actually you made a lot of blanket statements without being specific and I doubt Ronnie would look just as big being 13lbs lighter , and if we're talking about Dorian at his best B&W pre-contest at 269lbs than that discrepancy would be much greater
I disagree in some shots from 93 Dorian looks thinner from the same in 95 where he looks fuller , he doesn't say Dorian did have a bloated gut he didn't say a lot of things you seem to try and read to much into what he didn't say. When he said he was even harder in 95 that means he was carrying more dense muscle and less fat so when you type his gut was bloated and most of the weight is there it's contradictory to reality
if hypothetically it were close these are the things that separate a winner from a loser.
inferior conditioning , see above.
no we didn't establish Ronnie could look at big as him at his best in fact at their respective bests Ronnie 2001 and Dorian at 269lbs it would be very apparent who had this advantage
symmetry is part of balance & proportion and if you're using it in the context of smaller waist & hips and joints , than Ronnie with all of the aspect not part of it , then we must factor in the rest
shape? certain muscles yes , certain muscles NO overall NO
overall muscularity goes to Ronnie? LMFAO is the end result of conditioning and guess who wins this? Ronnie has more detail in certain parts , Dorian in others
now remember how contests are judged ALL ROUNDS ARE PHYSIQUE ROUNDS so we add up in every single pose , from every single angle , who is more complete , who is carrying more muscular bulk , who is drier , harder , better balanced , who has better symmetry , who poses better , who has a better stage presence ALL of this is assessed at ONCE , now Ronnie may meet part(s) of this better than Dorian but as a whole NOPE Dorian just has to many advantages
I'm only speculating on what he may have thought in response to your query, you're the one who started that trend 
please show me where he 94 and 95 weren't close? ( which is true BTW ) where are you getting this info?
Well you have your interpretation of what it means , you want it to be close and maybe it would be but either way Dorian would beat him like I said 1998 vs Dorian 1993 or 1995 would not be close at all
Ronnie 2001 vs Dorian 1993/1995 maybe very close Dorian just has to many pluses , Dorian at 269lbs vs Ronnie 2001 247lbs 
Ronnie would be left for dead
actually you made a lot of blanket statements without being specific and I doubt Ronnie would look just as big being 13lbs lighter , and if we're talking about Dorian at his best B&W pre-contest at 269lbs than that discrepancy would be much greater
I disagree in some shots from 93 Dorian looks thinner from the same in 95 where he looks fuller , he doesn't say Dorian did have a bloated gut he didn't say a lot of things you seem to try and read to much into what he didn't say. When he said he was even harder in 95 that means he was carrying more dense muscle and less fat so when you type his gut was bloated and most of the weight is there it's contradictory to reality
Ok, he was a little bigger in 95, but most of it was in his torso anyway. Can you honestly say his arms, delts or legs were bigger? I think not.
Anothet thing, how balanced and proportionate was Dorian in 95 with his torso overpowering his arms?
if hypothetically it were close these are the things that separate a winner from a loser.
inferior conditioning , see above.
no we didn't establish Ronnie could look at big as him at his best in fact at their respective bests Ronnie 2001 and Dorian at 269lbs it would be very apparent who had this advantage
symmetry is part of balance & proportion and if you're using it in the context of smaller waist & hips and joints , than Ronnie with all of the aspect not part of it , then we must factor in the rest
shape? certain muscles yes , certain muscles NO overall NO
overall muscularity goes to Ronnie? LMFAO is the end result of conditioning and guess who wins this? Ronnie has more detail in certain parts , Dorian in others
now remember how contests are judged ALL ROUNDS ARE PHYSIQUE ROUNDS so we add up in every single pose , from every single angle , who is more complete , who is carrying more muscular bulk , who is drier , harder , better balanced , who has better symmetry , who poses better , who has a better stage presence ALL of this is assessed at ONCE , now Ronnie may meet part(s) of this better than Dorian but as a whole NOPE Dorian just has to many advantages
I'm only speculating on what he may have thought in response to your query, you're the one who started that trend please show me where he 94 and 95 weren't close? ( which is true BTW ) where are you getting this info?
Well you have your interpretation of what it means , you want it to be close and maybe it would be but either way Dorian would beat him like I said 1998 vs Dorian 1993 or 1995 would not be close at all
Ronnie 2001 vs Dorian 1993/1995 maybe very close Dorian just has to many pluses , Dorian at 269lbs vs Ronnie 2001 247lbs Ronnie would be left for dead
Ok, Dorian has the advantage in conditioning also, but it wouldn't be a major advantage as with vs Nasser, Levrone, Ray, etc.
How much did Dorian 'weigh' in that 96 grand prix? Wasn't he almost as big as in 95? A little bigger than 93 maybe.
Ronnie still looked just as big as him, but softer obviously. Now factor in his 98 conditioning with the same size and Dorian's heavier scale weight wouldn't mean too much. There are so many examples of lighter guys beating heavier ones.
I think overall shape goes to Ronnie, much better taper, smaller joints, better muscle bellies overall, etc.
Muscularity - Even though Dorian was harder and better conditioned, Ronnie still displayed better muscularity or muscular definition. Let me explain, muscularity is the ability to show great muscle definition, separation, tie-ins, etc. correct?
Then Ronnie has the advantage in these areas, not in every single bodypart but overall yes.
Even though Dorian was harder, he never showed better overall separation than Ronnie, he never had Ronnie's outstanding tie-ins, he never had the same amount of overall muscle detail as Ronnie did. Call it genetics, but it is the truth.
Of course 94 & 95 weren't close at all, but I was trying to show how he bragged about it, how he is not someone who is careful of not coming off as arrogant.
Here is the thing you say 98 Ronnie vs 93/95 Dorian wouldn't be close and you say that in 2001 Ronnie vs the same versions of Dorian still its a sure Dorian victory. But here is the thing, Dorian who is an IFBB judge doesn't know who would win. He is the only judge's opinion we have on the subject, the rest of us and the "experts" can just speculate as you say.
Do you think your view or opinion on this has more weight than Dorian (IFBB judge) who says it would be a close contest?
