you're missing the point. I could just as easily accuse you of ignoring Ronnie's advantages such as better taper, symmetry, and lower back detail.
Yes, Ronnie does have better taper, but that is not included when we're talking exclusively about back - it is taken into account in the total package in the back mandatories and in the symmetry round from the back, but the back as a bodypart must be judged separately for it's own merits. As for symmetry, Ronnie doesen't have better symmetry than Dorian. I don't see how Ronnie's lats are more proportionally developed in relation to each other than Yates'. And lower back detail? Isn't Dorian regarded as the absolute best of all times in that area?
Who is to say that Dorian's strengths are better?
I think that Dorian's advantages are more relevant according to traditional criteria than Ronnie's in this case. Conditioning is more relavant than good skin.
Furthermore, the purpose of conditioning is to enhance the appearance of the muscles. Dorian's back may look "harder" but lacks the fullness of Ronnie's back. Again, who is to say which is better?
I'm not sure that Ronnie's back is fuller. According to all reviews I've read of Mr.Olympias, Dorian's back was always complimented for it's fullness. However, we do know for a fact that Dorian's back did look harder than Ronnie's.
Where does it state in the IFBB criteria that density trumps muscular bulk?
Ronnie's back does not have superior muscular bulk in the particular version you've used. If you're talking Ronnie in his 2003 incarnation, then that's a different story.
Don't be so foolish as to proclaim Dorian's strengths greater when he and Ronnie are so evenly matched. In the case of a tie, we must pick at straws to decide a winner. The fact of the matter is that Ronnie's back is just as good as Dorian's and doesn't have bance or folds of skin.
But Dorian has the advantage of conditioning, which is a much more relevant advantage according to the criteria than having superior skin. We don't even need to pick at straws, because conditioning is not a straw, but one of the
major things that bodybuilding judges look for.
hmmm... yes. Bodybuilding is a visual sport and the skin is the most visible part of the body.
Correction: bodybuilding is a visual sport that tries to access the development, symmetry and definition of the competitor's skeltal muscles.
The IFBB criteria states that skin blemishes may affect a competitor's placement.
Right, then why wasn't Yates marked down at the 1993 Olympia for it? From what I've read, all the 13 judges gave him perfect scores in both the symmetry and muscularity rounds. No where was he marked down for his acne - maybe because, like me, the judges considered his super-conditioning as far more relevant than his bad skin. And I must emphasize that his acne is only apparent in some areas of the back and a little in his chest. The rest of his body was clear of it.
