actually, we do know that Ronnie's back at a heavier weight was wider. We have a pic of both hitting the same pose standing the same distance from the camera (as evident by their heights matching) in 96, and they were already the same width back then. It's silly to believe that Ronnie's back didn't get wider from 96 to 03.
we also have a comparison using Kevin Levrone as a reference that shows Ronnie became wider than Dorian. You cannot claim the pics aren't scaled properly b/c the difference in height is the same between Dorian and Kevin, and Ronnie and Kevin.
the pic of Ronnie used is from the 99 English GP when he weighed about 267 lbs. He was 20 lbs heavier at the 03 Mr. Olympia. There's no logical reason to believe Ronnie in 03 was not wider than Dorian.
ha ha ha, you talk as if Ronnie had high lats. Dorian's lats weren't much longer than Ronnie's, and who's to say that extremely low lats are better? Franco Columbo has the lowest attaching lats and they look awful. Better traps? That's your opinion. Dorian's upper traps were smaller and almost non-existent in some poses. His traps were less symmetrical also. Lats covered in striations? Big deal! So were Ronnie's. As for lower back, Ronnie easily wins this area. How can you honestly claim that Dorian has a better lower back when it looks flat as a pancake compared to Ronnie's?
actually, we do know that Ronnie's back at a heavier weight was wider. We have a pic of both hitting the same pose standing the same distance from the camera (as evident by their heights matching) in 96, and they were already the same width back then. It's silly to believe that Ronnie's back didn't get wider from 96 to 03.
No we don't know his back is wider and the pic posted Dorian is to the far left not dead on side-by-side and Dorian doesn't hold his pose like Ronnie does with his lats flared all the way out and that's not even Dorian at his prime , and the pic I posted which is more dead on , a side-by-side comparison of both men on stage clearly shows Dorian's lats are wider no angles involved . obviously Dorian & Ronnie's backs got wider the heavier they became but to say definitively Ronnie's is wider is simply speculation
we also have a comparison using Kevin Levrone as a reference that shows Ronnie became wider than Dorian. You cannot claim the pics aren't scaled properly b/c the difference in height is the same between Dorian and Kevin, and Ronnie and Kevin.
LMFAO you're always trying to connect the dots from one gut to another , sorry sport to many variables to determine who is wider , such as angle , the moment the picture was snapped , style of hitting the pose , look at the pic of Yates in 1997 when he is fully flexing his lats big difference from other pics
the pic of Ronnie used is from the 99 English GP when he weighed about 267 lbs. He was 20 lbs heavier at the 03 Mr. Olympia. There's no logical reason to believe Ronnie in 03 was not wider than Dorian.
logical reason? lol your ' logic ' leaves a lot to be desired , in an actual pic side-by-side of Yates & Dorian in the same pose Dorian is clearly wider despite only being 7 pounds heavier , no connecting the dots needed and Dorian wasn't even at his best in that pic , he's not at his heaviest and to boot lets entertain he is even wider in 2003 it's a moot point because his back isn't as detailed or as dense as Dorians so it's a paper advantage which means nothing , he has wider albeit higher , less detailed , less dense lats some advantage lol
ha ha ha, you talk as if Ronnie had high lats. Dorian's lats weren't much longer than Ronnie's, and who's to say that extremely low lats are better? Franco Columbo has the lowest attaching lats and they look awful. Better traps? That's your opinion. Dorian's upper traps were smaller and almost non-existent in some poses. His traps were less symmetrical also. Lats covered in striations? Big deal! So were Ronnie's. As for lower back, Ronnie easily wins this area. How can you honestly claim that Dorian has a better lower back when it looks flat as a pancake compared to Ronnie's?
No Ronnie doesn't have high lats in the Orville Burke context , however they're still higher than Dorian's and this is where the torso length comes into play something you obviously didn't take into account . and who's to say low lats are better? nice attempt at dismissing muscle length , that's like saying a guy with high calves are better than Dorians just nonsense .
Better traps that is my opinion and it's based on facts not fantasy like you , just look at the back double biceps shot of Yates & Ronnie , just look at the sheer size of Dorian's traps in relation to Ronnie's it's no contest at all , Dorian's traps are bigger , they're longer . you can't change muscle length so no matter how heavy Ronnie became his traps would never be as big as Dorian's , ontop of never being as dense or as detailed , Dorian's you can actually see striations and a split between upper & lower traps and Yates' upper traps were smaller and almost nonexistent in some poses
fuck me this isn't even worth a cognizant reply
Ronnie's lats aren't covered in striations like Dorian nice try and trying to equal up on that one , it's night and day and part of the reason Dorian's x-mass tree blows Ronnie's out of the water , Dorian's are feather from point A to point B . and lower back lol you think because you can see in indent on Ronnie's lower back that means it's somehow better lol talking about the thickness of the spinal erectors the detail the sharpness , this is is part of the reason Dorian's x-mass tree is so great and Ronnie's isn't
Let me wrap up why Dorian has a better back
He has larger & better traps with separation between the upper & lower not to mention striations
Look at the difference in in size & detail of the teres & infraspinatus another clear advantage to Dorian especially if you look at the back double biceps of both of them
lats , Dorian are thicker , lower and more striated , even entertaining the idea that Ronnie's in 2003 would be wider it wouldn't be by any great margin and what advantage of is being wider with shorter lats with less density & detail? lol none
lower back look at the staggering difference in spinal erector thickness & detail it's no contest
Dorian's back has advantages Ronnies doesn't it's that simple.
