These Ronnie vs Dorian threads have gotten beyond retarded.
I am not biased either way I just believe what i see with my eyes, and that being said, anyone who thinks Ronnies arms weren't light years ahead of dorians is just being a stubborn idiot.
It's so very obvious, yet you lack the ability to communicate an analytical basis for your position, instead opting to be insolent towards those that disagree with you. A familiar approach it would seem. One wonders if this is resultant of the maladroit nature of the typical Coleman fan, or simply the inability of his physique to provide a solid foundation on which to base an argument. It takes more than a bicep to constitute an arm. Few people would debate that Ronnie has the edge in terms of biceps, but as eluded to, the triceps and forearms also come into play. Likewise, presentation becomes a very important factor while on stage. Dorian's side triceps shot is but one example. Even if one were to concede an advantage to Coleman in the area of biceps, would Dorian's advantage in triceps and forearms not technically give him the advantage in "arms"? Seems like a case of simple deduction.
