The point here is, Dorian, in peak condition, had NO fat, NO water, and his muscle had a very smooth, dense, polished marble look. Yes, I understand what youre getting at, but for some reason you are trying to insinuate that if a person has more striations, deeper striations and deeper separation between muscles genetically (yes, genetically, not everyone has the same appearance to their muscles, some are more separated at higher bodyfat than others) that must mean they have lower bodyfat, which is not the case. Lower bodyfat will emphasize these things, but you cannot compare striations between 2 different individuals to compare conditioning, it doesnt work. It would it they both had the same striations, same muscle separation, but people dont. Genetically people are different. Their muscles look different, have different thickness, different densities of fibers.
Coleman, weather at higher bodyfat or not, always had more visible striations and deeper separation (giving him the appearance of being better conditioning than he really was, like you said better conditioning will enhance the appearance of those "details", since Coleman genetically has more and deeper striations and muscle separation, it give the illusion of being in better shape due to EXACTLY what you are arguing.)
That in an of itself should be enough to show you that you cannot judge conditioning based on detail.
At least were getting somewhere now...
BBing is the most bullshit of contests, why? Because its based on appearances, and before you shout I am changing my point I will tell you Im not:
"you are trying to insinuate that if a person has more striations, deeper striations and deeper separation between muscles genetically (yes, genetically, not everyone has the same appearance to their muscles, some are more separated at higher bodyfat than others) that must mean they have lower bodyfat"
I am not trying to insinuate this, I am explicitly saying this; when you have to judge by the eye, whether in pictures or live, this kind of things tell. Ok, now were getting to the point in which youll claim that Dorian had genetically worse separation and striation, I am going to say this is utter nonsense because it makes no practical difference, even if there is a genetical difference, it is by no means subtantial, in any way, more substantial is water and fat (or lack there of) when JUDGING (keep in mind we are just judging with the eyes and I DONT care for the opinion of shitty magazines or other bbers).
So now we are at a point in which none will be able to prove the claim that genetics will play, or not, a visual difference, my claim is that is doesnt, at all, and that in fact, Coleman has been the man with the greatest conditioning due greatly to virtually no fat and water, and of course the other side of the story, the mass that pushes against the skin giving aiding more in the cuts and what not. Dorian was close, yes, but not quite. I do not see how the exact same muscle fibers, the relative same amount of mass and dehydration, are less of a factor that "genetics", in fact, year after year, people blame water or fat to the lack of detail, not genetics, because again, our protein muscles are made of the same muscle fibers. Also, genetics determine instertion points, shape of muscles, etc, how would it exactly play a role in striations?
Whatever though, this discussion leads to nowhere and it has been stretched far enough
Gooday.