99% of these guys base who looks better in a pose by personal preference , what they THINK should win a pose , what looks better to them from an aesthetic point of view . I used to ...until I learned how contests are judged , they'll cherry-pick what parts they like what they think is more important , what doesn't matter to them and say " see he wins " that's not how it works
Classic example of pumpster's claim calves & forearms don't count 
they ask for the calves in every single mandatory pose , in the criteria for the front double biceps pose they assess the forearms as well as the biceps , as well how proportionate one muscle is to the next , they assess who carries more muscular bulk , who is harder and drier who is the better technical poser , so while Ronnie & Levrone meet parts of this criteria better but when all things are judged they don't meet ALL of it better . that's how contests are judged and why Dorian dominated.
I couldn't agree more. It is very easy to hand pick certain poses and make conclusions based upon one's own personal preferences. Many so-called experts will assert that one bodybuilder allegedly "owns" another in a pose, but are completely incapable of providing a substantive basis for their viewpoint. They can only reason that their choice, "looks better". Hardly the most definitive manner by which to award a title. If contests were to be judged in such a manner, we could have instances where every single judge hand picks a different winner based upon their own personal criteria. Instead, the champion is supposed to represent the bodybuilder that encompasses the best of EVERYTHING.
When debating who the victor might be in a theoretical contest, most people fail to debate based upon how actual contests are judged. Instead, they substitute their own standards. How can one realistically hypothesize who would win, if the judging parameters used in deducing a winner, are the antithesis of the guidelines that are used in actual contests?
