Still no one has answred my question. Which genius decided that a bbing contest should be won from the back... Why does it have to be won from the back... Dorian got disciplined by Nasser from the front and side... Simple math that's TWO angles Nasser trounced Dorian from... Plus Nasser had better flow and body part for body part he embarassed Dorian arms chest delts legs ... Nasser was superior ... Dorian only won from the back.... To make matters worst Dorian had one 15 inch arm and one 19 inch arm on that huge blocky torso... And you guys think he should have beaten Nasser ... It's so easy for some people to be brainwashed. But the quandary for me is why must a bbing be won from the back .... 
Well as usual you mistakenly assumed he only won it ' from the back ' when in fact he didn't , Nasser clearly wins the standing relaxed from the front and the front double biceps pose , and maybe the ab-thigh Dorian wins the front latspread , now turn to the sides , Dorian wins the 1/4 turns and side triceps and side chest and then turn them around and Dorian obliterates him from the back it's no contest
I really don't care about 1997 , you can give it to Nasser , what did he accomplish? he beat a career worse Dorian , wow wee it's like Jay beating Ronnie in 06
the reason Nasser lost in 1997 was his mediocre conditioning and his massive liability of a back. The back is a huge and complex muscle group you think Dorian's torn bicep and tricep are more a liability than missing clear development , detail and density of an entire group? it looks like someone took an eraser to Nasser's back
There are two people , one who vastly understates his pathetic back and people who know how pathetic it is. break down the back and compare
traps - Dorian's are larger and thicker with more detail and density , Nasser's traps are pretty big but not Yates big or as dense and detailed
teres - same as above you look at the difference in just physical size , depth and separation between the two it's no contest , you can see on Dorian the clear separation from the infraspinatus and lats and they look like tissue paper covering raw muscle , on Nasser it's barely noticeable and looks washed over
infraspinatus - exact same as above the clear separation between it and the teres and the lats & traps , you can see it on Nasser like Yates , which shows you his back is not as dense , i.e. his back is carrying more subcutaneous fat and more water
lats - whoa guess who has another clear advantage here? Nasser may be , and that's being kind may be as ' wide ' as Dorian and that's it. the difference again is staggering , Dorian's are thicker , denser and more detailed his lower lats are feathered with striations in a manor which Nasser's NEVER were
erector spinae - Dorian again just outclasses Nasser in this area , there is NO discussion when it comes to any part of the back. Dorian's are thicker more detailed which is exactly why his x-mass tree is clearly defined and Nasser never had one
Dorian's back is thicker , denser , drier and more detailed as a whole there is NO comparison in backs and you think a torn tricep and bicep are worse than a back that's missing traps , teres , infranspinatus , lats and spinal erectors? a back that's missing comparable thickness and physical size in relation to his other parts?
You dislike Dorian at all costs because you like men with pretty physiques , you're ignorant on how contests are judged and are also incapable of looking past your own preferences and biases , so just because things don't match your slanted view on how things should have went doesn't mean the sport is the one with the problem.
