|
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 29, 2010, 04:39:02 pm |
|
 |
V I S I T I R O N A G E . U S
Powered by SMF 1.0.19 |
SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: Haney guest posing Screencaps!!!! (Read 1789 times)
|
shuggyboy
Universe Level
 Offline
Posts: 125
I'm a llama!
|
Lees upper body looks the best ive saw it there, in my opinion Lee Haney had very underpar and soft hams with poor calves when he competed. Very much like Arnie his lower half wasnt as good as his tremendous upper body, where i would say overall Arnie was more superior albeit with poorer aesthetics in comparison to Lee.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Matt C
Guest
|
ok, so we aren't allowed to judge Arnold by today's standards, but apparently we're allowed to judge Ronnie by the ironage standard?
Actually neither, we are here to celebrate a specific era and those who participated in it! http://ironage.us/yabbse/index.php?topic=7319.0Nothing hard to undestand there. We stand by the Ironage standards, that's what brought us to the dance. Generally when modern bodybuilders are brought into the conversation it is because they do represent the standards that that we grew up on and it's a breath of fresh air. If members are insistent on prasing standards other that what we hold as perfection here, don't be suprized if they are met with less than enthusiastic responces. We will never apologize or justify to anyone why Ironage is on the map! You don't walk into Baskin Robbins and proclaim how great McDonalds french fries are. Well we're like Baskin Robbins and if you want to discuss ice cream ...this is the place!
If you're suggesting that this board will show animosity to those who don't follow the ironage standard to the letter, then I think that's more than a little silly. I like old school bodybuilding for one reason and I like new school bodybuilding for completely different reasons. It doesn't help the reputation of this board when I come on here being completely reasonable and polite only to have my point of view attacked, especially when I give valid justifications for why it is the way it is. I also don't need to have others affirm my point of view to be confident in the validity of it. I have enough confidence in myself and what I believe in to not need a board full of members agreeing with me to feel happy about what I believe.
Regarding the reputation of this board and the comments about sheep - that is what I heard from tons of boards and that's why it's taken me so long to get here. I didn't want to register on a board which has a certain preset mentality because it makes sharing opinions or being open minded impossible.
ND said that Arnold looked good in his day despite his weak thighs because given the era he competed in, weak thighs were acceptable. As I have said numerous times to ND, in Pumping Iron in the outtakes when they were on the mountain, somebody said "Nobody will look at the legs." It was known that Arnold had weak legs. If ND is suggesting that Arnold's legs were ok but they were not bad for his era then I would counter that by saying Ronnie has given the judges exactly what is expected in THIS era.
If ND is going to use that type of argument to justify Arnold's weaknesses, I will use the same argument to justify Ronnie's weaknesses.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt C
Guest
|
Matt you keep making the claim Arnold had " weak thighs " not true , simply not true , he had amazing development & separation...
I agree 100% I'll never understand why Arnold gets so much flack for his leg development.
His legs were huge but were laughable compared to pros today. That is my point. It's like saying Jay has a weak back - compared to Ronnie this is true. Nobody is denying the strength of Arnold's quads on an absolute scale, simply a relative one. At the time he competed his quads were not to bad compared to other pros, but compared to many who came later his quads were very, very weak.
And here is a completely unrelated image:
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
BoYD
Olympia Level
Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 1762
|
His legs were huge but were laughable compared to pros today. That is my point.
OK, fine, I didn't realize that was the argument. I got here late.
As far as his legs being "laughable" compared to the pros today, that's just a whirlwind of amazing insight. I assume you are talking about sheer size, in which case, I agree. However, the seperation in Arnold's quads is mind-boggling even today.
I have not ONCE seen a current pro and remarked at how his quads resembled snakes under the skin.
IMO, most of the leg development today is out of hand anyway. I salute guys like Gunter, who maintain a balanced physique.
Arnold still represents the absolute ideal to many of us here, including myself. Bodybuilding does not get much better than that, no matter how far it has "evolved" since his reign over 30 years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Irish Oak
Olympia Level
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 245
Natural Born Ironager
|
I always thought Arnolds legs were pretty good when he was competing
I dont believe thighs should be over developed rather a combination of mass and defination that dosen`t take away from the over all flow of the body.
I think Arnold got it just about right.And those calves,well thats another thread I think.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt C
Guest
|
I can't deny Arnold's exceptional separation. His thighs were still lacking in terms of mass and striations compared to pros today though.
That Arnold pic never ceases to amaze me. He looks to be all of 210 pounds at 5'11. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
arnoldplatz
Olympia Level
Offline
Posts: 2232
arnold,bruce lee,platz,zane,ray
|
i don't think so matt. 
look at this photo of arnie.(i scanned last month. )
arnies quads are huge and great separation & shape in that pic!
arnie looks totally perfection!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
arnoldplatz
Olympia Level
Offline
Posts: 2232
arnold,bruce lee,platz,zane,ray
|
great shape and balance!
|
|
|
|
|
SuperScuba
Guest
|
Is that above pic from Jimmy Caruso or Russ Warner? Either way, having a high res pic of that in a gym would look something!
See what I mean by the term 'Majestic'?!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
siouxcountry
Olympia Level
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 793
|
Great photos all around. Had no idea Arnold was into long distance running.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
BoYD
Olympia Level
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1762
|
great great photos. gotta love that vaccuum.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Matt C
Guest
|
Is it just me or was the photo quality a lot better back in the day?
What we need is more black and white closeup shots today. Reminiscent of the 1993 pre Olympia Yates pics.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
John M.
Olympia Level
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 1174
I'm a llama!
|
found a few more shots 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dash
America Level
Offline
Posts: 19
Make Muscle, Not War!
|
ummmm
can anyone say BEST EVER?
this thread just made me rethink my all time greatest...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
stevce
Olympia Level
Offline
Posts: 255
Natural Born Ironager
|
Makes you think when other bodybuilders looked their best ever.
Was 1974 Arnolds best ever or could it have been 2 weeks after?
Or at a guest pose somewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 
|
|
|
|
|
|
best_of_the_best_arnold11.jpg
