Hulkster - you clearly know your stuff and many of your arguments are compelling. However, what do you think about the theory (I won't call it 'fact' ) that since Haney it seems to be that the best back always wins no matter what.
For example..Haney clearly had the craziest back, despite having relatively small arms etc and often being matched from the front, he would turn around, spread his wings and it was game over.
Likewise with Dorian ..torn arms..or whatever..his back would see him through.
Same also with Ronnie..his gyno and gut would not matter when his alien back was flared.
I'm not saying I agree with it - I think it's stupid - but it really does seem to be these days that the biggest and best back wins the O. Even Cutler in 2006 had brought his back up to be on a par with Ronnie's slightly diminishing one. I won't mention 2007 as I don't think anyone thinks that Cutler was the real winner on physique alone.
hard to say. the judges seem to love a good back. It has been said that the back is more difficult to bring up because it is harder for you to actually see it - you need a mirror, as opposed to something like arms which you can see as you train.
seeing the actual muscle groups as you train leads to more motivation via visual stimuli.
the thing about Ronnie, Yates and Haney was that no one ever said Ronnie or Haney was owned from the front.
but with dorian, everyone says it, can see it and can show it.
that is a crucial distinction:
