New MD Cover: Jay Cutler Bodybuilder of the decade

[Flex]

-Jay beat Ron twice. Ronnie beat Jay at least 4 times. Yes, this matters.

-Listing the guys the defeated Coleman is bull****. Because half of those guys were in 2007 when Ron was old, beat up, and should of already been retired.

•And then theres that light years of difference between the two when they speak & how they carry themselves!!! Jay has shown the way tp up & commers how to be presentable & marketable and how to carry themselves on (point in case Ronnie's stripper moves, US flag posing trunks and the Moses skit + ESPECIALLY how both athletes took their losses on stage)& off the stage ...!!!

haha, I guess you're forgetting how poorly Jay handled his 2005 loss to Coleman. Back stage interview "wah wah...this is BS...wah wah....everyone knows I should have won tonight"

Believe it or not, I like Jay Cutler more than Ronnie Coleman. I'm just pissed that MD is trying to use this crap to promote their own athletes.

 

[Flex]

Right after Jay Cutler switched to MD. FLEX came out with an article on "reasons why Jay Cutler should retire."

 

[pakiman]

...I'm just pissed that MD is trying to use this crap to promote their own athletes.

MDs got people arguing over it on most boards so this has not been too bad a move on their part plus like I said earlier good arguements could be made both against and for them giving that self-made title to Jay! Its like some US magazine deciding the "sexiest man alive" or phuking Times declaring "Person of the Year"... I guess since MD coined the term they have kindda right to choose the winner too

 

[Line]

MDs got people arguing over it on most boards so this has not been too bad a move on their part

Well yeah, seeing how it was a marketing decision, and nothing else. No one is contesting that. It's just that to credit "success," for lack of a better word, in such an arena is to trivialize the more relevant points of reasoning and merit.

 

[mvsf1]

Choosing 2002-2012 as the decade is being too selective and unfair. Should be 2000-2009 ONLY, which would be Ronnie Coleman, easily. And in case you can't count, 2002-2012 is eleven years, not a decade.

Don't forget that Jay Cutler SHOULD have lost in 2007 to Victor Martinez, and lost his title to Dexter Jackson in 2008.

Man, don't be like that.

You are wrong about what a decade is: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/decade

It can be also defined as a "period of then years". I can count, don't be an ass, we only had a couple of shows in 2012, current year could be ignored. That being said, Jay is the most succesful BB from January 1st 2002 to December 31th 2011.

Yeah, "SHOULD". Whatever man. Name a BB most succesful than Jay Cutler in that time span. Anyone.

 

[dilatedmuscle]

He showed this to the world...

... This was this decade.

Just because has been more successful in bodybuilding these last few years that Ronnie was downhill doesnt mean that Ronnie was any less successful. From 1991-2000 decade, Ronnie wouldnt be considered bodybuilder of the decade.... and this Decade its Jay? Ronnie PEAKED this decade, won more Olympias (all of which he deserved unlike 07 jay) than anyone. He could have EASILY won more shows than jay but he wasnt competing as often because he would preserve himself for the O and grand prix shows afterwards just like Jay did after he became Mr.Olypmia. He got a multi-million dollar contract with BSN, he was a way bigger attraction than Jay at the expo's. He got a new supplement sponsor plus he launched his own supplement line. IMO the era Ronnie peaked and dominated in is his era, the last decade was his era.

 

[Flex]

Man, don't be like that.

You are wrong about what a decade is: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/decade

It can be also defined as a "period of then years". I can count, don't be an ass, we only had a couple of shows in 2012, current year could be ignored. That being said, Jay is the most succesful BB from January 1st 2002 to December 31th 2011.

Yeah, "SHOULD". Whatever man. Name a BB most succesful than Jay Cutler in that time span. Anyone.

Wasn't trying to be a dick. In that specific decade, yeah it would probably be Jay.

 

[mvsf1]

^^ Dilated, who the **** denied Ronnie is the best bb ever? In terms of wins, it's Jay. In terms of pure bodybuilding, Ronnie takes it.

 

[dilatedmuscle]

I didnt say anybody denied him being the best BBer ever but It seems like we're short changing him. He dominated an era.

 

[Natzo]

I pretty much dominate my era.

 

[Anabolicus]

Why would anyone care what MD says anyway?

Everyone knows that Ronnie will remain above Jay in everything unless you count da beatzz by Jay.

 

[tim290280]

People have short memories if they think Ronnie wasn't the most dominant BBer from the late 90s until he retired.

Also, trying to compare various contest totals for a decade when Ronnie didn't compete in some of the events listed, is rather pointless and misleading. When Ronnie was on stage it was more an issue of who was going to come second to him, the wins others had were when he wasn't there (except on one occasion I can remember which was the gut wars period).

 

[dilatedmuscle]

Everyone knows that Ronnie will remain above Jay in everything unless you count da beatzz by Jay.

Well... now that you mention it.

lol

@ Tim, thats what i was saying. Ronnie wasnt competing as much because he was preserving himself for the Olympia. Something jay wouldve done in his shows and something he did before he turned Mr.O. If we're gonna talk about wins like that we should throw Dexter Jackson into that mix lol.

 

[pakiman]

....
Also, trying to compare various contest totals for a decade when Ronnie didn't compete in some of the events listed, is rather pointless and misleading. ...

Hows that pointless and misleading when the premise of the "title" is time bound i.e. a Decade! At best you can accuse MD (or me for listing a calendar year dacade phffph) of being selective in the 10 years they chose... but since their declaration was specific to THOSE 10 years... hows that misleading? No one is claiming Jay was the best BBer of the century or something! By your ratinale its like we cannot call anyone BBer of the year or decade from here on in because Ronnie isnt competing!!!!

 

[tim290280]

Hows that pointless and misleading when the premise of the "title" is time bound i.e. a Decade! At best you can accuse MD (or me for listing a calendar year dacade phffph) of being selective in the 10 years they chose... but since their declaration was specific to THOSE 10 years... hows that misleading? No one is claiming Jay was the best BBer of the century or something! By your ratinale its like we cannot call anyone BBer of the year or decade from here on in because Ronnie isnt competing!!!!

Seriously??

To be the best you have to beat the best. Would you honestly say that because Darrem Charles won the NY Pro in 2005 that he was better than Ronnie and Jay? My point being that Ronnie was the best and he didn't compete in all of the events. The events he competed in he won (mostly). Thus he was the guy to beat, he was the king and everyone else was trying to match his standard.

You have to look at the best BBers of the time period and then look at when they went head to head. Those are the wins you look at. Because no one cares if you came 1st at the Mr I Showed Up in Florida Open, not unless the current best competitors were there.

From my own history: I came a close second to the state sprint champ in a local meet. That makes me second fastest sprinter in the state...... Until I rock up at the state sprint champs and come 2nd last in a much stronger field, the champ coming first.

 

[pakiman]

Seriously??

To be the best you have to beat the best. Would you honestly say that because Darrem Charles won the NY Pro in 2005 that he was better than Ronnie and Jay? My point being that Ronnie was the best and he didn't compete in all of the events. The events he competed in he won (mostly). Thus he was the guy to beat, he was the king and everyone else was trying to match his standard.

You have to look at the best BBers of the time period and then look at when they went head to head. Those are the wins you look at. Because no one cares if you came 1st at the Mr I Showed Up in Florida Open, not unless the current best competitors were there.

From my own history: I came a close second to the state sprint champ in a local meet. That makes me second fastest sprinter in the state...... Until I rock up at the state sprint champs and come 2nd last in a much stronger field, the champ coming first.

Seriously??
ASC is a "Mr I Showed Up in Florida Open"? And your Darem Charles example would be true if anyone was calling Jay the best of the decade based ONLY on the years that he won ASC... but no one is! Ronnie not competing in the the 4 or 5 years that MD is considering doesnt take anything away from Jay's achievements! When Jay got beat he kept coming back... what about your Champ Ronnie? Since no one had a gun to to his head to stay away from competetion in the years he wasnt the "king" anymore then why take away Jay's achieved during those years... and MDs is acknowledging the fact that Jay competed more often, took most runner-ups at O, won O, defended his title, lost it only to regain it for the first time in the history of BBing ... kept coming back in face of defeat and then ended up beating the great Ronnie Coleman twice... DID NOT REQUEST Ronnie not to compete against him for the following years and went on to add 2 more titles to his list of "Mr I Showed Up in Florida Open" wins!!! And MD is acknowledging his collective effort spanning 10 years, during/after the Ronnie career...
And as for your head-to-head rationale... so we cant call Roger the best of last decade because he loses head-to-head against Rafa... and we cant call Rafa the best of last decade because he loses the head-to-head against Djoko... and Djoko cant be it either because he loses head-to-head aginst Roger.... effen Tennis hasnt had a true champion then according to your rationale!

 

[mvsf1]

Guys, I see this issue this way:

1) Ronnie (AGAIN) is the best BB ever. Therefore, at their primes, he is better than Jay Cutler. Period.
2) (And this is no debatable) Jay won more pro contests than anyone in this past decade (2002-2011). In fact, he never came worse than 2nd.

So, Jay being the bodybuilder of these past 10 years doesn't seem a lie to me.

so we cant call Roger the best of last decade because he loses head-to-head record against Rafa... and we cant call Rafa the best of last decade because he loses the head-to-head against Djoko... and Djoko cant be it either because he loses head-to-head aginst Roger.... effen Tennis hasnt had a true champion then according to your rationale!

What a great point. Props for that.

 

[The King Of Lurkers]

Someone needs to buy the damn magazine to see wich time period their talking about ROFL!!!!!!

 

[Flex]

Arnold Classic wins Jay would have if Ronnie Coleman decided to compete every year = 0

 

[mvsf1]

Arnold Classic wins Jay would have if Ronnie Coleman decided to compete every year = 0

You know that's not a valid point.