i hate to come in again, but i will.
nd, use any argument you like about who's better, but PLEASE stop using their competitive history against each other. ronnie, by everyone's account except yours, didn't hit his peak until two to four years after dorian retired. you're saying, basically, that 1993 dorian is better than 2001 ronnie because 1996 dorian beat 1996 ronnie. they're different physiques entirely.
dorian was better than ronnie when they competed. no questions asked. that's why he won. now, if ronnie was in 2nd place year after year and then won you could make a case, but the man went from 9th to 1st between 97 and 98, so clearly dorian's retirement wasn't the only thing that bumped him to victory.