|
View Poll Results: Who won in your opinion?
- Voters
- 253. You may not vote on this poll
-
Ronnie
152 60.08% -
Flex
101 39.92%
Thread: Flex vs Ronnie
-
04-29-2008, 02:03 PM #1
- Join Date: Mar 2008
- Location: Washington, United States
- Age: 36
- Posts: 13,205
- Rep Power: 41419
Flex vs Ronnie
Disregard Everything, Acquire Aesthetics Crew
Libertarian Crew
PSN - Sin_on_Sunday
I have learned that if one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.
-Henry David Thoreau
Seattle Sports Crew
-
04-29-2008, 02:04 PM #2
-
04-29-2008, 02:07 PM #3
-
04-29-2008, 02:09 PM #4
-
-
04-29-2008, 02:11 PM #5
- Join Date: Mar 2008
- Location: Washington, United States
- Age: 36
- Posts: 13,205
- Rep Power: 41419
Disregard Everything, Acquire Aesthetics Crew
Libertarian Crew
PSN - Sin_on_Sunday
I have learned that if one advances confidently in the direction of his dreams, and endeavors to live the life he has imagined, he will meet with a success unexpected in common hours.
-Henry David Thoreau
Seattle Sports Crew
-
04-29-2008, 02:12 PM #6
I vote Flex over Ronnie due to personal preference in terms of asthetics,lines and that kind of aspects but if i were a judge i also would have choosen Ronnie for the winner...
But i don't think this is one of those years that Ronnie's win can be debated,if we were to debate Ronnie's wins when he probably could have lost,those years were 2001 and 2002...
-
04-29-2008, 02:14 PM #7
- Join Date: Jun 2007
- Location: Balsam Lake, Wisconsin, United States
- Age: 40
- Posts: 6,860
- Rep Power: 0
The arms were oil-enhanced....
And the may have been better relaxed, but ronnies arms are almost bicep peaks are probably the greated of all time. His tris matched Flex's too in actual flexing shots. Ronnie had much more "hardness" in his arms. Flex's were kind of just big...
Obviously Flex had better ab genetics, but their waists were very close to the same size and condition at this particular show.Last edited by J_Bo; 04-29-2008 at 02:16 PM.
-
04-29-2008, 02:17 PM #8
-
-
04-29-2008, 02:17 PM #9
I much prefer Flex's physique.
No question that Ronnie was the clear winner though. His muscularity and conditioning wasn't even in the same universe as the other two. Lights out:
I would have placed Flex behind Cormier. Flex's arms and delts that year just took away from things IMHO.Last edited by Duckenheimer; 04-29-2008 at 02:20 PM.
Interested in investing in militarizing poultry? Based in our Southernmost continent, no local taxes, no laws to worry about, guaranteed return! PM for further details
-
04-29-2008, 02:19 PM #10
- Join Date: Jun 2007
- Location: Balsam Lake, Wisconsin, United States
- Age: 40
- Posts: 6,860
- Rep Power: 0
I think a lot of people are like that... They prefer Flex's look, but if you really break down the factors, Ronnie was obviously the superior bodybuilder...
Edit: just saw your edit... Damn! Cormier was awesome that year, too... Haven't had a top 3 that good in a while.Last edited by J_Bo; 04-29-2008 at 02:21 PM.
-
04-29-2008, 02:20 PM #11
-
04-29-2008, 02:22 PM #12
1993 Flex, with that kind of conditioning and quality, may have been a worthy challenger to a much larger Ronnie. But the softer and synthol filled late 90s Flex, just didn't have the edge on conditioning over Coleman, which would be necessary to fend off such a monstrously sized competitor.
Interested in investing in militarizing poultry? Based in our Southernmost continent, no local taxes, no laws to worry about, guaranteed return! PM for further details
-
-
04-29-2008, 02:37 PM #13
-
04-29-2008, 03:01 PM #14
93 flex was off the chain.
He was so damn crisp...his back was "perfect"
But ronnie had moar hardness, a larger clavicle, and larger back and legs in 99
One thing that i always thought of is that Chris Cormier was the only bodybuilder who could trump Ronnie in the genetics department and overthrow ronnie coleman.
He had a great blend of asthetics size fullness and was a bodybuilders bodybuilder.
-
04-29-2008, 03:14 PM #15
-
04-29-2008, 03:18 PM #16
-
-
04-29-2008, 03:22 PM #17
It's a video of both guys standing relaxed. One guy worked his a$$ off physically and mentally (Ronnie), and the other guy half a$$ed his way mentally and physically while injecting his body with oil (Flex). I like Flex, but I would never award a guy filled will oil as the winner. Flex without oil is one of the best of all-time though. Ronnie in 99' was just too big and ripped that year to lose. That is probably Ronnie at his best and in my opinion the best physique of all-time.
Legends Of Bodybuilding!!! 1000's OF PICS OF YOUR FAVOURITE BODYBUILDERS!!!
********: https://www.********.com/lobofficial/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lob_forever/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNy...CGkj1WuOBceyFA
Website: http://www.legendsofbodybuilding.com
-
04-29-2008, 03:33 PM #18
-
04-29-2008, 03:43 PM #19
-
04-29-2008, 04:05 PM #20
-
-
04-29-2008, 04:12 PM #21
i fail to see how ronnie was any less asthetic then flex in 99
you just think ronnie is and always was a un apealing mass monster.. he still had a small ass waist in 99
if anything i would pick ronnie as being more aesthetic then flex, and IMO he just blew everyone out of the water that year, i think 99 was ronnies best year.Last edited by Newtime; 04-29-2008 at 04:16 PM.
-
04-29-2008, 04:21 PM #22
- Join Date: May 2006
- Location: Texas: swimming in a way that you can't detect...
- Age: 36
- Posts: 46,471
- Rep Power: 19965
Wow, you read my mind (serious). At least goin by that vid. Flex was a little bigger in the limbs but Cormier's overall shape was better IMO, and Cormier's rear lat spread was better. Rear lat spread was always Flex's weak point.
Well I think Flex's waist was a little less distended but Ronnie wasn't totally bloated either. And honestly I also feel that Ronnie's overall aesthetics were better than Flex's that year.
This is just my opinion of course, but I feel that Flex looked REALLY good in the front double bi...but not much else. Oh ab and thigh looked good but overall didn't have the stage presence in it like the front double bi. Back double bi was good but severely lacked lower back thickness (not lower lat, I mean below the lats in the lumbar region, didn't have much of a christmas tree) so it threw the whole pose off.
Am I nitpicking? Yes. Still one of the greatest physiques ever, but I feel people tend to overlook his flaws, which honestly I found pretty glaring.Last edited by stealth_swimmer; 04-29-2008 at 04:25 PM.
-
04-29-2008, 04:25 PM #23
-
04-29-2008, 04:37 PM #24
-
-
04-29-2008, 04:41 PM #25
-
04-29-2008, 05:36 PM #26
-
04-29-2008, 06:05 PM #27
-
04-29-2008, 06:05 PM #28
-
-
04-29-2008, 06:08 PM #29
-
04-29-2008, 06:08 PM #30
Bookmarks