection!

You honestly telling me that 295lbs of mass that just hangs off the body is perfection!!! It is the complete opposite! Coleman has one of the ugliest physiques of all time! His lats HANG from his body like lumps of meat, his stomach protrudes like it he's pregnaunt! How often do you think Coleman gets a laid........... hardly ****ing ever! The chicks couldnt even get close to his dick due to the size of his stomach! Arnold on the other hand was a total PIMP! He stories of sexual adventure are almost as famous as his bodybuilding success!!

Im a white guy and I can tell you that the only guy I think should be the next "Mr O" is Dexter Jackson!

To quote the gay inmate form PI, "That man has a beautiful body!" The blade is huge, cut, defined and is totally symmetrical! He is the PERFECT bodybuilder of our time bar no-one!

**hydroP** · 07-28-2005, 07:58 AM

I cant believe anyone is even saying Arnold compares to Ronny, its simply a matter of evolution in the sport in which Arnold is simply outclassed....sure Arnold was a great in his time but its like comparing a 1960's Ferrari to a new Ferrari Enzo, yes the 60's Ferrari had class and was great in its time but if you were to race the old & new the outcome would be simple......technology wins hands down.

Arnold wouldnt even compare to most of the pro's these day let alone Mr Olympia Ronnie Coleman. Bodybuilding is about mass with symmetric muscles and Arnold didnt have the mass to compete with bodybuilding standards.
It is true that we have many scientific advances but to the person above who mentioned that they only used a little test with no anti-e's; you might try doing a little research before you say stupid things like that, they had primo, anadrol dbol , and deca and many others.
Someone also said they had no anti-e's, well Nolvadex was invented in 1978 and Clomid was invented in the 50's, HCG was discovered in pregnat women's urine in 1927.
Whether or not they used them is up to them personally but I'm sure some of them did.
Anyone that competes will agree that the pro's of today are genetic freaks compared to the pro's of yesterday.

**Kreatine_Kid** · 07-28-2005, 09:11 AM

True, but the BB's of today are ugly freaks of nature, compared to the guys of yester year who will ALWAYS have something the guys of today dont have! A pleasing physique!

**BigMike J** · 07-28-2005, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by Kreatine_Kid

True, but the BB's of today are ugly freaks of nature, compared to the guys of yester year who will ALWAYS have something the guys of today dont have! A pleasing physique!

Ditto! I don't see how you can compare the two.

For those of you who say that Ronny is better.. well by todays standards i would have to say yes, but he'll never have the rep that ARNOLD has.. his legacy will live one.. Ronnies won't.