so according to you dorian's quads are better here 
.. nasser's are clearly more detailed and look better shape wise, i didnt feel there was a need to mention this as it's very clear.. nasser is tanned yes but the lighting in dorian's pic is better..
sure idiot quads are more important than calves and again i am giving you ronnie as an example, imagine if he had great calves but no quads at all would have he won any olympia??.. but still he is 8X mr. olympia while he had great quads and no calves at all.. also dorian's great calves are too big for his quads, same with his forearms/arms.. so sometimes very good/big parts play against the overall symmetry and proportion..
instead of showing your assholeness i was expecting you to let me know in details and in a more repectful way how do you see dorian better 
so according to you dorian's quads are better here .. nasser's are clearly more detailed and look better shape wise, i didnt feel there was a need to mention this as it's very clear.. nasser is tanned yes but the lighting in dorian's pic is better..
You're drawing your own conclusions ( you do this often ) did I say they were better? I asked how did you come to the conclusion they were better? and your vague response when pressed is , clearly more detailed and look better shape wise
great way to elaborate on your point. Nasser is tanned and has posing oil and I disagree the lighting is better in the Nasser pic
sure idiot quads are more important than calves and again i am giving you ronnie as an example, imagine if he had great calves but no quads at all would have he won any olympia??.. but still he is 8X mr. olympia while he had great quads and no calves at all.. also dorian's great calves are too big for his quads, same with his forearms/arms.. so sometimes very good/big parts play against the overall symmetry and proportion..
To use your own warped logic against you and entertaining Nasser did have better quads explain why he never beat Dorian despite this advantage? and piss-poor analogy anyway because Dorian does have quads and calves , Ronnie never had calves so your point is moot. And Dorian's calves are to big? LMFAO says you who ironically has smaller calves in your comparison than Nasser LOL
One part I do agree with you on his very good/big parts play against overall symmetry , strong parts can be a ' weakness ' if their only purposes is to highlight weaker ones however this isn't the case with Dorian , especially when it comes to proportionate forearms which he has and Nasser DOES NOT analogous to Ronnie's calves , Nasser's lack of forearms can be seen when directly compared to someone who has the like Yates
You also neglected other very important aspects of symmetry & proportion like torso length , Nasser has a long torso , Dorian doesn't his is almost perfect upper/lower balance , leg length Nasser has short legs , Dorian doesn't , proportionate forearms , Nasser has highish lats Dorian doesn't. ALL of this comes into play so even entertaining your assessment Nasser is still behind Yates in balance & proportion, what you did was cherry-pick what you think wins while ignoring the rest NOT how it works
instead of showing your assholeness i was expecting you to let me know in details and in a more repectful way how do you see dorian better
I don't think I was coming across as an asshole or disrespectful
just pointing out the many problems with your laughable comparison
