Royal let's break Dorian down body part for bodypart against Coleman
arms Coleman
chest coleman
legs Coleman
back tie both had great backs (opinion wise I'd say Coleman)
shoulders (Coleman)
abs tie (Dorian has better ab shape Coleman has a narrower waiste)
coulpled with the fact that Coleman muscle shape is among the best in history round and vascular
Dorians is crap no round muscle
how can you then turn around and say Dorian
Dorian is the same bbing tier as fux and Nasser size yes genetics no
no nice muscle shape blocky huge torso small arms
Here's how I seet it:
Arms: Coleman (arguably the best bis ever; however, Dorian's arms, especially tris and forearms were great. Coleman had an incredible bicep peak.)
Legs: Could go either way - Coleman had bigger quads, but Dorian had much better calves. Hams equal.
Chest: Could go either way - both had great chests, lots of striations.
Shoulders: Coleman, but just barely.
Abs: Dorian for sure - he had one of the best overhead abs shots of all time, see below. Not sure how you could claim they tie.
I agree that Coleman had rounder muscles and more shape; however, Dorian had a level of thickness, completeness, and conditioning that was incredible and unmatched. Bodybuilding contests are more than just muscle shape. Their physiques are very different, both are great (as I have claimed all along).
The amazing thing is that I have claimed throughout my posts that it would be close between the two and it could go either way. Yet you claim I am blind and biased. Then you turn around and make statements like "Dorian is crap" "Dorian is in the same bbing tier as Fux and Nasser." Your apparent Dorian hate is nearing Hulkster levels. Not sure why you guys are so threatened by the fact that he dominated during his reign...its laughable really.
You really think Ronnie's abs were this good??