your speculation does NOT hold up to the test of REALITY, since we can clearly see here that the argument that dorian probably has more musce fibre density and less subcutaneous fat is incorrect:
his arms and chest would NOT appear so watery in comparison to ronnie if he did:
the same holds true for the quads, glutes and hams.
The ONLY part of Dorian that appeared to hold less subcutaneous fat than Ronnie 99 is the lower back and abs. THATS IT.
that does not make up for the other 90% of the body.
OWNED
"Owned"

Well, you're wrong for several reasons. First of all, you give your opinion of where Ronnie is drier and pass it as fact. Well, in my opinion, Dorian is drier in all muscles. Secondly, I said that odds are that Dorian is carries more muscle. You conversely, just said they had the same amount and didn't give any evidence. Secondly, even if Doria had the same muscle fiber density as Ronnie, this still would mean that odds are that Dorian carried the most mass, because they even out in skeletal frame and yet Dorian is drier. Now, you said that Dorian is not drier. Well, I think that it is pretty evident that he is. Besides, Dorian could have less intra-muscular water as well. You can't get over this fact, dude. Dorian's greater hardness suggestes, overwhelmingly, that he either had more muscle fibers or less water. One of the two, or both of them.
Owned.

SUCKMYMUSCLE